How I Cured Gear Acquisition Syndrome (GAS) and Focused on My Photography Goals
I’ve finally learnt how to overcome gear acquisition syndrome in photography and I’d like to share what helped me.
In today’s fast-paced world of photography, it’s easy to get caught up in the endless cycle of buying new gear. Whether it’s the latest camera body, a new lens, or other accessories, many photographers experience Gear Acquisition Syndrome (GAS) at some point. I know I did. Over the last 10 years of my non-professional photography journey, I owned far too many cameras, constantly upgrading and switching gear in search of the next best thing. However, I realized something important: buying more gear wasn’t making me a better photographer.
In this blog post, I’ll explain how I cured GAS, simplified my photography kit, and redirected my focus towards what really matters: creating meaningful photographic work and achieving my personal photography goals. This shift has not only improved my photography but has also allowed me to regain the joy of shooting, unburdened by the pressure of owning the latest and greatest gear.
If you are already over the GAS stage then head on over to my personal blog where this week I discuss the work of Ernst Haas
How to overcome gear acquisition syndrome in photography.
Firstly, What Is Gear Acquisition Syndrome (GAS)?
Before we dive into how I cured it, let’s talk about what Gear Acquisition Syndrome (GAS) actually is. GAS is the constant desire to purchase new photography equipment, even when it’s not necessary. You might convince yourself that a new camera body or a specific lens will take your photography to the next level, or you feel pressure to keep up with the latest gear trends, thinking it will improve your work. While upgrading your gear can be useful in some cases, it often becomes a distraction from what truly matters: the art and purpose behind your photography.
My Personal Struggle with GAS
In the past 10 years, I fell into the trap of constantly upgrading my equipment. I’ve owned countless cameras, ranging from entry-level DSLRs to advanced mirrorless systems. I’d read reviews, watch videos, and believe that each new piece of gear would somehow transform my photography. However, during the 5 years I spent as a professional photographer, I only had two cameras—and that was more than enough. Back then, I was entirely focused on the work, not the gear.
Lightroom Metadata showing just some of my cameras
As I transitioned into a non-professional photography role, I found myself paying more attention to the latest gear releases and less attention to what I was actually photographing. I became obsessed with having the latest technology, thinking it would make me a better photographer. But deep down, I knew it wasn’t the gear that mattered—it was my vision and technique.
Notice how few shots I’m actually taking with each camera
The Turning Point: Focusing on What Matters
After years of chasing gear, I started asking myself some serious questions about what I really wanted from photography. What is the purpose of my work? What kind of photography do I want to create? The answer was clear: I wanted to create story-driven, meaningful photography, focusing on social and environmental projects. Gear was simply a tool to achieve those goals, not the goal itself.
Photographers Like Ernst Haas used minimal gear
At that moment, I decided to simplify my gear collection and focus on only what I needed to produce the kind of photographic work I care about. By streamlining my kit, I stopped thinking about the latest tech and started thinking more about the techniques and projects that would help me achieve my goals.
Simplifying My Gear
One of the first steps I took to cure GAS was to significantly reduce the number of cameras I owned. I now focus on just a few key pieces of equipment that I need for the work I want to do. Instead of constantly switching between camera bodies and lenses, I’ve honed in on a setup that works for me: the Fuji X100Vi and Fuji XT5, along with a couple of small, versatile prime lenses. These cameras allow me to capture the images I need without the distraction of having too many choices.
Don McCullin, a great photographer used simple gear to capture his incredible stories
By limiting my gear, I’ve noticed that my creativity and focus have increased. I’m no longer wasting time researching the next camera upgrade or worrying about whether my gear is good enough. I’m able to concentrate on my photography projects, honing my skills, and telling the stories that matter to me.
Refocusing My Photography and YouTube Channel
This shift in mindset has not only impacted my photography but also the direction of my YouTube channel. When I first started making videos, a lot of the content was focused on gear reviews and comparisons. But as I’ve re-evaluated my goals, I’ve realized that I don’t want my channel to be about gear anymore. Instead, I want to focus on photography techniques, the projects I’m working on, and the inspiration behind my work.
My future content will highlight photography as an art form and how we can use it to tell meaningful stories, whether those are personal projects or broader social or environmental issues. Of course, I’ll still mention gear when it’s relevant to a project, but it will no longer be the focus of my channel. My goal is to connect with like-minded people who care more about the purpose behind photography than the equipment we use.
