GX9 or EM5III?

Steppen wolf wrote:

I've had a GX9 for some time and have recently bought an EM5 MkIII. I'm pretty happy with the GX9 overall - and it's a steal at the current prices. The EM5 is pretty expensive.

However, the PDAF focus of the Oly is way better than the GX9's CDAF. I know DFD has its adherents but it simply doesn't work very well when you try to focus on small moving objects - like birds for example. The Oly is in a different league - it snaps into focus very quickly without problems.

The other thing is the IBIS. The Oly is again way better. The GX9 isn't bad - it's better than my A7RII for example - but again the Oly is in a different league. I never really believed their claims of 5.5 stops stabilisation but I do now. It is pretty amazing what it can do.

The other feature really like is the Pro-capture where it buffers up shots and writes them to the card when you hit the shoot button - great for capturing moving subjects.

But it all depends on what kind of photography you do. I'm pretty well sold on the EM5 despite the "plasticky" feel and high price, If you can afford it I'd go for it. The other factor is what lenses have you got. Some of the nice Oly features don't work with third party lenses. They're both good cameras.

Interesting that DPR hasn't picked up on those alarming Panasonic weaknesses in their testing. They like the IBIS on both, and concerning autofocus, "Fast, accurate" autofocus for the GX9, "unimpressive continuous autofocus and tracking performance" for the EM5III.

nevada5 wrote:

Max5150 wrote:

I've had both. Unless the tilt up viewfinder in the GX9 is mission critical, definitely without hesitation, EM5.3 . I'd also go as far to say that if for some reason you prefer some feature inherent in Panasonic camera's like the menu setup, or the focus system, then I'd pick a different Panasonic camera entirely, like the G90 or wait for the GX9 to be replaced. Although I really like the Panasonic menu and ergonomics in their other camera's, the GX9 was just too cramped for me and I didn't enjoy using it.

The OP says he's had the GX7 since it came out - over 6 years. So I don't think the form is too cramped for him. You didn't mention any other negative, nor did you mention why the EM5.3 would be advantageous, so........

I also have a GX7 that I enjoyed using.  I bought a GX9 and returned it.  There are quite a few physical changes on the GX9 compared to the GX7, and they are all in the wrong direction.  They added an unnecessary dedicated exposure compensation dial, causing everything else to be more cramped, especially the on/off switch.  The built-in flash, weak but occasionally useful, is gone.

The GX7 had a small but comfortable grip.  There was no good reason for eliminating that, but they did.   Why do designers change things for the sake of change, even if they make the product worse?

Chris Noble wrote:

Interesting that DPR hasn't picked up on those alarming Panasonic weaknesses in their testing. They like the IBIS on both, and concerning autofocus, "Fast, accurate" autofocus for the GX9, "unimpressive continuous autofocus and tracking performance" for the EM5III.

They probably had the AF misconfigured. C-AF and tracking settings seem a bit backwards, as lower sensitivity is what makes the focus sticky. Which doesn’t feel intuitive to me. It might help if it defaulted to sensitivity = -1, but I’ve never owned a camera with C-AF that worked, so there might be a downside that I don’t know about.

nevada5 wrote:

SamKnopf wrote:

nevada5 wrote:

Max5150 wrote:

I've had both. Unless the tilt up viewfinder in the GX9 is mission critical, definitely without hesitation, EM5.3 . I'd also go as far to say that if for some reason you prefer some feature inherent in Panasonic camera's like the menu setup, or the focus system, then I'd pick a different Panasonic camera entirely, like the G90 or wait for the GX9 to be replaced. Although I really like the Panasonic menu and ergonomics in their other camera's, the GX9 was just too cramped for me and I didn't enjoy using it.

The OP says he's had the GX7 since it came out - over 6 years. So I don't think the form is too cramped for him. You didn't mention any other negative, nor did you mention why the EM5.3 would be advantageous, so........

I also have a GX7 that I enjoyed using. I bought a GX9 and returned it. There are quite a few physical changes on the GX9 compared to the GX7, and they are all in the wrong direction. They added an unnecessary dedicated exposure compensation dial, causing everything else to be more cramped, especially the on/off switch. The built-in flash, weak but occasionally useful, is gone.

Everyone else who bought a GX9 got a flash built into theirs - yet it was missing from yours.

I'm wondering if maybe the OP shouldn't consider your advice as "expert" with regards to the GX9.

