ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
Panasonic Lumix G9 review part 2 of 3: handling and autofocus
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ธ.ค. 2017
- Part 2 of my Lumix G9 in-depth review! This covers handling and autofocus. Part 1 covers design and controls and Part 3 covers photo and video quality.
Buy the Lumix G9 from B&H: bhpho.to/2BzJ1Ne
Buy Gordon & Doug a coffee: www.paypal.me/...
Gordon's book at Amazon: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon.uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ
Get a Cameralabs T-Shirt: redbubble.com/...
My Lumix G9 review: www.cameralabs...
"The best bird photograph is the one you just missed" Doug brilliant just brilliant
Great review as always. Thanks.
I'm still not reassured though about panning AF on a distant subject against a busy background.
I think the amount of compatibility between Panasonic and Olympus is enough to maintain competition and innovation. If they were %100 compatible on every feature, I think it would be pointless to have 2 cameras that do the exact same thing, just with different names.
I have a em1-ii and a Panasonic Leica 100-400mm, use this combo to shoot birds and the autofocus is great. The Olympus body works well with a Panasonic lens. I wonder how much better does the G9 works with the 100-400mm when compares to em1-ii though.
I wish Panasonic would make a 12-250 image stabilized lens. My wife has an FZ2500 and that would make a great replacement when paired with the G9.
That would be amazing BUT also huge and expensive. Remember the sensor in Micro Four Thirds is larger than in the FZ2500.
I’m going to have to stop watching Camera Conspiracy’s channel. 😀
I was waiting for the G9 but finally got the e-m1 II instead simply because my two favourite lenses will work better with it. Olympus and panasonic should keep more compatibility between them.
Yes I wish they supported all of each other's techs, but they develop independently.
While I like the smaller panasonic primes like the 15mm f1.7 and the 25mm f1.4 42.5mm f1.7 and they work well with dfd, I must say the phase autofocus in the em1.2 is Superior in use and doesn't seems to be limited to olympus lenses. The olympus 7-14mm f2.8, 12-40mm f2.8 and 40-150mm f2.8 are so good that I would recommend going with a em1.2 and those lenses to someone starting in the system. I say that but I prefer panasonic interface and menu but the ergonomic of the em1.2 is just fantastic. Another good point for olympus is the firmware updates they did on the body and software provided where we feel Panasonic just don't care when the camera is purchased.
I just did some test and the phase detect AF on he mkII work on a leica lens, compared it to dfd on my gx85 with the same 43mm f1.7 and the m1 mkII focus a lot better so it's evident the phase detection work. Olympus is more inclusive with their af system.
Another excellent realistic review unlike so many posted by others regarding Sony cameras which are awful to use even if the specs are interesting.
Thanks Mike!
Very tempting product pana delivers but without full caf support on olympus lenses i will keep the em1 mk2 on my list. Hopefully the lower price of the G9 will affect the price of the olympus body.
It will do CAF on Olympus lenses, but I don't think it supports DFD, so the performance won't be as good as on the EM1 II.
I have both cameras and I find EM1.2 way better for CF even with Pana 200mm f2.8
So much for the compatibility of M43 lenses. But I imagine there is no love lost between the two companies particularly as Panasonic has now parked their tanks on Olympus's lawn. For the first time Panasonic has produced a better stills camera than Olly. They must be seriously peed off!
Hi Gordon,
the video sample from the game drive shows lots of artefacts beside in the trees .
Is this caused by the TH-cam upload or is this the original quality oft oft the camera?
Regards, Joerg
Shame that Olympus pro 12 to 40 it's Stella lens don't combine is
Great review but, again, no mention is made of any shutter lag using CAF. I do equestrian photography where catching the horses legs at the proper position during a trot or canter is essential. Yes, I know I can use 20fps or 4/6k photo but I have no time to sort through hundreds of images for the right one when I know I can get it with one shot on a DSLR.
I have gone over to MFT because I can no longer put up with the weight of full frame combos. At the moment I rely on single AF but limit myself to side on shots where the focus doesn't change. I was hoping to get a positive review on the CAF for this type of shot...
