687

Panasonic Lumix DC-G95/G90 Review

Is the Panasonic Lumix DC-G95 right for you?

Cameras can serve different purposes for different photographers; the right tool for one person might be the wrong one for someone else. With that in mind, we'll be taking a look at how the Panasonic Lumix DC-G95/G90/G91 stacks up for a variety of common uses, based on its specifications, our lab testing and the time we've spent with it in the real world.


Family and moments

Out-of-camera JPEG using the Standard profile.
Lumix 12-60mm F3.5-5.6 @ 14mm | ISO 200 | 1/640 sec | F9
Photo courtesy Robert Rose

A camera well-suited for family and moments needs to be responsive, give good image quality and be convenient to take with you. The Panasonic DC-G95 isn't the most compact camera out there, but in other respects, it's quite capable. Let's take a closer look.

Pros:

  • iAuto mode makes it easy to hand camera off to an inexperienced user
  • Reliable face and eye detection with one or two people in the scene
  • Good out-of-of-camera JPEGs
  • Selfie-friendly screen with responsive and polished touch interface
  • Generally reliable Wi-Fi + Bluetooth to share files instantly
  • Weather resistance means peace of mind in wet conditions

Cons:

  • No way to switch between multiple faces when using face detection
  • Continuous AF performance not best-in-class
  • A bit bulky
  • Battery life is 'just okay'

[Back to top]


Travel

Out-of-camera JPEG using the Standard profile.
Panasonic Leica 10-25mm F1.7 @ 10mm | ISO 200 | 1/1000 sec | F5
Photo by Jeff Keller

For those photographers who are used to (or are willing to become used to) bringing a dedicated camera with them on a trip, the G95 strikes a good balance of weight, ergonomics and image quality. It obviously won't fit into your pocket, but the latest 20MP Four Thirds chip offers good resolution, and a wide variety of lenses will let you build a kit to your liking.

Pros:

  • Good out-of-camera JPEGs, and in-camera Raw conversion lets you tweak your files without editing on a computer
  • Weather-resistant body
  • Selfie-friendly LCD with a responsive touch-interface
  • Generally reliable Wi-Fi and Bluetooth for easy uploading to social media
  • USB charging lets you top up your battery on the go, or forego a wall charger when traveling light
  • Wide-ranging 12-60mm kit lens adds a useful degree of flexibility

Cons:

  • Some may find it a big too large for travel
  • 4K video crop limits ability to capture wide-angle footage, results in noisier video as light levels drop
  • Battery life is 'just okay'

[Back to top]


Lifestyle and people

Image processed in-camera from Raw using the L Monochrome profile.
Panasonic Leica 10-25mm F1.7 @ 10mm | ISO 200 | 1/1600 sec | F4
Photo by Carey Rose

For those looking for a camera to aid in capture of Instagram-ready lifestyle and people photos, the G95 is a good option: particularly thanks to its robust in-camera Raw conversion, letting you tweak photos to your liking with more control than you might get on everyday mobile editing apps.

Pros:

  • Good out-of-camera JPEGs
  • In-camera Raw conversion lets you tweak your files on the go, with more control than many social apps and good profile / filter options
  • Reliable face and eye detection for one or two people in a scene
  • Direct controls for quick setting changes
  • Extensive range of lenses available

Cons:

  • No way to switch between detected faces
  • 'Wobble' during continuous AF is distracting
  • Smaller sensor requires fairly bright lenses to get shallow depth-of-field

[Back to top]


Landscape

Out-of-camera JPEG using the Standard profile.
Lumix 12-35mm F2.8 OIS @ 15mm | ISO 200 | 1/500 sec | F5.6
Photo by Jeff Keller

While the G95 has a lot going for it in terms of handling and build regarding landscape photography, some may find that they prefer the higher resolution and greater dynamic range available from competing cameras with larger sensors.

Pros:

  • Well-built, weather-resistant body
  • Fully articulating LCD makes it easier to work from a tripod
  • Plenty of physical controls to change settings
  • Good out-of-camera JPEGs
  • USB charging for topping up while off the grid

Cons:

  • 20MP resolution may be low for some users
  • Dynamic range trails some comparably priced options with larger sensors

[Back to top]


Formal portraits

Processed using Adobe Camera Raw 11. Image captured using face and eye-detect autofocus.
Panasonic 12-60mm F3.5-5.6 @ 60mm | ISO 200 | 1/400 sec | F5.6
Photo by Carey Rose

The G95's eye-detecting AF makes it easy to get perfect focus for posed portraits and the kit lens covers the classic head-and-shoulders portrait range. You'll probably need a dedicated lens for shallow depth-of-field images, though.

Pros:

  • Responsive autofocus
  • Reliable face and eye detection
  • Nice selection of portrait lenses

Cons:

  • Difficult to obtain depth-of-field as shallow as competitors with larger sensors
  • Resolution on the low side
  • Limited flash selection

[Back to top]


Candid and street

Out-of-camera JPEG
Panasonic Leica 10-25mm F1.7 @ 10mm | ISO 200 | 1/100 sec | F2.8
Photo by Carey Rose

The G95 isn't the smallest, most discreet camera, but its articulated screen lets you subtly shoot 'from the hip.'

Pros:

  • Good out-of-camera JPEGs for instant printing or sharing with subjects
  • Responsive autofocus for rapidly changing situations
  • Generally reliable face and eye detection
  • Silent shooting with low rolling shutter
  • Lots of direct controls to quickly change settings

Cons:

  • Size of the camera body limits ability to be discreet
  • Fully articulating screen is less discreet than a tilting design

[Back to top]


Video

Panasonic has made a name for itself as a manufacturer of cameras that are as capable at capturing videos as they are at stills - but the G95 disrupts that in some respects. While it still comes with a good amount of video features, the 4K crop limits the camera's overall capability.

Pros:

  • Minimal rolling shutter
  • V-Log L built-in
  • Headphone and mic sockets
  • Fully articulating LCD
  • Exposure compensation can be used with manual exposures and Auto ISO

Cons:

  • 1.25x crop in 4K greatly reduces wide-angle options
  • Video quality not as good as competition since full area of sensor not used
  • 'Wobble' while camera is focusing is distracting

[Back to top]


Sports and wildlife

Out-of-camera JPEG.
Lumix 12-60mm F3.5-5.6 @ 18mm | 1/160 sec | F6.3 | ISO 200
Photo by Carey Rose

The Panasonic G95 is certainly capable of capturing excellent action shots, but with 6 fps burst shooting with autofocus, a somewhat cumbersome 'Tracking' option and the viewfinder 'wobble,' it wouldn't be our go-to choice if this is your main style of shooting. The small sensor and 2X crop factor does mean that you don't need to spend a fortune for high-quality telephoto lens options, though.

Pros:

  • Good out-of-camera JPEGs
  • Fast autofocus
  • Large EVF for this class
  • Numerous direct controls for quick setting changes
  • Optional battery grip for extra comfort with long lenses

Cons:

  • 'Wobble' when focusing continuously is distracting
  • Continuous AF/tracking not best-in-class
  • Burst speed limited to 6 fps (with C-AF)

[Back to top]


Our reviews are designed with real-world shooting scenarios in mind, and on this page we're looking at how the Lumix DC-G95 performs for several popular use-cases. After considering its features and target market, we have opted not to specifically address 'Weddings and events' in this section.

25
I own it
27
I want it
14
I had it
Discuss in the forums
View Comments (687)

Comments

All (687)
Most popular (15)
Editors' picks (1)
DPR staff (32)
Oldest first
TonyPM

Now what's next?
The GH5ii was announced, the GH6 is coming soon, there is no G9 replacement in the works, and the G100 is just not enough for photography.

The G90/G95 are ok, but what if we get a GX10 that is a true replacement for the G9 and Gx8.
And if we get a better sensor and high ISO performance in the bag it would great.

3 months ago
pula58

I chose the G95 over the G9 because it is smaller and weighs less, and is still a great camera. 4K video crop is a bummer, but video isn't my main thing, and nothings perfect. I tried the G9 for a couple of weeks before making the decision to return it. Just too big and heavy for 3-4 day backpacking trips (I do almost all of my photography up in the mountains).

3 months ago
vynz
vynz

I have the G80 and the size of that is perfect for travel. Not sure why they wanted to make this update bigger. I have my A7 for when I need a bigger camera. That 4k crop also kills the joy for me.

