gdprice: We have used the G series since they first arrived and have upgraded a number of times. Currently we have a G12 (which has a lens issue so we were thinking of upgrading) and a G1X (which is rubbish). If it were not for the fact that we have a ST-E3-RT Speedlite Transmitter and 3 x 600EX-RT Speedlites which all work perfectly with all the G Series cameras we might look for alternatives. When I saw the G7X announcements I thought this might be a good option for an upgrade but it doesn't have a hotshoe so can't be used with the flashguns. This seems really strange for a semi-professional camera and makes me really worried that Canon might omit it from all future G Series releases making much of my system obsolete.
There are several distinct classes of camera within the G series: the G16, G7 X and G1 X II are all aimed at different users (and different budgets).
I'm not sure I'd draw any conclusions about what could replace the G16 and G1 X II, based on the spec of the G7 X.
But equally, I wouldn't (personally) describe the G7 X as being semi-professional.
ThePartaker: The bottle labeled honey balsamic vinegar (bottom of shot right hand bottle) seems to be viewed from a different angle as the white barcode on the side of it is more visible than in any other studio comparison I have seen. Has someone turned the bottle slightly or is this indicative of an off centre shot which could account for some of the lens issues?
I think the bottle must have turned slightly. The G7 X is shot slightly closer to the scene than the Sony, but not to the extent that it would make this much difference (the same turn isn't seen in the other bottles).
The way the studio is set up to ensure the scene *can't* be shot significantly off-axis.
PicOne: I note that DPR has sample images on the camera info page, but not within the Preview. Why not?
plasnu: Advertorial. It seems like the review is updated just to draw attention to this nothing special camera.
So us adding a page that undercuts some of our initial excitement about this camera (see accusations of bias, further down the page), is advertorial?
Cubby1: This has to be a bias review; at least to some extent. (Otherwise, why would you offer a counterpoint at the end?) Usually I follow reviews on DPR and Cameralabs as the primary sites, and also look at the others. Generally, except DPR, they all seem to think the G7 X is pretty good, and responsive. And, the images are "excellent". So, who is out of step? This has to be the most negative review I have ever read on DPR. Either you had a bad sample, or you have it in for Canon, or......what?
@Cubby1 - the fact that Jeff and I have slightly different perspectives on the user interface (and actually not so different that I'd consider my piece a counterpoint), doesn't imply that this piece is biased - just that one person's experience is only a single person's experience.
I think both Jeff and I mentioned that we liked the image quality. However, 'responsive' isn't the term I'd choose to use about the G7 X.
Mike FL: Battery Life (CIPA) = 210.
BTW: I know some people will say they can get more, and much more shots than 210...
The CIPA standard rarely tells you how many shots *you'll* get, because that depends so much on how you use the camera.
However, if you're getting 420 shots out of a 210 CIPA-rated camera, it's highly likely that you'll get 640 out of a 320 shot CIPA-rated camera.
The point is that the number (and our experience of it) is around 2/3rds as much as the Sony.
Felix E Klee: What's with Berlin all the time? I thought you guys are in Seattle.
We (DPReview) are in Seattle but Andrew Reid (EOSHD.com) is in Berlin.
jesus_freak: What happened to the video mode Studio Test Scene comparison? I'd be interested in seeing the difference between native 1080p and downscaled 4K with this test scene.
Also, a low-light video mode test scene would be really helpful too!
The ones at [the bottom of page 3](http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-gh4/3#sampling)?
Kevylloyd: What about focus speed in low light ?(better than any other camera I've used). What about focus speed with none dfd capable lenses? Still very fast from what I've read elsewhere. Ok so DFD might not be all that you expected per Pany's claims, but regardless I'd be surprised if many mirrorless cameras are as fast in aquisition.The AF performance section of this review seems to be unbalanced and lacking in breadth in my opinion. Perhaps you cover these points elsewhere in the review to some degree, but why not in the AF section?
Otherwise thanks for the review, I love mine for fast, silent, low light shooting especially combined with the stabilized F1.2 Noctiocron!
Those are fair points - I'll add a bit more detail (about things other than tracking).
RickPick: Just noticed a couple of small mistakes in the comparison chart above - you call the GH3 "GM3" - and the GH3 actually does support time code. Trivial, I know. Thanks for giving the camera a full review, I know you got some stick (Brits will understand) for your comparison with the A7S.
@RickPick - it was always my intention of including separate conclusions and scores. But either way, I'm hoping that people find things to enjoy or to interest them in this review. Sorry it took so long.
