GX850/GF9 worthless, nice job again Panny

Raist3d · Jan 7, 2017

situman1 said:
The GM was stuck in a no man's land sort of space. Not enough controls to entice photo enthusiasts and even semi pros, but not basic enough and high priced for the compact user crowd. Plus Panasonic's lack of marketing didnt help either. The GM1 was probably mildly successful. Enough to get a GM5 made. However, I think the complaints and even high price pretty much killed it.

For a new GM to come out, it will have to be after the GX9 with the sensor and processor to justify a premium price. Maybe call it a GX9m. I mean you can't possibly expect the GM and GF line to coexist at the same price point and use the tech in the GF at the same time.

Now that the GH line is introduced with a new sensor, the current 16mp will be relegated to the bargin entry level cameras and anything from the GX80 and up will use the new 20mp sensor from the GH and that includes a new GM.

But that's assuming the GM line carries on.

Harold66 · Jan 7, 2017

Le Frog said:
Harold66 said:

For the enthusiastic most realized that the controls were too limited.

Click to expand...

Agreed - but there is actually room for more controls, if only Panasonic chose to put them there (for example: a 2nd wheel, instead of the focus mode selection dial)

Le Frog said:

leading to very unnatural choices like a 16:9 LCD screen on a 4:3 sensor ratio camera or a very tiny, almost useless evf on the Gm5

Click to expand...

Agreed again - but Sony has proven that you can fit a pop-up evf in a tiny body; not easy to implement (Panasonic conceded that they tried and failed), but not impossible

you are talking about the sony Rx100 ? if yes this is hardly relevant as comparing fixed lenses cameras with ILC cameras does not make much sense on that specific point

Le Frog said:
Le Frog said:

Le Frog said:

...btw - what makes you so sure that GH buyers would not be even happier if it were the size of, say, the EM5 (which, by the way, is more or less the same size with a Nikon FE/FM - a classic loved by pros and enthusiasts alike, back in the old days); and, sorry, but the "big hands" argument is just a lame excuse - I cannot recall anyone using it back in the film days and I fail to see why going digital makes a difference.

Click to expand...

You cannot have it both ways by saying that all m4/3 rds models should be around GM size or around that size and use the em5 size to speak of the GH.

Click to expand...

As far as I am concerned the pro models could easily be EM5-sized (there is a heat dissipation problem, after all, if you wish to shoot 4k video) and the semipro/enthousiast models GM sized

Well it might for for you and me and others but not for those who need to use the large heavy lenses for say wildlife or sports

Le Frog said:
Le Frog said:

if you had big hands, you would not say that regardless of film or digital. For me a camera size like a GM is useless and it feels clumsy, maybe because I shoot mostly in manual mode. And have normal size hands. The optional grip of the gm as i remember did not make a big difference Maybe you have tiny hands, or do not need to access controls much,

Click to expand...

I would consider my hands as normal sized. I prefer to shoot in A or S mode with exposure compensation (I concede used to shoot manual back in the film days, and I guess I might do the same, if there were any digital cameras with 3 control wheels, but only Fuji and Nikon Df offer that option). And the GM cameras suit me just fine.

Can you tell me what is the THIRD wheel in your example. Are you talking about the wheel dedicated to exposure compensation ? or something else ?

Le Frog said:
Le Frog said:

or use mostly small lenses.. whatever it works for yoy

Click to expand...

Manual focus is a different story; focus peaking barely replaces the split prism/microprism of my beloved Nikon FE2 (remember it?), never mind the useless OVFs of contemporary DSLRs, and, besides, my eyesight is not what used to be, thanks to presbyopia, so I prefer autofocus these days.

As for lens size, granted, I have never used anything bigger than a Panasonic 14-140ii (well, once, I have played with a friends Zeiss manual cinema lenses, but that's a different story), so I have no opinion how it would work with a Pansonic 100-400. But I can assure you that a GM works just fine with a 14-140.

POssibly but it does not work with pro lenses or the heavy ones (often the same)

Le Frog said:
Le Frog said:

it does not mean that this should be the experience of others

Click to expand...

Of course not; but since I am the one losing out by the death of the GM line (incidentally: I bought it full price, because it was the camera I was waiting years for) you will excuse me for finding those different experiences irrelevant.

What are you losing out exactly ? your GM still works , yes ? it does not work less because there is no successor ? You even have a wider choice of lenses that would not be ridiculous on your GM that when you bought it ? so what are you losing out exactly ?

