UrbaneHobbit
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,754
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 2,547
First off, so you know where I am coming from: I am very much an amateur and not a professional. I have recently moved to Japan, and during COVID, cameras have become something of a coping mechanism for me. My first purchase here was a Canon EOS M5, with the goal of really learning photography this time around. I appreciated just about everything about it, especially the EVF with live preview of my settings using the many physical controls. However, as small as it was, it was always just a little too big to cram into a pants pocket conveniently. I followed it up with the older but more compact EOS M2, but missed the EVF. And, for both cameras, manual-focus assist features were strongly biased towards the native EF-M lenses, whereas I was gradually becoming an adapted/vintage lens enthusiast.
I went back to my original research and through many posts here (thanks, all) and reconsidered my other top choice, the Panasonic Lumix GM5. I found one in good condition on eBay, for $350 shipped from the US. I thought that was a fair price for what seemed to be an achievement in camera design. After it arrived, I was pleased to see that it had fewer than 3,500 shutter actuations (caveats duly acknowledged there). So, without further ado:
All the accolades are well-deserved. Over five years on, the GM5 is a marvel of product design, created with clear intent to suit my needs as a street shooter and family man who wants more control and better image quality than I can get on my smartphone. The build is solid, the controls are considered, and the overall package with any of the several available pancake lenses is small and light enough to slip into a trouser (not jeans) front pocket. It turns out that the grip size of a camera body has less impact on pocketability and retrieval than the amount the EVF protrudes on the other side. To wit, the EOS M5's beefier grip doesn't stick out more than any of my flat pancake lenses – it's the hard rubber non-removable DSLR-style EVF cup that sticks out far enough to snag on cloth. Whereas the Lumix GM5's lower-profile EVF housing poses no such problem. Every millimeter counts!
Startup time, particularly with a prime lens, is very fast – fast enough that I can pull the GM5 out of said pocket and flick the power lever On in one motion, and the camera is ready to shoot by the time I have it up to my eye.
The GM5's viewfinder is admittedly of an older generation compared to that of the EOS M5. However, I have been lucky to have quickly gotten used to the slight "tunnel vision" feel of it, and am apparently not sensitive to the color tearing effect. I do not wear glasses, having gotten laser surgery a few years ago, so perhaps that has something to do with its suitability.
With the M5, enabling focus magnification with anything other than a Canon lens of modern vintage was kind of a pain, requiring two button presses. With even a vintage manual lens on the GM5, all I need to do is tap the screen and I'm in. Add to this the extremely convenient pushable rear control dial for switching between aperture and shutter speed while in M mode, and I don't miss the Canon's many dials much at all. (I am not in the habit of using exposure compensation, and so the M5's dedicated dial for that always seemed... overcommitted.) All in all, I would say that the controls are just what I need, nothing more and nothing less.
As you might guess, I shoot exclusively with available light, trying to keep ISO far below 1600 (usually at 100-200). So, the absence of a built-in flash doesn't bother me. Most of my shots are of family and the dog at meals or outdoors. The rest are for my version of motorsports: getting quick shots of Japan's many unusual motor vehicles. For this, I have found the Olympus 14-42mm EZ kit zoom to be the solution, for several specific reasons. The range of focal lengths is suited to zoom in for across-the-lane pans of moving vehicles, and gets wide enough to full-body shots of parked ones. At the very far end of the range it does get soft, a slight disappointment. I did try the Panasonic 12-32mm, a fine lens and probably sharper across the range. However, the Olympus won out for its absolute pancake flatness (pocketability), power zoom with option to extend to the previous focal length (see vehicle shooting hobby), and that wonderful automatic lens cap accessory (pocketability again). With that setup, I am able to walk down the street with eyes peeled, then pull the GM5 out to get the shot of that amazing Toyota 2000GT before it gets away.
One more note on the 14-42mm EZ: the surprise for me here was how well it does in the middle/wide end of its range for closer shots: the kids having ice cream, the dog resting on the lawn, that kind of thing. Even at the higher end of my preferred ISO range. Underrated, if you ask me.
For lower-light conditions, I picked up the Lumix 20mm f/1.7 and 14mm f/2.5. (For my M5 I would have used a single lens, the 22mm f/2.0 – probably the best optically that I have in that system, albeit with a look I would characterize as clinical.) Here again, the absolutely tiny dimensions of the GM5's body means I can pocket it with either of those lenses mounted, and then slip another lens in the other pocket for a versatile mini-kit.
I would say that neither of those lenses are quite as accurate on the GM5 as the 22mm EF-M on the M5, if we're talking about autofocusing. (That's not quite fair, as the M5 is a different class of camera using newer technology.) However, for lower light family stuff, I tend to switch to manual focus anyway, and the 20mm in particular is able to generate comparable results, perhaps even with a bit more character. As an adapted/vintage lens fan, I do not mind hearing and feeling the 20mm quietly grinding away when it is on AF!
I can see the appeal of the 14mm, perhaps closest in spirit to the EF-M 22mm. As a newer prime, it is ready to go as soon as the camera turns on. This is the lens I take for more conventional street shooting: daylight, urban scenes, capture-the-human-moment stuff.
