Panasonic G9 mk2

[John Matthews]

5 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

I’ve never seen moiré on any S5ii footage using a 1/8th so coincidence or because of?

Good to know!

[MrSMW]

2 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Good to know!

Well as I think it was Kye who mentioned above, it’s at least partially about before hitting the sensor so it makes sense that if the potentially offended subject is softened or diffused at the lens stage…

At least as I understand it but as above, I use a 1/8th mist and I think it helps in the is regard, but not the principal reason I use one which is more about taking off that digital edge and making both video and stills more ‘filmic’ at the point of capture.

That’s my theory anyway and I’m sticking with it!

[John Matthews]

On the G100, I tried a number of things to eliminate moiré, including a mist filter. Maybe it wasn't the right strength, but nothing worked other than moving back a foot or so. Of course the framing was wrong after that. I even tried a different lens altogether and kept the same frame- it was the same result, moiré on a cotton shirt. Panasonic does a decent job at detecting moiré and removing the color from it but the pattern remains. With DFD, it was always puling and that also mitigated the problem- moiré would go off and on.

I watched a video just this morning filmed on a X-T5 and there was moiré of the worst kind with plenty of colors roaming around. It was definitely the shirt though. Clothing is one thing you can control sometimes, but not buildings. On a wedding shoot like yours, it's impossible though.

[kye]

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

Well as I think it was Kye who mentioned above, it’s at least partially about before hitting the sensor so it makes sense that if the potentially offended subject is softened or diffused at the lens stage…

At least as I understand it but as above, I use a 1/8th mist and I think it helps in the is regard, but not the principal reason I use one which is more about taking off that digital edge and making both video and stills more ‘filmic’ at the point of capture.

That’s my theory anyway and I’m sticking with it!

I'd imagine that it would have a partial effect to reduce any moire, but may not be strong enough for moire with large contrast.

The mist filters essentially do a blur of a small percentage of the light that goes through them, with the blur being stronger at small distances, so it's sort-of like a mostly transparent OLPF.

[John Matthews]

Well, I've decided to get the G9 ii. Should arrive around November 2. If people have questions, I'll do my best to answer.

Also, now that I've given up my CF Express Type B that I used for my GH6, I have many v30 cards, but no v60 or v90. I don't really need the highest data rates, but I want 4k 120fps. What card to I need for that? On my CF Express card, I could just do everything without thinking about it, but I'd rather not have to shell out serious money for a v90 card unless absolutely necessary. When I look at the 4k 120fps files, their only 100 Mbps in HVEC. Can a v30 card handle 5.8 open gate?

[TomTheDP]

1 hour ago, John Matthews said:

Well, I've decided to get the G9 ii. Should arrive around November 2. If people have questions, I'll do my best to answer.

Also, now that I've given up my CF Express Type B that I used for my GH6, I have many v30 cards, but no v60 or v90. I don't really need the highest data rates, but I want 4k 120fps. What card to I need for that? On my CF Express card, I could just do everything without thinking about it, but I'd rather not have to shell out serious money for a v90 card unless absolutely necessary. When I look at the 4k 120fps files, their only 100 Mbps in HVEC. Can a v30 card handle 5.8 open gate?

How did you feel about the GH6 btw? 

[John Matthews]

1 hour ago, TomTheDP said:

How did you feel about the GH6 btw? 

I liked it. I felt like there was a rather large learning curve having come from very consumer Panasonic cameras to something that has so much in it. The AF seemed serviceable to me, but I'm sure the G9 ii will make it look bad. It seemed a little overkill for me and my family stuff. I better understand the menus now; so, the G9 ii will be fine, but still, there's more than what I need out of a camera. If everything goes well, I'll sell my E-M1 ii and use the G9 ii for my "big" camera with big lenses and a GX800 for my "fun, small" camera. It's funny because I've bought and sold the GX800 3 times now and it's one of the most fun cameras I've ever had. I just can't live with so many audio and video quirks. I expect the G9 ii to perform better for all of my needs over the GH6 and the E-M1 ii.

[John Matthews]

Am I correct in saying the G9 ii does 120fps 4k, but the GH6 only does C4k 120fps?

