starbase218
Senior Member
I should probably start with a disclaimer: I'm basing this off of a purchase of a used GX80 last Monday, and unfortunately I returned it today because it had a scratch on the sensor. So, it was really just a few days that I got to try it out.
History
I've been sort-of interested in micro four thirds since a long time. When I had a Pentax DSLR, I was already thinking that maybe a smaller system would be nice to have. But I never purchased an actual camera in the range. As a secondary camera I have pretty much had compact cameras. Right now my DSLR is a Nikon D750 and the compact camera is an RX100 V. I have an underwater housing for that RX100 V too, as well as a JJC grip that mounts to the tripod socket on the underside of the camera.
About a year ago, I traveled to Costa Rica with my D750 and a zoom triplet (18-35, 24-120 and Tamron 100-400), plus my phone (mistake; I should have brought my RX, but ok). What I found was that while 400mm was sometimes enough for wildlife, more often than not it just wasn't. But I wasn't willing to take a substantially bigger lens with me. I considered a used Nikon 200-500/5.6, but that about doubles the weight, and it wouldn't fit in my regular camera bag either.
Of course, the other side of the range-equation is the crop, either in post or by the sensor. And so I considered other options: a Nikon 1 J5 with adapter, a Nikon DX body like the D7500, or a higher-MP Nikon FX body like the D850. The first option lacks a viewfinder, the second would mean carrying two relatively bulky bodies, and the third was still bigger and heavier than my D750.
Another thing came into play: the underwater housing for my RX100 V is rather substantial, and that's not always the best thing when scuba diving. But there is an underwater housing for the Lumix GM1, which is smaller. The GM1 itself is smaller as well. And so, I was beginning to wonder, if I could replace my camera system for travel with an all-MFT system.
I also started watching the MicroFourNerds YT channel, so I got a bit more familiar with the camera models and lenses.
Buying decision
One thing lead to another and I thought to myself, why not get a cheaper used camera to see what it's like? At first I tried to chase down a GM1, but they are not so cheap (the brown one they sold exclusively in Japan looks SO stylish though
). I briefly considered a GX800, but I know from past experiences with a Pentax Q10, that I would want to have a viewfinder. Also I realised that, for non-scuba photography, I would be much better served with a slightly bigger, more capable body. So I ended up looking at the GX80. I found a good deal with the 12-32 kit lens and an Olympus 12-50 lens, and purchased it. As I mentioned, that was last Monday.
One thing to note is that I did look at Olympus too, but I went with Lumix for two reasons: the lens zoom rings rotate in the same direction as on my Nikon lenses (maybe a bit of a silly reason but ok), and the more traditional look of e.g. an EM-5 makes the camera a bit larger. Not ideal for an RX100 V replacement, which is how I envisioned this camera: small, discrete, and great for street photography.
Experiences
As I said, I only had a few days with the camera, but my experiences over those days are on the whole, quite positive. Control-wise, there is a lot, though to switch focus modes you do need to go into the quick menu. I struggled a bit with the exposure modes, only to find out that I could press the rear dial inwards to make it change function: from aperture control to exposure compensation for example. In general I have to say that I feel much more "invited" to control the camera than I do with the RX100 V. The Sony is a technical marvel, but the ergonomics are just not my thing at all. But this GX80 was a very pleasant surprise. Speaking about ergonomics: the slight grip was enough to securely hold the camera, at least with the small 12-32mm lens. It felt almost as secure as my RX100 does with the JJC grip. The camera is a little larger and heavier than the Sony, but I like that, and it actually doesn't feel any heavier (precisely because it is larger).
There were some annoyances: I had to be careful when looking through the viewfinder, as my cheek would sometimes touch the touch screen and move the focus point. I find it a bit strange that the screen turns off when it detects you're looking through the EVF, yet the touch functionality still works, including on the left side of the screen. Another annoyance is that, in order to tilt the little flash in order for it to bounce off of a ceiling, part of my hand would sometimes be in front of that same EVF sensor, and so the screen would be disabled. But it's possible to get used to this.
Another annoyance has to do with image review. On both my D750 and RX100, if I play back images, I can zoom in to 100% with a single touch of a button/lever. I like doing this to check critical sharpness. With the GX80, first of all there is no 100% mode to directly jump to (or even iteratively go to). And secondly, if you shoot RAW, the image you're looking at is the low-resolution JPEG that is embedded within the RAW file. So it's not really usable for this. I had to switch the camera to RAW+JPEG (fine) in order to be able to at least see the detail in image review. Thankfully, image review sees the two files as one photo.
