A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Panasonic GX9 - FAIL (a cheapened GX8)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 14th 18, 06:47 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default Panasonic GX9 - FAIL (a cheapened GX8)

On 2018-02-14 03:39:42 +0000, RichA said:

I had the GX8. It's stabilization for non-stabilized Panasonic lenses
was poor, way below that of my Olympus. But the EVF was superb like
looking out a window. So they "updated" it with the GX9. What did
they do? Dropped the price $200. Cut out weather resistance. The EVF
isn't as good. The stabilization was upgraded to 5-axis. But what a
let-down. They've essentially dropped the camera into the lower class
tier. This was the only non-DSLR-styled body that was in a high tier
as the Gx8. There were changes to video, but I'm not concerned about
that.


I still think that those tiny sensors makes mFT fraudulent...
--
teleportation kills

  #2  
Old February 15th 18, 05:57 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default Panasonic GX9 - FAIL (a cheapened GX8)

On 2018-02-15 04:29:48 +0000, RichA said:

On Wednesday, 14 February 2018 00:47:15 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-14 03:39:42 +0000, RichA said:

I had the GX8. It's stabilization for non-stabilized Panasonic lenses
was poor, way below that of my Olympus. But the EVF was superb like
looking out a window. So they "updated" it with the GX9. What did
they do? Dropped the price $200. Cut out weather resistance. The EVF
isn't as good. The stabilization was upgraded to 5-axis. But what a
let-down. They've essentially dropped the camera into the lower class
tier. This was the only non-DSLR-styled body that was in a high tier
as the Gx8. There were changes to video, but I'm not concerned about
that.


I still think that those tiny sensors makes mFT fraudulent...
--
teleportation kills


Spare me. If you can't take a decent picture with one, the fault lies
with you.


No, I won't spare you 'cause you are dooomed! Besides the ugly look of
mFT and FT photos because of the small format itself they just don't
produce good files since the sensors are tooo small to gather photons
properly compared to larger sensor with similar tech... :-ppp
--
teleportation kills

  #3  
Old February 16th 18, 01:03 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 91
Default Panasonic GX9 - FAIL (a cheapened GX8)

On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 06:47:10 +0100, android wrote:

On 2018-02-14 03:39:42 +0000, RichA said:

I had the GX8. It's stabilization for non-stabilized Panasonic lenses
was poor, way below that of my Olympus. But the EVF was superb like
looking out a window. So they "updated" it with the GX9. What did
they do? Dropped the price $200. Cut out weather resistance. The EVF
isn't as good. The stabilization was upgraded to 5-axis. But what a
let-down. They've essentially dropped the camera into the lower class
tier. This was the only non-DSLR-styled body that was in a high tier
as the Gx8. There were changes to video, but I'm not concerned about
that.


I still think that those tiny sensors makes mFT fraudulent...


....troll...
  #4  
Old February 16th 18, 06:56 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default Panasonic GX9 - FAIL (a cheapened GX8)

On 2018-02-16 00:51:52 +0000, RichA said:

On Wednesday, 14 February 2018 23:57:37 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-15 04:29:48 +0000, RichA said:

On Wednesday, 14 February 2018 00:47:15 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-14 03:39:42 +0000, RichA said:

I had the GX8. It's stabilization for non-stabilized Panasonic lenses
was poor, way below that of my Olympus. But the EVF was superb like
looking out a window. So they "updated" it with the GX9. What did
they do? Dropped the price $200. Cut out weather resistance. The EVF
isn't as good. The stabilization was upgraded to 5-axis. But what a
let-down. They've essentially dropped the camera into the lower class
tier. This was the only non-DSLR-styled body that was in a high tier
as the Gx8. There were changes to video, but I'm not concerned about
that.

I still think that those tiny sensors makes mFT fraudulent...
--
teleportation kills

Spare me. If you can't take a decent picture with one, the fault lies
with you.


No, I won't spare you 'cause you are dooomed! Besides the ugly look of
mFT and FT photos because of the small format itself they just don't
produce good files since the sensors are tooo small to gather photons
properly compared to larger sensor with similar tech... :-ppp
--
teleportation kills


Put up, or...


