651

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.

3
I own it
23
I want it
12
I had it
Discuss in the forums
View Comments (651)

Comments

All (651)
Most popular (15)
Editors' picks (1)
DPR staff (32)
Oldest first
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.

37 min ago
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....

43 min ago
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?

1 day ago
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...

17 hours ago
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...

17 hours ago
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.

4 hours ago
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)?

1 hour ago
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.

42 min ago
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.

6 days ago
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. :(

6 days ago
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?

6 days ago
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.

6 days ago
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.

44 min ago
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.

1 week ago
buratino

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

1 week ago
Thematic

FF or Fujifilm XT3

6 days ago
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?

6 days ago*
Thematic

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

Try again.

5 days ago
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.

4 days ago
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...

4 days ago*
Thematic

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

3 days ago
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.

2 days ago
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.

1 week ago
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).

1 week ago
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. :)

1 week ago*
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.

1 week ago
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.

6 days ago
Thematic

Wrong

So very very wrong.

Dpreview is correct.

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

6 days ago
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.

6 days ago
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.

1 week ago
tbasher

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

4 days ago
agachart

can reuse battery grip from G85?

1 week ago
Jeff Keller
Jeff Keller

Yes indeed!

1 week ago
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).

1 week ago
s1oth1ovechunk

Which lenses are you using?

1 week ago
ozturert

You mean continuous AF, right?

1 week ago
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...

1 week ago
CaPi

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

1 week ago
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)

6 days ago
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!

1 week ago
ozturert

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

1 week ago
LeoNL
LeoNL

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

1 week ago
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.

.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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?

.

1 week ago*
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?

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
dr jim

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

1 week ago
Hex144

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

1 week ago
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

1 week ago*
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
entoman

Thanks Richard

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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...

1 week ago
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.

6 days ago
camfan1

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

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago*
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.

1 week ago*
john Clinch

So the Fuji is sealed and has IBIS?

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago*
NicoPPC

Well.. the EM1II stays the king of m43.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
duchamp

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

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago*
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.

1 week ago
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 :)

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago*
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.

1 week ago
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).

1 week ago
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).

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
NicoPPC

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

1 week ago
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

1 week ago*
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago*
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

1 week ago*
NicoPPC

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

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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...

1 week ago
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".

6 days ago*
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

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago*
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.

1 week ago*
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago*
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.

1 week ago
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).

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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!

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago*
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?

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
cgarrard
cgarrard

Those stupid strap lugs.

Flush them Panasonic, flush them to the body.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago*
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.

1 week ago
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...

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago*
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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).

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago*
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".

1 week ago*
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' ?

1 week ago
kolyy

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

1 week ago
zxaar

also when medium format has same lens selection.

6 days ago
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.

1 week ago
NicoPPC

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..

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago*
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.

1 week ago
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).

1 week ago*
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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.

6 days ago*
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?

5 days ago
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!

1 week ago
chopsteeks

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

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago*
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
NicoPPC

But the m43 would be smaller and more robust.

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

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
dpr4bb

That DFD wobble is no good.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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?

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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?

1 week ago
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

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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.

1 week ago
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

6 days ago
thx1138
thx1138

I'm confused. On one hand you say very good image quality and on the other hand you criticise image quality for not being as good as APS-C peers. Well which is it? All you should ask is it good enough for a normal persons needs. This is like saying you drove a Porsche Carrera and was blown away by the speed, then in the conclusion just throwing in that "yeah but it's not a fast as a Ferrari 488GTB". Everyone knows the limitations of m4/3 sized sensor compared to larger formats, but is that important to someone looking for a m4/3 camera, I doubt it. Why bring up at all that IQ is inferior. I have no desire to own m4/3 but if I did I couldn't care less about IQ advantages of larger sensors, if the the IQ is already good enough for my needs.

1 week ago
zakk9

I agree 100%. Another important point is that sensor size must be seen in connection with lens apertures, lens sizes, lens quality and image stabilisation. The selection of high quality APS-C lenses for the Sony is mediocre to say the least, and for the Fuji, most quality lenses are heavy beasts.

I've been using MFT, mostly Panasonic, for 10 years now, sometimes in combination with other cameras like Nikon FX DSLRs. I also end up going back to MFT simply because no others offer this image quality in such a compact package and at a very reasonable price too. If the camera body costs a couple of hundred dollars more doesn't matter much. It's the lenses that destroy the budget.

1 week ago
Thematic

The picture quality is very poor.

It is only good relative to other m4/3rs cameras.

That's what they meant.

