Question on M43

Hi,

I am trying to re-enter into the world of photography after a brief interval. I have used film SLRs in the past and in the digital world, I tried Pentax and Canon systems. Last one I used was Canon 5D Mark II with 24-105mm lens. However, after 2011, I did no spend any time on photography due to some personal reasons. Now I am coming back to the world of photography.

My needs are family (kids - outdoor and indoor portraits), occasional landscapes, street photos. I want to enjoy the photography rather than worrying too much about the large equipment. Image quality is important, but I would not be printing anything more than 20x30 (that itself is very extreme as most of the time I would not be printing anything). M43 caught my attention as it looks to have the right balance of image quality with the equipment size. After all I would like to enjoy the photography as it is not a source of income for me.

Could someone help me to answers for the following questions

1) How good is the Panasonic GX-8 compared to some of the full frame options from Canon? (6D, 5D Mark III). Since I have used Canon 5D Mark II, I am quite familiar with Canon setup. Is image quality very much acceptable?

2) What about the lenses like Panasonic 15mm, 42.5mm and 25mm (from Olympus and Panasonic)? I might opt for a superzoom also for video and I am thinking of getting Panasonic 14-140 for that.

3) What about the flash systems in Panasonic world?

Regards,

Emzee.

My needs are family (kids - outdoor and indoor portraits), occasional landscapes, street photos. I want to enjoy the photography rather than worrying too much about the large equipment. Image quality is important, but I would not be printing anything more than 20x30 (that itself is very extreme as most of the time I would not be printing anything). M43 caught my attention as it looks to have the right balance of image quality with the equipment size. After all I would like to enjoy the photography as it is not a source of income for me.

I came to m43 about 4 years ago after more than 20 years primarily shooting medium format (6x7) and 35mm film, followed by several years with Pentax APS-C digital.  The drop in size and weight from APS-C was significant and wonderful and I've never regretted the change.

My largest prints are 11x14-ish and my 16mp m43 files are excellent for those.  The largest m43 print I've seen was 20" wide and was made from an early 12mp camera (EP1 I think).  It was a beautiful print, so I'm sure the newer 16mp, and now the 20mp GX-8, can print larger with good results.

2) What about the lenses like Panasonic 15mm, 42.5mm and 25mm (from Olympus and Panasonic)? I might opt for a superzoom also for video and I am thinking of getting Panasonic 14-140 for that.

I have the Lumix 42.5/1.7 and it's an extremely good lens (and comes with a hood).  The Power OIS is outstanding, and it's sharper at every aperture than my Oly 45/1.8.  The 14-140 has a reputation for being Shutter-Shock prone, so be sure and research that before buying one.

Good luck, I hope this helps.

Clayton

emzee wrote:

Could someone help me to answers for the following questions

1) How good is the Panasonic GX-8 compared to some of the full frame options from Canon? (6D, 5D Mark III). Since I have used Canon 5D Mark II, I am quite familiar with Canon setup. Is image quality very much acceptable?

There is no way to answer this question intelligently without knowing how big you print and what is the highest ISO you routinely use.

I shoot low-light events at ISO 1600 & 3200 for online use and prints up to 12"x16". I also print landscapes shot at low ISO at 16"x21". IQ is excellent for these uses. For reference, my pre-MFT camera was a Canon 1Ds Mark III.

emzee wrote:

Hi,

I am trying to re-enter into the world of photography after a brief interval. I have used film SLRs in the past and in the digital world, I tried Pentax and Canon systems. Last one I used was Canon 5D Mark II with 24-105mm lens. However, after 2011, I did no spend any time on photography due to some personal reasons. Now I am coming back to the world of photography.

My needs are family (kids - outdoor and indoor portraits), occasional landscapes, street photos. I want to enjoy the photography rather than worrying too much about the large equipment. Image quality is important, but I would not be printing anything more than 20x30 (that itself is very extreme as most of the time I would not be printing anything). M43 caught my attention as it looks to have the right balance of image quality with the equipment size. After all I would like to enjoy the photography as it is not a source of income for me.

Could someone help me to answers for the following questions

1) How good is the Panasonic GX-8 compared to some of the full frame options from Canon? (6D, 5D Mark III). Since I have used Canon 5D Mark II, I am quite familiar with Canon setup. Is image quality very much acceptable?

Can't comment relative to FF (but others have) but I can say that Ihave had the G1, GX1, G5, GM1, GX7 and they are reliable cameras that never gave me any trouble at all. The image quality on the early cameras (G1, GX1 2008-2011) left me wanting better, but since then that hasn't been an issue

2) What about the lenses like Panasonic 15mm, 42.5mm and 25mm (from Olympus and Panasonic)?

