Upgrading to a Lumix G9 in 2020?

Hi All,

I shoot primarily with a Nikon D7200 w/battery grip and an assortment of lens from a 70-200 2.8 to the massive 200-500 f5.6. I love the handling and layout of the D7200. I also purchased a Lumix G7 last year on sale, and it's primarily used as my B-camera, and for when I'm looking to travel lighter.

Recently though, I've been intrigued by the Lumix G9 and the amount of features relative to its price. While it's a bigger body than the G7, it's still smaller than my Nikon and a bit lighter too.

My question is, in light of the recent news, and lower cost FF cameras supposed to be coming soon, is the G9 a good choice still in 2020? I'm not really interested in going to an entry level FF, as most of the features I'd like are in FF cameras 2-3 times the price of the G9, with only the D500 and Z6 being remotely close.

To me, it would seem the G9 offers a lot of higher-end features, without the huge costs, while still being a bit easier to carry around. What do others think?

Cheers

Ryan

MiniMadRyan wrote:

Hi All,

I shoot primarily with a Nikon D7200 w/battery grip and an assortment of lens from a 70-200 2.8 to the massive 200-500 f5.6. I love the handling and layout of the D7200. I also purchased a Lumix G7 last year on sale, and it's primarily used as my B-camera, and for when I'm looking to travel lighter.

Recently though, I've been intrigued by the Lumix G9 and the amount of features relative to its price. While it's a bigger body than the G7, it's still smaller than my Nikon and a bit lighter too.

My question is, in light of the recent news, and lower cost FF cameras supposed to be coming soon, is the G9 a good choice still in 2020? I'm not really interested in going to an entry level FF, as most of the features I'd like are in FF cameras 2-3 times the price of the G9, with only the D500 and Z6 being remotely close.

To me, it would seem the G9 offers a lot of higher-end features, without the huge costs, while still being a bit easier to carry around. What do others think?

Cheers

Ryan

G9 shooters are a discerning bunch who demand the finest in equipment in the smallest form factor that preserves ergonomics and provides incomparable DR. No other camera compares. Folks that tell you why it isnt the best dont own one, or spend their time speculating instead of shooting.

My friend shots a D500 and the 200-500, me the G9 and Pl100-400. Can't tell you how he envoys me at the end of a day of shooting:)

G9 is an amazing camera.

You've missed two years with a G9!  But, on the other hand, the firmware has been upgraded at least 3 times and is now at version 2.1.  It's a better camera - with better auto focus - now, then when it launched.

I own a G9 and love it.  It does everything I want to do, even when I dream up something new to do with it. It's incredible.  At $1000 it's also a certified bargain.   Yes, buy a G9 in 2020!

The G9 isn't a camera I enjoy using, but that's more down to subjective issues with its handling and design rather than the feature set.

It doesn't offer the best AF system, but it's not terrible once you learn its quirks. It isn't going to offer the DR/noise/resolution of a high end full frame camera, but If you're happy with the image quality from your G7 then the newer 20mp sensor will be more than acceptable.

Outside of a couple of nice features I don't find the G9 a particularly impressive camera in 2020, but at the discounted price it isn't a bad deal.

For 1000$ dollars you will get a very nice handling camera with awesome IBIS, fast operations and great video.

Only you can tell if it will actually add to the shooting envelope you want to do. Which lens do you plan to put on your g9 for example? If you are a video shooter the PL 10-25 f1.7 should give you an awesome combo for video. If you are intend on wildlife/birds the PL 100-400 or PL 50-200 might give you a combo that would be a lot more costly in different systems.

If your great interest is portraits you are probably looking at the wrong system

If you lived near me I`d loan you one of my G9`s for the day and you would be hooked( might even loan you my 40-150 Oly pro lens and make your mouth water.)

Out of interest I have a Nikon 7500 that lives indoors now.

Dave

So I am someone that owns a G9 and a GH5, but am also really tempted by the new Z mount and RF mount cameras as well.
From the sound of it you like long focal length lenses and this is where something like the G9 is going to excel do to how much smaller and how good the longer lenses in the m43 system are.