1 week ago
blackcoffee17

"very good image quality" and "not as good as APS-C" are not mutually exclusive

1 week ago
thx1138
thx1138

Read what I said. I didn't say they were mutually exclusive, I said who cares, we already knew that. If your basing a review on that premise why bother with the review and just conclude it's not as good as others with a larger sensor.

Also where did they say picture quality is very poor! Nowhere, they said very good picture quality. make up your mind.

1 week ago*
Thematic

Key takeaways: (dpreview quote)

Raw files aren't as malleable as those from cameras with larger sensors.

At higher ISOs, noise in Raw images is more noticeable than on cameras with larger sensors, like the Sony a6400

Noise reduction is light at low ISOs for JPEGs, though it smothers fine detail at high sensitivities.

At midrange ISOs, the G95 shows more noise, with the difference becoming rather glaring as the sensitivity increases a bit more.

Switching to JPEG: The G95 is not quite as punchy as the Fujifilm X-T30. Sharpening is solid, but not as sophisticated as Sony's implementation, which brings out more fine detail.

When shutter speeds are matched, the Sony a6400 has less noise, thanks to its larger sensor and lower base ISO.

When you brighten the image even more, you can really see the difference in noise between the two cameras, illustrating how the a6400 allows for further brightening of shadows, without as big a hit in noise as the Panasonic.

1 week ago
Thematic

and that's just picture quality.

Should we quote Dpreview for focus also?

Look this cameras has its audience but don't challenge dpreview when they clearly just state facts.

This is a $1,000 camera in 2019.

1 week ago
Sigma82

@Thematic, please point out where they said image quality is very poor

1 week ago
zakk9

With the image quality of current cameras, the discussions about this are very theoretical. I've been using Panasonic cameras for paid work since the GH1, and although there were limitations back then, there are very few today in real life settings. I use a couple of GX8 bodies for most of my work today, and although I also own a Nikon D800 (and have owned the D700, D610 and D810 in the past), the quality of the MFT lenses and the dual IS make me grab the Panasonic cameras on most occasions.

The G95 runs circles around my GX8 in every aspect, and when it comes to ergonomics, it runs circles around the competitors from Fuji and Sony as well. With the G95, I have access to an f/1.2 portrait lens with dual IS. With the Fuji competitor, I would have access to an f/1.2 portrait lens with no IS. Which one would I choose? I've chosen the Zuiko 45mm f/1.8 which weighs 116g, costs a fraction and fits in my pocket. Yes, you do get great separation at f/1.8 on MFT.

1 week ago
Impulses

" The picture quality is very poor. It is only good relative to other m4/3rs cameras. That's what they meant. "

It's not really a significant jump over the 16MP M4/3 bodies that have been around for years now...

1 week ago*
1 week ago*
ozturert

Everyone thinks camera = sensor but it isn't really. The sensors today are so good that you just think what you need. I don't also need tracking erratic movement so I don't care about AF-C performance as well. G90 meets all my needs like good ergonomy (you can actually use this camera perfectly with heavy lenses), good button layout, perfect touch screen, decent sensor with decent shadow recovery (not 5-6 stops), good AF in low light, excellent IBIS, good 4K video (not the best but still very good), real weather sealing.
It is a very good overall package.

1 week ago
John Koch

Introduction of 1080/120p is certainly an improvement over the G85 predecessor. Do any competing devices offer continuous AF for video at high frame rates?

Did the G85 shoot 4k without sensor crop? I see no mention in DPR's 2016 review. The LX100vi used a cropped area of the sensor for that. Does use or non-use of the IBIS affect that G95's crop at all?

Of note: the price of a G85 with kit lens is now down to about $700. Perhaps one can dispense with 120p video and save $.

1 week ago*
Impulses

G85 had a milder 1.1x crop of it's 16MP sensor, the 20MP Sony sensor does handle long exposures better than that 16MP sensor tho (like really long night exposures, it's been a thing for a while), but yeah the G85 is still a great value and I dunno why DPR is pretending it goes for $1K... Hasn't sold for as much as that in all of 2019 I think.

1 week ago
Jorginho

Dpreview Always keeps mentioning the introduction price….for some reason. Which is another inconsistency: are they also comparing to cams at the date of introduction? No. Everything a review needs to do is to show us what all the theoretical data means in reality. Why do they keep mentioning a theoretical price?

1 week ago
cheenachatze

"It also costs hundreds of dollars more than its closest competitors". Really? It comes with a much sharper, weather resistant and more versatile lens, that would sell for $500 on its own. Many that buy the Panasonic kit will be plenty happy with a 24-120mm lens, and not even buy another lens.

