Horshack: Here's the price six months from now: $998
> @SDPharm, it's not Panasonic specific. Historically the price of MFT bodies has dropped precipitously after introduction.
That's true. It doesn't help when these companies come up with new models all the time. They really need to simplify their product lines and stablize the new product cycle. I think a new model every two years is more appropriate. That way, each new model would have actual new and improved features to justify upgrades.
I just sold my used GH3 body on eBay for more than US$800. I think the market actually recognizes a good value and keeps it high. Mind you, I did not sell the GH3 because it's obsolete. I sold it because I down sized to a GX7.
@Horshach, I'm not sure I got the point of your post. Did you mean to imply a general fact that the prices of all electronics drop quickly, or that Panasonic makes junk so all of their gears lose value quickly, or did you specifically target GH4 and thought it's a bad value?
Shirozina: Astonishingly low price for what it offers for video shooters even including the add on module.Don't care a jot what it's stills capabilities are. Most people interested in this camera probably wouldn't blink an eye if Panasonic had removed it's stills capability altogether. Why on earth did they include a pop up flash?????????Who on earth uses these things in this level of camera??????? - they could have used the space for a better EVF or a flip up VF. Great camera - my only problem is I've just ditched my GH3 for a BMPCC and after working with Prores 10bit 4.2.2 files I can never go back to 8 bit 4.2.0.................
> Why on earth did they include a pop up flash?????????
Panasonic uses it's built-in flash to control Panasonic's wireless flash FL360 (up to 3 groups with 4 units per group).
SDPharm: Here's my question: take an identical scene with this new Hassy and a Nikon D800, process them to the best one can, then print each to a reasonable size, say, 5 ft wide. Then hang them in a gallery with controlled lighting. Will I be able to tell which one is which when viewing them from a comfortable viewing distance of 3-5 ft?
> Take a wide angle shot in your bathroom at home with a FF camera from nikon/canon… now from the same vantage point, take a shot using a MF camera and you'll realize that using a relatively cheap MF body like the HD31 series (crop) you get more subject matter in each shot than using a smaller sensor camera…<
But, but what if I just flushed the toilet, would a large sensor still help me see the subject matter?
Sorry, can't resist.
> I've seen gallery work done with 6-25 shot panoramas on FF, 100-1000mp <
Forget about gallery, true super resolution images can only be appreciated online. Try this 50 giga pixel image of Marseille:
And, this is by no mean the biggest composite image around.
Here's my question: take an identical scene with this new Hassy and a Nikon D800, process them to the best one can, then print each to a reasonable size, say, 5 ft wide. Then hang them in a gallery with controlled lighting. Will I be able to tell which one is which when viewing them from a comfortable viewing distance of 3-5 ft?
sillen: Purchasing a new DSLR with this hefty pricetag, you would expect specs that are competitive for a few years. At this price level you would expect premium photo resolution and high video quality such as 4K. How come the 4S only provides medioker photo resolution, and yesterdays video specs?? Imagine how behind the 4S will be in a few years, when it is so behind already at the launch date
> How come the 4S only provides medioker photo resolution, and yesterdays video specs??
Yes and no. Every designer team has to pick a battle to fight. By your logic, a lesser camera may come with a built-in flash, then a D4s should have 3 built-in flashes. But they decided that's not what appeal to their target market.
SDPharm: On the side bar, the title for this article has a blue over title that says "4K for the rest of us." If we don't know the price, how do we know it's for the rest of us? Double sigh.
I guess everyone has a different budget. For me, I wouldn't consider $1500-$2000 for the body the price for the rest of us, especially now that the new LG phablet also does 4K. I know they are not in the same league (or even the same planet), but still.
On the side bar, the title for this article has a blue over title that says "4K for the rest of us." If we don't know the price, how do we know it's for the rest of us? Double sigh.
The DPReview home page heading says "Lumix DMC-GH4:Hands-on" but really, this is just a regurgitated version of the press release of something that has no release date and no pricing. Sigh.
Timmbits: I'm puzzled as to why there is marked difference in sharpness and contrast between the Oly omdem5 and the Pan gx7 test images. They do test with the same lens, right? Why would the Oly be sharper then? I'm not sure I get it - same sensor size, same bayer pattern, both have olpf... I see nothing to explain the softness of the gx7 other than bad focus?
ps: Merry Christmas everyone!
> I'm puzzled as to why there is marked difference in sharpness and contrast between the Oly omdem5 and the Pan gx7 test images….<
JPEG: different companies have different JPEG engines. If one puts higher priority in noise reduction, that may reduce sharpness and contrast.
RAW: the results vary depends on the RAW processor being used. I use Apple Aperture (mostly) and it destroyed the sharpness of GX7 RAW images. Same images processed through Lightroom resulted in MUCH greater details in higher ISO (>800) images or in shadow areas. This has been documented by others as well.
Naveed Akhtar: It's only real disadvantage is that "Fuji X-Trans sensor is damn good at higher ISO".I think DpReview should put this in the Cons section. Though, I know its not Pany's fault if Fuji knows how to really make sensors ;)
After sitting two months tossing between this one and Fuji XE-2, I just ordered Pany GX7! Whatever the small cons are, this camera is a level above the rest, as an overall package!
At one hand no camera is perfect; on the other you can't go wrong with any camera these days (Except Canon APSCs) ;)
The solution is not to take pictures under crappy light. :)
Timmbits: LET'S CRANK UP THE NOISE!
