I've owned many different cameras over the years, and have jumped in and out of MFT at least three times. Despite having many positives, the system always lacks a certain something for me - it's stuck in a limbo, so to speak, in that it has good IQ but is still handily surpassed by larger sensors, and the kits are small but not entirely practical. A good MFT kit is usually comprised of half a dozen lenses or more; it's ideal for collectors, but not the best for those of us who want a 'holy trinity' that doesn't cost an arm and leg.
Anyway, what I wanted to say is that I'm quite familiar with the strengths and weaknesses of the format, and the G85 was an impulse buy that I could then sell for a profit later. Well, I'm going to sell the camera, but honestly don't want to - it's an incredible piece of kit! The problem lies with the lenses, as usual, but more on that later.
The camera is well built. It's sturdy without being heavy, and the weather sealing looks decent (better than any Sony I've owned, but definitely behind Olympus and Pentax). Some of the controls are fantastic (the AF mode lever, the front wheel, the top dials and the touchscreen are all excellent), but others could be better (the rear wheel is slippery, and the dial function button is in a terrible place). The response of said controls is fantastic, however, and make the camera feel extremely agile in use. I didn't quite like the grip; it's not deep enough to wield like a DSLR, but not shallow enough to hold like smaller cameras either. The EVF is nice, but the sensor is too easily activated, and the switching between modes is slow.
The AF is a mixed bag; it can follow subjects quite well, and has no problems when they move parallel to the optical axis (a typical problem of CDAF systems). The 'slideshow effect' when shooting 6 FPS is bad, and makes keeping a subject in the frame quite difficult. It takes more practice to get tracking right than competing systems, definitely, but once one manages to do it, the camera delivers results competitive with PDAF systems. Point-to-point focus is blazing, even in extremely low light; I don't think there's any other camera that comes close to its performance, except for other Panasonics, of course. The standard focus area box is too large - seriously, no other camera from 2017 uses such huge boxes. AF in video, as is well known by now, is less than impressive - hardly unusable, but way behind what Sony and Canon manage with their cameras.
In terms of the interface the G85 shines. Everything is clearly labeled; the menus are straightforward, informative and clean; there's a switch, dial or button for everything; the camera is highly customizable; and it has plenty of unusual and highly intelligent features strewn all over. A favorite of mine is the direct access to bracketing and flash compensation after pressing the exposure compensation button - a brilliant solution that I can only wish every camera had. The touchscreen operation is sophisticated, quick and comprehensive. The soft buttons on the screen are gravy on a camera with enough physical controls already.
The IBIS is fantastic, every bit as good as the E-M1.1's, which is still state of the art. It's a bit noisy, like many in-lens solutions; current Sony cameras have a much less effective mechanism, but it's dead silent, both in the lens and the body. Anyway, the stabilization is great in both video and stills, and is highly consistent; the latter cannot be said of other IBIS solutions, which tend to inevitably blur one frame out of every three or four even at higher shutter speeds. I did not try the Dual I.S. 2 function, but honestly, the camera alone already does a terrific job.
Video features are another mixed bag. 4K quality is good, and still miles ahead of any 1080p, but doesn't really compare with the current oversampled solutions. It's just not that detailed. It also has a ton of rolling shutter (almost as much as the A6300/A6500), which I didn't expect due to the smaller sensor, recording crop, and total lower amount of photosites. 1080p is very nice, much better than that out of most Canon DSLRs or the A6500, but still behind the new Fujis or the 1" sensor cameras. It has no 120 FPS recording, which is a crying shame. Even 100 FPS would be greatly appreciated.
Two smaller aspects worth noting are the battery and the shutter. The former is weak, and doesn't last very long; it also doesn't reliably indicate how much charge there's left. The latter is incredible! Extremely quiet and soft, it's the best thing this side of a leaf shutter on any current ILC that I've used. Props to Panasonic for adding it.
So, why do I give this camera 4.5 stars? I sound overly critical, but actually the camera does most things well, easily and predictably. The interface is a delight, and I can't for the life of me understand how Olympus is the more popular choice in MFT, when they sport the absolute worst UI of any camera brand. Period. The G85 will outshoot an E-M5II any day for burst shooting and video, has a stabilizer that is just as good, is considerably easier and faster to operate, has a much better WiFi app, and feels like a complete package, really. There's nothing (except slo-mo video) that you can't do with the G85, and do it well.