After reading a lot of negative remarks about the viewfinder, it actually surprised me positively. It is a field-sequential panel, but that did not bother me. And it is 16:9, so when displaying a 4:3 image the panel isn't fully used for the image. But I still found it a more pleasant experience than the tiny EVF of the RX100 V.
Performance
I did very little testing of this, but I will report on what I did do. I compared the image quality to my other two cameras by setting up sort of a still life scene and shooting all three from a tripod, with self-timer, at equivalent exposure settings, as follows:
I also did some quick testing of the stabilisation using the 12-32mm lens. The camera indicated "dual IS", meaning it used both the sensor shift stabilisation and the optical stabilisation in the lens. I just took a few shots, but it did seem to work quite effectively. Of course, as ever, YMMV.
Closing thoughts
To be honest, despite the positive experiences, I find myself rethinking the broader issue. This is a system camera, with a slow kit lens. The RX100 V with its sensor and lens combination is still a stop faster in equivalent terms. You can of course mount different lenses, but then the package becomes much bigger than the Sony. At the same time, would I really replace a camera with a sensor 4 times the size, with this one? Also to invest in the lenses for that system? Because despite the smaller footprint, the lenses aren't actually that cheap. Like, the Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8 is more expensive than the Nikon AF-S 24-120mm f/4 on MPB. And you get a 24-70mm f/5.6 equivalent zoom range. I could buy a Nikon 24-85/3.5-4.5 for much cheaper, and already save a bit of weight compared to my 24-120, and it would still be faster in equivalent terms. But then, that is a consumer lens, and the Lumix 12-35 is a pro lens.
I have been looking at the Lumix LX100 II as well. That is even a bit smaller than the GX80, and it has a fast lens. But it doesn't have a tilting screen. It is almost a bit of a conundrum: if you want the best street photography compact camera, that might be a system camera. But then, should you invest in that system?
Maybe getting the GX80 wasn't the best place to start; maybe I should have gotten the tiny GM1. On the other hand, as an introduction to the system, it's probably overall still a better choice for most people.
But I did enjoy the tiny lenses, and still getting great image quality. In that sense, it reminds me of that Pentax Q I mentioned in a positive way: it's just a joyful, unencumbered experience. With a viewfinder, excellent controls, and good stabilization.
History
I've been sort-of interested in micro four thirds since a long time. When I had a Pentax DSLR, I was already thinking that maybe a smaller system would be nice to have. But I never purchased an actual camera in the range. As a secondary camera I have pretty much had compact cameras. Right now my DSLR is a Nikon D750 and the compact camera is an RX100 V. I have an underwater housing for that RX100 V too, as well as a JJC grip that mounts to the tripod socket on the underside of the camera.
About a year ago, I traveled to Costa Rica with my D750 and a zoom triplet (18-35, 24-120 and Tamron 100-400), plus my phone (mistake; I should have brought my RX, but ok). What I found was that while 400mm was sometimes enough for wildlife, more often than not it just wasn't. But I wasn't willing to take a substantially bigger lens with me. I considered a used Nikon 200-500/5.6, but that about doubles the weight, and it wouldn't fit in my regular camera bag either.
Of course, the other side of the range-equation is the crop, either in post or by the sensor. And so I considered other options: a Nikon 1 J5 with adapter, a Nikon DX body like the D7500, or a higher-MP Nikon FX body like the D850. The first option lacks a viewfinder, the second would mean carrying two relatively bulky bodies, and the third was still bigger and heavier than my D750.
Another thing came into play: the underwater housing for my RX100 V is rather substantial, and that's not always the best thing when scuba diving. But there is an underwater housing for the Lumix GM1, which is smaller. The GM1 itself is smaller as well. And so, I was beginning to wonder, if I could replace my camera system for travel with an all-MFT system.
I also started watching the MicroFourNerds YT channel, so I got a bit more familiar with the camera models and lenses.
Buying decision
One thing lead to another and I thought to myself, why not get a cheaper used camera to see what it's like? At first I tried to chase down a GM1, but they are not so cheap (the brown one they sold exclusively in Japan looks SO stylish though
). I briefly considered a GX800, but I know from past experiences with a Pentax Q10, that I would want to have a viewfinder. Also I realised that, for non-scuba photography, I would be much better served with a slightly bigger, more capable body. So I ended up looking at the GX80. I found a good deal with the 12-32 kit lens and an Olympus 12-50 lens, and purchased it. As I mentioned, that was last Monday.One thing to note is that I did look at Olympus too, but I went with Lumix for two reasons: the lens zoom rings rotate in the same direction as on my Nikon lenses (maybe a bit of a silly reason but ok), and the more traditional look of e.g. an EM-5 makes the camera a bit larger. Not ideal for an RX100 V replacement, which is how I envisioned this camera: small, discrete, and great for street photography.
Experiences
As I said, I only had a few days with the camera, but my experiences over those days are on the whole, quite positive. Control-wise, there is a lot, though to switch focus modes you do need to go into the quick menu. I struggled a bit with the exposure modes, only to find out that I could press the rear dial inwards to make it change function: from aperture control to exposure compensation for example. In general I have to say that I feel much more "invited" to control the camera than I do with the RX100 V. The Sony is a technical marvel, but the ergonomics are just not my thing at all. But this GX80 was a very pleasant surprise. Speaking about ergonomics: the slight grip was enough to securely hold the camera, at least with the small 12-32mm lens. It felt almost as secure as my RX100 does with the JJC grip. The camera is a little larger and heavier than the Sony, but I like that, and it actually doesn't feel any heavier (precisely because it is larger).
There were some annoyances: I had to be careful when looking through the viewfinder, as my cheek would sometimes touch the touch screen and move the focus point. I find it a bit strange that the screen turns off when it detects you're looking through the EVF, yet the touch functionality still works, including on the left side of the screen. Another annoyance is that, in order to tilt the little flash in order for it to bounce off of a ceiling, part of my hand would sometimes be in front of that same EVF sensor, and so the screen would be disabled. But it's possible to get used to this.
Another annoyance has to do with image review. On both my D750 and RX100, if I play back images, I can zoom in to 100% with a single touch of a button/lever. I like doing this to check critical sharpness. With the GX80, first of all there is no 100% mode to directly jump to (or even iteratively go to). And secondly, if you shoot RAW, the image you're looking at is the low-resolution JPEG that is embedded within the RAW file. So it's not really usable for this. I had to switch the camera to RAW+JPEG (fine) in order to be able to at least see the detail in image review. Thankfully, image review sees the two files as one photo.
After reading a lot of negative remarks about the viewfinder, it actually surprised me positively. It is a field-sequential panel, but that did not bother me. And it is 16:9, so when displaying a 4:3 image the panel isn't fully used for the image. But I still found it a more pleasant experience than the tiny EVF of the RX100 V.
Performance
I did very little testing of this, but I will report on what I did do. I compared the image quality to my other two cameras by setting up sort of a still life scene and shooting all three from a tripod, with self-timer, at equivalent exposure settings, as follows:
- RX100: f/4, 1/6s, ISO 100 (focal length 18.5mm)
- GX80: f/5.6, 1/6, ISO 200 (focal length 25mm)
- D750: f/11. 1/6s, ISO 800 (focal length 50mm)
I also did some quick testing of the stabilisation using the 12-32mm lens. The camera indicated "dual IS", meaning it used both the sensor shift stabilisation and the optical stabilisation in the lens. I just took a few shots, but it did seem to work quite effectively. Of course, as ever, YMMV.
Closing thoughts
To be honest, despite the positive experiences, I find myself rethinking the broader issue. This is a system camera, with a slow kit lens. The RX100 V with its sensor and lens combination is still a stop faster in equivalent terms. You can of course mount different lenses, but then the package becomes much bigger than the Sony. At the same time, would I really replace a camera with a sensor 4 times the size, with this one? Also to invest in the lenses for that system? Because despite the smaller footprint, the lenses aren't actually that cheap. Like, the Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8 is more expensive than the Nikon AF-S 24-120mm f/4 on MPB. And you get a 24-70mm f/5.6 equivalent zoom range. I could buy a Nikon 24-85/3.5-4.5 for much cheaper, and already save a bit of weight compared to my 24-120, and it would still be faster in equivalent terms. But then, that is a consumer lens, and the Lumix 12-35 is a pro lens.
I have been looking at the Lumix LX100 II as well. That is even a bit smaller than the GX80, and it has a fast lens. But it doesn't have a tilting screen. It is almost a bit of a conundrum: if you want the best street photography compact camera, that might be a system camera. But then, should you invest in that system?
Maybe getting the GX80 wasn't the best place to start; maybe I should have gotten the tiny GM1. On the other hand, as an introduction to the system, it's probably overall still a better choice for most people.
But I did enjoy the tiny lenses, and still getting great image quality. In that sense, it reminds me of that Pentax Q I mentioned in a positive way: it's just a joyful, unencumbered experience. With a viewfinder, excellent controls, and good stabilization.
Last edited:
.
