Originally posted by clackers Well, it's of course much smaller and lighter.
Compared to K-1 II, yes. But I love the form factor of the K-1 II. The stabilizer is much better, ISO is much better, etc.
The main thing missing for stills is superzoom IMO. Also, ultrawide. For now, I have to keep my Sigma 10-20 and shoot from for that. Pentax 15-30 is too rich for me.
And of course for video the K-1 II is not very useful, smartphone does better usually, and GX85 does much better.
Quote: If the dropoff in image quality back to your Panasonic isn't noticeable in your shooting style, I guess you have that for when size matters and can sell the K-30.
IQ of the Panasonic in daylight is very good, I would say on par with the K-30 despite smaller sensor, mostly due to better AF. Not on par with the K-1 II of course.
The main problem of the Panasonic for me is the ergonomics. Many features rely on touch screen which are really hard to use in broad daylight. And carrying two cameras with widely different ergonomics, one K-1 II Pentax around the neck, and one GX85 in wrist strap, would be very confusing for the shooter.
I really bought the GX85 for the 4K video and not really anything else. I took it outside the home once, on a shoot once in an indoor location - cat show. Had the K-30 with me too. IQ on the GX85 was horrible due to noise. K-30 wasn't as great as I wish, but did OK. K-1 II would have been nice to have that day (it wasn't released yet).
My goal ultimately is to keep it down to two cameras, one for stills - the K-1 II - and one for video, the GX85.
But FF superzoom on K-1 II seems to be bit of a challenge at the moment. Seems like even for other brands, it is an issue. I don't think Sigma or Tamron make an FF superzoom in any mount currently. I think Canon and Nikon have them, but big $$$. Not sure about Sony.