I am more of a wide angle shooter and while m43 has some incredible lenses (the 8-18mm for example) you have less meaningful control of depth of field due to the smaller sensor. This is where something like a z6 with a 14-30 and a 35mm f1.8 become really tempting for me.

But I have been going a lot of video stuff lately and my GH5 pretty much rules that front and the G9 is no slouch either.  The IBIS system really helps with handheld shots and the overall color and available video features are still today untouched by other camera, some are just now starting to get close.

I will probably end up with a full frame camera at some point of time in the future for the photo side of things, but for now m43 is pretty much filling all my needed and I very much like my G9.

Some will complain the G9 is a big body, and it is, but most of the m43 size and weight savings come from the lenses (FF gap is narrowing though) but the G9 is still the outright best handling body I have ever used, better than the GH5 for sure, better than any Sony ever made (seriously their ergonomics suck), better than the Z6/7, or the Canon RF offerings.  The only camera that I have had in the past the matches the G9 for handling is a Canon 7d that I owned a long time ago.

Hope that reference point helps.

If you want all the bells and whistles, plus the kitchen sink, then the G9 is the only option around.

Having shot both the 200-500mm and the 100-400mm, I've come to the conclusion that going the 100-400mm route will means some serious sacrifices when it comes to image quality and AF speed.

Especially at mid to long distances, the 200-500 is much better than the 100-400mm.

If one is looking for the shiny functions and nice bells, the Olympus E-M1.2 and 3 have more and better implemented ones. Just to give a few examples:

1) The G9 cannot use flash with any of it's stacking or high res modes.

2) The G9 cannot use AF-C with it's pre-capture mode.

3) The G9 cannot go to more than 1 sec on High-Res mode.

4) The G9 doesn't have the Live-Comp feature (that the E-M1.2 and Panasonic G90 have :))... c'mon FW 3.0)

I've been using the G9 for the past year in parallel with the Nikon D500 and the D810.

My experience has been that the G9 is a great camera IF it fits your shooting style.

It is great for travel if you got for the 8-18/12-35 /35-100 as a lightweight kit.

It is great for landscapes if you go for the 8-18/12-60/50-200 PL combo.

It is great for portraits. I recently did a side-by-side baby shoot with the G9+12-40 and the EOS RP ++ 24-105 f4 L and the G9 has better Eye-AF and was able to detect human bodies as well.

It will do decent video (better than most that Nikon can deliver for sure).

It will do macro and wildlife if pushed, but the AF-C and lenses (or lack of them) means it's a sub-standard choice.

I shot airshows with it and it will handle them but more often then not I would end up reaching for the Nikon kits.

As such, it has found it's way in my bag and it is staying there for the foreseeable future.

But it doesn't make me want to go out and sell my Nikon kit.

As such, I'd say it's a different type of tool. Not one that is necessarily better but one that allows me to do things that I can't with my Nikon DSLR.

MiniMadRyan wrote:

Thanks all for the kind words and great responses, it’s well appreciated!

Currently I have a few kit lens, a 14-42, 45-150 and my trusty 25 f1.7, though I’ve also been looking at a few other primes, and Panasonic’s 100-400 f4-5.6.

I shoot largely for fun, and mostly anything except portraits, with emphasis on various local motor sports, where my second camera is almost the opposite of my primary. For instance, I’ll shoot a 70-200 for on track shots (where I can’t get close to the action) on my 7200 and then a 14-24 or a 50mm for back in the pits/garage on my G7. The 100-400 seems like it would be a great lens for when I don’t want to lug around the 200-500 without sacrificing image quality.

My G7 has never been great at low light, does the G9’s IBIS work as well as advertised for longer low light exposures? Looking at some of the samples on this forum, I can’t see any loss in quality over that of my 7200, so I’m not seeing any reason not to jump on the G9 bandwagon!

With my PLeica 12-60 zoomed to about 40mm I've managed 3 secs hand held with excellent results, at 4 secs there was a slight blur noticed at 100 %. So for stationary subjects I'm confident I'll rarely need a tripod.