1 week ago
Impulses

Nobody in their right mind or who's done a bit of research would pay $500 for the slow 12-60 tho... For that kinda money or just a bit more you can get a 14-140 II that's also sealed. The 12-60 sells for about $200 new as a split kit FWIW... Which is probably close to what it's adding to the MSRP, biggest issue here is Pana not selling the G bodies sans kit lens in the US.

1 week ago
Richard Murdey
Richard Murdey

To confuse you yet further, this camera appears to be called the DC-G99 in Japan.

https://panasonic.jp/dc/g_series/products/g99.html

1 week ago
onlyfreeman
onlyfreeman

lol, what's with all the different versions of basically the same camera, now if only they came in different colours, that would be cool.

1 week ago
Marcus Sundman
Marcus Sundman

onlyfreeman, the point is to limit the user, making life more difficult for us. That's also why they refuse to use PDAF.

1 week ago
larkhon

what we need now is this 20mp sensor in the body of a GM1, or let's be fair, GX800. Or E-PL9 if we're looking for IBIS.

Seriously this new G95 is as big as the E-M1 II, every generation gets bigger and bigger. Look at the Fuji X-E3, the GX9 should have been lighter and smaller. Or be split into a GX9 with the size of GX8 and GX90 as a smaller option.

1 week ago
Impulses

To be fair, the GX9 is indeed smaller than the GX8 and pretty close to the GX85 (in way more than just size; other than the tilting EVF the GX8 DNA kinda went poof)... And at least they still make the GX850, it's probably due for a refresh as well but it was a withheld like worthwhile upgrade over the GM1 for me in several different ways (honest, it's quite a list, from C-AF to USB charging to auto ISO in M to eye AF, etc etc.).

I did buy the GX850 on sale for $400 tho, in 2017, not quite sure why they've priced it back up in light of the GX85's price over the last year and a half (same or lower and they've even sold it in a 2 lens kit with a tele). I love having it in addition to my larger E-M5 II tho. Pana deserves credit for filtering quite a lot of features down their whole lineup, that's what Oly used to be known for... Oly's low/midrange has been languishing hard tho.

1 week ago
kolyy

This sensor in the GM1 would be underwhelming, if the slow mechanical shutter (limited to 1/500s) was retained. A fast 12 bit electronic shutter is a must in a potential GM1/GM5/GX800 successor, in my opinion. That means the much faster sensor from the G9 should be used.

1 week ago*
Impulses

Yeah that'd be nice, for the average user I don't really think it matters that much tho, specially the average user that would buy an entry level GX### rather than a revived GM... I mean hell, Oly is still putting first or second gen IBIS that's worse than the original E-M5 into it's recent E-PLs (which debuted at the same price as the E-M10 III, with near state of the art IBIS, now that's daft)...

Personally I'd love it tho, to have that faster full 12-bit readout on a tiny body... In large part because any kind of manual lens forces those bodies into e-shutter mode (cause the mechanical is full EFC all the time and Pana doesn't let you use that with manual glass on any body, course other bodies have a fully mech shutter as fallback), so it's kind of a bummer when I use my manual fisheye or Laowa UWA on the GX850. Gotta expose more carefully...

1 week ago
kolyy

That's a good point about the manual lenses, I didn't know that. To me, I feel two main limitations on my GM5: on a bright day it's practically impossible to keep the SS under 1/500s in generic situations and that means 10 bit raw files with very limited processing latitude (noisy shadows). And then of course, if I need to freeze motion with faster SS than 1/500s, typically with quickly moving subjects, the slow e-shutter introduces rolling shutter artifacts.

1 week ago
larkhon

To be honest, I didn't those limitations in mind, but I think if they ever bring better sensors to their entry-level camera the limitations will still be there. At least we'd go back to how it was before when you could get the same IQ from any camera from the same generation.

1 week ago
Impulses

The bits and speed of the sensor readout does change with the specific sensor (which they never actually spec, yay), which can ultimately impact IQ for the reasons we were discussing... On those GM/GX### bodies in particular shooting action you're hampered by the readout speed, shooting in e-shutter you'd have to be more careful with the exposure since the lower bit readout has an impact on DR and shadows...

There's just so many more sensors now, like, there's at least two 20MP Sony sensors in use across different M4/3 bodies and like two or three 16MP sensors (Pana's plus however many Sonys); and under most conditions the IQ differences are pretty small IMO. It's just those edge cases that can now ya, heh... Years ago we had maybe two 16MP sensors in use at most and that was that, and the first 16MP Sony sensor was probably the biggest leap in IQ in a good long while.