5 months ago
Spacedebree
Spacedebree

So much Noise event compared to the older 16mp G80. Whats the USP with this camera compared ro the competition? Which is the reading exept for the price to not go X-T30, EM5 MK II or Sony a6XXX? The tests with ISO 200 +5ev was scaring the shit out of me, especially compared to the G9 which still is too pricey. Not sure what to get next with me reborned interest in photography. If it wasnt for the green weird pattern in images, i should have kept My X-T20... Maybe the X-T30 is better for me, it X-T3.

10 months ago*
zephyrion974

Today in June, the G90 is priced at 839€ in France compared to the G9 with its 1149€, both body only.
I don't really need these high-end features in video with the G9 so I think I would go with the G90, even if it has a 1,25x crop in 4K and a less reliable AF-C than the G9.

Jun 14, 2020
TonyPM

I'd love to see Dpreview talk about the image editing software bundled with the cameras, like you guys did years ago.

Dec 1, 2019
Pin_Sharp

"Good for ... Travel " "Not so good for ... Those seeking a light and portable camera"
😂

Nov 4, 2019
TonyPM

Let's see how it stacks up against the Em5 mkiii.

Oct 22, 2019
Spacedebree
Spacedebree

How did it stack up?

10 months ago
TonyPM

I think they are pretty much in the same league in image quality and af. Even though one has contrast detect at and the other phase detect.

The Em5iii was supposed to have the same af as the Em1mkii, but Olympus didn't want that to happen. Yet.

10 months ago
pula58

I have both the G95 and Em-5 III. I figured I'd return the one I liked less...but have not yet figured that out yet. I like them both!

3 months ago
perry rhodan
perry rhodan

People watching this camera are not novices that glue the kitlens. So DPR it is time to include a rating for "SYSTEM". As it was 10 years ago. Simple and misleading camera-only-body reviews are next to useless when catering for the more experienced buyers.

Oct 22, 2019
Deadfisheye
Deadfisheye

The g95 has made me appreciate the g85 even more than I originally did. I have difficulties with arthritis in my hands. I loved the gx85 and gx9 with reasonable sized lenses. And the g85. Beautiful ergomomics.The g9 is just too bulky and heavy. I really wanted the g9 sensor in a g85 body. I thought g95 with a bit of extra weight would be OK. But the difference is very noticeable and the extra bulk puts extra strain on aged hands. The g85 is just comfortable in my medium sized hands. The slight changes in the g95 seem to have been instituted to make it significantly less comfortable. Lots of older people I know use m43 for weight and volume issues. I can only assume panasonic think buyers take a bigger camera more seriously. For older buyers this is just nonsense.

Oct 11, 2019
perry rhodan
perry rhodan

There is the GX series for.

Oct 22, 2019
Ilume
Ilume

Agree. I just read this thinking about the same. "Could the G95 be a G9 but in a G80 body". But no, apparently, after reading your comment I am also very happy with my G80. I have the GX80 also but don't like it really, not for general use. It is good for travelling though, and the 20/1.7 is glued onto it. But G80 is a perfect body for the system. Great size without weighing too much. I hold on to the G80 a while more. I wonder what the future will bring, hope we will get a much better G80-sized model later.

Jul 7, 2020
Spacedebree
Spacedebree

So it is heavier than G80? I did not know. 😕

10 months ago
Ilume
Ilume

Well... G80 is 505 gram, the G95 is 536 gram (w bat) :)

10 months ago
AdrianTWQ

I am staying with Fuji until either Panny make a GM6 or Olmy makes a PM3, with 20Mp or higher megapixels. And a UWA small aperture OIS Zoom

Sep 28, 2019
ecka84
ecka84

How on Earth did this thing score higher in image quality than the RP?
Is this a joke? :) Because the images are definitely not better.

Aug 24, 2019
CaPi

It can do more

Aug 26, 2019
CaPi

Feature wise only of course.
Speaking of a comparison to recent Canon releases:
Compare the JPEGS to those of the RP.
Interesting testshot Interpretation of skin colors.

Aug 26, 2019
ecka84
ecka84

Honestly, I don't care about JPEGs at all. Just like I don't care who wins the race in first gear.
I know that the Panasonic got more features. I'm talking about the image quality. You can turn on the Comparison Mode on Conclusion page and compare the ratings of all the aspects of these two cameras separately - quality RAW, quality JPEG (features, etc.), which both scored higher than RP's, somehow.
The RP/6D2 sensor might be the worst among FF cameras. But it still can produce much better quality than m4/3. This DPR camera rating system makes no sense to me. I mean, my understanding of "image quality" must be entirely different. Look, it says that 6D2 is a better camera than the EOS R ... Wow. Seriously?! And, according to DPR, my good old 6D beats 5D4 and 5DsR in RAW image quality?! There's something really wrong with it. If you downsample the 50mp 5DsR image down to 20mp and compare it against the same image shot on 6D, there would be a night and day difference (not in 6D's favor).

Aug 26, 2019
CaPi

The review you agree is the review you do yourself.
I have used both - for short periods of time only - and both are solid cameras.
Will I replace my Z6 with either? I guess not. All of them hold silver awards.
The reviews themselves showed me a lot. I dont give much about the numbers.

Aug 26, 2019*
ecka84
ecka84

I don't care about paper numbers much too. But I want them to represent reality, because I can't test them all myself. For me, image quality is priority #1. I wouldn't trade my camera for more fancy "features" and less quality. Which is why the RP and the 6D2 are a no-go. And all the crop systems are even worse. The best thing about any good camera review is the RAW sample gallery and DPR does it rather well. [Thank you guys!]
They all are solid cameras if the price is right. The whole point of reading reviews is finding the right tools for my needs. But when there are misleadingly wrong markers like '5D4 RAW image quality being worse than 6D', I simply don't trust the whole story. I mean, who knows what other false measurements there are and how many.

Aug 27, 2019
jackspra
jackspra

Great camera.Panasonic are on a roll.

Aug 24, 2019
Adrian-Van

This camera would be good for vlogging, light pro use, and personal use for video in Full Frame HD. However for 4K video too bad it is cropped in sensor. One reason why GH5 is better is full frame width for 4K which for professional use, this is important. Not sure if this camera is intended for pro users, although it could be used for limited shorter video productions and vlogs. Or as second camera to GH5.

Aug 24, 2019*
Platinumkid
Platinumkid

I have a Panasonic camera and there is something that is hard to translate in a written review. They are well thought out in terms of ergonomics and user interface. These are not "measurable" feats, but result in good user experience. Having said that - this particular model looks pointless. If I want the compactness of the M4/3, I would buy the GX9. If I want a full-size camera for the ergonomics and weather sealing, I would buy the G9. This one looks unnecessary really.

Aug 23, 2019
TheClueless
TheClueless

The last bit is kind of the problem - When I decided I needed a MFT back in my stash, my choice ended up being between the G9 and the G95. I wasn't blown away by the G9 from it's positioning perspective when I had it the first time around, but it was an utterly competent camera (with the usual Pana CDAF caveats). And now the slightly discounted G9 is barely more than the G95 in my locale, the newer unit didn't make any sense.

Aug 23, 2019*
MrTaikitso
MrTaikitso

Or get a G80/85, as I have just done. It's superb! In particular with the 12-60mm kit lens. I used it at an air show the other day, and despite lack of reach of the lens (I didn't buy the camera for long distance subjects), even with cropping stills from video, the IQ was great, and the auto focus tracked the aircraft 95% of the time, it only failing in almost direct sunlight or areas of poor contrast, such as when a silver plane flew past some clouds.
G80 is 3 years old, and my only niggle is the flat buttons on the rear. Stills and 4K video was tack sharp and the colours natural.
Under £600 now.

Aug 24, 2019
The Squirrel Mafia
The Squirrel Mafia

This is a very nice mid-range camera, but the price, extreme 4k crop, & the fact that you can't get the body alone in the USA kind of breaks it. Not to mention that the slightly older G85 is dirt cheap at the moment & the G9 is selling for almost the same price as the G95 too. They're going to have a very hard time moving these.

Aug 23, 2019*
GHebert

Exactly! This is why i have also just bought the GX85 at a ridiculous price including 2 lenses. No prime lens of course but very efficient. I will get some prime fixed M4/3 lenses at a reasonable price to complete that super deal. I am very pleased with that camera.

Aug 25, 2019
Robbster
Robbster

For those of us who do research and documentary video as well as stills, the unlimited recording time is crucial. Would like to 1) see the video recording time limits called out MUCH More clearly in all reviews and 2) more manufacturers enable unlimited record times.

Aug 23, 2019
speculatrix

There are simple hacks for most Lumix cameras, usually where you power them up holding some buttons, which allows you to choose additional video modes and disable the recording time limit. Check YouTube for demos.

