The Online Photographer

No Goliath anywhere: just David vs. David.

Thanks to a loan from B&H Photo (the Sony) and the generosity of a friend (the Fuji), I have Fujifilm's top APS-C mirrorless camera, the X-T2, and Sony's top APS-C mirrorless camera, the A6500, sitting, as you can see, on the light table at TOP World Headquarters (AKA the windowsill in my family room). (Actually the Fuji is the co-top-of-the-line, with the X-Pro2). I'll be using both over the next month, and no doubt will have a few comments to post as I go along.

I'm reasonably familiar with both cameras, as I owned and used a NEX-6 for two and a half years and have been using my X-T1 for almost the past three.

What do you think of the lens choices? Fair fight?

I won't be starting to post until B&H gets back up and running after the Succos holiday closing. They supplied the Sony to me, so it's only fair that my links should go to their pages.

Looking forward to getting to know these guys!

Mike

Original contents copyright 2017 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.

B&H Photo • Amazon US • Amazon UK
Amazon Germany • Amazon Canada • Adorama

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Ken Tanaka: "You’re in for lots of fun this Fall. I’ve used both for quite some time. While they're both 'diminutive' they feel very different in practice. My preference? The Sony for its all-around performance and versatility, as well as its touch screen. But the Fuji is wonderful for the 'classic' photographer."

Reviewed by Stephen Scharf

I recently rented a Fujifilm GFX 50S and the GF 32–64mm ƒ/4 zoom lens for a few days over a long weekend, a weekend that included my last professional motor race of the year, the Go Pro Grand Prix of Sonoma Indy Car race. To get a feel the camera in real-world settings, I thought it would be fun to use the GFX at the race for atmosphere, paddock and pit lane photos, as well as doing some landscape and architectural photography. This user review will be comprised of three parts: Part I, operation and first impressions; Part II, photographic use and image quality; and Part III, final impressions and conclusions.

Operation and first impressions
The GFX has the solid, robust feeling of a professional body, with all-magnesium construction and a grippy rubber covering. A deep front grip and extruded thumb rest ensure excellent purchase when holding the camera. The fit, finish, and overall build quality are excellent, as we’ve come to expect from Fujifilm.

As a Fuji X-T2 user, it was very easy to get up to speed with the GFX: the lens aperture rings and control knobs for setting ISO and shutter speed, the camera back with D-pad and function buttons and menu system are effectively identical to the X-T2. On the right side of the top cover there's an LCD in place of the exposure compensation knob that displays at a glance key camera settings, frames remaining, etc.

The 32–64mm ƒ/4 lens (25–51mm-e) is also very high-quality and well-made, the aperture ring having just the right amount of resistance to prevent accidental changes. The large rubber grip for the zoom ring makes holding the camera and lens very nicely balanced in-hand.

On both camera and lens, there are nicely thought-out design details. For example, the top surface of the ISO and shutter speed knobs are concave for improved ergonomics, a better feel turning the knobs and a more positive engagement of the locking buttons. The LCD articulates to the same positions as the X-T2, and also has a touch-screen to select both AF lock or position. In addition to the artificial horizon there is a set of half-rings with markings that can be displayed that show the degrees of pitch and roll of the camera.

Very cool.

There's also a framing outline that can be invoked on the LCD making it easier to see the frame borders when shooting against dark backgrounds, such as black seamless. Nice. Another big win is the self-timer can be set to remain invoked even if the camera is shut off.

The GF-series lenses have a "C" position in addition to the "A" setting on the aperture ring that allows setting of lens aperture with the command dial instead of the aperture ring if desired. There is also an interlock on the aperture ring of the lens that prevents selecting the C and A modes accidentally.

All these design details shows how well Fuji thinks things through regarding design, ergonomics, and functionality, providing photographers with the flexibility to configure the camera in a way that's best suited to their preferred style of operation.

Mounting the lens, the GFX is compact for a medium-format camera, but the most surprising thing is just how light it is. I don't know how Fuji made a camera and lens that are so well-made and robust, yet so light. Every photographer I showed the camera to remarked on its lightness.

Here’s a photo showing the GFX and 32–64mm next to my X-T2 for scale. The camera, with the 32–64mm attached, fits very easily into a Think Tank Retro 7 with room for an X-T2 and another lens or two.

Powering up, the camera starts up quickly and the electronic viewfinder is beautiful: big, bright, clear, and fast, with excellent resolution. The LCD is also very high-resolution and looks gorgeous. With the 32–64mm zoom lens mounted, I found the autofocus to be quite fast; likely faster than my X-T1, and plenty fast enough for the type of photography for which this camera was designed.

After taking a photo, there is a blackout of ~½ second, which is the time the Sony sensor takes to read out the data from the sensor. I noticed the blackout for the first five or six frames. The GFX is very much a "think about what you are doing before you take the photograph" kind of camera, and with that mentality in mind, after those first few frames, the blackout was something I never noticed when using the camera.

Pardon the cat photos, but these happen to be the very first shots I made with the GFX. I tried a to do a bit of product photography the night the camera arrived but my newly adopted little kitten, Aga, took over proceedings, so I took a few informal portraits of her.

This is a straight out-of-camera JPEG with virtually no editing.