Harold66 · Jan 7, 2017

Raist3d said:
situman1 said:

The GM was stuck in a no man's land sort of space. Not enough controls to entice photo enthusiasts and even semi pros, but not basic enough and high priced for the compact user crowd. Plus Panasonic's lack of marketing didnt help either. The GM1 was probably mildly successful. Enough to get a GM5 made. However, I think the complaints and even high price pretty much killed it.

For a new GM to come out, it will have to be after the GX9 with the sensor and processor to justify a premium price. Maybe call it a GX9m. I mean you can't possibly expect the GM and GF line to coexist at the same price point and use the tech in the GF at the same time.

Now that the GH line is introduced with a new sensor, the current 16mp will be relegated to the bargin entry level cameras and anything from the GX80 and up will use the new 20mp sensor from the GH and that includes a new GM.

Click to expand...

But that's assuming the GM line carries on.

Again you should check the interviews I was talking about. The GM line has been dropped . it is over . Move on guys

Harold

Raist3d · Jan 7, 2017

Harold66 said:
Raist3d said:

situman1 said:

The GM was stuck in a no man's land sort of space. Not enough controls to entice photo enthusiasts and even semi pros, but not basic enough and high priced for the compact user crowd. Plus Panasonic's lack of marketing didnt help either. The GM1 was probably mildly successful. Enough to get a GM5 made. However, I think the complaints and even high price pretty much killed it.

For a new GM to come out, it will have to be after the GX9 with the sensor and processor to justify a premium price. Maybe call it a GX9m. I mean you can't possibly expect the GM and GF line to coexist at the same price point and use the tech in the GF at the same time.

Now that the GH line is introduced with a new sensor, the current 16mp will be relegated to the bargin entry level cameras and anything from the GX80 and up will use the new 20mp sensor from the GH and that includes a new GM.

Click to expand...

But that's assuming the GM line carries on.

Click to expand...

Again you should check the interviews I was talking about. The GM line has been dropped . it is over . Move on guys

I moved on. You and I are saying the same thing. I will look for your links though to have a handy reference. Thanks Harold.

Harold66 said:
Harold

Le Frog · Jan 7, 2017

Harold66 said:
Harold66 said:

Agreed again - but Sony has proven that you can fit a pop-up evf in a tiny body; not easy to implement (Panasonic conceded that they tried and failed), but not impossible

Click to expand...

you are talking about the sony Rx100 ? if yes this is hardly relevant as comparing fixed lenses cameras with ILC cameras does not make much sense on that specific point

Why? how does the lens affect the evf?

Harold66 said:
Well it might for for you and me and others but not for those who need to use the large heavy lenses for say wildlife or sports

Care to explain why big heavy bodies are better for this kind of photography (particularly if you are using a tripod)?

Harold66 said:
Can you tell me what is the THIRD wheel in your example. Are you talking about the wheel dedicated to exposure compensation ? or something else ?

Aperture, Shutter, ISO.

Harold66 said:
POssibly but it does not work with pro lenses or the heavy ones (often the same)

If it works with the 14-140, it works with the 12-35/2.8 and the 12-60/2.8-4; and it should work with the 35-100/2.8 too.

Harold66 said:
What are you losing out exactly ?

Nothing much yet and for as long as my GM1 works ; except 1) the new sensor 2) the new processor 3) DFD 4) 4K (ok, I don't care much about that); and 5) the hope of a new model better controls, better shutter and IBIS.

arbux · Jan 7, 2017

sorry to hear about your disappointmnet. There are always customers that want features but don't want to pay for them even if we offer it for good price compared to competition. you're clearly one of them. Please wait year or to for end of life sale.

kenw · Jan 7, 2017

arbux said:
sorry to hear about your disappointmnet. There are always customers that want features but don't want to pay for them even if we offer it for good price compared to competition. you're clearly one of them. Please wait year or to for end of life sale.

Well I did buy the GM1 when it first came out at close to full retail. So your criticism seems misplaced. And I won't be buying the GX850 at any price or even keeping shelf space around for it if it were given to me for free. As must have been clear from the thread title and my post I don't find anything useful to me in the GX850.

Raist3d · Jan 8, 2017

kenw said:
Well so much for the ethic of the GM line.

New GX850 is a hunk of trash that does nothing useful and combines the worst of everything before it.

It manages to be bigger, with no EVF or hotshoe and a worthless flash that can't be tipped up. Dedicated 4K button you can't reprogram.

