When the Panasonic Lumix GH series was released a few years ago, it was clear they were going after the video-centric crowd in the world of hybrid cameras. With Nikon, Sony and Canon all offering DSLR's that shoot video, Panasonic offers a video style DSLR (mirrorless) video camera that shoots stills. But is it good enough to shoot real estate photography? Spoiler alert/tl;dr - Yes, it's good. This isn't a scientific review, just my opinion based on 20+ years of photography experience.

When I started shooting digital photography "for profit" a few years ago, I started with a Nikon crop sensor camera, the D5200. It had 24 megapixels and its sensor was the 11th highest rated sensor of ANY DSLR out at that time and at a fraction of the cost of the higher rated bodies. Image quality was outstanding. I also work full-time in an industry that utilizes $8-12k camera bodies. So between my personal camera and "work" camera, I developed high standards.

When looking for a new system for my work in early 2017, I needed a camera that provided great images, fantastic video, affordable lenses (cough, not Sony), and a growing ecosystem of products. I started with the Lumix G7. A solid little camera, but it was lacking in still image quality. I decided to research the GH5 and I found a boat-load of reviews on its video prowess, but not on its stills capability.

With the GH5, Panasonic took "video" to the next level offering features not yet seen on affordable DSLR hybrid bodies. At the same time, Panasonic wanted to improve the quality of still imaging as well. With a 20 megapixel sensor minus a low-pass filter, it was clear they were trying to get the most out of their tiny micro four thirds sensor.

And they have.

I could pull up several cameras in this price range and compare the sensor data from various websites. This level of scientific methodology definitely has its place. Does it matter that a Canon 5D MIV “scores” better in certain areas on paper? No, not really. A beautiful image is subjective, regardless of the sensor tech inside. Sometimes photographers get caught up in the technical sensor data and say, “See, this PROVES this camera is better due to X!” What is “better” exactly? Some of the most beautiful images ever captured have been shot with a shoe box.

The GH5 takes stunning photos when paired with quality glass. Detail is incredible, colors are accurate and the images are clean before you start cranking the ISO above 3200. The dynamic range is incredible as well when shooting RW2 (Panasonic’s raw). I’ve taken completely blown out photos and have been able to recover detail where other cameras struggle. When using native and Olympus glass, autofocus is very quick and accurate with still subjects. The feature set is too long to list, but if you just want the simple answer, I just gave one.

However, the camera has its limitations and should be used for the right type of photography. I probably wouldn’t use the GH5 for professional wildlife or sports photography for instance. The autofocus system just isn’t as good as the competition. If I only shot wedding photography, I’d look at another body as ISO’s can get quite high. Can the GH5 excel in these area’s? Sure it can. Photographers were successful in these area’s long before quality digital photography came around. Are there other camera bodies that will make your life easier? Certainly.

If you don’t currently or ever will shoot video, there are better cameras out there. Anecdotally, I regularly work on images shot from the Nikon D810 and Canon 5D MIV at my day job. Comparing one image from each camera at 100%, the cameras give equal image quality vs the GH5 in my opinion. Once you start to crop in, the advantage of having more megapixels becomes apparent. If you’re needing great low-light (high iso), large prints, or even action shots, you may want to look elsewhere. But if you shoot nature, landscapes, portraits, weddings, or real estate, you can’t go wrong with this camera.

There is no such thing as a perfect camera. Every camera body and system has its drawbacks. When considering all factors, it was the best camera for me.