The image below is a 100% crop (once you open it by double-clicking on it) of Aga’s cute little face. TOP's blog template unavoidably softens and blurs images somewhat, but take my word for it: the color, naturalness of tones, and detail, particularly on a 5K Retina display, are very impressive.

Overall, my first impressions are that the GFX is a very well-made and well-designed camera that is easy to pick up straightaway and start shooting with. Straight out-of-camera JPEGs show very accurate color and skin tones and impressive detail. They require little to no editing. The camera's compact size and light weight make it very easy to shoot with effectively hand-held.

More soon. In Part II I'll concentrate on using the GFX in a real-world photographic setting, and an evaluation of image quality.

Stephen

A scientist by profession and a photographer by avocation, Stephen Scharf has been a professionally accredited motorsports photojournalist since 2003. He’s currently one of the track photographers for Sonoma Raceway, covering all their professional motorsports and racing events for photojournalism, PR, and media purposes. His photographs have been published in numerous newspapers in the SF Bay Area, including the San Francisco Chronicle, as well as various motorsports websites and magazines. His work also includes landscape, architectural, urban exploration, fine art and documentary street photography.

©2017 by Stephen Scharf, all rights reserved

Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

Go big
Give Mike a “Like” or Buy yourself something nice

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

No featured comments yet—please check back soon!

Hearken ye! I'd like to blather just a bit about a very old word, yeoman.

But first: I'm being kind of a stumblebum this year. A sluggard. What used to be called, back in the dim, swiftly receding days of the 'nineties, a slacker. I posted Part I of the "Recommended Cameras" list way back on December 6th, and haven't even gotten around to writing Part II yet. (This isn't that.)

I hate it when I do things like that. I think at some point during my fifties, my get up and go got up and went.

I'll work on that soon. (The list, I mean, not my gumption, moxie, work ethic, spirit of enterprise, etc.—my current activity level is age-appropriate. As the great Uncle Arthur Kramer used to say, I'd work harder, but it would interfere with my nap.)

Meantime, it struck me that like many reviewers, I naturally concentrate on talking about high-level cameras in every line. The ones that offer the highest performance and the most appealing "it" factor. Before it arrived, I assumed I would include the new Olympus E-M1 Mark II on the TOP list.

But when it arrived on the scene, I was taken aback by the price. Two thousand dollars. For a Micro 4/3 body? You can get a Panasonic GX8 for $800 less even when it's not on sale. Same for Olympus's own Pen-F. You can get a full-frame Sony A7 Mark II mirrorless for $500 less.

So is that...smart?

Granted, it's an "overdeveloped" camera, as Olympus told DPReview. Granted, it's targeted at pros, who might like a striver's level of snappy performance and to whom a few hundred dollars tacked onto the purchase price might not matter in the grand scheme of the financial statement. Granted, its level of performance is class-leading in many ways. And it's well designed and pleasant to use, despite having its On/Off switch in an annoying place. I liked the Mark I, which I owned briefly. (And which is still available. For a nice price. You can get it in a kit bundled with the $700 12–40mm ƒ/2.8 zoom for $1,300—$700 less than the Mark II body with no lens.)

But...two grand. It made me think twice, and then think again. Is the E-M1 Mark II truly recommendable at that exalted price?

I know people who will buy it, many of them gladly. But what about people for whom the value equation is important? That includes a lot of us. It even includes a lot of people who could afford an E-M1 Mark II if they wanted to.

The E-M1 Mark II's stabilization may be the best of any camera's.

It's so, so tempting to chase the latest and best. Top models of anything are "no apologies." (Well, at least for three or four years, until they get superseded.)

But it might be smartest, just in terms of spending your money intelligently, to pick the lineup you like the best and then buy the next best camera, whatever that is. Thus:

• E-M5 Mark II rather than E-M1 Mark II.
• D7200 rather than D500.
• A6300 rather than A6500.
• 6D rather than 5D Mark IV.
• X-T10 rather than X-T2.
• A7II rather than A7rII.

Or even...

• E-M10 Mark II rather than E-M5 Mark II!

And so on. You get the idea.

The strategy might not be sexy, but it's sound.

Medieval metaphor
And now for "yeoman," and you can stop reading right here unless you enjoy reading my nonsense.

Yeoman is a tough word to get a handle on—it means many things, and none of them seem to quite relate to each other. A class in England below the gentry. (Not very helpful, given that most of us are hazy about what "gentry" means, too.) A clerk in the Navy. The owner of a small farm (we have lots of yeomen around where I live, if that's the case. Or can you be both Amish and a yeoman?). In medieval times, a servant ranking higher than a page but not quite as high as a squire. Without getting into a tangle of etymology, competing meanings, and mildly conflicting mental images, I think basically yeoman means one who serves, but solidly; a stalwart; someone who is loyal, dependable, and responsible. Someone who does drudge work because it needs to be done, but works well.

Anyway I think one might call these second-tier, near-top-of-the-line, more value-oriented, second-rank cameras yeoman cameras.

Okay, that name won't catch on. I'm not good at naming things. But you get the idea. From these yeoman cameras you get 80% of the performance of the glamorpuss line-leader cameras, but for more reasonable prices. They're reliable. Sensible.