They are very good. I have the 15/1.7 and find it is a good lens for landscapes and for indoor groups shots. I am not heavily into video, but I got a few nice low light videos out of it.

The Panny 25/1.4 has lots of accolades for sharpness, DOF and bokeh but the Oly 25/1.8 is good too, and half the price.

The 42.5/1.2 is a great lens for portrait and indoor work, but very expensive. But I've not seen a complaint that it wasn't worth the price paid.

I might opt for a superzoom also for video and I am thinking of getting Panasonic 14-140 for that.

Might be a little slow for indoor work. The Olympus 12-40/2.8 is closest to your old zoom and has excellent IQ. There is also the Panasonic 12-35/2.8 with excellent IQ which may track focus a little better on the GX8 but with slightly less zoom range. Both these lenses are F2.8 constant aperture, and so might do better for indoor video.

3) What about the flash systems in Panasonic world?

The Panasonic and Olympus flashes are interchangeable as far a connection to the hotshoe goes. Wireless trigger compatibility is more complex.

Metz flashes for Olympus/Panasonic work quite well too, as does the Yonguo line. I use a Metz, not that I use a flash much.

Since the camera is smaller, the flash head can be closer to the lens than with FF cameras.

Regards,

Emzee.

I would not hesitate to suggest either the GH4 or GX8 bodies. The GH4 has excellent ergonomics and fits (my hands) perfectly. The GX8 also works well (for me) and it has the rangefinder shape that I like. Images from both cameras are excellent. As for the 15 1.7, that is another piece of excellence as is the 42.5 1.7. I like sharp lenses and those two are perfect. The 25 1.7 is a good lens, but I prefer the 25 1.4 due to the rendering of that lens. The older and slower to focus (not by much) 20 1.7 is also an excellent lens. As for longer lenses, there is a new long lens rumored to be coming in 2016 that I will be watching for. In the meantime, there is the 100-300 which I use for wildlife and get along with, but it requires an f stop of 7.1 when at full extension. The 45-175 does not give the reach, but it is a nice mid range zoom with a non-extending design. Of course the 12-35 and 35-100 constant f 2.8 zooms are great lenses and a good match for either of the two bodies that I have mentioned. I do quite a bit of printing on a wide body Epson pigment printer, usually 11 x 17, but sometimes larger. No problems. Good luck with your quest.

emzee wrote:

Hi,

I am trying to re-enter into the world of photography after a brief interval. I have used film SLRs in the past and in the digital world, I tried Pentax and Canon systems. Last one I used was Canon 5D Mark II with 24-105mm lens. However, after 2011, I did no spend any time on photography due to some personal reasons. Now I am coming back to the world of photography.

My needs are family (kids - outdoor and indoor portraits), occasional landscapes, street photos. I want to enjoy the photography rather than worrying too much about the large equipment. Image quality is important, but I would not be printing anything more than 20x30 (that itself is very extreme as most of the time I would not be printing anything). M43 caught my attention as it looks to have the right balance of image quality with the equipment size. After all I would like to enjoy the photography as it is not a source of income for me.

Could someone help me to answers for the following questions

1) How good is the Panasonic GX-8 compared to some of the full frame options from Canon? (6D, 5D Mark III). Since I have used Canon 5D Mark II, I am quite familiar with Canon setup. Is image quality very much acceptable?

Dynamic range at low ISO is better on the GX8. It is how ever far behind at higher ISO. All other parameters are better allround on the FF Canons regardless of which one you chose (from the ones you mention).

If low light shooting is important, the Canon is a clearly better choice.

2) What about the lenses like Panasonic 15mm, 42.5mm and 25mm (from Olympus and Panasonic)? I might opt for a superzoom also for video and I am thinking of getting Panasonic 14-140 for that.

These are all excellent lenses in their respective categories. 25 mm: better Oly, Pann is cheap but has some broad sample variety it seems. Also veru cheap tough.

3) What about the flash systems in Panasonic world?

Can't comment. I have a Nissin i40 I believe which is a good flash unit with four batteries so it is speedy too. But of course this is nothing extensive.

Regards,

Emzee.

Good luck!

emzee wrote:

1) How good is the Panasonic GX-8 compared to some of the full frame options from Canon? (6D, 5D Mark III). Since I have used Canon 5D Mark II, I am quite familiar with Canon setup. Is image quality very much acceptable?

Apart from DoF control differences, Canon (having a larger sensor) will shine at high ISO compared to 4/3 sensor of GX8. So if you expect to be routinely shooting at ISO 1600/3200 and up, you'll be better off with an FF camera.

