Panasonic Lumix G9 review part 3 of 3: photo and video quality 

Thankyou Mark!

Thanks!

$1200 now

Harry Bunn Yep, we've come a long way. I have several GX1 bodies, and have enjoyed using them for years. I just bought a G9, primarily for the video capabilities.

I talked about it a little in this part, but will do more soon in my main review. The CAF in video is ok for basic focus pulls and tracking walking, but not running or sports.

OK thanks. I don't find the CAF in video on the G80 good enough for even pieces to camera, where there's some movement back and forth. I would be interested to read if there is any improvement when you write your in depth article.

the G9 update gives it 10 bit internal.

I notice you mentioned it right at the end, I like your other book so will look into getting that one as well.

Thanks, the product placement wasn't in vain! The one with the keyboard is called Digital Retro and tells the story behind 40 vintage computers of the 70s and 80s - here's more info: www.cameralabs.com/digitalretro/

Thanks!

But if you've already bought it, you don't need a review! That said, I may do an update video showing what's changed. Thing is, these videos rarely do well, so I need more support from viewers in order to justify doing them.

Well, I’ve STRICTLY used RU-vid reviews for my purchase decision and I thank you for your input thusfar. Seeing the news of Panasonic ditching the R&D and selling their sensors, it’s be a shame that the rest of world is ignorant to its goodness!

Cheers! Check out my long exposure tutorial...

Thanks Michael,

Ansel used a lot of the technology available to him. He dodged and burned images in the darkroom just like people do in Photoshop now.

Thanks! And if it reassures you, the Oly lenses still work great on the Pannie bodies and vide versa, it's just that some perform a little better if mated with a body from the same company.

Bart, Nikon has hopeless autofocus in video, so Panasonic wins that particular one even with a contrast based system. If you're into video I'd get the G9 or GH5 over the D500.

I don't think they will depart from the MFT mount and format, but they don't seem to be working together much on their new technologies. I still think having two major companies making compatible bodies though is still a big - and unique - advantage of MFT.

Hi Ken, it's a very difficult choice as both are really capable cameras with a lot in common. I've detailed most of the key differences in my main G9 review verdict here: www.cameralabs.com/panasonic-lumix-g9-review/4/

Yep, it's been around $1300 for some time now, great value...

Doesn't the camera display remaining time for video as it does for photos? Are you in the movie mode on the dial?

I don't have them side by side, but I wouldn't describe either as loud. Both also have silent electronic shutter options too.

Thanks Sam, glad you liked it!

Mirrorless cameras are certainly getting bigger at the higher-end. I think it's because the manufacturers feel they need to convert / tempt DSLR owners who are used to - and prefer - larger bodies; there's also an element of a high-end pro camera needing to be big to be taken seriously, for better or worse. I understand this, but also feel we need some really small ones too. Luckily there's still a bunch around. Panasonic's latest GX9 for instance has returned to the smaller GX7 form factor rather than the chunky GX8.

good question, I'll ask them. Personally I haven't physically touched a sensor in years. i just use a blower.

Hi Erdal, that sounds like a good idea, but sadly it's not available. No reason why it couldn't be in a very controlled environment though. I'll suggest it!

2018 not 2017

Great steal. How do u like it? Mines on the fedex truck as we speak.

I think it's March / April timeframe.

I still use Olympus cameras, they still work and you can still buy lenses for them. Also Panasonic just launched the G9 II, so do check out my review of that!

@@cameralabs of course you do! You have a RU-vid channel with over 200k followers. You are wealthy enough to buy some to collect and use. Why is the rich people always seem to think everyone else has plenty of money? As for the G9 ll, again you thinking I am loaded with money. That is way more expensive!

@@Oncewasgolden you've read that the wrong way. I still use my old cameras because I CAN'T AFFORD NEW ONES and because THEY ARE GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME. You should also know that RU-vid currently pays a channel my size about $1000 / £800 a month, which is not a great full-time wage.

@@cameralabs Then I am sorry. I misunderstood. That is sad, really sad. Truth is I probably can’t afford another camera right now either. But, since I am sure the government is going to eradicate our debt in trade for other things, I kinda don’t give a rat’s ass. If that does not happen, then a bankruptcy will solve it too. Most of us would not be in the financial situation we are in, if not for our governments. When you are walking down the road to death, the only thing left to do is hitchhike. Take care!😀

@@Oncewasgolden thanks, I wish you the best!