The smart buy.

The GX85 instead of the GX8. Anybody use the X-T10? Are ya happy enough?

...Because sometimes, you'd like the top of the line, but you just don't feel like parting with two grand for an electronic device that's going to be yesterday's news three to five years from now.

Nothing against the noble Olympus E-M1 Mark II.

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.

Yo, man!
Like Mike or Patronize TOP’s affiliates

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Luca: "Cameras are now computers, and with computers the smart strategy has always been exactly the one you just described, i.e. buying the 'second best.' And frankly unless you're a sport / war / extreme situations in general shooter I don't see the point to have an ultrafast camera (and even then something like the A6500 or the A77 II could be all you need anyway). Essentially, maybe 0.1% of us 'need' (as opposed to 'want') an EOS 1Dx, a Nikon D5 or even an Olympus E-M1 Mark II.

"And the X-T10, by the way, is an awesome camera!"

Marcelo Guarini: "I was waiting for the OM1 Mk II, but after reading its specifications I realized is not my camera. I don't need a camera for fast action, sealed for Mars sandstorms and freeze-proof for the dark side of the Moon. Amazon had the Pen F for $945 during a couple of days in November, so I got one and I couldn't be happier. Image quality is better than my OM-1 and so is the in-camera stabilizer. Last night I took several perfectly sharp handheld half-second shots. I'm loving this little camera."

Gordon Lewis: "Whether it was wise for Olympus to price the E-M1 Mark II at $2,000 and whether it's wise for someone to pay it are two different issues. The issue is moot for me because I can't justifying paying that much for any camera. I'm doing what you suggest in your post: looking at cameras that do most if not all of what I need a camera to do, at a lower price than the top of the line. Instead, I'll use the money I save to spend on high-quality lenses. As you say, cameras come and go, but good lenses are good for a lifetime."

Mike replies: I agree with you entirely except for the very last word of your comment. Seems to me the only lens line I could have used for my lifetime—mine being similar in span and era to yours—is the Leica M line. And with that there are, and have been, many other compromises. Seems to me when you and I were young we could have invested in the Canon FD lens line, and, while those are newly "good" again—on a full-frame mirrorless digital camera—there have been significant stretches of our lifetimes during which they would not have been good.

But if you had said "for a longer time" or even "for a long time" instead of "for a lifetime," then we would agree.

Dennis (partial comment): "I've noticed many times that I tend to be happier with things that I've paid more than I've wanted for than I am with things where I've compromised out of frugality. I love a good 'price performer' but over time, I have far more regrets about bargains than I do luxuries. So my recommendation is don't buy based on perceived value nor just because something is state of the art—buy what you want."

beuler: "It seems to me that Olympus is putting the E-M1 Mark II up against the Canikon 1D X Mark II / D5. Brave but stupid? Let's wait and see. In any case it is the cheapest of the three."

Arg: "One only needs to read the featured comments by Dennis and Gordon to confirm that the real driver here is one's personal values. By which I don't mean anything unique, but rather the common value sets. For example, valuing exclusivity highly is a common set, as is valuing economy."

...Or more precisely, non-review.

There are several things about the Panasonic GX8 (currently on sale and less than $1k) you would like a review to answer...one, how well does the Dual IS system work? And two, is the alleged shutter-shock problem real, or is that just a random slander to give armchair shoppers on the Internet something to bite their fingernails about?

The problem is, I can't really answer either question.

The reason I can't say anything about the shutter-shock problem is that, having heard about it, and being nervous about missing pictures, I switched the camera to electronic shutter to avoid it so none of my pictures could be ruined. (I think both the illustrations below are with the camera on mechanical shutter, however.) I was then on the lookout for any of the problems that the electronic shutter is alleged to cause. But unfortunately (this happened with the GX7 too), in all my shooting I never had any problems with the electronic shutter. My advice on this head would be, if you're concerned about it, read up on the issue, shoot with the electronic shutter most of the time, and switch to the mechanical shutter in those rare situations where you expect the electronic shutter might lead to problems. My general observation is that when a problem is said to exist but people who are looking hard for it have difficulty provoking it to happen, it might not be too much of a problem. But bear in mind I found out essentially nothing solid about the issue that might add to discussions elsewhere.

Also, I only used one lens with the camera, the 12–35mm ƒ/2.8 Panasonic zoom (currently on sale for $200 off). I really liked the lens, although it has stiff competition (Panasonic has a problem with that...it keeps coming up with great products which are then overshadowed by products that have slightly better specs) in the Olympus 12–40mm ƒ/2.8. To really have the last word on the alleged problem, you'd need to test it exhaustively with many different lenses. I'm sorry I can't be of more help here.

I'm also not going to say much about the Dual IS. It appears to work; how many stops it might gain for you, I can't say. I have some particular personal problems when it comes to objectively testing IS.

Mike you are worthless!
...I know. So what can I say about the Panasonic GX8 that might be useful to you?

Just this: I think that ergonomically, from a functional handling standpoint, this is one of the best digital camera designs I've ever used.

