Should Panasonic revitalize the GF line?

brentbrent said:

alcelc said:

GX85 is a major upgrade from GX7 (which is also a major upgrade from GX1) to me.

Click to expand...

Some aspects of the GX85 improved upon the GX7 for sure, but Panasonic also removed many GX7 features from the GX85 in order to be able to drop the price significantly. So maybe the improvements made it a major upgrade for you, but it struck me as a compromise camera that didn't interest me as a GX7 owner. The GX7 included the very best that Panasonic had to offer in a camera that size when it was released. The same cannot be said of the GX85.

Click to expand...

Agreed. The absence of a AF/MF switch could be worked around and if you put a dumb lens on it then it sensed no electronic communication and did auto MF anyway. Many lenses have an AF/MF switch on the lens, but some don’t - then you have to sacrifice a Fn button as a toggle. The AF/MF switch cam back on the GX9.

Panasonic threw their book of good things it had at the GX7 and made it a showpiece of their then technical prowess. The GX85 was a stop gap to plug the hole left by disappointing GX8 sales because the GX9 was not yet ready for release. Hence the double digit, “odd”, number sequence attached to it.

brentbrent said:

brentbrent said:

Indeed IMHO the upgrade on GX9 from GX85 is more incremental such that I picked G85 for the time being, and am waiting for GX7 mk-IV.

Click to expand...

To me the GX9 is the true no-compromise upgrade of the GX7. Well, there might still be one or two little things that the GX7 got better, but I'm sure I would have been tempted by the GX9 if I hadn't acquired a GX8 and G9 in the meantime.

Click to expand...

The only two issues that I have with the GX9 are the stupid retro mechanical EV dial that effective messed up the neat top plate controls for no real advantage - especially as I switched the nuisance off pretty quickly. Too close to the rear dial as to allow the thumb to turn it unintentionally*, leaves the mode dial too small, and makes the on/off switch less ergonomically located. The GX7 rear wheel projects backwards a little making the on/off switch recessed but perfectly placed. Should have been “if it ain’t broke don’t try to improve it”.

* My mechanical EV dial - switched off does not read “0” were I set it at the time - obviously a legacy of being twirled fruitlessly instead of the regular rear wheel.

The other issue is less of an issue - just that some of the goodies in the G9 were left out - I suppose that this was merely to preserve the pecking order with the G9. The RF body has to have a few things left out so that it could be sold cheaper.

Of course wise old country gentlemen are saying that back-burning prevented by “Greenie” activities has “caused” the issue. This is despite both the Fire Service and the National Parks Service stating categorically that they have done more back-burning than ever before. Also explaining that you cannot back-burn unless the season, the wind strength and direction, and the location are right.

I note - who is going to back-burn six million hectares? These forests are in deep deep country and almost inaccessible - anyone looking at satellite view can see just how remote the area and how hard to access. Once a decent size fire starts in there then there is little that can be done other than to try and protect property and lives. Responsible back-burning is already done simply to protect very vulnerable areas. Huge amounts of back-burn and firebreak bulldozing to containment lines were done during the fire outbreak.

3,000 homes were lost but maybe ten times that were actually saved.

In our particular area alone probably two million hectares were burned in mega fires where bushfires are known but seldom dangerous or out of control. Burned from the dividing range ridge right to the sea - maybe 150 Kms. Then south for another 1,000 kms as well - but this was not “one fire” but hundreds - quite a few of them merged. Basically burning from July 2019 to the end of January 2020. But in the early days they were basically ignored except locally. Crowds driven onto the beaches in small holiday resorts made for better world press. But this was the New Years Eve situation.

This preceding winter was the lowest rainfall on record (true) and was on top of several very dry years. As noted it is usually too wet for anything to burn much even if it is eucalypt forest where branches drop tinder dry and even green leaves can burn ferociously as they are full of oil.

So it was a bit of a shock to our system to see such extensive and huge fire storms.

The thing about it is that it is unlikely to be geared up to burn so well for a good while as all the fuel was burned out. Back-burning bare ground and blackened trees? What a joke.

Tom Caldwell said:

Of course wise old country gentlemen are saying that back-burning prevented by “Greenie” activities has “caused” the issue. This is despite both the Fire Service and the National Parks Service stating categorically that they have done more back-burning than ever before. Also explaining that you cannot back-burn unless the season, the wind strength and direction, and the location are right.

