"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread

Guys I need help. I'm using my new G5 now and having problems. It was sunny day today in London. We are on a trip here and when shooting photos in a direct sun main subjects look fine but the background is somehow overexposed, all too frealing bright. Cant see the freaking tower bridge in a back!
What is wrong?
It is set on awb, auto iso, multimetering. Besides all I see in vf or lcd is totally different than in reality, colors light etc...please help!
 
Last edited:
chphotos said:
You'll need to post a photo, with EXIF intact, so advice can be given.
Click to expand...

Can't do that:-( I'm on the trip with no access to pc...
 
I posted in the sports sub-forum, but I guess the people who hang out there aren't likely to be m4/3 people.

I took some photos of cricket a couple of days ago using my GF1 and an old MF Tokina 70-210mm zoom. I had to bin most of the shots, and wasn't especially happy with the ones I kept (although they grew on me once I stopped pixel-peeping). I shot most of them at 800 ISO, and really didn't like what the GF1 did with that.


P1060711 by Arfonfab, on Flickr

is the best one, I think. There's more in the set at http://www.flickr.com/photos/93569388@N08/sets/72157634894752848/

Does anyone have any experience with the 100-300 Panasonic f4-5.6? Would it be suitable for this sort of shot? (Also, nature?). I'm thinking with the OIS, I could drop down a stop of ISO or two, and be a lot happier with the shots, especially with a monopod.
 
phinix said:
Guys I need help. I'm using my new G5 now and having problems. It was sunny day today in London. We are on a trip here and when shooting photos in a direct sun main subjects look fine but the background is somehow overexposed, all too frealing bright. Cant see the freaking tower bridge in a back!
What is wrong?
It is set on awb, auto iso, multimetering. Besides all I see in vf or lcd is totally different than in reality, colors light etc...please help!
Click to expand...

I suppose the problem could be that the camera is metering mostly for a relatively dark subject and/or foreground and the brighter background is therefore blowing?

Look at the histogram and if you see the peaks disappearing off the right hand side that's your answer. The fix would be to change position so that the foreground and background are more evenly lit or dial in exposure compensation to keep the highlights and boost the shadows post capture.

Not sure why what the camera shows and reality are different though but if you're shooting with an AF lens unless you've activated "shutter effect" what you may be seeing is what the camera sees at the pre stop down aperture. As said above, would need to see the image and settings to be sure.

Perhaps it would be an idea to shoot with the histogram in view?
 
woof woof said:
I suppose the problem could be that the camera is metering mostly for a relatively dark subject and/or foreground and the brighter background is therefore blowing?

Look at the histogram and if you see the peaks disappearing off the right hand side that's your answer. The fix would be to change position so that the foreground and background are more evenly lit or dial in exposure compensation to keep the highlights and boost the shadows post capture.

Not sure why what the camera shows and reality are different though but if you're shooting with an AF lens unless you've activated "shutter effect" what you may be seeing is what the camera sees at the pre stop down aperture. As said above, would need to see the image and settings to be sure.

Perhaps it would be an idea to shoot with the histogram in view?
Click to expand...

Thanks Alan for your reply. Will try again today. This is first time I took this new cera out and this happenedExactly what you said, people-subjects were in the shadow of tower of london and the background was tower bridge in full sun. I asked you guys here cause thought it could be some camera setting. I will play with histogram today. It was set on multi metering so thought it will be ok. My GF1 never had this problem. Will report back tonight:)
 
phinix said:
... when shooting photos in a direct sun main subjects look fine but the background is somehow overexposed, all too frealing bright.
Click to expand...
Don't worry, unless you're using only Jpegs.
The RAW has loads of info up in the bright areas and a bit of "Auto" in ACR will bring it back.

Alternatively AELock on the backround and hold until you take the photo of the main subject. Sure, they'll be too dark but again, that's recoverable.
 
I have just been playing with the GX7 at work. Panasonic bought one in to show customers. all i'm going to say for now is....OMG
 
Last edited:
ShrubMonkey said:
This weekend I will break from the norm on this thread and actually take some shots with my G5 and post them in here :) anyone else going to join in?
Click to expand...

I decided to join in with this wacky plan... something different for me, so sky photos.

9433089843_d46f2e0d0f_b.jpg


9433065767_8e98858278_b.jpg


9433067725_f45d8b43ac_b.jpg
 
AndyWest said:
I have just been playing with the GX7 at work. Panasonic bought one if to show customers. all i'm going to say for now is....OMG
Click to expand...