Yes, you can re-program that button. The camera has labeled three F' physical buttons that's that's one of them. Panasonic allows re-programming of those buttons.

As for the GX850 doing "nothing useful" we have an articulated LCD, we have DFD focus, we have no AA filter, better JPEG engine, faster operation. At least vs the GM1 I see several wins. The GM1 dial in the back is quite frankly pretty bad.

I will agree the rest of the build is good.

kenw said:
Panasonic is just so frustrating and baffling. They come up with some amazing and innovative concepts and then manage to almost immediately destroy them.

Ah well, at least this one won't cost me any money! Shall continue to treat my GM1 with respect and care as I'm sure GM5 users will as well.

End rant!

EDIT: I should add of course they do an awful lot right too of course. The original G line still being more refined and capable most notably in the G85. Can't win em all I guess!

Sup Mylo · Jan 8, 2017

G'day Blue!

Trust an Aussie to ph**k up a Pommie quote.

The correct version is from William Congreve's 1697 play "The Mourning Bride"

"Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned, nor hell a fury like a woman scorned!"

Cheers ;-)

Sup

pterosonus · Jan 8, 2017

kenw said:
Member said:

The GM1 dial in the back is quite frankly pretty bad.

Click to expand...

I would assume that the dial on the back is the same as on the GF7, which I have. It is not the same as the fiddly dial on the GM1, which I used to own. It has click detents when it spins and is not prone to pressing in and choosing one of the 4-way selections when you don't want it to. In fact I prefer it to the dial on the GM5, which I also own, as I find the 5's dial too stiff and awkward to use.

Raist3d · Jan 8, 2017

pterosonus said:
kenw said:

pterosonus said:

The GM1 dial in the back is quite frankly pretty bad.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I would assume that the dial on the back is the same as on the GF7, which I have. It is not the same as the fiddly dial on the GM1, which I used to own. It has click detents when it spins and is not prone to pressing in and choosing one of the 4-way selections when you don't want it to. In fact I prefer it to the dial on the GM5, which I also own, as I find the 5's dial too stiff and awkward to use.

That's good to hear because I do like the GM5 dial, though using often sometimes my thumb is a tad sore.

dwkyre · Jan 8, 2017

Harold66 said:
What are you losing out exactly ? your GM still works , yes ? it does not work less because there is no successor ? You even have a wider choice of lenses that would not be ridiculous on your GM that when you bought it ? so what are you losing out exactly ?

I can answer this one: confidence in the system. I bought into Micro 4/3 because I was very impressed at the camera size/quality ratio. I will continue to use my GM5, but I might be very hesitant to invest substantially in lenses. If I am going to be pushed to a larger camera when my GM breaks, why not save my investment and move up to APS-C anyway?

Sure, I think the GX85 is appealing. I might stick around for something like that, but I would be a bit bummed out by the loss of the small end. The GX85 is large enough to leave 'pocketable' range. At that point, size becomes less of an object for me.

Le Frog · Jan 8, 2017

dwkyre said:
Harold66 said:

What are you losing out exactly ? your GM still works , yes ? it does not work less because there is no successor ? You even have a wider choice of lenses that would not be ridiculous on your GM that when you bought it ? so what are you losing out exactly ?

Click to expand...

I can answer this one: confidence in the system.

Quite right, I forgot to mention that too.

dwkyre said:
I bought into Micro 4/3 because I was very impressed at the camera size/quality ratio. I will continue to use my GM5, but I might be very hesitant to invest substantially in lenses.

Alas, I already did. Now, I am tempted to downsize instead: keep the 20, 45, 14-140 and sell the rest.

dwkyre said:
If I am going to be pushed to a larger camera when my GM breaks, why not save my investment and move up to APS-C anyway?

... or down to an 1" sensor high-end pocketable compact; no extra lenses to buy, no commitment, no disappointment.

dwkyre said:
Sure, I think the GX85 is appealing. I might stick around for something like that, but I would be a bit bummed out by the loss of the small end. The GX85 is large enough to leave 'pocketable' range. At that point, size becomes less of an object for me.

Exactly.

Search

GX850/GF9 worthless, nice job again Panny

Raist3d

Guest

Harold66

Forum Pro

Harold66

Forum Pro

Raist3d

Guest

Le Frog

Leading Member

arbux

Senior Member

kenw

Veteran Member

Raist3d

Guest

Sup Mylo

Senior Member

pterosonus

Forum Enthusiast

Raist3d

Guest

dwkyre

Well-known member

Le Frog

Leading Member

Keyboard shortcuts