I've been through some changes with Panasonic—I've owned or borrowed about five of them, starting with the GF1 (with the 20mm lens) which was my main camera for about three years, until about 2012. To say the company's design goals have been rather inconsistent is something of an understatement. Its premium mirrorless cameras have taken wild swings back and forth from one idea to another. The GF1 was a utilitarian brick, no-nonsense and workmanlike; the successor GX1 took small 'n' light to an extreme, being almost too small for adult human hands; the greatly improved but underrated GX7 looked sidewise at the Fuji X100 as an exercise in exquisite, jewel-like design, elegant and delicate.

With the GX8, Panasonic took another wild swing of the pendulum, throwing out the idea of small-as-a-virtue, but also tossing out the design-exercise aesthetic of the GX7, going back to the idea of a workmanlike brick that's meant to be used...but with a lot of the GX7's feature-richness kept on board.

The result, I think, is singularly successful.

And now, just when you didn't want it, a digression
One thing that's still shifting and changing about digital cameras is the degree to which different designs are allowed to "settle." It was a big advantage of the film era—refinement was slow and gradual, and designs evolved rather than being replaced. Leica's most successful rangefinder, the M6, was an M4-P with a manual light meter built into it, and the M4-P was made with some of the tooling for the M4 that had been sent from Germany to Canada. It was a steady and slow evolution. Nikon's first standard for the F pro SLRs was that they'd have ten-year lifecycles. Now, if you find a digital camera you love, well, enjoy it while it lasts, because it might not last long.

There have been some exceptions—Canon particularly, but Nikon almost as much, has tried to stay consistent with its SLR designs. The practical advantages are that users are already basically familiar with new bodies as well as with different bodies in the same lineup. The disadvantages are that it precludes top-to-bottom rethinks and the innovation that requires, as well as a certain boring sameness after a while that can put a damper on excitement and, hence, sales. Another exception is of course the "refresh"—Mark II and III, and so on, variants of basic designs.

Stop here
So may I just say that I truly hope Panasonic will stop here for a while with its top-of-the-line mirrorless design. The GX8 probably looks good to use to you, from afar, but it's actually better than it looks. I was encouraged that Fujifilm took a "Mark II" approach to the X-Pro1, even though it's called the X-Pro2. They took the best parts of the initial design and refined it exhaustively. That's how great cameras evolve. And it's a relief for users when they don't have to say goodbye to their favorite designs and learn a new body all over again from scratch. There would be nothing wrong with refining the GX8 in the same way. Really, the basic design is so good that it just shouldn't be thrown out with the next swing of the pendulum.

Dawn

Dusk

So what's good about it? Well, I'm not going to make exhaustive descriptions of, or arguments in favor of, each feature. You can go to the big review sites for that, the ones that have staff and only talk tech.

The things I like best about the GX8:

• The size: Not too big, not too small, just-right hand grip. Weight-to-size ("density") is just about perfect too.
• The VF: Love the viewfinder. The tilting feature seems somehow more serious and more useful than the same feature on the GX7. It's not just for use as a chimney finder (i.e., pointed straight up). In fact, I find that using it as a 45° angle finder is perfect, allowing a very comfortable and stable hand-holding stance with either eye. (Side note: the GX8 is a great camera for left-eyed shooters and also people who wear glasses). Also, you can completely cut out stray light outdoors so the view through the eyepiece is saturated and clear—I had no problems shooting in bright light. The EVF itself—although it's one of those things that can be noteworthy for only so long, as progress in the technology marches on—is the best I've so far experienced, edging out the excellent EVF on the Fuji X-T1, which itself is one of that camera's best features.
• Touchscreen: This is the first touchscreen (save the ones on my i-devices) that I truly like. It makes changing basic menu settings quick and simple, and I just love the way you can place the focus point using your right thumb on the touchscreen as you shoot. As good as the joystick on the Fuji X-Pro2? Can't say, but Panasonic's solution works a treat, that's for sure.
• Button 'n' dial configuration: In keeping with emerging practice, the camera is extremely configurable. You can change all sorts of things to suit your taste, from almost all the physical buttons to the directions the dials turn. I didn't do so, but I could see that if I owned the camera and took the time to set it up the way I wanted to, it would make the camera that much easier to learn to operate intuitively. (All the more reason the next iteration should preserve the same form-factor—you're going to put some effort into first customizing the operation of the camera, then using it enough that it becomes second nature. That's effort and practice you don't want to throw away three years from now when the body is replaced.)
• Lenses: I should mention again (I've said it before) that I love Panasonic lenses. They're all just the right size, great in quality, and you can put together a splendid, very sensible outfit that won't break either the bank or your back.
• IS: ...Even though I can't quantify its advantage. (This was the reason I tried the camera, because I suspect I personally need IS at age almost 60.)

The things I don't like? The swivel viewing screen. I much prefer flip-ups. That's just a settled preference of my own, and your take might be the opposite. Oh, and I had some problems with the battery door sticking, and my fingers are too big to remove the SD card comfortably. No biggie, but, in the Irony Dept., the old GF1 was perfect in this respect. See what I mean about not changing what works?

'Gestalt'
The overall "rightness" of this body design is where this thing scores like Stephen Curry. It's got the mojo of a pickup truck: fit for working and the tool for the job. The whole package has a sort of git 'er done gestalt that makes you feel like you're set to take on any task. It's not too pretty and not too precious, but oh man does it all come together.