Seriously???? cramming 20mp onto a tiny 1/2" sensor???
As if CA, poor contrast, distortion, noise, and failure in dim light weren't already bad enough in the combination of superzoom and too small a sensor... let's crank up the noise some more so that the photosites are even smaller and under-performing.
Looks like a desperate act.
Dude, you don't like 20mp in a small sensor. You think Panasonic is desperate. We get it. It's not necessary to post it over and over.
xectis: Up to the end of the 70's most manufactures had a sense of purpose, passion, some honesty, integrity and sprinkle of innocence and that meant in general products lasted because they were well made and most if not all eggs were put on one basket (sort of speak). After that it was downhill. They simply caught on he idea that more in less time equalled much more $$$£££€€€ and quality control was almost forgotten.
What the camera and whatever other industry does now is they cleverly and meticulously make a product with 'bits missing' so that we the sheep can complain about it (wish it had this, wish it had that). So, they then create a 'follow up' in a mere matter of months fooling us into thinking they did it because of us. And the beat goes on and on.
Do you really think they didn't/don't have the technology and or the know-how to make the almost if not perfect camera? Of course they dam well know!
Do we want the perfect camera? Sure, the power-ball is in our court: Stop buying!
To put your essay in three words: product cycle management.
Sadly (or gladly, depends on which side your on), this is the world we are in today. Comsumers are being actively managed by businesses.
Munene: I need some straight advice, please: GX7 or XE2?
Background: I used to shoot with my Leica M6. I do mostly street photography. I love my GF1, but am ready to upgrade. Two issues: I do not like the way the light meter reads in GF1 (or I use it wrong), why not a match like the old days (needle, diodes)? I don't know if the exposure is correct until I press the shutter? Again, this could be me. The XE2 has a shutter dial on the camera, but how does this affect reading the light meter inside the viewfinder? THIS IS A BIG ISSUE.
So, GX7 or XE2? I am not too concerned with video or wifi or whatever, just good images. Does the fuji sensor trump the 4/3, end conversation? I sometimes enlarge to 20X24. My old Leica (and Canon FTb), I have prints 4' X 6'! Both are awesome (not really planning more, I used to print at a lab).
Unfortunately I cannot find a store that carries both for me to look at (or even one of them, where I live).
Here is what I shoot: www.visualquotations.com
> I guess it does come down to the sensor...
IMHO, for what you shoot (street photography), it does not come down to the sensor at all. As someone here already said, differences in sensor are very small, relative to other factors. I would consider the following (not in particular order):
1) how fast is the camera, as in, can I change settings, compose and shoot quickly,2) can you easily customize the camera to your shooting style3) focusing speed4) ergonomics (GX7's tilt-able finder and screen win big time here)5) weight, size, 6) lens selection
I don't have experience with the X-E2, but do own the GX7. My guess is that GX7 will serve you very well.
FrankGr: Has anyone made excellent quality, sharp, very large prints - up to 20x30 inches with the GX7 files? Is it possible with a small sensor ?
And does it have eyepiece diopter adjustment ?
> 300dpi is hazardous to your eye sight. Your eyes can stay crossed when you stare at something too closely for too long.
Haha. True enough.
Please advise if this model support wireless flash.
Yep. Works with Panasonic DMW-FL360L real well. You can control the level of flash exposure from your camera menu.
Russell Evans: I setup the camerasize.com webpage with the GM1 and Sony Nex-3n on it and asked my wife which one she would like. She indicated the GM1 and said, "of coarse that one, as it has that old camera look". I then told her the GM1 is US $750 and the other is US $450. She then said the looks weren't $300 more important. I asked her about size and she replied she is happy with the 5n with the Sony 16-50mm she has now, and the little bit smaller camera isn't really enough smaller to interest her.
I have to admit I like the looks of the GM1, but even with my small hands, really small for a guy, I find the 5n too small and have to have a half case on it to have it be somewhat comfortable for me. My wife likes it without the case, of coarse. I also looked to find photos of the 3n with a half case on it, and that look is almost as attractive as the GM1 to me.
Crazy, after all that, I still would like to buy my wife the GM1. I might not be stylish, but my wife is still pretty hip and happening.
> my sore shoulder wins out over my cramped hands when walking around with non-serious photography….
Non-conspicuous cameras are important tools for street photographers and photojournalists. I wouldn't call their work non-serious.
duartix: I'd say that by the count of dpreview staff that came out justifying the review and the score, they're both mortally wounded.
@Richard > The very nature of a Silver award is that it means the camera is really good…
Richard, I'm sure you have learned by now that Silver is not a good word to use here. It could be insulting even. I like this scale better: Good, Really Good, Really Really Good.
In wine, the difference between 89 points vs 90 point translates into a ton of money.
nevada5: Gold or silver, tin or cow patty - why would this matter? I've never walked around with my camera, feeling better that a reviewer called it gold.
I've had my GX7 for about 5 weeks and it continues to please me more each time I use it. The level of customization available is fantastic, ergonomics and build quality are top-drawer, EVF and IQ are on a par with my NEX-6. The icing on the cake is that the menus make sense to me.
The review seems to be a fair one. (But I must have the only GX7 ever made that consistently UNDER-exposes. Hmmmm)
I suspect anyone who prefers a rangefinder-style camera will find little to fault with the GX7.
> *obliged* grrrr…
Thanks. That's what I meant to say, but I can't go back and edit anymore.