[ac6000cw]

1 hour ago, John Matthews said:

Am I correct in saying the G9 ii does 120fps 4k, but the GH6 only does C4k 120fps?

According to the specs here https://www.panasonic.com/uk/consumer/cameras-camcorders/lumix-mirrorless-cameras/lumix-g-cameras/dc-g9m2.html#specs yes, the G9ii does 120p in both UHD and C4k

[ac6000cw]

Quote

59.94Hz [C4K] 4096x2160

119.88p, 300Mbps (4:2:0 10-bit LongGOP) (H.265/HEVC, LPCM)*

Quote

59.94Hz [4K] 3840x2160

119.88p, 300Mbps (4:2:0 10-bit LongGOP) (H.265/HEVC, LPCM)*

(Quotes from Panasonic UK G9ii specs. It supports 100p as well)

[kye]

7 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Well, I've decided to get the G9 ii. Should arrive around November 2.

Enjoy!!  I think it's a solid choice - apart from the size of the body making people very excited it looks like a great spec'd camera.

[John Matthews]

4 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

(Quotes from Panasonic UK G9ii specs. It supports 100p as well)

6 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

yes, the G9ii does 120p in both UHD and C4k

That was ONE of the annoying parts about the GH6. The C4k 120fps was often a completely different aspect ratio from the rest... a lack of UHD meant you were either cropping the 120fps footage or making the entire project in C4k. It was a strange limitation. The GH6 seemed to do everything, but not that. Maybe it'll be fixed in firmware.

[John Matthews]

Just thinking through a big camera and small camera setup in terms of lenses, I think it makes sense to alternate between "pro" lenses and "consumer" lenses throughout the popular focal lengths. For example in MFT,

fisheye, 10, 12, 17, 25, 42.5, 75, 150, 300 (or more)

This would allow to mix and match better and have the right tool for the job. In the past, I thought I'd just copy the focal range for the pro and consumer camera, having the same focal range in both, understand better the focal length and essentially working consistently. For example,

Pro: 12-35, 35-100, 200 (don't have any of these lenses)

Consumer: 12-32, 35-100

Conversely, one could just choose the 10-25 and 25-50 (don't have those either) to cover most of the focal range, then choose small primes on the consumer side.

Maybe some could double as a lens in both situations (example, use the 9mm for both pro and consumer if it passes mustard).

Fact: the G9 ii is big for MFT; maybe the features will mitigate this, but the need for a smaller camera (for me) is necessary. The question is: which focal lengths should be pro and which should be consumer and not let the size of the g9 ii to get "out of hand".

I just curious to know what you would do if you need two systems (big and small), what would you choose/have you chosen?

 

[ac6000cw]

17 hours ago, John Matthews said:

When I look at the 4k 120fps files, their only 100 Mbps in HVEC. Can a v30 card handle 5.8 open gate?

According to the G9ii specs, 4k/C4k 120p is 300Mbps HEVC.

These are the open-gate specs:

...so it's 200 Mbps up to 30p 4:3 and 300 Mbps up to 60p 17:9.

I've captured Olympus C4k at 237 Mbps and G9 150 Mbps 4k50p to Sandisk Extreme (non-Pro) 128MB & 256MB V30 UHS-1 cards with no problem, so 200 Mbs should be fine to a high-spec V30 card (V30 rating => 30 MBs => 240 Mbps sustained write speeds). In reality I've found the high-spec, larger capacity (128GB or larger) V30 cards are very fast, limited as much by the UHS-1 interfaces as anything else, so you may find that 300 Mbps works fine.

Datasheet performance figures for a UHS-1 Sandisk Extreme (non-Pro):

...and the Extreme Pro version:

[kye]

4 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Just thinking through a big camera and small camera setup in terms of lenses, I think it makes sense to alternate between "pro" lenses and "consumer" lenses throughout the popular focal lengths. For example in MFT,

fisheye, 10, 12, 17, 25, 42.5, 75, 150, 300 (or more)

This would allow to mix and match better and have the right tool for the job. In the past, I thought I'd just copy the focal range for the pro and consumer camera, having the same focal range in both, understand better the focal length and essentially working consistently. For example,

Pro: 12-35, 35-100, 200 (don't have any of these lenses)

Consumer: 12-32, 35-100

Conversely, one could just choose the 10-25 and 25-50 (don't have those either) to cover most of the focal range, then choose small primes on the consumer side.