You can go to the gallery on my blog to compare pictures captures where
FT, APS-C, APS-H and 35mm FF is used... And an Xperia smartphone...
Unfortunately the negs from my 6x6 Zeiss Nettar seem to have got lost
somehow and all i have is a couple of prints. I might post scans on the
blog at a later date. This link takes you to the Gallery:

https://wp.me/P3strj-2m
--
teleportation kills

  #5  
Old February 17th 18, 05:43 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default Panasonic GX9 - FAIL (a cheapened GX8)

On 2018-02-17 01:38:35 +0000, RichA said:

On Friday, 16 February 2018 00:56:47 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-16 00:51:52 +0000, RichA said:

On Wednesday, 14 February 2018 23:57:37 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-15 04:29:48 +0000, RichA said:

On Wednesday, 14 February 2018 00:47:15 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-14 03:39:42 +0000, RichA said:

I had the GX8. It's stabilization for non-stabilized Panasonic lenses
was poor, way below that of my Olympus. But the EVF was superb like
looking out a window. So they "updated" it with the GX9. What did
they do? Dropped the price $200. Cut out weather resistance. The EVF
isn't as good. The stabilization was upgraded to 5-axis. But what a
let-down. They've essentially dropped the camera into the lower class
tier. This was the only non-DSLR-styled body that was in a high tier
as the Gx8. There were changes to video, but I'm not concerned about
that.

I still think that those tiny sensors makes mFT fraudulent...
--
teleportation kills

Spare me. If you can't take a decent picture with one, the fault lies
with you.

No, I won't spare you 'cause you are dooomed! Besides the ugly look of
mFT and FT photos because of the small format itself they just don't
produce good files since the sensors are tooo small to gather photons
properly compared to larger sensor with similar tech... :-ppp
--
teleportation kills

Put up, or...


You can go to the gallery on my blog to compare pictures captures where
FT, APS-C, APS-H and 35mm FF is used... And an Xperia smartphone...
Unfortunately the negs from my 6x6 Zeiss Nettar seem to have got lost
somehow and all i have is a couple of prints. I might post scans on the
blog at a later date. This link takes you to the Gallery:

https://wp.me/P3strj-2m
--
teleportation kills


Some interesting shots, but none really illustrates superiority to m4/3rds.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/159650750


Nice figurin but I think that you should go bigger in sensor size!

mFT and FT sensors are the same. The tiny sensors takes the umph out of
the captures. An EOS-M is as compact as a mFT cam and has almost twice
the umph! Smartphones are the way to go on the go!
:-ppp
--
teleportation kills

  #6  
Old February 18th 18, 06:46 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default Panasonic GX9 - FAIL (a cheapened GX8)

On 2018-02-18 04:00:19 +0000, RichA said:

On Saturday, 17 February 2018 11:43:14 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-17 01:38:35 +0000, RichA said:

On Friday, 16 February 2018 00:56:47 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-16 00:51:52 +0000, RichA said:

On Wednesday, 14 February 2018 23:57:37 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-15 04:29:48 +0000, RichA said:

On Wednesday, 14 February 2018 00:47:15 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-14 03:39:42 +0000, RichA said:

I had the GX8. It's stabilization for non-stabilized Panasonic lenses
was poor, way below that of my Olympus. But the EVF was superb like
looking out a window. So they "updated" it with the GX9. What did
they do? Dropped the price $200. Cut out weather resistance. The EVF
isn't as good. The stabilization was upgraded to 5-axis. But what a
let-down. They've essentially dropped the camera into the lower class
tier. This was the only non-DSLR-styled body that was in a high tier
as the Gx8. There were changes to video, but I'm not concerned about
that.

I still think that those tiny sensors makes mFT fraudulent...
--
teleportation kills

Spare me. If you can't take a decent picture with one, the fault lies
with you.

No, I won't spare you 'cause you are dooomed! Besides the ugly look of
mFT and FT photos because of the small format itself they just don't
produce good files since the sensors are tooo small to gather photons
properly compared to larger sensor with similar tech... :-ppp
--
teleportation kills

Put up, or...

You can go to the gallery on my blog to compare pictures captures where
FT, APS-C, APS-H and 35mm FF is used... And an Xperia smartphone...
Unfortunately the negs from my 6x6 Zeiss Nettar seem to have got lost
somehow and all i have is a couple of prints. I might post scans on the
blog at a later date. This link takes you to the Gallery:

https://wp.me/P3strj-2m
--
teleportation kills

Some interesting shots, but none really illustrates superiority to m4/3rds.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/159650750


Nice figurin but I think that you should go bigger in sensor size!

mFT and FT sensors are the same. The tiny sensors takes the umph out of
the captures. An EOS-M is as compact as a mFT cam and has almost twice
the umph! Smartphones are the way to go on the go!
:-ppp
--
teleportation kills


Why stop there? Maybe medium format should be the minimum size acceptable?


You can use mFT as much as you like but call it cost effective is a
lie. I have a Zeiss Nettar that I experimented back in senior high
wanted the portability of 35mm and ended up replacing my OM1 with a
Leica CL and a Rollie 35 on the side... That said: The 6x6 Nettar negs
was really good but it was not a pro grade cam.

It's more to this than DOF. The larger systems gives you more
mechanical stability in the gear and the sensors get less relative
variation in pixel patterns with deeper wheals that gives you more
continuity in the gain readout.