Compared to the A6500 that I currently use as my main shooter, the G85 is a much more approachable camera that is faster in operation, has more direct controls, a touchscreen interface that is light years ahead, and is a generally more competent camera. However, the Sony has some critical advantages for me - its sensor is unquestionably better, especially in low light; shooting bursts with it is a pleasure thanks to its live view implementation; has a noticeably longer battery life; reliably finds focus in difficult situations thanks to PDAF, and does an excellent job of it in video; it shoots at 120 FPS and oversampled 4K that is gorgeous; and it has the right lenses for me.
This last point is why I can't reasonably go with the G85. Despite it being the nicer camera to use, it's pointless without the right mix of lenses. MFT is a system with excellent choices from wide to medium telephoto, but it falls apart at the extremes - UWA lenses are expensive, large, or compromised, and the supertele options are only worse. The price of the Panasonic 7-14mm is outrageous for a relatively old lens that also has flaring problems on non-Panasonic sensors. The Pana-Leica is good as long as you get a good copy; searching for a proper one is completely unfeasible for me (I live in South America - the lens isn't even sold locally here). The Olympus 7-14mm f/2.8 suffers from many of the same problems that my Sony 10-18mm f/4 has, but is twice as expensive, larger, and offers no tangible benefits for me. The tiny Olympus 9-18mm is a good lens for some users, but I want something more robust, and is also overpriced. And then, the supertele lenses are reduced to either two top performers at a budget that is completely inaccessible for many users, a bevy of short zooms that are decent, or the disappointing trio of Olympus 75-300mm, Panasonic 100-300mm and 100-400mm, none of which can justify their price tags. I said I wanted a 'holy trinity' of zooms, and unfortunately MFT doesn't offer two of the three that I need, at least at a price that is affordable for me.
So, I've put the camera up for sale. I'd love to keep it, and maybe eventually upgrade to a G9 (the prettiest camera of the year for me), but I'm out of reasonable lens options for it. And an ILC without lenses is, well, useless. I've no doubt that users looking for affordable, stable 4K on a solid platform will love it, as will shooters using standard zooms and shorter primes. It can also be a terrific backup camera to an advanced user, doing more than the GH4 did at a still lower price. But I can't earnestly recommend it to people who want to shoot supertele or UWA at sane prices; the three main APS-C systems (Canon, Nikon and Sony) are just better for that, without a massive increase in size or weight.
Anyway, what I wanted to say is that I'm quite familiar with the strengths and weaknesses of the format, and the G85 was an impulse buy that I could then sell for a profit later. Well, I'm going to sell the camera, but honestly don't want to - it's an incredible piece of kit! The problem lies with the lenses, as usual, but more on that later.
The camera is well built. It's sturdy without being heavy, and the weather sealing looks decent (better than any Sony I've owned, but definitely behind Olympus and Pentax). Some of the controls are fantastic (the AF mode lever, the front wheel, the top dials and the touchscreen are all excellent), but others could be better (the rear wheel is slippery, and the dial function button is in a terrible place). The response of said controls is fantastic, however, and make the camera feel extremely agile in use. I didn't quite like the grip; it's not deep enough to wield like a DSLR, but not shallow enough to hold like smaller cameras either. The EVF is nice, but the sensor is too easily activated, and the switching between modes is slow.
The AF is a mixed bag; it can follow subjects quite well, and has no problems when they move parallel to the optical axis (a typical problem of CDAF systems). The 'slideshow effect' when shooting 6 FPS is bad, and makes keeping a subject in the frame quite difficult. It takes more practice to get tracking right than competing systems, definitely, but once one manages to do it, the camera delivers results competitive with PDAF systems. Point-to-point focus is blazing, even in extremely low light; I don't think there's any other camera that comes close to its performance, except for other Panasonics, of course. The standard focus area box is too large - seriously, no other camera from 2017 uses such huge boxes. AF in video, as is well known by now, is less than impressive - hardly unusable, but way behind what Sony and Canon manage with their cameras.
In terms of the interface the G85 shines. Everything is clearly labeled; the menus are straightforward, informative and clean; there's a switch, dial or button for everything; the camera is highly customizable; and it has plenty of unusual and highly intelligent features strewn all over. A favorite of mine is the direct access to bracketing and flash compensation after pressing the exposure compensation button - a brilliant solution that I can only wish every camera had. The touchscreen operation is sophisticated, quick and comprehensive. The soft buttons on the screen are gravy on a camera with enough physical controls already.
