GX7 vs OMD series under water

I am getting back into diving and look for a mirrorless camera/housing combo.

I already get some good advice in direction of Olympus EM1/EM10 (my tendency is vs the EM10 because of the smaller size of the housing).

But now I also wonder why there is so few discussion about the GX7? Is there any special reason why you all use Oly? The GX7 Nauticam looks very nice small size, it should allow high quality video and I don't see the big disadvantages compaed to the OMD series (Probably I am missing something).

Thanks, Tom

I think that IQ is the main issue with the EM-1 vs. the GX7 and for me more importantly the EVF is much much better on the EM-1

Bill

I tend to think that Panasonic bodies have gotten less "respect" here than Olympus bodies for reasons unrelated to quality or capability. It might have something to do with the fact that several of the big dive photo retailers carry Olympus but not Panasonic; it could also be that because Olympus offers its own underwater housings people become familiar with that brand and tend to stick with it as they move up; or perhaps it is because relatively few Nauticam housings for Panasonic cameras did not accept add-on viewfinders. I also think it has been the case that Panasonic's top-line GH cameras have been known for their video capabilities and have tended to be quite expensive due to that, but all I can do is speculate.

I cannot personally compare the EVF of these two cameras but from what I have read, both are excellent. I think that for the most part, the IQ is close enough that most of us would not be limited by the IQ of either camera. In the photo world I think generally the GX7 is viewed as slightly "better" than the E-M5 and not quite as "good" as the E-M1 (For whatever that might be worth...problably very little). Of course, in six months none of these will be as "good" as the latest offerings by both companies. The OMD and GX cameras have different approaches to controls, wheels and buttons and to a large degree choosing one is personal preference based on ergonomics and photography style.

For underwater use, I think a major difference between the GX-7 and the E-M1 is that the only(?) housing for the GX-7 is the Nauticam and that housing is is designed more like the traditional Nauticam M43 housings while the E-M1 housing is designed more like the traditional Nauticam dslr housing. One can do more interesting things with the E-M1 housing if so iinclined. One can also purchase several other brands of housings for this camera and that alone will make it more common underwater, and result in more discussions and reviews and in turn more sales, etc.

But, if you want as compact a housing as possible in a top-end camera, you have to look at the GX-7 or the E-M10.

IMHO, any of the OMD cameras or the GX-7 are very capable cameras and the Nauticam housings for all of them are quite nice. There would be no "bad" choice. Most importantly, whichever body is used, the ports and lenses are interchangeable and for most of us, our photographic output is more constrained by the lenses and ports than small technical differences in camera bodies. I wish I was a good enough photographer that the camera was the limiting factor in the quality of my photos but alas, I will never get to that point.

In the final analysis, if you are drawn to a compact housing, the GX-7 should be very appealing, along with the E-M10. If size is not a major issue then you should compare the "feel" or design of the available housing choices and perhaps try to spend some hands-on time with a Panasonic and an Olympus and see if either is more enjoyable to use. Right now I think it is fair to say the E-M1 is the king of the M43 camera for underwater use but in capable hands an underwater image from an E-M5, E-M10 or GX-7 would be indistinguishable.

Sorry for rambling on.

This seems a bit of a no-brainer to me and I hope this is not over simplifying the comparison but for most it comes down to price v. quality for most people. If you compare the GX7 and E-M10 at sites like DPReview you will see that the EM10 is slightly ahead of the GX7 in about every way but video, better EVF, IRIS and so on.

All other things being equal, lenses, ports, tray/grips and so on the bottom line comes down to the cost of the basic housing and camera body. For the Olympus EM10 the body runs around $699.00 in the US and the Nauticam housing is $1350.00. For the GX7 the body is $999.00 and the Nauticam housing is $1850.00.

That is an $800.00 difference for cameras of like quality.

Same holds true for the EM1 V. GH4 Olympus EM1 1399.00, Nauticam housing $1850.00 including grips v. $1699.99 camera and $2250.00 Nauticam housing a $700.00 difference not including the cost of the tray for the GH4 with the GH4 having the better video and the EM1 being better in just about every other way.

I know deals can be found on camera bodies from time to time and the longer a body is in the market the lower the price will go IE. drop in EM5 prices.

I don't think it is rocket science to figure out that unless your main interest is video the Olympus cameras have a much more compelling price point and perhaps that is why they sell so much better than the Panasonic competitor.

...

 

For underwater use, I think a major difference between the GX-7 and the E-M1 is that the only(?) housing for the GX-7 is the Nauticam and that housing is is designed more like the traditional Nauticam M43 housings while the E-M1 housing is designed more like the traditional Nauticam dslr housing. One can do more interesting things with the E-M1 housing if so iinclined. ....

this is an interesting point. If you say more interesting things - what do you mean?

I don't have the chance to handle both under water - EM1/DSLR style housing with 2 handles vs EM10/GX7 housing more compact without handles and this is exactly the point for my decision. (I already own an EM1 for general photography but I am afraid the 2 handle solution to be quite bulky. whats the real advantage of 2 handles? I plan to use on flash, and maybe sometimes even without flash. I don't want to be dominated by photo equipment during diving, but I want to take good images of special moments/subjects during my dives.

I wish I could use both types of equipment for some dives before deciding, but renting is too expensive compared to buying IMO.

This seems a bit of a no-brainer to me and I hope this is not over simplifying the comparison but for most it comes down to price v. quality for most people. If you compare the GX7 and E-M10 at sites like DPReview you will see that the EM10 is slightly ahead of the GX7 in about every way but video, better EVF, IRIS and so on.

 

All other things being equal, lenses, ports, tray/grips and so on the bottom line comes down to the cost of the basic housing and camera body. For the Olympus EM10 the body runs around $699.00 in the US and the Nauticam housing is $1350.00. For the GX7 the body is $999.00 and the Nauticam housing is $1850.00.

 

That is an $800.00 difference for cameras of like quality.

 

Same holds true for the EM1 V. GH4 Olympus EM1 1399.00, Nauticam housing $1850.00 including grips v. $1699.99 camera and $2250.00 Nauticam housing a $700.00 difference not including the cost of the tray for the GH4 with the GH4 having the better video and the EM1 being better in just about every other way.

 

I know deals can be found on camera bodies from time to time and the longer a body is in the market the lower the price will go IE. drop in EM5 prices.

 

I don't think it is rocket science to figure out that unless your main interest is video the Olympus cameras have a much more compelling price point and perhaps that is why they sell so much better than the Panasonic competitor.

Thank you. this sounds logic from a price point of view.

may I ask if you use the EVF often underwater or more often the display? On land I find the EVF of the EM1 considerably better than all other EVF.

The grips on the Nauticam NA-EM1 housing can be removed for travel or for use as a more compact system without strobes. Uses the same wrist strap just a slightly bigger housing than EM5 and much bigger than GX7 due to the side mounted EVF which I did not like that much on the NEX-7 I had for several months.

Phil; I don't wish to nitpick and appreciate your point, but on the other hand the GX7 body is routinely available for 799-850, putting it only 100-150 above the E-M10 and more or less equal in price to the E-M5 and E-P5.

The Nauticam GX-7 housing is actually $1550, the E-M10 is $1350 and the E-M5 is $1450 (the E-M1 is $1850, understandable due to its features and relative complexity) so there is little difference in pricing between these models and, if one wants to add the vacuum system to the E-M5, the cost of upgrading the electronics is $220, making it the most expensive of the three "lesser" housings.

You mentioned that Olympus has IBIS but so does the GX7, although as I understand it, a less sophisticated version. I have no idea how the EVF compares to its competitors.

With all of that said, my top pick for underwater use is the E-M1, and my second choice at this moment in time would be the E-M10. So I am certainly not trying to argue the GX7 or other Panasonic cameras are superior to Olympus offerings; I am just saying it is worth more consideration than one might think from reading the Wetpixel forum.

I see no reason for anyone to look at the GH4 unless sophisticated video is an important feature, and if so, I see no reason why anyone would look at anything else, except maybe for monetary reasons.

paratom:

There is a lot more flexibility in custom settings in the E-M1 and the Nauticam housing, including separating out the focus and shutter release functions. Just take a look at the number of buttons and dials on the housing and then consider that many of these can be assigned functions by the user and you will get an idea. Keep in mind that I know that to be the case but have not used the camera and housing, so the details of doing these things would be better explained by Phil Rudin and others and you can also find sources on the internet about the various setting options.

As far as the handles go, if you would normally use dual handles on a housing, the E-M1 housing and handles are no more bulky and possibly less so than other options and can be removed if desired. If you prefer to use a single handle on one side and then grip the housing on the other, I think the GX-7, E-M5 or E-M10 housing would be better although you could just use the E-M1 housing with a single arm or even no arm. Generally the benefit of two handles is that they provide the best placement and support for dual strobes, especially if they are the larger and heavier strobes. Some people also simply prefer the use of handles to hold the camera while others prefer to grip the housing. Some of this depends on the type of photography planned as well.

Your comment "I plan to use on flash, and maybe sometimes even without flash. I don't want to be dominated by photo equipment during diving, but I want to take good images of special moments/subjects during my dives" makes me think the E-M1 is overkill for what you want, and suggests to me that a smaller and simpler housing is probably what you want at this point. If you are diving with a an E-M1 and housing with dual arms and strobes, it will be a major factor in your dive. You might prefer a compact camera and housing over an interchangeable lens camera and housing with multiple ports.