The GX7 had a small but comfortable grip. There was no good reason for eliminating that, but they did. Why do designers change things for the sake of change, even if they make the product worse?

Sorry, I wrote quickly, and my memory was faulty about the built-in flash.  However, my memory is not faulty about the fact that I bought it, tried to like it, didn't like it, and returned it.

One thing I liked was that it used the same battery as my GX7, so that I could have taken the two on a trip, with the GX7 as a backup.   However, it just didn't convince me that it was a worthwhile upgrade.

I like the GX9 in concept but no mic input is a deal breaker for me, so if your deciding between the two then definitely the EM5.3

Chris Noble wrote:

Steppen wolf wrote:

I've had a GX9 for some time and have recently bought an EM5 MkIII. I'm pretty happy with the GX9 overall - and it's a steal at the current prices. The EM5 is pretty expensive.

However, the PDAF focus of the Oly is way better than the GX9's CDAF. I know DFD has its adherents but it simply doesn't work very well when you try to focus on small moving objects - like birds for example. The Oly is in a different league - it snaps into focus very quickly without problems.

The other thing is the IBIS. The Oly is again way better. The GX9 isn't bad - it's better than my A7RII for example - but again the Oly is in a different league. I never really believed their claims of 5.5 stops stabilisation but I do now. It is pretty amazing what it can do.

The other feature really like is the Pro-capture where it buffers up shots and writes them to the card when you hit the shoot button - great for capturing moving subjects.

But it all depends on what kind of photography you do. I'm pretty well sold on the EM5 despite the "plasticky" feel and high price, If you can afford it I'd go for it. The other factor is what lenses have you got. Some of the nice Oly features don't work with third party lenses. They're both good cameras.

Interesting that DPR hasn't picked up on those alarming Panasonic weaknesses in their testing. They like the IBIS on both, and concerning autofocus, "Fast, accurate" autofocus for the GX9, "unimpressive continuous autofocus and tracking performance" for the EM5III.

LOL no bias here!

The guy said he had a GX9 and now has an EM5-iii, so he has experience with both. Why do you dismiss his conclusions? (Oh now I know  . . . look at your gear list)

I have owned both and prefer the EM5.3 for these reasons:

• Autofocus
• weather sealing
• EVF quality
• general handling comfort, placement of dials, buttons.
• battery life

Just my opinion though and based on my usage scenario.

I find the EM5.3 IBIS to be top notch and no real-world difference to me compared to the GX9 + Dual IS lenses. I'm not a professional tester though, so this is just based on using the two cameras to simply take photos.

That being said, I have also broken the tripod mount off the bottom of my EM5.3 and waiting on Olympus to repair. Not really thrilled about that result.

tjuster1 wrote:

Chris Noble wrote:

Steppen wolf wrote:

I've had a GX9 for some time and have recently bought an EM5 MkIII. I'm pretty happy with the GX9 overall - and it's a steal at the current prices. The EM5 is pretty expensive.

However, the PDAF focus of the Oly is way better than the GX9's CDAF. I know DFD has its adherents but it simply doesn't work very well when you try to focus on small moving objects - like birds for example. The Oly is in a different league - it snaps into focus very quickly without problems.

The other thing is the IBIS. The Oly is again way better. The GX9 isn't bad - it's better than my A7RII for example - but again the Oly is in a different league. I never really believed their claims of 5.5 stops stabilisation but I do now. It is pretty amazing what it can do.

The other feature really like is the Pro-capture where it buffers up shots and writes them to the card when you hit the shoot button - great for capturing moving subjects.

But it all depends on what kind of photography you do. I'm pretty well sold on the EM5 despite the "plasticky" feel and high price, If you can afford it I'd go for it. The other factor is what lenses have you got. Some of the nice Oly features don't work with third party lenses. They're both good cameras.

Interesting that DPR hasn't picked up on those alarming Panasonic weaknesses in their testing. They like the IBIS on both, and concerning autofocus, "Fast, accurate" autofocus for the GX9, "unimpressive continuous autofocus and tracking performance" for the EM5III.

LOL no bias here!

The guy said he had a GX9 and now has an EM5-iii, so he has experience with both. Why do you dismiss his conclusions? (Oh now I know . . . look at your gear list)

I quoted DPR. Are you saying they are biased? I am biased in favor of professional testing.