News Reviews Features Buying Guide Sample Images Videos Cameras LensesPhonesPrinters Forums Galleries Challenges

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Review

July 2015 | By Richard Butler and Samuel Spencer

The Panasonic G7 is a direct descendant of the first ever mirrorless camera. Yet, despite this, the last thing it's trying to be is a mirrorless camera. Instead it's trying to be a non-specific interchangeable lens camera: a camera where you don't have to think about whether it has a mirror or not.

As a result it looks like a miniature DSLR and includes all the control points you'd expect. In fact it includes all the control points you'd expect from a mid-range DSLR, including twin control dials as well as plenty of buttons and switches. However, because it is a mirrorless camera, it is able to make good use of its fully articulated, touch-sensitive screen.

The specifications are pretty solid, too. 16MP isn't exactly cutting-edge at this point but 4K (UHD) video remains something of a rarity (at the time of writing), especially if you factor-in the fact that the G7 also offers focus peaking and zebra highlight warnings - two of the key tools necessary for shooting useable video that are often absent from its peers.

The G7 also tries to turn its video capability into a plus for people with no intention of shooting video: the latest iteration of Panasonic's '4K Photo' mode includes the option to constantly record 1 sec chunks of video that are written to the memory card the moment you hit the shutter button. This means that you still shoot to 'get the moment' but you're much more likely to be successful.

Camera specification highlights

16MP Four Thirds CMOS sensor
4K (UHD) video at up to 100Mbps, 30p/25p + 24p
4K Photo mode with 'Pre-Burst' mode
Fully-articulated touch screen
Wi-Fi for remote shooting and image transfer

The design of the G7 suggests Panasonic is hoping to attract would-be DSLR buyers, but the level of direct control also makes it competitive with the likes of Sony's a6000 (which also offers a built-in viewfinder and reasonable degree of direct control), Olympus's E-M10 or Fujifilm's X-T10. This means it represents something of a bargain for users who want this additional control but risks intimidating the first-time ILC shooter.

The Panasonic isn't, perhaps, the prettiest option in this company, but is the best specified if video and stills are taken into account. It's also one of the smallest of these cameras - especially if you consider the size of lenses that you might attach.

Specs comparison

	Panasonic G7	Canon T6i	Olympus E-M10	Sony a6000
Sensor resolution	16MP	24MP	16MP	24MP
Sensor size	17.3 x 13.0mm (Four Thirds)	22.3 x 14.9mm (APS-C)	17.3 x 13.0mm (Four Thirds)	23.5 x 15.6mm (APS-C)
Lens Mount	Micro Four Thirds	Canon EF/EF-S	Micro Four Thirds	Sony E
Stabilization	None	None	In-body	None
LCD size/resolution	3" 1.04m dot			3" 921k dot
LCD type	Fully articulating		Tilting
Touch sensitive?	Yes			No
Viewfinder resolution	2.36m dot equiv	Optical	1.44m dot
Viewfinder magnification	0.70x	0.49x	0.58x	0.70x
Max shutter speed	1/4000 sec (1/16000 electronic)	1/4000 sec
Max burst rate	7 fps	5 fps	8 fps	11 fps
Connectivity	Wi-Fi	Wi-Fi w/NFC	Wi-Fi	Wi-Fi w/NFC
Video capture max. resolution	3840 x 2160 (30p)	1920 x 1080 (30p)	1920 x 1080 (30p)	1920 x 1080 (60p)
Battery life (CIPA)	350	440	320	420
Dimensions	125 x 86 x 77mm	132 x 101 x 78mm	119 x 82 x 46mm	120 x 67 x 45mm
Weight	410 g	555 g	396 g	344 g

One thing that should be apparent from this table that, with the exception of the occasional distinguishing feature, the specifications are all pretty similar. They all offer Wi-Fi, builit-in viewfinders and movable rear screens. Those cameras that don't have built-in image stabilization tend to be sold with image stabilized lenses so that, as a package, they offer similar capabilities.

The majority of these cameras have APS-C sensors, which are around 60% larger than the one in the Panasonic or Olympus, would you'd expect to give them around a 2/3EV noise advantage but also allows the Panasonic and its lenses to be significantly smaller, for the same equivalent focal lengths.

Interestingly, the sole DSLR we've included here also has a similar battery life, which is unusual, and a significantly smaller viewfinder, which is the cost that is usually paid for choosing an optical viewfinder (especially at this price piont).

Two cameras not included here, for reasons of space are Nikon's D5500, which offers similar specifications again but with much greater battery life (820 shots) an a 0.52x optical viewfinder, and Samsung's NX500, which offers no viewfinder but can shoot 4K video from a small crop of its sensor and is said to offer around 400 shots per charge.

If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X, Y, and Z and ideally A, B, and C.

Gear in this story

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7

I own it

111

I want it

I had it

Discuss in the forums

Shop now

19 customer reviews

Camera Only, Black In stock Usually ships in 24 hours	From $747.99 »
Camera Only, Silver In stock Usually ships in 24 hours	From $747.99 »
Camera Only, Black In stock Usually ships in 24 hours	From $997.99 »

Comments

Total comments: 473

Remember the weeks of hype over the Canon 750/760D. We had pre previews, hands on, preview, review, post review, Canon littering the top of the news page day after day. DPR are dropping the G7 like a bad smell.
Oh I'm imagining all this of course?

2 upvotes

The G7 kicks the crap out of both these Canons, heck even the G6 could also, seems there has been a bit of the Panasonic micro 4/3 bashing in this review, yet they gave the G6 a great review, but the G7 is miles better, but more negative, duh!!! yet the `Canons are superbly superior, sorry, dont think so, i had a 60D, bought a G6, 3 days later the 60D is on E-Bay, it stood `no chance` against the G6 both in pic quality, video, and features!!

3 upvotes

I don't remember any hype surrounding those Canon models. There was coverage, yes, but it's not what I would call enthusiastic coverage.

0 upvotes

The T6i didn't get any rewards. Which has been nearly half a decade for any camera reviewed in this class.

So Canon isn't superior according to Dpreview quiet the contrary.

1 upvote

The RAW still image quality of the canons is distinctly better than the G7 in the DPR studio scene. Even more so at higher ISO.

So it depends on how much you value such characteristics.

2 upvotes

@ greivogel.
I also checked the raw image quality in terms of dynamic range.
And it guess what it's better then the Canon's. Despite them having a larger sensor in that aspect

1 upvote

We rated the G7 considerably higher than any of the new Rebels...

1 upvote

Actually the G7 viewfinder alone kicks the crap out of all the entry level and mid-range Canon DSLRs. 70D or 7D are the only ones who might have a viewfinder as good.

1 upvote

The only way I can see here that silver is justified, is a heavy weight on the shuttershock problem. A 2/3 stop difference with the best APS-c sensors is what you can expect given the size, so it is not a poor performance. Comparetively it is on the same level and 2/3 of a stop is barely notable.
Menu: I am all for better menu's so I hope Panasonic listens but if it is similar to my GH4 (and I think it is) I would like to note that by far the most reviewers I came across actually liked Panasonic menu's a lot. I barely have to use my booklet so to me it seems rather intuitive.

So you get very good stills, virtually state of the art video, fantastic autofocussing that does allow for all sorts of shooting including action, a great EVF, a swivle screen, I think they mentioned good ergonomics.
And that at that price. What do you have to do to take the gold?

6 upvotes

Should compare the G7 at ISO 800 to the Samsung NX500 at 1600...more than 2/3 EV difference

2 upvotes

Ichiro: it is 2/3 of a stop according to dpreview and it is 2/3 of a stop according to DxO throughout the range. COlour sensitivity fares a little better for the NX specifically at higher ISO and DR fares a little better throughout the whole range for the GH4 9bein 1/2 of a stop behind).

These two seem good proxies for G7 and NX500.

6 upvotes

Not sure how the 2/3 stop is determined but the EV pushing and ISO tests on this site itself show the NX500 looking better at 1 stop higher - not equal - which mean more than 1 stop better, let alone 2/3rd of a stop. My own photos show similar that they are not as close as being proclaimed. Additionally the Panasonics tend to overstate ISO, especially in video recording mode.

It's ISO 800 looks more like 1" sensor at 800 ISO than it does Samsungs ISO1600. This dont confirm 2/3 stop and real world photos tend to bring out the differences more so and especially with RAW.

Take the 30 seconds to compare G7 ISo 200 with 4EV push to NX500 with 5EV push...or 3 vs 4...the G7 looks good bit worse in comparisons with more noise and mush - less detail, less saturation - despite understating ISO, though less than predecessors.

It is more video camera than stills camera regardless. And great at it.

1 upvote

I've shot over 5,000 photos with the Panasonic G7 since it arrived, and I LIKE THIS CAMERA! Here's why:

- EVERYTHING on this camera is adjustable/customizable, so I can work out how I want to assign buttons, wheel operations, etc. for the way I like to use the camera. I change the white-balance presets to be what I want and then I change the settings for both the EVF and the rear screen to show me what I'm getting. I set up each photo mode using its adjustment controls for a specific purpose.

- I can use the electronic shutters at all times (except for flash photos), with no sound and no shake from the shutter.

- Carrying and using this small and light MFT gear is just plain FUN!

- I can work on the resulting images in Gimp to get results that print SHARPLY and well for tonality, color, and smoothness to 16.5"x22"+ image area.

What more could anyone want? BTW, brief MFT lens reviews (with some surprise lenses!) are at:
http://www.david-ruether-photography.com/MFT-Lenses.htm

7 upvotes

Cheaper lenses :) I mean the good quality primes like the nifty fifty.

Comment edited 56 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

I'm going to buy this camera for my trip to Japan. It's a great deal with the 14-140mm lens.

3 upvotes

While you are there, try picking up a Pana-Leica 25mm 1.4. Truly a prince amongst lenses!

0 upvotes

I decided to get the LX100 instead. The G7's EVF was in the wrong spot for a left-eye shooter.

0 upvotes

Some nags that I noticed after a few weeks with one

- While autofocus is good for still images, it's rather poor for video. Especially if you left on Focus Priority. Still images, eye detection doesn't mean the eye will be in focus half the time.

- Definitely does have shutter shock using the mechanical shutter and it can soften even 1/160 flash photos.

- Image quality in general is behind APSC from 4 years ago. Even at low NR settings it really attacks hair and yet still leaves some Panny color blotches now and then - much less than LX100 though. High ISO not as good as studio tests would make you believe.

- AWB is worse than any camera used/tested/owned recently.

Basically to use the 4K video, prepare for custom or tuned white balance and setting focus.

And head's up - if you turned on silent mode for taking photos, then you start taking a video, will not record audio!

0 upvotes

Also - - Build quality seems very poor, several small and rather flush buttons, EVF difficult to use because you have to shift your eye around to see different areas in focus (had others test to see if it was my eyes)

The good is properly set up 4K video is rather nice up to ISO 2000, doesnt get very hot during recording, and battery life was better than expected.

0 upvotes

Hi,
which lenses have you used when observing shutter shock? In my experience with the G6 shutter shock is very dependent on which lens I use.

0 upvotes

14-42mm and 20mm only. I've used other m4/3 cams with a reputation for shutter shock and was untouched by it but it was rather noticeable with the G7. Turning in Silent Mode and strongly lowering noise reduction made a drastic difference. The first day I was shocked how soft it was. A firmware update that could improve video AF and maybe microadjust timing of the shutter release would make it worth the money.

0 upvotes

I ordered this camera and the panny 15mm 1.7 last week. While I have my 5d ii, I'm looking for something light, quick, and with good image quality for shooting family. Additionally, I wanted the great 4k video capture this camera provides. For absolute quality, I will use full frame, but I don't need that kind of quality all the time. This camera will be just perfect for my needs.

2 upvotes

Don't forget to comment after you get to test it :)

0 upvotes

Im on the same boat, however as UE citizen im capped to PAL system due to hard lock in G7. So i can't get 60/30 fps which is quite shocking, and thats a deal breaker for me.
GH4 is to big, and GX7 or incoming 8 is not so video dedicated as G7....so, no luck and i have to wait for 5D mk4.

0 upvotes

Just what the world needs, another fugly retro-styled camera. I much preferred Panasonic's modern styling to Olympus' retro. Meh!

1 upvote

Duly noted. We will alert management.

8 upvotes

Doesn't look retro to me. More like a modern DSLR with some some pronounced edges.
Olympus OM-D is much more "retro" design than this is.

2 upvotes

I do think there is an obsession with keeping a form factor that was built around film cameras. If they could get past this, cameras would be far more ergonomic.

1 upvote

@pixelriffic: I don't believe that. In the last 27 years of digital photography, we've had practically every conceivable combination of size and shape; do you honestly believe that if one of those combinations had proven to be ergonomically vastly superior to all others and viable with regards to what needs to fit inside it TODAY, that it wouldn't have stuck around?? Or that some magical combination nobody's ever thought of exists out there in the creative ether?
Here, refresh your memory:
http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2013/10/30-most-important-digital-cameras

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

4 upvotes

The split-bodied Nikons remain the best form factor, IMO.

1 upvote

Was the autofocus test done with a Panasonic lens? If so, how well can it focus with an Olympus lens?

1 upvote

Read the review, it is in there.

0 upvotes

Sorry, I didn't see where they said what lens they used. There's a sample from the Lumix but they don't say outright whether the AF test was done with the Lumix, unless they want the reader to assume that. (And even so, it doesn't say how it performs with non-Panasonic lenses.) But maybe I missed it so would you be so kind as to point it out?

3 upvotes

The AF testing was performed using the Lumix 14-140mm F3.5-5.6.

0 upvotes

Thanks Richard. How quickly does it focus with an Olympus lens?

0 upvotes

It's not a question of speed, it's a question of C-AF consistency. We didn't test an Olympus lens in as much detail, but without DFD, the camera doesn't get as many shots in-focus and seems less confident about sticking to a subject.

0 upvotes

Thanks Richard.

0 upvotes

I know m43 is a system, but why would one want Oly (unstabilized) lenses on a Panasonic body? Most Panasonic lenses are stabilized, except for short focal lengths.

0 upvotes

Old sensor and shutter shock...nah. Why do 4/3 camera take soo long to replace their old senors.

4 upvotes

It's true the sensor may not be the latest and the greatest, however they did manage to improve video iso performance by about one stop compared to the GH4. Shutter shock is a little bothersome, but I'm willing to deal with that for the 4k video and overall performance.

2 upvotes

It's sensor is less then 2 years old.
If that is old then nearly every camera has an old sensor.
XT-10 - 2 years
Nikon D5500 - 2 years
Canon t6i - New but it's a canon sensor so who cares.

1 upvote

http://2.static.img-dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-g7/images/Battery-001.jpg?v=3134

Ouch -- small capacity battery, right next to which you have to slide in the SD memory card -- all from the bottom.

Hello, G7 -- I guess you've lost me at "hello."

0 upvotes

The review of the VIDEO capabilities of the G7 here are non-existent.

For example, we do not even know if the camera puts out a video signal via HDMI whilst it is recording video, and even f it does, in what chroma subsampling and color depth quality?

6 upvotes

I am still trying to understand, yet I cannot, as the format itself is so poor. The published samples here are worse than any 16MP APS-C camera, and are certainly not as good IMHO, as I get from an FZ1000: they do not have a photographic quality.

I try to be generous, I try to make allowances, but in a medium in which the lenses now cost as much as full-frame lenses do, why should anybody?

There is no comparison between the results here and those you can get from ANY full-frame SLR, and my ancient 20D and D200 both do better.

The mediums limitations have it stuck at 16MP as well, so it appears that nobody possessing excellent Olympus, Leitz and Panasonic lenses has any possibility of enlarging their work to match other more competent media, and I feel sorry always for people who have bought into the system when I see them.

As noted in the review several pictures show shake they ascribe to shutter shock I dont get ever with 10 year-old equipment. And certainly not with an FZ1000

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

6 upvotes

No need to feel sorry for me. Very happy using my GX-1 & 14mm for most things I do. It usually comes with me, while the Nikon stays home in it's bag.

11 upvotes

It's because the kit zoom lens that was used to shoot these samples is nowhere near as good as the Panasonic primes or the Olympus primes & Pro zooms. Shoot with one of these top performing lenses on any MFT camera and you'll be amazed.

2 upvotes

How's your ancient 20D and D200 at shooting video?

4 upvotes

I wish I could use a micro 4/3rds, though now Schneider are not going to do lenses for them any more...

Its just the size limitation.

1 upvote

Agree with you. I guess I just don't like 4/3 either. The inherent aspect ratio is lousy for landscapes; you can crop, but you loose pixels in the vertical direction, and the 16MP leaves less to work with. The kit lenses start at 28 mm (equiv), and are really closer to 30mm in the horizontal field of view. 24 is better, but you really need to invest in an (expensive) wide angel zoom. Less margin to bring up shadows due to less dynanic range and higher noise levels.

The shutter shock issue should never have arisen - Panasonic should know how to make shutters by now (and we are not talking about 36-50 MP camera here).

Other issues I have with this camera is the poor design of the 4-way controller, which is difficult (for me) to operate by touch, and the flush video record button.

I am inclined to go for the new Sony RX10m2 for a "light" weight general purpose camera.

0 upvotes

"There is no comparison between the results here and those you can get from ANY full-frame SLR, and my ancient 20D and D200 both do better."

Then your 20D is better than my 1Ds Mark II was. My GX7 easily matches or even bests it at resolution, noise and DR This fellow thinks so, too, and demonstrates:

http://admiringlight.com/blog/micro-43-vs-a-full-frame-legend/

Methinks you've never done a direct comparison yourself.

1 upvote

Munro, i too find the FZ1000`s pics looking better than most micro 4/3 cams, i had a Panny G6 and still have loads of pictures i took with it, on a comparison bases, yes the FZ1000 seems to have better color, sharpness, etc, i find it amazing how good the 1" sensor really is, i believe it is of Sony manufacture!

1 upvote

Bringing out a new system camera, and only offering it with kit lenses and not without a lens, is a poke in the eye to customers who own that camera maker's cameras and lenses. I have a set of 8 excellent Panasonic lenses that get a lot of use. The 14-42 I got with my G3 sits in my dry cabinet doing nothing.

I'd sure love to update my G6 to a G7, but instead I'll wait and see if they offer it body only. If they don't I'll just keep shooting my G6, or buy a body-only from Olympus. Olympus understands.

Really, Panasonic - treat your current customers with a little more respect. Make it easy for me to open my wallet.

4 upvotes

I do not have ANYTHING from Pana or Oly by way of cameras and lenses -- and I still would not want the terrible 14-42 kit lens with a G7 body. I will buy the G7 is Panasonic will knock off $50 from the price sand offer it w/o that hideous-looking kit lens in a body-only configuration.

Please, let ME decide what particular lens if I want with an interchangeable lens camera, if any.

1 upvote

What?!
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this 14-42mm kit-lens.
That can't be said about the previous 14-42 from Panasonic though.

5 upvotes

Francis - the G7 is available body only. They do that after they work through the initial interest.

1 upvote

@ Ednaz: "the G7 is available body only."

Well, it might be available from where you are buying your G7s from -- just not from these retailers, for instance:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=panasonic+lumix+dmc-g7&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ps

http://www.adorama.com/searchsite/default.aspx?searchinfo=panasonic+lumix+dmc-g7

So, Ednaz.... would you mind terribly to post a few URL links for us here showing the DP Review readership where we can purchase the Lumix G7 without any kit lens, body only, please, do it, okay, thanks a bunch.

Cheapest way I can get a G7 now is for $797.99 in United States funds, so to save a few hundred big ones off of the price of one w/o the kit lens is of great interest to a lot of folks here, I am pretty sure.

0 upvotes

Sorry, bad typing, I was referring to the GX7, not G7. Too many bodies with a G and a 7. On the GX7 camera info page on DPReview, you'll see links at the bottom to a couple different options to purchase from Amazon. The G7 is NOT available body only. The GX7 wasn't available body only initially, which is why I happen to own that second 14-42 lens, one of my m4/3 bodies expired and I needed that second body. Their pattern for cameras other than the GH series has been, "want this body, you gotta take another lens you don't want" for awhile, going to body only after the camera's been out awhile.

