GH6 vs OM1 for Stills Only - Also, Synergy of Panasonic with Own Lenses

abe4652 wrote:

danieljcox wrote:

abe4652 wrote:

Two questions:

1) If you are virtually only a stills shooter, does the GH6 make sense over an OM1?

2) Is there a synergy between Panasonic cameras (such as GH6) and older Panasonic lenses, like the 100-400?

Thanks.

Here's my take after testing the GH6 for a brief period of time and having the OM-1 now for several months. The GH6 is just too large. The added fan mechanism that is strictly for the benefit of video makes the camera HUGE in the world of MFT. It would not be an issue for anyone sticking with tripod work but carrying the GH6 all day would be painful compared to the OM-1.

Olympus OM-1 with Leica 100-400mm zoom. !/2500th of a second. F/4.6 ISO 2000

Secondly, I'm using several Pana/Leica lenses with the new OM-1. In particular the Leica 100-400mm zoom. This lens was always problematic with my Lumix gear but the OM-1 has resurrected this lens like I would have never believed. The Leica 100-400mm is like a totally new lens on the OM-1. Above is a sample of a Harris Hawk coming straight at the camera I recently shot. It's just one of a series of many that were all perfectly in focus. Something this lens was never capable of on any Lumix camera I owned. And I've owned them all. I was astonished at how good this lens works with the OM-1. I no longer plan on selling it since I'll use it for travel when my Olympus 150-400mm is not needed.

Thanks. So the 100-400 Panasonic is focusing a lot faster on the OM1 than on prior EM1 cameras, it seems.

interesting…

I surprised the hell out of me. It's like a brand new lens.

thinkinginimages wrote:

Pete_W wrote:

thinkinginimages wrote:

The OM1 and GH6 bodies are the same list price.

Yes, right. So my view is that if you're spending the same amount of money, you want to get the best bang for your buck, i.e. to get the features that you will use (e.g. in this case primarily for stills) and not pay for a lot of features you won't use (e.g. video).

My money is still on the GH6. Yes, its video-centric but why would that take away from its still capabilities?

Video centric is an understatement. It's an amazing video powerhouse but because of those capabilities, the new fan box on the back makes it monster of a camera. No interest in hanging the Gh6 around my neck for travel work that concentrates on stills. The OM-1 is superb for exactly that.

C Sean wrote:

abe4652 wrote:

Two questions:

1) If you are virtually only a stills shooter, does the GH6 make sense over an OM1?

2) Is there a synergy between Panasonic cameras (such as GH6) and older Panasonic lenses, like the 100-400?

Thanks.

Luckily, Chris and Jordon recently reviewed the GH6 and answered your question.

Basically when it comes to stills, OMD1 > GH6 and G9 > GH6. I hope the video helps.

When it comes to IQ

GH5M2 > G9 > EM1MKIII > OM-1

Features a different story and depends what you are looking for

abe4652 wrote:

Interceptor121 wrote:

C Sean wrote:

abe4652 wrote:

Two questions:

1) If you are virtually only a stills shooter, does the GH6 make sense over an OM1?

2) Is there a synergy between Panasonic cameras (such as GH6) and older Panasonic lenses, like the 100-400?

Thanks.

Luckily, Chris and Jordon recently reviewed the GH6 and answered your question.

Basically when it comes to stills, OMD1 > GH6 and G9 > GH6. I hope the video helps.

When it comes to IQ

GH5M2 > G9 > EM1MKIII > OM-1

Features a different story and depends what you are looking for

Whoa.

In video it couldn't autofocus on the target Olympus camera.

It's black. Also the olympus camera would not focus on an olympus black camera hahaha

Pretty much nothing focusses on a black object not sure if you have noticed they could have used a better example but that is an easy one

abe4652 wrote:

danieljcox wrote:

abe4652 wrote:

danieljcox wrote:

abe4652 wrote:

Two questions:

1) If you are virtually only a stills shooter, does the GH6 make sense over an OM1?

2) Is there a synergy between Panasonic cameras (such as GH6) and older Panasonic lenses, like the 100-400?

Thanks.

Here's my take after testing the GH6 for a brief period of time and having the OM-1 now for several months. The GH6 is just too large. The added fan mechanism that is strictly for the benefit of video makes the camera HUGE in the world of MFT. It would not be an issue for anyone sticking with tripod work but carrying the GH6 all day would be painful compared to the OM-1.

