Reading mode: Light Dark

Panasonic gave me a weekened with one

Go to last post
C

cgarrard

Guest
Smaller than I thought, and lighter. Built great, lots to use in this package. I dare say its almost too loaded considering its classic design- almost wish it had a more minimalist design personally. That said, I think its probably the best m4/3 Panasonic has made yet and I suspect many others will think so too. I didn't get a chance to eval the image quality yet because I don't have ACR set up to support it at this time- will get into that when I get more time with it with an extended review on a full production unit (the one I used is really the same, no changes in firmware or exterior have happened).

My first impressions were very positive though. It has a couple of quirks that I don't like, but overall It's a really good camera. I don't like the strap lugs, and the battery life should be better.

That said, I think its twice as useful as other RF designed m4/3 cameras in the past because of the integrated viewfinder yet super compact design. Pana of course makes many m4/3 cameras with integrated VF's but none this small. It's a camera I'm afraid should have come out when the GX1 did, since then competition on models an sensor improvements has really left Pana behind. It's price is too high to me- at this time, and with so much competition. Had it been introduced in place of the GX1, the price would have been fine.

I suspect it will drop very quickly.

This camera may save them for a while longer though, it's that good. Pana needs to get the horsey cart going though if they intend on staying viable in this market, if they don't it may eat them up alive.

Carl


http://www.photographic-central.blogspot.com (Gear reviews)
http://www.carlgarrard.blogspot.com/ (Best work compilation)
Also formerly AlphaMountWorld.com (Now off the web)
 
Member said:
cgarrard wrote:

I didn't get a chance to eval the image quality yet because I don't have ACR set up to support it at this time-

It's a camera I'm afraid should have come out when the GX1 did, since then competition on models an sensor improvements has really left Pana behind.
Click to expand...
It's cr*p "reviews" like this that give the internet a bad name. The OP is pretty much saying the sensor is no good even though he admits he hasn't done any testing of IQ at all.

What a load of horse manure.
 
Last edited:
I think he meant that when the GX1 was released, its sensor (GX1) wasn't as good as the APS-C ones, while this GX7 has a pretty good sensor already capable of matching the latest APS-C sensors.

Although it will be best if the OP can clarify things, because my interpretation of what he wrote may be incorrect.
 
Bob Meyer said:
Bob Meyer wrote:
Bob Meyer said:
cgarrard wrote:

I didn't get a chance to eval the image quality yet because I don't have ACR set up to support it at this time-

It's a camera I'm afraid should have come out when the GX1 did, since then competition on models an sensor improvements has really left Pana behind.
Click to expand...
It's cr*p "reviews" like this that give the internet a bad name. The OP is pretty much saying the sensor is no good even though he admits he hasn't done any testing of IQ at all.

What a load of horse manure.
Click to expand...
Try to take a moment and relax before you reply. Maybe just maybe you're overreacting a bit.

What I saw was through Panasonic's software and the Jpeg quality so far. My review scores aren't based off of image quality at all, rather how the camera performed otherwise which involves many other areas of performance. Was me saying that it's the best m4/3 camera that Panasonic has made so far not good enough for you?

This is a fill in the blank quick review here for DPR, it's not the full blown reviews that I do, or will do of the GX7 when I spend months with it. I thought I was being enthusiastic by posting this! Much to my surprise I didn't expect your kind of reaction a single bit.


Good luck to you Bob.


Carl


http://www.photographic-central.blogspot.com (Gear reviews)
http://www.carlgarrard.blogspot.com/ (Best work compilation)
Also formerly AlphaMountWorld.com (Now off the web)
 
logbi77 said:
logbi77 wrote:

I think he meant that when the GX1 was released, its sensor (GX1) wasn't as good as the APS-C ones, while this GX7 has a pretty good sensor already capable of matching the latest APS-C sensors.

Although it will be best if the OP can clarify things, because my interpretation of what he wrote may be incorrect.
Click to expand...
See my reply to Bob ;).

Btw, I was unaware that reviews in the camera section automatically posted in the forums. Doesn't matter either way really. I rated it 4.5/5 stars, and no camera is perfect to me. Thats a huge score considering I still have to evaluate raw quality through ACR. That's how much confidence I have in the GX7 based on 48 hours of shooting with it. So really, that's a good thing.

Carl


http://www.photographic-central.blogspot.com (Gear reviews)
http://www.carlgarrard.blogspot.com/ (Best work compilation)
Also formerly AlphaMountWorld.com (Now off the web)
 
Member said:
cgarrard wrote:
Member said:
logbi77 wrote:

I think he meant that when the GX1 was released, its sensor (GX1) wasn't as good as the APS-C ones, while this GX7 has a pretty good sensor already capable of matching the latest APS-C sensors.