Aug 24, 2019
GERICOM30
GERICOM30

The Lumix G90 is an excellent case, I had it to replace the G80 : the grip is more enjoyable, the build finish is superior and especially the JPEG photo quality is better in detail and colorimetry. My previous cameras were among others: Lumix G80, Lumix GX8, PEN F, OMD M5 II etc ... I do not regret my purchase and I am surprised not to see more ads for this device. I specify that only do the photo (GERICOM30 on Flickr) no video. Sorry for my English, I'm french....

Aug 23, 2019
TorsteinH
TorsteinH

As far as I know, DFD do not work with Olympus lenses. So is the AFC on this camera just as bad with Olympus lenses as normal CDF?

Aug 21, 2019
Impulses

That's what they claim anyway... I think DFD has always been about the improved algorithms and processing as much as the lens profiles they touted a lot in the marketing... I've seen some testing that seemed to insinuate recent Pana bodies with an Oly lens still AF-C'd a heck of a lot better than say an Oly body without OSPDAF, but it barely scratched the surface... Haven't seen any in depth tests but I've not been lurking in the boards lately either.

I might borrow a G85 I've got access to see what I see, but I'm not sure to what extent I could test this with my 17/1.2 or 45/1.8... AF tests are tricky, I guess that's why we barely see anything on it beyond subjective impressions and DPR's basic bike test. The manufacturers love to obfuscate all the technical aspects around it too, ugh...

Aug 22, 2019
TorsteinH
TorsteinH

It would be interesting to here what you experienced if you tried it, even if it's not a complete objective test. As it is now, I see no reason to upgrade my EM-10 II with anything from Panasonic when I own several Olympus lenses...

Aug 22, 2019
Impulses

I'm not in a hurry to upgrade my E-M5 II either TBH (barring a sensor breakthrough, C-AF would be the main reason to do so), but yeah I'm still curious about this. Oddly, I actually own far more Pana lenses than Oly ones (12/2 is the only other one of the latter), mostly cause of practical FL/size/etc preferences, but I also own a GX850... I'd borrow that G85 for testing if only because I'd guess it'll have beefier processing and y'know, EVF. It's definitely on my to-do... I just don't shoot much action outside of concerts and my Godson occasionally, I end up using touch AF-S a lot for either.

Aug 23, 2019
JakeJY

@Impulses
The E-M5 II is probably Olympus's best CDAF-only body, so it would probably be a useful comparison. That said, it's very hard to come up with an objective test of AF that can be consistently applied.

The other thing on DFD is that given none of the Panasonic lenses before the GH4 (first camera to have DFD) had the lens defocus profiles built in, Panasonic loaded the profiles of lenses before then into the camera. Officially Panasonic said they only have the profiles for Panasonic lenses, but could they also have loaded Olympus lenses too (nothing is stopping them from doing so)?

Aug 23, 2019
snowsurferDS
snowsurferDS

I have no idea whether they are using DFD, but I'm VERY happy with the Oly 12-40 Pro and 7-14 Pro on my GX8 (hopefully soon G9). Not buying anything longer from Oly due to the lack of OIS in most of their lenses, but those two are stellar zooms on my Lumix.

Aug 23, 2019
TorsteinH
TorsteinH

I don't doubt that this fine lenses will give great result on a Panasonic camera, but the only thing that interest me regarding this lenses are the performance with AFC

Aug 26, 2019
Ondra J

I wonder why the ugly yellow tint in RAW images on the IQ page. https://imgur.com/a/otOEHpc
From various cameras only this has apparently wrong WB in RAW. Makes the comparison a bit harder.

Aug 16, 2019
snowsurferDS
snowsurferDS

The biggest problem for Panasonic with this camera is their own G9, which can be purchased on special offers for less than or just around 1k€ from time to time (official channels in EU), and it is considerably superior in every regard, especially video. I feel like this should have been priced 15-20% lower in order to be competitive. I guess the shrinking ILC market is going to make this kind of pricing the order of the day. :(

Aug 16, 2019
Dave Hurwitz

I bought an open box G9 recently for $950 US and could have had a sealed one for $1200. Why would I, or anyone else, want a G95 for the same price?

Aug 16, 2019
Impulses

I think they miscalculated in pricing *up* the GX9 & G95 over their predecessors without truly significant upgrades beyond the 20MP sensor and a couple other things (and downgrades in some ways)...

You could argue that the higher end 12-60 kit lens is either to blame for part of that, or a value add despite the pricing, but then there's no body-only option for either so that just annoys existing M4/3 users further. At least the 12-60 does have a decent resale value.

Aug 17, 2019
snowsurferDS
snowsurferDS

@Impulses The GX9 was not an upgrade at all in comparison to the GX8, it was a downright downgrade in many key areas.

Aug 23, 2019
Sergey Borachev

Summary:

Another new M43 camera with an outdated sensor and hence sub par IQ and AF.

Panasonic and Olympus chose to provide a lot of good features in their M43 bodies like IBIS and robust construction, but they keep ignoring the need to be competitive in the two most important things to photogs - getting high quality images and getting them in focus. And so they continue to fade away.

Aug 15, 2019
buratino
buratino

what would be in your opinion an up-to-date sensor and what gear provides not-subpar IQ? FF?

Aug 16, 2019
Thematic
Thematic

FF or Fujifilm XT3

Aug 16, 2019
Androole

An X-T3 with lens costs $600 more than this camera. That's 50% more. Why pretend that they are in the same market category?

Aug 16, 2019*
Thematic
Thematic

Your math is way off. That's not the price difference.

Try again.

Aug 17, 2019
Rich Jacobson

X-T3 with 16-80 f/4 lens = $2,200
G95 with 12-60 kit = $1,200
G9 with 12-60 f/2.8-4.0 = $1.900. This is probably the most directly comparable to the X-T3. But now you can get an X-H1 with the 16-55 f/2.8 for $1,700.

Aug 18, 2019
Androole

Rich has got it.

And even if you go with the kit lens deal on the X-T3, you get the 18-55mm and it's $1800.

Which, as I said, is exactly $600 more than the $1200 that it costs for the G95 kit at the moment. $1200 * 1.5 = $1800...

Aug 18, 2019*
Thematic
Thematic

Wrong, and as dpreview has stated themselves, you always have to factor in lens equivalency.

Aug 19, 2019
StoneJack

Sergey: following your logic, everybody should buy FF Leica and be done.

However, there are different price categories, mobility issues and etc, m43 also have their usage as well.

Aug 21, 2019
Androole

Hi Richard:

With respect to the sensor performance, of which there is much ado, a DPR reader in the forums noticed:

"Exposure Latitude Test for the G95 were 10-bit RAWs (to people new to this, the file is still 12-bit, but the bottom two bits are filled with "11" so effectively they are 10-bit). That explains the big difference in the results. If anyone has Rawdigger they can see it for themselves (you will see the gaps in the values).

While I also initially suspected it had to do with Hybrid shutter, it's not the issue.

The studio scene ISO 200 sample was shot in Mechanical shutter and it is also a 10-bit RAW. What is different from other previous cameras tested (including GX9 the most recent), I noticed the G95 tests were all shot in bracketing mode. Perhaps Panasonic switches to 10-bit for bracketing"

Can you shed some light? Obviously I'm not blaming you, just trying to get to the bottom. If bracketing uses only 10-bits, it obviously significantly decreases its utility.

Aug 15, 2019
Richard Butler
Richard Butler

That's not something we spotted.

I can't jump on it immediately, but I'll try to look into it as soon as I can. Thanks for letting us know (please consider PMing if there's anything important like this though: we don't see every comment and forum post).

Aug 15, 2019
Androole

Thanks, Richard. I didn't think of a PM, but figured it might come across as hassling over minor technical stuff. Nitty-gritty stuff like this is interesting to us technophiles and engineering-types, but I'd hardly call it important. :)

Aug 15, 2019*
Richard Butler
Richard Butler

It'll change the results of our DR test, so it's useful for us to know.

We'll re-shoot as soon as we can. In the meantime I'll put a note in the review.

Aug 15, 2019
Impulses

That's really weird, why would it switch to 10-bit readout for bracketing if it's not using the e-shutter or a burst rate that requires it? Saving on wear shutter at the cost of DR for a function many people use to increase DR in post would be pretty bass ackwards.

Aug 17, 2019
SonyX
SonyX

"We will re-shoot and re-assess this test and the score as soon as we can" - very interesting - when?

Feb 28, 2020
Pete_W
Pete_W

Yes, I am interested in when this will be available. I am considering the G95.

Apr 27, 2020
Thematic
Thematic

Wrong

So very very wrong.

Dpreview is correct.