I loved this camera, and I think it's better than a) appearances, and b) you probably think it is.

Granted there's a huge amount of competition in the mirrorless space...a glut, even. But I hope the GX8 (here's the link again) won't be semi-ignored like some of Panasonic's bodies have been when they get apparently overshadowed by the competition. Try this before you diss it. The company's designers hit the nail on the head this time around. I really do hope this will be a long-lived design. It deserves to be.

Mike

[Thanks to B&H Photo for the loan of the review equipment. —Ed.]

[Ed. Note: Bear in mind that TOP is no longer publishing on weekends! So I'll see you on Monday. I said before I was going to do a techie post on Mondays and "Open Mike" on Fridays, but I'm switching that around. I think it's better to have a photo topic sitting at the top of the site for the whole weekend; to have an "Open Mike" up there could mislead surfers as to what the site is all about.

Hope you don't miss me too much, but, even more, I hope you don't forget to come back. Have a nice weekend!]

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.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Mike: "Yup, it's the best Panasonic camera ever. I've been a dedicated Lumix user professionally since the arrival of the GH3. I've used up two of those, two GX7's, and still have two GH4's with about 180,000 clicks on each. The GH4's have been retired to video only duty since the GX8 is out.

"I have two GX8's and use them exhaustively for all of my stills, professionally and for personal use where I use the square crop. They are the best still camera, for me since the advent of digital. I love the swivel screen because it lets me shoot verticals from low or high viewpoints, and even around corners or from inside a scientific hood pointing backward because it lets me see the composition from any angle, and set the focus point too.

"Now that my company is purchasing my cameras, finally, after three years of providing my own, they got me Sony A6300's. And, I hate them. They feel like toys compared to the Lumix cameras, and the lack of touch screen makes choosing the AF points absolutely maddening. Plus they overheat when outside in the sun, and sometimes just stop working altogether until I remove the battery and restart it.

"Don't get me started on the menus. And then there's the lenses. Blah, ugh, blech. Not nearly enough, slim pickings when it comes to available focal lengths and lens speed, and mediocre performance.

"The Micro 4/3 system is very complete. I mix and match my lenses between Panasonic, Olympus and Voigtlaender, and there's nothing that I need and either don't have or can't get. I much prefer the Lumix bodies over the Olympus, which are too small for the most part, and the batteries are underwhelming. I've never been happier with a camera, or the whole system as I am now. Good stuff.

"Oh, and I've never seen the effects of shutter shock, ever. I shoot in the danger zone all the time, and it's never ever reared it's blurry head in my experience of probably over half a million frames with many bodies."

Alan: "I recently ran into the shutter shock issue for the first time when using a GX7 and 14–42mm OIS kit lens. I'd previously used primes on the GX7.

"Once I saw the problem I Googled it and did my own little tests and although I found the issue intermittent and limited to that lens on the GX7, it's present enough to make me want to avoid using shutter speeds of 1/80th to 1/250th when using that camera and lens.

"Switching to electronic shutter is a work-around in natural light but I've seen banding in shots taken under artificial light and it completely ruined a shot I really wanted. So sadly it's an issue for me with the GX7 and 14–42mm when using the mechanical shutter at the sort of shutter speeds I'd be using in lower natural light and also when using the GX7 and the electronic shutter with any lens under some artificial lighting.

"The shutter shock issue ruined every shot I took on a day out (I'd been shooting in low light so I set the shutter speed to 1/200th and thought I'd be OK but unbeknownst to me this is right in the shutter-shock range and every shot is soft) and the banding issue ruined a shot I really wanted so I seem to hit problems both with shutter shock and when trying to avoid it, at least under some artificial light.

"As my G7 also has a few little niggles I'm not exactly happy with Panasonic. If they bring out a problem-free GX7 type camera (but I'm not getting the new GX80) I might buy one and maybe even a mini DSLR type camera too but only once the geeky Internet crowd have declared them shutter shock free.

"I'd advise anyone thinking about buying a Panasonic camera to research these issues and decide if the workarounds of using the electronic shutter or avoiding the affected shutter speed range are acceptable or not.

"I don't want to risk losing any more shots to these issues so until the shutter shock issue is fixed Panasonic isn't getting another penny from me."

Open comment directed at Panasonic: Great work.

Seriously, you did well. Whoever was responsible for the conception of the GX8, promote that person. Whoever worked on the details of the UI, give that person or persons a bonus.

I acknowledge that I am not Mr. Typical Photographer, representative of the widest possible swath of the buying fan base. But I do have a fairly wide familiarity with a variety of cameras, having owned 11,358 different ones (I first typed 1,358, but then it occurred to me that maybe that wasn't enough of an exaggeration to make it clear that it's an exaggeration) and having tried out another, oh, ~4,000 more. (That's an exaggeration.)

I'm really liking the GX8. It's not pretty, and it's not diminutive in the way that usually charms the Japanese, but it sure is nice to hold and pleasant and easy to use. Ergonomics get an A+ from me so far. Still R-ing TFM though*.

