I had a Gx85 but sold it. I enjoyed the small size and form factor, but the small and old tech evf is definitely inferior to the G85 , and way behind the Gx8’s. I also didn’t love the non-flippy rear screen. It’s a very nice camera though overall.
I seem to have negotiated a used G85 body for $750, subject to inspection.
Seems a pretty good price - I may pull the trigger.
I could get a 12-35 f2.8 ii also for $750, but this seems a little steep. Both for $1400 which is probably fair, but no bargain.
Took the plunge & bought a used (but mint) G85 + 12-35 f2.8 today.
Now scaling the learning curve re. controls & settings.
Good stuff mate. Enjoy it.
All good so far.
SAF is reasuringly reliable and IQ in good light is fine.
As expected high ISOs are a bit smeary. Might have to look at shooting RAW.
Biggest adjustment is relatively poor battery life - how do you tweak settings to get the most out of a charge?
The camera does have an economy mode, the LCD has to be set to info only iirc for it to work. The camera goes to “sleep” very quickly.
Personally, I shoot with the LCD closed anyway, and I also have Auto (image) Review set to off. But yes, battery life is an Achilles heal of mirrorless cameras. I generally carry two. Hahnel make a decent third party battery.
I keep buying lenses. Gumtree, Black Friday and the TRS is where my temptation lies.
So far -
Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8
Panasonic Lumix 14-140mm f3.5-5.6
Panasonic Lumix 100-300mm f4-5.6
Panasonic Lumix 42.5mm f1.7
Panasonic Leica 15mm f1.7
I could add the 35-100mm f2.8 to the current mix. But then I keep thinking I should really rationalise the zooms by replacing them with the PL 12-60 & 50-200 pairing. And I’m finding it is more important with mft to have fast primes to keep the ISO down & DOF shallow. So the Oly 75mm f1.7 beckons.
Oh sweet Jesus.
Ever thought about a VR camera?
Reckon it would be a neat way to record a few experiences.
Requires a VR headset to enjoy, but still it would certainly be a novel way to immerse yourself back into your holiday years down the track.
I’ve got the PL12-60. Its a very nice all-purpose lens but the f/2.8 is only at the wide end and f/4 isn’t that quick at 60mm.
You have my favourite lens of the whole system- the 15/1.7 .
I’m running the Oly 40-150/2.8 and I personally will stay with it over the 50-200PL.
If you want another midrange prime, Take a close look at the 30/1.4 Sigma.
Personally, I’ve never liked the large-range zooms like the 14-150 in any format.
I’d love the 75/1.8 but can’t justify it yet.
I’m looking at a way to afford the 100-400 PL.
If you like wide angles, you absolutely have to get the 8-16. Great lens . It also doubles as a street-use 35mm equivalent.
You have a very nice lens setup already.
Over 40 years ago, way back in the age of film, I coined the term describing photographers wanting to have a bigger and better appendage:“lens envy”.
Quite so. Though I’m after smaller and better, hence the move to mft.
I’m sure the 8-18 will get me in the end. I tried the 100-400 but couldn’t justify it over the 100-300. It renders better but is no faster and the zoom action was stiff and sticky (eww).
I always need a good all round travel zoom at the centre of my kit. The 12-35 and 14-140 serve this purpose at the moment. I picked up the 14-140 used at an irresistible price. It is surprisingly good and better than the much bulkier Nikon 18-200 I used to have.
Yeah, the 100-400 is mainly only if I think I’m going to start getting to VFL games again.
If I was starting from absolute scratch and wanted a top quality , good value prime kit, I think the three 1.4’s from Sigma - 16/30/56 - would be pretty compelling. Add in a zoom and I’d be ok.
I’m settling on a small kit for motorcycle travel and atm it’s looking like the Oly PenF with 15/1.7 and 45/1.8 . I took that mix to Sydney a year or so back , it weighs nothing and got most things done. The only thing I don’t like is the PenF isn’t weathersealed. Waiting to see if there’s a follow up.