Using a faster aperture does NOT negate FF or APSC image quality advantages.

Aug 16, 2019
Impulses

I think he's referring to IBIS, which is a real tho situational advantage towards ultimate IQ (low light scenes with static subjects etc.). OTOH Sigma's f1.4 primes are faster by equivalence on APS-C and the native f1.2 primes are pricey.

It's a pretty subjective advantage, just like being the only one of the trio compared to feature weather sealing... I'm really curious what Oly will bring with the E-M5 III since everybody else already played their hand, but Oly's refresh is long overdue so who knows.

Aug 17, 2019
larkhon

I'm usually defending MFT cameras but what DPR is saying is not wrong. At higher sensitivities MFT shows more noise than similarly priced APS-C cameras. Whether you can avoid high sensitivities with IBIS or fast lens (APS-C users can also use fast lenses btw) won't change anything to that fact.

Oct 7, 2019
Mentt

Yes, Amin is right. If you want to have sharp the whole picture(landscape photos for example) in case of FF usually F16 is used, in case aps c around F8-10 and with MFT you can get away with F4-5.6. Also anyone who used camera with good IBIS will tell you that it is actually big deal. In case of camera without IBIS you are forced to use high ISO values and no camera is performaning on high ISOs without penalties.

Oct 24, 2019
Tatouzou
Tatouzou

Every times a new camera is reviews, there come a lot of negatives comment: IQ is worse than the previous model, features are cropped, price tag is wayyyy too high.
Two or three years later, posters moans because this wonderful camera, that had been so widely bashed when introduced, cannot be bought new anymore and is replaced by an upcoming model, obviously worse, crippled and more expensive.

Aug 15, 2019
tbasher

You are spot on. I have never seen "this camera is reasonably priced".

Aug 19, 2019
agachart

can reuse battery grip from G85?

Aug 15, 2019
Jeff Keller
Jeff Keller

Yes indeed!

Aug 15, 2019
daqk

The AF is way outdated ... same reason I barely touch my G85. It hunts like in the woods lol.

AF worse than my FZ-1000 (with fixed on lens, maybe easier for Pana engineers to tune I guess).

Aug 15, 2019
s1oth1ovechunk

Which lenses are you using?

Aug 15, 2019
ozturert

You mean continuous AF, right?

Aug 15, 2019
rockjano

The problem with this cam is that it cost a lot more than the G85 and not much less tha the G9. And the G9 is a lot MORE camera...

Aug 15, 2019
CaPi

The g9 has the weirdest assortment of record time limits I’ve seen so far

Aug 15, 2019
rockjano

Tha one is true. This tecord limit drives me crazy and the new cam's does not have these... that is the only plus for the G90 vs. the G9, in any other way the G9 is the better cam (somewhat oldare of course may be replaced sooner or later)

Aug 16, 2019
24thWanderer
24thWanderer

I was deciding between buying a G85 and waiting to buy this. I ended up getting my G85 a month ago and I love it. The G95 looks really nice but I do not regret my decision one bit. The G85 plus two splash/dust proof lenses for $800 was too good to pass up. Those rebates are nice. I also cared about the video since I am trying to learn videography.

Anyway, thanks for the comprehensive review as always guys! Much appreciated!

Aug 14, 2019
ozturert

Great deal, that is! 2 lenses with a great camera, only for 800.

Aug 15, 2019
LeoNL
LeoNL

If my GX8 would break down, I would buy this one. Looks like a nice update.

Aug 14, 2019
DARKR00M

I found the review slightly disingenuous when it states that the G90/95 is hundreds more than its competitors. Body only, the a6400 and the X-T30 are $899. The G90/95 is $1199 with a $299 kit lens included. If they sold it in a “Body Only” option, it too would be $899.

.

Aug 14, 2019
007peter
007peter

AGREE, but who is BLAME for this pricing mess? It is Panasonic STUPID bundling, forcing people to buy lens they don't want. Panasonic COULD HAVE price it @$899 but CHOOSE NOT TO. The BLAME is 100% Panasonic.

Aug 14, 2019
DARKR00M

The issue is not blame, it’s accuracy. Simply mention that it’s virtually the same price, but only comes as a bundle.

What, did they run out of space on the internet?

.

Aug 14, 2019*
Richard Butler
Richard Butler

You're suggesting the review should say something like:

"The closest competitors to the Panasonic G95/G90/G91 are the Sony a6400 and Fujifilm X-T30. Both cameras are cheaper with their standard kit lenses and can be bundled with nicer lenses for around the same price as the G95 with its 12-60mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens."

Perhaps in a section called: Compared to other midrange mirrorless cameras. In the conclusion, maybe?

Aug 14, 2019
007peter
007peter

@Darkroom, your M43 fanbyyism is pathetic. I ♥ Panasonic, but Panasonic really SCREW up G90 introduction. You can keep blaming DPR and it will NOT do you or Panasonic any good against $899 Fuji XT30 and $899 Sony A6400. I just check both Amazon and B&H, both listed Panasonic G90 as $1197 with kit lens. So, are you going to blame Amazon & B&H video as well? Are you so deep in you own conspiracy theory that you cannot see clearly the BLAME reside 100% with Panasonic? Panasonic set the pricing; Panasonic set the bundled, the fault is not DPR, not Amazong, and not B&H video.

Aug 15, 2019
fft2000

The kit-lens can be sold for 300. BUT! With the G85 there was the possibility to buy body only, and that was just 100€/$/... less than the bundle so people ended up buying the bundle, resell the lens for 300 and get an instant rebate of 200 on the body. So with this in mind the G90 still is 1100 body only.

Aug 15, 2019
dr jim

Good luck selling that lens for $300. I just sold one for $225 and counted myself as fortunate.

Aug 16, 2019
Hex144

I heard the video AF in 1080 in much better than in 4K. Is that true?

Aug 14, 2019
Androole

Generally the DFD AF quality seems to correspond to the frame rate of the video (makes sense - more sampling opportunities to fine tune the focus). On the G95 you'll get 1080p @ 60 fps, whereas you're limited to 24/25/30 fps for 4K.

Certainly, some testers have found that at 60 fps the DFD in the Panasonic S1 is competitive with the very good PDAF on the A7 III:

https://youtu.be/8k3a7LNe0Mw?t=325

Aug 14, 2019*
entoman
entoman

Why is sensor-crop in 4K always regarded by reviewers as a design fault or a limitation? For many situations, the crop is actually advantageous - particularly for wildlife filming where the user can get a narrower angle of view without the need for a heavier and more expensive lens of longer focal length.

Ok it imposes some limitations for extreme wide-angle work, but even after the crop, an 8-18mm Vario Elmarit will give an angle of view wide enough for almost any purpose.

Aug 14, 2019
Richard Butler
Richard Butler

It makes it harder to get a wide-angle field of view but it also means you're using a smaller sensor than the one you've paid for, which means more noise at any given exposure.

Sure, offer a crop mode as well for the situations in which you need more 'reach' but an unavoidable crop, lowering your video quality and creating a greater mis-match between stills and video shooting is a negative in most respects.

Aug 14, 2019
entoman
entoman

Thanks Richard

Aug 14, 2019
Tatouzou
Tatouzou

The G90/95 keeps the main photographic features of the gold awarded G80/85: magnesium alloy weather resistant body, advanced IBIS, optional vertical grip/battery pack, 2.4 million dots OLED EVF, lots of direct access highly customisable buttons, and excellent ergonomy, replacing the aging 16MP sensor by the better 20MP sensor.

The A6400 and XT30 to which the reviewers compare the G90 dont have the weather resistance nor an optional vertical grip.

The 1.25 video crop in G90, like in GX8, instead of 1.1 video crop in the 16MP G80, is probably a hardware limitation of the 20MP sensor used, which is not the same as in G9 flagship.

Sales will tell whether costumers will prefer Sony or Fuji larger sensor and better video specs over the much larger M43 lens choice and the G90 ruggedness and haptics.

The price comparisons with G9 and G80/85 are not significant, as the G80/85 is heavily discounted to clean the shelves, and the G9 discounts may end soon if the G90/95 sells well.

Aug 14, 2019
Androole

Indeed.

For the mid-range market, Sony and Fuji put expensive sensors and processors into cheap bodies. Panasonic puts cheap sensors and processors into expensive bodies.

Aug 14, 2019
Impulses

" The price comparisons with G9 and G80/85 are not significant, as the G80/85 is heavily discounted to clean the shelves, and the G9 discounts may end soon if the G90/95 sells well. "

I'm not so sure about that, DPR seems to be under the impression that Pana will now keep selling the G85 as their more budget option (much like Sony has done with older models for like 5+ years), AND it's actually not as heavily discounted 2+ years after release as the G3/5/6 were at this stage in their product cycle.