Here they are at B&H Photo, which loaned me the equipment for the review. Note that GX8 bodies are currently on sale for $200 off.

Viewfinder über alles
To keep this post from being just a fluffle of opining:

A camera's viewfinder is all-important. It's what connects the camera to the world, in the most important way for the enterprise at hand, i.e., visually. A great viewfinder is a reason to buy one camera over another. It's what sold me on the Fuji X-T1, second only to Fuji's beautiful lens system.

(I should explain that I now prefer electronic viewfinders [EVF's] to optical viewfinders [OVF's]. Weighing the advantages and disadvantages of each, the EVF edges ahead for me.)

I directly compared the electronic viewfinders of the Panasonic GX8 and the Fuji X-T1, and the GX8 to the optical viewfinder of the Sony A900 DSLR, previously my gold standard (among the cameras I'm familiar with, so only 15,358 of them) for an OVF on a DSLR. The Fuji beats the Sony, as I've mentioned before (and the Sony beats the Nikon D750, as I've also mentioned before). The Fuji X-T1's viewfinder is one of that camera's strongest points, and it is indeed just a little bigger than the one in the GX8. But not much. The Fuji's seems a little more coarse to me, and not quite as color-correct. Big win for the Panasonic is with eye relief (this refers to how far back from the eyepiece your eye can be while still allowing you to see the whole frame). The Panasonic has great eye relief. I find it easy and pleasant to see the whole frame in the GX8 even with glasses on. With no glasses on it's A/B**.

So the GX8 is highly recommended to both left-eyed shooters and glasses-wearers.

I very much like the upper-left-hand position of the GX8's EVF, and I very much like the tilting feature, too, which I first learned I liked when reviewing the ill-fated Ricoh GXR a number of years ago. (Remember that one? With the interchangeable lens/sensor modules?)

I find this shooting position, with the finder at about 45°, very comfortable. Sort of midway between a studio and a snapshot camera. Reminds me of...

...Another camera with a 45-degree finder. (Rolleiflex 6008AF shown without lens.) Of course the GX8's VF adjusts effortlessly to all positions from straight up to straight back.

The GX8's tilting finder is in essence an answer to the grizzly Photo Dawgs who ask where interchangeable finders went, such as those on the Nikon F3, Pentax LX, and Canon New F-1. Well, it's now all-in-one, can't be lost, doesn't cost extra, and comes built-in on the Panasonic GX8.

There's even a larger accessory eyecup to eliminate extraneous light when you're shooting outdoors. I'm very curious about how the VF will do in bright sunlight, but this morning it's gray, wet, and snowing again. We've had more Winter in April than we've had all Winter; Winter took all Winter to get here. I'll let you know about the VF in bright sunlight once the sun comes out.

Anyway, just because the VF on the GX8 tilts, don't think it isn't a world-class VF. It's clean, clear, easy to see, and yes, pleasant to spend time looking at. A nice interface with the visual world. (And kind of a contrast, when you think of it, in innovation and implementation, to the traditional "faux prism humps" on the X-T1 and the OM-D's.)

It's an excellent viewfinder, both in an absolute sense, and comparatively.

Mike
(Thanks to B&H Photo)

*"RTFM" is "read the f------ manual."

**Awesome/brilliant, for American and U.K. readers respectively.

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.

I finally decided I could afford this book, and ordered
it two days ago. Can't wait!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Steve G: " I completely agree that a tilting viewfinder is a boon, not a gimmick. When I first got my Ricoh GX100—and there are still more gallery shots in my portfolio from that camera than any other—I thought the tilting EVF (maybe a first for Ricoh? I don't know) was just a marketing frippery. I soon found myself using it a lot, and it became a big part of why I loved that camera so much."

Mike replies: Yes, I do think this should be emphasized. Using tilting finders has convinced me. I think it's a serious and desirable feature, and this is the best implementation of it I've used yet.

Of course, I haven't actually used 15,358 cameras—in fact I probably use fewer cameras that most reviewers do. I'm sure Luke at Imaging-Resource, for example (he reads TOP) is familiar with many more VF's than I am.

James Clarke: "I am interested how you find the exposure compensation dial. Having not used the GX8 (still using the GX1) I'm inclined to agree with this take on the ergonomics."

Mike replies: Wow, I completely disagree with that assessment. The EC dial, which by habit I use a lot (I know it's something some people don't use, but I do), is one of the best things about the GX8. You just raise your thumb and forefinger and there it is, right to hand in the perfect place. I can set it easily—I mean very comfortably, no stretch, no fuss—while holding the camera one-handed!

beuler: "I first tried a tilting VF on the Konica Minolta Dimage A2. I miss the feature and wonder why it has not replaced the faux prism hump as design standard. I find a tilting EVF more versatile and useful than a tilting rear screen."

The box that arrived from LensRentals three days ago contained a Nikon D750 (currently on sale for $400 off at $1,897; that's normally the price for the D610, which is on sale for $500 off) and a copy of the new Tamron SP 35mm ƒ/1.8 Di VC USD ($599).