Here's a cute DOF simulator though:

https://dofsimulator.net/en/
--
teleportation kills

  #7  
Old February 18th 18, 10:01 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default Panasonic GX9 - FAIL (a cheapened GX8)

On 2018-02-18 08:30:49 +0000, RichA said:

On Sunday, 18 February 2018 00:46:36 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-18 04:00:19 +0000, RichA said:

On Saturday, 17 February 2018 11:43:14 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-17 01:38:35 +0000, RichA said:

On Friday, 16 February 2018 00:56:47 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-16 00:51:52 +0000, RichA said:

On Wednesday, 14 February 2018 23:57:37 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-15 04:29:48 +0000, RichA said:

On Wednesday, 14 February 2018 00:47:15 UTC-5, android wrote:
On 2018-02-14 03:39:42 +0000, RichA said:

I had the GX8. It's stabilization for non-stabilized Panasonic lenses
was poor, way below that of my Olympus. But the EVF was superb like
looking out a window. So they "updated" it with the GX9. What did
they do? Dropped the price $200. Cut out weather resistance. The EVF
isn't as good. The stabilization was upgraded to 5-axis. But what a
let-down. They've essentially dropped the camera into the lower class
tier. This was the only non-DSLR-styled body that was in a high tier
as the Gx8. There were changes to video, but I'm not concerned about
that.

I still think that those tiny sensors makes mFT fraudulent...
--
teleportation kills

Spare me. If you can't take a decent picture with one, the fault lies
with you.

No, I won't spare you 'cause you are dooomed! Besides the ugly look of
mFT and FT photos because of the small format itself they just don't
produce good files since the sensors are tooo small to gather photons
properly compared to larger sensor with similar tech... :-ppp
--
teleportation kills

Put up, or...

You can go to the gallery on my blog to compare pictures captures where
FT, APS-C, APS-H and 35mm FF is used... And an Xperia smartphone...
Unfortunately the negs from my 6x6 Zeiss Nettar seem to have got lost
somehow and all i have is a couple of prints. I might post scans on the
blog at a later date. This link takes you to the Gallery:

https://wp.me/P3strj-2m
--
teleportation kills

Some interesting shots, but none really illustrates superiority to m4/3rds.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/159650750

Nice figurin but I think that you should go bigger in sensor size!

mFT and FT sensors are the same. The tiny sensors takes the umph out of
the captures. An EOS-M is as compact as a mFT cam and has almost twice
the umph! Smartphones are the way to go on the go!
:-ppp
--
teleportation kills

Why stop there? Maybe medium format should be the minimum size acceptable?


You can use mFT as much as you like but call it cost effective is a
lie. I have a Zeiss Nettar that I experimented back in senior high
wanted the portability of 35mm and ended up replacing my OM1 with a
Leica CL and a Rollie 35 on the side... That said: The 6x6 Nettar negs
was really good but it was not a pro grade cam.

It's more to this than DOF. The larger systems gives you more
mechanical stability in the gear and the sensors get less relative
variation in pixel patterns with deeper wheals that gives you more
continuity in the gain readout.

Here's a cute DOF simulator though:

https://dofsimulator.net/en/
--
teleportation kills


FF is a bigger commitment in $$$ and size and in most cases, the
amateur shooter simply doesn't need it or can even make profitable use
of what it is capable of. Also, it depends on the situation and
subject. I got better images using a m4/3rd and 400mm lens shooting
wildlife than a guy with a 24mp FF and 400mm lens because I could fill
much more of the frame with the subject. Meanwhile, compare the cost
difference of the systems, $3000 versus $8000. FF will produce the best
images, all things being equal, but it also demands a much greater
level of dedication. Most FF potential in amateur hands is wasted
because they don't put in the effort.


APS-C is better and generally more affordable with higher IQ than mFT.
For soo many reason mentioned in the above. FT/mFT have been obsolete
since it's introduction and is fraud IMO.

No one NEEDS an exchangeable lens camera, BTW...
--
teleportation kills

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why did Sony's FF A900/850 fail in the marketplace? Wolfgang Weisselberg Digital SLR Cameras 0 July 3rd 11 05:15 PM
Why did Sony's FF A900/850 fail in the marketplace? PeterN Digital Photography 2 June 24th 11 03:22 AM
Why did Sony's FF A900/850 fail in the marketplace? PeterN Digital SLR Cameras 2 June 24th 11 03:22 AM
OT - Supply side solution for oil energy bound to fail. Alan Browne 35mm Photo Equipment 28 May 3rd 06 01:46 AM
6 Sony Cameras fail manufacturing test..! Davy Digital Photography 10 March 26th 06 03:44 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.