1 week ago
larkhon

"the IQ differences are pretty small IMO"

I don't really agree on that one. The sensor on the E-M1 II has a lot less noise at higher ISO than any 16mp or even 20mp we saw before it. It's really on par with slightly older APS-C sensors that would be fine until ISO 3200. To me it's the very reason I'm unhappy about Olympus not giving it to cheaper cameras.
That being said, when I look at jpegs I've taken with E-M1, with the sharpening that was applied by default, I must say I almost feel like the E-M1 II's are flat.

6 days ago
Photoman
Photoman

So in the end to sum it all up...buy a Sony...

1 week ago
photofan1986
photofan1986

Yeah or a G85 if you want a great cheap camera and lenses to go with it.

1 week ago
Tomasz_Wk

Yeah, but then you’ll be stuck with those kind of ok to mediocre Sony lenses.

1 week ago
Thorgrem

So in the end this is yet another topic filled with Sony believers that are so bored with there equipment they use there time preaching the Sony gospel.

1 week ago
ozturert

For Sony trolls, any conclusion is "buy Sony"

1 week ago
Jorginho

The trolls here are sadly not forummembers alone. This whole article could be written by a Sony fan-boy and use the exact same wording.

1 week ago
Photoman
Photoman

Maybe I should have said Olympus, since I own a couple of Olympus cameras, but the article suggests Sony.

1 week ago
Impulses

" Maybe I should have said Olympus, "

I love my E-M5 II, it aged relatively well IMO (C-AF aside), and for a sub-$1K body it's still unique in a couple key ways (one of the smallest with robust sealing, and high res mode, and live composite modes, etc.)... But tbh I wouldn't recommend *any* Olympus body under the E-M1 II to anyone right now unless they have some very specific stills-only needs and don't shoot action at all.

The E-M5 line is in sore need of an update, the E-M10 has been updated only to reach for low hanging fruit (4K with horrible C-AF is useful to who?) or to dumb it down for beginners who are put off by Oly's terrible iconography and vast customization, and the E-PL line has turned into a joke where they only update it for fashion/design reasons. I really do hope Oly loops back to pay attention to their low/mid-range...

If you're buying a M4/3 body right now tho and/or are cross shopping $500-1200 M4/3 bodies with APS-C ones, absolutely do stick with Pana IMO.

1 week ago*
ozturert

Impulses, EM10 III has great 4K. Here's how:
- It doesn't have crop! It uses all sensor's width for 4K video so it doesn't have any crop for 4K (I think it compresses 5K to 4K).
- It has great IBIS at 4K and in addition you can enable digital stabilisation! So you'll have one of the best stabilised camera.
- It doesn't have any Log but it.has very good and neutral OOC colours and contrast.
- You get decent touch screen which you don't at any Sony APSC camera (you get some but really bad)
And you get all these for an incredible price. If you don't need AF-C in 4K video, that camera is great.

1 week ago
Impulses

At current prices, sure, I wasn't aware the price had dropped so much, but when it came out the E-M10 III was priced just about on par with the G85 ($700+) which also has all that (and a better touch implementation, and some semblance of competent C-AF). Seems it's now around $450 (body only), guess price took a dive towards the end of last year.

There's still a heck of a hole between the E-M10 III and the E-M1 II, where's that damn E-M5 III.

1 week ago*
zxaar

these trolls are big problem. on Sony articles too we see these usual m43 trolls spoiling everything.

the usual ones always show up there too.

1 week ago
wootpile

This would probably sell well at 800 bucks. At 1200? Maybe those with older m43 and lots of glass who want to upgrade but I can't see many new users entering the mirrorless market with this as a first choice.

1 week ago
Androole

$900 body only, $1000 with kit lens is what everyone was expecting. The reception would have been different at that price point.

1 week ago
cameron2

Wait a few months ... it'll be $800. Pany drops prices faster than I drop singles in a strip club ...

1 week ago
Impulses

Pana used to do that, full throttle, it hasn't been their MO lately tho. The G7 held it's MSRP better than the G3/5/6 and the G85 is still $700-800 despite being 2 years old. The GX85 is still around at $500-some too and it came out before the G85... It seems they're aping Sony now and keeping old models as their budget play. Good or bad depending on how you see it, neither 95 model was a big upgrade so I view it favorably right now.