The next day's LensRentals box brought two Sigma 35mm ƒ/1.4 DG HSM Art lenses ($899, which is a chunk of change except that's very cheap for its specification—an AF full-frame 35mm ƒ/1.4 lens). They're identical except that one fits Nikon F mount and the other fits Sony A mount. I had in mind doing an evolution-of-FF tryout between the long-in-the-tooth 2008 24-MP Sony A900 and the new 24-MP D750. Predictably (I say that because I predicted it!), we have not had one spot of sunlight since the first box arrived, which annoys me, but then, it is Winter in New York, so what did I expect?

I've only got a few days with this stuff anyway, which is enough for tryouts but not tests. (When I used to write camera reviews, my personal standard was that I had to use the camera for 90 days, exclusively and for real work, before I'd write about it. Ah, youth.)

The lineup that doesn't quite line up
Even before seeing one in person, I considered the D750 the top recommendation among all Nikons. That doesn't mean this is an easy or sensible recommendation, however; Nikon's full-frame lineup is quite confused. It has the D4S (currently $500 off at $5,997), soon to be superseded by the D5; the D810 ($2,797), its 36-MP pixel-leader-o'-the-moment and a hunka hunka burning love (sorry; I mean it's a big ol' dragoon); the faux-retro Dƒ ($2,747 at the moment), which is apparently soon to go the way of all digital things, as end-of-lifecycle discounts have been doing the Whack-A-Mole dance recently; and then the D750 and the D610 (currently on sale for $1,497 and Nikon's best bargain in a FF camera), which are sorta the same but sorta aren't.

You get the feeling these days that Nikon's lineup is designed by a committee, but that the committee no longer meets. As if everybody's thinking straight but nobody's talking to anyone else. The only point of clarity in the FF range is that the D4S is targeted at pros. Beyond that, the D810 is for landscapes and product shots, sorta; the D610 (which I actually like quite a lot but which, as the D600, had a rocky intro with some well-publicized problems) is the entry-level FF; and the Dƒ is the camera that encapsulates Nikonish befuddlement in one body, because it's a retro dials-'n'-buttons buttons camera but a modern all-electronic camera as well. It comes off as not both but neither, a hybrid Frankenidea like a calf born with two heads or some other metaphor of DNA gone wrong. (While remaining a capable camera, of course; it's still a Nikon.) The distinction between the D610 and the D750, in terms of lineup placement, seems inherently difficult to parse. The difference in features between the two is modest (Imaging-Resource has the best comparison page). The biggest difference I notice is the D750's articulated viewing screen.

There's nothing wrong with any of these cameras, I hasten to add. It's just that as a product lineup it's pretty muddled. Nikon never lacks for competence, but recently seems lacking in clarity and, dare I venture to say it, confidence. Or it could be that the lineup suffers in comparison to Sony's bold A7 line, in which the various models each have unusual clarity of purpose.

Well and good
But down to the D750. It's named to conjure the famous D700 from 2008, which our readers in a poll some time back settled on as the #1 best-loved camera of the digital era. For some inexplicable reason, Nikon orphaned the D700. And the D300. When anyone would have thought that follow-ups to both those stalwarts would have been no-brainers. The D750 isn't entirely a logical D700 successor. It's been too many years, for one thing, and, as Thom Hogan points out, the D750 probably has the wrong sensor: to be a D700 heir it should have the one from the Dƒ. Not that there's nothing wrong with the sensor it has.

But I think it serves well enough as a D700 successor in spirit, as it's the current all-rounder FF Nikon that's best targeted at enthusiasts. Well and good.

It's impossible to unlearn what you already know, so I can't guess how the D750 would "present" to someone who's new to Nikon DSLRs or just new to DSLRs in general. They're very familiar to me. As a consequence the controls were mostly already familiar and the camera fell right to hand.

First handshakes with the D750 in the dark and changey weather.
Tamron SP35mm lens.

Nikon builds SLRs, and it is very good at building SLRs, and the D750 is a very good Nikon. It's a pleasure to hold, to look through, and to photograph with. Everything works a treat. It's loud. It has a flip-up viewing screen (I like those). Given time, you'd gradually fill in your knowledge of whichever controls aren't immediately apparent, and the controls you use most often would become second nature. The D750 is quite wonderful. It feels like a privilege to be using it every time I pick it up.

Making friends
The point I wanted to make today—forgive me if I go overboard here in the daily struggle to express myself—is that when you first try a new camera, I think a measure of respect for the process—for the experience—is appropriate. It's just a camera, so nothing about the experience is all that crucial. But, psychologically, you're at a vulnerable stage. You're calibrating broadly, and big missteps or mistakes or frustrations are going to loom larger than they should in your evolving appraisal. What I try to do, if I can, is to make sure that my first experience of a new camera is a positive one. If possible, I use a lens that's already familiar to me; I take some time to sort out the controls, and make sure I have the basic settings all configured correctly and that I know how to do things I'm likely to want to do right off the bat, like change the aperture or apply exposure compensation or switch to manual focus; I make sure the battery's charged and the card is fresh.

And I wait for good light and a relatively target-rich shooting location. The point is that your first experiences are going to go a long way toward setting your first impressions of the equipment, and it's sensible to make sure your first impression is a positive one. Even if you have to wait a few days.