Olympus OM-1 with Leica 100-400mm zoom. !/2500th of a second. F/4.6 ISO 2000

Secondly, I'm using several Pana/Leica lenses with the new OM-1. In particular the Leica 100-400mm zoom. This lens was always problematic with my Lumix gear but the OM-1 has resurrected this lens like I would have never believed. The Leica 100-400mm is like a totally new lens on the OM-1. Above is a sample of a Harris Hawk coming straight at the camera I recently shot. It's just one of a series of many that were all perfectly in focus. Something this lens was never capable of on any Lumix camera I owned. And I've owned them all. I was astonished at how good this lens works with the OM-1. I no longer plan on selling it since I'll use it for travel when my Olympus 150-400mm is not needed.

Probably didn’t do anything for the stickiness of the zoom. I don’t know what the heck gear ratio they used, but I would have been willing to do an extra half turn to zoom if Panasonic had just made the gear ratio lower.

Actually, there has been improvement in regards to a smother design. It's not too bad anymore. I have a relatively new version, and I had two others prior to this one. The first one was from the initial release. It's amazing how you can forgive some issues if the pictures are razor sharp. I sold almost all other Lumix gear but kept the 100-400mm due to its size. I'm very happy I kept it.

Interceptor121 wrote:

C Sean wrote:

abe4652 wrote:

Two questions:

1) If you are virtually only a stills shooter, does the GH6 make sense over an OM1?

2) Is there a synergy between Panasonic cameras (such as GH6) and older Panasonic lenses, like the 100-400?

Thanks.

Luckily, Chris and Jordon recently reviewed the GH6 and answered your question.

Basically when it comes to stills, OMD1 > GH6 and G9 > GH6. I hope the video helps.

When it comes to IQ

GH5M2 > G9 > EM1MKIII > OM-1

Features a different story and depends what you are looking for

Yes, that's the thing. It's not really worth comparing the GH6 and OM-1 as equivalent cameras in the same class. They may share a mount and a sensor size, but they are so different.

Jordan's comment towards the end (at 9:09) confirms this:

"What's my favourite mirrorless camera for shooting video? It's a real toss up between the Nikon Z9 and the GH6. The thing to remember is that one of them is USD $5,500, the GH6 is USD $2,500. So that kind of makes it a no-brainer".

glassoholic wrote:

drj3 wrote:

victorav wrote:

tammons wrote:

abe4652 wrote:

Two questions:

1) If you are virtually only a stills shooter, does the GH6 make sense over an OM1?

2) Is there a synergy between Panasonic cameras (such as GH6) and older Panasonic lenses, like the 100-400?

Thanks.

Doesnt the Om1 have cleaner high iso files?

Not really. In camera noise reduction is good for jpegs, raw performance is about the same as previous 20mp sensors.

There has been some debate on high iso of the GH6 but GH6 seems pretty good to me.

Why would you get the GH6 instead of the GH5.2, if you are not interested in its advanced video capability?

DPR's initial evaluation for stills on the GH6 compared to the OM1 (the full review is not completed so there may be changes)

Our Exposure Latitude test delves into the deep shadows of base ISO images to test the degree to which you can underexpose to protect highlights, then exploit the camera's full dynamic range. The GH6 is showing significantly more noise when given the same exposure as the OM-1. In principle this represents deeper shadows because of the difference in their respective base ISOs, but the difference is pronounced enough that you can comfortably conclude that the GH6 has less usable dynamic range than the OM-1.

The ISO invariance tells a similar story: above ISO 800, where the GH6's Dual Output Gain system kicks in, the two camera look very similar, but push the lower ISOs and the Panasonic shows increasing noise levels in the very deep shadows.

What if the next update to DXO PL5 Elite to make it compatible for the GH6, cleans up the low ISO shadow noise very well, and retails sharpness? Would the GH6 then be a good photographers camera, including for landscapes?

I don't think it is bad now, but possibly not quite as good for stills as the OM1 when noise is an issue. If the noise was primarily a high ISO problem, then I think it would be less of a problem for stills (but maybe a greater one for video). While we will have to wait and see what the full reviews indicate, it appears to have a lower dynamic range at ISOs below 800 than other mFTs cameras.

I did not intend for my post to imply that this would be a very serious issue. My post was actually only to clarify the statement " raw performance is about the same as previous 20mp sensors" which appears to be incorrect.

From what I have read from Interceptors posts, I would think the GH5.2 would be a much better choice for stills than the GH6 for one who wanted to maximize performance with Panasonic lenses.

If the OP had asked GH5.2 vs OM1, then I probably would have posted, pick the one which has the features you need for your photography.