Granted these are US prices with kit lenses and they haven't been selling anything body only over the last few years either, but I doubt they're knocking off much more than $100-150 for the kit lenses in other regions... (being generous since the 12-60 is sealed and a cut above the average kit lens in versatility)

1 week ago
Jorginho

I think it is way too expensive for what you get. The real killer here is the mediocre video IQ. If that had been a full sensor readout etc it would have been a very good cam. IBIS and weathersealing in there too. But no. And OSPDAF would have made it better for video also...But alas.

1 week ago
Impulses

I'd dare say the G85 at $700 with the same nice/sealed kit lens poses just as much competition to the G95 as anything from Sony/Fuji... You give up a bit of DR and res with the older 16MP sensor, and some IQ for long exposures IIRC, but you get less of a crop in 4K in a smaller/cheaper body that still has DFD and impressive IBIS. The 90/95-series for the G & GX lines were a bit of an underwhelming update for Pana after the aggressive 80/85-series that continue to be available and offer a strong value.

1 week ago
noisephotographer

"The G95's sensor performance falls behind that of other four-thirds cameras like the G9"
Not really, the G9 produces a purple tint.

1 week ago
Pov2

"Not really, the G9 produces a purple tint."
Hmm... Mine doesn't. Send yours for repair.

1 week ago
Kharan
Kharan

It does, actually, with Adobe software. The magenta goes off the charts in deep shadows. However, this is typically simple to correct.

1 week ago
Androole

Yes, if you're doing an extreme shadow push in Lightroom, use the Camera Calibration to adjust the shadow tint slightly.

1 week ago*
cambirdee

What I am not getting is how this camera is supposed to compete with G9, which has higher FPS, seemingly better ability to recover shadows (according to this review), and only costs like 10-20% more?

1 week ago
JakeJY

Some people don't like the size of the G9 and like this size (or even smaller) better. The current price of the G9 does make it very tempting though, although no doubt as the G95 will see price drops when it reaches a similar age as the G9.

1 week ago
Impulses

The G95 is still larger than the older G85 tho, and that one is still available for way way less... If you aren't married to the minor sensor gains or some of the advanced video features (v-log, etc) then the older model might be a better value, or even preferable since it has a milder 4K crop.

IDK why DPR listed the G85 at $1,000 when it's been going for $700-800 for months on end at every possible store. Going by MSRP on an old model that's still being stocked and sold isn't very useful.

1 week ago
SkiHound

That was my conclusion. I've had a GX9 quite a while and though it makes some compromises, I MOSTLY love it. But I also wanted something weather sealed, with a physical shutter release other than phone app, etc. It came with the 12-60, which is a darn fine kit lens with weather sealing. I was waiting for the G95. No body only option in the US. Price with kit lens was the same as a G9. I handled both. Yes, G9 is bigger and heavier. But I decided not so much in practical terms. The GX9 is markedly smaller, lighter, and more discrete than either G9 or G95. Unless a person needs and wants the 12-60, I can't see buying the G95 over the G9 at current prices. At least the current prices in the US market. A $900 body only option would make this a much more difficult decision, IMO.

1 week ago
Simon97
Simon97

Sony APS-C: decent cameras but the kit lenses are poor.
Fuji: Great system all around but even the kit lenses are pricey.
MFT: Smaller sensors w/ obvious drawbacks, but it allows the overall system (camera and lenses) to be smaller. Kit lens prices are reasonable and their quality is very good.

I'm impressed with the abilities of some raw converters to handle noise these days allowing MFT to work for me. My GX85, 3 lenses, two batteries and accessories fit in a tiny case at only 1kg which is wonderful for travel.

1 week ago
JakeJY

Totally agree, Sony APS-C is held back on the kit lenses (why I decided against the a6000). They really need an update to the 16-50mm and 50-210mm.

Fuji: I decided against because they had no pancake zooms, although they have a decent lineup.

On the flip side, the Panasonic kit lenses are above average and more than makes up for any sensor deficiencies (even when using a older 16MP sensor with AA filter; performs even better with AA filter removed or the newer 20MP sensors).

I have the GX85 with 12-32mm and 14-140mm (and a wide converter) and it fits in a tiny holster bag with all accessories. Or when I don't want to carry a bag, the GX85 with 12-32mm fits in my jacket pocket.

1 week ago
panther fan

The only sad thing is that the Sigma lenses result in far less usefull focal lengths on the M43 cameras.
And F1.4 on APS-C really delivers some great results, and that for very little money. The comparable F1.2 Panasonic / Olympus primes are prohibitively expensive and the F1.8 series doesn't nearly match these lenses in capability.