Hi Graham, I hear what you're saying, and there is immense satisfaction in nailing the decisive moment with a single frame. In use I felt the G9 was very responsive and you can configure priorities too, but if capturing the exact moment is really important, I really would recommend trying the fast burst modes. I know what you mean about sorting through loads of images - and I hate that too - but you WILL absolutely have the shot you want in there, and if you're used to capturing the decisive moment, you'd be shooting very short bursts anyway. So you'd typically have less than 20 frames to go through which is very fast. In my bigger review at cameralabs.com (coming soon), I'll discuss shooting approaching subjects with CAF in more detail with lots of examples. In short, it was very good, although you may prefer the Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II in this regard as it has embedded PDAF on the sensor which delivers a more traditional experience.
Thank you for your quick reply Gordon. When covering equestrian events I like to get at least 10-20 pics of each rider so it would still mean sorting through a few hundred images. I currently use a G80 with the Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 and have thought about getting an EM1 Mk2 to go with it. However, I really like the look of the specs of the G9 - especially the LCD and 180fps video.
One other thing (if you don't mind). One of my pet hates with the Panasonics is the fact that I always use the EVF. If I want to chimp, I have to switch over to the LCD screen and press play - then I have to cancel play (usually by pressing the shutter button half way) and switch back to the EVF. One (or both) of those things I often forget to do before another shot presents itself and I find I miss the shot. I know there's auto switch over but that's just too slow. Has the G9 (or the OMD) got any more options for this scenario?
I just wish I could try them both but there's nowhere near me that hires out...
I use back button on the G9 and set the shutter to half release. That is it fires on the first stage on the button; makes the experience very responsive. However I still get better results on the EM1.2
One question, the amazing stabilization is introduced a lot of jelly effect on the footages, I saw a few people also have this effect when they test the 6,5 stop stabilization. While they say it looks amazing.. I don’t think it’s looks nice.
I think that is the rolling shutter effect. It should not be as noticeable with slower moving subjects/objects. Most cameras (non-video only cameras) will exhibit this 'effect' unless you buy a Sony A9, which still has some rolling shutter effect in severe cases.
Do you have a link to a list of the dual IS 2 lenses? I am updating my kit from my A7s and am between G9 and A7 II, what would you go for?
Hi Gordon,! Great review. I was particularly interested in this as I do sport photography and it sounds like it might tick many boxes. I'm currently using Canon 7Dmii with a 100-400Mii lens. I've seen you've test the Panny 50-200 f2.8 - 4 against the Olympus 40-150 f2.8. I like the range and f-stop of the Oly but would the Panny lens work better for sport because of the DFD? The plan is to use this as a 2nd cam..
See my other comment - I shoot sports with bodies and Em1.2 is way better
Hi Gordon, thanks a lot for another comprehensive and informative video. I own an Olympus EM1.2 and a Nikon D500 and shoot wildlife. They compliment each other beautifully for my style of photography. I would like to know how the autofocus and tracking of the G9 behaves when capturing birds in flight. Are you in a position to say where the G9 lies for bif, when compared to the EM1.2 and D500?
I've only briefly tried the G9 for BIF and found it sometimes proved successful, but generally I enjoyed greater success with the EM1 II and D500 (and Sony A9) AF. But there's more to it than that, as I've found the G9's various pre-capture modes were most successful at capturing moments of takeoff, so it depends what moments you're trying to capture.
Thanks a lot for the prompt response. I already have ProCapture with my EM1.2, which may even be improved with the next update on 28.02.18. I am really only interested in the ability of the G9 to capture birds/insects in flight, not landing or taking off.
I thought that was the case. i think you'll find the EM1 II and D500, or again the A9, superior for subjects in fast and unpredictable motion.
Gordon will the IS work well with the cheaper 12 to 60 lens - it's a lot cheaper.
Yes I think the Lumix G 12-60mm supports Dual IS II. Certainly in my tests, the stabilisation works fine on that lens.
Gordon - You mention stay with the brand lens for the best compatible stabilization, but you used a Leica lens in Africa -Do the Leica lenses work as well as the Panasonic? Why not use the 12-60 Panasonic on that shoot?
