Previous page Next page

Studio Comparison (daylight)

Our latest test scene is designed to simulate both daylight and low-light shooting. Pressing the 'lighting' buttons at the top of the widget allows you to switch between the two. The daylight scene is shot with manually set white balance, but the camera is left in its Auto setting for the low-light tests.

Note: this page features our new interactive studio scene. Click here for instructions on the widget.

Aside from some moiré at the center of the scene, there's not much to point out while the GX7 is at its base ISO of 200 - and that continues as the sensitivity rises. At ISO 800, you start to see just a bit of detail loss, which is noticeable when compared to the Olympus E-M5. As we reach the mid-level sensitivities noise becomes more obvious, though the GX7 avoids the blotchy details of the Olympus E-M5 and Sony NEX-6, in exchange for luminance noise. While noise is prevalent at ISO 6400, the GX7 still retains more detail than the E-M5, NEX-6, or Nikon D7100 do at this sensitivity. Only when you reach ISO 12800 do you see a substantial loss of detail, making this setting (and the one above it) best suited for sharing via e-mail or Facebook.

The first thing we noticed when switching to Raw is the disappearance of the moiré at the center of the test scene. Otherwise, there's just a little bit of luminance noise, which stays under control as the sensitivity increases. While chroma noise becomes quite noticeable at ISO 1600, you'll see that the GX7 is on-par with its competitors. Even as you hit ISO 6400, the GX7 is still holding its own. The two highest sensitivities (12800 and 25600) will require considerable work with the noise reduction sliders if you're going to get anything usable out of them.

Previous page Next page
401
I own it
158
I want it
40
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 561
1234
Gesture

Would create a new award level for this astounding camera: Platinum or Titanium.

7 upvotes
Cane

you obviously don't shoot anything that moves, with AF?

2 upvotes
caver3d

And you obviously don't own the GX7. I do. Neither you nor DPReview know what you are talking about.

17 upvotes
Simon Joinson

phew! good job someone does!

16 upvotes
Raist3d
0 upvotes
Gesture

How many cameras allow you to move the enlarged manual focus box or histogram wherever you want?

5 upvotes
babalu

It seems to me that -unlike in other disputed reviews- the camera per se is not bashed in the comments, but the review itself is. Good so !

1 upvote
Demon Cleaner

Comparing the Pro's and Con's of the GX7 and its direct competitor the E-P5 are enlightening.

E-P5 Pro:
"Superb, high-res optional electronic viewfinder"

Yes, it costs $300 extra. You can get one for free with the GX7, but we're going to lob that in as a Con because we feel you need a $15 eyecup to use it effectively.

Leaves you dumbfounded after reading reviews that downplay poor ergonomics because you can purchase a $50 aftermarket add-on by Richard Franiec.

20 upvotes
Percival Merriwether

I love my Lumix G5, and the GX7 looks like a real winner. Now, if Nikon would only make a full-frame version of a GX7, I'd be able to make use of all of my Nikkor lenses on a mirrorless body!

1 upvote
jeffharris

I use all my Nikon AI-S lenses on my GX7 and GH2 with no problems at all. The Nikon macro lenses I have are excellent!

Adapting manual lenses is about the only way we m4/3 users will get telephoto primes to use NOW, while Panasonic and Olympus seem content to churn out zooms.

4 upvotes
Owen

Nikon should have made it instead of their new Df.......

4 upvotes
jim stirling

"I use all my Nikon AI-S lenses on my GX7 and GH2 with no problems at all. "

There are a few problems Jeff such as the focal length doubling fine for longer lenses not so good for wider.There is no AF , and the lenses are often significantly larger and heavier than the native options.

0 upvotes
HelloToe

The closest thing to a full-frame GX7 is probably what Sony will be launching this spring...

0 upvotes
jeffharris

@ jim stirling

Of course the focal length is doubled. That comes with the territory. And yes, wide angles are sort of pointless, which is again, another given. But given the great selection of native M4/3 wide angles from various manufacturers (Panasonic, Olympus, SLR Magic and Voigtländer) and ultra-wides, like the 7-14mm, that's not an issue either.

As far as size and weight go, since my cameras weighs 10-12oz.±, vs. 2lbs.+, The size/weight of the body balance things out. The larger ones I only use with a tripod or monopod. For me, it's another non-issue. For others, of course it is.

The other point is that there are lenses, like long macros and fast prime telephotos that may never appear as native M4/3 lenses. For instance, even the Panasonic 150mm f2.8 is in limbo now, so, what's the solution? Switch systems? Wail about a lack of lenses? Or adapt… literally and figuratively. I prefer to adapt.

1 upvote
whensly

I checked out this camera the other day, I own a GH3, and an LX7, have owned the GH1 and 2 and G3, so I'm pretty good to go with Panny. I found it bigger than I hoped, found the EVF small and uncomfortable. If and when the cam drops to $500, maybe. With my Fuji Xpro and Sony Rx1 I would probably choose to carry around a GX7 if it was just a bit smaller and cheaper. How about EVF capabilities on the GM1?

I have been pining for breakthroughs in the M4/3rd sensors which looks like a couple of years off. I figured Panny or Oly may pull the AA filter off the sensor and offer us that config to tide us over until a completely new sensor. Now I remember that Panny always had problems with digital noise so with these sensors so I'm guessing that will not happen.

