Just wondering if any Panasonic GX8 users have reports about the effectiveness of the Panasonic Dual Image Stabilization in the GX8 with properly modified lenses?
If you haven't heard of Dual I.S. [sic—Panasonic uses the periods], Panasonic claims to have perfected a method of combining the effects of in-body IS with in-lens IS.
The best breakdown of the feature's capabilities I've found so far occur in an excellent review of the GX8 by Richard Wong. The graphs about Dual I.S. start about halfway down.
In passing, let me note that it's difficult to write a really good review of a camera. The tendency is to vapor on with vapid banalities or else to create a turgid list of all the features and specs such that the review has about the same entertainment value as reading a manual. I've noticed a tendency in recent years—I think it started with Steve's Digicams—of expanding the "conclusion" section into almost a standalone mini-review in and of itself. If research shows that most readers skip to the conclusion anyway, then that seems to make sense. Although one slight oddity that then arises is that conclusions have to have conclusions. :-)
Sometimes the best reviews are amateur reviews. It requires a certain amount of passion and enthusiasm towards a camera on the part of the writer just to have the energy and diligence to do all the work to create a proper review...otherwise it's just too much of a grind. It looks like Richard did due diligence in his review of the GX8—it's nicely done. Kudos.
Years ago I ran across a very nicely-done review of the Leica M6. (Where was it, Photo.net maybe?) When I read it I thought, damn, I would have published that in the magazine. It was written by a guy from Texas I'd never heard of but whose name you might know—one Kirk Tuck.
Richard Wong's data abut the GX7's IBIS match my experience—good for a stop or a stop and a half maybe, or, in other words, not very good. His review implies that Dual I.S. in the GX8 is about as good as, and possibly a little better than, the IBIS in the OM-D E-M5 Mark II, by general consensus currently the gold standard in IBIS across brands and formats. If so, then it marks a giant step forward for Panasonic in that regard. Just wondering if any of our readers have opinions about that from real-world use.
I like Panasonic, having owned a GF1, GX1, and GX7. The latter two didn't break into the heavy use category for me, through no fault of their own, but the GF1 was one of my two most-used digital cameras since I first went digital 13 years ago. The other being my beloved Konica-Minolta 7D of sainted memory. I've asked for a GX8 to review. (I'm still in the queue for an Epson P600 review unit but have no other reviews on the horizon except one for a camera bag.)
One last comment about the GX8: seems to me that Panasonic has solved the riddle of size. I found the GX1 to be just too small for comfort for me, and although I know a great many people absolutely love the Fuji X100 and I certainly don't argue with them, I find that to be too small and fiddly too. (I wonder about the Pen F, pretty as it indisputably is.) Speaking of the M6, I remember a comment made by Andrew Matheson eons ago in his book Leica M6 to M1: Rangefinder Practice. The Leica, he said, "is a camera you can get to grips with." The GX8 seems to be a camera you can get to grips with.
Again, any users want to comment on that? I held a GX8 on a tether in New York, but I haven't shot with one.
Mike
Original contents copyright 2016 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
Michael Walsh: "Regarding camera size—am sitting here with a brand new, just arrived Pen F. I was very worried it might be too small, but having played with it for a few hours it feels just right. One thing though—everyone says 'modelled on the original Pen F,' but have to say it far more reminds me of my (very) old Leica IIIf ! Anyway, a lovely camera and I am (in Yorkshire-speak) chuffed."
Mike Peters: "The GX8 is so far the most satisfying digital still camera that I've shot with. I'm not a small or huge person, six feet, and it fits my hands perfectly.
"The GX7 was far too small, but I liked the tilting viewfinder and touch screen, but missed the articulation of the rear screen. Plus the battery was too wimpy. The GX8 uses the GH2 and FZ1000 battery, and so far at events I have put over 1200 shots on one and not killed it.
"The still image quality is a cut above the last generation of 16-MP chips, and it's very usable with judicious processing at ISO's over 3200, up to 12,800 in a pinch.
"The IS is a bit of an unknown to me. I don't use many stabilized lenses. My main zooms are the Olympus 12–40mm and 40–150mm 2.8's. What I can say is that I can shoot at 150mm at 1/60th with confidence. That being said, I've also shot with confidence at 1/125th without IS for a long time before the GX8.
"The other lenses I use are the fully manual Voigtlander ƒ/0.95's and a full complement of Panasonic and Olympus primes, only one of which, the 42.5mm ƒ/1.7, is stabilized in the lens. And when I shoot video, I rely on a 3D gimbal for stabilization.
"I have two GX8's for all of my still work, and two GH4's for my video work, and previously owned GH2, GH3 and GX7 cameras. I've always found the Olympus bodies too small, and the same for the batteries. And once you get used to moving focus points with your thumb on the rear screen while peering through the viewfinder, there's no going without it.
"Last, but not at all least, being a right-eyed user with a big nose and glasses, having the viewfinder on the left edge of the body allows me to peer into it straight on, as opposed to looking through the very top of my glasses. It's a big help, trust me.
"All in all, it's a very well designed tool for making photographs, and once you get used to the layout, it will disappear in your hands."
Massimiliano Marchetti: "I believe most camera reviews have usually a fatal flaw: they are very detailed and useful but are based mostly on first impressions. Especially with the current level of complexity of digital cameras, I do not believe spending a few days or a couple of weeks with a camera is enough to get a proper experience and understanding of it. That is why, in my opinion we often see a lot of focus on the camera features while at the same time the review misses to drill down how and if these features visibly improve the shooting envelope."
Mike replies: Back in my idealist and impoverished youth, reviewing cameras for magazines, my personal standard was that I had to use a camera for three months, including for real work, before I'd write about it. That's impractical now, of course, but you're right that too many review go too far in the opposite direction.
Edward Taylor: "I have a GX8 that I originally bought as a 4K b-roll camera to use for video along side my GH4. But I loved the camera so much that now I use it for stills and video, and find its ergonomics to be great. Image stabilization is amazing. I have pretty stable hands, but there is a real difference of at least 2–3 stops when using the GX8. Try this camera, and I think you will have a hard time putting it down. It is solid, weather resistant, and has all the bells and whistles and does everything well. I, too, used the GF1 and loved it, but this camera blows it away. I have a lot of nice cameras to choose from, but now, the GX8 always seems to be the one I grab on my way out the door."
[Edward has written a number of camera reviews for TOP. —Ed.]
Just this week I have updated my GF1 to a newer model. Always hated the add on viewfinder. My choice was between the GX8 and the Olympus Pen F, and I went for the latter. The Pen F is attractive to look at, comfortable to use with great ergonomics. IBIS played a part in my decision, too. The ability to use all those lovely m43 primes in very low light without having to bump up ISO and/or shutter speed is very worthwhile, to me at least. The GX8 felt bigger, blockier, a bit like comparing a Fujifilm X-Pro 1 to an X100. I'm fine with both, so not a deciding factor for me. 4k? Don't care. My iPhone shoots 4k video and I've never used it.
For days when I want to stick a camera into a coat pocket, I have a Panasonic GM5. Now that's one tiny high performance m43 body.
Posted by: Dave Wilson | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 10:09 AM
I have shot with a GF1 and GX1 in the past, nice cameras. The GX8 seems to be like a good successor of the line, well built, and rightly sized. But I have moved on from m4/3 in mirrorless, it's a system that does not make sense to me anymore, when the Sony Alpha 7 cameras have about the same size, and much larger sensor.
And the cost of a GX8 plus good lenses, is not very far from say an A7II with good lenses, so...
Posted by: Paulo Bizarro | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 10:18 AM
"...vapor on with vapid banalities or else to create a turgid list..." GO, Mike, GO. I loved this-in the way I like Beat Poets. Howl on! You're almost there.
Seriously, I very much enjoyed the article but those words to me back to Ginsberg, Kerouac, Ferlinghetti, etc. That's always a good feeling.
Posted by: Del Bomberger | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 12:01 PM
The Panasonic GX8 is my main camera, supplementing and to some extent supplanting a GX7 which had that role for two previous years. As you say, Panasonic have got the size exactly right - to fit my hands the GX7 always travels in the bottom half of its "ever ready" case, and the GX8 is exactly that size. The only ergonomic annoyance is the dedicated exposure compensation knob, which I find all-positioned and less useful than the more generic solution on previous Panasonic cameras.
I've used the camera extensively, particularly on a trip to Bhutan last year, and it's served well. The best way to describe the dual IS is that it "just works" - I have a high hit rate hand-holding down to 1/5s or even 1/4s - and on the Bhutan trip I got the reputation of being someone who didn't know how to use a tripod...
I recently wrote a lengthy owner's review in the form of an open letter to Panasonic, which you can read at: http://www.andrewj.com/blog/2016/an-open-letter-to-panasonic/. It goes a bit beyond a standard camera review into challenging their software/firmware strategy, but hopefully it meets your "amateur reviewer" objective.
Posted by: Andrew Johnston | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 12:03 PM
Regarding the usefulness of camera reviews. The most useful for me have been those where a series of cameras are evaluated for use under a particular set of circumstances by a user who makes her/his preferences/quirks explicit. It is fine if a given review is not comprehensive. What is much more useful is to have multiple reviews of cameras by (photographically literate) users with different interests. It's easier to understand relative merits rather than absolute properties, and if the reviewer's interests are similar to mine, it is easier to grasp why some features of cameras are good/bad.
Posted by: Adrian | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 12:19 PM
I got the Oly Pen-F recently, and so far I really like it.
Have no fear, it's not really compact. For me it's about the perfect size for serious work. (Which means, for me, a bit too big for a take-everywhere camera.)
It's about the size of the Olympus E-M5 II or the Olympus OM-1. Well, slightly bigger than the E-M5 actually, if you disregard the finder bump, which you can't use to hold onto anyway.
Based on your past writings, I'd be surprised if you wouldn't find it roughly the perfect size for you also.
Posted by: Eolake | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 12:31 PM
GF1 was (is) also my most used digital. I took it every where for almost 5 years (with 20/1.7 almost exclusively). Through the years I tried different cameras to replace it, GX1, EM5, GH2... NONE of them were as good for my use. When the GX7, and EM5ii came out I also considered them, but they were priced too high for a m4/3 body. I ended up picking up a EP5 for the half the price of the newer models, with the same or better specs... EP5 is the best camera I've ever had.
I believe the GX8's initial price of $1,200 was a mistake. At $800 they would have had a star, and would have stopped the migration of many m4/3rd enthusiasts to the Fuji camp. (I'm sure by summer time, we will see the GX8 in the $800 range price)
Posted by: ShadZee | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 01:37 PM
Ah camera size. A very contentious subject. I'm relatively large, a broad shouldered 6'2" 200 pounder who wears Ex Large Gloves. My favorite cameras are the very small Sony NEX 5n and the smallest Full Frame Film camera I've ever came across, the Leica IIIa. Most hated camera is the Canon 1Ds 2 (and all other pro-bodied cameras). I'll only use a pro-body if it is on a camera stand in a studio. Back when I was doing telephoto work a Canon 40D with an EF 400mm f/4.0-DO-IS-USM was perfect for hand holding.
For me, camera reviews, done by others are worthless. Unlike some, my real world isn't shooting cereal boxes in the kitchen :-) What's important to others may be a big minus for me. Therefore the only reviews I trust are conducted by me :-) Internet reviews of cameras/lenses need to be taken with a grain of salt. If I wasted my time reading all the 'net reviews, there would be no salt available in SoCal :-)
On the other hand a survey like your's can be made into a bell-sheped-curve. And could be useful.
I put size/weight above everything else. For several generations everything else has been more than good enough. If I'm shooting on the street, I like to look like a tourist — not a paid pro, so no pro-bodies or L lenses for me. YMMV.
Posted by: c.d.embrey | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 01:42 PM
I dunno..this camera, much like the Sony A6XXX series, does virtually nothing for me. The new Olympus Pen F is much more interesting. Guess I'm an analog control oriented guy; all those years shooting with an OM-1 and all that.
The GX8 also has a documented problem with shutter-shock...so, no thanks.
From the review at DPReview:
"Pretty much the only black mark against the GX8 is a persistent problem with shutter-induced softness in some shooting situations - an issue that Panasonic gets credit for trying to address in firmware, but has failed to completely eliminate."
Posted by: Stephen Scharf | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 02:45 PM
I will point out that that Tuck fellow has done it again, reviewing a Sony RX10 and RX10ii after owning them for a while, selling the RX10 and re-buying one. I don't think he quotes any numbers or stats, just how it works....for him. Just the way reviews should read. I just picked up an RX10 at closeout prices and am enjoying getting to know it.
Posted by: James Weekes | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 03:41 PM
As a committed Fuji X-T1 user I feel as though I am wedded to a vivacious, brainy beauty who is very much her own person but with whom I see eye to eye. And then one day the GX8 comes into the room with her own unique, compelling charms, and she sees me see her, and she smiles and walks my way . . . .
Posted by: Doug Thacker | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 05:34 PM
I've not shot with it's Sony competition,and i haven't done any careful pixel-peeping on my shots with it yet.But I can say that the GX8 is a very satisfying camera to shoot with. In terms of physical handling and responsiveness.
Posted by: davidabl | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 05:56 PM
I'd like to add that many pocket cam users tend to forget that it feels
much steadier shooting a heavier camera...
Posted by: davidabl | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 06:00 PM
Mike Peters: which 3D gimbal do you use? I have a similar lineup to you and think the extra stabilisation may help.
Thanks
Posted by: David | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 07:06 PM
Hi James, I have a year of experience with the RX10 and three months of shooting experience, including 9 professional, paid jobs under my belt with the RX10ii. I just now feel like I know my way around those cameras.
Posted by: kirk tuck | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 07:24 PM
"If you haven't heard of Dual I.S. [sic—Panasonic uses the periods], Panasonic claims to have perfected a method of combining the effects of in-body IS with in-lens IS."
Oly is doing this, too, with the latest E-M1 and E-M5 II firmware and the IS in the new 300/4 Pro.
==========
Most of my photography is done outdoors, of predominantly natural subjects, most often off the paved ways. When 'serious' I carry two camera bodies around my neck, one with 12-50, the other with 75-300.
For almost two years, a GX7 was paired with an E-M5. Before that, I was pairing an E-PM2 with the E-M5. The 2-axis IS of the E-PM2 was failing me in macro, and I didn't even try it for the long lens. OTOH, there was a period when I believed that the GX7 IS was better at 300 mm than the E-M5. More careful looking at some images showed that to be a incorrect judgement, based on quick looks at small portions of frames.
When I first got the E-M5, I found that the CDAF was working differently than the PDAF I was used to. With deep subjects with lots of fine detail, it sometimes surprised me at first by focusing at a different depth than I expected from prior experience. It turned out that what I was seeing with E-M5 and GX7 was not a difference in IS, but in focusing. Mount both sequentially on a tripod, Oly 75-300 lens @ 300 mm, AF and shoot - and they focused at slightly different depths of a complex subject. With the shallow DoF of 600 mm eq., each was equally sharp - in different areas of the subject.
I was conflating differences in focusing systems with differences in IS effectiveness when off a tripod.
Most tests I see of camera bodies with IBIS don't look at long focal lengths. This from a dpreview test, "... It's still a very effective system, reliably giving me 2 extra stops of shutter speed at the long end of the 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 II zoom lens (when comparing the number of steady shots achieved with it turned on and off)." Well, I shoot long - a lot. Of the 2,750 shots I took with the GX7, 629, 23%, were at 300 mm.
Forgetting about number of axes, my experience with the GX7 IBIS was that it is on a par with the E-M5 for long telephoto.
The E-M5 II is a whole different thing, a serious step up in long tele stabilization. There is a glitch in the "A" Mode exposure program with Silent Mode set*. It will go to very long exposures before starting to raise the ISO. As an unintended consequence, I took some shots of birds, 300 mm (600 eq.) at ridiculously low shutter speeds. I have a shot of a robin taken at 1/20 sec. Head has motion blur from the bird moving; body is sharp.
=========
This brings up the subject of shutter shock. The later OM-Ds allow EFC to (almost) entirely eliminate shutter shock. The GX7 & 8 do it only with full electronic shutter. Dpreview dings the GX8 for this. For my particular uses, full e-shutter on the GX7 has been effective and I've not had rolling shutter problems. I do prefer the choice of first curtain only on the Olys, though. But . . .
Unexpected, to me, are the results of ImagingResource's test of the 300/4 Pro.
Silent Mode (full e-shutter) gave better results than EFC alone. 'We tested all three primary shooting modes with the E-M1 (single-shot, anti-shock and silent modes), and found the Silent mode did indeed provide the sharpest images with the Olympus 300mm. Testing this again handheld with I.S. enabled, we also found similar results, with Silent mode producing better images when using a slower shutter speeds (1/125s for our handheld tests, for example)."
Might Panny have known this, in choosing only full e-shutter for the GX 7 & 8?
=========
"One last comment about the GX8: seems to me that Panasonic has solved the riddle of size. I found the GX1 to be just too small for comfort for me"
Ergonomics are SO personal. The GX7 is on the large side of right sized for me. I haven't held a GX8, but based on camerasize.com and specs., it's obvious that I would find it too large. But then, I Like the eensy GM1. I wouldn't want a 75-300 on it, but it's great with the Panny 45-150.
*Confirmed with Oly support. I haven't checked whether the latest firmware upgrade changes this.
Posted by: Moose | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 07:53 PM
I have two GX8s and like them a lot. They are noticeably bigger and heavier that GX7s -- if you look at the raw numbers, the GX8 doesn't seem much bigger, but somehow it has crossed a conceptual size/weight line that does seem to it closer to full-sized cameras. (It's only a bit smaller than a Fuji Pro-X2, an APS-C camera, but the lenses are more compact than the Fujis.)
However, the extra size of the GX8 still works for me, because when you put the cameras to the critical test -- packing -- then the raw size numbers still count.
Stephen Scharf in his comment mentioned the shutter-shock issue, which occurs with a number of cameras. The impact with the GX8 is somewhat controversial -- some fairly competent reviewers can't seem to find it, and one suggested that it's a problem that becomes evident only with certain lenses, notably the 14-140. DPReview was the most critical. They used three or four lenses in their test, and one of them was the 14-140. They didn't specify whether they experienced the shutter shock problem with all of the lenses, or just the one. I haven't seen the problem myself, with either camera, but I don't own the 14-140. Even with the 14-140, there is a work-around: the newer firmware allows you to choose to automatically switch to an electronic shutter when using the problematic shutter speeds with the problematic lenses, and also includes some adjustment that attempts to defeat possible shutter roll with moving subjects when using the electronic shutter. I don't know how well this works because I don't use it.
Posted by: John Camp | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 08:03 PM
Real world test and printed to A2 and Olympus OMD cameras are outperforming the Panasonic GX8 20 megapixel no improvement.
Posted by: Michael Petersen | Friday, 11 March 2016 at 11:21 PM
I rented the GX8 recently and have also owned the GX7 and OM-D E-M5 and Sony a850. I currently use the Sony a7ii for the majority of my work, some have some experience with the various manufacturers' stabilization systems. The E-M5 is still the best one I have experienced and I can only assume the Mk II version is even more impressive.
I am glad that Panasonic has started to include it, but I don't believe they are to the same level as Olympus and Sony currently are with their 5-axis systems.
That being said, I only shoot with rarely short focal-length prime lenses which wouldn't have any stabilization to make full-use of the Dual IS system. This, to me, is a flaw in their approach, though I'm sure it has advantages for telephoto lenses.
Posted by: Kyle Batson | Saturday, 12 March 2016 at 01:31 AM
On GX8 size - I'm inclined to agree it's the 'right' size (I use the similar sized EM-1) but there are many who claim it's too large for m4/3 and loses what they see as the main benefit of the format: small size/low weight. It is true that some of the more compact DSLRs come in at a lower weight.
On reviews - I was once told by the editor of an audio magazine that the majority of the readers of reviews are people who have already bought the product - people who are looking for reassurance that they have made the right choice. Obviously this colored how reviews - for that magazine at least - were written.
This was pre-internet, so people had to pay to read the review. I'm not sure if things have changed now.
Personally I would like to see more "tried and tested" style reviews from people who have lived with the camera for 3 months. Of course this would be little help for those who order items before release!
Posted by: Colin K Work | Saturday, 12 March 2016 at 05:07 AM
To address the initial Dual IS question, I a comparison between my E-M1 running release 4.1 FW (I've had it since early 2013) and a GX8 running release 2.1 FW (I've had for a month). I used the Panasonic 35-100/2.8 with the FW update to support Dual IS, set to 100mm. (The FW also nullifies the Olympus menu option to use lens IS or IBIS - this results in three data sets.) Both cameras were set to use electronic shutter mode. I used a USAF type target shot from 9'. The USAF target makes camera shake obvious to the casual observer. I used shutter speeds over the range of 1/8 - 1/250 sec. in 1/3 stop increments. FWIW, I'm 62.
EM-1 with IBIS was best with some blur at 1/8 & 1/10 sec. and sharp from 1/15 sec on up. (within Shaky Old Guy (SOG) tolerances)
GX8 Dual IS was better at 1/8 & 1/10 sec., but more variable at higher shutter speeds compared to EM-1. It may be more sensitive to SOG or I'm better trained on the E-M1 shutter release.
EM-1 with lens IS was not as good as Dual IS, or IBIS.
The area I shot in is lit with fluorescent and LED lights. The banding effect from this light with electronic shutter was most pronounced at 1/250 sec. and effected the EM-1 more. The newer sensor in the GX8 may have higher read speeds.
Posted by: Bruce Rubenstein | Saturday, 12 March 2016 at 10:55 AM
Regarding yours and Massimiliano's comments about reviews only discussing whiz-bang features with first impressions, in my accessory reviews for DPReview, I spend at least 3 months working with things as boring and uncomplicated as tripods, ball heads and macro lenses. I also prefer to do comparisons of 5 or more similar models, since that's most likely what reader/consumers are doing when they read individual reviews. Unsurprisingly, this means I get very few reviews published and out there, which does not make me a "big name" reviewer, or even bring in considerable revenue. So, Mike, I know what you mean about "idealist and impoverished."
Posted by: MarkB | Saturday, 12 March 2016 at 01:24 PM
You were asking about the Gx8 in particular, but it's interesting that Sony also uses this dual stabilization at times, for example with the 90 f2.8 Macro OSS. Apparently the a7rii plus an OSS stabilized lens gives better stabilization than either the lens or the body can provide. Of course, this setup is a different handful altogether than the panasonic you were asking about.
I will have the opportunity to test this particular configuration in about 24 hours. As we say in Vermont, Woo Hoo!
Does anyone want to buy a D800e and a couple of nikkor primes?
Posted by: John Lehet | Sunday, 13 March 2016 at 12:09 PM
Here's a Ken Rockwell quote that cuts to the chase of modern reviews: "The Canon 50mm f/1.0 L USM is such an extraordinary lens that it took me three weeks to review it."
Posted by: emptyspaces | Wednesday, 16 March 2016 at 09:31 AM