Sorry, the branding can get confusing! The Leica lenses for Micro Four Thirds are partnered with Panasonic, so they count as Panasonic lenses. Both the Leica 12-60mm and Leica 200mm are Panasonic lenses that support Dual IS 2. They also updated the Leica 100-400mm for Dual IS 2. Panasonic uses Leica as a premium brand for their lenses. Leica designs them, Panasonic makes them.
Hi Gordon, Does the amount of frames that the the buffer can handle increase if you lower the resolution? If you shot at say 8.3mp (3840 x 2160) RAW, would you be able to get more than 50 images in the buffer before it filled? The reason I ask is because that could be a useful creative tool for film makers. To get a couple of seconds of RAW 60fps video by using the high speed shooting mode.
Great question, but I don't think you can record RAWs at less than the full res. I'll check next time I have one though.
Gordon Laing, thanks. I've asked several reviewers of the camera but no one has been able to tell me. I think by the time I asked them they had already sent the camera back to panasonic. Looking forward to the answer! Cheers.
Yes, mine's gone back too, but I will try and get it back again to reconfirm a few things. But as I recall, RAW files are only at the full res on all of Panasonic's cameras.
Gordon you mention the 200 2.8 and the G9 got sharp pictures on moving subjects and you say it’s Impressive as its a 400mm EQ but it’s also a F 5.6 EQ and that’s not shallow DOF really
You're right that in terms of DOF, it becomes 400mm f5.6, but that's still pretty shallow for subjects a few meters away - it's still not a trivial task to autofocus that on an approaching cyclist.
Are you sure you really want shallow DOF? What’s the point to have the bird’s eyes and head in focus but nothing else? Don’t you want a wonderfully blurred background instead? Which is indeed the case for an EQ 400/F5.6 lens.
Well I think saying that the lens is equal in focal lenght but miss what it’s equal in light gathering is just telling the part that suits you
I use FF when I want to take a picture in low light of a moving object
Photos that arn’t doable with one of my m43 cameras
When I want to travel with light gear I take the m43 system or my Lx100
Dear, C-M T, I really agree that - in conformity with the professional photographers’ stereotypes - FF generally is better for serious work, but in this particular case I’m afraid you are not right.
Of course, the FF indeed has a theoretical advantage of 2 EVs over MFT. But you can easily lose this advantage as a typical FF 400/2.8 is almost impossible to use handheld (unless doing it in bright sunlight) just because:
1. it’s too heavy, moreover, it’s not even comfortable by design for handheld usage (as opposite to G9 + 200/2.8 combo),
2. it has just an OIS claimed to work up to 4 EV - as opposite to the G9 + 200/2.8 hybrid OIS + IBIS of 6.5 EV, confirmed by reviewers,
3. AFAIK the Canon 400/2.8 is good, but not tack sharp wide open - as opposite to G9 + 200/2.8.
So - unless you (a) shut really fast moving scenes in low light, (b) want to print huge posters or (c) are Canikon snob, I really doubt that a - say - Canon 400/F2.8 would be much more advantageous for bird photography over the much lighter G9 + 200/2.8 combo, which can take sharp photos even @ 1/15 sec handheld! Just try to do this using its FF sibling.
That's a very well written and thought-out response kesztio. You're absolutely right that for some subjects, the G9 and 200mm combo is much more practical and in fact could deliver better results. But conversely in some other situations, the FF and 400mm f2.8 combo would be preferable. It's about really understanding the pros and cons of each combination and importantly not kidding yourself. I know for most situations, I'd find the MFT and 200mm combo preferable, but in very low light when I needed a fast shutter and didn't need to handhold, then an FF plus a truly bright super-tele is fab. That's why many sports photographers love them.
You're the second reviewer to mention the disorienting nature of the viewfinder with caf, but that the pictures are in focus! So peculiar!
It's the way the depth by defocus system works. Because it's contrast-based, it has to wobble a bit to confirm the focus, it just happens very quickly on the latest Panasonics. So it successfully refocuses, but can't help looking a bit odd! I think they're working on reducing this visual effect,
Please, lose the old bloke, he offers nothing but confusion to these videos.
No, he's the only American I can listen to for more than ten seconds!