I'm not sure what more I could have said about DFD. The technology itself seems to work (the camera refocuses quickly and accurately as the subject moves in the Z axis), but, despite trying, we couldn't get the camera to lock onto subjects reliably enough for that capability to be the real-world advantage that the technology promises.
I'll go and look for those errors immediately. Thanks for pointing it out.
I must admit I still don't fully understand why publishing this separately from the a7S makes so much of a difference, but if separate reviews are what our readers want, then that's what we'll try to provide.
Terapixel: I'm just a still shooter, so that 85% is way lower when video is not taken into account, below 84%. So for just still shooters Fuji X-T1/ Samsung NX-1 is more interesting (not talking about Bokeh).
I'd put the GH4 on a par with the E-M1 for stills shooting (though I do slightly prefer the E-M1's 2x2 interface). It's less clear-cut against the X-T1, but there's still not a lot in it.
Our scoring system can't really cope with just how much better the GH4 is at video than the other cameras in its class, so it's not safe to assume that it would score lower than its peers, if video isn't important to you.
SulfurousBeast: Nice, some really good stuff from the likes of Pany, Sony and Fuji , Oly who are daring to innovate. I still wonder how long the big two will keep "milking" their customers with incremental updates and not truly innovating. i am a Canon user myself, but if it was not for the investments made already over 5K and I am a hobbyist, only thing preventing me to make the switch is my own inertia, sell the curent gear put together a new system etc. but always been amazed and lured to what Sony and Panasoic is doing in this place.
BTW, good review DPR though I almost did not care if GH4 was reviewed already or not.,.so late in getting this out.
Jorginho - we did test the AF fairly extensively, we've just illustrated it with this particular example. I tried using tracking AF in a number of situations, with different subjects, indoors and out, and found it struggled.
But, since I didn't shoot any birds in flight, I can't comment with complete certainty - it's possible that having just sky in the background is the necessary difference to make it more reliable.
However, even testing *extensively* doesn't mean testing *exhaustively* - there are too many variables and shooting situations to convincingly test every one of them. And for every one we did, someone could name another and say we haven't done it properly.
mpgxsvcd: Is it safe to assume that this review was written before firmware 2.0 was included? Will the review be updated with firmware 2.0 benefits?
Firmware 2.0 fixes some of the issues with AF and rolling shutter as well as adding multi-aspect ratios for video. No other camera offers the multi-aspect ratio video at any price. That is a huge benefit to get without paying any more money.
The review is based on firmware v1.1 but we'll be writing something about the 4K Photo Mode in the coming weeks.
mpgxsvcd: I can’t figure out what is more impressive. The fact that Dpreview placed this camera in the “Professional Interchangeable Lens Category” or the fact that it was actually competitive in that category.
I can’t believe that the GH4 is listed in the “Professional Interchangeable Lens Category” and the Canon 5D MKIII, Nikon D800E, and Sony A7R are not. Those are all listed as Semi-Professional.
mpgxsvcd - no, it was scored alongside its peers (E-M1, D7100 etc), it's just appearing with the wrong category title.
That's a database error, I'm afraid. I'm trying to find someone able to fix it.
kristian1: About AF performance I can say that GH4 has best AF from all mirrorless cameras , have tested samsung nx1, fuji xt1,olympus em-1, about c-sf fastest is samung but focus accuracy is very low not very useful , olympus is a bit faster, but focus accuracy not as good as gh4, xt1 is very difficult to lock first shot, its slower and accuracy a bit lower. about s-af GH4 is fastest and also very accurate.I have testes on leica 42.5mm f1.2 and oly. 75mm f1.8 at wides aperture also at difficult lighting conditions.
I am coming from 1dx , nikon d810 and gh4 is closing the gap very well on AF..Only about BIFs there is no lens with fast enough AF , and 100-300 is way too slow for BIFs , so I wouldn't spend time on that.
kristian1 - this isn't the only testing we did. We had the same problem when trying to use AF tracking in video mode and neither of the two people who tried it could get it to consistently lock onto subjects. We can only report our experiences.
Jay Turberville: Not sure what they mean by "No 1080 video from 4K crop region to minimize aliasing". If you shoot 1080 with Ex Tele Mode you get 1080 using a pixel for pixel center crop which certainly seems like the minimal aliasing mode they are looking for. Should be better than cropping the 4K image because the compression per pixel would be less.
I'll re-check that.
Menneisyys: The Scoring bar chart is missing at the bottom of Conclusions.
Sorry, we're having trouble with the database.