Hi Pete, glad you like my reviews! First of all the Fuji system is not Micro Four Thirds - it uses a larger APSC sensor. So if you want to stick with MFT you need Panasonic or Olympus. In terms of image quality, the G9 will be a bit better, but not massively, it's more about the build, design, speed etc. You can also get the G9 sensor - or similar - in the GX9, so it depends what you're looking for. I have reviews of most of the Lumix bodies at cameralabs.com

Gordon Laing Hi Gordon, thanks for the response. The reason I mention the XT2 is that from the reviews I've seen it looks like it would meet my needs in term of image quality. I'm aware that this would mean a complete change of system and lenses though. I will check out you reviews as you said and I'll probably go to my local camera store to get some hands on with the G9, GX9 and XT2 before making any decisions. Thanks again!

ASC I’ll try to answer this a week later. I would put my money in a better lens for your 80d. To switch over to another system would probably cost you more money than saving up for a better long lens for you great 80d.

Thanks, Daniel, I look forward to your further thoughts on this. I had looked into better lenses for my 80D. I'm concerned that with the lower light levels, I'll need an f/2.8 lens. One could get a great 70-200mm f/2.8, but I think the reach even on a crop body would be too short. New and used, the latest Canon 300 and 400mm f/2.8 primes are out of my price range, though a used 300mm IS USM mk1 could work. However, I appreciate being able to zoom while tracking action, especially b/c I'm working with only a single camera body. So that basically leaves the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 Sport as a fast, sharp lens w/ fast AF. But it seems like a beast at 7.5 lbs. Tempting, but at its price tag of $3,600, one could get a G9 or EM1m2 with good glass (Oly Pro 40-150 f/2.8 -- admittedly not appreciably more reach than a 70-200 on the 80D, but so many other interesting capabilities to explore with m43 system). If the current m43 flagships won't cut it for fast action in low light, then the decision is easy. But if they are as good or better than 80D with AF speed & accuracy and noise at high ISO, then I'm torn. I suspect that the greater DOF on m43 would mean greater success with focus at f/2.8 under low light.

I think so, but check the Atomos website.

There is no crop in 4k with either of those cameras.

You're describing the X-T3 - I think it's the camera for you!

@@cameralabs That's not what I meant, I would like to see the next G9 Mark II a tad smaller, with more dials on top (like the G85) and no top LCD.

@@gabrielalamberti5860 I think they'll probably keep the G9 series large, but they might make one of the lower-end models more sophisticated... hard to tell, especially with their new efforts on Full Frame coming soon.

I think Olympus does.

Thanks Gordon, I really value your opinion.

It's presented in 720p as it's recorded as a skype phone call and that's the best quality available to us. The G9 doesn't have V-Log, but it does have Cinelike D.

Only 720p! The humanity!! For gods sake, someone think of the children!

It depends what you want from an upgrade. The sensor is much smaller and even though it's newer, it probably won't have the potential dynamic range. BUT it has built-in stabilisation and access to lots of smaller, lighter and cheaper lenses that are typically sharper into the corners. I would also consider a Fujifilm X series body like the XT2 or XT3.

@@cameralabs im looking for an image that I can lift shadows more to be honest so maybe the G9 won't be the answer. Dynamic range id say would be paramount.

@@BJJandBS I'd stay with a large sensor then. If you can afford it, the Sony A7 III is an excellent choice, otherwise, take a look at the Fujifilm X images and see if they're good enough for you. PS - if you end up ordering it online, please do consider going through my links here or at cameralabs.com thanks!

@@cameralabs will do. thanks!

Yes, there's visible skewing if you pan quickly using the electronic shutter.

Thanks, that might limit the usability of the 20fps mode for some action/wildlife shots....

True, but you still have 9fps with CAF using the mechanical shutter. I also used the e shutter at 20fps lots for wildlife, albeit not zooming past me.

Mario, I receive hundreds of questions a day, I can't answer all of them! Maybe mft owners feel they have something to prove. I certainly like showing you can get great results from smaller sensor systems and also don't need to post-process all the time. Conversely, maybe larger sensor owners don't feel they have anything to prove?

Gordon Laing gr8 & thank you!👍

I'd say one of the main reasons there's relatively little fanfare for APSC is that most of the manufacturers that make APSC cameras (bar Fujifilm) also make full frame, so the latest, greatest model from Sony/Canon/Nikon is going to be full frame, even if they've also got some great APSC cameras to offer. Whereas Panasonic and Olympus are able to throw their full weight behind micro four thirds. Most high-end Sony/Canon/Nikon glass is designed for full frame cameras - sure, you can whack it on an APSC body, but then there's no advantage to having the smaller sensor, whereas micro four thirds lenses fully take advantage of having a smaller sensor by creating smaller, lighter lenses. As I say, Fuji is the notable exception in the APSC world, in that they don't don't make cameras with FF sensors and as such their highly regarded lenses are less bulky than Sony/Canon/Nikon's offerings. As far as I can see, there is a lot of love for Fuji in the photography world at the moment it's just that no one's talking about how they love their crop sensor Fuji, they just love their Fuji, which happens to have an crop sensor.