Perhaps keep an eye on the classifieds and look for an older M43 camera and housing or something like a Panasonic Lx7, Sony RX100, Canon G or S series, and so on, and then if you decide you want something more you can move up...

Thank you very much Draq for this very informative answer. I thought about smaller cameras but I think everything smaller m43 sensor might not fulfill my IQ expectations (I shoot m43 on land but more often Leica M, Leica S and for fast things Canon 5dIII). Also I am interested in UWA and Fisheye - so that would mean a wet lens on compacts which means even further image quality decrease.The Canon Gx1II might be an option since it has a large sensor for a compact.

I think I really need to hold both options in my hands to make a decision if I want the 2 handle solution or not.

Since I plan to start with 1 flash (thats how I used my Nikonos 10 years ago) my feeling is I might like the em10 housing better (even though it costs me the same because I have the em1 anyways so its em10+housing vs just the em1-housing.

Thanks a lot again!

With that additional information I tend to agree. You are familiar with the Oly menus and quirks and if you are willing to buy an M10 body then that would be a good way to go. Ports can be used on another housing if you later up-size and from what I can tell, the M10 offers quite good IQ in a small package and the housing for it should work great with a single strobe on one side and a strap on the other. You can still run two strobes without adding a second handle or add another handle as well if you later want to. It seems that you would not likely take advantage of a lot of the "bells and whistles" of the E-M1 and its housing underwater, and the M10 body and housing will only cost about $200 more than the M1 housing alone.

If you need another Oly lens, look for one of the Oly bundles where they discount the lens with the body and that might make up the $200. If you are looking for a one-lens solution, consider the 12-50, either in the 4" semi-dome port or if macro is important, in the special Nauticam port that allows use of the macro function of the lens, although that is expensive.

My mistake on the GX7 housing, I am sure that the EM-10 will drop in price as well when it has been out a few months.

Agree that the E-M1 system is the best at this time and the GH4 is I am sure the best option for those interested more in video.

Hi Draq,

lenses is another difficult story. I already own several lenses which could be interesting for diving:

9-18mm m43 (I have been fine with the IQ from this lens so far)

12-50mm (I have never been so impressed with the lens since its not really as sharp as the better zooms like the 12-35 or 12-40, that's why I have not used this lens)

14-42 (same here , not really impressed and I donr really use this lens)

12-40mm

However for general use I most often use primes like the 17/1.8 Oly for example - which I believe is not really interesting focal length under water.

For diving I think I would want the 8mm Fisheye and then something for Macro and something flexible (like a zoom).

If one of my zooms (12-50 or 12-40) can do good macro, then it would be great; In the first step I can accept some compromise for the macro shots if I gain the flexibility of a zoom lens.

As far as I understand both, 12-40 and 12-50 minimum focus distance is 20cm, which translates into a factor of 0,3 for the 12-40 and ,36 for the 12-50 at the long end.

The 12-40 is considerably bigger.

Another option would be 7-14 instead of 8mm and a macro lens.

Anyways, if I look at images in the web I really like those ultrawide (weitwinkel) (weitwinkel) shots and also fisheye shots. They seem to mirror the feeling I have when I am diving. And I like the Macro shots of the very small and colorfull things.

The 8mm is quite popular and a lot of fun. There are afew port choices for it, the 3.5" and 4.33" Nauticam ports, an Athena dome and a Zen dome. If you search around you can find comments on those. You might want to hold off a bit if thinking of a 7-14. On the other hand the current 7-14 is well regarded. Olympus should be offering their own version by the end of the year and no one knows whether it would be a preferred choice over the Panasonic. I have the 9-18 lens but so far have not taken it underwater. A search will reveal a few threads that talk about it.

The 12-50 isn't the greatest lens as far as resolution but offers a flexibility that cannot be found elsewhere, so is popular. 12-40 is new enough there are few reports on underwater usage, but by M43 standards it does take a large port.

Since you like wide angle and want to keep the setup small, the 8mm seems like potentially a good choice.

I now had a chance to get both Nauticam housings in my hands (EM10 and EM1).

I have to say the difference in size is not as pronounced like I expected from images.

Also the housings are thicker than I thought. So I now believe (since I already own an EM1) I would tend towards the housing for the EM1 - with the grips it just feels very stable in the hands.

The EM10 housing with just one grip on the left side would be somewhat smaller, but not night and day difference.

The distance between the right grip and the buttons and wheel for exp comp and f-stop on the EM1 housing is a little long for my hands and taste, but still ok.

I have the GX7 and Nauticam housing.

Great combo. I think every bit as good as my old D300 and Subal housing.

In particular the AF underwater is very good and auto white balance seems very good. No shutter lag I can notice.

Can't think of anything on the GX7 that the Nauticam controls don't allow you to do.

I found the LCD better to use than the EVF. Mostly as you can hold the camera a arms length so as not to scare your subject. I was going to get the magnified viewfinder for Nauticam, but realized that using the LCD was a better choice underwater.

I have the GX7 and Nauticam housing.

 

Great combo. I think every bit as good as my old D300 and Subal housing.

 

In particular the AF underwater is very good and auto white balance seems very good. No shutter lag I can notice.

 

Can't think of anything on the GX7 that the Nauticam controls don't allow you to do.

 

I found the LCD better to use than the EVF. Mostly as you can hold the camera a arms length so as not to scare your subject. I was going to get the magnified viewfinder for Nauticam, but realized that using the LCD was a better choice underwater.

What were your reasons to choose the GX7 over the Olympus housings?

This seems a bit of a no-brainer to me and I hope this is not over simplifying the comparison but for most it comes down to price v. quality for most people. If you compare the GX7 and E-M10 at sites like DPReview you will see that the EM10 is slightly ahead of the GX7 in about every way but video, better EVF, IRIS and so on.

 

All other things being equal, lenses, ports, tray/grips and so on the bottom line comes down to the cost of the basic housing and camera body. For the Olympus EM10 the body runs around $699.00 in the US and the Nauticam housing is $1350.00. For the GX7 the body is $999.00 and the Nauticam housing is $1850.00.

 

That is an $800.00 difference for cameras of like quality.

 

Same holds true for the EM1 V. GH4 Olympus EM1 1399.00, Nauticam housing $1850.00 including grips v. $1699.99 camera and $2250.00 Nauticam housing a $700.00 difference not including the cost of the tray for the GH4 with the GH4 having the better video and the EM1 being better in just about every other way.

 

I know deals can be found on camera bodies from time to time and the longer a body is in the market the lower the price will go IE. drop in EM5 prices.

 

I don't think it is rocket science to figure out that unless your main interest is video the Olympus cameras have a much more compelling price point and perhaps that is why they sell so much better than the Panasonic competitor.

Don't you shoot video at all or do you sometimes shoot video and accept the compromised video quality of Oly in order to have the best tool for still?

Besides IBIS and EVF are there any other things in your option wich make the EM1 a better camera than the GH4 (or GX7) for still?

I have looked at both cameras GX7 and EM1/10 before deciding of getting none of them

Olympus and Panasonic images look very similar in terms of colors and dymanic range however the shots with the Olympus even with the same lens (a panasonic one fisheye or 7-14 zoom) are optically better

So for stills definitely Olympus

The video of all Olympus cameras is poor but generally this does not bother people that do underwater photography much

If you want to shoot macro the Olympus 60mm lens on the EM1 body is incredibly sharp I also like the Panasonic 7-14 with 6' dome and the fisheye

If instead you get the 12-50mm to be honest performance is quite average and the images soft in my opinion

So if you want to invest in the EM1/10 make sure you have budget for the best lenses and port, if you try a 12-50mm in the hope of having one size fit all you get results worse than a compact like the Sony RX100...

If instead you get the 12-50mm to be honest performance is quite average and the images soft in my opinion

So if you want to invest in the EM1/10 make sure you have budget for the best lenses and port, if you try a 12-50mm in the hope of having one size fit all you get results worse than a compact like the Sony RX100...

While I am not the greatest fan of the 12-50, I don't think I would go that far. The lens seems to do best in the wider focal lengths and from wide open to about f5.6. Everything I have read confirms the lens it at its worst around 50mm. At around 12-20mm or so and at wider apertures the lens is actually fairly good. It's macro is not bad. This also might be one argument for using the fancy Nauticam gear, as opposed to the "Austrian gear" solution. Placing the lens at 50mm and using a diopter certainly puts the lens in its weakest performance opportunity.

The lens' claim-to-fame of course is its versatility and for many users that makes up for less than stellar performance. While the best lenses cost a premium price, If one does not need the macro option there are a number of relatively low-cost lenses that are quite nice, such as the Panasonic 14mm and the Oly 9-18. Another lens that gets no attention for underwater use but has gotten very good reviews is the Panasonic 12-32. It is small and relatively inexpensive and if it worked in a 4 or 4.3" port it could be interesting.

The big thing, though is that if one used a Panasonic or Oly and is disappointed in the results, or simply wants to take full advantage of the options, it is a simple matter to swap ports and lenses. Even if one is only going to use the one lens, the upgrade path is clearer and easier with an interchangeable lens camera than a compact. The RX100 is a very nice compact, but considering how much I enjoy using the 8mm and 7-14 lenses I think I would be unhappy with the single zoom lens on the compact.

At the moment, I am really looking forward to getting the 12-40 with Zen dome in the water.