p.14 #4 · Panasonic G9 image thread and discussion
Blueshound wrote:
Firstly, nice photo.
On the comment of going back to the G9, as compared to an A1 . . . this resonates with me. My new A7RIV notwithstanding, I love my G9 & Pana lenses.
Is that something you're really feeling, or is there a bit of "chumming the waters" . . . . (I could appreciate either one!)
Brian
I purchased some Panasonic gear over the weekend to get the ball rolling - not to say I won't get cold feet and change my mind (again) at some point, but after spending a lot of time going through my Lightroom catalog, there's not really a lot of difference between the two cameras (and the OM E-M1X) at the higher ISO settings used for bird photography, including the amount of noise. The A1 files look better if you can stay close to the base ISO, but that's landscape territory and I have the GFX system for that; at ISO 3200-6400, I can actuall get better results from the mFT files by using DxO PureRAW, which currently does not support the A1. I also can't get the same reach with Sony as I can with mFT unless I want to pony up for a 600mm f4 GM, because the combination of the A1, 200-600 G, and 1,4x TC don't work so well.
p.14 #5 · Panasonic G9 image thread and discussion
molson wrote:
I purchased some Panasonic gear over the weekend to get the ball rolling - not to say I won't get cold feet and change my mind (again) at some point, but after spending a lot of time going through my Lightroom catalog, there's not really a lot of difference between the two cameras (and the OM E-M1X) at the higher ISO settings used for bird photography, including the amount of noise. The A1 files look better if you can stay close to the base ISO, but that's landscape territory and I have the GFX system for that; at ISO 3200-6400, I can actuall get better results from the mFT files by using DxO PureRAW, which currently does not support the A1. I also can't get the same reach with Sony as I can with mFT unless I want to pony up for a 600mm f4 GM, because the combination of the A1, 200-600 G, and 1,4x TC don't work so well.
Not to throw fuel on the fire.... but did you see @litepixels post here on surfers using a EM1-X and the new Olympus 150-400 f4.5 Pro using the built-in 1.25tc and a additional 2x TC? Simply amazing detail and sharpness taken on fast moving subjects at over 1/3 mile away. The old photo gear saying is to invest in expensive glass, not bodies, and this setup proves that saying.
p.14 #6 · Panasonic G9 image thread and discussion
I downloaded the latest DxO PureRAW update today, hoping it would clean up some of the noise in my Sony A1 images, but they are apparently still working through some bugs and the A1 files are not supported yet.
Just for fun, I ran one of my old G9 files through the latest iteration of Deep Prime:
p.14 #8 · Panasonic G9 image thread and discussion
It's quite funny that the trolls over on the Sony forum couldn't tell which image was from the lowly mFT camera... both shot at ISO 6400, both with noise reduction applied, same post-processing settings used, and both images downsized to 2000 pixels on the long edge (which should give the A1 a big advantage). The cleaner image on the right is from the G9.
p.14 #10 · Panasonic G9 image thread and discussion
arbitrage wrote:
Then forget about the G9 and I'll sell you an A9II for clean files and AF that works.
But Geoff, the Sony fanboys are now claiming the A1 has the same clean high ISO files as the A7S III... so an A9 II just wouldn't cut it.
It's too bad DxO didn't test the G9 - it has an improved processor over the GH5 and performs a bit better, so if the GH5 is only 2/3 of a stop worse than the A1, the G9 would probably be about half a stop worse at most. I guess this confirms what I see looking at my own images...
The A9 II looks to be roughly 1.5 stops better than the A1, but it can't be cropped to the extent the A1 files can.
p.14 #14 · Panasonic G9 image thread and discussion
unhappymeal wrote:
How late (or early) in the day did you shoot that? 1/125 second and pushing ISO 3200...that was always my challenge with wild life on m4/3.
Late in the day, in pretty deep shade. We have large cedar and hemlock trees all around our yard, so the light is always a challenge... but the shade is nice when we get these heat waves. DxO is a game changer for low-light shooting.
p.14 #15 · Panasonic G9 image thread and discussion
molson wrote:
Late in the day, in pretty deep shade. We have large cedar and hemlock trees all around our yard, so the light is always a challenge... but the shade is nice when we get these heat waves. DxO is a game changer for low-light shooting.
Yeah, DxO is pretty amazing. I will say it’s still pretty shocking to go hiking in be forest with the PL 200 F/2.8 and seeing the ISO spike up to 6,400 as soon as you are under the canopy.
p.14 #16 · Panasonic G9 image thread and discussion
unhappymeal wrote:
Yeah, DxO is pretty amazing. I will say it’s still pretty shocking to go hiking in be forest with the PL 200 F/2.8 and seeing the ISO spike up to 6,400 as soon as you are under the canopy.
I guess one alternative would be to move to Saskatchewan...
p.14 #18 · Panasonic G9 image thread and discussion
unhappymeal wrote:
Hahaha, touche. Although I will say, those rolling plains make for great landscape shots.
Considering the substantial amount of time I've spent in Saskatchewan over the years, I have remarkably few photos to show for it. I might have to go back again one of these days...
(I could appreciate either one!)