I've pinged Panasonic on multiple social media channels scolding them for treating current customers who've bought a lot of their lenses badly by forcing a kit lens on us if we want to upgrade. If a few thousand people did that, maybe something would happen.

I'm also going to a product presentation they're doing at my local camera store to complain in person.

0 upvotes

"Panasonic's newest DSLR-styled mirrorless camera..."

Wow, and I was under the impression that DSLRs have those constantly up-down flipping mirrors tucked away inside them... and that MIRRORLESS cameras do not. But maybe I was wrong?

3 upvotes

I think it's your reading comprehension that's wrong.
"DSLR-styled" does not mean it is a DSLR merely that it looks like one.

12 upvotes

Really? 'Cause it looks like a good old MIRRORLESS camera to me. Yeap, they have been around for quite a few years by now, you know?

0 upvotes

True.
And many of them have copied the looks of DSLRS that have been around for a lot longer. Even though an EVF means that they no longer need to.
Some have even copied the looks of film SLRs and I'm pretty sure that was mentioned in the reviews as well.

1 upvote

Who cares all that much how the thing LOOKS. A digital camera = a digital camera. 'Nuff said.

0 upvotes

DSLR style without a floppy mirror and Rangefinder style cameras without any finder at all!

Many "authors" of photography articles need to learn how to communicate effectively with their readers. Faux DSLR style and Faux Rangfinder style would be more truthful.

BTW how would DPRevies describe an Olympus Pen F film camera—a SLR that looked like a Faux Rangefinder 8-)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

1 upvote

cdembrey, the qualifier "style" already implies DSLR-style is not a DSLR and Rangefinder-style is not a rangefinder. Please report to the Redundance Office of Redundancy.

2 upvotes

WOW! Space for a NOSE! Yahoo!!!! It CAN be done! Thank you Thank you THANK YOU!!! Now if the OTHER camera makers would just do this.

2 upvotes

Rushed out to defame a quality product before the summer season gets going.
If you want a balanced true review of the G7 try camera labs .com.

1 upvote

Defame it how? By pointing out a few reasonable cons? Go away troll.

2 upvotes

I fully agree with olypan, although the final score of 80% and the silver award give it some credit, the review is a bit harsh and I didn't get any "ooh, I want this!" kinda feeling.

The review is written in a hurry, with badly chosen words at times and the writer doesn't seem to find it at all impressive that this camera has about 95% of the features and quality of the GH4 for a much lower price.

Also the fact that this is the only MFT camera that offers all modern features (I'm not saying how useful or not they are) combined like touch-focus, 4K video (at useful fps), Wi-Fi, focus peaking, interchangeable lenses and so on. This fact seems to not make any difference for the reviewer. Basically it combines the best features of the NX500, GH4 and a6000 in a similar sized package with a similar price (apart from the GH4).

10 upvotes

But no IBIS.

0 upvotes

I did look up the review at Camera Labs.com and you are right, they gave it a glowing review, highly recommended with translated would be about 85 to 90% on DP review. I have question DP review a lot of times on different cameras that I either own or that I know someone who does and I never saw some of the complaints they mentioned. I think they need to get some new reviewers, they do not seem to go along with what the customer thinks or other review sites.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting

1 upvote

How boring would it be if all the review sites agreed with each other. Even though I'm a hardcore popphoto.com fan, I still like to come here for a different viewpoint on cameras. That's what makes the internet interesting—diversity of opinions.

3 upvotes

I wish Panasonic would make 24-120mm equiv. zoom lens that's not too expensive, and bundle it as kit lens with this camera. It would make a perfect travel camera for people that care about image quality, but don't want to carry a lot of gear.

2 upvotes

They have a 28-280mm equiv. zoom lens that's actually bundled as kit with this (and other Panasonic) camera(s). Unless you desperately need that extra 4mm on the wide end, it looks like a perfect deal for you.

3 upvotes

I wish they had a 24-120mm F4 equiv. zoom lens. I think that range is their weakest range in their lens line up (Oly & Pany).

1 upvote

Only decent lenses for a the M4/3 form factor is from Voigtlander: their F0.95 maximum wide open aperture Nokton line. Nothing whatsoever by way of zooms, only a couple of "almost got 'em."

0 upvotes

Panasonic offers many zooms that start at 28mm. The only zooms that start at 24mm are either very expensive (f2.8), or very short range (12-32). I wish they offered more general purpose zoom that starts at 24mm, similar to the Olympus 12-50 (which does not have IS, unfortunately). I travel a lot, and I find 24mm extremely useful to have at hand.

4 upvotes

Francis,

"Only decent lenses for a the M4/3 form factor is from Voigtlander"

Panasonic's 42.5mm f1.2 and Olympus' 75mm f1.8 get glowing reviews. Both makers' kit lenses are consistently better than those from CaNikSon. The f2.8 zooms give DSLR pro glass a run for it's money. My Pan 7-14mm f4 is noticeably sharper at the edges than my Canon 17-40mm f4L was. And my Pan 20mm f1.7 runs rings around my old Canon 35mm f2.

1 upvote

I don't want to buy my OPTICS from the same company that makes my CAMERA. Let them make cameras. I prefer to buy my lenses elsewhere. From companies that make LENSES for a living, you see.

Mixing Olympus and Panasonic lenses is crazy -- one type is image stabilized, the other type is not. Hard to keep track of what exactly you have got screwed onto your camera and how to achieve IS, if at all.

Voigtlander has a 10,5mm focal length F0,95 maximum open iris prime lens in a M4/3 mount. What is the Panasonic and Olympus equivalent of this particular Nokton lens, please? Thanks!

0 upvotes

Well, with Voigtlander and Panasonic, the IS worrying is easily dealt with. You just never get it = problem solved. You mean that makes you happier?

1 upvote

You mean the Panasonic cameras have no IS inside them, and the Panasonic lenses also don't have any IS inside them? Cool!

0 upvotes

Troll.

2 upvotes

Quotes "as a left-eye shooter, my nose will sometimes move the AF point."

"The only downside we found is that the wider screen can be nose activated if you're a right-eyed shooter."

That should cover most of us then.......

3 upvotes

Found that a bit strange as well. I guess it's a typo, since you can see from the pictures that the EVF is placed slightly to the left of the screen. Logic says this'll be slightly less of an issue for right-eye shooters.

1 upvote

As a right eyed shooter, to avoid activate the screen, you could flip the screen out. But then it can be difficult to hold the camera with a heavy lens.

1 upvote

It's been a while since I managed to mistake my left and my right.

They should both read 'left' - I've corrected the page accordingly.

1 upvote

>Number of external controls make the camera seem more complex than it is

How ironic. People complain that cheaper bodies don't include full manual controls and more physical buttons, but when Panasonic does it in this body, they get criticised for it. Ha!

21 upvotes

I agree. That seems like an odd thing to fuss about. It's not $500 so it's not really a noob camera. At this price I think the more (well placed and easy to use!) buttons the better.

4 upvotes

quote: `. This puts it up against serious competition from the likes of Canon's EOS 750D/Rebel T6i` ermmm! dont think so, i would put that the other way round!!

1 upvote

Why is it in this day and age that on 99% of Canons rebels you have to press and hold an exposure button in before you can turn exposure up or down? and their focus system is horrid, i missed many shots because of that slowwww! exposure and horrid focus system, yet the G7 with its brilliant exposure system(s) and stunning dfd focusing is up against serious competition from Canon rebels, whattttt?? dont make me laugh, these `two` farces alone on the rebels was enough to change me to Pannys systems, sorry Canon, `NO` Contest!!!

1 upvote

Why do we have to click a link on the home page, and then click a SECOND link before we can see the review? Which web designer made this moronic decision? Does DPReview make additional advertising income from the one extra click?

17 upvotes

In order to show more pages, thus more ads and increase site revenue.

3 upvotes

Well seeing this free information is to much for you I suggest you don't waste any more time here complaining.
Maybe you should do your own review?

Personally I don't use stuff I find "moronic" -Though maybe you just like torturing yourself.

4 upvotes

Don't be naive. Nothing in this world is free. You are paying for the content on this site. The site makes their income from advertising. Merchants who pay for the advertising factor this cost into the price of the goods they sell you. You could live in a cave and look at no advertsing your entire life. You're paying for it every time you spend money.

5 upvotes

nice testing on the under-ISO-then-push behaviour. when you switch to 1/3 steps you should notice that panasonic m43 cameras exhibit the same noise characteristics up to the next "major" step.

200 - 250 - 320 will look the same
400 - 500 - 640 also.. and so on.

good to know when you need to balance ISO - noise - exposure times, something very common in sports photography for example.

btw, Nikons since the D200 have the exact same behaviour of their amplification, just sayin. =)

1 upvote

The Body & Design widget doesn't seem to play well with Chrome browsers, or is it just me? None of the buttons seem to work so it just rotates (maddeningly) endlessly.

0 upvotes

Sigh......I just had a moron at work whine at me going on about how Micro four thirds cameras are rubbish because of the sensor size, his camera is twice the size and has double the aperture and so is better blagh blagh blagh. Now as calm as possible I tried to inform him his Nikon D5500 is an APS-C camera and so he does not have double the sensor size, and aperture does not work like that.

Honestly I don't know why people love to compare M43 to full frame when 90% of the SLR's out there have cropped sensors anyway so the difference is far less the they think!

(Apologies posted 3 times, can't seem to delete!)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 8 minutes after posting

7 upvotes

stutter, stutter, stutter

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

sapporodan, you will always have negative comments from the DSLR luvvies, they dont like it when mirrorless cameras that are far more capable than their beloved DSLR`S arrive on the scene, most know they are better, but wont admit to it and would rather bash the mirrorless and micro 4/3 system, Francis Carver is a prime example of this, he just loves to carve mirrorless cameras up, lol.

1 upvote

Excellent little camera, handy, great value and capabilities
.. great review .. shutter shock is a good catch!!

also love the photo-gallery. Photos are much better this time, different photographer?

1 upvote

This is one of the first dpreviews that seem truly misguided.

Panasonic takes one of your favorite cameras , the GH4 (Gold award, 85% in oct 2014) and slashes the price in half by making it lighter and plastic.

But instead of praising what is essentially a cheap entry into semi-pro level features and usability, you choose to slam it not being beginner-friendly enough.

This is the sort of criticism I'd expect on a consumer-oriented site, not on a specialist site like Dpreview.

What a shame.

34 upvotes

I did not read the piece as particularity harsh or anti-G7. Just mentioning a few facts, is all.

0 upvotes

I really like the plastic body,. My G6 took a couple of hard falls and you can barely tell. My alloy bodies look like beaten up war veterans.

2 upvotes

Try dropping your cameras a little less often. I'm weird, but I tend not to drop my cameras at all. Weird huh.

1 upvote

Looks like a very good camera with decent ergonomics and most of the features I need.

I've only just bought a GM5, which I love, but will probably buy into the G-series when the sensor is upgraded to use as my full-sized option.

2 upvotes

If they upgrade the pixel count to 20 or 24MP, the pixels will be so tiny that low light work will be much more challenging, not to mention defraction will start happening at F5.6. At 36MP the image will start defracting at F4 instead of F8.

So I think you would be loosing quality. The sensor hits that sweet spot where it is.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

I never mentioned pixel count.

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

the cyclist should be wearing a helmet!!!

4 upvotes

what for?

1 upvote

What for? So gray matter on the pavement doesn't pose a slip hazard for pedestrians.

1 upvote

When I read the "Pros" and "Cons" I drew the conclusion this was a gold reward, because the cons seemed minor where the "some softness at around 1/100th exposures" was the most critical one, and battery life with video (at least to me).

The rest seemed just like minor niggles "seem more complex" "Q.Menu is over-complex" "...screen a bit cluttered", "...unnecessarily complex", and all centered around complexity in handling.

12 upvotes

battery life is typical for a mirrorless camera in this size/class.
Dslr's just have better battery life with the same capacity batteries.

The complexity is based on his experience vs rebels and the Nikon D5500. With those camera's it's harder to get into certain features of the camera as a consequence to their simplicity.

But then you write a review based on the potential buyers. And in this case DPreview thinks this camera is rather complex for it's target market. Which is probably also due to Panasonics extensive 4k photograb focussed marketing.

But then on the flipside as a more advanced shooter i actually quiet like the customizeability of Panasonic bodies. With the Gx7(the wifes now) i can access everything i use in 2 tabs on the screen. and some features without ever leaving the viewfinder.

4 upvotes

Replace the word "Complex" with "Advanced" and you get the truth.

If something is complex, then it is when camera can't do something and you need to play around to get the effect.

Example if the camera does come with the pop-up flash but doesn't have flash shoe and you want to take photos with better lighting than pop-up flash allows, it can be complex thing to do as you need to use slave modes on external flashes instead having simply capability to use RF trigger.

Or you have hotshoe, no pop-up flash to offer optical slave control (TTL or without) and you can't buy supported flashes, so you need to use some other manner to get flashes work with.

Or example Olympus 30fps limit for video is a feature making most Olympus cameras complex to use because you need to do extra things in post-process or you can't avoid lights flickering in 80% of the world countries that use 50Hz power grid, so you are required to work around the problem instead camera offering advanced features.

