stratokaster
Top Veteran
- Location
- Dublin, Ireland
- Name
- Pavel
Hi guys and gals, long time no see.
Recently I had my main camera (Panasonic GX8) and my most expensive lens (12-35/2.8) destroyed in an unfortunate accident. I also have a Lumix GX85 which, sadly, suffers from the well-documented battery drain issue. The camera works fine, but if I leave it swithed off for 2-3 days, it completely drains the battery. The only solution to this problem is to store the battery separately from the camera, which is a major hassle. That's why the GX85 is now basically my webcam: it lives on a small tripod on my desk and is permanently powered by a dummy battery. Since it's a US model, it can output clean 1080p/30 and 1080p/60 via HDMI, which makes it perfect for webcasts, but as a photographic tool it's as good as dead.
All this exciting stuff means that I need a new camera (at least one). I really liked my GX8, which was mostly great, but I'm reluctant to get another one for two reasons: 1) I don't like the separate exposure compensation dial which is difficult to operate without looking at it; 2) in my experience, the shutter shock issue is very real, at least with zoom lenses. The shutter also sounds absolutely awful. I recently was asked to photograph a chamber music concert, and I could not use the GX8 because its shutter is too loud and in the electronic shutter mode it produces horrible banding under LED lights. I also dislike the fully articulated screen (I would prefer a tilting one), but after some consideration I decided that this is the downside I'm willing to live with.
Normally, I would get a G-series camera. I have always considered them to be "Goldilocks cameras" in Panasonic's lineup: historically they have been not too big and not too small, not too cheap and not too expensive, and their specs have mostly been very good. In this respect, I think the G80 and the G90 were the true heirs of the GH2 (which I had many years ago and which I still remember very fondly). Unfortunately, both cameras have been discontinued, and the G100 is... well... for all I know, it could be a cracking little camera, but it's just not what I am looking for. Obviously, I can easily procure a second-hand or refurbished G90, but what if I need another camera in, say, 4 to 5 years? Would a decent mid-range body be available or would I have to spring for an overkill (for my purposes) and oversized top-range camera like the GH6 or the G9? And would the system even be around, considering that one founding member is investing heavily into a full-frame system, and the other one has completely embarrassed itself and sold its camera division to a private equity firm (which is about as confidence-inspiring as selling your liver to a vulture...) The upside of the Micro 4/3 is that the system has been on the market for a very long time, and there is a significant number of second hand bodies available, so assembling a two body kit should be fairly inexpensive.
A couple of words of what I would like to achieve. I absolutely hate switching lenses, that's why I prefer to have two bodies. In my happier days I was shooting with this combo:
This setup was not ideal, because 28mm EFL was not quite wide enough, and the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 had an annoyingly long minimum focus distance, but it worked for 99% of my photography, and I took some of my best shots ever with this humble setup.
So ideally, I would have a 2-body setup with 4-5 lenses – 2 lenses (moderate wide and moderate tele) for general purpose photography, one 35-ish mm fast lens for social photography, a wide angle lens, and a macro lens. That's just a general idea; I'm also open to other variations, e.g. moderate wide and moderate telephoto lenses could be replaced by one fast standard zoom.
If I stay with Micro 4/3, I'm not thrilled with any of the currently available body options, and I feel that the ~35mm EFL options in the system are not ideal. The Olympus 17mm f/1.2 PRO is too large and expensive, the Olympus 17mm f/1.8 is rather disappointing optically (I have tried three different copies and they all have been meh; about as good as the Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 which I consider one of the weakest lenses in the system), and the Panaleica 15mm f/1.7 is just a touch too wide (but a brilliant lens otherwise). Amazingly, wide angle options are also rather disappointing. The closest wide angle lens to my needs is the Olympus 9-18mm, but after the recent price hike it's 700 euro which is just way too much for what it is (I have had Olympus standard-grade lenses in the past and there's no chance in hell that I will pay 700 euro for that level of build quality). There is also the new PanaLeica 9mm f/1.7 which could be the right lens for me: the samples I have seen look very good, and I quite like the price. I already have a macro lens (Olympus 30mm f/3.5) which is very close to being optically perfect. I also have a cheap tele zoom (Panasonic 45-100mm) which is very nice and sharp but I just never use it, so it does not count.