I note - who is going to back-burn six million hectares? These forests are in deep deep country and almost inaccessible - anyone looking at satellite view can see just how remote the area and how hard to access. Once a decent size fire starts in there then there is little that can be done other than to try and protect property and lives. Responsible back-burning is already done simply to protect very vulnerable areas. Huge amounts of back-burn and firebreak bulldozing to containment lines were done during the fire outbreak.

Click to expand...

The fire-fighters faced a hellish impossible task . I recall the video where the fireman eloquently passed judgement on your PM

Tom Caldwell said:

3,000 homes were lost but maybe ten times that were actually saved.

Click to expand...

Still an awful lot of folk forced to start over

Tom Caldwell said:

In our particular area alone probably two million hectares were burned in mega fires where bushfires are known but seldom dangerous or out of control. Burned from the dividing range ridge right to the sea - maybe 150 Kms. Then south for another 1,000 kms as well - but this was not “one fire” but hundreds - quite a few of them merged. Basically burning from July 2019 to the end of January 2020. But in the early days they were basically ignored except locally. Crowds driven onto the beaches in small holiday resorts made for better world press. But this was the New Years Eve situation.

This preceding winter was the lowest rainfall on record (true) and was on top of several very dry years. As noted it is usually too wet for anything to burn much even if it is eucalypt forest where branches drop tinder dry and even green leaves can burn ferociously as they are full of oil.

So it was a bit of a shock to our system to see such extensive and huge fire storms.

Click to expand...

No wonder !

Tom Caldwell said:

The thing about it is that it is unlikely to be geared up to burn so well for a good while as all the fuel was burned out. Back-burning bare ground and blackened trees? What a joke.

Click to expand...

That is a positive take from it , no fuel no fire

PM went off for a quiet Christmas holiday with family. Main roads north had been cut by fires, already hundreds of homes lost - fires had been pretty bad for months. The Feds seemed asleep.

When the fires threatened some Sydney suburbs city folk suddenly “woke up” that it was a bit more than just annoying pea soup smoke haze. The fires then broke out more seriously on the south coast but Sydney went ahead with its fireworks display anyway whilst the same night horrified holiday makers watched from the beach as 300+ local homes burned for their own “fireworks night” - they then found the PM and asked him to come home. Made the mistake of saying that the fire fighters liked volunteering for the job.

Hardly surprising that nobody was going to shake his hand when he (finally) tuned up for a photo-op - meet and greet - some of the people there had just lost their homes and he expected them to be happy that he had turned up with the cameras.

Heck many of these fire fighters are retired people and women who have the time to be off fighting fires for months. Others have day jobs and need the support of their regular employers to be absent from work for an extended period. Some of them died.

If I were employing fire fighters I would have paid them their regular ages anyway - but how many absent fire fighters can any particular small business support? They are mainly country heroes as most of the fires are away from seriously urban areas. Volunteers = don’t get paid.

But this is seriously off topic and I am in it - sorry.

Some seriously good images of the fires were taken - I never wanted to get close enough or get in the way of the fire fighting effort myself.

brentbrent said:

alcelc said:

GX85 is a major upgrade from GX7 (which is also a major upgrade from GX1) to me.

Click to expand...

Some aspects of the GX85 improved upon the GX7 for sure, but Panasonic also removed many GX7 features from the GX85 in order to be able to drop the price significantly. So maybe the improvements made it a major upgrade for you, but it struck me as a compromise camera that didn't interest me as a GX7 owner. The GX7 included the very best that Panasonic had to offer in a camera that size when it was released. The same cannot be said of the GX85.

Click to expand...

I agree. That's why I skipped the GX85 despite it having some improvements. For me it removed a lot of the things that I liked about the GX7, without fixing any of the main issues I had with that camera.

brentbrent said:

brentbrent said:

Indeed IMHO the upgrade on GX9 from GX85 is more incremental such that I picked G85 for the time being, and am waiting for GX7 mk-IV.

Click to expand...

To me the GX9 is the true no-compromise upgrade of the GX7. Well, there might still be one or two little things that the GX7 got better, but I'm sure I would have been tempted by the GX9 if I hadn't acquired a GX8 and G9 in the meantime.

Click to expand...

For me the only really significant thing the GX9 lacks compared with the GX7 is a decent grip.

The GX7 fit my hand perfectly and was secure even when using a long lens. In contrast I find the GX9 really slippery and uncomfortable to hold without adding an accessory grip, which makes it bigger than the GX7.

