Light theme [beta]
We're testing a lighter alternative to the regular DPReview theme. Both options will stay.
For more information, click here. Don't forget to leave some feedback.

JimW-203

Lives in United States Tarpon Springs, FL, United States
Works as a Retired
Joined on Jun 4, 2011
About me:

I have been doing photography since the early 50s while in school and later traveling the world in a variety of positions in the government and private industry. Moved from Boston to Florida in 1988; first, St. Petersburg then Orlando, and now, Tarpon Springs.

Comments

Total: 273, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

MrTaikitso: As a GX8 owner, the fact they left out a flippy forward screen (ideal for composing video), mic input, exp comp dial and a flip up EVF indicates that other than the slightly improved stabilization and shutter, GX8 is still the top end.

However, it augers well for the GX8 successor's feature set. Perhaps we have something very exciting to look forward to.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2016 at 13:00 UTC
On article Great Eight: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 review (526 comments in total)
In reply to:

princecody: Is DPreview being "dramatic" on this shutter shock thang? I've talked to a bunch of Panasonic GX8 owners on here and on other sites that say they haven't had this issue. Maybe DPreview got a defective unit in for review?

My frustration with all the SS fright inducing hoopla is the lack of objective information that would lead users to the knowledge of what SS looks like and the ability to move away from an overall brand indictment. If SS is analogous to mirror slap in a DSLR in film, then the entire film plane shudders when a mirror moves up and down and the mirror and/or body are poorly dampened. If this is correct, then the corollary behavior in digital would be the entire sensor shuddering durring the same process or durring shutter movement . If so, the whole image would exhibit the double image or blurring that is often identified as being caused by SS. If, on the other hand, the flaws exhibited do not extend across the whole image but, rather, are isolated and discrete then I would be reluctant to attribute those flaws to SS. Consequently, it would be a valuable service for someone - DPReview, perhaps - to create a set of exemplars that illustrate how to recognize and diagnose the flaws.

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2016 at 18:47 UTC
On article Great Eight: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 review (526 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ed Overstreet: The new Auto feature for the electronic shutter, added in the firmware update which gives the Post-Focus feature, is now also available in the G7 in a firmware update -- as well as Post-Focus for that camera. The G7 uses the same batteries as the GX8, so they compliment each other nicely.

The review completely misses the point (IMO) of Post-Focus. Post Focus really shines if you want to do focus stacking in a situation where the subject(s) in the frame aren't moving around. With Post Focus it is now possible to do hand-held capture for focus stacking quickly, silently and easily. In about two seconds of 4K MP4 burst you can record the scene at all focus points in the frame with an f:1.4 - f:2.8 lens in low light at much faster shutter speeds and/or much lower ISOs than you'd need at f:16 or f:22, and yet get the same effective depth of field in your focus stack and without the loss of sharpness from the diffraction you'll get at f:16 or f:22 on most MFT lenses.

Regarding in-camera focus stacking:

What benefit can you envision from such a feature? When I stack focus, I choose the sequence of focus points based on the image needs and my intent. I can imagine no on board feature that would provide an acceptable substitute for my judgement in those regards. Why would I abrogate my responsibility for deciding what I want in focus to an arbitrary rationale established by some group of unknown engineers? Whomever those persons may be, they can't possibly have seen what I am seeing in the finder nor are they capable of interpreting my intent - what they could bring to the practice escapes me.

Link | Posted on Mar 14, 2016 at 16:04 UTC
On article Great Eight: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 review (526 comments in total)
In reply to:

princecody: The only flaw I find with the GX8 is having that tilting viewfinder. It looks goofy to me. Remove it.

I, personally, would opt for functionality over subtlety that does nothing to aid its use. The ability to pivot upwards is massively useful for low level and macro photography. If, on the other hand, you mean that the rubber eyecup extends too far from the back, then I submit that the extra eye relief is very welcome. In fact, one of the first accessories I bought was the larger eyecup to extend eye relief somewhat.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2016 at 20:50 UTC
On article Great Eight: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 review (526 comments in total)
In reply to:

princecody: The only flaw I find with the GX8 is having that tilting viewfinder. It looks goofy to me. Remove it.