When I’m not as bothered by weight, it’s the Panasonic G9, 8-18, 12-60, 15/1.7 and 42.5 Noc.
The system can be most things to most photographers.
Do you get much use from the 40-150?
More than I thought I may. If you want subject isolation and compression it’s as good as anything going around so it’s more versatile than I thought it may be.
Thinking of trading the 12-35 f2.8 and 14-140 for the PL 12-60 and 35-100 f2.8. That gives me a weather proof all rounder for travel & hiking plus a fast’ish, compact option for portraits, street candids, events & compression.
Hopefully I won’t miss the reach of the 14-140 and speed of the 12-35.
Check your shots and see how often you are shooting at 100mm+ . If it’s a lot then you’ll probably miss the longer range. You could always add a cheap 40-150 Oly, it’s usually under $200 and is optically very decent. Also consider if you’re happy to change lenses frequently on a casual day out/look around, as opposed to a specific photography day.
Instinctively, my answer would be to just add the 35-100/2.8 when you can. The caveat is whether the 12-60 will function as your do everything lens, which it may well do. In outdoor lighting and for general depth of field , f/4 is excellent.
It is tricky. Been agonising for a while.
Breakdown of mft-equivalent focal lengths from recent travels (mostly with D7000 & 18-200) -
- Europe: 94% less than 65mm, 41% at widest end, nothing over 100mm.
- Mexico: 84% less than 65mm, 31% at widest end, 8% over 100mm.
I haven’t looked at my recent South Africa trip as it was atypical with a large proportion of wildlife shots over 100mm using the P 100-300mm ii.
Of the 16% over 65mm in Mexico, over half were from situations where the need for a long lens was fairly predictable (festivals, butterfly migration etc.).
So I guess for travel I would use the PL 12-60 unless the specific situation called for the 35-100 or 100-300, which hopefully would be predictable enough to avoid frequent lens changing (I need to keep this to a minimum to avoid divorce).
Next big trip is to Japan where we do an 8 day hike in addition to Tokyo & Kyoto. I’m thinking the weather resistant PL 12-60 would be ideal for this. I’d also take the 35-100, along with the PL 15 but leave the 100-300 at home. If I don’t pull the trigger, I expect the 12-35 would be on the camera much of the time, with the 14-140 used for reach when needed (the 14-140 is not WR).
All of that to me, still makes me think either do nothing , or ditching the 14-140 for the 35-100. You have the 100-300 for genuine distance work. The 2.8 apertures are handy and the 12-35 / 35-100 makes a fairly compact premium travel kit.
The 12-60 overlaps more or less half the range of the 35-100 (which is why I haven’t bought the latter). If I went the 12-60 (in your situation) I’d leave it on most of the time and I’d probably look at the 75/1.8 for legit telephoto, DOF versatility.
And for purely outdoor travel, there’s nothing wrong at all with the Pana 12-60 kit lens. Very decent, weather sealed, half the price of the Leica.
Lol, there’s too many options.
Yep. The tyranny of choice.
You make good points, but I think the 12-35 / 35-100 combo might lead to divorce citing excessive lens changing. Historically I shoot around 73% in that 12-35 range, but find I run out of length too often for comfort.
I think I need to build my kit around the ideal general purpose travel / walkaround / hiking lens, which leads to:
P 12-35: fast & WR, but short.
P 14-140: huge range, but slow, not WR & maybe not wide enough.
PL 12-60: some speed, some reach & WR.
After that, its about specialisation.
There is plenty of overlap between the 12-60 & 35-100, but I figure it regains the speed I lose with the 12-35 and some of the reach I lose with the 14-140. In general, I’m not bothered by overlap if a lens does its own job well.
In an ideal world, the Oly 40-150 f2.8 or PL 50-200 f2.8-4 would be half their size / weight. But they aren’t.
I’ve wondered about the 75 1.8 too - results look magical, but it may be a bit inflexible for travel.
How do you find your PL12-60?