SteveY80 said:

SteveY80 wrote:.

For me the only really significant thing the GX9 lacks compared with the GX7 is a decent grip.

Click to expand...

Absolutely! The GX7’s grip is fantastic.

SteveY80 said:

The GX7 fit my hand perfectly and was secure even when using a long lens. In contrast I find the GX9 really slippery and uncomfortable to hold without adding an accessory grip, which makes it bigger than the GX7.

Click to expand...

The grips on the GX80/85 and GX9 are atrocious.

Needing to add an external grip to “improve” handling is simply poor design.
Or they just want to sell more stuff.

I had a GX7 and loved the camera but ultimately bought the GX9 which is also a great camera in so many ways.

I also agree with you that it would also be great if they (Panny) improved (enlarged) the grip and fit a bigger battery in that space as well.

I love my GX9 and these crazy and tragic Covid-19 times have enabled me to go out and shoot more with, and of, my kids. Now all I need is a longer battery life. I do carry a power bank but would rather not have to.

Cheers

Mike F

MikeF15 said:

I had a GX7 and loved the camera but ultimately bought the GX9 which is also a great camera in so many ways.

Click to expand...

It always felt like the GX7 was the first M4/3 camera that really delivered on the promise of a full array of features and great handling in a small package. If only the EVF was larger, or t least a 3:2 aspect ratio instead of 16:9.

MikeF15 said:

I also agree with you that it would also be great if they (Panny) improved (enlarged) the grip and fit a bigger battery in that space as well.

I love my GX9 and these crazy and tragic Covid-19 times have enabled me to go out and shoot more with, and of, my kids. Now all I need is a longer battery life. I do carry a power bank but would rather not have to.

Click to expand...

When I was traveling with my GX7, I carried 3 extra batteries (and 2 chargers) and rarely tapped into the third battery. That was with all-day walkabout in places like Paris, Ghent, Antwerp, an 1800+ kilometer driving trip around Morocco, Costa Rica, etc., shooting lots of photos.

I have a USB charger and a couple of small power banks I can use to charge GX8 batteries, but luckily have never had to.

Yes extra batteries are a good idea (perhaps I'll get one), and I certainly get more shots than the CIPA rating states. But a battery with "promised" 350+ shots would be nice as well. I'm sure that many others feel that way as well.

I am curious to see what Panny has up it's sleeve for the rumoured GX10 (or whatever they call it).

Back to the thread,. Another smaller, well made and capable MFT camera would be nice too.

Cheers

Mike F

MikeF15 said:

Yes extra batteries are a good idea (perhaps I'll get one), and I certainly get more shots than the CIPA rating states. But a battery with "promised" 350+ shots would be nice as well. I'm sure that many others feel that way as well.

Click to expand...

Good luck with those promised CIPA shot numbers.

When I got my GX8 (+ an extra battery), it took a number of recharge cycles before the batteries started delivering anywhere near the ± 300 shots in the specs. I think they started at around 150 per charge. It was a little distressing.

Luckily I already had some batteries from my GH2 that were the same as batteries for the GX8. I eventually replaced the older batteries, because they weren't performing well, either.

MikeF15 said:

I am curious to see what Panny has up it's sleeve for the rumoured GX10 (or whatever they call it).

Click to expand...

Let's hope that it's a REAL, full-blown GX8 Mark II. We already have a GX9 for a smaller camera.

MikeF15 said:

Back to the thread,. Another smaller, well made and capable MFT camera would be nice too.

Click to expand...

GM9, maybe?

jeffharris said:

MikeF15 said:

Yes extra batteries are a good idea (perhaps I'll get one), and I certainly get more shots than the CIPA rating states. But a battery with "promised" 350+ shots would be nice as well. I'm sure that many others feel that way as well.

Click to expand...

When I got my GX8 (+ an extra battery), it took a number of recharge cycles before the batteries started delivering anywhere near the ± 300 shots in the specs. I think they started at around 150 per charge. It was a little distressing.

Click to expand...

Some of us remember when shooting an entire roll (or maybe 2 rolls)? was a respectable outing.

I wonder if the "sleep" modes between shots could be made more sophisticated, as the cameras burn most of the power between shots.

jeffharris said:

jeffharris said:

I am curious to see what Panny has up it's sleeve for the rumoured GX10 (or whatever they call it).

Click to expand...