Pana and Oly both keep running into these issues at the opposite end of the spectrum with their high end models too, it's not that much of a temporary scenario (original E-M1 was the same price as the E-M5 II for over a year, same with some GH models). The G85 has been hovering at $700-800 since last year, it's now August.

These are not the $500 and less fire sales of the G bodies of old...

Aug 14, 2019
jdu_sg

@impulses
I agree. The G7 was available for sale even at the start of the year afai recall, priced in the range between $500 and the G80.

Aug 16, 2019
camfan1

Congrats ! ... Fujifilm.
Smaller, yet bigger (sensor).
Better, yet cheaper.

Aug 14, 2019
entoman
entoman

But you fail to acknowledge the biggest advantage of M43 cameras - the fact that the lenses (for equivalent angles of view) are substantially smaller and lighter than those made for APS or FF cameras.

Fujifilm lenses are generally heavier and more expensive than other APS lenses (Sony, Canon, Nikon), and about double the size and weight of Panasonic or Olympus lenses.

Everything in photography is a compromise, a trade off between size/weight and quality/price. Some (myself included) need FF quality and are prepared to pay the cost and carry the weight in order to get it.

Others are perfectly happy to trade the drop in image quality (which with M43 is still very good at ISO 400-800) for the substantial advantages in portability and cost reduction.

Aug 14, 2019
camfan1

@entoman. Indeed you are 100% right of cource. The compromise here makes this G90/95 a terrific camera. If we do take more lenses into the equation ... also non-stabilized primes then indeed the X-T30 is a less desirable camera ... for those purposes. But if I read here @dpreview that the G90/90 is a nice travel camera then, IMHO, there are so many other options. To me no crop for video is important, so the G9 would suite me better. I, very personally, also believe this camera may be a bit too expensive for what is offered in 2019 (?). But the G90 indeed seems a great 'compromise', as you wrote.

Aug 14, 2019*
entoman
entoman

camfan - Fujifilm make very nice cameras, in fact almost any camera nowadays is extremely capable.

Choice of brand and model really comes down to personal preference for ergonomics, cost and lens system.

I use Canon DSLRs and I'm very happy with them, except when photographing birds, when I find the cost and weight of the long telephotos too much.

So I'm looking at getting an M43 system specifically for bird photography and occasions when I need to travel light.

For me the choice is between G9 or EM1 Mkii bodies, as I need cameras that are tough and will withstand harsh conditions.

Aug 14, 2019*
john Clinch
john Clinch

So the Fuji is sealed and has IBIS?

Aug 15, 2019
dpfan32

In the Studio scene on page 5 "Image quality" when I set the zoom box on the beautiful asian girls face on the right, boy there is lots of noise at ISO200 on her skin and on her hairs. Same with the darker skin lady over on the left side.
A 16 MP sensor (E-M10 Mark II) doesn't suffer that much.

Aug 14, 2019*
(unknown member)

Well.. the EM1II stays the king of m43.

Aug 14, 2019
Richard Butler
Richard Butler

Smaller pixels will always be noisier at the same exposure if viewed at 1:1 scale, however, this is not necessarily the case when you view the images at the same size. Make sure you look at 'Comp' mode [top right of the comparison widget] before drawing conclusions.

Aug 14, 2019
Adrian Harris
Adrian Harris

I generally find the detail captured by the 20mp sensor m43 cameras outstanding and always have the option to add noise noise reduction if required, and then the images still hold up compared to other systems.

Aug 15, 2019
dpfan32

The woodland photo on page 5 "Image quality" is awesome.
But mounting a 2000$ lens on a consumer body makes no sense.
I bet not one G95 buyer who doesn't use it as a second body will eve be willing to afford the Leica 10-25 lens.
It's like tuning a small Renault Twingo to go 300km/h.

Aug 14, 2019
duchamp

Isn't quality about optics? Better spend $2000 on a premium lens and $900 on body than vice versa.

Aug 14, 2019
Androole

While true, buyers can get the same image quality by mounting the tiny, cheap, and incredibly sharp 20mm/f1.7. Particularly perfect for a scene like that (shot at 21mm/f4.5).

The PL10-25/1.7 is so astonishing because it really is like a "bag of primes." But if you can't afford that lens, you can always just get the literally bag of primes.

In that context, I would recommend starting with said 20mm/1.7 and the 42.5mm/1.7. Or the Sigma 30/1.4 and 56/1.4 options (and 60mm/f2.8) are also razor sharp.

Aug 14, 2019*
El Jeffe

There are other lenses available that will capture images equal to or better than that lens. The 12mm f1.4, 25mm f/1.4, 15mm f/1.7 to name a few. You can buy these three or the 10-50 for about the same cost it’s your choice.
No matter what system you use it remains true the image is in the lens. The body just records it. Invest in glass. Lenses hold their value while bodies come and go.
A kit lens on a pro body makes less sense.

Aug 14, 2019
dpfan32

Yes but some will still want an affordable camera system and look at this picture and this might be a bit misleading: wow this camera makes nice pictures.
No it's not without this lens :P
And I had the 20mm f 1.7. It has excessive purple fringing and to be honest at the image borders left and right it's not that sharp like a real premium lens. Otherwise it's a bang for the bug I agree :)

Aug 14, 2019
Androole

...but that's true of all systems, isn't it?

No one is going to be impressed by the pixel-level sharpness coming from an A7 III with the 28-70/f3.5-5.6 kit lens, or even an X-T3 with the ($700) 18-55/f2.8-4 kit lens.

Lenses are always what give you the wow factor, and the best lenses cost a lot, across the board.

Aug 14, 2019*
dpfan32

LOL don't mention the 28-70 Sony piece of garbage :)
I had this with the A7.
For me kit lenses are quite important.
And having a system with a bad kittens is a no-go for me.

Aug 14, 2019
Carey Rose
Carey Rose

We actually used this camera body to shoot a lot of our 10-25mm F1.7 lens gallery, which is why there are so many shots from that lens in the review / camera gallery. But I made a concerted effort to add a lot in with the 12-60 kit lens that you're forced to buy in the USA, to give as realistic a view of out-of-the-box IQ as possible.

But on the IQ page, I was okay using that image using the 10-25 to really show the maximum IQ the camera is capable of (not that the kit lens is particularly lacking).

Aug 14, 2019
Impulses

" It has excessive purple fringing and to be honest at the image borders left and right it's not that sharp like a real premium lens. Otherwise it's a bang for the bug I agree :) "

LensRentals old tests of M4/3 primes would disagree with the sharpness assessment, maybe you got a less than optimal sample... I don't notice a big difference between my 20/1.7 and some of my much pricier glass (PL8-18, 17/1.2), at least when it comes to sharpness and CA. Bokeh does go cat eye towards the edges when wide open and it has it's AF quirks that make it useless for C-AF or video, there's loads of cheap sharp primes in the system that make less significant compromises (just not at 17-20mm :s they all have some kinda quirk at that FL).

Aug 14, 2019
Impulses

I mount a few $1,000-1,300 lenses on a body that only ran me $700, I don't shoot action so investing in glass over bodies that age out quicker has always made sense to me. /shrug The PL10-25 is $2K because of how unique and fast it is for a zoom but less pricey lenses can surely achieve similar results. I think the lens catalog has always been one of the main draws to M4/3.

Aug 14, 2019
dpfan32

Yeah my 20mm f1.7 was sharp at first glance all over the image but it was not as sharp at the edges as the Olympus 14-42 (first model on the P1) at 20mm on a 16mm body. Do this test for yourself and you will see similar result. It must be a reason this is so cheap.

Aug 15, 2019
(unknown member)

@Androole: the XF 18-55 f2.8-4 can be very sharp especially stopped down..

Aug 15, 2019
Androole

@dpfan32 - the 20mm/1.7 doesn't quite reach the edge quality of the best zooms in the system like the 12-40/f2.8, but stopped down to f/4 it is close (within 10%)

@NicoPPC - the 18-55mm is a fine lens, and should be praised for its size and aperture, but optical quality is not in the same category as the other lenses in this discussion. It makes nice sharp photos on 16MP sensors - quite similar to the 12-60mm kit lens included here - but you can clearly see in the galleries taken with the latest 26MP sensors that the 18-55mm is not resolving well at the pixel level.