Other than that, the output from any modern MFT camera is perfectly fine.

2) What about the lenses like Panasonic 15mm, 42.5mm and 25mm (from Olympus and Panasonic)?

For GX8, I would prefer Panasonic lenses, due to support for DFD focusing and Dual IS system (only for lenses with OIS obviously). As for the lenses you mention, 15/1.7, 42.5/1.7, 42.5/1.2 and 25/1.4 are all excellent. The cheapo 25/1.7 is a decent lens, but not very sharp (ie. it's fine across the frame even wide open, but it's not as sharp as you would expect from a prime lens).

I might opt for a superzoom also for video and I am thinking of getting Panasonic 14-140 for that.

That's a bummer. From what I heard, Panasonic 14-140 suffers from jittery OIS in video mode. And is known to be prone to shutter-shock (but that's only important for stills). So you might want to google that first.

3) What about the flash systems in Panasonic world?

Can't help you much on this one. I got myself a second hand Olympus flash from the old 4/3 system. Works perfectly fine on Micro 4/3 with TTL, high-speed sync mode, remote triggering with on-camera flash and all the basics like that. All perfectly functional for $100. But Panasonic also has its own flashes dedicated for Micro 4/3. Those are probably better.

Sorry for the late reply, was gone for a few days.

Thanks for the reply. Since you came from medium format and APS-c, did you notice any image quality issues with M43?

No because I don't make large prints.  The only restriction from the smaller sensor is the size of the prints that can be made, and that's partly a resolution issue (16mp vs 20 or 24mp).  Other than that, the only IQ issues would come from the ISO/noise/DR arenas and the lens quality.  Most of the m43 lenses are excellent to superb, and the newer m43 sensors and processing engines are competitive with APS-C (I use the new G7 and it's a superb camera).  So I would say that the print size would be the major concern.

Regarding the Panasonic 14-140, any other options that you can recommend (either a standard zoom or super zoom)? I am not looking for 12-35mm lens from Panasonic as I am not sure whether it is worth.

I've used a number of standard range zooms and my favorite is the Lumix 14-45.  It's sort of the Rodney Dangerfield zoom these days because of the newer and more expensive models like the 12-35.  But according to my own experience and the slrgear.com interactive resolution widgets for lenses I haven't personally used, the 14-45 is more consistantly sharp across the entire frame than any of the 14-42 models, Oly or Lumix (I had an Oly 14-42 on my first m43 camera that was horrible in that regard).  That's important for me because I do mostly landscape work where softer corners can ruin an otherwise good image.  But lots of shooters don't seem to mind that and choose the 14-42 II because it's slightly sharper in the center.

The 12-35 is as good or better but it costs 3x as much.  I've never found the 14-45 to be inadequately sharp, even for my largest 11x14 prints, and I don't need weather sealing, so I'm not tempted to get the 12-35 (and I often use the lens above 35mm (40-45mm is a great portrait length) and almost never find 14mm to be not wide enough, so the 12-35 range would be restrictive for me.  The 14-45 is a winner and many users in this forum speak highly of it.  It's my most often used lens and lives on the camera full time, only removed when some specialty lens is needed, such as a fast prime like the 42.5/1.7 for indoor portrait work.  I recommend it without hesitation.

Clayton

Re: "25 mm: better Oly, Pann is cheap..."

I think you are thinking of the Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 which has been on deep sale for $99 recently.  But you should be thinking of the amazing 25mm f/1.4 which is branded "Leica" and sells for over $500.  It is not cheap, and it is an excellent lens.

Clayton Jones wrote:

Sorry for the late reply, was gone for a few days.

Thanks for the reply. Since you came from medium format and APS-c, did you notice any image quality issues with M43?

No because I don't make large prints. The only restriction from the smaller sensor is the size of the prints that can be made, and that's partly a resolution issue (16mp vs 20 or 24mp). Other than that, the only IQ issues would come from the ISO/noise/DR arenas and the lens quality. Most of the m43 lenses are excellent to superb, and the newer m43 sensors and processing engines are competitive with APS-C (I use the new G7 and it's a superb camera). So I would say that the print size would be the major concern.

Regarding the Panasonic 14-140, any other options that you can recommend (either a standard zoom or super zoom)? I am not looking for 12-35mm lens from Panasonic as I am not sure whether it is worth.