Let's hope that it's a REAL, full-blown GX8 Mark II. We already have a GX9 for a smaller camera.

Click to expand...

I like the GX9 size for rangefinder-style shooting. I'd prefer if the grip was integrated.

jeffharris said:

jeffharris said:

Back to the thread,. Another smaller, well made and capable MFT camera would be nice too.

Click to expand...

GM9, maybe?

Click to expand...

I'm treating my GM5 with great care, but it won't last forever!

Chris Noble said:

jeffharris said:

MikeF15 said:

Yes extra batteries are a good idea (perhaps I'll get one), and I certainly get more shots than the CIPA rating states. But a battery with "promised" 350+ shots would be nice as well. I'm sure that many others feel that way as well.

Click to expand...

When I got my GX8 (+ an extra battery), it took a number of recharge cycles before the batteries started delivering anywhere near the ± 300 shots in the specs. I think they started at around 150 per charge. It was a little distressing.

Click to expand...

Some of us remember when shooting an entire roll (or maybe 2 rolls)? was a respectable outing.

I wonder if the "sleep" modes between shots could be made more sophisticated, as the cameras burn most of the power between shots.

Click to expand...

Yes!

I found that with some autofocus lenses that if I didn't shut down the camera, it would continue to try to focus on things as I walked around. It must chew through battery power doing that.

Chris Noble said:

Chris Noble said:

Chris Noble said:

I am curious to see what Panny has up it's sleeve for the rumoured GX10 (or whatever they call it).

Click to expand...

Let's hope that it's a REAL, full-blown GX8 Mark II. We already have a GX9 for a smaller camera.

Click to expand...

I like the GX9 size for rangefinder-style shooting. I'd prefer if the grip was integrated.

Click to expand...

Yes, it's a shame the GX9 didn't inherit the GX7's grip!

jeffharris said:

Chris Noble said:

Some of us remember when shooting an entire roll (or maybe 2 rolls)? was a respectable outing.

I wonder if the "sleep" modes between shots could be made more sophisticated, as the cameras burn most of the power between shots.

Click to expand...

Yes!

I found that with some autofocus lenses that if I didn't shut down the camera, it would continue to try to focus on things as I walked around. It must chew through battery power doing that.

Click to expand...

You have quick AF (pre-AF) on! It will definitely drain the battery quickly.

My experience is that the sleep modes are very efficient. The only issue I have had is that the camera does not go to sleep because the EVF proximity sensor detects something. Nowadays I just switch the camera on and off all the time. Luckily it's very easy to do with my right hand thumb.

pannumon said:

jeffharris said:

Chris Noble said:

Some of us remember when shooting an entire roll (or maybe 2 rolls)? was a respectable outing.

I wonder if the "sleep" modes between shots could be made more sophisticated, as the cameras burn most of the power between shots.

Click to expand...

Yes!

I found that with some autofocus lenses that if I didn't shut down the camera, it would continue to try to focus on things as I walked around. It must chew through battery power doing that.

Click to expand...

You have quick AF (pre-AF) on! It will definitely drain the battery quickly.

Click to expand...

I’m not sure what AF mode I use, aside from AFS.

I use a lot of manual lenses, so it’s not an issue with those.

pannumon said:

My experience is that the sleep modes are very efficient. The only issue I have had is that the camera does not go to sleep because the EVF proximity sensor detects something. Nowadays I just switch the camera on and off all the time. Luckily it's very easy to do with my right hand thumb.

Click to expand...

Same here. I just got into the habit of shutting it off.

jeffharris said:

pannumon said:

jeffharris said:

Chris Noble said:

I wonder if the "sleep" modes between shots could be made more sophisticated, as the cameras burn most of the power between shots.

Click to expand...

Yes!

I found that with some autofocus lenses that if I didn't shut down the camera, it would continue to try to focus on things as I walked around. It must chew through battery power doing that.

Click to expand...

You have quick AF (pre-AF) on! It will definitely drain the battery quickly.

Click to expand...

I’m not sure what AF mode I use, aside from AFS.

I use a lot of manual lenses, so it’s not an issue with those.

jeffharris said:

My experience is that the sleep modes are very efficient. The only issue I have had is that the camera does not go to sleep because the EVF proximity sensor detects something. Nowadays I just switch the camera on and off all the time. Luckily it's very easy to do with my right hand thumb.

Click to expand...

Same here. I just got into the habit of shutting it off.