So while an updated line of zooms is desperately needed, on the prime side the Sony isn't that bad. (Also many of the APS-C Sony primes are actually quite good. The 24mm F1.8 is a gem, and others are pretty good as well)

1 week ago*
Nicephore Niepce

All but 1 Sony APSC camera lacks IBIS.
So all those nice 3rd party lenses without IS are hindered, especially for video.
Add to that the smaller apertures, often larger sizes, and other issues mentioned, and it becomes a big problem for the E mount system.
Of course Sony only has one awkward body style which is another problem.

1 week ago
Impulses

Some of the full frame Sony primes can also pinch hit pretty well on APS-C bodies, I'd totally use the 28/2 or 85/1.8 as normal & mid teles... Fuji's best primes also tend to be cheaper than M4/3's best tho it often comes with some compromise. It's definitely worth weighing up all 3 and your particular needs if you're a heavy prime shooter...

I use zooms as much as primes tho and M4/3's variety of zooms is awesome and there's options that just don't have any sort of equivalent elsewhere. At the very low end ($150-350) there's also more primes to choose from AFAIK... And Sigma's longer primes still work pretty well (56/1.4, 60/2.8).

1 week ago
DrHook59
DrHook59

panther fan: "The only sad thing is that the Sigma lenses result in far less usefull focal lengths on the M43 cameras. "

Are you kidding? The 60mm DN 2.8 is a stunning 120mm equivalent lens that is as sharp as a tack, cheap as a button, and produces wonderful contrasty images for all m4/3 cameras. There is nothing in the APSC or FF arena that matches it for price, weight and size. Stick it on a GM5 and you have a ridiculously small and resonably fast portrait or long-shot street outfit - not good enough for presidential billboards or advertising campaigns, admittedly, but I'm not expecting that phone call anytime soon.

1 week ago
Impulses

Amazingly, Sigma's own 56/1.4 is just about the same size as the cheaper 60/2.8, and is just as good, and it's not any more expensive than some of the ~45mm f1.7-1.8 primes either... Those two were unquestionable hits IMO. I shot a lot with a borrowed 60/2.8 during concerts and I loved it, only ended up with Oly's 75/1.8 because I already had the Pana 42.5/1.7, but the 56/1.4 makes a ton of sense for people that only ever wanna buy one tele prime...

OTOH, I can see where he's coming from when it comes to the wider Sigma primes... The 16/1.4 is one of the few wide primes with any kinda sealing for less than a grand, but it's larger than Oly's own 17/1.2! (even uses larger filters IIRC). I dunno how much smaller a native f1.4 wide could be, but that one clearly didn't leverage the system's strengths. The 30/1.4's size isn't as egregious but it still runs into the PL25 and the much cheaper 25/1.7, both of which are smaller.

1 week ago
Impulses

The Sigma 20 & 30mm f2.8 primes are smaller, but then their price isn't as enticing vs something like the native 20/1.7 (even smaller), the teles filled a niche in that the only longer native tele prime was the much pricier 75/1.8. So transplanting the Sigma APS-C primes has been hit or miss IMO, I'm glad they did tho.

If anything it speaks to how strong the M4/3 lineup is, for E mount they were almost must haves whereas within M4/3 they're just another option, a very good one at times (60 & 56mm), but still...

1 week ago
Nicephore Niepce

f2.8 primes are only appealing for Sony APSC E mount because it lacks f2.8 ASPC
zooms.
And all the Sigma f2.8 primes with all the Sony APSC bodies that lack IBIS are very poor choices indoors or after the sun starts to set.

1 week ago
panther fan

As I said in M43 they are just not that usefull. But on APS-C they are amazing.

The 16mm F1.4 / 30mm F1.4 and 56mm F1.4 are equivalent to

12mm F1.05
22.5mm F1.05
42mm F1.05

An that at a price of 289-429$. There is really nothing competing in the M43 system. So while like I said they aren't all that amazing on a M43 body, on an APS-C body they run circles around around every lens body combination at that price in M43

1 week ago
SpacemanUA
SpacemanUA

I don't get it.

Pro:
Very good image quality
Con:
Image quality behind similarly priced APS-C peers at high sensitivities

Pro:
Autofocus system is responsive and tracks fairly well
Con:
Distracting 'wobble' while camera is continuously focusing
AF-C tracking not as good as best-in-class models (like Sony a6400)

Pro:
Solid 4K and 1080 video quality in good light
Con:
4K crop reduces video quality, especially in low light

Now, again, what of those are pros or cons? :)

1 week ago
otto k

Simple - if you like the camera read only pros, if you want to bash it just the cons. Everyone's happy :)

1 week ago
Halina123

20MP sensor! How prehistoric!

You need 120MP to persuade smartphone users to upgrade to a real camera.