Please Andy! You have to say more than that! If you aren't allowed to say more, how about whether or not it's preferable to the OMD and the E-P5? It does look tempting from what I've seen!
 
Thought I might take a couple of photos this weekend too



Cheers,

Simon.
 
AndyWest said:
I have just been playing with the GX7 at work. Panasonic bought one if to show customers. all i'm going to say for now is....OMG
Click to expand...

A quick question Andy. Does the rear thumb wheel still have the click twin function?
I understand if you are not able to say.
Thanks
 
Well now I have a little more time I can write a bit more. I didn't have too much time with it but what a solid, brilliant camera. Rear screen is superb, EVF is small, A bit too small for me, but very clear and good when panning. Can't seem to see the IS working but shots were crisp and clean so must be working. High ISO images are superb. At ISO 6400 the fils we took in a dark cupboard were really really good. At top ISO of 25600 or whatever it is the files are kinda still usable and really good. It feels really nice in the hand, a bit heavy even with the 20mm on it but feels awesome build quality. this is one GREAT camera. The on screen curves and a nice touch and work quite well.

I'm sure the images will look really good as they looked superb on the rear screen. I know images on the rear screen mean nothing but you just kinda know they are going to be good!

Matt B, Not sure, I can't really remember about the rear thumb wheel. Sorry

It should be in store @ Park Cameras next weekend if anyone wants to have a look.
 
Last edited:
So I went to the seaside yesterday and played with my Tokina 35-200 on my G1.

Now, other than a sneaking suspicion that the adapter I have doesn't focus to infinity, and the fact that my aperture lever is held in place with blu-tack, is it unreasonable to write this lens off as crap? There seems to be some kind of grain to the photo which isn't ISO noise, and everything's a bit blurry (but maybe that's due to the adapter not letting me focus to infinity).

https://secure.flickr.com/photos/joeofloath/9445119532/
 
Joe there isn't much that looks sharp, so can't know if its just the expected fairly low quality of a cheap zoom from the film era (generalising here) or your infinity problem.

I watched Twist's link of the boring German guy going on interminably about the GX7 : which made it a comprehensive hands-on review, really. (y)
It certainly looks to be a G6 with tilty viewfinder, and nicer looking than the pictures, to my eyes.
Am I right in saying the actual camera's coming available at a lower price than the E-M5 was?
 
I'm having the same issue with a Tokina 70-210mm on my GF1 (see the previous page) My first thought was that the lens was crap, but then some shots seem pretty sharp even at max length, so I'm kinda leaning to the side of operator error - I'm just not used to using a lens with an effective length of 420mm.

Having said that, I probably had false expectations of it anyway - I'm used to my sharp 30mm Sigma, and most of the long lens photos I've admired that built up my expectations cost considerably more than the £14 I spent on the Tokina :p
 
G6 update. i went out today only with old MF lenses and the focus peaking on the G6 and the results are really good. very very few out of focus. the new view finder is so so much better than the G1 which again makes it so much easier. the shots all have my family in so which i don't really want to put up so i'll have another go at something i can share and put them up.
 
touch screen question

is it possible to look through the view finder and use the touch screen at the same time for focusing areas? if so how?? thanks
 
abdoujaparov said:
I'm having the same issue with a Tokina 70-210mm on my GF1 (see the previous page) My first thought was that the lens was crap, but then some shots seem pretty sharp even at max length, so I'm kinda leaning to the side of operator error - I'm just not used to using a lens with an effective length of 420mm.

Having said that, I probably had false expectations of it anyway - I'm used to my sharp 30mm Sigma, and most of the long lens photos I've admired that built up my expectations cost considerably more than the £14 I spent on the Tokina :p
Click to expand...

are you using a tripod? without IBIS you will have to anchor the camera down, it will make a big difference at the long end. are you using the left button on the back to select an area and then focusing on that too?
 
rugeyes said:
touch screen question

is it possible to look through the view finder and use the touch screen at the same time for focusing areas? if so how?? thanks
Click to expand...
On the G5 (and I expect the G6) yes. It is an option to enable in the menu system somewhere. I'll leave finding the option as an exercise for the reader ;)
 
Yup, I was using the focus zoom, but no tripod. I'm going to get a monopod and see how sharp I can get the old MF lens before deciding it's the lens's fault.
 