Looks goofy? Are you concerned that others are laughing at you behind your back? Just think of it as snowshoes - they look goofy but get you where you want to go in the snow. In other words they both work when you need them.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2016 at 19:33 UTC
On article Great Eight: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 review (526 comments in total)
In reply to:

spikey27: A nice camera, but ....

A big camera needs a big grip, and a number of DPR staffers weren't thrilled with the one on the GX8. It's not as deep as we would've liked

It seems the trend continues toward smaller and smaller products regardless of whether they are so small their usability is compromised. This one is no different.

I've always been a fan of "larger" bodied cameras simply because they aren't as difficult to hold, operate, etc. as the "itty-bitty" ones - regardless of how many features can be packed into them.

Sigh....

I have had my GX8 for several months now and find it still a pleasure to use. For more that 20 years the only 35mm SLR I used was non-metered Nikon Fs; in that time I worked my way through 7 of them. By the time they had seen their full life they were mostly brass with bits and pieces of black remaining. Since moving to digital, I was unable to find a camera that felt as comfortable in my hands - until the GX8. Immediately upon picking it up it felt familiar in shape and size; admittedly the VF was in a different place, there was no prism pyramid, no rewind, no film advance yet my thumb fell to where the advance lever would be, the dials on the top plate (while more of them) felt good and worked well. I never thought the grip was too shallow or awkward; after all, the F had no grip and the closest I came to a grip was either a motor drive or an outboard flash. All-in-all, I find it comfortable and familiar as it should.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2016 at 13:07 UTC
In reply to:

Soggoth: Thanks for the samples!
Edge sharpness seems to be good straight from f/1.4 and great on f/4.

Glad I preordered this lens

Rishi:

Thanks for the samples; an excellent choice of subjects with several shot with a fair range of options in settings. I, for one, would love to see a follow up - sooner rather than later - of a head-to-head series using the Oly Pen F and the Lumix GX8. Given those cameras' role as the most recent top-of-the-heap (in specs, at least) in MFT they represent what may be argued as the best representatives of the core market for this lens. I would also argue for a tightly controlled format that would allow a one-to-one comparison of the results. Thanks again for your thoughtful contribution.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 09:37 UTC
In reply to:

beavertown: $339 or $500???

Sigma website (USA) shows the new Contemporary as $339 in all mounts indicated. They also show the current APS Art lens with the same designation as $499. I suspect Amazon doesn't drill very deeply enough to get the correct price matches.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2016 at 09:25 UTC
On article Great Eight: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 review (526 comments in total)
In reply to:

cgarrard: I still think the L1 handles way better and is much prettier to look at ;). Too bad panasonic couldnt have just taken the L1's shell, replaced the OVF with a nice new EVF and upgraded the sensor/af/processor/lcd/menu :).

I understand and, to a degree, agree with you. However, had what you suggest been done, the result would have been a significantly smaller camera. To whit:
1) no more need for a mirror box - thinner camera
2) flange distance would have shrunk - as above
3) the flange diameter would have shrunk - reducing the need for as large a face.
The resultant design probably would have very much what the GX8 is in fact. It would have even been able to accommodate the second dial on the top plate and an exceptionally nice tilting EVF that so many have commented on so favorably. Compare sizes: L1 146 x 87 x 77 mm and 1090g
GX8 133 x 78 x 63 mm and 487g
Had they done as you suggest it would have only provided grist for the "it's too big" mill - and they may have bee right.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2016 at 21:19 UTC
In reply to:

RStyga: I wish they could make this a F2.8-4 and without much difference in volume. :-)

0MitchAG:
"...Maybe I expect too much from Panasonic... but other manufacturers can get it right the first time, or even on the second - Panasonic though? Nah, 5th time lucky!"

Could you please link us to those stellar manufacturers? I have yet to see any manufacturer that is without slips, hiccups, and other lapses in design or implementation. Also, why, if Panasonic is so remiss in satisfying your needs/demands, do you seem to be supporting their efforts so vigorously as evidenced by your gear list?

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2016 at 08:28 UTC
In reply to:

RStyga: I wish they could make this a F2.8-4 and without much difference in volume. :-)

0MitchAG:

By all means, bring your power to bear on these slackers. During your next product planning meeting, let them know they are letting you down. Follow it up by giving the whole department a poor performance review.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2016 at 18:48 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: Panasonic should bring for Pana users 16mm f/1.8 prime instead of this zoom and put to shame overpriced Oly 12/2.