Thank you for such a detailed answer.

If you look the yearly shareholder financial documents from Canon and Nikon (and Sony), you will find a very interesting things. Example, from all the ILC that Canon sells, less than 15% of them are with FF sensor! More than 85% of the all ILC that Canon sells, are APS-C! Nikon... IIRC it was less than 10% and Sony was as well around 20% of them all! The FF from all three major ILC manufacturers doesn't sell FF bodies at all as much as you see people to admire and claim to be so amazing! The ILC bread and butter is in their APS-C catalog! And their catalogs for that format are terrible! Canon and Nikon are still like you should just invest to FF if you want lenses. Sony is same! The whole FF is so hyped that it is just crazy. And then comes the cold hard facts, that clear majority of the people (like >95% of the camera owners) doesn't require anything better than what a 1" sensor can capture in the last 3-4 years! The APS-C is very much looked down by Canon, Nikon and Sony. That is why you see that people are experiencing the feeling that "crop format" is bad, because APS-C is the crop format only by those manufacturers! The 4/3" sensor is FULL FRAME, as it is designed from scratch by Olympus and KODAK to match all the quality requirements of majority of the professionals, in majority of the work they need to do from large printing to high ISO work. That is huge difference as Olympus cut off all the legacy to previous 135 film format, that was bread and butter for Canon and Nikon. Olympus knew what are requirements for the camera handling, what are the requirements for optics, shutter speed, depth of field in the whole photography business! And then they combined their knowledge with the KODAK knowledge about image quality requirements! KODAK, the world #1 film and paper manufacturer, that basically knew everything about photography image quality requirements by their statics and sales and what films and papers, chemicals etc were required. And they told to Olympus that what is the quality that >90% of the photographers needs. And combining these two companies knowledge about requirements, Olympus designed the ultimate format based the advancements done in electronics and software technologies, that what kind improvements can be done there to image. And at the moment, 4/3" format is the ultimate, best of the best format and system (mount) if someone wants to get a camera that is powerful, capable, small and light and delivers higher image quality than is required by most people in most critical work. As the whole meaning of the photography is that you have fun to do it, and you have your camera gear with you! And that means, you have more than a single body and single lens with you, so you have like one body and three lenses with you. Or two bodies and three lenses. That is why the weight and size matters a lot even in the size and weight of bodies and lenses like G9 and E-M1 II with their best "PRO lenses" as they are still smaller and lighter to carry and have, and cost less, than anything close to identical IQ delivery that APS-C or FF formats can deliver. Ie, when one goes to safari as professional, then you have 2-3 bodies, you have 4-5 lenses, 1-2 flashes, all batteries and cards and laptop etc. How much it cost to buy those, how much it weights to carry all those, and how much it takes space to have those with you (airport luggage, taxes, traveling on streets, in car etc). The admiration comes that the m4/3 system delivers more than needed when it comes to image quality and video capabilities. The system allows you to build a camera that is fun to use an that is flexible and beautiful. And at any point you do not feel from none of the m4/3 main manufacturers (Olympus and Panasonic) to even hint "Pay more to carry more, if you would later want to upgrade to this better model... Hint hint..." And they don't leave a doubt to customer mind that they bought a inferior format. But you will hear that alot from the community, admiring the Canon/Nikon/Sony FF as they are golden standard and would be better. While once you start to place the photographs to the real context like you start doing huge 30" prints few times a year and usually just 14-18" prints, you will notice that even at 30" you don't see inferior quality with 4/3" format. ISO 6400-12800 looks great! And how long did many work just with ISO 100-400 film? Yeah... Capturing all the historical moments, wildlife documents etc. So only the FF fanboys and dreamers are talking down everything that there is below the FF, and even above the FF (as medium format is "nothing") that is just silently passed if possible. So even when you go to buy a totally capable APS-C sensor body, sooner than you manage to say it, someone comes and say "You should have gone to FF if you now are starting"... Instead "Hey, great choice!".

Do you mean only working in daytime? No.

Cool Gordon thank you, I am seriously looking at this camera just to play with the 8-18 lens on. I shoot Nikon you know?

The 8-18mm is one of my favourite lenses, but for Nikon, you still have the 14-24mm, plus of course the latest Sigma ART options.