We recently visited one of Japan's taller tower attractions, operating under safer protocols, and for the occasion I ordered the Lumix X Vario 45-175 Power Zoom, perhaps not as popular as some other zooms I'd seen here, but I saw a deal on Amazon Japan for $150 used and couldn't resist. (Apparently the previous owner felt the mount was too tight, but to me it seemed just a little snug the first few times. No metal shavings that I could see!) Wow, what fun to use this thing, which allowed me to zoom in from almost 900 feet up and see individual people on amusement park rides below. Having no image stabilization in the GM5, the lens's IS made all the shots possible that day. I understand the geometry of sensor sizes and implications on lens design, but it still feels impossible to be able to fit that capability into a pants pocket. (Are you sensing a theme here? I don't like to carry a bag, especially in Japan's summer heat.)
Other comparative shortcomings? The difference in resolution is definitely noticeable, but that's to be expected going from the M5's 24 megapixels to the GM5's 16. As a rank amateur, I don't even go to a real computer for editing; instead I dump the SD cards to a newer iPad and do a little tweaking in Photos or Darkroom. So, my version of pixel-peeping is how far I can pinch-zoom before the image starts to break down. Files from the M5 tolerate this kind of abuse better.
As mentioned before, I think the Canon's autofocus system is certainly better for shooting fast-moving targets – but here again, my own speed-oriented use case is actually dominated by how fast I can pull the camera out and have it ready to shoot. With the GM5, it's out and ready to go, with a bit of extra time to use the touch screen to move the focus point. With the M5, there is a little more fumbling, a slightly longer startup time, and by then the moment may have passed for the AF to shine.
It's only been a month, and I am sure I have more to discover. So far, I have found the GM5 to be worthy of all the praise. Here we have an absolutely tiny camera, comparable in size to the Sony RX100 (or even the Pentax Q), but with the much larger sensor and the wide variety of interchangeable lenses of a full system camera. A marvel of engineering, and for me just a keeper as a designed object to show future generations. In the GM5 I have the ability to take a full-fledged camera out with me every single day, relegating my smartphone to casual videos. I enjoy contemplating which lens to put on the thing before I head out the door, then putting the combination to use as intended.
Like others, I am already wishing for some kind of update. Looking at what's available, I think the GX9 is probably the closest thing out there. I don't think I would mind the tradeoff in size to get four more megapixels and in-body image stabilization. The GX9's body is still smaller than the M5's in that critical depth dimension! For now, I am planning to sell the M5 and see what Canon announces next for the M line; hopefully a true rangefinder-style body with a built-in EVF and IBIS, but I'm not holding my breath.
Thanks for reading what should probably be categorized as a review, although it feels silly so long after the product's release. And thanks again for all the previous posts about this wonderful little camera, which made my research easier and ultimately convinced me to give one a try for myself.
I went back to my original research and through many posts here (thanks, all) and reconsidered my other top choice, the Panasonic Lumix GM5. I found one in good condition on eBay, for $350 shipped from the US. I thought that was a fair price for what seemed to be an achievement in camera design. After it arrived, I was pleased to see that it had fewer than 3,500 shutter actuations (caveats duly acknowledged there). So, without further ado:
All the accolades are well-deserved. Over five years on, the GM5 is a marvel of product design, created with clear intent to suit my needs as a street shooter and family man who wants more control and better image quality than I can get on my smartphone. The build is solid, the controls are considered, and the overall package with any of the several available pancake lenses is small and light enough to slip into a trouser (not jeans) front pocket. It turns out that the grip size of a camera body has less impact on pocketability and retrieval than the amount the EVF protrudes on the other side. To wit, the EOS M5's beefier grip doesn't stick out more than any of my flat pancake lenses – it's the hard rubber non-removable DSLR-style EVF cup that sticks out far enough to snag on cloth. Whereas the Lumix GM5's lower-profile EVF housing poses no such problem. Every millimeter counts!
Startup time, particularly with a prime lens, is very fast – fast enough that I can pull the GM5 out of said pocket and flick the power lever On in one motion, and the camera is ready to shoot by the time I have it up to my eye.
The GM5's viewfinder is admittedly of an older generation compared to that of the EOS M5. However, I have been lucky to have quickly gotten used to the slight "tunnel vision" feel of it, and am apparently not sensitive to the color tearing effect. I do not wear glasses, having gotten laser surgery a few years ago, so perhaps that has something to do with its suitability.
With the M5, enabling focus magnification with anything other than a Canon lens of modern vintage was kind of a pain, requiring two button presses. With even a vintage manual lens on the GM5, all I need to do is tap the screen and I'm in. Add to this the extremely convenient pushable rear control dial for switching between aperture and shutter speed while in M mode, and I don't miss the Canon's many dials much at all. (I am not in the habit of using exposure compensation, and so the M5's dedicated dial for that always seemed... overcommitted.) All in all, I would say that the controls are just what I need, nothing more and nothing less.
As you might guess, I shoot exclusively with available light, trying to keep ISO far below 1600 (usually at 100-200). So, the absence of a built-in flash doesn't bother me. Most of my shots are of family and the dog at meals or outdoors. The rest are for my version of motorsports: getting quick shots of Japan's many unusual motor vehicles. For this, I have found the Olympus 14-42mm EZ kit zoom to be the solution, for several specific reasons. The range of focal lengths is suited to zoom in for across-the-lane pans of moving vehicles, and gets wide enough to full-body shots of parked ones. At the very far end of the range it does get soft, a slight disappointment. I did try the Panasonic 12-32mm, a fine lens and probably sharper across the range. However, the Olympus won out for its absolute pancake flatness (pocketability), power zoom with option to extend to the previous focal length (see vehicle shooting hobby), and that wonderful automatic lens cap accessory (pocketability again). With that setup, I am able to walk down the street with eyes peeled, then pull the GM5 out to get the shot of that amazing Toyota 2000GT before it gets away.
One more note on the 14-42mm EZ: the surprise for me here was how well it does in the middle/wide end of its range for closer shots: the kids having ice cream, the dog resting on the lawn, that kind of thing. Even at the higher end of my preferred ISO range. Underrated, if you ask me.
For lower-light conditions, I picked up the Lumix 20mm f/1.7 and 14mm f/2.5. (For my M5 I would have used a single lens, the 22mm f/2.0 – probably the best optically that I have in that system, albeit with a look I would characterize as clinical.) Here again, the absolutely tiny dimensions of the GM5's body means I can pocket it with either of those lenses mounted, and then slip another lens in the other pocket for a versatile mini-kit.
I would say that neither of those lenses are quite as accurate on the GM5 as the 22mm EF-M on the M5, if we're talking about autofocusing. (That's not quite fair, as the M5 is a different class of camera using newer technology.) However, for lower light family stuff, I tend to switch to manual focus anyway, and the 20mm in particular is able to generate comparable results, perhaps even with a bit more character. As an adapted/vintage lens fan, I do not mind hearing and feeling the 20mm quietly grinding away when it is on AF!
I can see the appeal of the 14mm, perhaps closest in spirit to the EF-M 22mm. As a newer prime, it is ready to go as soon as the camera turns on. This is the lens I take for more conventional street shooting: daylight, urban scenes, capture-the-human-moment stuff.
We recently visited one of Japan's taller tower attractions, operating under safer protocols, and for the occasion I ordered the Lumix X Vario 45-175 Power Zoom, perhaps not as popular as some other zooms I'd seen here, but I saw a deal on Amazon Japan for $150 used and couldn't resist. (Apparently the previous owner felt the mount was too tight, but to me it seemed just a little snug the first few times. No metal shavings that I could see!) Wow, what fun to use this thing, which allowed me to zoom in from almost 900 feet up and see individual people on amusement park rides below. Having no image stabilization in the GM5, the lens's IS made all the shots possible that day. I understand the geometry of sensor sizes and implications on lens design, but it still feels impossible to be able to fit that capability into a pants pocket. (Are you sensing a theme here? I don't like to carry a bag, especially in Japan's summer heat.)
Other comparative shortcomings? The difference in resolution is definitely noticeable, but that's to be expected going from the M5's 24 megapixels to the GM5's 16. As a rank amateur, I don't even go to a real computer for editing; instead I dump the SD cards to a newer iPad and do a little tweaking in Photos or Darkroom. So, my version of pixel-peeping is how far I can pinch-zoom before the image starts to break down. Files from the M5 tolerate this kind of abuse better.
As mentioned before, I think the Canon's autofocus system is certainly better for shooting fast-moving targets – but here again, my own speed-oriented use case is actually dominated by how fast I can pull the camera out and have it ready to shoot. With the GM5, it's out and ready to go, with a bit of extra time to use the touch screen to move the focus point. With the M5, there is a little more fumbling, a slightly longer startup time, and by then the moment may have passed for the AF to shine.
It's only been a month, and I am sure I have more to discover. So far, I have found the GM5 to be worthy of all the praise. Here we have an absolutely tiny camera, comparable in size to the Sony RX100 (or even the Pentax Q), but with the much larger sensor and the wide variety of interchangeable lenses of a full system camera. A marvel of engineering, and for me just a keeper as a designed object to show future generations. In the GM5 I have the ability to take a full-fledged camera out with me every single day, relegating my smartphone to casual videos. I enjoy contemplating which lens to put on the thing before I head out the door, then putting the combination to use as intended.
Like others, I am already wishing for some kind of update. Looking at what's available, I think the GX9 is probably the closest thing out there. I don't think I would mind the tradeoff in size to get four more megapixels and in-body image stabilization. The GX9's body is still smaller than the M5's in that critical depth dimension! For now, I am planning to sell the M5 and see what Canon announces next for the M line; hopefully a true rangefinder-style body with a built-in EVF and IBIS, but I'm not holding my breath.
Thanks for reading what should probably be categorized as a review, although it feels silly so long after the product's release. And thanks again for all the previous posts about this wonderful little camera, which made my research easier and ultimately convinced me to give one a try for myself.
Last edited:
