Here is a roundup of new GX7 tests:
1) Blunty posted that GX7 vs GH3 shootout. Click on play on the video on top to see the it.
2) Dpreview posted the GX7 studio comparison images.
3) ePhotozine (Click here) posted a new Panasonic Lumix GX7 Vs Olympus OM-D E-M5 Comparison Review:
While the cameras use different sensors, with Panasonic using their own sensor, and the Olympus OM-D E-M5 using a Sony sensor, they both produce similar levels of noise, with a slight benefit going to the GX7 at the highest ISO settings of ISO12800 and ISO25600.
4) Dpreview and Fotopolis posted some new full size image samples.
5) Richard posted this set of pictures on Facebook showing a ripped off GX7 body. Looks well made!
—-
GX7 preorder list (Click on store name to open the GX7 price, specs and preorder page):
Silver GX7 body at Amazon US, BHphoto, Adorama, Samys, Wex Deutschland, Wex UK , Amazon JP.
Silver GX7 with 14-42mm lens at Amazon, BHphoto, Adorama, Samys, Henrys, Wex Deutschland, WexUK, Amazon UK.
Black GX7 body at Henrys, Wex Deutschland, Wex UK, Amazon UK, Amazon Japan.
Black GX7 with 14-42mm lens at Henrys, Wex Deutschland, Wex UK, Amazon UK.
Black GX7 with 20mm lens at Henrys, Wex UK, Amazon UK, Amazon Japan.
Silver GX7 with 20mm lens at Henrys, Wex UK, Amazon UK, Amazon Japan.
79 Responses
While the cameras use different sensors, with Panasonic using their own sensor, and the Olympus OM-D E-M5 using a Sony sensor, they both produce similar levels of noise, with a slight benefit going to the GX7 at the highest ISO settings of ISO12800 and ISO25600.
If they aren’t shooting in RAW and then converting them with the same software with the same settings, then it’s wrong to say this.
You can check dpreview studio shot and select RAW:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8599640731/panasonic-gx7-first-impressions-review/2
GX7 looks quite good
Yes, GX7 looks good. Actually, RAW shows not a single difference compared to E-P5 – not even at the highest ISO as some reviews claimed, which makes me think Panasonic has not really designed a new sensor here but just tweaked the one from the GH3, which in turn is the same as in the OMD and of course E-P5.
I second this… looks like it’s exactly the same sensor… Also in the video test the image looks a lot like one from a Sony sensor.
the main diffrence I could see was less skewing in the GX7 of the image than the GH3 when fast panning. I’de guess about 1/3 less rolling shutter effect!
http://www.smallcamerabigpicture.com/lumix-gx7-review-part-2-sensor-shutter-and-in-body-stabilization/
PART TWO IS UP…It’s a Brand-Spanking-New Sensor.
But we all know Fanboys are going to harp that it’s not new, even after seeing the facts…
they(pany) told about design & develop but never told who is manufacturer?
Panasonic itself is the manufacturer and even if it was another manufacturer, that’s not the most important part, the important is that they designed, if they designed it, even if it was made by Sony, it’d be different from Olympus and GH3’s sensor.
Design and development are the critical stages there are several fabrication plants including Sony,Panasonic,Canon,Toshiba,Aptina.I can see this becoming a popular way to bring a sensor to the market.This approach has enabled Nikon with the D5200/D7100 to bring the best APS sensor to market.Presumably if you have a large enough user base to amortize costs of a large enough production run it will allow companies to design a sensor exactly to their spec a high MP,native 50 ISO mFT sensor for me Please 🙂 Obviously Sony in the past have been at an advantage as they were able to spread the design and production costs across multiple camera models from Nikon,Pentax and naturally Sony Nex/Alpha.
I wonder how small a run you need to cover costs maybe we will see some unique options,such as a sensor truly optimized for video or high ISO or high res etc
+1
Looks that way to me as well – a modified GH3 sensor and a better jpeg engine. Which is not bad at all.
Youre trying too hard. Get over it. Its a new sensor.
Fools… they’ll think anything..
All you need to do is read the sensor specs (e.g., total pixels, and pixels height and width, to see it’s not the same as the GH3 sensor.
No it’s not. When someone is talking about a camera that means they are talking about a camera, not just a sensor, which you are trying to say. Even though cameras use software for NR, that software is still part of the camera. So why is that statement wrong?
The problem is that you don’t know what you’re comparing. Without knowing how the NR and sharpening were set in the cameras, and how the default values compare, you can’t really reach any conclusions. The GX7 might appear to have less noise simply because NR is set higher. Adjust the other camera’s NR to match, and the comparison might come out differently.
Comparing jpegs is valid if you shoot jpegs, but only if you make a controlled test and understand the variables involved. Right now, we don’t know anything about those variables.
The first half of the video, looked like the GH3 was a half a stop or so more exposed, to me. At that size it’s hard to see much difference, but I suspect the night shots would go to the GH3 for more detail in the night lights. Not to bad for the GX7, it’s just to bad it doesn’t come in black, or I would have ordered one.
Like this side-by-side no hyperbole review. Blunty’s done this before and it’s very revealing and refreshingly appealing. My general take is the GX7’s motion output looks better next to the GH3. While I suspect that GH3 still gives the photographer more choice, the new model’s sensor certainly looks sharper and is handling colours and contrast better, as well as shutter roll. A realworld sample. It doesn’t address all aspects, but for comparison of old vs new output, this is quite a useful test.
The reason it doesn’t come in black (despite all of the websites in various markets that indicate that it does so) is that the EU restricts non-camcorders to 2.9 seconds of video and their batteries to 14 shots (RAW + JPEG). However, because the UK is not part of the Euro region, the “Hello Kitty” pink version can shoot up to 29 minutes and the battery allows for over 100 shots (JPEG only – RAW is prohibited).
Clarification of above: The EU does allow the grey version of the camera to have full capabilities, including the .mov codec.
Further to that:
The EU imposes extra taxes if a device is considdered a video recoder – and having over 30min of recoding places it in this class – hence EU cams tend to stop recoding at 29min…
N.B. if the resolution is below 768×520 you can record more than 30min as it is not conciddered “video” resolution/quality.
I just have to say “WOW” on the video capability of the GX-7. Too bad I am not into video, just stills.
I feel that GH3 has better HDR than GX7, but GX7 has better color saturation, more sharp. But it is possible that the less contrast of GH3 and the higher HDR be better to color grading. Great comparison from Blunty, thank you Blunty !
I see a lot more similarity than differences between the GX7 and GH3 videos. Very nice comparison, great to see the the GX7 is capable of such good results – it’s an important capability for me.
Although the GH3 may be better for grading, I’m surprised how well the GX7 keeps up w/ the GH3 in video considering that it has a much lower mbps. That new sensor is looking to be a real improvement over the GH3 (which I own) and the OM-D. Can’t wait to see what the OM-D Pro and the GH5 will bring, haha!
Video was shot at 24mbps…enough said.
I don’t think he cleaned the GH3 lens too well (he might have wiped it, but smudged his thumb-print oils while doing so)
If the lens are veryfiably equally clean then the GX7 wins hands down. (The whole GH3 reel is foggy in comparison)
I guess it could be due to different apertures. Look at the DOF in the last scene.
It may also explain the flare on some GH3 shoots.
now dpreview published new scene shots with gx7 http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8599640731/panasonic-gx7-first-impressions-review/2
wheres the moron Betiko saying this was the GH2 sensor? Ooop, nowhere to be found
ePhotozine have messed up the WB in the last review (and had to reshoot after they published) and here not shooting raw and making bold statements – if their techniques are flawed let’s wait for a reputable source to compare them properly
Unfortunately, the web is full of fools who don’t have a clue about how to do CONTROLLED testing, and as a result generate results that mean little to nothing. The web is also full of people who take these meaningless results and use them to justify what they already believe.
Even most of the major, “reputable” blog sites produce reviews that are full of errors.
personally I like dpr text as a reference point, being Amazon owned they clearly show a Canon & Nikon bias since the website is link bait … but I never look at their photos because their reviewers can’t of find anything interesting to shoot
mingthein – now that is a reliable place to look if he’s reviewed something because he can shoot and write
photozone – unfortunately haven’t addresses the biggest failing of m43 = Oly/pan do not correct each others lenses … so testing an Oly lens on a GX1 is worthless. For other makes its a great resource
kind of getting to like DxO
@
dCap
“personally I like dpr text as a reference point, being Amazon owned they clearly show a Canon & Nikon bias since the website is link bait … but I never look at their photos because their reviewers can’t of find anything interesting to shoot”
DPreveiw have very inconsistent exposures amongst their test shots making them useless for any kind of accurate comparison
“mingthein – now that is a reliable place to look if he’s reviewed something because he can shoot and write”
Problem with him and Robin Wong etc is that they have a clear fanboy bias in favour of mFT and Olympus in particular
“photozone – unfortunately haven’t addresses the biggest failing of m43 = Oly/pan do not correct each others lenses … so testing an Oly lens on a GX1 is worthless. For other makes its a great resource”
They have addressed this and make it very clear that they are fully aware of software corrections.In fact originally they refused to give ratings to mFT lenses for this exact reason.As for testing the other makers lenses on the others bodies the shared mount means that many of us will do exactly that. I use both Olympus and Panasonic lenses on my Panasonic cameras.
“”kind of getting to like DxO””
DXO is a wonderful resource for those who understand it the overall score is a bit silly but the data provided in the graphs is excellent.
They were even comparing shots that were set at different f-stops and shutter speeds. WTF?
You noticed that too, eh?
What a joke of a ‘magazine’.
To be fair DPreview do this all the time yet posters there argue to the death about their comparison shots which are often anything but comparable.
The GX7 looks like a great camera. I have the E-P5 and have to say that the GX7 finally brings the lineup up to par with the Sony Sensor.
Now when we get clean ISO 3200 then I can get excited again. As it is, great times and no real bad choices out there if you’re in the market for a m4/3 body.
crap vs crap – crap wins
Assuming you are the first crap.
John, really your comment is literally full of crap.
I’m under the impression that GX7’s rolling shutter is better than GH3’s. Overall, I’m pretty impressed by the GX7, it turned to be a great camera – from impressions, of course. Panasonic seems to finally catch up with Sony in sensor department – even if it’s a couple of years later -, the tiltable EVF seems very nice, the overall feats seem very balanced between photo and video. I’ve 1 month to think about the possibility of buying this camera.
I was looking at dpreview’s new test scene, and GX7’s raw sample looks just about the same as E-P5’s. I’m also thinking that it’s looking better than NEX-6’s?
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8599640731/panasonic-gx7-first-impressions-review/2
Also, try the 5D. I was expecting the results to be much more obviously different.
The 5D does stand out above all the others though. It is the only one that is clearly superior. Between the GX7, P5 and the Nex-6 it just depends on where you look and at what you focus on. They are all very close.
I´ve done this. For example raw Iso 800 with the 5D3 is better than Iso 200 with the others, esp. if you compare it the most logical way: for the printed output…, even more so in the low light version of the test box….
“I’m also thinking that it’s looking better than NEX-6′s?”
That was my impression too. GX7 on average is better than the NEX-6.
Though, since NEX-6 has a very good sensor, I think DPR might have rushed the shots.
P.S. Though with normal light, rendering of the colored circles pattern (on the right side of the bottles) suggest that GX7 is also far from perfect. But confirms that it has very weak or no AA filter at all.
Awesome test from blunty.. really appreciate your effort! Now i can’t wait for a hacked GX7..! (drooling)
video test : GX7 vs GH3
if vataly hacked GX7 above 50Mbs that mean GH3 will lose
Agreed. Just wonder what codec was used in the GH3. Yes, get the GX7 hacked to above 50Mbs and I will cancel my order to BMPCC 🙂
GX7 seems a bit better in high iso and a bit more sharper when comparing raws in DPR samples. Removing AA filter completely was a good move by panasonic.
Too bad raws are not yet supported, would be interesting to try and push shadows from in dpr samples and compare side by side e-p5 and gx7 🙂
“GX7 seems a bit better in high iso and a bit more sharper when comparing raws in DPR samples. Removing AA filter completely was a good move by panasonic.”
Check the colored circles (on the right side from the bottles; opposite of the money bill) and “enjoy” the lack of/weak AA filter.
Now go sing me a swan song how easy it is to correct aliasing artifacts in PP.
P.S. Sadest part: all cameras to some extent fail the test. DPR needs to add at least one medium format camera and at least one Foveon sensor camera to the test – to be able to tell how it actually looks.
Not more than e-p5 raw file, but i do see more detail. Where in e-p5 sample thinnest lines blur almost into one big mess, gx7 still keeps them separated.
Blame the poor pana jpg engine, that could not handle it well and might be because of early firmware too. Who knows. But i do know, that when i convert raws on pc, i can expect far more control and almost always better result that pana ooc jpg’s.
Ill sing you the song dummy…
Moire is very easy to correct in lightroom and post. A little moire is far outweighed by the extra detail you get from a filterless sensor.
Can you sing me a song about how youre gonna get rid of the artifacts youll get trying to match the detail from the filterless sensor by oversharpening?
i dont know
iso 6400 is better at OMD and is Totaly usable…
who cares then on iso 25600 when they are noisy both(who cares who is noissy slightly less)
back in the olde days when we shot film
tmax 3200 was pretty much left alone to relatively few low light fans … you could push it to 6400 and beyond but it got messy
the ISO 3200 we have in the OMD sensor is pretty amazing by comparison
yes I agree and thatswhy I dont understand the statement that GX7 IQ is better, because the iso 12800/25600 is less noisy on the GX7
Panasonic made a really nice camera to compete with the OMD.
These are exciting times for the M43 community.
“These are exciting times for the M43 community.”
+10^10
No need to argue.
Yes!
Hopefully Panasonic’s old habit of crippling on purpose image quality (i.e. leaving the best sensor to the flagship model only) is gone, for good. The market taught them the lesson the hard way, but they seem to have learned finally.
you mean as opposed to Olympus using the same 12mp sensor time after time after time lol
It is nice to see, meanwhile we can choose different kameras to take great pictures with iso even more then 1600. Buy a OM-D (like me) ore a E-P5 or a GX7 or GH3 and some great lenses (9-18, 20, 45, 60, 35-100) and you will enjoy a small system for many years
That the GX7 is better than the GH3 for video in some aspects is more evidence (if not confirms) that the GH3 sensor is Sony made, while the GX7 is Panasonic’s design. Pana’s video in regard to rolling shutter and moire was better in the GH2, while DR is better in the GH3. So I guess GX7 sensor tests will show that DR is less than GH3 / E-M5 etc., while high ISO and detail will be equal / slightly better, and also video will be improved.
ISO 125 and 200 render more sharp detail on GX7 vs E-P5.. 🙂
In addition to a slightly better High ISO I am pleased witht the sensor performance Panasonic has achieved – Not really a huge step forward but a small one, and that’s pretty much all I suppose we could expect.
Really happy about the improvement in low IS0 🙂
It’s a huge step for Panasonic, as their previously best sensor was from the GH2. Dependening on what Sony announces next, Panasonic might still be one generation behind though.
“A Lie told often enough becomes the truth.”
GH2 sensor was pretty quickly matched by Panny with the G3 sensor (slightly lower DR vs. slightly more details). G5 sensor is better than G3 and GH2. G6 sensor is differently tweaked and I personally can’t tell whether it is better than G5: different for sure, but better?
As detail rendering and color fidelity goes, even GF6 is better than GH2 – despite its lower resolution.
See for yourself:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
and stop spreading the lies.
Sheesh. Learn to separate the sensor from the rest of the image processing chain, please.
The G5 and G6 use the same sensor as the GH2. It’s the rest of the image processing that makes the difference in color output, not the sensor.
Youre living up to your name there dummy. The g5 has the gh2 sensor
Okay, okay. You convinced me – that you are blind. Or too dumb to click the link and check the difference for yourself. Go on, read the DxO numbers instead – they are so much more telling than the real images anyway. /s
First, i dont care and therefore dont look at jpegs. which is what youre linking at. What youre looking at is processor difference, if I turn the in camera noise reduction to +5 images are cleaner, do you think the gh3 has more than one sensor inside and it changes when I make changes? second nikon mark..eeer i mean dxo mark is and always has been a joke.
So heres the question, are you the only person on the planet who actually thinks the G5 doesnt have the GH2 sensor?
DXO is an excellent resource for those who are able to understand it ignore the overall score and check the data provided in the graphs.The main reason so many here hate DXO is that not surprisingly a larger sensor of a similar tech generation will always out perform a smaller sensor. This works both ways a larger sensor with poorer tech will fall behind a smaller with better alternative such as happens with the Canon APS options compared to the latest mFT options.The reason for Nikon beingh at the top of the DXO charts is simple their APS options D5200/D7100 and FF options D600,D800,D800E ,D4 are the best options available in each sector.As can be easily established by downloading RAW samples
What’s so interesting but academic interest in comparing video by GH3 and GX7, if the last one has no mic input? Panas just chopped GX7 not to become its killer.. Hence GX7 is a good companion body, no more, alas..
Hahahahaha! !! Yeah, RIGHT!
This is going to be my primary camera! I’ll still keep my FF around, but this camera will be around my neck for my daily commute.
I suspect the vast majority of camera buyers who shoot video will never plug in an external mic, even if the camera allows it. If you’re saying this isn’t intended as a “professional” video camera, that’s certainly true. But the lack of a mic input won’t bother very many people.
Yes, I mean professional videography.
GX7 looks to be a rival to OMD with similar still features, and much better video, but amateur video. And not a GH3 rival, but a talented younger brother 😉
Analog input that also will collect extra EM noise from outside? No thanks.
so you prefer external audio sync?
sadomaso 😉
I guess this is also a test of the old vs new 20mm f/1.7. Look at the train pulling away towards the end. Look how the old 20mm gets confused and completely fails at autofocus. Meanwhile, the new one is rock solid. That’s why I didn’t like that lens. Also, I don’t know if it wasn’t cleaned right or something but the old 20mm is a little more foggy.
BE AWARE PEOPLE OF LUMIX GX7
This camera has the mini HDMI port locked! You cannot use the HDMI port for LIVE work. Only playback mode ! Their website says mini HDMI output but it hides the fact it’s locked! FALSE ADVERTISING
I totally agree, when I got my GX7 I read on may review sights about the “full HDMI out” and although it takes fantastic pictures and good video, I’m disappointed with the HDMI feature.