Although it will be best if the OP can clarify things, because my interpretation of what he wrote may be incorrect.
Click to expand...
See my reply to Bob ;).

Btw, I was unaware that reviews in the camera section automatically posted in the forums. Doesn't matter either way really. I rated it 4.5/5 stars, and no camera is perfect to me. Thats a huge score considering I still have to evaluate raw quality through ACR. That's how much confidence I have in the GX7 based on 48 hours of shooting with it. So really, that's a good thing.

Carl

http://www.photographic-central.blogspot.com (Gear reviews)
http://www.carlgarrard.blogspot.com/ (Best work compilation)
Also formerly AlphaMountWorld.com (Now off the web)
Click to expand...
Unfortunately i agree with BOB. Your review is contradictory. You did mention that you did not have any ACR support etc and then you did mention that the IQ is worse off then many other APS-C sensors. This is very subjective and is not backed up with fact. Many reviewers have said this is the best sensor by Panasonic and rivals EM5, GH3 and if that is the case, it is indeed as good as may APS-C sensors. The DXO mark for the GH3 and EM5 is already beating the Canon 70D 700D and 100D. just my 2 cents.
 
Ag_Paladin said:
Winston Loo wrote:
Ag_Paladin said:
cgarrard wrote:
Ag_Paladin said:
logbi77 wrote:

I think he meant that when the GX1 was released, its sensor (GX1) wasn't as good as the APS-C ones, while this GX7 has a pretty good sensor already capable of matching the latest APS-C sensors.

Although it will be best if the OP can clarify things, because my interpretation of what he wrote may be incorrect.
Click to expand...
See my reply to Bob ;).

Btw, I was unaware that reviews in the camera section automatically posted in the forums. Doesn't matter either way really. I rated it 4.5/5 stars, and no camera is perfect to me. Thats a huge score considering I still have to evaluate raw quality through ACR. That's how much confidence I have in the GX7 based on 48 hours of shooting with it. So really, that's a good thing.

Carl

http://www.photographic-central.blogspot.com (Gear reviews)
http://www.carlgarrard.blogspot.com/ (Best work compilation)
Also formerly AlphaMountWorld.com (Now off the web)
Click to expand...
Unfortunately i agree with BOB. Your review is contradictory. You did mention that you did not have any ACR support etc and then you did mention that the IQ is worse off then many other APS-C sensors.
Click to expand...
Uh no I did not.This is what I said "It's a camera I'm afraid should have come out when the GX1 did, since then competition on models an sensor improvements has really left Pana behind."

Panasonic's sensors have lagged behind other competitors, which is why Olympus is now using Sony' sensors. I'm talking about the marketplace with my comment and had Pana introduced the GX7 instead of the GX1 they would have leaped forward instead of sort of stagnating till the GX7 came about. If that doesn't make sense I'm afraid I'll never be able to explain it to you.
Ag_Paladin said:
This is very subjective and is not backed up with fact.
Click to expand...
Reviews always are and since I never said that your comment is null. As is the rest and why I'm not going to comment on it.

Carl
http://www.photographic-central.blogspot.com (Gear reviews)
http://www.carlgarrard.blogspot.com/ (Best work compilation)
Also formerly AlphaMountWorld.com (Now off the web)
 
caimi said:
caimi wrote:

Have you spent any time with the Fujifilm XE-1or XPro-1 models? I'm wondering how the GX7 compares. Thanks.
Click to expand...
XPro-1 yes, but it so different than the GX7. XE-1 would be a better comparison I think. Personally I prefer the handling and menu system on Panasonics to Fuji's. Fuji still seems new to the industry in that respect, even though I know they aren't. Not sure what it is with them. Fuji have quirks too, many, that Panasonic do not.

So having not used the XE-1 yet, I still have a fair idea that I'd probably go with the GX7 over it- but can't say 100% till I used tit to be completely fair. I didn't like the X-Pro1 though, lets just get that straight.


C


http://www.photographic-central.blogspot.com (Gear reviews)
http://www.carlgarrard.blogspot.com/ (Best work compilation)
Also formerly AlphaMountWorld.com (Now off the web)
 
Member said:
cgarrard wrote:

I think its probably the best m4/3 Panasonic has made yet... I didn't get a chance to eval the image quality yet.
Click to expand...
I am curious... Why publish such a rushed first impression rather than do a thorough analysis before expressing judgment? Does anyone out here prefer to make buying decisions based on rushed 1st-impressions, rather than thoughtful reviews? Surely it takes longer than a weekend (and some comparative analysis) to usefully evaluate a camera. And there are already plenty of other "Here's my first impressions" postings on this camera.

Not trying to be rude, just curious.
 