How You Can Overcome GAS
If you’re struggling with Gear Acquisition Syndrome, here are a few tips to help you break free and refocus on your photography goals:
Ask yourself why you need new gear: Do you really need that new camera, or are you just upgrading because it’s the latest trend? Think critically about whether new gear will truly improve your photography or if you’re just falling into the trap of consumerism.
Focus on your photographic goals: What kind of photography do you want to create? Whether it’s street photography, documentary work, or creative portraiture, think about the type of work you want to produce and what gear you actually need to achieve those goals.
Simplify your kit: By reducing the amount of gear you own, you’ll spend less time thinking about equipment and more time taking photos. Limiting your options can also boost creativity by forcing you to work within constraints.
Shift your mindset: Stop thinking of gear as the answer to better photography. Instead, focus on improving your skills, mastering the tools you already have, and working on meaningful projects that inspire you.
Conclusion: Gear Isn’t Everything
For a long time, I thought that having the best gear would make me a better photographer, but I’ve since learned that this isn’t the case. Photography is about storytelling, creativity, and technique—not the latest camera or lens. By curing my Gear Acquisition Syndrome and focusing on my goals, I’ve rediscovered the joy of photography and am more motivated than ever to work on projects that truly matter.
If you’ve been struggling with GAS or feel like gear is distracting you from your creative goals, I hope this post helps you refocus on what’s really important in your photography journey.
In this post I am putting the Sony A7III vs A7IV to see how the two compare. Is the Sony A7IV worth upgrading to from the Sony A7III?
I originally owned a Sony A7III back when it was released in 2018. I was pretty impressed with it as you can see in my review at the time. The Sony A7IV intrigued me as I wanted to see how they could improve upon what is still one of the best hybrid cameras, even in 2022.
In this article I am going to cover everything that you need to know when considering the Sony A7III vs A7IV including image quality, video quality, ergonomics, menus and all the upgraded features. If you would rather watch then my video comparison of the Sony A7III vs A7IV Can be found here . The video shows screen recordings of the AF in action, the IBIS and video quality as well as everything else.
Sony A7III vs A7IV – Ergonomics
The first thing that you notice when you put the Sony A7IV next to the A7III is that the new camera has gained a little size over its predecessor. In terms of weight they are within a few grams of each other but the size difference, particularly the depth of the camera is more noticeable than the figures would have you believe. The mark III feels quite small and dinky in comparison to the latest mark IV version. The A7IV is deeper due to Sony adding a fully articulating screen (more on that later) and improving the heat management of the camera.
The grip has also grown and now offers more depth and provides more purchase on the camera, particularly when operating it one handed. Those with larger hands will definitely appreciate the added space and comfort. The A7 IV now weighs in at a measured 658g with the battery which is only 8g more than the mark III.
One of the most obvious changes to the A7IV is the switch to a fully articulated rear LCD screen. The previous model had a tilting mechanism often favoured by purely stills photographers but the new, articulated screen works much better for hybrid shooters like myself.
Not only is the new screen fully articulating it has also increased the resolution from 0.92 million dots to 1.04 million dots. More importantly the screen now has a 3:2 aspect ratio which matches the cameras sensor resulting in less wasted space on the screen.
The Sony A7IV’s screen now uses the touch screen functions to much greater effect, allowing you to use it to navigate the menus as well as the usual AF funtionality. The A7 III touchscreen was mainly limited to selecting AF points. The new one feels much more modern and in keeping with what we have become used to with modern gadgets like phones and tablets.
The EVF on the Sony A7IV has also been upgraded to 3.69m dots from 2.36m dots on the A7III. The improvement is welcome and a noticeable one but it is not class leading compared to some of the competition. The refresh rate can also be boosted to 120hz, double that of the older model. Everything else remains the same on the viewfinder.
One of the ergonomic changes that I find most satisfying is the increased size of the buttons on the mk IV. The AF-On button is now substantially larger and the AF joystick has also been enalarged and also flattened slightly which definitely makes it easier to move your AF point as desired.