The IBIS is fantastic, every bit as good as the E-M1.1's, which is still state of the art. It's a bit noisy, like many in-lens solutions; current Sony cameras have a much less effective mechanism, but it's dead silent, both in the lens and the body. Anyway, the stabilization is great in both video and stills, and is highly consistent; the latter cannot be said of other IBIS solutions, which tend to inevitably blur one frame out of every three or four even at higher shutter speeds. I did not try the Dual I.S. 2 function, but honestly, the camera alone already does a terrific job.
Video features are another mixed bag. 4K quality is good, and still miles ahead of any 1080p, but doesn't really compare with the current oversampled solutions. It's just not that detailed. It also has a ton of rolling shutter (almost as much as the A6300/A6500), which I didn't expect due to the smaller sensor, recording crop, and total lower amount of photosites. 1080p is very nice, much better than that out of most Canon DSLRs or the A6500, but still behind the new Fujis or the 1" sensor cameras. It has no 120 FPS recording, which is a crying shame. Even 100 FPS would be greatly appreciated.
Two smaller aspects worth noting are the battery and the shutter. The former is weak, and doesn't last very long; it also doesn't reliably indicate how much charge there's left. The latter is incredible! Extremely quiet and soft, it's the best thing this side of a leaf shutter on any current ILC that I've used. Props to Panasonic for adding it.
So, why do I give this camera 4.5 stars? I sound overly critical, but actually the camera does most things well, easily and predictably. The interface is a delight, and I can't for the life of me understand how Olympus is the more popular choice in MFT, when they sport the absolute worst UI of any camera brand. Period. The G85 will outshoot an E-M5II any day for burst shooting and video, has a stabilizer that is just as good, is considerably easier and faster to operate, has a much better WiFi app, and feels like a complete package, really. There's nothing (except slo-mo video) that you can't do with the G85, and do it well.
Compared to the A6500 that I currently use as my main shooter, the G85 is a much more approachable camera that is faster in operation, has more direct controls, a touchscreen interface that is light years ahead, and is a generally more competent camera. However, the Sony has some critical advantages for me - its sensor is unquestionably better, especially in low light; shooting bursts with it is a pleasure thanks to its live view implementation; has a noticeably longer battery life; reliably finds focus in difficult situations thanks to PDAF, and does an excellent job of it in video; it shoots at 120 FPS and oversampled 4K that is gorgeous; and it has the right lenses for me.
This last point is why I can't reasonably go with the G85. Despite it being the nicer camera to use, it's pointless without the right mix of lenses. MFT is a system with excellent choices from wide to medium telephoto, but it falls apart at the extremes - UWA lenses are expensive, large, or compromised, and the supertele options are only worse. The price of the Panasonic 7-14mm is outrageous for a relatively old lens that also has flaring problems on non-Panasonic sensors. The Pana-Leica is good as long as you get a good copy; searching for a proper one is completely unfeasible for me (I live in South America - the lens isn't even sold locally here). The Olympus 7-14mm f/2.8 suffers from many of the same problems that my Sony 10-18mm f/4 has, but is twice as expensive, larger, and offers no tangible benefits for me. The tiny Olympus 9-18mm is a good lens for some users, but I want something more robust, and is also overpriced. And then, the supertele lenses are reduced to either two top performers at a budget that is completely inaccessible for many users, a bevy of short zooms that are decent, or the disappointing trio of Olympus 75-300mm, Panasonic 100-300mm and 100-400mm, none of which can justify their price tags. I said I wanted a 'holy trinity' of zooms, and unfortunately MFT doesn't offer two of the three that I need, at least at a price that is affordable for me.
So, I've put the camera up for sale. I'd love to keep it, and maybe eventually upgrade to a G9 (the prettiest camera of the year for me), but I'm out of reasonable lens options for it. And an ILC without lenses is, well, useless. I've no doubt that users looking for affordable, stable 4K on a solid platform will love it, as will shooters using standard zooms and shorter primes. It can also be a terrific backup camera to an advanced user, doing more than the GH4 did at a still lower price. But I can't earnestly recommend it to people who want to shoot supertele or UWA at sane prices; the three main APS-C systems (Canon, Nikon and Sony) are just better for that, without a massive increase in size or weight.