A spot of manual focus tracking using the focus peaking feature of the G6 with a Canon 200mm f2.8 nFD lens


Kyla - White Tailed Sea Eagle by srhphoto, on Flickr

Focus peaking makes it doable, but by no means easy. My keeper rate was horrendous, but I did learn a few things that should make it a little easier next time. I'm sure as with all things, practice will help me get better.

Cheers,

Simon.
 
srhmoto said:
A spot of manual focus tracking using the focus peaking feature of the G6 with a Canon 200mm f2.8 nFD lens

http://www.flickr.com/photos/srhmoto/9433852795/
Kyla - White Tailed Sea Eagle by srhphoto, on Flickr

Focus peaking makes it doable, but by no means easy. My keeper rate was horrendous, but I did learn a few things that should make it a little easier next time. I'm sure as with all things, practice will help me get better.

Cheers,

Simon.
Click to expand...

My targets were a little less mobile! Its alot easier than on the G1 thats for sure.

Nice shot btw
 
abdoujaparov said:
Yup, I was using the focus zoom, but no tripod. I'm going to get a monopod and see how sharp I can get the old MF lens before deciding it's the lens's fault.
Click to expand...

You will need to get the shutter speed really high to eliminate shake. Back in the SLR days I was told that the shutter speed had to be higher than the focal length of the lens, so a 400mm lens would shoot faster rhan 1/400 th. No doibt someone here will correct me on this though.

I tried a couple of old zooms but I got much better results from long primes. They are huge and heavy but they were sharper
 
rugeyes said:
Back in the SLR days I was told that the shutter speed had to be higher than the focal length of the lens, so a 400mm lens would shoot faster rhan 1/400 th. No doibt someone here will correct me on this though.
Click to expand...
You have to factor crop factor and personal ability into this too. For a micro 4/3rds camera, you need 1/(2 x focal length) (the 2x for the crop factor), so a 100mm lens needs 1/200th minimum. Also, if you are pixel peeping and have a good lens (i.e. very sharp) you may also still see blur there and need to make the shutter speed even further. Personally, I prefer 1/(1.5x effective fl) so for a 100mm lens, I'd prefer 1/300th or faster.
 
michael23 said:
Well hopefully the GX7 finds it's way to the Rutland Water Bird Fair either with Park Cameras or panasonic who are going to be there too. Would be nice to give it a good going over.

And now some pics from my g5 and 14mm


31128 @ Levisham by scilly puffin, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Great set of images but this one above I really like. It's got a really nice DOF and it's really sharp with great detail. Just a real nice image!

Here is one from my newly aquired G5 and 14-45mm lens...


Leaves by andywest1, on Flickr
 
Has anyone got the 12-35mm f2.8? If you do what do you think of it on your Panny?
 
It's a solid all-round performer. If you have enough light to always shoot at f5.6-f8 on the 14-45, you probably won't notice much difference, but it's a really nice f2.8 lens throughout the focal length. It's on my G5 95% of the time...
 
AndyWest said:
Has anyone got the 12-35mm f2.8? If you do what do you think of it on your Panny?
Click to expand...

I have one on with a GX1. I rarely take it off.

Personally I think that the only downside to M4/3 is studio work and macro and if I had my time again, I'd probably have stuck with the kit lens on the GX1 and got a decent DSLR with L glass.

Sadly it didn't raise what I was hoping for when I tried to sell mine so wonder if decent glass on M4/3 is not too smart.
 
Tulipone said:
Personally I think that the only downside to M4/3 is studio work and macro
Click to expand...
What's wrong with micro 4/3rds in a studio? I'm perfectly happy with mine for the sorts of stuff I do (mainly product still life, but I've used it for portraits too). In fact before I decided to sell the 5D2, the G5 had to be good in a studio environment too.
 
arad85 said:
It's a solid all-round performer. If you have enough light to always shoot at f5.6-f8 on the 14-45, you probably won't notice much difference, but it's a really nice f2.8 lens throughout the focal length. It's on my G5 95% of the time...
Click to expand...

I usually shoot as wide open as possible as I like narrow DOF so would prob have the 12-35 at f2.8 95% of the time. I have a chance to get one from work at a good price so just seeing if users like it over their Kit lenses.

I do like the 20mm but find it a tad to tele for a prime and it's slow focus is a little annoying. I thought the 12-35 would be a good wide all rounder for me and it would be nice to have 12mm at the wide end!

Thanks guys.
 
The 14/2.5 is wider than the 20mm and at f2.5 faster than the 12-35. Cheaper too :)

Just an observation... :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top