The record button has been moved to the top of the camera instead of to the right of the viewfinder. In all honesty I don’t mind either location but given the choice I prefer the new placement as it is more in keeping with the other cameras that I use such as the Canon R5 and Nikon Z series bodies. I would prefer the Menu button to be on the right hand side like Nikon and Panasonic cameras so that it can be selected one handed.
There is now a dial below the PASM dial which allows you to switch between photo, video and S&Q modes. The dial is lockable as is the unmarked exposure compensation dial (it can be set to whatever you want now). There are also 3 custom setting slots on the PASM dial as opposed to 2 on the A7III.
The Sony A7 IV now has dual UHS-II card slots with slot 1 also accepting CF Express type A cards. You will need either V90 rated SD or CF Express A cards to record in the higher video resolutions/bitrates now available on the A7 IV. The A7 IV wont allow me to even try using a Sandisk Extreme Pro 170mb/s card for these higher quality video settings. I ordered a couple of these cards to enable recording using the higher quality video modes and they work well.
There is also a new locking mechanism on the memory card door. You now have to slide the lock (similar to the A7III) and at the same time slide the memory card door towards you. It is kind of awkward to be honest and one of the things that I prefer on the Sony A7III. Also the strap lugs on my A7IV are quite thick and can get in the way of the memory card door when opening. It’s not a big deal but something that I have noticed.
Menus
The A7IV uses the latest Sony menu system and my goodness what a difference it makes. The old Sony menus were a confused mess fo the most part. I often still find myself searching through them to find certain options and settings.
The new menu system is now much better laid out and for the most part it is logical and much quicker to find what you need. I particularly appreciate that it gives you a preview of the items contained within the selected menu option so that you don’t waste time diving into a menu only to find that the setting you needed is not there. I’d go as far as to say it is now one of the best menu systems available.
One thing that has caught me out and something that I find annoying is that when you set the camera up to use a picture profile in video mode, the camera carries this across when you switch back to photo mode. So I shot a bunch of images this morning with the log profile set for photos. Why Sony thought this was a good idea I do not know. Luckily I shoot in RAW + Jpeg so had the RAW files to fall back on.
Sony A7III vs A7IV – Image quality
The main headline grabbing upgrade for the A7IV is probably the increase in resolution from 24mp to 33mp. In all honesty, if this were the only reason that you are considering an upgrade from the Sony A7 III then I would save your money.
The increased resolution is nice to have as it enables a little more cropping room but the difference is not enough to justify the expense of an upgrade. You’re going from images measuring 6000×4000 pixels to 7008x 4672.
Yes, there is a little more detail in the 33mp images but it’s only just about enough to go up one print size. It does make the A7IV a more interesting proposition for landscape photographers who also have a hybrid workflow, perhaps aspiring youtubers who focus on landscape photography may give the A7IV more consideration but for most people resolution alone, while nice to have, likley isn’t the main reason to upgrade.
From my testing dynamic range remains essentially the same so at least that resolution bump has not come at the cost of dynamic range.
Here is an A7IV raw file with no adjustments. The blacks and highlights have clippedAnd here is the same file with the exposure increased by 1 stop along with a 100 push on both the blacks and shadows as well as -100 pull on the highlights. It looks hideous but gives an idea of just how flexible the RAW files are.
In terms of high ISO noise performance, you can see from my test shots below that the A7III and A7IV perform very similarly.
A7III Raw ISO 3200, Converted in Lightroom, no adjustmentsA7IV Raw ISO 3200 converted in Lightroom, no adjustmentsA7III Raw ISO 6400, converted in Lightroom, No adjustmentsA7IV Raw ISO 6400, converted in Lightroom, no adjustmentsSony A7III compared to A7IV 100% crop, ISO 6400
The A7III does slightly better once above ISO 6400 but once you down size the A7IV file to match the A7III dimensions it is actually a tiny amount better.
A7IV Tiff resized to A7III dimensions, converted in Lightroom, no adjustmentsA7IV downsized to A7III dimensions, ISO 6400, 100% view
One thing that I have noticed is that the auto white balance in the A7IV does a better job than the A7III. I often had to apply fairly significant corrections to the A7 III images as they sometimes gave a magenta or yellow tint depending on the lighting conditions. I have not found this to be an issue with the mark IV. Outdoors the colours are very similar as seen below.