Maybe some could double as a lens in both situations (example, use the 9mm for both pro and consumer if it passes mustard).

Fact: the G9 ii is big for MFT; maybe the features will mitigate this, but the need for a smaller camera (for me) is necessary. The question is: which focal lengths should be pro and which should be consumer and not let the size of the g9 ii to get "out of hand".

I just curious to know what you would do if you need two systems (big and small), what would you choose/have you chosen?

I have the GH5 and GX85.

The GH5 was my default body, and I used it with the Laowa 7.5mm F2, the Voigtlander 17.5mm F0.95 and the Voigtlander 42.5mm F0.95.  Occasionally I'd use a longer lens for wildlife etc, like the FD 70-210mm F4, or the Tokina 400mm F5.6.  I would carry the 12-35mm F2.8 for difficult situations where I need very fast zooming or extra IS.

That was up until a recent trip when I discovered the GX85 with the 14mm F2.5 pancake lens combo.  Not only did I fall in love with the size of the setup, and the lack of attention it raised, but I also discovered that the AF-S was extremely useful and the DoF was adequate.  

I've since come upon the idea that there are three setups that I think I will pursue:

1. GX85 with 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 zoom lens
   Having a 10X zoom lens will be liberating because I'll be able to shoot whatever compositions I can see, the AF-S will allow me to work really quickly, and (after spending a lot of time with a DoF calculator) I realised that the DoF should be sufficient for the work I do.  This is a day-time setup.
   Interestingly, this lens is the same size as the 12-35mm F2.8 lens, so not too bad in practice.
2. GX85 with 12-32mm F3.5-5.6 pancake lens
   Compact walk-around setup when size really matters, and still gives a good zoom range.  Similar use-case to the above.
3. GX85 with 7.5mm F2, TTartisan 17mm F1.4, and TTartisan 50mm F1.2 lenses
   This is the low-light setup.

All that is in combination with iPhone, and especially the wide camera, which acts as a second body and gives quick access to a super-wide angle.

If I was going somewhere that camera size didn't really matter, like doing a tour with a busload of tourists, then I'd consider taking the GH5 instead, but I'm struggling to put my finger on why it would be that much better.  I know it has various better specs, but in reality I'm only doing home video stuff, so the shooting experience and the reaction of people in-frame matters more than DR etc.

My philosophy is to think hard about how I shoot and what I am trying to achieve and to challenge my assumptions.  Hope this is useful 🙂 

[MrSMW]

4 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Conversely, one could just choose the 10-25 and 25-50

I really like this pairing and whether one body and switching lenses, or a matched pair, if I was shooting 4/3rds video, stills or hybrid, those full frame focal lengths of 20-50 (indoors in my world) and 50-100 (out) are near perfect.

The only thing that bothers me is the size and weight that isn’t quite in keeping with the 4/3rds approach, but then compared with equivalent (that don’t exist!) full frame zooms, they are hardly tanks.

I prefer primes in principle but fast zooms are just more convenient more of the time.

 

[ac6000cw]

4 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Just thinking through a big camera and small camera setup in terms of lenses, I think it makes sense to alternate between "pro" lenses and "consumer" lenses throughout the popular focal lengths. For example in MFT,

fisheye, 10, 12, 17, 25, 42.5, 75, 150, 300 (or more)

This would allow to mix and match better and have the right tool for the job. In the past, I thought I'd just copy the focal range for the pro and consumer camera, having the same focal range in both, understand better the focal length and essentially working consistently. For example,

Pro: 12-35, 35-100, 200 (don't have any of these lenses)

Consumer: 12-32, 35-100

Conversely, one could just choose the 10-25 and 25-50 (don't have those either) to cover most of the focal range, then choose small primes on the consumer side.

Maybe some could double as a lens in both situations (example, use the 9mm for both pro and consumer if it passes mustard).

