I bought a used Lumix GX8 camera a month ago. Factors in my decision to buy the GX8 included the 20 megapixel image sensor, water sealing, and the in body image stabilization (IBIS) feature and there are great prices on the now used or refurbished models available; albeit, it is a 3 year old camera at this point. Plus I am familiar with the Lumix user interface.
I also have a used Olympus E-M10 I bought for cheap and I love this camera for still photography. It has an excellent IBIS which set my expectations high for the GX8’s IBIS.
Unfortunately, the IBIS in my GX8 does not appear to be in the same league as the E-M10. To be fair, the E-M10 mk ii is a newer camera than the GX-8. The following comments are primarily about the IBIS feature of the GX8.
GX8 IBIS works for me on the following lenses:
(Update) GX8 IBIS does work on the following:
I did not hear internal IBIS noise with these lenses, plus the GX8 does not show the stabilization in real-time on the electronic viewfinder as is done on Olympus and other vendors’ cameras with IBIS. Not seeing the stabilized image means we do not have an easy way to know if IBIS is operating for the shot. But apparently IBIS is applied when the shutter is operated.
Some say IBIS operation is restricted to operating above certain shutter speeds such as faster than 1/15th of a second. I took a number of photos at an indoor event using both an E-M10 and the GX8 and the GX8 photos, when enlarged, showed minor pixel blur that was not present on the photos shot with the E-M10. The IBIS may have worked but not as well as the Olympus equivalent, which is said to provide up to 4 stops improvement. Some forums suggest that GX8 IBIS works best if you continue to follow the 1/focal length rule. That is, shoot at a minimum of 1/25th of a second with a 25mm lens. Shoot a 200mm focal length at 1/200s and the IBIS should work very well to improve that shot. Others suggest (and my own experiments seem to confirm) that the GX8’s IBIS combined with Lumix optical stabilized lenses (OIS) is better than OIS alone and is very effective when used on Lumix long zoom lenses.
IBIS does not work with 4k30 video although Panasonic lenses with OIS work great for this. Update: Have since read or watched some Youtube reviews and they confirm IBIS does not work on video.
Discovering this, I looked at online forums and found others with similar issues, although some suggested IBIS worked okay for them, including on one of the lens I tried (above).
I was spoiled with the Olympus IBIS which is excellent. I can mount my 135 mm f/2.8 full frame lens with a focal reducer (effectively about 100mm) on the E-M10 and get rock solid image stabilization in the viewfinder. Can’t do that with the GX8. Test GX8 shots, outdoors in good light, did produce very sharp images with this lens indicating that IBIS was working for those shots.
On the plus side, the GX8’s 20 megapixel images are very nice when using a tripod or fast shutter speed . The camera shoots real 4K video and includes 4K Photo, including 4K pre-shot mode (takes continuous frames so you can grab images from before you press the shutter) and 4K Post focus modes, which have interesting applications. 4K photo mode is actually a very neat feature.
The GX8 uses the same battery as the Lumix GH-2 and I had a stash of those batteries already on hand.
Used or refurbished GX8s are available for half the price of a new GX9. The GX8 has an anti-alias filter while the GX9 does not. Some prefer AA filters while others prefer the sharper image when AA filters are not used. The E-M10 mk ii does not have an AA filter and produces noticeably sharper images than a similar 16 MP sensor with AA filtering. The E-M10 mk ii, without AA filtering, appears to produce images on par with the sharpness of GX8’s 20 megapixel images – I intend to do some testing on this.
In pixel peeping (which may or may not matter to many), the GX8’s low light performance seems about 1-stop worse than the GH-4. In other words, an ISO 800 image on the GH-4 seem to have about the same noise/grain as an ISO 400 on the GX8. I suspect this is due to the higher pixel density of the 20 megapixel sensor. If the 20 MP image was resized to 16 MP for a direct comparison, they are probably comparable, however. If you are mostly shooting outdoors this is not a problem, but if you shoot dimly lit scenes, it may be a problem.
The GX8 is a decent camera and it should be noted, is about 3 years old at the time I bought mine, used. The GH5 and the GX9 have both come out since then and are said to have outstanding IBIS. At current market prices, the GX8 is a very good value.
Update: The Lumix G9 has excellent IBIS and even better when used with a compatible Lumix OIS (optical image stabilization) lens. The issues raised above about the GX8 are specific to the GX8. It seems that all of the newer model cameras have much improved IBIS and dual IBIS/OIS. I have since purchased a used Lumix G9 and am extremely pleased with the G9.
Canon introduces its new mirrorless camera, two weeks after Nikon introduced 2 mirrorless cameras, and ten years after competitors launched the mirrorless revolution in photography:
it’s official: mirrorless cameras are no longer the preserve of second-rate companies who couldn’t compete against Canon and Nikon’s DSLR duopoly, but a crucial part of the future of high-end photography. Canon and Nikon are late to the game, to be sure, but no-one can doubt that both companies’ new products are serious, wholehearted efforts to develop credible and wholly modern camera systems.
And the EOS R is still missing many features that have been available from those second-rate companies for years. And whose products cost a fraction of those from Canon and Nikon. That said, the Canon and Nikon products are fine, albeit, late. Their new products mark a foundation on which they will build into the future. The problem is the Canon fan boy reviewer that wrote this nonsensical first look.
The Verge writer has defined “credible” cameras, not in terms of features, but in terms of brand name. A balanced view, by comparison, may be found here.