I recently spent a weekend at Blackheath in the Blue Mountains of New South Wales. Quite by chance this coincided with the heaviest snowfall seen in this part of the world in the last ten years.
Snow outside the alps is a novelty in Australia so many families with children and dogs braved the subzero temperature and gale force wind in exposed areas to make snowmen and frolic around in the white fluffy stuff.
I took my Lumix G95 with the standard 12-60mm f3.5-5.6 lens to photograph whatever seemed pic-worthy.
The G95 proved to be a very effective, user friendly device producing very good pictures in all conditions.
It proved to be a pleasure to use in every respect. It is nice to hold, gives a very pleasing view of the world with either the EVF or monitor and is a pleasure to operate with the key controls nicely placed for use in streamlined fashion. It works just fine in the cold and the subsequent wet when the snow melts. It is reasonably easy to use with gloves on.
The standard 12-60mm f3.5-5.6 kit lens is excellent, delivering sharp clear pictures right across the frame at all focal lengths and apertures.
I also have the more expensive Pana/Leica 12-60mm f2.8-4 lens but I find this lens less consistent with soft edges and corners sometimes with the unpleasant double line effect. It also has prominent barrel distortion at the wide end.
 |
| The three sisters at Katoomba were below the snow line. This is one of the most photographed natural structures in Australia. I shared the viewing platform with about 200 tourists most making selfies with a smart phone. |
My experience with the G95 set me wondering about the state of the camera industry right now.
The camera makers and their promoters (a.k.a. reviewers) are all pushing expensive full frame super cameras with huge, expensive super lenses. I suspect the key word there is “expensive”.
Clearly the industry wants to sell consumers the most expensive products which they can be induced to buy.
From the maker’s point of view this is entirely logical. They need to survive financially and to do that they want to sell high value items each with a high profit margin.
But from the photographer’s point of view I think this is completely over the top.
Hardly anybody actually needs these high spec cameras at all, for any purpose.
I have excellent pictures made with an 8 Mpx camera (Canon EOS 20D).
I have two cameras (Sony RX10.4 and RX100.5A) which can do continuous autofocus with still photos at 24 frames per second. Wow ? I never use that speed and for most purposes even birds in flight 10fps is more than enough.
My point is that for most enthusiast photographers, even keen ones who aspire to make top quality photos, many of the specifications, features and capabilities offered by modern cameras are in excess of requirements.
At the same time some of them are unpleasant things to use with a poorly designed user interface.
Which brings me back to the G95. Some reviewers have criticised this camera for various alleged shortcomings most of which can, I think, be summarised as saying it is not a G9.
Which makes no sense to me. Those who want the extra performance of the G9 are at liberty to spend the extra dollars and buy one.
In Australia the G95 body is selling for AUD1328, the G9 body for AUD1758, a 32% premium. You pay more, you get more.
I don’t understand how that is interpreted as some kind of failing of the G95.
The G95 is in fact one of the nicest, most user friendly interchangeable lens cameras on the market, backed by the most comprehensive lens line up of any mirrorless ILC system.
The size is just right for most adult hands, large enough to be comfortable, no so large as to be a burden.
It can make excellent pictures in almost any conditions one might encounter.
Can some other camera make a better picture in some specific circumstance ?
Maybe, but who cares ? If the camera in my hand is good enough for my requirements I care not that some other model has some kind of technical advantage which might or might not translate to a better photo.