Fact: the G9 ii is big for MFT; maybe the features will mitigate this, but the need for a smaller camera (for me) is necessary. The question is: which focal lengths should be pro and which should be consumer and not let the size of the g9 ii to get "out of hand".

I just curious to know what you would do if you need two systems (big and small), what would you choose/have you chosen?

 

If I had to choose just one lens to keep out of my collection, it would be the Pana 14-140mm F3.5-F5.6 - for the range it provides it's relatively small (75mm long) and light (265g), it supports dual-IS2, focus breathing isn't noticeable and on my copy at least the zoom ring is reasonably smooth. It's been my most-used lens ever since I got it as a bundle with a G6 years ago.

If I could keep a few more, then...

The Oly 12-40mm F2.8 - just a great all-round, reasonably bright, moderate wide to moderate telephoto, no noticeable focus breathing, 85mm long and 382g. (The Pana 12-35mm F2.8 is a bit smaller and lighter and gets you dual-IS - I was considering both a while ago and then a really good used deal on the Oly came up so I went for that).

The Oly 75-300mm F4.8-F6.7 - what I use most often for wildlife, pretty small (117mm long) and light (423g) for the focal range, and decently sharp for something that small/light/cheap.

Low light? usually just chuck the Pana 25mm F1.7 into the camera bag or pocket in case I need it - cheap/small/only 125g.

I also own the old Pana 20mm F1.7, but that's noisy when focusing, so I might swap it for a 17mm or 15mm fast AF prime at some point (Oly or Pana Leica probably).

I've recently acquired a used Pana 35-100mm F2.8 (to complement the Oly 12-40mm F2.8). Decent lens and not too large/heavy for a 'pro' lens, but it's got noticeable focus breathing so not ideal for video C-AF use.

(and yes, the Pana 12-32mm pancake is great when you want to keep things as small as possible, especially if you're taking two cameras on a trip, so that would be a 'keeper' too).

[Beritar]

7 hours ago, John Matthews said:

That was ONE of the annoying parts about the GH6. The C4k 120fps was often a completely different aspect ratio from the rest... a lack of UHD meant you were either cropping the 120fps footage or making the entire project in C4k. It was a strange limitation. The GH6 seemed to do everything, but not that. Maybe it'll be fixed in firmware.

No, the GH6 is able to do 4K 120fps as well. 
The issue is with 5,7K, only available in 17:9.

[Beritar]

6 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Just thinking through a big camera and small camera setup in terms of lenses, I think it makes sense to alternate between "pro" lenses and "consumer" lenses throughout the popular focal lengths. For example in MFT,

fisheye, 10, 12, 17, 25, 42.5, 75, 150, 300 (or more)

This would allow to mix and match better and have the right tool for the job. In the past, I thought I'd just copy the focal range for the pro and consumer camera, having the same focal range in both, understand better the focal length and essentially working consistently. For example,

Pro: 12-35, 35-100, 200 (don't have any of these lenses)

Consumer: 12-32, 35-100

Conversely, one could just choose the 10-25 and 25-50 (don't have those either) to cover most of the focal range, then choose small primes on the consumer side.

Maybe some could double as a lens in both situations (example, use the 9mm for both pro and consumer if it passes mustard).

Fact: the G9 ii is big for MFT; maybe the features will mitigate this, but the need for a smaller camera (for me) is necessary. The question is: which focal lengths should be pro and which should be consumer and not let the size of the g9 ii to get "out of hand".

I just curious to know what you would do if you need two systems (big and small), what would you choose/have you chosen?

 

I have both the 10-25mm and the 25-50mm, these lenses are the pinnacle of M43.
Sure, they are very sharp, not extraordinary sharp as my 35mm GM, my 50mm S Pro or even my 24-70mm S Pro, but they are among the best you can find in M43. No, what make them special, apart from their focal range is their rendering.
Their local contrast (and colors in my opinion) is crazy good, especially the 25-50mm, one of my favorite lens ever.