Continued:

With reference to the examples given, above: they all illustrate admirably the quality of the results that can be achieved by talented users of quality tools used correctly. My statements had nothing to do with the separation or any other quality achieved with the lens in actual use, but rather with any perceived or actual increase in "niceness" (to use the concept originally responded to) with the change from f2 to f1.7 for a lens of the focal length specified.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 21:40 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: Panasonic should bring for Pana users 16mm f/1.8 prime instead of this zoom and put to shame overpriced Oly 12/2.

Ten feet was a totally arbitrary distance. So, pick a distance, any distance; the choice is determined on what the subject is and what the intent is. See: http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html
The closer you are, the shallower the dof is; the farther you are, the deeper the dof.. That remains true - always - it is just a given. I can think of no specific distance I could have chosen that would have captured anything close to the "majority" of all subject to camera distances actually used with any given focal length. The exception might be the use of infinity as a subject distance for landscape photography.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 21:28 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: Panasonic should bring for Pana users 16mm f/1.8 prime instead of this zoom and put to shame overpriced Oly 12/2.

The 15mm FL changes the results somewhat, but the results never approach what I would consider shallow:
15mm @ f2 subject 10' yields 7.12' to 16.8'
with f1.7 yield is 7.46' to 15.2'
How "nice" is that?

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 20:00 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: Panasonic should bring for Pana users 16mm f/1.8 prime instead of this zoom and put to shame overpriced Oly 12/2.

I wonder if the original user of the "nicer DoF" term actually knows what the in-focus range comparison is for a 12mm focal length lens on a four thirds sensor with a subject, say 10 feet from the camera, with f1.7 and f2 apertures.
12mm FL @ f2 with subject distance @ 10 feet yields an in-focus range from 6.13' to 27.4'
The same setup @ f1.7 yields 6.53' to 21.4' in-focus
Thus, you can see it may be very hard for the f1.7 to be seen as significantly "nicer" than f2.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 19:48 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: Panasonic should bring for Pana users 16mm f/1.8 prime instead of this zoom and put to shame overpriced Oly 12/2.

Mateus1:
"I would choose Pana 12/1.7 over Oly 12/2 just for nicer DoF..."

What does "nicer DoF" look like?

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 17:59 UTC
In reply to:

RStyga: I wish they could make this a F2.8-4 and without much difference in volume. :-)

The point sis simple: why expect Panasonic to deviate from their practice of including OIS in their lenses just to satisfy the wishes of a few customers who may use them on an IBIS body? The chances of that happening are slim to none - about the same as asking Jaguar to offer a Ferrari engine in one of their cars because they are superior at high revs. Or, perhaps a bespoke suit at off-the-rack prices.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 16:27 UTC
In reply to:

RStyga: I wish they could make this a F2.8-4 and without much difference in volume. :-)

Gee, you may be on to something! Many of these lenses are made in China; why not a Chinese restaurant menu ordering option? One from column A, two from column B, MSG yes or no, extra garlic please. After all, I should have a seat at the product planning table; they are custom built for me, aren't they? (please note: sarcasm intentional)

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 16:01 UTC
In reply to:

RStyga: I wish they could make this a F2.8-4 and without much difference in volume. :-)

0MitchAG:
"They could get rid of OIS as well! A weather sealed lens is clearly intended for a weather sealed body, like the GX8... which has IBIS."
Why limit the market to just the GX7 & 8? Admittedly, the GX8 is currently the optimum target, but it is not the only one.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2016 at 21:15 UTC
In reply to:

greypixelz: haven't Panasonic gotten the message from Kai and Lok that micro4/3rds is dead? and don't they know that Pentax is the king of WR and that it had just out-sensor'ed them?

I mean, really, Panasonic! :P

AFAIK, L mount refers to the L1 (Feb, 2006 and Panasonic's first true DSLR; followed a year and a half later by their second) and L10 (Aug 2007) cameras from Panasonic. The L1 was their first movement into a larger sensor, the 4/3" using the same sensor as the Olympus E330. Its crop factor was the same as the current MFT cameras, X2. The only difference was in the mount size and flange distance from the sensor - 4/3" is still 4/3" no matter the mount.

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2016 at 21:10 UTC
Total: 273, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »