The Panasonic G7 will be announced on Monday May 18 at 6am London time. And those are the specs:
– 4K video. 4K Photo
– 4K 30p / 24p
– Contrast AF employing the DFD technology
– 16MP Digital Live MOS sensor
– New Venus engine
– 360-degree panorama function
– Shutter speed 1/16000
– 2.36 million dot organic EL EVF
– 1.04 million dot free-angle monitor
Follow the live blogging on 43rumors! And subscribe our newsletter here to get the announcement news:
[wysija_form id=”2″]
via Digicameinfo.
71 Responses
Nice specs, now to see the MSRP and body size. If they’ve kept it around $750 and taken some cues from the E-M10 for body size but with a better grip, they’ve certainly gotten my attention. I have a GM1 and am sold on the sensor compared to my E-M5 (no significant differnece, a pretty high compliment to Panasonic).
Really not bad. It sounds like the inexpensive version of the GH4.
“360-degree panorama function”
Good. Nice feature to have.
With both 4K and DFD, if it maintains the pricing model of the previous G series, it will be the best value in m43 for both stills and video. By far!!
Agreed. Lack of IBIS is the only thing that might make me hesitate to endorse it over the E-M10. Two worthy competitors.
Doesnt the EM10 only have 3 axis IBIS? If it had 5 axis like the EM1/5 I could understand feeling the EM10 is a viable alternative, but while it’s good, 3axis isn’t great, and seems to fall short when compared to OIS.
there’s no “only” about the 3 axis. It’s almost up with the 5 and often performs better than OIS (I have compared on 14-45 and 100-300. I’d rather use the 3 axis but it’s close on the 14-45). With long legacies it works very well.
I think there’s some confirmation bias there. While Oly buffs often offer up anecdotal experience and say it’s awesome, The actual comparative stuff I’ve seen places it a bit better than he GX7s 2 axis, but well short of the 5axis.
well I’ve got the GX7 too and it’s more than a “bit” better than the 2 axis in that model. GX7’s still a great camera, mind! Fair enough tho: I’ve only got other people’s opinions to take from vs the 5 axis (And from what I read the E-M5 MkII is probably significantly better?). The 3 axis is still VERY good though and I’ll stand by that statement all day.
The G-series have better ergonomics, better handling and a far better interface than the EM10. That beats the EM10’s IBIS along with it’s too-small body and fiddly controls.
The G-series have ALWAYS been the best bang for the buck M4/3 cameras!
If they only had the Constant Preview (full-time live view in M mode) feature of the GH, GM and GX7!
LX100 has constant preview as well.
Ugh. It doesn’t?
Deal breaker for me. I’ve been hooked on that since day 1.
I couldn’t find it in the G5 or G6 or GX1 (which I own) when I looked.
It’s in the Custom Menu on the GH2 and GX7.
It’s THE best feature!
So far, so good
All it remains to be seen now, is the price?
My guess is 799$/€ with kit lens.
It will probably compete with Olympus E-M10, Sony A6000/A6100 and Samsung
NX500.
The real price and it’s not a trivial consideration, is having to buy OIS lenses or have no image stabilisation. That’s the main problem for Olympus camera and lens owners, who have Olympus lenses (with no OIS) but it’s also a problem for all M43 users if they want to use legacy lenses or even Panasonic lenses like the 25mm f/1.4.
Now, with 42,5/1,7 Panasonic has bright alternatives for almost all current Olympus lenses. Except 75/1,8, which is an outstanding performer but this focus distance is somewhat limited.
Finally , 4K & DFD .
It should feature at least this 2 items to make G7 relevant to the market .
My prediction hit it again .
Your “prediction”?
I predicted every one of the specifications accurately. Even the ones you haven’t seen yet.
No-one believes me either.
Either show some proof (a link maybe?) or don’t mention it at all.
Please, tell us more about your predictions.
I wonder if panorama will work -never did on GX7 ..or the wifi
What are you talking about?
Organic EL EVF. Does that mean it’s different tech than the previous stacked EVF?