A7III (left) vs A7IV
Skintones have also been improved on the A7IV vs A7III, particularly in mixed lighting conditions. This quick portrait was shot in window light with auto white balance and auto ISO. The AF nailed shot after shot. It really is impressive and the more I use it the more I appreciate just how easy the A7IV makes everything.
A7IV, Sony 85mm 1.4GM @ 1.4, 1/250, ISO1250 – RAW file, no editing done
The A7 IV now also adds the ability to shoot lossless compressed RAW files which helps to save some card and hard drive space without compromising image quality.
You can also shoot in 10bit HEIF format instead of Jpeg. In theory this should give more colour information than the 8bit Jpeg files but in use I haven’t noticed any difference. You also have to consider that HEIF is a relatively new format so before shooting chekc that they are compatible with your device/PC.
A7 IV vs A7 III – IBIS
The IBIS in the A7 IV is said to give 5.5 stops of image stabilisation compared with the 5 stops quoted for the A7 III.
I wanted to test out whether there was any real world difference so I shot my usual tests handheld at 24 mm on the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8.
I found that results were so similar as to not warranty any further testing.
It is impossible to explain the difference in IBIS performance for video without showing the footage so please see my video here
This is where the A7IV shines against the A7III – Auto Focus
The AF in the Sony A7 III was always pretty good, especially as Sony updated the firmware to add better Eye AF as well as animal detection. However this has been improved again, with the A7 IV taking advantage of the BionZ XR which Sony claims is 8x faster than the BionZ X found in the mark III.
The A7 IV has 759 phase detect AF points giving 94% coverage vs 693 with 93% coverage on the A7 III. The increase doesn’t sound like much but more importantly it puts it in line with the A1 and A7SIII which I suspect will allow it to benefit from any AF improvements added to those bodies.
The phase detect points now work down to f/22 (vs f11 on the A7III) and the AF will work in -4 EV vs the A7III’s -3 EV.
When I first noticed that you can now change the AF point selection colour from white to red I gave a little prayer to the camera gods as this was something that I often had issue with in previous generation Sony cameras. When using the A7III and the A7R2 I owned before that, it could sometimes be incredibly difficult to know which focus point was being activated if the colour matched the background. It’s funny how small things can sometimes turn out to be instrumental in giving you a feel for whether you will like to use a camera or not.
The A7 IV has ported over the same AF algorithms found in the top of the line Sony A1 which adds real time eye AF and subject tracking. The A7 IV also adds human/animal AF that works in both photo and video mode. There is also vehicle tracking for photography as well as the ability to select bird eye AF.
Having tested this out on some not too challenging geese and pigeons I can say it does a great job.
Bird Eye Af works flawlessly for subjects such as this goose.
Again, it is best to watch the video for demonstrations of just how good the AF in the Sony A7IV is.
In use I have found it to be as good as anything available (including my Canon R5). In fact I would even put it a notch above the R5. It locks on really quickly and is accurate. To see this in action subscribe to my Youtube channel and hit the notifications bell as the full video will be released soon which includes footage of the AF captured on an Atomos Ninja V. You can now see the video here
With Eye AF turned on it is the quickest system that I have used to pick up the subjects eyes and it can do it even when the subject is quite small in the frame. Mind you, the Sony A7III is no slouch in this area either.
I could see a discernible difference when shooting the Sony A7IV vs A7III. It is simply much quicker to react, pick up the subject and place that green box over the eye.
When the subject either turned away from the camera or left and then returned to frame it was significantly quicker to regain focus on the eye than the A7III. The MK III did not always pick up the subject’s eyes again quickly and on some ocassions even failed to do so at all. I believe this is due to the older algorithm scanning the entire scene to re-aqquire the subjects eyes whereas the Sony A7 IV has been programmed using machine learning to prioritise looking for a subjects eyes in the same area as it last detected them. Whatever the technicalities it is a marked improvement.
Video
The Sony A7III was one of the first true hybrid cameras, bringing together great stills and at the time, excellent video specs. However times have moved on and the lack of 10 bit internal video as well as 4k is starting to show against the competition.
The A7IV has adressed this and now offers upto 4k30 with no crop whereas the A7III tops out at 4k25 without a crop. Once you go to 4k30 there is a 1.2x crop on the A7III. The recording limit of 30 minutes found on the A7III has now been removed too.