With the great small camera big sensor offerings out there from Fuji , Ricoh, Nikon and I'm sure others, if I was not a legacy Panny owner I would probably have little attraction to the GX7.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Jogger

Even though DPR keeps saying that the rating is separate from the assessment. I have to say that it really taints the whole review, to the point where i dont bother with reading the review anymore. The "best in class" RX100v2 and now this one are perfect examples of the disconnect.

Back in the day, I used to read them front to back, even on cameras i had no intention of buying. But, now there are other sources. I wont bother reading this one.

I bet DPR gets more page hits (i.e. more ad revenue) from the comments section than the actual review.

24 upvotes
Iskender

Well, I guess you save time this way.

You *could* ignore the ratings instead, and read the content. But if you're that happy to just skip the content, you probably never liked it much in the first place. I don't think the rating has a lot to do with if the review is read or not.

1 upvote
lookrndyou

Blathering on some more...

Sometime -- when -- IF? -- I get around to it, I can see dozens of menu items that may or may not come in handy. For now, the very basic and "photographic" parts of it just really work, and really work well.

The pictures, examined on the larger screen, simply impress and from long experience are what I bet are going to produce very beautiful prints, or any other end display.

I see it's traditional to include at least one whine, so here's a possible one. I'm a Photoshop user on a version a bit behind CC. Camera Raw can't "see" the RAW file version Panasonic has graced the GX7 with. This may actually be a blessing, since DNG Converter makes a good job and file sizes trimmed by 3-5MB each, of the native RAW files. So one extra step, for this workflow. YMMV. As they say.

0 upvotes
lookrndyou

(Blathering on...=)

The EVF feels and looks like a good SLR vewfinder and -- I know the nigglers who obsess on these things can tell me off -- the perception is of no delay in any of the process of taking a picture or looking at what you've done. At the moment of shutter release the EVF "blinks" dark, and so briefly it's only just preceptible. If I'm following a person walking across the street, the viewfinder image reappears so fast (really it's about like the dark interval using an SLR while the mirror is up, but, I'd wager, much shorter than that), and the lag is so minimal, that it is clear from what I see in the finder that the exposure happened when I hoped it would, and not...later. This last is confirmed if I shift my attention to my sly other eye squinting around the end of the camera.It's one very deep instrument.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
lookrndyou

Well, this will be 2 cents or a mere drop in a very large bucket. I am a GF1 fan and user, but the GX7 newly arrived is just so far beyond any (ANY) digital model I have ever used that I am simply overjoyed.

It sits in one's hand like a Leica -- or maybe like the OM-1 of yore. Controls are where they "should " be; almost from the first outing things seem to fall under my fingers without thinking about it.

The whole flow of taking pictures, being at the ready, and of the camera's overall quickness, make it a joy to use.

Then there is silent mode. There. I took a picture. Did you hear it? In fact, several.

4 upvotes
cgarrard

Even I'm a bit surprised on the final score and rating with this one, and I usually agree with DPR's conclusions.

And I do mean a bit, not a lot- as in a sarcastic reply. To me I thought the GX7 would get a gold award by dpr staffers, seems to tick off a lot of what they like in a camera. No worries though, there might be some intangibles mixed in there too with that score.

Personally I think the GX7 is the best camera for m4/3 Panasonic has ever built.

Carl

20 upvotes
Richard Butler

From my use and discussing it with Jeff, I'd put it this way: the GX7 is really good, but not great. The tiling EVF is an interesting idea but if, like me, you're a bit sensitive to the field sequential LCD, then it's pretty much unusable (I'm going to check it against the G6, but it would be enough to stop me buying a GX7, personally). We didn't criticise it too hard for that, since not everyone notices/minds it.

The criticism of lack of stabilization for preview comes down to its intent - its inclusions, plus focus peaking should make this perfect for using old lenses on, but that's undermined by the lack of stabilization when you're trying to align your shots (there are also times that focus peaking only seems to highlight noise, so you end up using magnifies LV, where stabilization would really help).

The touchscreen interface is pretty good but it doesn't feel well integrated with the physical controls - there's massive and overwhelming redundancy...

9 upvotes
Richard Butler

...None of the above are devastating flaws. Overall it's a very good camera, with the best JPEG results we've yet seen from a Panasonic.

However, in use it never quite lives up to the promise it offers 'on paper' - the whole isn't quite the sum of the spec highlights. At which point, against some cameras that are really well worked-out, that's a Silver (which still means this camera is really good), not a Gold.

To an extent, if it had achieved this much a year and a half ago, it might have been a Gold. However, arriving 17 months after the E-M5, it doesn't push the bar any higher (and arguably isn't as coherent a camera), so just misses out.

As always, though, if your needs differ and the things that we were disappointed by don't matter to you, then you're welcome to reach a different conclusion - we just hope our work helped in drawing that conclusion.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
9 upvotes
FrankS009

To each his own. You do your job. And if you are particularly sensitive to field sequential EVFs, you have a personal point of view.
But I don't see your score as fair - the GX7 seems "really well worked out" to me relative to the nits you have picked.

A 79 is always basically a cop-out score. Give it a 78 or an 80.

F.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 12 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
babalu

I agree . Too much personal likings/dislikings were used as pivotal arguments in the review. Sadly, it was not as balanced as I would have expected.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler

The numerical score is based on our testing - the concerns we had about the consistency of interface, lack of stabilized preview, etc, aren't factored into the score. They're only included in the award chosen by the reviewer.