Hmm. Isn´t the GH4 using the same OLED EVF already? The other (stacked) EVFs are LCD as far as I know / remember. The newer LCD EVFs are also stacked (but scanning faster – So you don´t see the rainbow effect that pronounced any more (compared to the GX7 EVF for example).
The LCD’s are not stacked but have coloured pixels, the ones you are thinking of are the older field sequential ones which showed one colour at a time. The new ones aren’t just ‘that but faster’ they simply show all colours at once.
Oh. Ok. Thought the new ones are still sequential driven ^^.
So Panasonic still doesn’t want to offer IBIS except in their GX cameras (assuming the GX8 will have IBIS again, what we, of course, don’t know yet), even after Sony, too, has finally accepted that it’s the way to go?
IBIS or 4k, pick one. Then pick the camera that offers it. Right now there seems to be a sensor cooling issue preventing both in one camera. One day, sure, but not yet.
Actually, IBIS or (4K + DFD)
I’m really afraid IBIS and DFD are mutually exclusive as well.
Yes but is there a technical issue driving this (DFD not with IBIS)? That was my point.
Like Panasonic, Sony offers it only in their stills focused cameras and not their hybrid cameras.
With legacy glass, IBIS has a clear advantage, but if you use native glass, the nod goes to OIS since it lets you have stabilized high quality video. Of course, with 4K you can shoot wide and stabilize in post and still have much better video than the Oly codecs produce.
Yes but it is just letting Olympus mFT lenses in as well. That is not really to the advantage of Panasonic. So I understand them really well. I think they see the GX7/8 as a RF cams for streetshooting in which legacy lenses do really well. GH4 seems to be a good subject for IBIS, but it is not: you need exceptional IBIS to get video very stable. 2-3 stops won’t work well enough. So I can see why Panasonic did not implement it on the GH4. People will use tripods are rigs to keep it stable enough.
As far as I can see, the next Sony E-Mount camera will be the A7r II, and it will offer both IBIS and highest-quality video. IMHO OIS has no inherent advantage over IBIS, not for stills and not for video. Except maybe, perhaps, for extremely long supertele lenses, but what I get from the E-M1 with 800mm equiv. FL is quite nice, too.
DFD!
So you get your 4K photo feature =) ^^
Wow, that’s actually way more than I expected after reading the previous G7 rumor articles and the (shitty, negative, stupid, immature, hateful) comments (written by the trolls and haters and those who can never be satisfied) below them!
Panasonic has another winner here!
Agreed. It sounds almost like a GH4 without weather sealing. I imagine there will be a few other features the GH4 has that will be left off of the G7, but for their entry level hybrid model, they are loading it with features!
No different from the G6 vs GH3 actually, the G6 was newer and in some ways better than the GH3.
The GH3 had a much better sensor.
Depends who you ask and what for, even though the GH3 was the video flagship in a number of ways the G6 was better with its (non multi-aspect) GH2 sensor.
no it doesn’t. The G6 had a better body and EVF than the GH3 and was more of a photographer’s camera and that is the bit where it would depend who you asked – yes in some ways the CAMERA was better – but the SENSOR in the GH3, as Steve has correctly stated, was much better – colour fidelity, dynamic range and snr all better.
I presume you are talking DXO scores… I did say for video. The G6 also had peaking and a few other things, again for video.
No I’m talking stills results. I’ve had multiple cameras with either of these two sensors. DXO backs it up, mind. Peaking is for stills as well as video, btw! Steve said better sensor and was correct as far as stills go. It wasn’t clear from your comment that you meant only for video so apologies if that was where you were going with it and I couldn’t honestly give a view on that side.
Well, with DFD on the playground the game has changed a little: who prefers a smaller, fancier and still ergonomically good body (and cannot afford a GH4) now has an excellent choice (it’s my case).
On the other hand I also like the GX series as well, but I have 3 concerns here:
– the ergonomics is a bit worse due to the rangefinder style:
– no swiveling screen (GX8 presumably will have);
– I’m really afraid whether the computationally expensive DFD and the IBIS (which lowers the heat dissipation ability) are mutually exclusive or not. Hope for the latter.
I don’t think DFD increases the heat load on the sensor. I’m pretty sure it would be processor heat, so it’s likely that heat issues will not be a factor in having DFD and IBIS. If anything, it is possible that a floating sensor will interfere with getting an accurate reading on the out of focus characteristics of lenses, but even that seems doubtful. I think the only things that are incompatible are high quality video and IBIS.
You might be right, it worths to find out.
To implement IBIS you need to shift the sensor at high speed. Thus, from basic engineering principles you want the sensor module to have as low an inertia (mass) as possible.
Now, to dissipate heat effectively you need to attach some heat-sinking devices to the sensor (fins, cold plates, heat pipes, anisotropic graphite strips, what have you..) which increase inertia and mass.
Therefore, it is much better, from a thermal POV, to deal with a stationary sensor than with a shifting one. They will run cooler and be less electrically noisy.
I certainly hope that the GX8 will stick with the tilting LCD, which I and many others prefer. But the G7 looks like a winner to me. I will certainly wait to see the GX8, and maybe for the price of the G7 to drop a bit, but I can definitely see myself getting one at some point. I don’t need the video capabilities of the GH4.
Other thing worth to mention:
Despite using the same sensor I bet G7 will have slightly higher DxO Mark score than GX7 due to 2 facts:
– The additional circuitry might have been evolved,
– G7 presumably has a much better heat dissipation system.
It will be slightly better because the improved Venus engine
DxO measures the sensor’s RAW performance – and I’m not 100% sure but I think Venus engine hasn’t to do really much with it.
They use the RAW files, and even then, the processing engine has been used.
I don’t wanty to say “I told you so” but I told you so. I would believe it had no DFD when I see it. And there it is. Competition means they cannot hold back. Now: excellent camera with a good sensor, but the sensor is now its weakest point. However: not nearly so as the G6 sensor was.
So if you thought it would have no DFD, and it does have DFD how do you say ‘I told you so”?
Good new, it look like an GH4 but lower bitrates videos mode. It will compete with Em-5 II and X-T10.
I still don’t get it. Panasonic still offers lenses with no stabilization or lenses with out-dated OIS, which can’t compete with Olympus IBIS. Yet no IBIS in any camera except the GX7. It is a huge mistake. Even Olympus, which doesn’t focus as much on video has shown that IBIS and video work very well together.
IBIS has not only the advantage that every lens is stabilized, but also that every lens profits from innovation in stabilization technology.
Really, it is a pity, that Panasonic is so less innovative, here. No IBIS no buy. Video isn’t so important to sacrifice the advantage of IBIS for it.
I think this will split opinion but I’m in general agreement. Live IBIS is a godsend – it won’t be easy using the 300 f/4 (if it ever arrives) on the G7, for example. Even the GX7 is a bit of a pain in that you have to trust it to stabilise your shot whereas you SEE it with the Oly version ( I have both Panny and Oly gear, pros and cons to both brands). It would have been nice to see at least the GX7’s IBIS make it to the G7, for me more useful than DFD on this level of body, though BOTH would be preferable if it’s even possible….
I see no mention of burst rate in these specs either. Burst can get you around lack of IBIS at times, but it needs to be fast – 8fps or higher really. Depends entirely on the situation too!
Why not just use an Oly camera then? Well I prefer the output from the Panasonic sensor. I just wish there was a body with that sensor and an Oly set of features that wasn’t as pricey as the E-M1. Or maybe I just need to “pony up” for one of those!
“Burst can get you around lack of IBIS at times, but it needs to be fast – 8fps or higher really.”
How? Surely it is shutter speed that gets round lack of IBIS?
Your shake when hand holding has peaks and troughs to it. A fast burst can sometimes (more often than not) catch a point where shake is minimal. I’ve used it before and it does help (with long lenses in my own case). I’d rather have a fast shutter and / or IBIS of course, but burst can be a big help at times when neither are available (try shooting in Derbyshire, UK, in winter – good luck getting that fast shutter! 🙂 )
Fair point.
Looking out of our ront door we see Kinder and the Pennines so I sympathise with you regards light level!
hehe you’re not too far from me then! In fact possibly close to where I’m from originally. I’m not claiming it’s a “magic bullet” solution of course, but it can come in handy at times (i used to use it with a Canon 7D and 400 5.6 when the light levels weren’t good, as an example).
It is not a huge mistake. Their choices probably hinges on these things:
– Ability
– Necessasity
– Strategy
1) Oly’s IBIs is so good for a reason: they have a very advanced technology because of their medical equipment department. Many over here think you can just make something like that. No. it takes skill.
It is why Panny is so good in video, where Oly lacks. Same reason.
2) With good OIS, which Panny has, you do not need it really. Nice to have. But who needs 2 stops IBIS when the lenses are 3 -4 stops good?
3a) Suppose you introduce 2-3 stops IBIS. You now will be directly compared to your main rival and lose in a review of your system. Better to avoid any such comparison.
3b) When you have good IBIS, you are now as good as OLy. Still no advantage. Yet: now all good Oly glass including the expensive fast zooms are now viable on a Panny body. You wan’t more competition here? The situation now is that Panny lenses can be used on both Panny and Oly bodies without any problems, while the same cannot be said from Oly lenses.
So to me, for us as consumers of course it would be great to have good IBIS. But what is good for us is sometimes bad for a company or simply not possible to achieve.
My experience with OIS on the P35-100/2.8 is that the lens is full of micro-jitters making it useless for handheld video. My hands are less shaky than the lens.
I know that some of it is just Oly fanboy stuff, but those people who insist stabilization of ANY kind is neccessary and a deal breaker, and that IBIS is a miracle kind of make me giggle. I shot for YEARS without ant stabilization at all. The only stabilization a Leica has is good technique (Hmmm… I guess that explains those guys who think Leica has nothing on m43. Truth: It does, and thats coming from a big m43 fan and user).
Apparantly, digital really spoils people. Reading comments on camera sites makes me think that nobody learns good technique anymore. Seems like if I loaned some folks my OM1 with a nifty 50, I would get back 36 poorly exposed shaky shots.
Being able to shoot handheld where a tripod would previously have been required is hardly indicative of poor technique.
People who disqualify the desire for technology that makes life easier because they “shot for years without it” make me giggle.
Some people create art, others approach photography as a craft. Technology will improve your craft. It will never improve your art. It’s been my experience that those who chase technology are craftsmen. There is no shame in that. If your job is to take 500 school photos at the local middle school, better tech will make your life easier.
But for someone who looks at photography as an art, IBIS is just not that big a deal. It’s useful in a narrow range of lighting conditions, it is at best marginally better than stabilized lenses (and worse with some lenses), and good technique has always been able to accomplish what IBIS does for 90% of its users (good technique could always give an extra 2-3 stops). It shines when wanting some stabilization for old legacy telephotos, but other than that, it’s just not particularly significant. I realize it’s the only thing that makes Olympus bodies (bodies, not optics) stand out so the fanboys repeat the IBIS mantra endlessly, but it is honestly far down on the list of features a photographer should look for in a camera (unless you shoot primarily legacy telephotos).
So giggle all you want when I roll my eyes at “photographers” who salivate over technology, and call me when you find that some tech that helps you create compelling photos by improving your composition.
Where did anyone ever suggest that IBIS helps you to create art? It’s a tool that can either aid in achieving the task at hand, or be of no use at all, just like any other tool. That fact stands, no matter how many straw man arguments or derisive sneering you put up against it and those who appreciate technology for what it is.
This is much more interesting than what the original rumour claims. I really like Panasonic’s lineup of varied models, in comparison to Olympus’s reiterations of almost the same camera. Panasonic has been really innovative in the past few years by bringing to the table the DFD technology, viable 4k capabilities, newer generation of sensors, miniaturised bodies and lenses, and etc. This just shows that what a giant technological company like Panasonic is capable of. It has been in the top 3 of companies with the most patents for years. Its technological accumulation and resources simply cannot be matched by some small company that cannot even design their own sensors. My next body would certainly be a Panasonic.
very nice specs indeed! ….looks far better than my E-M10