As well as the usual S-log options the A7IV now includes S-Cinetone.
Importantly the A7IV now offers 4k60 full pixel readout (no binning) but this does crop to APS-C or 1.5x.
Where the A7IV has definitely taken things up by several notches vs the A7III is with the codecs and colour depth available. This is great news for those wishing to colour grade their footage in post.
The A7III only offers 8bit 4:2:0 internal shooting options whereas the A7IV now shoots 10 bit 4:2:2 internally with the option to use the H.265 codec or All Intra H.264 at a bit rate of 300mbps for 30p or 600mbps for 60p footage. Lower data rates are also available for those who don’t need the added grading headroom or simply want to save on disk space.
Below are the various 4k codecs and bit rates available.
4k H.265 24p bit rates4k H.265 60p bit rates4k H.264 24p Bit rates4k H.264 30p bit rates4k H.264 60p bit rates
4K All intra has fixed settings as follows :
24p – 4:2:2 10 bit 240mbps
30P – 4:2:2 10 bit 300mbps
60p – 4:2:2 10 bit 600mbps
The A7IV does away with the Micro HDMI port and replaces it with a full sized HDMI which is so much more sturdy.
It also adds what Sony call Active stabilisation. This is basically a digital stabilisation using information from the gyro on the IBIS. The field of view crops in a little to allow this. This is something that I tested for my video review and will show there.
The A7IV now lets you adjust (in 7 steps) how quickly focus transitions are performed as well as 5 steps of control for how quickly the AF will switch from one subject to another.
An interesting concept and one that I have seen carried out extremely well by DJI is the focus mapping option. This shows you which areas of your image are in and out of focus by colouring the areas. I’m still not convinced on its usefulness so will report back when I have had time to use it a little more.
Sony A7III vs A7IV – Conclusion
When I saw the specs for the Sony A7IV I wasn’t blown away. There was no one aspect that really stood out to me as groundbreaking or a must have. A little more resolution, an articulating screen, a new menu (again), a few extra video modes and promised AF improvements didn’t really seem like that much considering how groundbreaking the A7III was back in 2018 and how long it has been since then.
I have had and owned at least one of each generation of Sony’s A7 series bodies since the A7R. I have always appreciated their technical abilities, groundbreaking specs and ability to push the boundaries for autofocus. However, I have never gelled with one the way I have with say, the Fuji X-Pro 1 & 3 or the Nikon Z7II or Canon R5. The difference, I have always felt is that those feel like cameras made by a camera company that understands photographers. They get the little things right in terms of button placement, menus, ergonomics, design and handling. These things really do make a massive difference when it comes time to pick up a camera and shoot.
The Sony A7IV is the first Sony camera that I have picked up and felt like it is finally designed by a company that understands what we as photographers/videographers want. There are no headline grabbing features that blow your mind the way that the Canon R5, Sony A1 or Nikon Z9 did at release but the whole is definitely more than the sum of its parts when it comes to the A7IV.
After having shot a lot with both of these cameras side by side, if it were my money and I had to decide between the Sony A7III vs A7IV , I would buy the A7IV without doubt. It feels like a camera, makes everything easy and gets out of your way and lets you shoot. Not to mention that I would no longer consider a camera without 4k60 video.
I hope that you found some value in this article and it helps with your decision. Please don’t forget to help out in anyway you can by subscribing to this blog, my yotube channel or buying through my links. Any help is much appreciated and allows me to spend more time creating content like this.
In this article I am going to compare the Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II vs the Panasonic GH5. I own both of these top of the range Micro 4/3 cameras.
I have been using them for a few months now with a variety of different lenses and for different types of photography including landscapes, portraits and travel.
There are loads of comparisons on line that deal with the video side of things far better than I ever could as a primarily stills photographer. However despite the often stated presumption of using Olympus for stills and Panasonic for video I thought it would make an interesting comparison to see if this still holds true with these two flagship Micro 4/3 cameras.
So let’s get straight into the comparison by looking firstly at the specs and then on to ergonomics and handling.
Both have the latest 20mp Micro 4/3 sensors
Both shoot 4k video although the GH5 has many more options including super slow motion full HD at 180fps as well as higher bit rates.
The EM1 II has a 3 inch touch screen LCD and 2.36 million dot viewfinder
The GH5 has a larger 3.2 inch touch screen LCD and 3.6 million dot viewfinder
Both are weather sealed down to -10c
The Olympus can shoot at up to 60 fps with the electronic shutter and 15 FPS with the mechanical shutter
The GH5 shoots at 11 FPS
Both have in-body 5 axis image stabilisation
Both have a variety of shooting modes including time-lapse, HDR and focus bracketing
So let’s look a little bit beyond the specs and see what the cameras are actually like to handle.
Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II vs Panasonic GH5 – Handling
First up the Panasonic GH5 is 139x98x87mm and weighs 725g with the battery in. I might note it’s the same battery as the GH4 which is great if you already own some. Compare this with its predecessor the GH4 at 133x93x84mm and with a weight of 560g with battery and you can see that the GH5 has put on a considerable amount of weight and some heft too. Where I really notice this most is in the depth of the grip. It is very comfortable but I have to be honest and say I prefer the GH4’s grip.
The Olympus OMD EM1 mark II is slightly larger than its predecessor at 134x91x69mm and lighter too at 574g but still feels svelt in comparison to the GH5.
Both cameras feel great in the hand and are very comfortable to hold, even with larger lenses attached. However the GH5 is starting to feel quite large for a Micro 4/3 body. A lot of people (myself included) use this system for its light weight and portability.
I personally prefer the size and weight of the Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II. When I had both cameras on me in Asia recently I found myself gravitating towards the Olympus when given a choice. It was the one I naturally reached for out of the two. The reason is not just the size and weight but the fact that I also find the grip more comfortable. The grip on the GH5 is just a little too deep and results in your hand feeling the strain on extended use.
In terms of controls, both of these cameras are incredibly customisable. You can set them up virtually as you want. However one of the benefits of the larger body on the GH5 is more function buttons and more direct access buttons to things like ISO, white balance and exposure compensation. If you are used to the direct controls of a DSLR then the GH5 will feel more natural to you.
The Olympus takes a little more setting up initially but once you have set it up to your liking then you rarely have to delve in to the menu system during everyday shooting. The Panasonic just make sense and is very logical and intuitve in its control layout. I really can’t find fault with it. Picking it up for the first time everything was just where I would expect it to be and using it comes very naturally to me.
As for the menu systems themselves, the GH5’s menu is a little better set out and more intuitive to use thanks to a simple layout and straight forward logical ordering. The Olympus on the other hand does take a little getting used to with some odd naming of items such as noise reduction being called the noise filter etc. However once you are used to it then even the Olympus is quick and easy to navigate through. Top marks to Panasonic here though as I feel their menu system is one of the best available and having used loads of different cameras I find that everything is where I would expect it to be.
One new addition for the Panasonic GH5 is the AF joystick which has been added to the back of the camera. This allows direct access to change your AF point and it is a joy to use. Not only does it enable you to change your AF point more quickly but when clicked it also returns the AF point to home (default is centre point). Panasonic have implemented this brilliantly. There is also a switch which lets you quickly flick between AF-S, AF-C and manual focus.
The Olympus on the other hand relies on the D-Pad and while it is quick to use I do prefer the AF joystick of the GH5 and I’m sure most people would too.
Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II vs Panasonic GH5 – Image Stabilisation
One of the big new additions to the Panasonic GH5 over the Gh4 is in body image stabilisation. Traditionally this has always been one of the big advantages that Olympus had over Panasonic.
However now that Panasonic have added this to the GH5 it really is a great improvement. Not only does it allow you to handhold shots at much lower shutter speeds enabling you to use a lower ISO but I also find it results in a much higher keeper rate for virtually all photos that you take.
So how does the image stabilisation compare between these two models.
Olympus claims 5.5 stops of stabilisation on the EM1 Mark II and Panasonic claims 5 stops on the GH5.
In my testing I found that I could comfortably handhold the Olympus at shutter speeds as low as 1-2 seconds at 12mm and still consistently get tack sharp images. Some even claim shutter speeds as low as 10 seconds are possible but I think that is a bit hit and miss and requires propping yourself up against a wall or tree to try and minimise any movement in your body.
With the GH5 I was able to consistently get tack sharp images at 1/3 second at 12mm on the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro lens ( see my review of that lens here ). So while the Olympus does still hold an advantage in this area the Panasonic certainly puts up a respectable fight.
Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II vs Panasonci GH5 – Auto Focus, Burst rates and action
Both of these cameras are built for speed.
The Olympus boasts an incredible 60 fps burst rate (single AF only) and 18 FPS with C-AF with the electronic shutter . These drop down to 15 FPS (S-AF) and 10 FPS (C-AF) with the mechanical shutter.
The GH5 while not as fast still offers very reasonable rates of 12 FPS (S-AF) and 9FPS (C-AF). So if you actually ignore the headline grabbing rates of the Olympus and look at the most useful option which is C-AF with the mechanical shutter there is on 1 FPS difference between the two.
So how do these two cameras handle fast action.
I’m going to say straight up here that I am not a fast action shooter. I do portraits, landscapes and travel photography. However just in my simple testing having models walk through the scene I found that the Olympus AF system copes better and gives a higher keeper rate than the GH5. Although the GH5 has more focus points at 225 vs Olympus’ 121, the EM1 II uses a hybrid system of phase detect and contrast detect points that seem better able to keep up with movement.
Panasonic’s Depth from Defocus contrast detect system struggles a little bit more when it comes to C-AF and tracking auto focus.
Olympus also captures images at any of its high frame rates in full raw resolution. Pro capture is a feature which will pre record 14 images and constantly hold them in the buffer. Then if you start shooting you will be able to select from those pre-recorded images. It allows you to capture shots where maybe your trigger finger wasn’t quite fast enough.
Panasonic on the other hand offers 6k photo mode which allows you to continuosly record at 30fps and then extract 18mp still images from the recording but only in Jpeg format.
If I’m honest I find the implementation of Panasonic’s 6k photo mode more useful than Olympus’ due to one factor. With the Olympus you have to trawl through and delete any images that you don’t want. With the Panasonic you still have to look through all the images but you can simply select the ones that you want to keep. That saves me having to constantly delete multiple photos. However I rarely find myself using either of these options as I prefer a more considered and slower paced approach to photography but I understand birders, wildlife and sports photographers would appreciate them. Basically you can choose between the Raw files of the Olympus or the Jpegs of the Panasonic.
Standard focus performance from both is excellent
When it comes down to what I use most which is S-AF in single shot mode both cameras are brilliant in good light. They lock on quickly and are incredibly accurate. When the light drops slightly the Olympus is a tad better but there really is not much in it.
One thing I did notice while testing the Olympus 25mm 1.2 Pro on the GH5 was that a strongly back-lit scene could throw the GH5 off and it would hunt or in some cases fail to focus altogether.
When it comes to how I use these cameras I would take both of them over a DSLR any day of the week because they just focus much more accurately.
Let’s not forget that both offer face detection and eye detection which is so useful for portrait work. Both work well but I prefer Olympus’ implementation as it adds a square over the face and then a smaller one over whichever eye is in focus. Panasonic puts a square around the face but then has intersecting lines to show you which eye is in focus. It is not quite as intuitive as the EM1 II and on occasion the intersecting lines do not meet over an eye so I was unsure as to whether the eye was in focus or not.
Taken on the EM1 II using face detect and near side eye selectionPanasonic GH5 + 25mm f/1.4 shot using eye detect AF
Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II vs Panasonic GH5 – Image Quality
Both cameras are using the latest Micro 4/3 20mp sensors so they should be quite evenly matched. However there has always been a notion that you use Olympus for stills and Panasonic for video but does this still hold true with the latest generation of cameras.
In terms of IQ the two cameras are virtually identical, offering sharp detailed photos. The GH5 removes the AA filter but in practise I have not noticed this to offer any tangible benefit. Both cameras seem to resolve the same level of detail.
One area where there is a slight difference is that the Olympus offers an extended ISO setting of 64 compared to that of 100 with the GH5. This does allow the EM1 II to give incredibly clean results with none of the noise that used to be present at base ISO in clear skies. This is a big improvement for me personally with my landscape work.
Look how clean those shadows are at ISO 64 on the EM1 Mark II
In terms of high ISO performance the two cameras are very evenly matched offering very usable files even at 3200 ISO and even 6400 ISO if the photos are just for web use or small prints.
Panasonic GH5 + Pana Leica 25mm f/1.4
At up to 800 ISO images are very clean and retain detail. At 1600 ISO you can see a slight loss of detail but no noise. At 3200 ISO there is further loss of detail and some noise creeping in to the images. At 6400 ISO details become smeared and noise is quite visible.
One thing that I have seen is that the Panasonic GH5 seems to handle colour noise a little better than the Olympus EM1 II at higher ISO settings. At 3200 the Olympus sometimes shows some ugly colour noise in skin tones whereas the Panasonic doesn’t. This is in the Jpeg files but not present in the raw files so if you shoot raw then it is nothing to be concerned about. If you shoot jpeg it is worth being aware of.
The colours on the GH5 have been improved quite a lot and I particularly like their natural profile for almost all types of imagery. The L Mono setting also gives very nice high contrast black and white shots. The natural profile on the Olympus is still the one I go to for most images and of course you can tweak the black and white profile in both the highlights, shadows and mid-tones to get it exactly as you wish.
Dynamic range of the two cameras is essentially identical.
I’ll be adding some high ISO examples soon. Having just gone through all my photo from these two cameras I realised that I don’t have good test shots to share because I was using the Olympus 25mm 1.2 (see my review here )and Pana Leica 25mm 1.4 a lot of the time and that allowed me to keep my ISO to 1600 or below at all times while in Asia.
GH5 + Pana Leica 25mm f/1.4EM1 ii + 25mm 1.2EM1 ii + 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro
Olympus does have a trick up its sleeve to best the GH5 for stills imagery in the form of the Hi Res mode. This combines 8 images in camera using sensor shift technology to give one hi resolution image.
I have found that this worked better in the EM1 Mark II than on my old EM5 II. It deals with movement better. For instance it is usable for running water now. However movement in trees and grass etc can still leave issues in your images that means this mode is only really fully usable for things like product photography. Let’s hope Olympus can improve Hi Res mode further as it has so much potential.
To use Hi Res mode you have to have the camera locked down on a sturdy tripod. I use the Manfrotto 055 XPRO3 which is absolutely rock solid.
You also need to be using very sharp lenses to really take advantage of this and resolve all the detail.
Another area where the Olympus EM1 II has an advantage is in night photography. Live view, live boost and live composite really are very useful as they allow you to see the image on the LCD screen as it is being created. It gives you a live preview as the exposure is taking place so you know exactly when you have the correct exposure and can stop at the perfect time.
Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II vs Panasonic GH5 – Conclusion
So which camera is the better one for stills photography?
If you are not going to take advantage of Hi Res mode, Live view, Live bulb and Live composite then at £1699 compared with £1849 the GH5 is surely the logical choice with its better viewfinder, LCD and far better video features. It definitely offers the better value and can keep up with the Olympus EM1 Mark II for general photography use.
However having said all that I still prefer the Olympus EM1 II and here is why.
I prefer the handling of the Olympus. I use Micro 4/3 to keep the size and weight of my kit small and light. The Panasonic GH5 is just a little too large for my liking and I prefer the grip on the Olympus which is more comfortable to hold all day long.
The GH5 does have good ergonomics and I particularly like the AF joystick and direct access to ISO via a dedicated button but I am quite happy using the D-pad to move AF points on the EM1 II and I can assign almost any button on the EM1 II to give me quick access to ISO. In all honesty if I am shooting in situations where the ISO needs changing quickly then I will have either camera set to auto ISO and set a maximum ISO and minimum shutter. If I want to set the ISO manually such as when shooting landscapes then quick access is not so vital and a quick press of the OK button and I am in to Olympus’ Super Control panel.
I find the auto focus on the Olympus just a touch more reliable in low light and I prefer their implementation of face detect AF. These two things can and did make the difference between me getting a candid shot of my daughter and not.
Lastly and this is a very subjective thing but I find the Olympus OMD EM1 II to be a beautiful camera and the finish in my opinion feels higher quality and more refined. It just works so well. In fact I would say that ergonomically it is the best camera that I have ever used and in the end this factor more than specs make me want to pick it up and take it with me everywhere.
So which one should you chose?
My brain finds it hard to recommend the Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II vs Panasonic GH5 at this time but my heart would chose the Olympus each and every time. However I will be keeping both as they are two of the best cameras available right now and whichever one you choose I’m sure you will be delighted.