It's not a perfect system or one that it's possible to make 100% objective but, having been party to its development, an awful lot of effort went into making it as fair and consistent as possible.

Looking at the finer grained scoring, the score is around 0.6% lower than the E-M5, which sounds about right to me.

6 upvotes
cgarrard

Thanks for the reply Richard, I'm not surprised and it helps make more sense. For anyone who are negative about DPR's conclusion- they are absolutely entitled to it- why that is questioned on replies so often is beyond me.

To be surprised and mention it is one thing, to try and devalue their opinion or berate them, is intolerable to me. It's their opinion. We are all entitled to our own.

4 upvotes
babalu

Richard, I have always respected DPR reviews, they were the one point of reference for me in the decision to buy a certain product or not. I know many camera dealers who link to DPreview when discussing camera specifics with customers. That is the more reason why I am not convinced this time. I feel your narrative in the review is balanced against the camera, can't help it.

While we are at that, would you consider to change the review in this point:

"The GX7's pop-up flash, which is released manually, has a guide number of 7 meters at ISO 200, which is typical for a camera in this class.

This flash cannot be used as a wireless 'master', though you can buy and attach an external flash that can serve that purpose."

This is objectively a false statement, the camera can indeed trigger wireless flash with the built-in pop up .

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Raist3d

Thank you Richard or taking the time to explain more about the context of the award. As one of the first ones that posted about it, I want to make clear i wasn't particularly upset just confused - more so because of the reasons given at the end (the three reasons).

This makes more sense even if ultimately I may not quite totally agree but makes me think and reflect a bit. Thanks for taking the time. Appreciated.

2 upvotes
HelloToe

"If it had achieved this much a year and a half ago, it might have been a Gold."

That's what's been bugging me. As great as it is, it kinda feels like it should have been launched a year ago, around the same time as the NEX-6 (probably its closest competitor). Tempting as the GX7 is, I can't help but wonder if by spring we'll see a 'NEX-6N' that blows it away. (It'll come sooner or later, of course, just a matter of when.)

0 upvotes
PicOne

Is the launch date a factor, or rather should it be.. how does it compare to other current cameras available in stores now? There is no Nex-6n yet.

1 upvote
FrankS009

May we have the fine grained scoring on all reviews please.

F.

0 upvotes
okfuture

Responding to HelloToe and R Butlers reply just above. He begins: "...None of the above are devastating flaws," and adds "it doesn't push the bar any higher."

That's the thing -- other cameras that have pushed the bar do have devastating flaws. The gx7 seems like an effort to bring polish, iQ, and usability into the complete package.

He references the e-m5 for achieving similar specs more than a year earlier. I'd rather have the same specs now, without the flaws: "Focus tracking distinctly unreliable ... Small controls sometimes awkward ... Several useful features hidden in obscure and confusingly-named menu options."

0 upvotes
moha

good article .. And Awesome blog i love this .. thanks

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 33 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
pedroboe100

Very little praise for the camera's amazing jpegs and color rendition in the conclusion. First camera I own that needs little or no retouching, esp. With WB.

10 upvotes
greenarcher02

Indeed. Although I almost always shoot RAW and like to play with different colors using split toning, the JPEGs from the GX7 and its WB is a vast improvement from the GX1.

1 upvote
Vinc T

Olympus has been offering that amazing color/jpg for a long, long time. So why the praise?

0 upvotes
Iskender

Vinc T: Olympus are praised for good JPEG's, so why not others? The world won't run out of nice words.

0 upvotes
Cane

I guess if it doesn't have pdaf for tracking like em1, you can't mention it. It got one sentence that it may hunt during tracking. How is this a huge deal on some cameras and barely mentioned on others?

2 upvotes
D200_4me

Once again, people have been personally offended and insulted by a review. ;-) The reviews contain a lot of useful information, regardless of the score given at the end. I know there are many other sites that have reviews, so rather than get upset about the score, I guess you could go look at another site that has a score you agree with? :-) I mean...if that makes you feel better. I've owned several cameras that didn't get a gold award here. So what? I liked them anyway.

6 upvotes
justmeMN

"Strong 'rainbow' tearing effect in EVF", "EVF is hard to see outdoors".

A $1,100 mirrorless camera that's not as good as a bottom-of-the-line DSLR.

1 upvote
Andy Crowe

On the other hand a bottom-of-the-line DSLR viewfinder is smaller, darkens on DOF preview, can't be used for WB preview or image review and doesn't support focus peaking.

7 upvotes
greenarcher02

I haven't experienced the rainbow effect yet.

As for DSLR, I can't even use the viewfinder in dark places.

3 upvotes
Fullframer

Cant use the viewfinder on a DSLR in dark places?? I have no problem using my D3S viewfinder in any condition. It is far better than any EVF ive used.

0 upvotes
rpm40

I would hope your $6,000+ professional 35mm body has a good viewfinder. :P

3 upvotes
Andy Crowe

I wouldn't call a D3S a "bottom-of-the-line DSLR" !

1 upvote
Olymore

I have an Olympus OM-1n at home which makes the D3s viewfinder look like a dark tunnel and even that isn't as good as the latest EVFs in dark conditions.

1 upvote
Fullframer

D3S wasn't $6,000 it was $5,200 MSRP, I paid less than that before the D4 came out. That said, my D80 viewfinder was perfectly usable in dark places, which was a sub $1k DSLR back in 2006.

0 upvotes
Fullframer

Sorry, but your Om-1N is a toy compared to a D3S or any other Nikon DX series camera.

0 upvotes
Summi Luchs

Silver award...so what. For me the GX-7 is the small and capable camera I was waiting for (years). It is right in the sweet spot between bulk, image quality and usability as a photographic tool. I have this camrea since it was available in Germany and have to say, that I'm not disappointed. Only few reasons left to take out my FF DSLR equipment anymore. I must admit that I do stills only, so the missing microphone jack doesn't hurt.

9 upvotes
babalu

Why isn't the very useful feature of "Moving the enlarged area" when manually focusing an image mentioned as a positive point?
The review by DPR of the GX7 leaves me with a shallow taste , as if DPR was looking for reasons to downsize the merits of the camera .

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
5 upvotes
DRNottage

Love the fact that manufacturers are wising-up and putting EVFs in, but these cameras end up so big, I might as well carry my Rebel- and my trusty Sony WX10 for awesome video, for plinking. Now IF it had a mic/ headphone jack...

0 upvotes
Demon Cleaner

So compared to the E-P5 the following is worth 1 point I take it? Congratulations DPR, you've outdone yourself once again.

* E-P5 is more expensive;
* E-P5 has no EVF, requiring a $300 add-on;
* E-P5 has a major fault: shuttershock;
* E-P5 applies focus peaking as an art filter, which reduces the display frame rate, stops the use of other art filters, and is unusable in video (where it's essential);
* E-P5's video quality is a mess with no 24/25/50/60p (no PAL frame rates);
* E-P5 has no electronic shutter;
* E-P5 wifi is only usable in iAuto mode (and unlike the GX7, no control of: WB, ISO, aperture/ss, exposure comp, focus mode, burst mode, bracketing, photo style, image quality, metering, flash mode, video quality and record options, stop animation, etc etc);
* E-P5's time lapse is limited to 999 exposures and doesn't put the camera to sleep between shots;
* E-P5 has no sweep panorama

42 upvotes
Jorginho

Yes, like I said here a couple of times but a nice summary. Also: all lenses will work perfectly fine on a GX7 while Oly does not correct panasonic lenses to the same extend as Panny does. So this cam is more universal as both stablise lenzes.
5-axis is all the EP5 seems to have left, unless I am forgetting something truely usefull.

8 upvotes
greenarcher02

Aesthetics, as some people like the Olympus designs better, but that's subjective.

0 upvotes
FrankS009

I was a bit disappointed with the score given, and the reasons provided for the score. They seemed like severe nit picking to me. If a professor gave me this mark on a paper, I think I would be justified in asking him to take a second look.

F.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
okfuture

I agree. They should stop doing the ratings if they aren't going to be consistent about them.

Just as one example -- they had lots of negative things to say about the X-M1 handling and use and positive things to say about the GX7 in this regard. Yet the scores show the reverse. Subjective reviews + scientific tests are great. But these scores are empty.

"We found this material to be a bit slippery, which doesn't give you a lot of confidence when you're holding the camera. ... Two other design-related things we weren't huge fans of include the very plasticky power switch / shutter release and the top control dial, which turns too easily and can result in accidental setting adjustment."

I take comfort in the fact that they didn't find any major problems with the GX7. After a few months of consideration, I can get this thing with confidence, sure it will be my camera for the next half-dozen years.

2 upvotes
mseawell

I'm at Ramstein Air for base in Germany. We have a mall and the guy that got me started was in (Chris has been shooting since the 60's) and he had the GX7. He let me handle this...gem. Fast AF, sharp, terric feel, ergonomically superb. Of course this is all personal but I can sum it up for you in one word...winner! I love the reviews on DP review but don't forget we all draw our own conclusions. You are upset it didn't get gold? Buy it and go out and take some award winning pics! The possibilites with this class of cameras (including the GH3 I received yesterday, the EM-1, EM-5, Sony A7/A7R are only limited by the photographer! People didn't like the GH2 (bad stills, just good for video) I have 9 IPA's HM's and 3 Spider Awards that beg to differ! Camera's are great but it comes down to the photographer. Love the GX7 and will (when money and Mama allow) get it.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
10 upvotes
pdelux

Wise words.

1 upvote
eastvillager

I've owned dozens of cameras in my life from a Leica M6 to a current Nikon D4 and D800 and in my opinion this is one of the best cameras I've ever owned. Great picture, super fast focusing, great build, great layout and just feels wonderful in your hands. The silent mode is amazing. Love the WiFi and use it everyday to post to Instagram. I haven't enjoyed a camera this much since the old SX-70 days. This camera doesn't deserve a gold rating, it deserves a platinum rating. At a grand with a sharp lens it's a steal in todays market.

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
19 upvotes
Jeanadriane

Surprising review in a number of ways.

Page 1 of the review mentions "the semi-auto Av and Tv modes" of the GX7. Somehow I can't seem to find them on my cam... ;)

Like many previous posters I'm amazed that some relatively minor niggles are given so much weight in the final verdict. Attributing so much importance to features that will have little meaning for the crowd of enthousiasts that make up the target market for this camera, like iA mode or in-camera RAW processing, seems a bit unbalanced.