3 upvotes

The body pictures are okay but where have Allison's carefully manicured hands gone? :)

4 upvotes

I was going to order one till I found out that it's 300$ more expensive than the Sony a6000 and Samsung nx500 in my country

0 upvotes

Are you sure your comparing compareable kit lenses?
On BH the G7 is 799 with the 14-42mm. Which is the same as the Samsung NX500 and $90,- more then the A6000.

1 upvote

Yeah I'm sure. The nx500 cost 664$, the a6000 cost 697$ and you get 55$ in cash back. The Panasonic cost 996$. I really don't understand panasonics pricing here in Denmark.

0 upvotes

it's 799,- euro's here in holland.
which is $875,- or nearly 6000 krones.

German prices are often the same as here. So i guess a trip across the border?

Make sure you get some beer as well:D

2 upvotes

Page 4: "it would be really useful to be able to zoom in to the chosen focus point in playback mode, to check focus and shake, sadly this is something this is absent."

A double tap on the image enables selective zoom focus at up to 16x magnification.

9 upvotes

Pretty much.
It was already like that 4 years ago on the GH2.

2 upvotes

Maybe I'm imagining things, but the intro (and most of the review) seems very cagily worded - almost damning with faint praise - and includes some rather odd statements, such as, "a camera where you don't have to think about whether it has a mirror or not" (really? This is "a thing" now?) and "16MP isn't exactly cutting-edge at this point" (are there any m4/3 cams with more, at any price?). As for using "try" three times on the first page... how does it "try not to be mirrorless" any more than the E-M10? Or am I missing some critical difference in the form factor? (the hand-grip makes it "less mirrorless", perhaps?)

Seems like a very good camera to me. I almost get the feeling that the reviewer would like it better if it had a Samsung-style smartphone-like interface (kill me now, please) and is maybe selling potential buyers short in this respect.

BTW, it's "eke", not "eek"...

8 upvotes

Eek! I hold my hand up to that.

At a time when many of the cameras APS-C rivals have moved on to 20, 24 and 28MP, then yes, 16MP starts to look a little less than cutting-edge.

I tried to write an honest assessment of the camera and explain my perspective on it, so that readers could decide whether they agree with me.

6 upvotes

Hi Richard,

Fair enough with the MP comparison to APS-C. Maybe I was extra-sensitive to the way this review was written because I've been really looking forward to seeing how the G7 stacked up. A return to more direct external controls is something I am a big fan of - I enjoy using my old G2 for that exact reason.

Shame about the shutter shock, though. I wonder how much more a better-damped mechanical shutter would add to the price? Assuming there is one that would overcome the problem in such a lightweight body. It does seem strange that this is an issue when there's no reflex mirror "flapping around"! I would assume the mirror assembly would have more inertia than the shutter, but it doesn't seem to affect small DSLRs, even though APS-C shutters have more distance to travel...

1 upvote

The 16mp point is a fair one, even in comparison to APS-C sensors. Respected photo writer David Kilpatrick noted in his F2 magazine, that if m43 sensors had the same pixel density as Sony's 1inch 'RX100' sensor, then an m43 sensor could be 40mp. Possibly m43 sensors have been 'capped' at 16mp for video? But time for some improvement, maybe to 24mp??

1 upvote

Mirrorless cameras have the problem that the shutter has to close immediately prior to opening for the exposure. I would guess that this is the main reason we are seeing these problems. The vibrations from the closure will be continuing as it opens to make the exposure. This is certainly something that Panasonic need to address.

1 upvote

If a m43 sensor has the same pixel density as a 20MP APS-C sensor, it will have around 15MP. Comparing with a 24MP APS-C, a m43 with same pixel density should have 18MP.

1 upvote

Panasonic really took the ugly stick to this one. Geez.

1 upvote

I dont care how it looks, and if it can perform as good, indeed better than many DSLRs which it probably can, then that's all that matters in my book, geez!

1 upvote

Where we thinking of dating it as well as using it as a photographic tool?

0 upvotes

This is a nicely detailed review. However one thing I take from it is that the G7 is basically a GH4 lite, just without the weather sealing and some pro level video features (luminance settings, etc).

For half the price.

Yet it receives a negative assessment because of it. Which is a really confusing standpoint for mine. Surely we should be encouraging manufacturers to provide more capability/functionality for less outlay, rather than punishing them with lower review scores for giving us more value for money. I don't understand why DPR are actively attempting to dissuade manufactures from taking this path.

Particularly when there are multiple models (GF and GM lines) targeted specifically at the entry level consumer.

19 upvotes

Assuming that the manufacturers are not behaving like small kids, a bit of constructive criticism, which we see in this review, should encourage them.

2 upvotes

The criticism is relative to the time when G7 is launched. It would have been a gold camera 2-3 years ago, but the competition has moved on. Limited implementation of auto-ISO and camera shake are two of the biggest disappointments for me.

7 upvotes

You make some good points G1H, but I think it also bares considering the advancements over the previous model (G6 in this instance).

Some manufacturers (remaining nameless) continually pump out iterative updates with innocuous improvements (wifi module, few extra focus points). Models which still review strongly regardless of the stark lack of functionality and capability with competing cameras.

Meanwhile Pana upgrade the preceding model with an improved sensor, vastly improved AF system (DFD), state of the art video capability, innovative and unique new features (4K Photo), customisation options generally reserved for pro-level cameras, etc etc, and yet it's all just a little bit too much for the poor DPR staff.

Then for an encore they besmirch the camera for not being focused at "beginners", a market segment already catered for with 2 (yes, two) current models.

Which I guess is reasonable considering competing manufacturers all have at least 3 entry-level models.

9 upvotes

Comparison to G6 doesn't seem appropriate any more, now that we've seen the GX7 and GM5 and know what Panasonic is capable of in general.

That's why the expectations were higher (including the auto-ISO improvement, no matter how small it may seem to some).

2 upvotes

Sure ikfoto, as long as they maintain that approach across reviews. Which they don't. If you read the reviews of the competing cameras listed in the review they are primarily reviewed against the preceding model, with an overarching view to how they fit in the current market. So why hold the G7 to a different standard?

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting

4 upvotes

We must have read different reviews. I see no G6 on any of www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-g7*

0 upvotes

Are you suggesting the G6 doesn't exist because there's no DPR review of the thing?

0 upvotes

Isn't the point of the micro 4/3 sensor to be a small camera? I feel like I'm missing something when I see a DSLR with a sensor that small.

2 upvotes

It's still smaller than a DSLR, and has better ergonomics than the smaller micro 4/3 cameras. Even my GX7 can be unwieldy for some. At this point, it's all about the overall size and weight, including the lens. NO DSLR lens can get as small as m4/3 lenses with the equivalent focal length.

3 upvotes

I think the idea of m43 is to give more design options in creating new bodies. To have a certain amount of usability, you must maintain a certain minimum size. For me, anything smaller than about a Nikon D3300 gets a little too small for good handling.

0 upvotes

^^ Yes a lot of Americans prefer bigger cameras as they have bigger hands. However a lot of Asians prefer smaller cameras and lenses. I personally loved my old mag alloy A700 DSLR camera but my hands used to pain after prolonged use. It died prematurely and I didn't like the Sony A77 which I felt was too noisy so I went with a small A55 camera. I enjoyed my photography much more after using that camera as it was lighter.

0 upvotes

It's a half a stop smaller than a Canon DSLR, but vastly more capable. I don't see the issue.

0 upvotes

With a 14-42II kit lens, it's obviously smaller than a DSLR with 18-55.

0 upvotes

I tend to agree with Mr. Butler about some confusion in the G7's positioning. Even more, to me it's not a pro, not a mini, not a mini-pro, not a new mini-flagship, and not an entry-level. I would just relax and wait (if thinking stills-only). Or, to quote the Q from Startrek, "Patience, mon capitaine!"

0 upvotes

m43 has a problem with sensors. The 16MP sensor was midly competitive with aps-c sensors when it came out. But now, it is lagging far behind in most respects. I really, really want to like the m43 system, but I can't really get behind it until they beg sony for a BSI m43 sensor (meaning better noise performance and DR).

2 upvotes

1-1.5 stops isn't "far behind." Also, 16 versus 24mp isn't a major resolution disadvantage, like says 16 to 36-40 is. BSI and stacked sensors are mostly hype, as can be seen from the performance of recent 1" sensors.

4 upvotes

I don't care about resolution, I dont care if m4/3 drops back to 12MP. What I would like to see is noise performace close to the same level as the latest aps-c senosrs. Take the D7200 as an example - it destroys any m4/3 sensor in noise performance.
And - stacked CMOS was not for noise performane - it was a speed upgrade. BSI - that is no joke and does produce real benefits.

1 upvote

Far behind? I would totally disagree. I'm just curious what m43 can't and apsc can because of senor? Any samples? I could somehow understand if you were talking about ff and m43, which can give noticeable advantage in some cases. Not even big, but noticeable. But APSC?

2 upvotes

Here comes the hordes of m43 defenders. Look - I like the m43 system, I really am not beating up on them. Olympus and Panasonic have produces some very desirable lenses and bodies - I envy them. But there is no denying that this 16MP sensor is lagging behind the latest aps-c sensors - and not just in resolution. I don't need to produce any sample images for you. If you are a low light shooter - you know this.

1 upvote

Auto iso set up to 6400, have no problem. You have to look at 100-200% and part of photo with fine detail to notice difference between d7200 and my e-m1 (about any current m43). This you say is "huge" difference?

1 upvote

Oh, isn't d7200 sensor same as in 7100 with just improved processing? At least in dpr tool i don't see any difference in raws

0 upvotes

I am more concerned about the nasty color shifts that start to occur at higher ISOs. And yes, sometimes ISOs higher than 6400 are very useful.
And no - D7200 sensor is different and processor is different. And if you can't see the difference, then you are the only one. DPreview declared it the best aps-c sensor to date.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

Well, looks like d7100-d7200 sensors are indeed different, however sample raw photos at all iso setting look almost identical even at 100%. I just don't understand, when people say huge difference when you have to look hard to notice it, i.e. compare exactly same scene side by side at 100% or even 200% magnification. Search for particular problems too. How would you call then difference between 2 or 3 gen. sensors?

0 upvotes

Compare D7200 to any m4/3 sensor at ISO 6400. m4/3 is absolutely destroying detail - and this is with both images normalized. Also has weird color shifts. D7200 doesn't have these problems.

1 upvote

In reality the current 4/3 sensors sit in between the current Sony APS-C and Canon APS-C sensors. So whats the problem? Canon seems to do just fine with slightly worse sensors.

0 upvotes

It's still ok. It has better DR and similar noise performance but lower res than the latest Rebels.

On the feature department however, the G7 is second to none.

0 upvotes

Thorgrem - yes, Canon does OK with worse sensors - but everyone, including most Canon users complain about Canons old sensor tech. Well, this is me wishing m43 could get a sensor upgrade. Well, anyway, this is getting old. I suspect Olympus will get a fresh new Sony 16 or 20MP sensor pretty soon. Probably for an E-M2 (or E-m1 - II?)

0 upvotes

Well, isn't that interesting? Still lagging Olympus (Sony) on sensors, but for some reason, the e-shutter seems to have sharpened up the image at most ISOs. Go figure.

1 upvote

Olympus and Panasonic use identical sensors. Panasonic has used the Sony sensor previously, and Olympus use a Panasonic made sensors in some of their current models.

2 upvotes

Probably because of the issue with the mechanical shutter shaking things up.

0 upvotes

That's why the OMD E-M10 has zero second delay, (and also IBIS.)

0 upvotes

Panasonic seems to take the smallest of steps with improving their image quality for stills. Because I don't ever hit the record button for video, the latest models are pointless.

3 upvotes

Buy a different camera. They seem to be more focused on video. I'm actually tempted to shift to Olympus, but at this point they're almost identical and I still get a bonus of good video with Panasonic.

If I have unlimited money, though, I'd probably go for the A7R II

1 upvote

Shows you how much I know; I never thought video would become an equal part of was once strictly a stills camera(and I mean all cameras). I wish this had been the case back when I shouldered my first Panasonic camcorder!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

0 upvotes

The original G1 had no video at all!

1 upvote

If that would be true, the differencebetween this and the best APS-c sensor would be more than the 2/3 of a stop. In fact that difference is what is to be expected based on the size. Compared to the Canon APS-c sensors it does in fact very well delivering far more punch per square mm...

Having said all that it is even so that I would like to have seen a 30 MP sensor with the very same technology for this cam. I have the GH4 with the very same sensor. I do not miss anything compared to the D800E to be honest, even not in stils IQ (there is difference but how many times do I see it. And I shoot landscapes mostly..)? So that is what I would like. May be het G8will have such a sensor.

0 upvotes

A small correction: the kit lens included should be 14-42mm II, not 14-45mm. The photo this link referred to shows clearly that 42mm is the maximum in the zoom range.

0 upvotes

Even Olympus is upping their video features...

0 upvotes

I still don't understand why Panasonic isn't offering electronic first curtain shutter. Heck, my Samsung NX20 has EFCS and it was announced more than three years ago. Other than that, though, I don't really see much to nitpick about with this camera. It looks like a solid offering.

8 upvotes

Two possible reasons.

1. The Panasonic sensor is incapable of that (because Panasonic is behind Sony in sensor technology).

2. Panasonic was too lazy/cheap to hire a developer to program it into the camera's operating system. Maybe this review will make them regret their stinginess.

0 upvotes

I played with a G7 at a B&H last week, because I've been longing a DSLR like camera with chunky buttons, grippy body and a large viewfinder. And I have to say, I was quite impressed with G7. It has one of the nicest Viewfinders of all cameras right now. I would say the viewfinder is even better than X-T1. You have to use it to believe it, its just larger and with good coverage. I'm surprised most reviews aren't doing justice to the viewefinder.

Everything else seemed very nice and usable. I'm tired of these tiny mirrorless bodies with menu driver controls. This seemed like a breath of fresh air.

Now if only, they added auto exposure bracketing with 5 frames, 2 full EV steps apart, like the OM-D EM1, that would've been perfect. But may be in another couple of iterations.

3 upvotes

What exactly are you using bracketing for that requires more than 7 frames at full 1ev stops?

2 upvotes

Don't knock it 'till you try it....ok I've tried and now I'm knocking it.

0 upvotes

the specs comparison table seems to show that the E M-10 lcd is the tilting type. Isn't it fully articulated?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Nope, tilting. Of the OMDs, only the E-M5ii is fully articulated. I prefer the tilting LCD, though I can see that some folks would prefer the full articulated LCD.

0 upvotes

Folks like me! Reason being, you can use it at high and low angles in portrait orientation, and aren't locked in landscape orientation when you want to shoot from the hip or overhead.

4 upvotes

Agreed, Samuel.

My GX7 has the regular tilty type, and I find that in many of the situations where I actually want to tilt it, I prefer a portrait framing, and so the tilt functionality is pointless anyway! So I still do a lot of squatting for low-angle photos...

2 upvotes

The fully articulated screen is perfect for shooting videos. And Panasonic wanted the G7 to be a little video monster.

0 upvotes

Check out my photo, The Tourists, in my album, Selected Photos. Shot with the 14-42 at 15 mm, enlarged to 18x24 for exhibition, and won third prize in a recent show. I think the 14-42 is pretty amazing for a kit lens.

0 upvotes

In the past cameras on this site have been scored compared to others in their class. Now this camera is being compared directly with DSLRs. And such a confused final message. I have deliberately chosen micro 4/3 because I like the size and weight advantage.

Much of what the reviewer writes as criticism is to my mind a plus. What does the following mean?

> Number of external controls make the camera seem more complex than it is

What I would liked to have seen is a review of the 14-140 lens. At £599 for the body only the camera is looking expensive next to the Olympus. £849 for camera and zoom make it look more attractive. At the end of the day, regrettably I think that the shutter shock is going to put me off this one. I'll stick with my G3 until that one gets sorted out.

1 upvote

I don't agree that you should ask Panasonic to dumb down the G7 to suit less experienced users. Less experienced users with no intention to learn will simply set the camera to auto and leave it there anyway.

Dumb the camera down and it will still be used on auto whilst those seeking to improve will have less functions to explore and learn from,and those who would like an advanced camera that is physically smaller (we do exist) will give it a complete miss.

More involved camera users are not all looking for a substantial size camera in order to demonstrate our expertise. The larger the body the more status for the photographer?

Anyway the G7 is already too large - give me the GM1/5 and to heck with my street cred .... ;)

Comment edited 54 seconds after posting

3 upvotes

My hope isn't really for Panasonic to dumb down the G7 (though starting with a blank piece of paper, when it comes to the menus and interface wouldn't be a terrible idea, for them or their rivals), but to decide what they want it to be.

My concern was that it risks being too complex for beginners but not well built or enthusiast-focused enough to win-over dedicated photographers who might also be looking at the E-M10, X-T10, a6000 or even the GX7.

These are more vague concerns about it getting noticed, rather than criticisms, per se. And, as I conclude, if you have any interest in video, these concerns are irrelevant.

Comment edited 13 seconds after posting

6 upvotes

For anyone interested in video, this camera is unique: a 4k ILC under $1000.

0 upvotes

^^ Just like the older Samsung NX500 ?

0 upvotes

Smaller sensor (for 4K-video), no mic input, lower bitrate, no fully articulated screen, no viewfinder, fewer lenses, adaptors and no speedboosters.

1 upvote

I hate it when reviewers try to make a negative out of an excellent set of external controls! "First time ILC buyers", indeed! Had a look at the controls on a PowerShot G3X or a Coolpix P610 lately?

8 upvotes

Those are definitely both mass-market models.

1 upvote

I don't know if it's my computer/browser, but I see no change in samples when switching back and forth from eshutter to mechanical shutter.

0 upvotes

Very VERY VERY subtle change... not really noticeable unless you look back and forth a couple of times.

0 upvotes

Thanks for the review, which seems balanced and fair. Did you get a chance to plug an HDMI cable in to see if live view is available in shooting mode? According to the advanced manual (section 7) it is, allowing for shooting stills while monitoring, e.g. in a studio environment. It also says that live view via HDMI is disabled when you start recording video. Can you confirm these statements? Previews of the camera on other sites stated or implied that clean HDMI out is available, but there seems to be some confusion about this now.

0 upvotes

Shutter shock as a MFT contagious symptoms, but who got it first? Olympus or Panasonic?

Other than work-around, Who will be the first to stop it? Or as Canon always says "We see impossible".

"We see impossible"?

0 upvotes

Shutter clunk destroys this camera and the auto ISO, is that an issue?

The rest on the cons are reaching, however.

It's a clunker.

As usual... SO CLOSE; but no cigar.

PS: The price is a con.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

I sent my E-P5 back because around 1/3 of all photos suffered from shutter shock.
For me this is a total no-go. I don't mind CA and such but I need a sharp photo or my brain cries foul. Don't know how bad it is with the G7 but the E-P5 was a joke. Ok, they came with a fix many months after release, but for me it was too little too late. I find it ridiculous that a major manufacturer releases something that has problems at shutter speeds as common as 1/100.
When will this be fixed once and for all?
When will 4/3 go beyond 16MP? I like to shoot at 16:9 which gives me 12MP. I know, that's enough for most photos, but it's 2015 now!

8 upvotes

Shutter shock will be more pronounced If they go beyond 16MP.

3 upvotes

It amazes me that after all the discussions and evidence that shutter shock is an issue for many body/lens combinations, Panasonic release such a feature rich camera but fail to address this fundamental problem.

1 upvote

Next gen electronic shutters should negate the problem.

0 upvotes

Shutter shock would rule out any camera for me. I spent years battling with the vibration produced by an 80's 35mm film camera, with many good images ruined. It does seem sad that considering the huge developments in technology since then, this issue is still rearing its head. I guess the dominance of the spec sheet plays a part - things which can be quantified on paper are given a higher precedence by the makers than those which cannot. Thank goodness we have the web and sites like this now to highlight such issues before we waste time, effort and money discovering them ourselves.

0 upvotes

Total comments: 473

Editorial content

Product database

Community

About us Work for us Advertise with us FAQ Feedback Interest-Based Ads Privacy Legal

All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998 - 2015 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.

Mobile site