Leaderboard

The more I use the GX85, the more I like it. I've taken it out with the 12-35/2.8 a couple of times now, including a street festival on the weekend where I got a bunch of shots of a friends kids running around non-stop, and the camera and lens kept up, even at F2.8 the whole time. Some beach visit sample images from the 12-35mm F2.8 (probably wide open).. and the festival outing, also 12-35mm f2.8 wide open, but this includes some shots using the 2X zoom mode too.. and a couple from an outing with the Cosmicar 12.5mm F1.9 wide open (and cropping into the image)... The 12-35mm images are almost SOOC using the Natural profile (I hadn't put Cine-D on yet), just with some slight tweaks in post, but the Cosmicar ones above have been graded under a Kodak 250D / 2393 emulation process, which did surprisingly little to the colour actually. The more I use the 12-35mm the more I appreciate a zoom lens for just getting shot after shot in fast situations, which is pretty much the key to having lots of options in the edit and keeping an edit fresh with lots of different types and compositions of shots. I'd really like a longer lens as I got quite a few shots at 35mm with the 2X engaged, so I'm contemplating the 12-60mm F2.8-4 which seems to be a good match from the reviews I've seen. Curious to hear others thoughts on this. I found the Cosmicar a little challenging to work with as I composed for the screen and was then surprised in post with how much crop I needed to apply, so had a few shots where I was chopping peoples heads off etc. I've ordered a cheap 28mm F2.8 m42 lens to go with my m42 speed booster, which will give a 43mm FOV, which is a little tighter than the 12.5mm Cosmicar which gives about a 35mm FOV once you crop into the image circle. I'll have to see how I go with it. I'll need a 22mm lens on the SB to give a 35mm FOV and those aren't super common in m42 mount! The alternative is my 17.5mm Voigtlander which is 38mm on the GX85 but isn't exactly vintage, so I'd have to look more seriously into filters to get similar flare characteristics (which is the part I love about vintage lenses). The stabilisation is really good, and in combination with the 12-35 is just spectacular, and my regular camera is a GH5 so I'm guessing I'm not easily impressed. It really makes me feel like shooting. Great stuff!

The Panasonic GX85 with the 12-60 f/2.8-4 is a wonderful combination, both for photography and video. I've had the combo since they both came out and have yet to be disappointed by the results.

Its not a lens that many people (including myself) have regretted buying. Best to consider it as a constant f4 though, partially for convenience of exposure, but also because it doesn't stay f2.8 for long in the zoom range. Very convenient all rounder but would I have bought it if I had the 12-35mm f2.8 ? Maybe not for me personally as the 24-70mm equivalent range is ideal for me and if I want to go beyond 70mm then I would prefer to go a bit beyond the 120mm equivalent and have a faster option too. So I would be looking at something like the Olympus 75mm f1.8 to supplement the 12-35mm and also benefit from the constant and faster apertue versus the 12-60mm. If you're shooting in a situation where you can't spare the time to change lenses though then, as I say, the 12-60mm is not something you'll regret having in that role.

Now now, he's a camera reviewer who reviews cameras for making camera reviews, you have to keep a hold of your expectations! These are the same people that keep making endless "how to get cinematic images" videos but for some unfathomable reason keep talking about new cameras and higher resolutions when the people who actually make cinema have basically been using the same cameras for a decade.

if they had only put that fantastic (& tilting) EVF from the GX8 into the GX9, or even just put better IBIS in the GX8, it would have been beating out other Pana rangefinders as an allrounder for years

If they were THAT concerned with segmentation they wouldn't release a camera that can double as a cine camera, including RAW.

So, turns out that hitting Command-Return instead of Shift-Return submits the post. Who knew? anyway, Part Two. They have smaller apertures. This might seem to be a disadvantage, but maybe not as much as you'd imagine. Firstly, smaller apertures are easy to focus, so less shots with missed focus. BOOM. You're welcome. Tell Panasonic (or whoever) I just upgraded their AF. See if you can tell the difference in DoF between these? No? Well, F2.8 to F3.5 isn't much difference. OK, let's get less fair.. What about these? Sure, it's a small difference, but that's a two whole stops. It's also many many hundreds of dollars. Low light is definitely a difference here, that's true, so the kit zoom isn't really a low-light monster, but these lenses are practically free so you can't have everything!

If the additional 4k crop is not an issue, the GX9 is even better than the GX85, in my opinion. Got on used from a friend , interested in the 12-60 zoom kit lens, the plan was to sell the body and keep the lens, but instead the GX85 body was sold. Better color science, tilting EVF and dedicated focus switch (both things that I've missed from the old GX7), faster operation and a little better menu, better color from stills, better AF (for CDAF standards).

It's rare for an adapter to surprise me, and the Anamorph-X 1.33x Pro from Letus achieved that. It allows you to go super wide and it holds up image quality like very few other adapters out there. Flares could be improved, but as these are still being made, we can just email Letus a bunch and get things changed - which is another great advantage of this lens over vintage adapters. What do you think of the footage and the results? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GplZGXPXmS0