Although I liked the glorious big & clear EVF of my GX1 better, I find the EVF of the GX7 very useful and usable, even with my darn problem eyes. And for a left-eyer its tilting function is extremely useful.

4 upvotes
Olymore

Aperture priority and Shutter speed priority are sometimes called Av & Tv. And they're semi-automatic as you set one value and the camera the other value. I think that's what they mean.
I suspect that they have to concentrate on minor niggles as we're approaching the point where all these cameras are very good and the minor niggles are all that separate them. And are of course relatively subjective.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Jeanadriane

"Aperture priority and Shutter speed priority are sometimes called Av & Tv" - yes, I know, in Canon land. But otherwise the usual indications are A and S for aperture priority and shutter speed priority.

And concentrating on minor niggles might be balanced by also concentrating on minor advantages, like the many points that are being mentioned in the comments on this page.

Nowadays even a high degree of customizability seems to be counted as a con - when we now can choose whether we want deal with our menus by buttons or by touch screen, that's called "massive and overwhelming redundancy"... My, am I glad I have this redundancy and I can choose to have my touch AF point and touch pad AF on screen and do ALL other settings by buttons! As glad as others probably will be to do everything on touch screen. Hurray for massive and overwhelming redundancy!

1 upvote
ivey3721

Canon, Nikon chose to have in-lenses stabilization system, while Sony has its IBIS. And like Canikon, Panasonic chose to have in-lenses stabilization system,too. Since when the lack of IBIS (or not efficient enough) prevent a camera from owning Gold Award?
And lack of in-camera raw process? Seriously?

4 upvotes
martin0reg

No in-body stabilisation means no stabilisation of video without OIS lenses.
For me this is a real downer because there are some very good lenses without OIS, especially wide angles, which are NOT stabilized in video mode...I have to agree with DP here...

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
ivey3721

Martin0reg, the two approaches (stabilization in-lenses and in-body) have their pros and cons, and that is another story (and a long story). The point I want to makes is that the lack of IBIS (or not efficient IBIS) has never prevented a canon camera (or nikon, leica) from owning gold award. I just don't understand the reasons provided by DPR in their conclusion part. Don't get me wrong, I own both canon and M43 gears.

3 upvotes
martin0reg

You are right. DP did not critizise the lack of in-body stabilisation on other panasonic 4/3 cameras either...but this has become a big point for the olympus om-d..

1 upvote
ivey3721

Think about this:
"the fantastic Canon 85 F1.2 or Nikon 85 F1.4 does not have in-lenses stabilization. Therefore, lack of IBIS, as well as lack of in-camera raw processing, prevented Canon 5D Mark III and Nikon 800 (E) owning the gold award. "

Fair enough?

How about Leica?

The point here is not the score, nor the award, but the reasons provided by DPR in its conclusion part are hard to be justified.

0 upvotes
rhlpetrus

Pretty much same performance as OMD5 in RAW, both daylight or lowlight. Good camera, differences are down to personal taste.

2 upvotes
jim stirling

The same can be said for the E-M1 , e-pl5,e-pm2, GH3 RAW results are all but identical and there has been zero advance in high ISO. I am happy with my mFT cameras GH3/GX7 and will not consider updating them until there is an honest full stop advance in RAW high ISO+ DR

0 upvotes
Henrik Herranen

I think that sensor size should always be in the first page "Key specifications" list, and at the top of it, too. In my opinion if is more important than whether the sensor is Live CMOS, CCD, Backlit CMOS, or toast. Well, ok, maybe perhaps not more important that toast.

Please...?

2 upvotes
yabokkie

basically sensor size affects base ISO performance, and lens aperture defines low light peroformance. that ISO25 on 4/3" should be able to compete with ISO100 on 35mm full-frame.

so it's really well depth that matters.

Comment edited 55 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Andy Crowe

Sensor size isn't nearly as important as the "image quality compared" page because, you know, that's the actual image quality.

5 upvotes
Henrik Herranen

Andy: Of course sensor size doesn't tell image quality directly, but that was not my claim to begin with.
Sensor size is a major feature of every digital camera.
Not having sensor size in the "Key specification" list is especially frustrating with P&S cameras where sensor size can be 1/2.3", 1/1.8", 1/1.5", 1", or anything else. It gives a range of reasonable expectation for image quality, which then can be verified from the actual review.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Piciul

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
"The Live MOS sensor is a brand name of Image sensor used by Leica, Panasonic and Olympus in their Four Thirds System DSLR manufactured since 2006"
So, can you tell the size from that definition?

0 upvotes
yabokkie

we do need sensor area for traditional calculations but the traditional measurements doesn't reflect the nature of photograph.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe

@Henrik I don't really see what the issue is here, it's a Micro Four Thirds camera so the sensor size is implied, the sensor size is clearly listed near the top of the specs on the 2nd page and also very prominent on the overall camera listing pages. What benefit is there to repeating the sensor size again on the first page?

0 upvotes
tjbates

Lack of in-camera RAW processing. What is that exactly and when would I ever use it? Strange score. Something' up.

16 upvotes
Andy Crowe

I suspect the "tendency to close down the aperture in Program mode" is the main reasons for the silver vs gold score.