I think the OP did a good job reporting exactly what the subject said. A weekend with a GX7. I personally like seeing these as each of the first impression stories gives me a slightly different view and we all know everyone has their own bias so take all of them with a grain of salt.

It also seems petty and disingenuous to start ripping on a quick review for being a quick review or to be inserting meanings or completely false assumptions that were not even included in the quick review. I know there are many trolls that try to pick fights but this one was actually funny. I am wondering if some of these people have canned responses to any quick review they see and are not actually reading the review. For example, I could not find any comment on APS-C in the review at all but someone took the time to rip the OP for saying the GX7 was not as good as APS-C cameras and rambled on about DXO scores. How the heck did the person read an review and then start making up stuff? This was not even a long review, how confused can you get with a few paragraphs?

I for one appreciate the review, it gives me more insight. May I suggest that those that freak out on quick reviews possibly ignore them since High Blood Pressure is not good for anyone. Of course if you have canned responses ready to go then it has nothing to do with blood pressure and all to do with trolling.

OP, just ignore the trolls, you can never win since they cannot read, do not read or really have nothing of substance to say. Sad to say but the education system has failed a lot of our citizens and we need to have pity on them and not cause them anymore brain headaches by making them think.
 
Member said:
cgarrard wrote:

Uh no I did not.This is what I said "It's a camera I'm afraid should have come out when the GX1 did, since then competition on models an sensor improvements has really left Pana behind."

Panasonic's sensors have lagged behind other competitors, which is why Olympus is now using Sony' sensors. I'm talking about the marketplace with my comment and had Pana introduced the GX7 instead of the GX1 they would have leaped forward instead of sort of stagnating till the GX7 came about. If that doesn't make sense I'm afraid I'll never be able to explain it to you.
Click to expand...
Hmmm.... so you're saying Panasonic should have released the GX7 instead of the GX1 back in February of 2012 to avoid stagnating. Yet the GX7 is being touted by reviewers as having a sensor that's a real leap forward into E-M5/GH3 territory, which surely took Panasonic time to develop the technology for and which wasn't of course available when they released the GX1.

Count me among those not quite following your logic here.
 
Chris Noble said:
Chris Noble wrote:
Chris Noble said:
cgarrard wrote:

I think its probably the best m4/3 Panasonic has made yet... I didn't get a chance to eval the image quality yet.
Click to expand...
I am curious... Why publish such a rushed first impression rather than do a thorough analysis before expressing judgment? Does anyone out here prefer to make buying decisions based on rushed 1st-impressions, rather than thoughtful reviews? Surely it takes longer than a weekend (and some comparative analysis) to usefully evaluate a camera. And there are already plenty of other "Here's my first impressions" postings on this camera.

Not trying to be rude, just curious.
Click to expand...
Totally agreed. This is not a User Review. To me at least, a user is one who has owned and used something for a long enough time, perhaps at least several weeks, to better compare it to what the user had owned and used before. This will make the User Review much more useful and meaningful.
 
David Wilson said:
David Wilson wrote:

I think the OP did a good job reporting exactly what the subject said. A weekend with a GX7. I personally like seeing these as each of the first impression stories gives me a slightly different view and we all know everyone has their own bias so take all of them with a grain of salt.

It also seems petty and disingenuous to start ripping on a quick review for being a quick review or to be inserting meanings or completely false assumptions that were not even included in the quick review. I know there are many trolls that try to pick fights but this one was actually funny. I am wondering if some of these people have canned responses to any quick review they see and are not actually reading the review. For example, I could not find any comment on APS-C in the review at all but someone took the time to rip the OP for saying the GX7 was not as good as APS-C cameras and rambled on about DXO scores. How the heck did the person read an review and then start making up stuff? This was not even a long review, how confused can you get with a few paragraphs?

I for one appreciate the review, it gives me more insight. May I suggest that those that freak out on quick reviews possibly ignore them since High Blood Pressure is not good for anyone. Of course if you have canned responses ready to go then it has nothing to do with blood pressure and all to do with trolling.

OP, just ignore the trolls, you can never win since they cannot read, do not read or really have nothing of substance to say. Sad to say but the education system has failed a lot of our citizens and we need to have pity on them and not cause them anymore brain headaches by making them think.

--
Panasonic GH2, 14mm 2.5, 20mm 1.7, 45mm 1.8, 14-140mm and 100-300mm
Panasonic GX1, Yes, I like it...... Usually had the 20mm 1.7 and it is a great compact system.
iPhone 5

Fuji XP-60 - Fun camera for just bumming around and not having to worry about damaging it.
Click to expand...
Chill out David. This kind of ranting is bad for your health.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
n
Next
w
Next unread
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top