I also have some of the fast little primes like the 20mm f1.7 II, the 15mm f1.7 and the 25mm f1.4 II.
They are not as sharp as the PanaLeica f1.7 zooms, but, the 20mm f1.7 is tiny, produce nice colors with good global contrast, and the image has a very good sense of volume, it is why so many people love it. The focus is slow and noisy (really noisy), but accurate, and from what I've seen the G9II makes the AF almost usable (certainly usable for me).
The 15mm and the 25mm are more expensive, slightly bigger, slightly less sharp wide open (especially the 25mm f1.4 which can be nice for video), but their AF is faster. 
They have not the same sense of volume as the 20mm in my opinion but they have solid local contrast, thought not as good as the Oly 25mm f1.2 Pro by exemple.

[John Matthews]

2 hours ago, kye said:

I have the GH5 and GX85.

The GH5 was my default body, and I used it with the Laowa 7.5mm F2, the Voigtlander 17.5mm F0.95 and the Voigtlander 42.5mm F0.95.  Occasionally I'd use a longer lens for wildlife etc, like the FD 70-210mm F4, or the Tokina 400mm F5.6.  I would carry the 12-35mm F2.8 for difficult situations where I need very fast zooming or extra IS.

That was up until a recent trip when I discovered the GX85 with the 14mm F2.5 pancake lens combo.  Not only did I fall in love with the size of the setup, and the lack of attention it raised, but I also discovered that the AF-S was extremely useful and the DoF was adequate.  

I've since come upon the idea that there are three setups that I think I will pursue:

1. GX85 with 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 zoom lens
   Having a 10X zoom lens will be liberating because I'll be able to shoot whatever compositions I can see, the AF-S will allow me to work really quickly, and (after spending a lot of time with a DoF calculator) I realised that the DoF should be sufficient for the work I do.  This is a day-time setup.
   Interestingly, this lens is the same size as the 12-35mm F2.8 lens, so not too bad in practice.
2. GX85 with 12-32mm F3.5-5.6 pancake lens
   Compact walk-around setup when size really matters, and still gives a good zoom range.  Similar use-case to the above.
3. GX85 with 7.5mm F2, TTartisan 17mm F1.4, and TTartisan 50mm F1.2 lenses
   This is the low-light setup.

All that is in combination with iPhone, and especially the wide camera, which acts as a second body and gives quick access to a super-wide angle.

If I was going somewhere that camera size didn't really matter, like doing a tour with a busload of tourists, then I'd consider taking the GH5 instead, but I'm struggling to put my finger on why it would be that much better.  I know it has various better specs, but in reality I'm only doing home video stuff, so the shooting experience and the reaction of people in-frame matters more than DR etc.

My philosophy is to think hard about how I shoot and what I am trying to achieve and to challenge my assumptions.  Hope this is useful 🙂 

Very helpful. Thanks for that. The superzoom option is interesting as I've never done it. The GX85 is such a great camera. In fact, it's the only other camera that I've preordered. I had it for 2 years, but sold due to gas. I often wish I had just kept it all this time, but wanted to try other things (watched too much YouTube probably).

I've been thinking of the "system" a little differently though. I've been thinking "big and capable" vs. "small and less features"; not "low-light" vs. "abundant light". It's essentially the same though. I guess it's more about a "get by with" system and "no compromise-ish" system.

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

I really like this pairing and whether one body and switching lenses, or a matched pair, if I was shooting 4/3rds video, stills or hybrid, those full frame focal lengths of 20-50 (indoors in my world) and 50-100 (out) are near perfect.

The only thing that bothers me is the size and weight that isn’t quite in keeping with the 4/3rds approach, but then compared with equivalent (that don’t exist!) full frame zooms, they are hardly tanks.

I prefer primes in principle but fast zooms are just more convenient more of the time.

 

I've also considered those big zooms, but the size and price are just killer.

44 minutes ago, ac6000cw said:

If I had to choose just one lens to keep out of my collection, it would be the Pana 14-140mm F3.5-F5.6 - for the range it provides it's relatively small (75mm long) and light (265g), it supports dual-IS2, focus breathing isn't noticeable and on my copy at least the zoom ring is reasonably smooth. It's been my most-used lens ever since I got it as a bundle with a G6 years ago.

If I could keep a few more, then...