Hi Jack, yes the bit rates are lower on the G9, but are they good enough for you? What did you think of my slow mo footage in this part of the review? I'll add links to my review at cameralabs.com so you can download the original files and check them out for your own evaluation.

PS - here's a couple of 1080 / 180p: vimeo.com/248311014 and vimeo.com/248305059

Did you also compare the 180fps of the GH5 with the one of the G9? Most reviewers came to the conclusion that the 180fps on the GH5 looks bad and should be avoided, that's why I am wondering if it has improved with the G9. 120fps would be enough but unfortunately the G9 doesn't shoot at that rate (for whatever reason).

I haven't compared them side by side, but feel free to download my clips from both cameras and tell us what you think!

It's all about expectations. if your limit is 3200 ISO on a 6D, then I'd say you wouldn't want to use this much beyond 800 ISO. But download some of my sample images at cameralabs.com to see what you think.

Thank you! I was expecting about two stops difference! I could compensate the exposure with wide aperture lenses, like Panasonic 42.5mm f/1.2 but it's a rather expensive lens.

drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B1jaAaFJGQXHYmJDekpLamFYYkU

drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B1jaAaFJGQXHSzVsWUxnSnVET00

Not that long yet, no, but I plan to the next time I get hold of the body to complete my review at cameralabs.com. Have you heard anything good or bad in this regard? It's the GH5 sensor though, so the performance should be similar.

thank you for the reply Gordon!!! I haven't tried it but I'm interested in buying a G9. LE performance would be a deal breaker for me, but i really haven't been able to find much on online in regards to LE and the G9. thank you ill have a looky look into the GH5 as guild.

I just checked my GH5 review and the longest I tried was only 60 seconds, sorry! I generally don't do more than 4 minutes though as I use LE for landscape, not astro. I will try the G9 for a few minutes next time I have one available.

thanks Gordon ill be keeping an eye out for sure!

Hi Josh, I made some 4 minute exposures with the G9 last week and added them to my review at cameralabs.com

Tough choice. Both shoot great stills and video. I'd decide based on the choice of lenses and the physical form factor. For example the G9 feels better, but is noticeably larger which may be a pro or con for you. Micro Four Thirds also has a way broader selection of native lenses than Sony's APSC mirrorless, so I think you have more opportunity to grow without having an eye on full-frame in the future.

Gordon Laing Thanks! What are your thoughts on FE 90 mm F2.8 Macro G OSS vs. Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8?

The Leica 45mm macro is an older model, so i wouldn't recommend it now. i'd suggest either the Lumix 30mm or Olympus 60mm for a macro on MFT. The Sony FE 90mm is a superb lens (I'll wager superior to those others I mentioned), but it's going to be much more expensive, plus much longer too. Remember the 1.5x field reduction on the A6500 vs the 2x field reduction on the MFT bodies. You'll be quite far from the subject with the Sony 90mm, but maybe that's what you want.

PS - if you end up ordering online, please go through my links at cameralabs.com!, or I could generate one for you here!

Gordon Laing Thanks! Could you generate a link for each one of them?

There's a lot of benefits to the G9 over the G80 / G85, but I'd say most are focused around being able to shoot very quickly. so if that's not a priority to you, I'd consider your options carefully.

Great review, thank you. I love this camera, and the Olympus EM1ii but as a landscape photographer, taking one image at a time, in daylight at low iso, these cameras are overkill for me, a lot of money for features I don't need. I'm actually disappointed that I am better off with a boring Canon 80D.

thanks gordon - could you just elucidate what you think those main benefits are over and above those focused on speed ?

If the sensor was bigger it would require a new lens system.

They should do that as well... Every other manufacture has multiple lens systems now.. Fuji has a Medium format?? How much demand is there for that? M43 for travel, full frame for top performance... easy!

I think the Fuji medium format is a pretty niche product!

Exactly yet it still got developed and made. People like using Panasonic's and they don't mind using big lenses like the M43 F1.2 primes and 3rd party Speed boosters ect, Just cut out the middle man and make a high end Full frame or APSC as well

The full frame market looks pretty saturated with Canon, Nikon and Sony. These small sensors look like a disadvantage for you but for video it doesn't matter and look at the improvement in a few years : who knows 5-10 years from now what can Panasonic can achieve in term of image processing ? maybe on the long run it will be the good way to go.

These are recorded as skype conversations over the internet using the built in camera on the laptop. It's meant mainly for a podcast. I think the sound is ok for an internet phone call, but yes, the video is never going to be great on a skype call. He's in the US, I'm in the UK.

So yes, a MacBook Pro-tato.