0 upvotes
jim stirling

Honestly Andy just how many people amongst your readership here are liable to be dependent on shooting program mode

1 upvote
Andy Crowe

@jim stirling How about people in a hurry to get a picture? If I'm in manual mode but suddenly see something that requires completely different settings to capture and need to get a shot quickly I'll stick it in auto or program or auto mode to get it. Sensible aperture/shutter speed choice in automatic modes should be a solved problem in camera design by now!

1 upvote
petr marek

A very unfair review, especially conclusion...
I give you silver award for it!
Olympuss...

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
babalu

Bronze award would likely be more accurate for this review.

4 upvotes
pdelux

Wow some people are really hurt! Its just a camera and a make believe rating! doesnt change the camera in anyway, if you love your camera, why do you care someone else doesnt?

0 upvotes
babalu

In your review of the flash you stated :
"This flash cannot be used as a wireless 'master', though you can buy and attach an external flash that can serve that purpose."
That is ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE ! The camera DOES control external flash units, there is a whole chapter in the manual titled "Setting the wireless flash".
Obviously you did not read the manual.

16 upvotes
babalu

This has now been corrected in the review, after insisting about it.

0 upvotes
Jacques Cornell

One thing I learned here that I hadn't read elsewhere already was that frame rate goes up to 10fps with electronic shutter. That's definitely nice to know. Nice, also, to have the old noise test to compare the GX7 with older cameras that aren't included in the new studio scene database. Would be nice to see an exhaustive test of IBIS with various lenses across a wide range of shutter speeds. There are a lot of conflicting anecdotes out there about this.

0 upvotes
babalu

The frame rate can go up to even 40 fps, although at a lower resolution of 4MP .

0 upvotes
Zayne

Dear DPReview, please just tell me why the video score is the same with E-P5 & E-M1? Don't tell me it is because it doesn't have the mic input. Spec to spec this camera even blow out of the water the video spec of E-M1. Make comparison the video quality out of the box and tell us are they really equal, hence you giving the same score?

17 upvotes
Jorginho

I did not see it, thx. This is absurd if true. Liek I said below: 1 point more than EP5 inspite of silent shutter, built in EVF, indeed much better video, same IQ, I think a better menu, I think much better ergonomics and last but not least: a much lower price. It is beyond me. If I want an EP5 with EVF of similar IQ, I need to add another 250 euro or so....And I am no panny fan: I have the EPl5 and like it a whole lot.

8 upvotes
ntsan

Yeah the video is in a different league than Olympus and their crap codec, a simple video of dog running will result in macro blocking on Olympus machine

0 upvotes
jackf00

In addition, what is surprising is that in the EM1 review they conclude by “Disappointing video quality” while in the GX7 review they say in some of the comments “The video quality is impressive” but finally not even mention this as a Conclusion – Pros, and give same video performance level in their camera comparison tool.
Not very consistent review as usual !

In fact, DPR just start deciding which award to give and then find which arguments they will use to qchieve their choice ! Not fair review definitely !

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
Hen3ry

This focus on the EVF's "tearing" effect is ludicrous. Is if going to affect your photography 99% of the time? No!

So what’s the big deal? This is a reviewers' nitpick, something they are trying to hang their hat on because the camera is so darned good.

Where is the silent mode of the much lauded E-M5? How does it compare for size? What about its pop-up flash (reported here as flimsy -- ALL pop-up flashes of that type are flimsy, but it is way, way better than none at all!).

Then there is the nonsensical expectation that you should be able to see through the EVF with glasses. Come on!!! I've been photographing for 50 years with glasses, and I have NEVER had an eye level viewfinder that works with glasses! The glasses used to go into my pocket; nowadays, they!).

As for the necessity to have the optional eye cup for sans glasses viewfinding -- OF COURSE!! I have been using them on every camera I have had for 50 years. Literally.

Give the GX7 the gold it deserves.

Cheers, geoff

32 upvotes
Andy Crowe

Yeah, when I wear glasses I don't actually look through the viewfinder with them, that's what the dioptre adjustment is for!

5 upvotes
hayely

Tears, Jeff!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Bram de Mooij

I wear glasses. The em5 viewfinder does not give me problems. I keep my glasses on. If the gx7 viewfinder requires me to put my glasses off, that would be a major disappointment.

3 upvotes
babalu

No it does not require you to put off your glasses, unless you wear them very far down your nose, like some reading glases are worn.
The tiltable EVF has some real advantage, as you can use it with just a little bit of tilt, which may provide a better and less conspicious appeareance while shooting and better ergonomics of neck position at that, and , because it's tiltable, it offers a GREAT advantage to left-eyed viewers. Finally, it is a fine aid when it comes to viewing in bright light conditions while shooting macro subjects.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
vesa1tahti

Problems in opening samples and starting slide shows. Explorer 9: samples sites don't get opened at all. Firefox and Chrome: individual images can be opened but slide shows not. What to do? Thanks a'lot. BTW: Windows 7.

1 upvote
inorogNL

same problem here, I just updated to latest adobe flash and still slideshow not working

0 upvotes
babalu

Show me a better, more flexible viewfinder camera with exchangeable lenses at this price point. There simply aren't any, and that is something the reviewer did not consider.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
5 upvotes
Daniel Alenstein

Sony Nex-7? "Better" is of course a relative term. The Nex-7 has the raw image qualtity in it's favour and is quite a bit cheaper today. GX7 still looks very nice. Envy the silent mode.

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
greenarcher02

Although NEX-7 and GX7 RAW are very close. Close enough that it's the system that matters most, not the sensor size and RAW quality.