I've used a number of standard range zooms and my favorite is the Lumix 14-45. It's sort of the Rodney Dangerfield zoom these days because of the newer and more expensive models like the 12-35. But according to my own experience and the slrgear.com interactive resolution widgets for lenses I haven't personally used, the 14-45 is more consistantly sharp across the entire frame than any of the 14-42 models, Oly or Lumix (I had an Oly 14-42 on my first m43 camera that was horrible in that regard). That's important for me because I do mostly landscape work where softer corners can ruin an otherwise good image. But lots of shooters don't seem to mind that and choose the 14-42 II because it's slightly sharper in the center.

The 12-35 is as good or better but it costs 3x as much. I've never found the 14-45 to be inadequately sharp, even for my largest 11x14 prints, and I don't need weather sealing, so I'm not tempted to get the 12-35 (and I often use the lens above 35mm (40-45mm is a great portrait length) and almost never find 14mm to be not wide enough, so the 12-35 range would be restrictive for me. The 14-45 is a winner and many users in this forum speak highly of it. It's my most often used lens and lives on the camera full time, only removed when some specialty lens is needed, such as a fast prime like the 42.5/1.7 for indoor portrait work. I recommend it without hesitation.

Clayton

I have had the 14-45  since getting it as a kit zoom with the G1.

It's got a very nice image quality and I often use it when I must pack a light camera kit.

However, I find it a little slow for indoor work, and some times not as wide as I want, and so I have the 12-35/2.8 as well, and this  gives a 24mm equiv view as well as the ability to get more background separation at the telephoto end.

But I find I'm not ready to give up the 14-45.

1) How good is the Panasonic GX-8 compared to some of the full frame options from Canon? (6D, 5D Mark III). Since I have used Canon 5D Mark II, I am quite familiar with Canon setup. Is image quality very much acceptable?

I always find this type of question tough and the best answer is "you'll have to see for yourself". The biggest problem here is that you're comparing things that are worlds apart in terms of price. And you DO get something for the extra money, though like most things in the photography world you pay as much (if not more) for the last 5% of performance as you do for the first 95%. Your old camera cost twice as much as the most expensive m43 offerings new, and even now used goes for about the same price as a high-end m43 body.

If you were looking at cars this would be like saying "I used to have a Mercedes-Benz S550 and now I'm looking at buying a Toyota Camry, will I be happy?" I don't know. The Camry is a powerful, comfortable and extremely reliable vehicle. It'll get you going where you're going comfortably. But will you start complaining that the ride's not quite as soft, the leather's not quite as supple and the heated seats don't warm up as fast? I have no idea how to answer that. Will you wish you'd spent the extra $60k to get those little things? How should I know?

m43 cameras are generally light, compact, economical, reliable and produce great photographs. But are you going to start looking at the results under a microscope and complain that it's not quite as good as the latest FF alternatives? Are you going to wish you'd spent 2 or 3 times the money to get a high-end FF DSLR? I don't think any of us can answer that for you.

Chris

Thanks for the suggestions. The Panasonic 14-45mm lens is not a newly releases lens. Is that correct?

Yes, it was the original kit lens with the first G1 body and has remained popular ever since. It's currently $267.99 at B&H.

Any comments on other Panasonic 14-42 lenses?

I have used the 14-42 II (2nd generation and current model, which is much better than the first one) and did not like it nearly as well as the 14-45 for the reason mentioned before: consistency across the frame, even though it is a tad sharper in the middle. At various aperture/focal length settings the corners could be much softer, and sometimes the sharpest zone wouldn't be in the center but nearer to one corner. In a nutshell it was not consistent. The 14-45 is very consistent and there is no particular aperture/focal length that I need to avoid or treat differently. That is a valuable asset when working out in the field. I can choose with confidence whatever aperture and focal length the scene requires.

Here is a photo taken with the 14-45 at Zion Nat'l Park. It was shot with a GH2, 17mm @f/7.1
Morning Light, Zion N.P. 14-45, 17mm @ f/7.1

Here's another, taken on my new G7, 24mm @ f/5.6

Big Spike, 14-45, 24mm @ f/5.6

I have never found the 14-45 to inadequately sharp, and I like very much its general rendering of subjects.

Here's a recent yacht picture

Yacht, West Palm Beach, FL, 14-45, 29mm @ f/6.3

I have never found the 14-45 to inadequately sharp and I like very much its general rendering of subjects. I'm extremely happy with it.

Also any comments on Panasonic 12-32mm lens?

I have no experience with it so I can't comment. I hear good things about it in the forum, but I've learned to take everything with a grain of salt because I often place value differently than others. For example, I value consistency more than sharpness. All the new lenses are adequately sharp but few are as consistent as the 14-45.

I hope this is helpful.

Regards,
Clayton