1 week ago
Leandros S

Says who?

1 week ago
Nicephore Niepce

Topax Labs GigaPixel AI. It is similar to what Googles does and kills almost any reason to by a higher megapixel camera (that is probably overpriced anyway).

1 week ago
Halina123

Billions of smartphone users and me.
See the news section on the latest Samsung 108MP. Sensor.

1 week ago
Leandros S

Oh, undefined other people. I see. Well, "billions" of people say I'm a fantastic lover, so guess what I'll be doing with my time? Not debating you, clearly.

1 week ago
Leandros S

@Nicephore: I see that you bought into the notion that there is a software that can give you great image quality without having a high quality camera. These sorts of software come around once in a while.

The specific software you mention uses an algorithm called "hallucination" and introduces things into the picture that are definitely artefacts and once you've seen the output a few times, you can tell where it came from.

A general rule in life is, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is, and this certainly applies to "hallucinating" the content of your images.

1 week ago
cameron2

I'm with you. Gigapixel or bust.

1 week ago
DtBB
DtBB

it’s hard to ignore the many other options that you can get for similar or less money, sometimes with a larger sensor to boot.
- From the article

And there we have it. Another mFT cam hampered by its small sensor STRUGGLING to compete with more COMPETENT and CHEAPER rivals such as Sony A6400, Fuji X-T30 and so on.

If it would have been HALF the price it would put a real DECENT fight against the other options bu as it stands?!?

Too overpriced, too little (sensor) and too late (for the fight).

1 week ago
Androole

The A6400 and X-T30 which have:
- No IBIS
- No weather-sealing
- No fully articulated displays
- Small EVFs
- Cramped, fiddly ergonomics
- Fewer direct controls
- Short time limitations on video recording OR terrible rolling shutter artifacts

There is more to a camera than literally just its sensor and AF. And even in those cases, the differences aren't nearly as huge as you are pretending.

The G95's C-AF isn't in the same class as the A6400's, but neither is any other camera that costs less than $1500 (and that camera is the D500).

The difference in noise and dynamic range is also just 2/3 EV. That's hardly make or break, especially if you are shooting with a telephoto or a static subject, where 5-stop IBIS easily makes up the difference and then some.

1 week ago
BrentSchumer
BrentSchumer

You're paying for a lot of features that other brands segment (like weather resistance and IBIS). The M43 lens lineup is also the more developed and diversified than any APSC mount.

I write this as an APSC shooter.

Sensor size is important, but the rest of the ecosystem matters, too.

1 week ago
Nicephore Niepce

Truth is, APSC is dying slowly.
Sony has had only one bodystyle/sensor for 5 years now.
Samsung quit.
Nikon isn't making APSC mirrorless.

Meanwhile, M43 is more diverse than any other system, with more body styles, more features, and more lenses than any other mirrorless systems.

1 week ago
JakeJY

@Androole
Yeah, when people talk about MFT it seems they have blinders on and forget there's a lot more features to a camera than sensor size.

For example why does a6500 cost $1200 (body only), when you can get a a6400 for $900 ($1000 with 16-50 lens)? People seem to completely forget that.

I would add that the G95 comes with a 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 weather sealed lens.

1 week ago
Nicephore Niepce

@JakeJY
Also, most actually think there is a 1 stop and 1EV difference between APSC and M43 which is false. It is 2/3rds of a stop or more precisely .7 stops. It is about half the 1 and 1/4th stop difference between APSC and FF.
The M43 sensors are easier to stabilize which is why their IBIS is usually better (and on most ASPC cameras IBIS is non-existent), and that better IS often is more than the slight difference due to sensor size,
It is also a lot harder to get an APSC sensor to shoot 60 FPS like many m43 sensors can, and you never read about M43 overheating like we do with ASPC/Sony.

1 week ago*
Impulses

" If it would have been HALF the price it would put a real DECENT fight against the other options bu as it stands?!? "

The G85 says hello, still available for $700-800, with sealing and IBIS and most of the G95's advantages besides the minor gains from the 20MP sensor and some advanced video features. Shoot it even has a milder 4K crop...

The GX95 vs GX85 update was a similar story, neither were groundbreaking but by keeping the older models in stock Panasonic is actually offering quite a robust lineup. It's about time someone copied that strategy from Sony TBH.

1 week ago
Ruairi
Ruairi

DtBB not all of us print large regularly, or need 7000px wide images. For price, weight, and reliability, m43 kicks ass for anyone printing A3, or publishing for web. That Sony and Fuji you mentioned do not stand a chance against a G95 out in the wild, only regaining some minor points if you need to print something at A1 size - in which case, you should probably consider hiring a specialised hires camera anyway.

