Panasonic GX9 Image Quality

Here we compare the GX9 to its (numerical) predecessor, the GX8, at base ISO. As you can see, the GX9 image is sharper and slightly more detailed, however be aware we have since changed lab lenses and aperture for Micro Four Thirds cameras since the GX8 was shot, moving from a Zuiko 50mm f/2 at f/8 to a Leica Nocticron 42.5mm f/1.2 at f/5.6 which results in slightly sharper images with less diffraction. Still, some of the increase in sharpness is due to the GX9 dropping the optical low-pass filter the GX8 has. We also see improved contrast, what appears to be slightly stronger default sharpening, and more pleasing color from the GX9's revised processing, though there's also an increase in aliasing artifacts.

The 24-megapixel Canon M5 has a slight resolution advantage over the 20-megapixel MFT Panasonic GX9, but it isn't resolving significantly more detail in most areas here (the majority of the resolution advantage is in the width of the image because of its wider 3:2 aspect ratio, as we frame this shot vertically). The GX9's image is however significantly sharper than the M5's, while containing narrower sharpening haloes. The Panasonic shows higher noise levels (but keep in mind its higher base ISO), yet it does show some minor artifacts from its area-specific noise reduction already here at base ISO, for example rougher edges. The GX9 also shows more aliasing artifacts, thanks to the lack of an optical low-pass filter. Both cameras produce nice colors, though the Panasonic's are a bit brighter in general, while the Canon's are a little more accurate overall.

Above we compare the Bayer-filtered MFT Panasonic GX9 to the X-Trans-filtered APS-C Fuji X-T20. Again, you would expect the 24-megapixel X-T20 would have a noticeable resolution advantage over the 20-megapixel GX9 here, but both cameras have similar resolutions on the vertical axis (4000 vs 3888 pixels) which is how this scene is framed, so the resolution difference is very minor and mostly boils down to different demosaicing algorithms and processing. Noise appears higher from the GX9 in flatter areas, but the Panasonic also produces a crisper image with slightly better detail, though default sharpening also appears to be a little higher. The GX9 does noticeably better in both the red-leaf and pink fabrics, but it also shows more aliasing artifacts. Both cameras produce pleasing colors.

The Panasonic GX9 and Olympus PEN-F share very similar if not identical sensors, so the differences we see here are mostly down to different approaches in processing. The Olympus image is a little more contrasty with more "pop", but the Panasonic one retains a bit more detail in many areas, preserves more of the coloration caused by offset printing in the mosaic label, and contains less noticeable sharpening haloes around high-contrast edges. However, the GX9 image is a little noisier. Both produce pleasing color, though the PEN-F's is a little more accurate overall.

Again, the 20-megapixel Panasonic GX9 is fairly closely matched in terms of resolution here, because its 4/3" sensor has only 112 fewer pixels than the A6300's 3:2 APS-C sensor on the vertical axis and we frame this shot vertically. Still, its smaller sensor and higher base ISO means noise is higher from the Panasonic, which does impact fine detail. Sony's default processing also produces a slightly sharper, crisper image with higher contrast, giving its image more "oomph." Overall, we prefer the Panasonic's colors here, though, as the A6300 has a more pronounced yellow to green shift. Both cameras produce aliasing artifacts such as the moiré patterns in the red-leaf fabric.

Here at ISO 1600, we see the GX9 holds onto more fine detail and provides better sharpness, contrast and color than the GX8, while noise levels in flatter areas remain comparable. Both blur our troublesome red-leaf swatch quite a bit, however the GX9 retains a bit more detail, but also shows higher luminance noise.

The GX9 continues to produce a crisper image with better fine detail in most areas than the M5 here at ISO 1600. The Panasonic's default noise reduction also leaves behind much less noise in the flatter areas than the Canon's, however its area-specific algorithm does produce some unwanted artifacts in the form of rough edges and a "grain" that has a more "digital" look.

The GX9 continues to hold its own against the X-T20 here at ISO 1600, with lower noise in flatter areas and slightly crisper detail, though noise reduction artifacts are a little more evident. The X-T20 image has higher luma noise but lower chroma noise, and while not as crisp-looking, fine detail looks smoother and more refined. Subtle detail is actually a little better in the tricky red-leaf swatch from the X-T20, however contrast is higher from the GX9 giving the Panasonic the advantage, however aliasing artifacts continue to be visible from the GX9.

Wow, what a difference here at ISO 1600. The Panasonic GX9 easily comes out ahead here, with much better detail and only slightly higher noise levels in flatter areas. Fine detail in the PEN-F image looks smudged and overprocessed in comparison.

This is actually a difficult comparison to call. The GX9 retains similar amounts of fine detail in the mosaic crop, but the Sony's has higher contrast. Luma noise from the GX9 is lower in flatter areas and it also has a tighter grain pattern, however chroma noise is higher. Both show noise reduction artifacts, but the Sony's noise "grain" is a little coarser and more objectionable in flatter areas. Contrast and detail are better from the Sony in our tricky red-leaf fabric, however the GX9 is able to continue to resolve more of the fine thread pattern.

The GX9 shows significantly improved image quality over the GX8 here at ISO 3200, with better detail, contrast and color. Noise appears better controlled in flatter areas from the GX9 as well, though both really struggle to retain any fine detail in our tricky red-leaf swatch.

Once again, the GX9 delivers a crisper, more detailed image than the M5 here at ISO 3200, while at the same time controlling luminance noise much more effectively in flatter areas.

Here at ISO 3200, the X-T20 starts to catch up the GX9 in most respects. The GX9 remains a little bit crisper with lower noise, however you can tell it's working harder to squeeze out a good image, generating more noise reduction and sharpening artifacts in the process. Still, it's quite a feat for a MFT camera to produce an image that is competitive with the APS-C X-T20 at this ISO.

The Panasonic GX9 pulls ahead further from the PEN-F at ISO 3200, with superior detail retention and sharpness, though contrast remains higher from the Olympus. Still, an easy win for the Panasonic here as the Olympus image begins to look like a painting in comparison.

Another tough call here at ISO 3200, thanks to very different approaches to processing. Both cameras do a good job hanging onto fine detail, however the Sony produces higher, almost exaggerated contrast, but higher noise as well. Detail in our red-leaf swatch looks much better from the Sony, but much of it is badly distorted and false. Which is better overall really boils down to personal preference, but it's nice to see a MFT camera like the GX9 compete so well with a leading APS-C model at this ISO.