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/5505670310/fujifilm-x-t30-sample-gallery/9628672334

Aug 15, 2019*
dpfan32

The 20mm f1.7 (40mm ff) has a very nice angle for my taste.
I like it much more than a 25mm on mFT (50mm ff).
A 17mm (34mm ff) is IMHO the most boring focal length of them all IMHO.
Maybe I'll get another copy. I sold it much because of the purple fringing. But hey: there is Lightroom to fix this problem :)
I liked the 24mm STM lens on my Canon APS-C (38mm ff) very much so the 20m for mFT is the equivalent for that.
And lets say it again: it's cheap. :) I can get one for 135 EUR.

Aug 15, 2019
Androole

Out of curiosity, what body are you using it on?

Panasonic bodies have a stronger UV-cut filter on their sensor than Olympus. Olympus chooses to put their UV filtration into the lens coatings, instead. As a result, Panasonic bodies tend to have better performance when it comes to purple fringing - this is a hardware phenomenon, and has nothing to do with digital CA correction (which you can also do, of course).

It's a slightly different phenomena, but also the reason why "purple flare" doesn't show using the P7-14/f4 on Panasonic bodies, but causes problems on Olympus bodies.

I noticed this most acutely when I compared the 4/3 Olympus HG 11-22mm lens on my Panasonic GX7 compared to an Olympus E-M5. Much less purple fringing visible on the Panasonic.

Aug 15, 2019*
dpfan32

Olympus E-M10 Mark II / E-PL5 / E-P1 all showing heavy purple fringing with the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 lens :(
I don't like Panasonic Color Science :P

Aug 15, 2019*
(unknown member)

@Androole: i own an X-T3 and the XF 18-55.. it's quiet sharp stop down..

Aug 15, 2019
Impulses

dpfan - FWIW, I was gonna mention it earlier but didn't wanna add too much clutter, this link is a distillation of nearly all you'd ever wanna know about the UV filtering and CA disparity that Androole is referring to:

https://alanwatsonforster.org/writing/mft-purple.html

A whole bunch of content bandied about on the boards for a few years was slowly added by Alan in there... I've never considered it a major issue (outside of the 7-14's more obvious flaring) but it can bug ya if you're picky. FWIW I've got some of the special 2A UV filters mentioned within, as well as both Pana and Oly bodies...

Been meaning to do some testing of my own for like a year, just haven't carved out the time, but if there's a comparison or something you'd like to see feel free to shoot me a PM.

Aug 15, 2019
Impulses

Oh and LensRentals' old tests were done with a 16MP body btw... My 20/1.7 holds up to what they saw, it's easily sharper than any kit zoom I own and Pana kit zooms have often been better than Oly's. /shrug Bad samples do happen more often than a lot of us would like tho.

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/05/wide-angle-micro-43-imatest-results/

If the far edges were truly worse than a kit zoom I don't think the average would literally be the highest score amidst the bunch of tested lenses (at f2.8-4, and it's already close wide open against lenses with f4+ max aperture). Granted the PL15 or PL12 and the newer Oly Pro primes aren't in there because they were still years away, nor the f2.8 or f2.8-4 zooms...

Aug 15, 2019
dpfan32

@ Impulses
Wow tank you for the links! Much appreciated!

I ordered a 20mm f1.7 again.
When I look at my previously shot pictures, it has this bitingly sharp character.
I like sharpness.

I compared the 20mm f1.7 on a PL5 body with the EF-S 24mm f2.8 STM on a Canon EOS 50D body (15MP) ant it was pretty close I must say.
Except that the purple flinging was quite bit less on the Canon lens.
While pixel peeping I liked the details of the bigger sensor a bit more though I have to admit.
But the whole package of the Olympus+Panasonic was much smaller and the Canon body lacks so many features ...
My Canon EF-M 22mm STM mounted on an old Canon EOS M (18MP) was as sharp as the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 as well, except it had much less purple fringing as well.
But the EOS M was ergonomically a disaster.
I tried the Canon EOS M5 and Canon EOS M50 to replace my EOS M as a small camera system but they are made of very cheap thin plastic so I didn't like shooting with such "plastic cup".

Aug 16, 2019*
JEROME NOLAS

I am little lost with Panasonic cameras, too many models that are basically same, the differences so subtle no one knows about them DPR has to write about them...the end of the road??? GX7 owner

Aug 14, 2019
duchamp

Current GX-series doesn't have microphone/earphone ports, optional battery grips and aren't weather resistant. On the other hand they're more compact and lighter than the G/GH. IQ is comparable.

Aug 14, 2019*
Androole

Honestly, it's the same with any manufacturers line-up these days. God knows how many Canon Rebel alphabet-soups there are, and what the differences between them are.

And Fuji has just as many models (actually more) in its current line-up than Panasonic does.

In any case, the basic naming theory is the same for all of them:

3-digit number = entry level
2-digit number = enthusiast
1-digit number = prosumer

GX = rangefinder-like form-factor
G = DSLR-like form-factor
GH = professional hybrid camera with DSLR-like form-factor

Once you know the basics of the market you're looking in, finding the particular feature-set that suits you is always going to be a slog. Unless of course you're looking at a company that simply doesn't offer any good choices, or hasn't bothered updating models in years.

Aug 14, 2019*
Sranang Boi

Basically same/?? The GX9 isn't even good enough to stand in the shadow of the GX8, let alone be the same. And neither is the G90 anywhere as exciting as the G80.

Aug 14, 2019
Androole

It's true, the GX9 is actually the GX95.

I admit that in that respect, the naming is confusing.

Completely disagree that the G90 is less exciting than the G80, though. The body has quite a few legitimately useful upgrades. The only real complaint is the price point. People buying it primarily for video may be the sole exception.

Aug 14, 2019*
Impulses

The 80/85 series haven't been priced as aggressively as the 90/95 series which ended up a couple hundred more at release, and that's further magnified by the fact that the former are still available, but that doesn't mean they're a terrible value... Just maybe not the best value for all people.

The GX series in particular has always been a sort of experiment, sometimes it went years without a follow up (GX1 to GX7) and at other times they decided to shove 2-3 models out within a couple years (GX8, GX85, GX9)... The old GF entry level line also turned into the GX850.

Aug 14, 2019
Impulses

Outside of that Androole's definition of the different model lines has been consistent for a decade, tho they only recently started using two digits for lower end models. Maybe I'm too familiar with it but it's still clearer to me than Oly's terrible naming scheme and the fact that they haven't been as consistent in updating all their lines.

GX9 totally should've been GX95, would've saved them a lot of short term grief tho maybe it might've lead to rampant speculation about a higher end GX that they clearly don't wanna make again. If you like the GX7 form factor then just stick to looking at the GX85 & 9 (I'd take either over the GX8 personally but you'd only find that one used anyway so YMMV).

Aug 14, 2019
rsf3127

Regarding the fuss about APS-c vs M43: I have switched from FF to the former and then to the latter. The lack of low pass filter and the amazingly sharp and compact lenses fit my bill. When coupled with that witchery they they call IBIS, one simply doesn't need to go past ISO 800. But that is me today. If I was a wedding photographer, I would keep my FF gear and those humongous lenses.

Aug 14, 2019
Rolandigital
Rolandigital

Regarding switching. I just sold my FF DSLR gear and bought GX80 with 12-32. This combo was only for incredible 299€. 12-32 IQ is pretty rubbish, but I've just ordered 15mm/1.7 Always wanted GX with this lens. So far I'm lightweight and a happy man.

Aug 14, 2019
jonby

While high ISO performance is more or less what you would expect compared to APS-C (around a stop worse), the dynamic range of this camera appears to be worse than you might expect. It appears to be performing at least a stop worse than the E-M1X, for example, which has the same size and resolution sensor, and which is roughly a stop behind the Sony as you might expect. Not sure whether this is due to the sensor, in-camera processing or post-processing, but it surprises me.

At low ISO, there's very little to choose between this and the APS-C cameras in terms of IQ if you're not lifting shadows, but this difference in dynamic range is quite significant.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr144_0=panasonic_dcg95&attr144_1=olympus_em1x&attr144_2=sony_a6400&attr144_3=nikon_d7200&attr146_0=200_5&attr146_1=200_5&attr146_2=100_5&attr146_3=100_5&attr177_3=off&attr404_1=1&normalization=full&widget=701&x=0.11957884479156516&y=-0.9624638253091293

D7200 still rocks!

Aug 14, 2019
eivissa1
eivissa1

Interesting to see is that DPreview (in comparison with the G85) states that the video mode of the G95 is significant better. I wonder what the criteria in this regards are. Regarding the severe crop in 4K I would rather say the opposite...