Don't "stress" the camera right away by going directly to a test of whatever extreme capability it's supposed to be better at than the competition, or, worse, don't immediately test the feature the Internet tells you is weak or suspect. You know what a camera needs to shine: good light, middle apertures, low or medium ISO, subjects that are easy to focus on. Feed it what it wants and let it please you from the start. Make demands gradually. You'll make friends more easily that way.

Because it doesn't matter which camera you use, but it does matter that you enjoy using it and that you come to trust it. Doing good work helps your fluency with your equipment, and fluency with your equipment helps you do good work. Of course it doesn't matter so much with a brief tryout using a rental, but it certainly does when you've been saving for six months to buy an expensive camera you hope to use for several years, and it just arrived and you have it in your hand for the first time. In that case especially, what you want with your new camera, like Bogart said at the ending of Casablanca, is "the beginning of a beautiful friendship."

Hey, look—the weather's clearing up! I'd better get outside.

Mike

Equipment for our posts is provided by
LensRentals or B&H Photo

Original contents copyright 2015 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.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Lorne Black: "I think you are describing the difference between the lust for new equipment and actually using it as intended. Once money changes hands there is often a bit of buyer’s remorse. With cameras, the best way to battle that is to attach a favourite lens and make some photos.

"As to Nikon’s Dƒ, I see it from the other direction. In the ’60s and ’70s most SLRs looked pretty much same, slab sided and with sharp edges. Currently, DSLRs look pretty much the same with softer, rounded edges. Shape has nothing to do with capability though it can affect how comfortable it is to hold. Control layout may be good or bad, but the camera style has little impact. After eight years with my trusty D200, and with no D400 in sight, I was on the verge of buying a D800. But for about the same money the Dƒ offered the D4 sensor in a style I preferred. Admittedly, owning an F2, F3HP, and FM3a does influence my thinking. After two years and 20,000 frames I still find it an amazing bit of kit."

jerry roebuck: "When you have the time, and of course if it interests you, I would be very keen to know how easily this camera works with AI lenses. (I'm an old geezer with some very good Nikkor glass...and failing eyesight, so ease of focus is high priority.) Thank you."

Mike replies: With limited time with the equipment I'm unable to try everything. The D750 with AI lenses is something I'm unlikely to get around to because I'm not interested in it myself. Generally, my position for years has been that it's best to use cameras with the lenses they were designed to be paired with. I've had to modify that position since mirrorless came along, but I still stick to it pretty firmly personally.

I think I'd probably encourage you to switch to AF, Jerry, even if you have to trade a lot of older lenses for only two or three current ones. I often say that I lived at the perfect time to be a photographer. There are many reasons for that, but one of them is that the various automated focusing aids came along at the right time for me. As I got worse at focusing, cameras got better at it. Sweet. If you have problems focusing, the technological solution for you exists and is very effective and convenient, so I'd say you might as well take advantage of it.

Anders responds to jerry: "Kirk Tuck recently posted about using manual focus lenses on modern DSLRs."  

Thom Hogan responds to jerry: "The Dƒ is the best of the Nikon DSLRs if you're going to try to manually focus them via the focus screen. It's mildly better than the rest due to some small focus screen changes.

"However, remember that the AF indicators still work on all Nikon DSLRs when you manually focus. They even tell you which way to turn the top of the focus ring on AI lenses  ;~)  ."

Roger Engle: "I'd be curious to see B&W conversion comparisons between the D750 and X-T1, having heard that both do pretty well."

Mike replies: That's something I'm curious about too. I'll try if I have time.

Chris: "An incredible camera package, no doubt. I don't see the Nikon 35mm ƒ/1.8G ED lens getting much attention online. It's an excellent performing lens, on par with the Sigma in sharpness. You can couple it with a D810 and have a camera package that is actually lighter (by 230g) than the D750/Sigma combo. A light, capable lens on a D810 is nice alternative to consider for anyone's hard-earned $."

Bob Gary: "We need a paragraph or two like that with every camera manual we get so we don't get disappointed. If we applied those evaluations every time we approach any human tool, their usefulness would be so much more rewarding...."

Words and Video by Michael Tapes of LensAlign

When a new Nikon or Canon camera comes out I always pick one one up to test in the "LensAlign Lab" to check for any issues. I also like a hands-on feel so I can answer customer questions from my own experience. In the case of high-resolution cameras like the brand new Canon 5DS and 5DS R, I was particularly interested because the degree of precision in its autofocus would be so critical for these cameras to realize the true potential of their native resolution.

I purchased a 5DS R with the above intent in mind. No surprises in the lab. But after some real world shooting, I was impressed enough with how it performed in my own photography that I decided to put together a "Real World Review" video that your readers might find informative.

—Michael Tapes

[Here are the links for LensAlign and FocusTune. I think it's also interesting that this video shows you one reason why Michael developed these products...he clearly needed them for his work. As you might for yours...or you might just want them to optimize your system because you appreciate precision. —MJ]

©2015 by Michael Tapes, all rights reserved

Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Speed: "I know. I'll sell my motorcycle to buy a new 5DS. The same motorcycle I promised to sell when I bought my 5D MkIII."

Mike replies: Made me laugh. We've heard about that motorcycle before. That's a very useful bike—it can be used to justify many cameras.