The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
The GX7 Thread - Images and Observations
- Thread starter Matix
- Start date
That's exactly why I'm waiting to the GX7 since long time! Globaly I liked the E-P2, the design, the ergonomy, the results… but a viewfinder in the corner terribly missed me (because I like to shoot with my two eyes wide open, as I always did with my beloved R-D1 or my M2).
So I sold the E-P2 because of that bulky viewfinder.
WOAW, THAT'S THE IDEA! THANKS!
I'm an idiot, but I didn't know there's sticky soft releases!
So I may consider buying a GX7! IT'S GREAT!
In my case I clearly prefer the convex soft releases, and I only saw concave ones on the bay; but never mind, I think it's easy to make one by myself with a gently adapted piece of plastic or rubber and a part of 3M double tape.
About the thumb grip : You're right, it's very useful on the cameras, in order to free the left hand for focusing on manual lenses… and in the case of the GX7 the hot shoe is too far for using a chinese thumb-up.
Maybe the solution is a DIY thumb-up, as I did on my EP2?
Please look at the pictures below (from my Flickr) :
Get two or more photographers talking about a camera and get none will necessarily agree. What I hate you will love ...
There isn't a right camera for everyone although there is certainly a right camera for me, the only thing is I'm not sure which one it is!
I've been looking for a CFC to replace my NEX7 (can't wait until Sony eventually produce the range of lenses I actually want ... a few of us have no doubt been there!), so I've been considering the Panny GX7, the Fuji XE-1 (or 2) and the OMD-EM1.
Each camera has it's strengths and weaknesses in my opinion and I think that I'm quite torn between these cameras.
I have no interest in video whatsoever.
I tend to take considered (slow) pictures and do not do any form of action but do like available light/candid work.
Image quality has to be the number one consideration and in that respect all three are good enough with their respective strengths and weaknesses ironed out by shooting RAW (my usual practice).
One negative factor for the GX7 and EM1 is the smaller sensor. From my observations from processing RAW images from each camera, they are about 2 stops more grainy (iso 1600 on the XE1 being as grainy as iso 400 on the mft sensors (imo!)), that said I still got some very acceptable results at iso 1600 from the GX7. Without angrily jumping to the defense of your particular camera (please), do you have any comments that might reassure me on this? Grain is a bit of a killer for me.
I know that AF speed with the XE-1 isn't on a par with the GX7/EM1 but I think it is similar to the NEX7, so it's not an issue for me.
When processing the RAW image files from the XE-1, the EM1 and GX7 I noticed that the XE-1 needed less sharpening and when sharpened to the same amount the XE-1 files looked better than the GX7/EM1 versions which looked a little over-sharpened in comparison. I may well have been working on a duff bunch of RAW files (not taken by me incidentally), who knows? My question is, compared to using larger sensors (which many of you will have in the form of APSC cameras), do you feel the small sensor images look as good when printed?
Now I'm not trying to start a punch-up here! Just asking for any pertinent observations from those who have had use of both APSC and MFT sensors and in particular any users of the XE-1 who have rejected the MFT to find out why.
There isn't a right camera for everyone although there is certainly a right camera for me, the only thing is I'm not sure which one it is!
I've been looking for a CFC to replace my NEX7 (can't wait until Sony eventually produce the range of lenses I actually want ... a few of us have no doubt been there!), so I've been considering the Panny GX7, the Fuji XE-1 (or 2) and the OMD-EM1.
Each camera has it's strengths and weaknesses in my opinion and I think that I'm quite torn between these cameras.
I have no interest in video whatsoever.
I tend to take considered (slow) pictures and do not do any form of action but do like available light/candid work.
Image quality has to be the number one consideration and in that respect all three are good enough with their respective strengths and weaknesses ironed out by shooting RAW (my usual practice).
One negative factor for the GX7 and EM1 is the smaller sensor. From my observations from processing RAW images from each camera, they are about 2 stops more grainy (iso 1600 on the XE1 being as grainy as iso 400 on the mft sensors (imo!)), that said I still got some very acceptable results at iso 1600 from the GX7. Without angrily jumping to the defense of your particular camera (please), do you have any comments that might reassure me on this? Grain is a bit of a killer for me.
I know that AF speed with the XE-1 isn't on a par with the GX7/EM1 but I think it is similar to the NEX7, so it's not an issue for me.
When processing the RAW image files from the XE-1, the EM1 and GX7 I noticed that the XE-1 needed less sharpening and when sharpened to the same amount the XE-1 files looked better than the GX7/EM1 versions which looked a little over-sharpened in comparison. I may well have been working on a duff bunch of RAW files (not taken by me incidentally), who knows? My question is, compared to using larger sensors (which many of you will have in the form of APSC cameras), do you feel the small sensor images look as good when printed?
Now I'm not trying to start a punch-up here! Just asking for any pertinent observations from those who have had use of both APSC and MFT sensors and in particular any users of the XE-1 who have rejected the MFT to find out why.
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
It depends on how little available light you are aiming for. XE-1/2 with Fuji's trio of fast primes would be ideal for that of course, unless you want to go all manual with Voigtlander's f/0.95 lenses and m4/3. In that case, I would go with the E-M1 with superior IBIS and very good low light capabilities.
When that is said, I shoot my GH3 at ISO 6400 without hesitation, particularly if b&w is the purpose. But then, I actually consider grain a natural component of a photographic image
When that is said, I shoot my GH3 at ISO 6400 without hesitation, particularly if b&w is the purpose. But then, I actually consider grain a natural component of a photographic image
ptomsu
Workshop Member
Agree with most said about m43 versus Fuji. Only thing I really need to add is that the XE2 now also has really acceptable AF for me (speed, low light) and thus does away with the crippled AF from XE1 and XPro1.
In the Leica 3 leaflet, so years ago it was, they explained, to my point of view, an excellent way to get steady, I didn't find better since. This of course works for cameras with VF but I guess you can adapt it if framing with back screen.Not necessary, Tom Abrahamsson did it for me
On this one he's using a "softie", but I use the same technic without soft release on my Epson R-D1 which have a bulky release button and it's the best "in(human)body stab" I know.
Here it goes, it all stands in the setting of the strap.
The palm of your hand being up, place in the strap.
Fold your arm and set the strap for the top plate of camera to be just under your elbow.
Now, your arm and your head must pass thru the strap.
In this position, when you bring the camera to your eye level, the strap is so tight you just can't have any shaky mouvement.
Simple and terribly efficient !
kit laughlin
Subscriber Member
Like a great many here, I have been looking at the Sony A7 bodies, but for much of the work I do, I find the shutter sound a bit too loud. I love the images from the cameras. But if I want a be-with-me-everywhere camera for stills only, then IQ and ergonomics (and framing experience through an EVF) is the major part of the equation for me.
After spending a day or so on the net (on holidays; what a rush), I did a feature-by-feature comparison of a used X-Pro1, used X-E1 and a new X-E2. Used prices on the X-Pro 1 are ~$750 or so, s steal IMHO.
I used to have an X-E1, and the XF 18, 35, and 60 lenses. I found the camera to be very good, on the whole, but not really compact (as is a GX-7 with the 20/1.7, for example, or the CV 35/2.5 that is sitting on it now). "Compact' for me is about shape in the bag (so this aspect 100% rules out an external finder) and I must have a finder.
The X-E1 I used to have was before the firmware updates—by all reports, the last update has provided significantly faster AF on both the X-Pro1 and the X-E1. I will report back once I have taken camera and lens out for a street 'spin'.
I bought a black X-E1 in perfect condition for $350. I intend to buy an XF 27/2.8 pancake (favourite focal length). I have a bunch of CV and OM lenses that will work via adapters if I want to go that way. The APS-C sensor size is a bit better crop-factor wise than the µ4/3rds one. I do now know how the CV 12/5.6 will work on it, but I intend to find out.
The final part of this equation is Raw processing—and (again, from what I can read on the net) Iridient Technology's processor does a stellar job on X-Trans files, and it's $75. We all know that the jpegs out of the Fujis are great, but a particular image might need more PP, so this looks like an excellent place to start.
I bought the X-E1 rather than the X-E2, simply because for what I do, any AF difference will not be significant. The video differences are irrelevant, as I have this aspect covered with the GX7. And I intend to use just the one lens on the X-E1 for now. I will probably sell one of the GX-7 bodies (I have another Panny body that does excellent video, the $175 GX-1, and do not need three video cameras). And I will cull the Panny lens collection too, as well as the too-heavy but brilliant OM 50/2 macro. For example, I have the also excellent OM 50/3,5 macro, so will sell the Panny Leica 45/2.8 macro; with the OMs, I have never used it. I will keep the 20/1.7, as it's a stellar lens for stills and/or video, for my use (I alway shoot second system sound).
No, the X-E1, at today's disposable prices, seems like the best stills camera for me, with the 41mm EFOV native lens. We'll see.
After spending a day or so on the net (on holidays; what a rush), I did a feature-by-feature comparison of a used X-Pro1, used X-E1 and a new X-E2. Used prices on the X-Pro 1 are ~$750 or so, s steal IMHO.
I used to have an X-E1, and the XF 18, 35, and 60 lenses. I found the camera to be very good, on the whole, but not really compact (as is a GX-7 with the 20/1.7, for example, or the CV 35/2.5 that is sitting on it now). "Compact' for me is about shape in the bag (so this aspect 100% rules out an external finder) and I must have a finder.
The X-E1 I used to have was before the firmware updates—by all reports, the last update has provided significantly faster AF on both the X-Pro1 and the X-E1. I will report back once I have taken camera and lens out for a street 'spin'.
I bought a black X-E1 in perfect condition for $350. I intend to buy an XF 27/2.8 pancake (favourite focal length). I have a bunch of CV and OM lenses that will work via adapters if I want to go that way. The APS-C sensor size is a bit better crop-factor wise than the µ4/3rds one. I do now know how the CV 12/5.6 will work on it, but I intend to find out.
The final part of this equation is Raw processing—and (again, from what I can read on the net) Iridient Technology's processor does a stellar job on X-Trans files, and it's $75. We all know that the jpegs out of the Fujis are great, but a particular image might need more PP, so this looks like an excellent place to start.
I bought the X-E1 rather than the X-E2, simply because for what I do, any AF difference will not be significant. The video differences are irrelevant, as I have this aspect covered with the GX7. And I intend to use just the one lens on the X-E1 for now. I will probably sell one of the GX-7 bodies (I have another Panny body that does excellent video, the $175 GX-1, and do not need three video cameras). And I will cull the Panny lens collection too, as well as the too-heavy but brilliant OM 50/2 macro. For example, I have the also excellent OM 50/3,5 macro, so will sell the Panny Leica 45/2.8 macro; with the OMs, I have never used it. I will keep the 20/1.7, as it's a stellar lens for stills and/or video, for my use (I alway shoot second system sound).
No, the X-E1, at today's disposable prices, seems like the best stills camera for me, with the 41mm EFOV native lens. We'll see.
Well, the decision's made. I'm going for an XE-1, which on balance is probably the best option for me.
A MFT like the GX7 is still very appealing and perhaps one day I will have both but my conscience probably won't let me (she wants a dishwasher...).
So glad to have benefited from all of your help, it's been great to benefit from your thoughts.
A MFT like the GX7 is still very appealing and perhaps one day I will have both but my conscience probably won't let me (she wants a dishwasher...).
So glad to have benefited from all of your help, it's been great to benefit from your thoughts.
kit laughlin
Subscriber Member
woodworth, I will be very interested in your responses to this body and although this is an 'outdated, superseded' body, perhaps we can share setup tips, etc; mine will arrive within ten days or so, I think. Make sure yours is updated to the latest firmware (XF lenses need to be updated after the body, I understand.
Elliot
Active member
I haven't seen anything about the GX7 recently, so thought I would post something. This vase is by a window and shows really different colors on different days and time of day. I tried the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 today.
View attachment 79802
I am considering the Fuji X-E1, since I have read so much about the Fuji colors, etc. But this little camera does quite well.
View attachment 79802
I am considering the Fuji X-E1, since I have read so much about the Fuji colors, etc. But this little camera does quite well.
Matix
Member
Interesting vase for sure Elliot. Yes, the GX7 is a heck of a camera... just got back a couple of weeks ago from China and the UK. The Gx7 and GH3 were my companions, both on sling straps loaded with the lenses for the day.
I used the 20mm 1.7 and 7-14mm Lumix on the GX7 most of the time, and the 12-35mm on the GH3. The combination was fantastic, but the GX7 took most of the shots.