Great news is that Electronic Stabilisation (ES) does not effect the quality of 4K video at all! I thought this ES would always have a trade off.
I wonder if the older camera, the G85, would have the same benefit? ES is not mentioned in the DPreview review of the G85.
All weighing; he G85 is definitely a more attractive buy for me.

Aug 14, 2019*
eivissa1
eivissa1

And Electronic Stabilisation has no further crop too!
Still, DPreview does not go into the effect of the Electronic Stabilisation. Does it work properly?

Aug 14, 2019
Androole

A little bit more exploration in the the technical effectiveness of the IBIS would have been welcome. Even in a slightly colloquial way.

I imagine that Dual IS + EIS probably makes for a nearly rock-steady image.

Aug 14, 2019
(unknown member)

Those stupid strap lugs.

Flush them Panasonic, flush them to the body.

Aug 14, 2019
entoman
entoman

Better than the awful ones on Canons, which cut into the strap material. No accidents so far, so I may be worrying too much, but a lug that cuts into a strap is a fundamentally bad design and an accident waiting to happen.

Aug 14, 2019*
Jorginho

I was just reading IQ and immediately larger sensors are mentioned. And than speciafically a Sony A6400. SO I went to the review of that cam. Is there any mention of how it performs not as good as larger sensored cams. No. Why the difference. Why mentioning it when it is m43s in virtually every single review out there but why not when it comes to APS-c cams? Because in both cases the difference in size is very significant and yes, even more so from APS-c to FF.

Aug 14, 2019
Jorginho

To add to the above: can't I get a Canon FF for as low as 1300 dollar (since we are talking similarly priced cams in this review...)? A7 at 1000 $...A7II for a little more? Why don't I read it with APS-c cams? Isn't Aps-c significantly larger than mFTs (too)? Also: "DFD is not bad for a CDAF system...." and "wobbling can be disconcerting" All words that tell me the AF is not so good. Is it? Does it remain disconcerting all the time or do you get used to the wobble. How was Sony's overheating never disconcerting? Why is Canon btw never mentioned to make the comparison with similarly priced cams broader. Where is Olympus and its EM10.3 or EM5.2? These are still Oly's competitors but it will soon change. Might show how good DFD is. Also: how about artefacts of the APS_c OSPDAF sensors. Might be ""diconcerting". Hammering the video IQ is fine. It is lacklustre. But a video cam with no IBIS does not work well either...

Aug 14, 2019
kolyy

As I see it, M43 cameras compete with APS-C ones at the same market. And this market segment is dominated by cameras with APS-C sensors, that's the standard. There are some FF cameras at the same price point (A7 I/II, RP), but these have ancient FF sensors with serious shortcomings and the cameras themselves have some heavy compromises as well. In comparison, the X-T30 and A6400 are up-to-date cameras with very good APS-C sensors.

So I think it is very appropriate to point out the disadvantage of the smaller sensor in each and every M43 camera review, as it offers a (slightly) below average IQ for its class. Until there is something like the A7 III available at this price, there is little reason to the same with APS-C cameras.

Aug 14, 2019*
katastrofa

"As I see it, M43 cameras compete with APS-C ones at the same market. And this market segment is dominated by cameras with APS-C sensors, that's the standard."

Users don't care about market segments, users care about taking photos and prices. Good point about lack *good* FF alternatives at the same price level as MFT/APS-C, though.

Aug 14, 2019
katastrofa

@Jorginho

" Does it remain disconcerting all the time or do you get used to the wobble."

Just because you're getting used to a problem doesn't mean that the problem goes away. Wobbling C-AF means the camera is not usable for sports, action or wildlife photography.

Aug 14, 2019
kolyy

I would say users care about market segments in the sense that they can be expected to compare similar cameras at similar prices. And a good reviewer should point out if a feature of the product is inferior to others in its class (of similar products at similar prices).

Aug 14, 2019
Androole

"Wobbling C-AF means the camera is not usable for sports, action or wildlife photography."

That's actually not true, according to the actual reviewers. In their tests of C-AF on recent DFD bodies, they always comment that the experience through the viewfinder is disconcerting, but then they are surprised and impressed with how good the hit rate is when they actually review the photos they took.

So I think the take-away is that these cameras are eminently, completely usable for sports, action, and wildlife. But they aren't very fun to do so, subjectively! Which I think is a valid argument. It's better to have a camera that's nice to use, as well as effective.

In any case, the wording in the review is specifically to call out the subjective experience. They actually explicitly say that the AF system is responsive and tracks fairly well, so they don't have really serious qualms with its performance.

Aug 14, 2019*
Jorginho

The wording is essential though. How about this one: "The AF is really good in S-AF, which is what CDAF (which DFD essentially is) is known for. This camera is no exception.
When it comes to C-AF it is very good too but with some caveats. First of all it shoots 6 frames per second in this modus whereas similarly priced cmas wil get you 10 or even 20 shots. We think 6 FPS is clearly on the low side. More importantl is that fact that the DFD system introduces a visible wobble. It is disconcerting to us because it looks like the cam is oscillating between out of focus in focus all the time. In stills the end results tend to be fine with a high keeperrate. For video this wobbling is far worse since we can see it in the endresult which to any serious videographer we think is unacceptable. There are tools in the cam to do manual focus but surely this requires some practicing to say the least and is not for everyone. The competition uses PDAF which means you won't have this problem".

Aug 14, 2019*
Adrian Harris
Adrian Harris

Funny you should have brought that up (no mention that aps-c not as good as FF), because my first thoughts when reading the review/conclusion was that why have I never read 'FF images not as good as Medium Format' ?

Aug 15, 2019
kolyy

When similarly featured medium format cameras will compete with FF ones at the same price point, then you'll have a point.

Aug 15, 2019
zxaar

also when medium format has same lens selection.

Aug 16, 2019
ozturert

"Image quality behind similarly priced APS-C peers at high sensitivities"
I see this comment under "Cons" of every m43 camera review but cannot see the same comment for Sony APSC cameras? Like "Image quality behind similarly priced FF peers at high sensitivities"? Why not? FF camera proces have come down significantly.

Aug 14, 2019
(unknown member)

Indeed.. this is annoying. Especially the little sponsoring to Sony each time..

DPReview can ve a great ressources of information but it's too much obviously biased sometime to time..

Aug 14, 2019
Androole

To be fair, DPR doesn't consider market pricing changes over time in their analysis, they only look at initial MSRP.

The only FF camera to be actually released at an APS-like price point is the Canon RP, with a sensor which in some ways (DR) is no better than its M4/3 or APS-C competitors.

Ironically, the other main FF competitor that has made its way into the bargain price point by aging out is the Sony A7 and A7 II, which also has sensor performance that is no better than APS-C, but this time in low light conditions. The only advantage that sensor has is in base ISO dynamic range. So it's basically the opposite problem as the Canon.

The outlier, of course, is the Nikon D750 (or even D610), which has a sensor that trounces any M4/3 or APS-C sensor on the market, upside down and backwards. And is also miles better than the Canon RP or Sony A7 II sensor. But it's a DSLR, and has a lot of compromises (particularly for video) that modern shooters probably won't want to make.

Aug 14, 2019*
unhappymeal

I'm not sure the Nikon is a fair comparison. It's nearly a full inch taller than the G95 and 200 grams heavier. That's before you factor in the weight of the lenses. Also the Nikon D750 street price is $1,750 in Canada for body only. The G95 is available for $1400 with the (very good) 12-60.

Aug 14, 2019
Androole

Sorry, to be clear I don't think it fits directly in any comparison with the G95 (and the G95 would shoot massively better video, for whatever that's worth).

I was just trying to fit the thought into the overall commentary that says "M4/3 cams are compared to APS-C cams because of price overlap, so why aren't APS-C cams compared to FF cams with price overlap."

And there are plenty of APS-C models that sell for the same street price (body only) as the D750. Especially when promotional season rolls around, the A6500, D750, X-H1, and X-T3 are all within ~$100 of each other (along with M4/3 flagships like the G9).

Aug 14, 2019*
unhappymeal

That's fair. I can see what you mean in overlapping price points. I would argue once you start getting into lenses, there is less overlap (due to size and cost). For example, I would have no issues with shopping for something like a G9 whilst never giving the D750 a second thought because of how massive its lenses are.

I can fit a G9 size body plus something like the Panasonic Leica 12-60 and three primes or another telephoto lens in my tiny Kata bag. The D750 would take up roughly the same space, but I would only be able to fit one lens.

To each their own though. The D750 sensor is amazing and I won't lie, low light shooting with m4/3 leaves a lot to be desired.

Aug 14, 2019
ozturert

Androole, RP has better high ISO performance than XT3, XH1, A6500 and alike. In their reviews, you will not see a sentence like "Falls behind its FF peers in high-ISO" in Cons section.
But "conveniently" you'll see the same comment under almost every m43 camera review.

Aug 14, 2019
Revenant

DPR is apparently treating FF as one market segment, and "crop sensor" (including APS-C and m4/3) as another, with very little overlap in terms of target users and consumer interest, even when there's overlap in terms of pricing. I'm not sure how well this view reflects reality, but it seems to be DPR's rationale for consistently comparing m4/3 with APS-C, but not APS-C with FF.

Aug 15, 2019
zxaar

so I agree with the core point that in every camera review they shall point out that what they can do better with similar price point.

they should add similarly priced FF to the comparison of apc and m43 reviews.

Aug 15, 2019
Androole

It mainly seems to be a matter of expectations.

While Olympus and Panasonic now reliably deliver weather sealing in the ~$1000 (or even less) price point, no other manufacturer does, and it's not expected. Therefore, "no weather sealing" is not a con listed on every mid-range mirrorless camera (like the Gold-awarded X-T30 and A6400).

As I've said before, for the mid-range price point, Canon, Fuji, and Sony are delivering high-end internals in low-end bodies. Panasonic and Olympus are delivering low-end internals in high-end bodies. People have different preferences.

Aug 16, 2019*
dpfan32

A6300 is weather sealed too. But try to find a weather sealed lens so the package will stay under 1000... At least I don't know such A6300+lens combination. Is there any weather sealed APS-C Sony E lens?

Aug 17, 2019
StoneJack

As I said, we are witnessing exciting times for ILC cameras. Panasonic continues to produce a series of well received hybrid cameras, some of which like GH5 became a legend on its own. Nikon's Z series continues to appeal to all videographers and now no one doubts advantages of Nikon's video (which wasn't the case with Nikon DSLRs). Fujifilm is doing great with compacts. Canon is going to release new cameras soon. Sony is releasing 61 mp camera. Exciting times, indeed!

Aug 14, 2019
chopsteeks

I am just overwhelmed by the number of new cameras coming out....unbelievable.

Aug 14, 2019
entoman
entoman

Yes it seems a bit odd that there are so many cameras being released at a time when the camera market is shrinking significantly due to smartphonography.

I guess it's just a sign of the necessity for brands to compete more aggressively for the smaller market that remains.

That is a good thing in the short term, but it's inevitable that some brands will lose so much market share that they ultimately exit the camera business.

Aug 14, 2019*
SpeedyNeo
SpeedyNeo

Hi Jeff/Richard
In the Pros, you could've just written: "Very good image quality (for a micro four thirds sensor)."
Instead of stating "Very good image quality" then in the Cons: "IQ not as good as APSC in high sensitivity."
Why? Because high sensitivity performance is inherent to the sensor size. It would be redundant to keep mentioning it.
Or otherwise you should write in every FF camera review's cons: "IQ is not as good as Medium Format." And same for APSC: "IQ is not as good as FF at high sensitivity" etc.

Aug 14, 2019
TN Args
TN Args

Yes, I think this is a good point. DPR seem to be singling m43 out for this treatment. Prices overlap between APSC and FF too, with Sony and Canon FF available new for under $1400.

Aug 14, 2019
(unknown member)

But the m43 would be smaller and more robust.

So actually if you look for a small travel camera.. better get a rugged m43

Aug 14, 2019
duchamp

Another point is comparing results from real life situations. I'm a longtime dslr ff user. When I think of taking pictures in low light I either consider the inconveniences of carrying a tripod the whole day and maybe never using it or shooting at higher iso and compromising on iq. I was blown away with ability of the g85 and 12-35 ii to get sharp pictures at 1/8th (and iso 400). Even at half a second the pictures were surprisingly very useable. Obviously, in such situations "dual is' wins over "dslr ff".
If only Panasonic had a GX with weather sealing and a mic input I'd certainly buy one.

Aug 14, 2019
dpr4bb

That DFD wobble is no good.

Aug 14, 2019
Jorginho

Panasonic has been seriously stubborn to not provide OSPDAF for its users. It can make it. EM1.1 had OSPDAF and that sensor was made by Panasonic. Now after 6 years they come with TOF focussing. Nice, but all the negativity around its AF (which is partially correct, for stills even with C-AF it is very good) could have been prevented.

Aug 14, 2019
SkiHound

Everyone craps on CDAF and I wonder if this is from personal experience or if it's just become one of those things everyone knows from reading reviews. Yes, the best PDAF and PDAF/CDAF hybrid systems are clearly better for CAF. Yes the earlier CDAF only systems were pretty awful at CAF and my experience is that the Olympus CDAF only systems still are. And yes when using CDAF in CAF there can be a slight wobble. The BUT is that CDAF generally never suffers from back focus and front focus. They will lock focus on the highest contrast area in your focus area. And the current systems are dang fast. For most general use, I think it's a much better system. I hear folks complaining about front/back focus issues all the time with PDAF only systems. And the CAF on the newer Panasonic bodies has improved greatly as well. If you do lots of sports or birds in flight kind of stuff, CDAF only systems are still disadvantaged. But for almost all other uses it's simply not an issue.

Aug 14, 2019
buratino
buratino

Hey, not-US/NTSC guys! Can you comment on the video standards available for not-US G95=G90 etc? Asking because after long hesitation I bought nice orange GX800 instead of GX850 (to complement my GX85) hoping that GX800 would shoot video not only in PAL but NTSC as well. And GX800 did not fail: in mp4 mode, it allowed for p25/50 and p30/60. Strangely enough, in AVCHD mode it was only p25/50, but I have nothing against mp4, taking into account that bitrates were the same for both formats. So, what about G90?

Aug 14, 2019
beavertown
beavertown

Never mind the Very Good IQ, in bright light it will be as good as full frame that no one is able to tell the difference.

Aug 14, 2019
Angrymagpie
Angrymagpie

In some special circumstances, maybe (such as when both cameras are shooting in equivalent aperture). But otherwise the difference is quite noticeable - albeit not necessarily meaningful

Aug 14, 2019
buratino
buratino

Of course, there is a difference but is it always relevant? I design a book/magazine with Blurb from our recent trip to Yucatan (pyramids etc). I used MFT, while other team members used Canon G7X and a high-end phone. Well, I see my MFT with best and just kit glass wins at 100% viewing/editing, but others - including G7X with its terrible (bad) lens produce quite printable images. Interesting, I bought "Royal cities of the ancient maya" just to discover that many of its original photos were taken with quite poorly corrected lens, especially at wide angles, which was clearly inferior to MFT gear and phone we used during the trip.

Aug 14, 2019
buratino
buratino

I believe that in good light at base ISO even 1" sensor behind good glass, say, Sony 24-70mm FF eq, can produce 13x18" prints barely distinguishable from FF. Am I wrong?

Aug 14, 2019
Angrymagpie
Angrymagpie

The problem is you lose so much flexibility in relation to the types of photographs you can take and processing latitude with smaller sensors. Ultimately wether if the trade-off is worthy depends on the individual. I was simply responding to the original post because I find it misleading

Aug 14, 2019
buratino
buratino

Angrymagpie, FF has 4x area of MFT - I readily admit it. As for flexibility - with processing latitude, I agree: the latitude/processing capability is less in MFT. Regarding the flexibility: too often, I see discussion of a "travel lens" for FF, which sounds quite strange to me - why to have a high-end glass just to leave it at home? With MFT - with its inferior/"inferior" sensor - I can easily afford to take literally the best glass I have to my trips and travels without real weight and space penalty. More extreme example about flexibility: when I go to Boundary waters canoe area (at the US/Canada border) with up to 9 portages a day, some of them 200-rod/1-km long or more with an elevation of a 30 store building, FF does not have many chances - for me. But I might consider supersmall MFT with a sharp, fast prime to take that night sky without any traces of night pollution. Will it be not as good as pics from FF? No doubt, but that's irrelevant. Flexibility has many interpretations.

Aug 15, 2019
Angrymagpie
Angrymagpie

Look mate, I use mft for most of my photography nowadays so we are on the same boat. In fact, I don't even use high-end mft gears because affordable ones would do (and is precisely one of the appeals of the system). But whether if the significant quality difference you get from ff is relevant or not is not for us to decided.

Aug 15, 2019
buratino
buratino

Angrymagpie, I believe that for us, between us - and others who ready to discuss - we all are eligible to decide what is significant and it is ok if we are not agree.
You and others may find the thread interesting:
µ4/3 and Medium Format: Dual-System Thoughts [long post]
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62993895

Aug 16, 2019
Total: 154, showing: 1 – 50
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »