Awaiting the GX7, Recalling the L1

[Jorginho]

amalric wrote:

Joel Halbert wrote:

Regarding the IBIS, I think that any IBIS is already a welcome surprise from Panasonic - Lumix OIS is extremely effective on their zooms, but the addition of IBIS does substantially enhance the use of Olympus and other non-stabilized lenses on Lumix bodies. Having grown up with no stabilization, and now having much more usable high ISO vs. film (i.e. faster shutter speed capability), I am less insistent that one can't live without ultimate stabilization performance. I know about the 5-axis vs. 2-axis mantra, but it's hardly the end of the world (I guess the correct jargon is "not a deal-breaker"). Also, I won't be surprised to see the GX7 IBIS having some kind of ability to cooperate with Lumix lens OIS - but again we'll have to wait and see.

It seems to me that Lumix users are still in denial of the main argument for a strong IBIS. Is that is closes the gap in luminosity with other bigger formats, by allowing to shoot at lower ISO. Say if the gap is two stops with FF, it is more than plugged by a 4 stop IBIS.

Only in landscapes. In sports, it is useless. And FF lenses have usable OIS too in quite a few of them. I agree that IBIS is important for GX7.

Additionally there is the steadycam effect for video, and the stabilised image in the viewfinder which is extremely useful with long lenses.

Is there? I hope so. But the videolenses all have OIS. So no need to it seems. And 2 axis IBIS does not seem to be too good for video to say the least in all current iterations.

The GX7 looks like an interesting camera but it will need a lot of improving to even reach the technological level of an E-M5. You simply can't go on parading that YOU are so good that you don't even need IS in the first place.

But it is already clear that it will get 2-axis IS I think. So what is the point?

Because of the above it has become a strawman of the uninformed. Strong IBIS is NOT a secondary feature.

Am.

 

[dougjgreen1]

Donald Chin wrote:

If it's just a "me too" sensor like the one in GH-3, then they have to cut the price to around $700 in order to compete. For a $1000+ price tag, we're talking about high-end APS-C DSLR like 700D & D7100!

 

[dougjgreen1]

eques wrote:

A very interesting post!

You are right, the GX7 will be a success only, if the package is just right and matches the price.

The difficulty is, that this GX7 comes rather late - the EM5 has set a high standard, and now, with the EP5 as direct rival but without EVF, plus the NEX 6, NEX 7, it's rumored successor, the X Pro 1 and XE1, it has to top their sensors significantly.

This will be difficult with a 16 MP sensor, so there has to be a higher pixel count, and I doubt a 18MP multi aspect sensor will do it.It would have to be a 24 MP sensor or some new technology, but I don't see that for this year.

With just a GH3 sensor and EVF and only 2 axis IBIS the GX7 will be behind the aging EM5, not a big recommendation.

Peter.

But then, 3 months later, it won't. And by next year, it will be priced reasonably.

 

[herebefore]

But then after reviewing a few of the several thousand shots I have from it, I backed out..




Only a dozen or so L1 images on this computer.. but hare are a few.




At 100% I can read the speed limit sign on the span at right! F8 is NOT shallow DOF...




shooting raw, I never have to adjust the WB...




Young Goat..




I even use it hand held with the ZD 70-300



--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Connecticut
Be Careful, sleep can be a symptom of caffeine deprivation
..
I figured out why I cant lose weight! The only exercise Im good at is CHEWING
..
Don't take yourself so seriously. No one else does
..
In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.
Oscar Wilde

 

[herebefore]

Jorginho wrote:

Does anyone know which proces Panny's lab uses? It is clear to me this is a deciding factor. It is the reason why Sony made a jump in sensorperformance a couple of years ago. It is a reason why Canon sensor remained constant for 4 years and it is also a reaon why Panny sensors for the last 3 years have not become any better either I think.

We also see that Sony sensored cams are now standing still. NEX6 does not perform much better than its predecessor. D7100 is not much better than D7000. And because Canon is moving on to a new fabrication process, they are expected to make a singificant leap forward.

If Panny's new 18 MPixel sensor is made with new tech, we can expect a good jump in performance. Say somewhere around 73 in DxO numbers. As Oly will most likely keep sourcing Sony sensors for the coming years, the next few cams will not perform much better in RAW.

Also, if the sensor is really new I wonder if Panny will use a form of PDAF on the sensor and if so how will it perform?

What do you expect from this sensor?

Guessing is fruitless, and a total waste of time.

Each new camera cannot advance in "great leaps and bounds" like the OMD and the GH2..

Along the way you will get small advances (firmware advances, focusing improvements, etc). Not every camera coming along can give you Major Improvement, More pixels, improved dynamic range, lower noise...

Panasonic seems to have set the bar pretty high with the GH2, and I've not seen a great improvement in IQ in the GH3/G5/G6..

Olympus set their bar pretty high too... everything since has been down to firmware improvements.

PDAF would be nice if it doesnt compromise IQ (from either maker, or both) and Focus Peaking seems to have been worked on (also cant hurt either Pany or Oly).

IQ took a giant leap with the GH2, and then another with the OMD.. How many of those leaps do you expect to get in a couple of years???

Also, you should remember that increasing from 16 mp to 18 mp is a "trivial change".

 

[tgutgu]

Ben Herrmann wrote:

".....say's you. :-|

We all have an opinion. I happened to own both, and both were superb photographic instruments of their time and the E330 led the field with their introduction to LV.

Wow...a classic example of how different folks can view the same scenario' and then proclaim the glass as being either of half empty or half full.

 

[Ben Herrmann]

than some of the current EVF's - for clarity sake. And although the two mentioned weren't a commercial success, they did command a loyal following. Many of the Olympus cameras set the ground work for other brands to follow, with regards to features. If I could get my paws on a new E-330 and/or Panny L1 again, I would in a heartbeat.

 

[Donald Chin]

Donald Chin wrote:

If it's just a "me too" sensor like the one in GH-3, then they have to cut the price to around $700 in order to compete. For a $1000+ price tag, we're talking about high-end APS-C DSLR like 700D & D7100!

 

[Jorginho]

herebefore wrote:

Jorginho wrote:

Does anyone know which proces Panny's lab uses? It is clear to me this is a deciding factor. It is the reason why Sony made a jump in sensorperformance a couple of years ago. It is a reason why Canon sensor remained constant for 4 years and it is also a reaon why Panny sensors for the last 3 years have not become any better either I think.

We also see that Sony sensored cams are now standing still. NEX6 does not perform much better than its predecessor. D7100 is not much better than D7000. And because Canon is moving on to a new fabrication process, they are expected to make a singificant leap forward.

If Panny's new 18 MPixel sensor is made with new tech, we can expect a good jump in performance. Say somewhere around 73 in DxO numbers. As Oly will most likely keep sourcing Sony sensors for the coming years, the next few cams will not perform much better in RAW.

Also, if the sensor is really new I wonder if Panny will use a form of PDAF on the sensor and if so how will it perform?

What do you expect from this sensor?

Guessing is fruitless, and a total waste of time.

It seems to be quite human too. And since I am one, apparantly I enjoy fruitless wastes of time.

Each new camera cannot advance in "great leaps and bounds" like the OMD and the GH2..

Along the way you will get small advances (firmware advances, focusing improvements, etc). Not every camera coming along can give you Major Improvement, More pixels, improved dynamic range, lower noise...

Panasonic seems to have set the bar pretty high with the GH2, and I've not seen a great improvement in IQ in the GH3/G5/G6..

I have seen a singificant improvement with my EPL5 oer my GH2. GH3 is significantly better than G6.

Olympus set their bar pretty high too... everything since has been down to firmware improvements.

PDAF would be nice if it doesnt compromise IQ (from either maker, or both) and Focus Peaking seems to have been worked on (also cant hurt either Pany or Oly).

IQ took a giant leap with the GH2, and then another with the OMD.. How many of those leaps do you expect to get in a couple of years???

Since you are not into guessing I think you have time enough to do some reading. If so you would have noted that you cannot equate Gh2 with OMD. that is why the 18 Mpixel has a good chance of big leap.

Also, you should remember that increasing from 16 mp to 18 mp is a "trivial change".

I never said that the pixel count was the main thing, it is merely an indication of a truely new sensor.

--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Connecticut
Be Careful, sleep can be a symptom of caffeine deprivation
..
I figured out why I cant lose weight! The only exercise Im good at is CHEWING
..
Don't take yourself so seriously. No one else does
..
In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.
Oscar Wilde

 

[herebefore]

I never said that the pixel count was the main thing, it is merely an indication of a truely new sensor.

New means "different" it does not always mean better.

I see no reason NOT to compare The OMD with the GH2..

They were the top of both lines, for a while, with arguably similar (if not the same) IQ levels..

OMD had some things the GH2 did not have, and GH2 had things the OMD didnt have..

There has been no real "leap" in still image IQ from either Olympus or Panasonic since those cameras..

 

[amalric]

dougjgreen1 wrote:

Donald Chin wrote:

If it's just a "me too" sensor like the one in GH-3, then they have to cut the price to around $700 in order to compete. For a $1000+ price tag, we're talking about high-end APS-C DSLR like 700D & D7100!

--
http://www.fotop.net/DonaldChin

I wasn't aware that the GH3 had a "me too" sensor. I thought the GH3 actually has the best sensor in the entire Micro 4/3 domain - every bit as sensitive as the one in the Olympus OM-D, but without the extreme sensitivity to purple flare on the 7-14mm lens.

This Chin guy is set to show the error in our ways. As I read it the E-M5 has 13 stops of DR which should be the same of the latest Nikon. And resolution wise S. Huff showed that it has the same resolution of a Leica M9. If the GX7 has the same figures the bleeding from dSLR, even FF, will surely increase.

I also suspect that this Chin getleman was a former 4/3 user: that would compounds his ridcule. God protect us from self important people with a dSLR on their belly.

Am.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric/sets/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric

 

[Jorginho]

herebefore wrote:

I never said that the pixel count was the main thing, it is merely an indication of a truely new sensor.

New means "different" it does not always mean better.

I see no reason NOT to compare The OMD with the GH2..

"Comparing" doest equate "equating"'. I have compared the two and the IQ of the Sony sensor is what you expect form a next generation sensor. better in every way. Noticably better.

They were the top of both lines, for a while, with arguably similar (if not the same) IQ levels..

Are you talking about Gh3 or Gh2. I think you are confusing them. The DR of the OMD is simply well aherad of GH2, tonality and colour depth too. GH3 is on par though.

OMD had some things the GH2 did not have, and GH2 had things the OMD didnt have..

OMD had everything bar good video. Also to some, handling indeed was some sort of an issue.

There has been no real "leap" in still image IQ from either Olympus or Panasonic since those cameras..

There has been for Panny: GH3 is a clear step up on GH2. And as there is no next generation OMD of course there is no leap yet. And I don't expect one either from Oly's side. But in the GX7 I would expect one compared to GX1 or GF6.

 

[Bob Meyer]

Nothing wrong with OVF's in general, but the OVF's in those particular cameras were awful. Small and dim, and like looking through a length of plastic pipe.

 

[bgalb]

A truely new sensor? Not necessarily. The GH2 has an 18mp sensor. Panasonic just elected to use the last two megapixels for it's multi-aspect function. They could easily decide to use the same sensor and use all 18mp for a 4:3 image along with improvements in firmware. It's extremely unlikely that they would do this, but it is a possibility.

18mp vs 16mp can be considered almost insignificant. 24 vs 16 could be considered a moderate improvement.

 

[Bob Meyer]

APS-C sensors using similar technology will always test better than m43 sensors. That's just basic physics, and there's no way around it. FF sensors will be even better. If having the "best" sensor is the most important criteria for you in choosing a camera you shouldn't be wasting your time in the m43 forum.

The benefits of m43 are many, though. You'll never get an APS-C kit including a body or two, and several lenses, that is as compact and lightweight as an equivalent m43 kit. For most of us, the quality of the current "crop" of m43 sensors is more than good enough. And any "loss" in quality compared to larger sensor bodies well worth the advantages provided.

If the GX7 matches the OM-D and GH3 in performance, at a price roughly the same, it will be an effective value proposition. Why do you expect a camera which matches $1000 bodies in performance should be several hundred dollars cheaper? Seems illogical to me.

 

[Jeff Tokayer]

bgalb wrote:

A truely new sensor? Not necessarily. The GH2 has an 18mp sensor. Panasonic just elected to use the last two megapixels for it's multi-aspect function. They could easily decide to use the same sensor and use all 18mp for a 4:3 image along with improvements in firmware. It's extremely unlikely that they would do this, but it is a possibility.

In 4:3 format, the GH2 uses only 16mpixels. I don't believe that sensor is capable of using the full 18mpixels.

 

[M Hamilton]

I would happily pay $1000 for all those things in a tight NEX6-esque body.

 

[dougjgreen1]

Donald Chin wrote:

Donald Chin wrote:

If it's just a "me too" sensor like the one in GH-3, then they have to cut the price to around $700 in order to compete. For a $1000+ price tag, we're talking about high-end APS-C DSLR like 700D & D7100!

 

[M Hamilton]

I would HAPPILY take OM-D image quality in a smaller package. I don't need a "giant leap forward" I don't think anyone does. The sensors of today are already fantastic. What most of us need is a sensor that physically jumps out of the camera and kicks us in the butt until we get out of the house, off the computer, and take more pictures.

 

[TClair]

I still use my L1 almost daily, as of late, and 30,000+ images later I still enjoy it. I have been waiting for a replacement camera but may go with Fuji if Panasonic doesn't get it act together. I'm going to need to replace lenses anyway.