Here are a few samples from the GX7, all hand held JPG out of camera.
Canton Tower, formerly known as Guangzhou TV Astronomical and Sightseeing Tower and also known as Guangzhou Tower, is a 600m, 1,969 ft tall multi-purpose observation tower in the Haizhu District of Guangzhou, Guangdong, China. In the evening it is part of the Pearl River Light Show.
GX7 ISO 3200, 1/6 Sec f2.8 12mm Taken from a moving boat!!
GX7 ISO 1600, 1/60 Sec, f2.8, 32mm
GX7 ISO 200, 1/400 sec, f8, 11mm
GX7 ISO 3200. 1/40 Sec, f1.7, 17mm
GX7 ISO 200, 1/500 Sec, f8. 7mm
And just for fun, a 180 degree, overhead pano with the GX7 and 7-14mm, out of camera JPG.
In this fun why not shot, one can view both stained glass windows, the one behind me, and the one at the other end of the cathedral.
The GX7 is a fun all round camera for travel, and found it to be a very worth while tool and equal to any task I put to it.
Phil
nostatic
New member
Can anyone confirm the max iso when shooting in silent mode? On the GH3 it is 1600. Rumor has it that the GX7 is higher (3200?). Last week I was reminded that there are times when I need as little sound as possible (was shooting a video crew documenting one of our projects) but also need high iso.
Matix
Member
The GX7 will shoot up to 3200 ISO in Silent Mode... I have used S.M. a few times but due to other limitations it is not set to ON very oftern...
Phil
Matix
Member
Thanks Elliot, The Old Bell is in Malmesbury, south west UK, north of Bath. Great place to visit.
Link to the China Pics here... travel pics, not necessariily pro captures..
We stayed in the Sofitel in Guangzhou, superb 6 star hotel.. around $200 AUD a night, including guest bar, wine, food bar... very good deal.
Phil
I recent purchased a RX1 and I am blown away that I can get decent shots shot at ISO 6400 and passable shots at 12800 which allows me to shoot in dark restaurants and inside without a flash. However that is my carry with me camera and my main camera is a Panasonic G5 and I am considering upgrading to a GX7.
I noted in this this thread that the GX7 can produce photos with good IQ up to ISO 3200. I am considering getting the slow 100-300 lenses and it will probably be necessary to use high ISO's so the shutter speed is high enough to get sharp, movement free photos shooting with the lens extended.
What are the results when shooting at ISO 6400 and 12800 with the GX7??
If I upgrade from G5 to the GX7, will there may be a noticable improvement in shooting at higher ISO's?
I noted in this this thread that the GX7 can produce photos with good IQ up to ISO 3200. I am considering getting the slow 100-300 lenses and it will probably be necessary to use high ISO's so the shutter speed is high enough to get sharp, movement free photos shooting with the lens extended.
What are the results when shooting at ISO 6400 and 12800 with the GX7??
If I upgrade from G5 to the GX7, will there may be a noticable improvement in shooting at higher ISO's?
Matix
Member
Hi Howard, I find the noise not a problem at all, while I rarely shoot at 12,800 the noise is very grainy and cleans up well with ACDSee Pro 7 or Capture One 7 if it is a really important shot.
Here are 3 shots today with the 100-300mm at the 3 ISO settings you mention, 3200, 6400 and 12,800, plus one from the Gx7 at 25,600
First 3 with the GH3, second with the GX7
Hope they help your decision.
Phil
GH3
GH3, f/6.3 @ 275 mm, 1/1000, ISO 3200,
DMC-GH3, f/7.1 @ 275 mm, 1/1600, ISO 6400,
DMC-GH3, f/9 @ 275 mm, 1/2000, ISO 12800, No Flash,
GX7
GX7, f/10 @ 275 mm, 1/2500, ISO 3200, No Flash
GX7, f/10 @ 275 mm, 1/3200, ISO 6400, No Flash
GX7, f/10 @ 275 mm, 1/5000, ISO 12800, No Flash
GX7, f/13 @ 275 mm, 1/6400, ISO 25600, No Flash
Matix
Member
No problem Howard, they were just out of camera JPG, not the best of several, just 3 from the GH3 and 4 from the GX7, focus did not look too great on a couple, but you get the idea.. I have no reservations about using 6400 in a pinch, they clean up fine.
Phil