And besides, NEX-7 and NEX-6 aren't that flexible in terms of buttons and menus, and the NEX menus are the worst for a camera.

0 upvotes
Artistico

If this camera had existed a year ago, i probably would have got it instead of the Olympus OM-D EM5. I see Panasonic even fixed the awful dynamic range that used to bother me with the GH2 I had before. As it doesn't improve on the E-M5 in more than really tiny ways, and possibly the IBIS isn't as good (which remains to be seen), I'll stick to Olympus for now.

3 upvotes
Andrew Butterfield

The EVF is hard to see outdoors? This is a bit of a shocker, since the point of the EVF is that it should be for when you can't see the LCD outdoors. It's hard to believe this is the case.

5 upvotes
babalu

I agree, you can VERY WELL see the the image in the EVF outdoors, and it's invaluable at bright light conditions.

2 upvotes
MikeInRomsey

This is totally ludicrous. I have used it outside with no problems whatsoever. I was worried about the tearing issue but again have not experienced any issue when using the EVF. I do not wear glasses however and this may help.

6 upvotes
AlpCns2

I agree. I think maybe they meant the LCD is hard to see outdoors?

0 upvotes
AlpCns2

I agree. I think maybe they meant the LCD is hard to see outdoors?

0 upvotes
babalu

I think the scoring is a slap in the face of those who appreciate things like a tiltable EVF (which can be used in bright light conditions better than the rear LCD) and can also improve life for those who due to physical limitations cannot really crouch, squat, bend like young children anymore; and an electronic silent shutter that is not available in most of the compared brands. A gold award was due, I believe I am not alone in that assumption.

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
rpm40

A slap in the face? Over an arbitrary award for a camera? Come on now, you're taking it too seriously. Take a breath.

2 upvotes
babalu

Right. Arbitrary award is the right definition for this.

0 upvotes
MGJA

This is silver, but Canon 70D is gold. Heh.

Really, I am ever more convinced that dpr just hands those out in order to maximize page reloads as irate fangurls battle it out in the comments. Fine, whatever puts food on their tables is a-ok with me.

10 upvotes
HelloToe

No kidding, these days Canon's APS-C cameras can't even keep up with the image quality of little MFT sensors. But I guess we have to keep the legions of Canon fanboys visiting the site!

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
Dave Oddie

It's got IBIS and it's got an EVF which makes the camera far more useful than similar cameras that lack one or the other or both yet these have aspects of them listed in the cons?

IBIS is great and the fact you don't see a stabilised image from it is just how it works and how it has worked to the best of my knowledge on all IBIS based cameras including the Oly Pen cameras and it isn't listed as a con in the el p5 review so why here?

The EVF adds bulk? Well I have seen one of these cameras in the shops and its a very small camera regardless and it gives you the option of shooting in (to my mind) a far more natural way. External EVF's cost a lot and add even more bulk.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
pdelux

Non stabilised VF is a con probably because it is up against the EM-5 and not the PENs, however the P5 does have stabilised view

1 upvote
Ray Sachs

I liked the GX7 a LOT, despite mostly being an Oly user since I got into m43 a few years ago (I really liked the GF1, didn't much like the GH2 or G3, and haven't spent much time with a Pany since until the GX7). But the stabilized viewfinder is a pretty big deal with longer lenses. When I first used the EM5 with the 100-300, this was a revelation. The whole view calms down and lets you much more easily pick out a focus point and lock focus on it. Before this, working at extremely long focal lengths was often more bother than it was worth unless you were using a tripod and a relatively stationary subject. I never got how great BIF shooters did what they did. The EM5, EP5, and EM1 all have this feature and it's an awesome feature. And when I had a GX7 for a month, the lack of EVF stabilization was the one negative I immediately noticed and was bothered by. This is a pretty big deal with long lenses...

4 upvotes
zigi_S

"No kidding, these days Canon's APS-C cameras can't even keep up with the image quality of little MFT sensors."

No matter what a score says. My canon apsc camera takes better photos than a 43 and m43 ever did. IQ is not only about sensor noise. Bigger format captures also more detail and colour information.

1 upvote
MarkyM

But the 100-300 has OIS so the view is stabilized even on my GX1. I have no trouble picking out a focus point.

0 upvotes
Alpha Whiskey Photography

I was curious about this camera when I heard it announced, but the IBIS and LIVE TIME functions on the Olympus EM5 are so useful to me that I don't regret my purchase. Having captured a variety of subjects with m4/3, I think this format is just great. My FX Nikon is a paperweight.

http://alphawhiskey.slickpic.com/photoblog/

1 upvote
fatdeeman

They damn it for the ibis, a bonus feature nobody would have even expected of a Panasonic m43 body 6 months ago, cheap move.

17 upvotes
Anfy

It would be interesting to compare GX7 IBIS to that of the newer Olympus cameras, i. e. the 5-axis system; once DPR made this kind of tests.
Maybe a future addition to the review?

2 upvotes
Raist3d

I think that answer is known- at least of which one will be better. The Olympus 5 axis will be undoubtedly better. By how much? Probably not all that much. Enough to be of difference I suppose.

0 upvotes
Impulses

Yeah, why was this not tested?