However, if I look at other systems, things kinda look more interesting than Micro 4/3 options. For example, there is the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 DC DN for APS-C cameras (Sony and Fujifilm) which kinda looks like a perfect walkaround lens. It's not the best optic in the world, but it's tiny, light and fast. Add the new Viltrox 13mm f/1.4 (which is a brilliant lens by all accounts), and I already have a large chunk of my wishes fulfilled, and quite cheaply at that. There is no shortage of ~35mm EFL options for either Sony of Fujifilm mount either. The only problem is that I don't like Sony and Fujifilm cameras
Still, Sony looks like an attractive option, for example, I could get an A6500 and pair it with a cheap second hand A6000 and get probably the smallest possible 2-body, 2-lens kit.
Another option is Nikon Z... The sensor in the Z50 is fantastic (that said, I have never had any issues with the 20MP sensor inside my GX8), I tried the camera and found it to be very good in terms of ergonomics (almost as good as Panasonic) and speed. And it has the tilting screen! The only issue is the lack of APS-C lenses, but there are rumours that Sigma will bring its lenses to the Nikon Z mount next year. If they release the 18-50mm DC DN and/or their APS-C primes for Nikon Z, the Z50 would be a very serious contender.
What do you think? Should I try another system? By the way, I tried multiple other systems in the past and found them lacking, especially Sony (horrible UI) and Fujifilm (slow and unpredictable operation + clunky and outdated controls + "the X-Trans look"), but it's been several years since I last tried their cameras, so for all I know they could be much better today.
Recently I had my main camera (Panasonic GX8) and my most expensive lens (12-35/2.8) destroyed in an unfortunate accident. I also have a Lumix GX85 which, sadly, suffers from the well-documented battery drain issue. The camera works fine, but if I leave it swithed off for 2-3 days, it completely drains the battery. The only solution to this problem is to store the battery separately from the camera, which is a major hassle. That's why the GX85 is now basically my webcam: it lives on a small tripod on my desk and is permanently powered by a dummy battery. Since it's a US model, it can output clean 1080p/30 and 1080p/60 via HDMI, which makes it perfect for webcasts, but as a photographic tool it's as good as dead.
All this exciting stuff means that I need a new camera (at least one). I really liked my GX8, which was mostly great, but I'm reluctant to get another one for two reasons: 1) I don't like the separate exposure compensation dial which is difficult to operate without looking at it; 2) in my experience, the shutter shock issue is very real, at least with zoom lenses. The shutter also sounds absolutely awful. I recently was asked to photograph a chamber music concert, and I could not use the GX8 because its shutter is too loud and in the electronic shutter mode it produces horrible banding under LED lights. I also dislike the fully articulated screen (I would prefer a tilting one), but after some consideration I decided that this is the downside I'm willing to live with.
Normally, I would get a G-series camera. I have always considered them to be "Goldilocks cameras" in Panasonic's lineup: historically they have been not too big and not too small, not too cheap and not too expensive, and their specs have mostly been very good. In this respect, I think the G80 and the G90 were the true heirs of the GH2 (which I had many years ago and which I still remember very fondly). Unfortunately, both cameras have been discontinued, and the G100 is... well... for all I know, it could be a cracking little camera, but it's just not what I am looking for. Obviously, I can easily procure a second-hand or refurbished G90, but what if I need another camera in, say, 4 to 5 years? Would a decent mid-range body be available or would I have to spring for an overkill (for my purposes) and oversized top-range camera like the GH6 or the G9? And would the system even be around, considering that one founding member is investing heavily into a full-frame system, and the other one has completely embarrassed itself and sold its camera division to a private equity firm (which is about as confidence-inspiring as selling your liver to a vulture...) The upside of the Micro 4/3 is that the system has been on the market for a very long time, and there is a significant number of second hand bodies available, so assembling a two body kit should be fairly inexpensive.