Click to expand...

Well, if you have to shut the camera on and off all the time, they aren't very efficient. Cameras have motion sensors and can do scene analysis, they should be able to figure out that you are composing, lifting them up to your eye etc. and change their alertness status (and their lens actuation) in a much more sophisticated fashion than they do now.

jeffharris said:

pannumon said:

You have quick AF (pre-AF) on! It will definitely drain the battery quickly.

Click to expand...

I’m not sure what AF mode I use, aside from AFS.

Click to expand...

It is found from the custom menu. As the default setting, I would strongly recommend having it disabled. "Quick AF on" sounds better than "Quick AF off", but this function is not about the quickness of the AF, and in many cases it actually makes AF slower (because the camera has focused to ground etc, and not where the photographer set it to focus previously).

Chris Noble said:

jeffharris said:

pannumon said:

jeffharris said:

Chris Noble said:

I wonder if the "sleep" modes between shots could be made more sophisticated, as the cameras burn most of the power between shots.

Click to expand...

Yes!

I found that with some autofocus lenses that if I didn't shut down the camera, it would continue to try to focus on things as I walked around. It must chew through battery power doing that.

Click to expand...

You have quick AF (pre-AF) on! It will definitely drain the battery quickly.

Click to expand...

I’m not sure what AF mode I use, aside from AFS.

I use a lot of manual lenses, so it’s not an issue with those.

Chris Noble said:

My experience is that the sleep modes are very efficient. The only issue I have had is that the camera does not go to sleep because the EVF proximity sensor detects something. Nowadays I just switch the camera on and off all the time. Luckily it's very easy to do with my right hand thumb.

Click to expand...

Same here. I just got into the habit of shutting it off.

Click to expand...

Well, if you have to shut the camera on and off all the time, they aren't very efficient.

Click to expand...

Opening my 2018 smart phone via fingerprint detection is much more annoying and slow than turning my camera on. It happens automatically. For me it's mostly a habit from 2010 or so (it could be totally unnecessary?).

Chris Noble said:

Cameras have motion sensors and can do scene analysis, they should be able to figure out that you are composing, lifting them up to your eye etc. and change their alertness status (and their lens actuation) in a much more sophisticated fashion than they do now.

Click to expand...

Quick AF does some kind of analysis, although it is more than 5 years when I last tried it.

One problem is that the scene analysis will consume power as well.

The last thing for any device is that it is doing something without asking me, and whatever it is doing interferes what I want to do. I understand that people may have opposite preferences.

Some modern computer operating systems are so clever that they do optimization in the background. The idea of optimization is to increase the performance, but when using older computers, the optimization takes much more resources than what is the gain. The optimization can take forever and does not stop when the user becomes active (although it should). It is like increasing bureaucracy in order to control increasing bureaucracy.

Auto-correction for typing is another feature that can be very annoying, especially if you want to type several languages on the same device. In order to be able to type two languages, a freaking dictionary needs to be loaded to the memory of the device. And of course this feature is on by default.

jeffharris said:

pannumon said:

jeffharris said:

I found that with some autofocus lenses that if I didn't shut down the camera, it would continue to try to focus on things as I walked around. It must chew through battery power doing that.

Click to expand...

You have quick AF (pre-AF) on! It will definitely drain the battery quickly.

Click to expand...

I’m not sure what AF mode I use, aside from AFS.

Click to expand...

Pannuman may be right. Quick AF is not an AF mode like AFS. It's a setup option. From the GX8 manual:



Or, another potential culprit could be Eye Sensor AF. If that is turned on and you are carrying the camera on a strap such that your body activates the Eye Sensor, then that repeated AF would also consume the battery faster:







--
Brent

Same thing keeps happening with my GX9 too,.. that is likely why my battery drains quickly. Thanks I never thought of that, I just keep turning it off and on as well.

Yes. Currently using a gx800 (gf9) for kingfisher shooting. I need max detail on mft which is 20 megapixel.

Oh and panny: make your firmware open source, so i can control the camera trough the usb-c port. Adding pir sensors, wifi antenna extenders, ir trigger, etc etc etc. As light as possible camera.

Maybe make a panny pan and tilt. Usable on the panasonic image app.

Oh and panny: skip the black and silver. Make it in realtree camo pattern and waterproof.

There is a whole new type of wildlife photography out there: its called wide angle and camera trapping photography.

Jump aboard panny!