0 upvotes
Infared

R/ead this...It's SURPRISING!
http://tysonrobichaudphotography.wordpress.com/2013/10/17/the-gx7-vs-the-om-d-e-m5-battle-for-my-affection-round-1-ibis-evfs-lcds/

2 upvotes
Anfy

Yes, I already read the Tyson Robichaud article, and found the results surprising (I thought GX7 IBIS could be equal to E-M5, but not better, let alone vastly better). Kudos for Panasonic if this is true, but the E-M5 should fare a little better IMHO.
That was the main reason I was hoping in another test, this time by DPReview.

0 upvotes
cruz031

What's worth having a gold award camera if your imagination is ony worth a bronze? ;)

1 upvote
SirSeth

Or if the opinion of a reviewer is going to sour your milk because he dosn't validate your bias.

0 upvotes
JudgeDread

These silver/gold awards certainly are the most absurd ratings a technical review could ever use. This camera paired with a 20/F1.7 is really an excellent (maybe the best) sub FF mirrorless combo, really small, excellent rendition of human skin at high iso.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
petr marek

Agree, it is best M43 camera to date...

0 upvotes
Pixnat2

Why you people bother with Gold or Silver awards? This is very subjective.
The most important is reading the review and make your own mind.

2 upvotes
John Driggers

Oh yeah...the flash doesn't work in silent mode as a criticism???? Why, pray tell, would you want the flash to fire when you are being "stealthy?"

In fact, if the flash would fire, THAT would be a valid criticism.

There are just too many really dumb observations in this review.

40 upvotes
intruder61
2 upvotes
Jeff Keller

I don't see how pointing out a trade-off of the e-shutter feature is a 'criticism'. It's not listed as a 'con' and rest assured that we're not knocking points off of the score because you can't use the flash in silent mode.

6 upvotes
MikeInRomsey

In fairness the review states that the flash wont work when the electronic shutter is selected. The electronic shutter can be used outside of the 'silent' mode.

2 upvotes
Raist3d

Because it's not a trade-off. It's part of the concept of silent mode as a feature.

A trade-off happens when you are losing something, compromising- whereas losing the flash in this context is not a disadvantage, but a complete advantage, as designed.

There is probably some photographer in a parallel universe that would have required the flash to fire in silent mode but that's probably one in several billion humans :-)

2 upvotes
babalu

Or, that the flash would be fired, but without light, as deems in silent mode.. :)
Really, the review tends to belittle the camera .

2 upvotes
M Irwin

If a flash goes off in silent mode in the woods, would anybody see it?

4 upvotes
Digital Suicide

Exactly. The same thing with cameras having "clickless" ring. Why on earth would you want to manual focus with ring that has steps...?

0 upvotes
Jorginho

I did notread the whole review, but I did read the part of the negative points. However: I cannot understand that this cam just gerts one point more than the Oly EP5. EP5 does not have an EVF (so no rainboweffects there..), EP5 has far worse video. EP5 has a shuttershock problem. And if EP5 menu is anything close to my EPL5 menu, it is clearly worse than even my GH2 menu. By far (can work with it though).

A remark like ËVF adds bulk to the camera...come on! That applies to any camera with any VF!

30 upvotes
alendrake

Now I get it - as long as Olympus didin't release a rangefinder styled calera, DPreview considers GX7 as a competitor for E-P5. And not to hurt the sales of Olympus, they had to give similar marks.

3 upvotes
John Driggers

Panasonic makes great cameras that are the be all, end all for video. Then they make a stills oriented camera (the GX7) and everybody moans about it not having every video capability (mic inputs, etc). If you want a video oriented camera go buy the one that's video oriented--that's not what this camera is supposed to be.The new Nikon doesn't even do video so it should get a score of 50-bet that doesn't happen. This effort to list as a disadvantage an aspect of a camera that's not part of it's design brief happens too often.

You don't know why a tiltable EVF is useful, as the LCD tilts? Guys, how useful is a tilting LCD when you are doing a low level shot in bright light and can't see the LCD? I bought this camera via preorder because it had both a tilting LCD and EVF. I was tired of using my tilting EVF from my PENs on my OMD-EM5 when the tilting LCD washed out in bright light. If you don't why having both viewfinders tilt is useful, don't embarrass yourself by telling us.

13 upvotes
yabokkie

very like GX1, marketed as a high end with compromised features.
don't know if it has same capacity for deep price plunge as GX1.

0 upvotes
panos_m

If you want to be successful in bashing a camera you have to say something that is believable, something near the reality but a little uncertain or something that can be difficult to prove. Saying that GX7 has compromised features won't work. Try harder.

15 upvotes
yabokkie

should stand in user's shoes and look for them again.
then you will see more and understand more.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Raist3d

So yabokkie- what exactly are the compromised features of this camera?

3 upvotes
Impulses

Well, it does have a worse EVF than the G6, and IBIS could be more advanced... But I guess that's what the next GX model's for! Just hope Panasonic keeps the line alive.

0 upvotes
Raist3d

How does the EVF is worse than G6? (not a rhetorical question).

0 upvotes
Impulses

G6's OLED EVF suffers much less from the rainbow effect visible to some on field scanning EVF, and it's better sized for stills (vs video).

1 upvote
Raist3d

Thanks. I would have expected them about the same on that. Good to know.

0 upvotes
Aleo Veuliah

Should had a Gold Award, from what I have seen on other camera reviews.

But things are not linear in this reviews world.

17 upvotes
Total comments: 561
1234