The Oly 12-40mm F2.8 - just a great all-round, reasonably bright, moderate wide to moderate telephoto, no noticeable focus breathing, 85mm long and 382g. (The Pana 12-35mm F2.8 is a bit smaller and lighter and gets you dual-IS - I was considering both a while ago and then a really good used deal on the Oly came up so I went for that).

The Oly 75-300mm F4.8-F6.7 - what I use most often for wildlife, pretty small (117mm long) and light (423g) for the focal range, and decently sharp for something that small/light/cheap.

Low light? usually just chuck the Pana 25mm F1.7 into the camera bag or pocket in case I need it - cheap/small/only 125g.

I also own the old Pana 20mm F1.7, but that's noisy when focusing, so I might swap it for a 17mm or 15mm fast AF prime at some point (Oly or Pana Leica probably).

I've recently acquired a used Pana 35-100mm F2.8 (to complement the Oly 12-40mm F2.8). Decent lens and not too large/heavy for a 'pro' lens, but it's got noticeable focus breathing so not ideal for video C-AF use.

(and yes, the Pana 12-32mm pancake is great when you want to keep things as small as possible, especially if you're taking two cameras on a trip, so that would be a 'keeper' too).

 

2 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

..so it's 200 Mbps up to 30p 4:3 and 300 Mbps up to 60p 17:9.

I've captured Olympus C4k at 237 Mbps and G9 150 Mbps 4k50p to Sandisk Extreme (non-Pro) 128MB & 256MB V30 UHS-1 cards with no problem, so 200 Mbs should be fine to a high-spec V30 card (V30 rating => 30 MBs => 240 Mbps sustained write speeds). In reality I've found the high-spec, larger capacity (128GB or larger) V30 cards are very fast, limited as much by the UHS-1 interfaces as anything else, so you may find that 300 Mbps works fine.

Datasheet performance figures for a UHS-1 Sandisk Extreme (non-Pro):

Yeah, I've also shot with the Olympus C4k, but it almost never hit those datarates, only at f8, lots of detail and handheld. I'll probably go for the v60 cards as they seem to be the best compromise. If I need more, I'll go for my SSD.

47 minutes ago, ac6000cw said:

If I had to choose just one lens to keep out of my collection, it would be the Pana 14-140mm F3.5-F5.6 - for the range it provides it's relatively small (75mm long) and light (265g), it supports dual-IS2, focus breathing isn't noticeable and on my copy at least the zoom ring is reasonably smooth. It's been my most-used lens ever since I got it as a bundle with a G6 years ago.

If I could keep a few more, then...

The Oly 12-40mm F2.8 - just a great all-round, reasonably bright, moderate wide to moderate telephoto, no noticeable focus breathing, 85mm long and 382g. (The Pana 12-35mm F2.8 is a bit smaller and lighter and gets you dual-IS - I was considering both a while ago and then a really good used deal on the Oly came up so I went for that).

The Oly 75-300mm F4.8-F6.7 - what I use most often for wildlife, pretty small (117mm long) and light (423g) for the focal range, and decently sharp for something that small/light/cheap.

Low light? usually just chuck the Pana 25mm F1.7 into the camera bag or pocket in case I need it - cheap/small/only 125g.

I also own the old Pana 20mm F1.7, but that's noisy when focusing, so I might swap it for a 17mm or 15mm fast AF prime at some point (Oly or Pana Leica probably).

I've recently acquired a used Pana 35-100mm F2.8 (to complement the Oly 12-40mm F2.8). Decent lens and not too large/heavy for a 'pro' lens, but it's got noticeable focus breathing so not ideal for video C-AF use.

(and yes, the Pana 12-32mm pancake is great when you want to keep things as small as possible, especially if you're taking two cameras on a trip, so that would be a 'keeper' too).

Again, the superzoom is compelling (and only 265g). I already have most of the other lenses you mention with the exception of the 35-100; instead, I have the 40-150 Pro f/2.8. I'm not sure it's a better lens. I sold the Pany 20mm, but loved it for DFD.

36 minutes ago, Beritar said:

No, the GH6 is able to do 4K 120fps as well. 
The issue is with 5,7K, only available in 17:9.

Thanks. My mistake. I don't know why I couldn't figure that out. (I should have kept my mouth shut.)