1 week ago
ozturert

DtBB is a Sony troll. Read his comments in the last months and you'll understand.

1 week ago
ilza

@Nicephore Niepce: about your estimates of future of APS-C and μ4/3, you could not be more wrong:

The share of sales of μ4/3 went down 1.7 times (in value) between 2017-10 and 2018-10 according to BCN (see the top chart; the right half is for “in value”):
    https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://www.bcnretail.com/market/detail/20181103_91600.html
blue=APC red=4/3 green=FF purple=Other
(and APC keeps its position). Only DSLRs and 1″ have worse stats than this!

To see how this was going month-on-month, inspect the second from the bottom plot on
    https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=jp&tl=en&u=https://www.bcnretail.com/market/detail/20180812_81425.html
            未満=less than
(I THINK it is in value, and the bottom plot is in units.)

1 week ago
JakeJY

@ilza
1st link is comparing 1 month october vs 1 month october, not comparing the year end YTD, so there's going to be plenty of variation.

As for second link it seems to show MFT fluctuating but from the 22-23% in 7/2017, it ended up at slightly above 20% in 8/2018 (and heading up). That's hardly suggesting a troubling trajectory.

On other hand APS-C DSLRs dropped from 44% to 38%, while smaller formats than 4/3" dropped from 5% to almost 0%.

1 week ago*
ilza

As I said: if you think that the first link is just a fluctuation, see the month-on-month plot (2nd from the end) in the second link. It conforms steady decline (with a few exceptional months of no-growth).

> “As for second link it seems to show…”

Wrong graph. You are looking at the last one — which is for units. I was discussing VALUE.

> “On other hand …”

Yes, (as I said) there are other sectors with yet worse performance than the (catastrofic!) 41% YoY decline of μ4/3 (in value). DSLRs are 45% down YoY (per CIPA, in value). 1″ is 67% down (!).

1 week ago
JakeJY

@ilza
"if you think that the first link is just a fluctuation, see the month-on-month plot (2nd from the end) in the second link. It conforms steady decline (with a few exceptional months of no-growth)."
I'm talking about this graph. It's showing up and down and the decline trend is only modest (the last values show a upward trajectory)
https://d1nzh4uot4722i.cloudfront.net/files/user/201808091405_5.jpg?v=1533791112

"Wrong graph. You are looking at the last one — which is for units. I was discussing VALUE. Yes, (as I said) there are other sectors with yet worse performance than the (catastrofic!) 41% YoY decline of μ4/3 (in value). DSLRs are 45% down YoY (per CIPA, in value). 1″ is 67% down (!)."
That 2nd chart is showing units (販売台数) not value.
And once again your number is only comparing a single month result: 7/2017 vs 7/2018. And by showing pure units (instead of market share like other one) it doesn't normalize for market conditions for that particular month.

1 week ago*
Nicephore Niepce

Someone mentioned BCN.
BCN has said M43 has been the best selling mirrorless mount for 10 years. The number of M43 users in Japan dwarfs all other mirrorless systems.
It is true Olympus moved factories and has not had a new high selling camera for a while, but this past week the best selling camera in Japan was an Olympus, and they usually have several in the top 10.
As for APSC, only Canon and Fujifilm seem serious about selling APSC cameras.
every year for the past 3 years, Canon has sold more APSC mirrorless cameras in Japan that ALL Sony cameras combined.

1 week ago
Oboyle
Oboyle

I agree with DPR's conclusion here. A competent camera that is somewhat overshadowed by its peers. A choice between better IQ and AF in stills and video in one corner vs Ibis in the other. With an annoying forced kit lens bundle to boot. I'm really hoping the em5iii brings some thunder, my upgrade GAS is getting hard to repress and the G95 is not going to satisfy it.

1 week ago
SkiHound

My take is a solid but not very exciting body. At least in the US, it's not sold body only which makes it much less attractive to folks that have the kit lens or a kit lens/normalish focal length lens with which they are already happy. Sure, one can sell the lens but the market is pretty saturated and it's not worth much on the used market, and it's kind of a PITA that should be unnecessary. Release price with kit lens is about the same as the more fully featured G9 without kit lens. I'd been kind of waiting for this release and would've been interested if there had been a body only option at around $900. But the lack of a body only option and the release price reduced my GAS very quickly.

1 week ago
otto k

And G9 is as good as Panasonic m43 gets. It is larger and heavier, but it's hard to find something it doesn't do well.

1 week ago
Total: 138, showing: 1 – 50
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »