Previous page Next page

Body & Design

While the Lumix DMC-GX7 draws some inspiration from its predecessor (the GX1), it has a more contoured grip and less boxy design. The design of the GX7 can be seen elsewhere in the mirrorless world, namely on the Fujifilm X-E2 and Olympus E-P5. If the two-tone silver and black doesn't do it for you, Panasonic also sells an all-black model in select regions.

The GX7 feels like a $1000 camera as soon as you pick it up. Its body is made of a magnesium alloy that gives it a very solid feel. The only parts that give us pause are the plastic ones, namely the pop-up flash, which feels a bit flimsy.

If you were planning on stuffing the camera into a small pocket, you probably won't be able to get away with it, as it's on the chunky side. That said, the GX7 feels 'just right' for an enthusiast mirrorless class, and it's a lot smaller than any of its DSLR rivals.

Top of camera

Looking at the camera from the top down, everything looks pretty conventional. As you'll see below, that's not the case. Toward the left-hand side of the photo you'll spot the EVF and flash, with the hot shoe squished in-between.

Moving right, you have a dedicated movie recording button, which can be disabled (though not customized), if you wish. Beyond this is the shutter release button, which has the top control dial wrapped around it. The final thing to see here is the fully loaded mode dial, which has the power switch beneath it.

In your hand

The GX7 has a substantial grip that gives the camera a secure feel in your hands. It would be nice if the top dial was a bit further forward, as it's a bit of a stretch in its current location. The back of the camera has very little room for your thumb, making it easy to accidentally press a button. Unlike the top dial, the rear control dial is easy-to-reach.

Tilting capacitive touchscreen

The DMC-GX7 sports a 3-inch, touch-enabled tilting LCD. The display has 1.04 million dots, with impressive sharpness. The screen has a wide viewing angle and vivid color. If you want to tweak the color or contrast, you can do so in the setup menu. Panasonic advertises that the LCD has no air gap between the screen and the touch panel, improving outdoor visibility by reducing internal reflection. We couldn't see any appreciable difference in our testing.

As the animation above illustrates, the LCD can tilt upward by 80 degrees, and downward 45 degrees. This always-handy feature allows you to shoot over crowds, or take tripod photos without craning your neck. Unlike some recent Olympus mirrorless cameras, the eye sensor does not turn off when the LCD is tilted upward.

Electronic viewfinder

One of the highlights on the GX7 is undoubtedly its tilting electronic viewfinder. This feature hasn't been built into a camera since the Konica Minolta DiMAGE A2 (from 2004), though recent add-on EVFs have the same ability.

The EVF smoothly tilts upward by as much as 90 degrees, and is stiff enough that you won't accidentally bump it out of position. Unlike the Minolta cameras of old, you cannot pull the EVF toward your eye.

There's a lot more to this EVF than just its ability to tilt. It's extraordinarily detailed, with 2.76 million dots (equivalent), and the 1.39X magnification (0.70X equiv.) gives you a large view of the scene. Panasonic has also made the viewfinder replicate nearly 100% of the AdobeRGB color space, to ensure the best accuracy possible.

When you're out shooting, the camera switches from the LCD to the EVF when you put your eye to it. If you find the sensor to be, well, too sensitive, then you can opt for a button instead. The camera's optional 'Eye Sensor AF' feature activates autofocus when you put your eye to the EVF.

One frustrating thing that we discovered when using the EVF outdoors is that too much incident light comes in, making it very hard to see - especially if you are wearing glasses. This makes the optional DMW-EC1 eyecup a must-buy, in our opinion. The EVF uses 'field sequential' technology, and while everyone's different, we noticed an unpleasant 'rainbow effect' when rapidly panning the camera, engaging menus or blinking.

Viewfinder size and view

One figure often hidden (or undisclosed) by camera manufacturers is the size of the viewfinder. The size of the viewfinder is a key factor in a camera's usability - the bigger it is, the easier it is to frame and focus your shots, and the more enjoyable and involving a process it is.

Because of the way viewfinders are measured (using a fixed lens, rather than a lens of equivalent magnification), you also need to take the sensor size into account, so the numbers in the diagram below are the manufacturer's specified magnifications divided by the respective 'crop factors'.

While the DMC-GX7's electronic viewfinder is good-sized, it's eclipsed by those found on the Olympus E-M1 (but not the E-M5) and the Sony NEX-6. The GX7's EVF is larger than the much bulkier optical viewfinders on cameras such as the Nikon D7100.

If you're wondering where the mirrorless Fujifilm X-E2 stands, it's nearly the same size as the D7100.
Previous page Next page
384
I own it
152
I want it
36
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 561
1234
Gesture
By Gesture (10 months ago)

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

7 upvotes
Cane
By Cane (10 months ago)

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

2 upvotes
caver3d
By caver3d (10 months ago)

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

17 upvotes
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (10 months ago)

phew! good job someone does!

16 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (10 months ago)

Hehe.

0 upvotes
Gesture
By Gesture (10 months ago)

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

5 upvotes
babalu
By babalu (10 months ago)

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
By Demon Cleaner (10 months ago)

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
By Percival Merriwether (10 months ago)

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
By jeffharris (10 months ago)

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
By Owen (10 months ago)

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

4 upvotes
jim stirling
By jim stirling (10 months ago)

"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
By HelloToe (10 months ago)

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

0 upvotes
jeffharris
By jeffharris (10 months ago)

@ 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
By whensly (10 months ago)

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
By Jogger (10 months ago)

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
By Iskender (10 months ago)

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
By lookrndyou (10 months ago)

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
By lookrndyou (10 months ago)

(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
By lookrndyou (10 months ago)

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
By cgarrard (10 months ago)

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
By Richard Butler (10 months ago)

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
By Richard Butler (10 months ago)

...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
By FrankS009 (10 months ago)

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
By babalu (10 months ago)

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
By Richard Butler (10 months ago)

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
By cgarrard (10 months ago)

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
By babalu (10 months ago)

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
By Raist3d (10 months ago)

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
By HelloToe (10 months ago)

"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
By PicOne (10 months ago)

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
By FrankS009 (10 months ago)

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

F.

0 upvotes
okfuture
By okfuture (10 months ago)

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
By moha (10 months ago)

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

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 33 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
pedroboe100
By pedroboe100 (10 months ago)

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
By greenarcher02 (10 months ago)

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
By Vinc T (10 months ago)

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

0 upvotes
Iskender
By Iskender (10 months ago)

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
By Cane (10 months ago)

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
By D200_4me (10 months ago)

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
By justmeMN (10 months ago)

"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
By Andy Crowe (10 months ago)

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
By greenarcher02 (10 months ago)

I haven't experienced the rainbow effect yet.

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

3 upvotes
Fullframer
By Fullframer (10 months ago)

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
By rpm40 (10 months ago)

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

3 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (10 months ago)

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

1 upvote
Olymore
By Olymore (10 months ago)

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
By Fullframer (10 months ago)

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
By Fullframer (10 months ago)

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

0 upvotes
Summi Luchs
By Summi Luchs (10 months ago)

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
By babalu (10 months ago)

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
By DRNottage (10 months ago)

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
By Demon Cleaner (10 months ago)

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
By Jorginho (10 months ago)

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
By greenarcher02 (10 months ago)

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

0 upvotes
FrankS009
By FrankS009 (10 months ago)

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
By okfuture (10 months ago)

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
By mseawell (10 months ago)

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
By pdelux (10 months ago)

Wise words.

1 upvote
eastvillager
By eastvillager (10 months ago)

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
By Jeanadriane (10 months ago)

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
By Olymore (10 months ago)

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
By Jeanadriane (10 months ago)

"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
By ivey3721 (10 months ago)

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
By martin0reg (10 months ago)

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
By ivey3721 (10 months ago)

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
By martin0reg (10 months ago)

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
By ivey3721 (10 months ago)

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
By rhlpetrus (10 months ago)

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

2 upvotes
jim stirling
By jim stirling (10 months ago)

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
By Henrik Herranen (10 months ago)

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
By yabokkie (10 months ago)

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
By Andy Crowe (10 months ago)

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
By Henrik Herranen (10 months ago)

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
By Piciul (10 months ago)

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
By yabokkie (10 months ago)

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

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (10 months ago)

@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
By tjbates (10 months ago)

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
By Andy Crowe (10 months ago)

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
By jim stirling (10 months ago)

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

1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (10 months ago)

@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
By petr marek (10 months ago)

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

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
babalu
By babalu (10 months ago)

Bronze award would likely be more accurate for this review.

4 upvotes
pdelux
By pdelux (10 months ago)

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
By babalu (10 months ago)

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
By babalu (10 months ago)

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

0 upvotes
Jacques Cornell
By Jacques Cornell (10 months ago)

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
By babalu (10 months ago)

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

0 upvotes
Zayne
By Zayne (10 months ago)

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
By Jorginho (10 months ago)

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
By ntsan (10 months ago)

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
By jackf00 (10 months ago)

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
By Hen3ry (10 months ago)

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
By Andy Crowe (10 months ago)

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
By hayely (10 months ago)

Tears, Jeff!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Bram de Mooij
By Bram de Mooij (10 months ago)

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
By babalu (10 months ago)

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
By vesa1tahti (10 months ago)

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
By inorogNL (10 months ago)

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

0 upvotes
babalu
By babalu (10 months ago)

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
By Daniel Alenstein (10 months ago)

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
By greenarcher02 (10 months ago)

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
By Artistico (10 months ago)

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
By Andrew Butterfield (10 months ago)

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
By babalu (10 months ago)

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
By MikeInRomsey (10 months ago)

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
By AlpCns2 (10 months ago)

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

0 upvotes
AlpCns2
By AlpCns2 (10 months ago)

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

0 upvotes
babalu
By babalu (10 months ago)

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
By rpm40 (10 months ago)

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
By babalu (10 months ago)

Right. Arbitrary award is the right definition for this.

0 upvotes
MGJA
By MGJA (10 months ago)

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
By HelloToe (10 months ago)

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
By Dave Oddie (10 months ago)

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
By pdelux (10 months ago)

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
By Ray Sachs (10 months ago)

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
By zigi_S (10 months ago)

"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
By MarkyM (10 months ago)

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
By Alpha Whiskey Photography (10 months ago)

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
By fatdeeman (10 months ago)

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
By Anfy (10 months ago)

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
By Raist3d (10 months ago)

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
By Impulses (10 months ago)

Yeah, why was this not tested?

0 upvotes
Infared
By Infared (10 months ago)

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
By Anfy (10 months ago)

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
By cruz031 (10 months ago)

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

1 upvote
SirSeth
By SirSeth (10 months ago)

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

0 upvotes
JudgeDread
By JudgeDread (10 months ago)

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
By petr marek (10 months ago)

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

0 upvotes
Pixnat2
By Pixnat2 (10 months ago)

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
By John Driggers (10 months ago)

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
By intruder61 (10 months ago)

exactly.

2 upvotes
Jeff Keller
By Jeff Keller (10 months ago)

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
By MikeInRomsey (10 months ago)

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
By Raist3d (10 months ago)

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
By babalu (10 months ago)

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
By M Irwin (10 months ago)

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

4 upvotes
Digital Suicide
By Digital Suicide (9 months ago)

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
By Jorginho (10 months ago)

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
By alendrake (10 months ago)

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
By John Driggers (10 months ago)

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
By yabokkie (10 months ago)

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
By panos_m (10 months ago)

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
By yabokkie (10 months ago)

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
By Raist3d (10 months ago)

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

3 upvotes
Impulses
By Impulses (10 months ago)

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
By Raist3d (10 months ago)

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

0 upvotes
Impulses
By Impulses (10 months ago)

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
By Raist3d (10 months ago)

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

0 upvotes
Aleo Veuliah
By Aleo Veuliah (10 months ago)

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