Mirrorless (Panasonic G5) vs. iPhone 5

[honza]

I've long wanted to get into photography, and have been using my iPhone which surpassed my point and shoot last year. After a lot of online research, I decided on the M4/3 Panasonic Lumix G5, since it was the right price ($399), had a lot of DSLR like qualities (ergo, EVF, programmable buttons, physical scroll wheel, etc), and had good reviews. I am definitely an amateur, but I have had a few tutorials from a friend as well as online. After doing a test photoshoot out in the yard, I compared the photos I took from the G5 and my iPhone (I took shots with each with the same composition. My problem is, while the G5 is better than the iPhone, it was not drastically better, and some photos were no better without zooming in (I was viewing the photos on my Mac). I was taking pics in auto mode just for comparison purposes. Then I went out with just the G5 and took photos in Aperture priority at different f stops. I was hoping to see differences like the whole image in focus at high F stop and only subject in focus with low f stop. I didn't really notice much of a difference except that the pictures usually looked better with low f stop (3.5).

Sorru for for the long post - the big question is, what can I do to get better pictures (compared to the iPhone)? Is it the kit lens, my skills, or the camera? Should I take my camera back and stick with the iPhone until I can get a $2000 setup?

 

[robbins.photo]

I've long wanted to get into photography, and have been using my iPhone which surpassed my point and shoot last year. After a lot of online research, I decided on the M4/3 Panasonic Lumix G5, since it was the right price ($399), had a lot of DSLR like qualities (ergo, EVF, programmable buttons, physical scroll wheel, etc), and had good reviews. I am definitely an amateur, but I have had a few tutorials from a friend as well as online. After doing a test photoshoot out in the yard, I compared the photos I took from the G5 and my iPhone (I took shots with each with the same composition. My problem is, while the G5 is better than the iPhone, it was not drastically better, and some photos were no better without zooming in (I was viewing the photos on my Mac). I was taking pics in auto mode just for comparison purposes. Then I went out with just the G5 and took photos in Aperture priority at different f stops. I was hoping to see differences like the whole image in focus at high F stop and only subject in focus with low f stop. I didn't really notice much of a difference except that the pictures usually looked better with low f stop (3.5).

Sorru for for the long post - the big question is, what can I do to get better pictures (compared to the iPhone)? Is it the kit lens, my skills, or the camera? Should I take my camera back and stick with the iPhone until I can get a $2000 setup?

Honza, you don't need $2000 worth of camera gear to get good photos. I started with roughly $500-$600 worth of gear, a Nikon D5100 and a 70-300 mm lens. If I didn't need the telephoto I could have gotten just the D5100 with a standard kit lens a lot cheaper, probably for not a whole lot more than what you spent on the G5.

Now I'm not too familiar with a G5, I've never shot one myself. But I can tell you that to really get the most out of any camera equipment you'll need to do some reading and learn some of the basics of photography. The real big difference is going to be noticeable when you start learning how to use aperture to get the kind of effects you want like using it to separate your subject from the background - just as an example:

 

[honza]

Thanks for the reply - I could definitely use the advise. I'm a little puzzled because I have tried the same shot with different aperture settings to try to achieve effects like the gorilla pic above. I can get the background to be blurry when I'm close and focussing on the subject, but it doesn't seem like the aperature setting makes a big difference as far as the focus. For example, one of my test shots was the side of a brick house (maybe 25 feet away), and I took shots with at 4.5, 18, and 20 aperture. The only difference seemed to be that the 4.5 shot was a little clearer since there was more light. Shouldn't I expect the focus to be different among the shots? Or do I need to be close to the subject to see this kind of effect?

 

[jaomul]

The size of sensor comes into play here as does distance and focal length. Due the m4/3 sensor being slightly smaller than the crop camera used to get the gorilla above your framing and apparent focal lengths act different.

Basically you need a lens that can open up wider than a normal dslr to get the same effect. You could likely not get this effect at all with an iPhone without a software edit. There are fast lenses for your camera also (45mm f1.8). You can get the above effects with your kit Lens (I assume you have a 14-42 or similar). Zoom it out full and select the smallest f number possible in aperture priority. It will work but won't give as pronounced separation as it would with a faster lens or as with a larger sensor camera

 

[robbins.photo]

Thanks for the reply - I could definitely use the advise. I'm a little puzzled because I have tried the same shot with different aperture settings to try to achieve effects like the gorilla pic above. I can get the background to be blurry when I'm close and focussing on the subject, but it doesn't seem like the aperature setting makes a big difference as far as the focus. For example, one of my test shots was the side of a brick house (maybe 25 feet away), and I took shots with at 4.5, 18, and 20 aperture. The only difference seemed to be that the 4.5 shot was a little clearer since there was more light. Shouldn't I expect the focus to be different among the shots? Or do I need to be close to the subject to see this kind of effect?

Well the shot above was actually taken with a 70-300 mm telephoto lens with the aperture set at F/5.0 at 180 mm. The wider the aperture (the smaller the number) the more you increase the effect. However there are a couple of other factors. The distance you are from your subject, in this case I was as close as I could get to the gorilla and still keep him entirely in the frame. The second variable is the distance the subject is from the background - in this case the gorilla is a pretty fair distance away from any of the background elements so they are all very much out of focus.

The reason your test shots didn't produce results like this is that the wall you were focused on is all on the same plane - it's all roughly the same distance from the camera's lens. Try focusing on an object that is closer to you than the wall and as long as you keep the aperture as wide as you can (the lower the number, the wider the opening) and there is enough distance between the object your focusing on and the wall behind it and you'll start to see this effect. What you want is a small distance between yourself and your subject, and a large distance between your subject and the background. It's referred to as "Distance Ratio".

There are a lot of websites with some great articles and information on the subject, just do a web search on bokeh or "how to achieve bokeh" and you'll get a ton of information. This of course is only one thing that will separate your G5 from an Iphone. When you look at pictures taken by your G5 and your Iphone on a computer screen you'll probably see that they look pretty similar. Reason being is that a computer screen is actually a fairly low resolution compared to the actual photo taken by your G5. Start zooming in, a despicable process called "pixel peeping", and you'll see pretty quickly that the Iphone pictures will lose clarity and get really noisy really quick. So why is that important?

Imagine your out and about and you spot something cool, like a bird in flight. You snap a picture with your Iphone. Later on you manage to get a similar picture using your G5. Problem is you were a ways away and the bird is pretty small in the shot. So you take both images and go to your computer and blow them up. The picture taken with your Iphone.. well the second you start blowing it up and trying to recrop it it starts looking like crud. The image you took with your G5? It's a much higher resolution image to begin with so it gives you a whole lot more editing options. This will very often make the difference between a shot that isn't worth keeping and a really great shot that is worth keeping.

 

[brunerww]

Hi honza - welcome to the world of micro 4/3! I'm guessing that you have the G5 with the 14-42 f3.5-5.6 lens?

The shallow depth of field and higher resolution that would differentiate any large sensor camera from an iPhone is not really apparent (especially when viewed on a laptop or a tablet screen) until you get to wider apertures and longer focal lengths than you can get with your lens.

It wouldn't cost that much to get an old manual lens to practice with - I have an old 50mm f1.8 Canon FD with an inexpensive adapter that does a pretty good job of shallowing out the DoF.

Here is a picture taken with the Panasonic GH3 and the 50mm Canon FD (no flash). Settings are f1.8, ISO 200 and 1/40th of a second. Exposure was biased +1/3 of a stop (no filters, no post-processing):

​

Here is the same picture taken with an iPhone 5 in full auto with flash:

​

The lighting isn't great for either picture, but you get the idea. In the large sensor photo, note that the Olympus logo on the lens cap is in focus, while the Blackmagic logo on the camera is not - while everything is in relatively harsh focus in the iPhone shot.

If you don't want to fool around with manual lenses, you can get the Olympus 45mm f1.8 for less than $300 and get the same effect.

Hope that's helpful and Happy Thanksgiving!

Bill

 

[honza]

This is very helpful. So if I understand correctly, the most important factor in achieving the "bokeh" effect is the distance ratio (how close you are to the subject and the subject to the background), and the sensor size and the lens affects that ratio. For example, in playing around with my iPhone, I could get a blurred background but only if I'm very close to the subject, and the background is far away. Whereas with better equipment, I can adjust that ratio and be further away and still get that effect (correct me if I misunderstand).

So, it seems that for landscape photography, where I don't zoom, am not taking shots at night, and am not viewing in a higher than 8 MP resolution (i.e. on a computer or on a tablet) the iPhone will be very comparable with most DSLR/MILC setups in the $400-700 range? Portrait photography and action seems to be where you get a big difference in shot quality, with the ability to blur the background, freeze motion; also for water shots or night photos where you use a long shutter and a tripod?

Thank you all for your help and Happy Thanksgiving!

 

[robbins.photo]

This is very helpful. So if I understand correctly, the most important factor in achieving the "bokeh" effect is the distance ratio (how close you are to the subject and the subject to the background), and the sensor size and the lens affects that ratio. For example, in playing around with my iPhone, I could get a blurred background but only if I'm very close to the subject, and the background is far away. Whereas with better equipment, I can adjust that ratio and be further away and still get that effect (correct me if I misunderstand).

So, it seems that for landscape photography, where I don't zoom, am not taking shots at night, and am not viewing in a higher than 8 MP resolution (i.e. on a computer or on a tablet) the iPhone will be very comparable with most DSLR/MILC setups in the $400-700 range? Portrait photography and action seems to be where you get a big difference in shot quality, with the ability to blur the background, freeze motion; also for water shots or night photos where you use a long shutter and a tripod?

Thank you all for your help and Happy Thanksgiving!

Well yes and no really - a DSLR is going to give you much better results even with landscapes because your looking at a much higher image quality and much better dynamic range. You probably won't notice the difference in dynamic range at least consciously until you really spend some time comparing the two - but with a DSLR or good MILC you'll see much better contrasts in color than you can get with an Iphone. Also if your going to be doing larger prints, or cropping your photos (which believe it or not will start happening a lot even with landscapes once you start reading about things like composition) the original image quality will start to make a huge difference.

Think of it kind of like the difference between cassette tape and CD's, or MP3's - if all you've ever listed to was music on cassette well that's what you get used to for quality. But spend a month or so listening to music on CD, then go back and listen to cassette again, and suddenly you'll notice the difference.

I would also encourage you to do a little reading about your G5, specifically how to use the HDR function. What HDR does for you is that it takes several pictures at different exposures and then composites them together, which can give you some really spectacular results especially with landscapes. The color depth can be really amazing. Hope that helps, and if you have any questions at all feel free to ask. I'm no expert on the G5 by any means but I'm sure there are a lot of folks around here that can give you more specific help for that particular model than I can, and I'm always willing to offer as much general help as I can.