A couple of words of what I would like to achieve. I absolutely hate switching lenses, that's why I prefer to have two bodies. In my happier days I was shooting with this combo:
This setup was not ideal, because 28mm EFL was not quite wide enough, and the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 had an annoyingly long minimum focus distance, but it worked for 99% of my photography, and I took some of my best shots ever with this humble setup.
So ideally, I would have a 2-body setup with 4-5 lenses – 2 lenses (moderate wide and moderate tele) for general purpose photography, one 35-ish mm fast lens for social photography, a wide angle lens, and a macro lens. That's just a general idea; I'm also open to other variations, e.g. moderate wide and moderate telephoto lenses could be replaced by one fast standard zoom.
If I stay with Micro 4/3, I'm not thrilled with any of the currently available body options, and I feel that the ~35mm EFL options in the system are not ideal. The Olympus 17mm f/1.2 PRO is too large and expensive, the Olympus 17mm f/1.8 is rather disappointing optically (I have tried three different copies and they all have been meh; about as good as the Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 which I consider one of the weakest lenses in the system), and the Panaleica 15mm f/1.7 is just a touch too wide (but a brilliant lens otherwise). Amazingly, wide angle options are also rather disappointing. The closest wide angle lens to my needs is the Olympus 9-18mm, but after the recent price hike it's 700 euro which is just way too much for what it is (I have had Olympus standard-grade lenses in the past and there's no chance in hell that I will pay 700 euro for that level of build quality). There is also the new PanaLeica 9mm f/1.7 which could be the right lens for me: the samples I have seen look very good, and I quite like the price. I already have a macro lens (Olympus 30mm f/3.5) which is very close to being optically perfect. I also have a cheap tele zoom (Panasonic 45-100mm) which is very nice and sharp but I just never use it, so it does not count.
However, if I look at other systems, things kinda look more interesting than Micro 4/3 options. For example, there is the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 DC DN for APS-C cameras (Sony and Fujifilm) which kinda looks like a perfect walkaround lens. It's not the best optic in the world, but it's tiny, light and fast. Add the new Viltrox 13mm f/1.4 (which is a brilliant lens by all accounts), and I already have a large chunk of my wishes fulfilled, and quite cheaply at that. There is no shortage of ~35mm EFL options for either Sony of Fujifilm mount either. The only problem is that I don't like Sony and Fujifilm cameras
Still, Sony looks like an attractive option, for example, I could get an A6500 and pair it with a cheap second hand A6000 and get probably the smallest possible 2-body, 2-lens kit.Another option is Nikon Z... The sensor in the Z50 is fantastic (that said, I have never had any issues with the 20MP sensor inside my GX8), I tried the camera and found it to be very good in terms of ergonomics (almost as good as Panasonic) and speed. And it has the tilting screen! The only issue is the lack of APS-C lenses, but there are rumours that Sigma will bring its lenses to the Nikon Z mount next year. If they release the 18-50mm DC DN and/or their APS-C primes for Nikon Z, the Z50 would be a very serious contender.
What do you think? Should I try another system? By the way, I tried multiple other systems in the past and found them lacking, especially Sony (horrible UI) and Fujifilm (slow and unpredictable operation + clunky and outdated controls + "the X-Trans look"), but it's been several years since I last tried their cameras, so for all I know they could be much better today.
Last edited:
makes sense - we have a "new" player with OM Systems that's making small-ish, but interesting steps towards renewing the Olympus side of things, and Panasonic just issued a new flagship, the GH6, so I don't think they're about to give up 
