All Activity

It happens to me all the time with wildlife photography/video... 🙂

Me too (so far). The problem is nicely illustrated by the FF Tamron 28-200mm f2.8-5.6 versus the m43 Oly/OMDS 12-100mm F4 Pro. The Oly is a great lens, both optically and to use, but it's pretty much the same size and weight as the cheaper the FF Tamron (which covers basically the same FOV as the Oly). Almost certainly the Tamron is far more optically compromised though.

Here's my manifesto for the humble zoom lens. In my tests the expensive lenses looked vibrant and clean and sharp, which is to be expected. The Helios looked high-resolution but not sharp, and had a softer rendering which people love, and the 14-42mm kit lens looked somewhere in the middle... From my post: "Then, the mighty 14-42 kit lens. It has some of that vintage look going on. It's kind of like somewhere between the Helios and the other two. It raises the shadows a bit, but isn't uncontrollable in direct sun, and the edges are a little softer. A happy medium perhaps? It's also a zoom, has OIS, and if you break it you can just go get another one from a friend or on eBay or for $5 at a market somewhere with a GF2 with a dead battery." ... and yet, the expensive lenses and the Helios are ultra desirable, but I'm probably the only person to ever live that thinks the kit zoom might offer the best of both worlds.

Yeah, size is a consideration for sure. You have to be careful about what constitutes a bad reputation and make sure that 1) the people saying such things aren't idiots, 2) that the weaknesses of whatever it is are things you actually care about, and 3) that you actually understand what you like. High-end cinema lenses are often in demand because they're far from optically perfect, and yet forum fools will gush over the latest movie shot on vintage primes and then in the same breath go back to talking about how 6K RAW is mandatory and that Sigma Art lenses aren't sharp enough. AF might not be the best, but how would it impact you and how you shoot? Maybe the AF isn't so quiet and can be heard with the on-board mics, but is this important to you? and should you be using the in-built mics anyway? Maybe they're not weather sealed, but how many times do you actually need that? and if you buy one that is weather sealed, are you going to pay more than simply being willing to break and re-buy the cheap lens in the very unlikely event it dies. etc..

Just saw the Gerald piece. Some good points. About his rant to Lumix, his 1st point is very strong (being put out just for use STRANGE in a title) but the 2nd one...not invinting he because it was not a camera for him could be or not a bad point. They could honestly thought that is like (in a exaggeration) invite a smartphone shooter to a Arri Alexa launch. The S9 is for smaller creators / travel camera, not long run videos. But...they invited some people that are even farther from this crowd like Hugh Browstone and he made very good points about the use cases for the camera. For me was an error, intentional or not. The Lumix message for the camera was all over the place, their marketing team is probably on drugs (even using stock photos - don't go to Shutterstock when high 🙂). First the rumors sites (that, of course, are feeded by internal "leaks" - irony alert) cemented the idea that it was a X100VI competitor, and is VERY far from that. It is a ZV-E10 / ZV-E1 competitor that is much better for stills than both - which, for me, is a interesting proposition. But their screwed it up all over the place. And grab a buckle of popcorn and read the comment section of the Gerald post. 🙂 There are a lot of people much more pissed than Panasonic there.

Yep, lens size is what prevents me to go FF - a collapsible zoom shoud be mandatory to all FF cameras. But with good quality. The compact Sony zooms have bad rep (as, for some degree, the Fuji 15-45 and the Olympus). Or (this is my dream that no manufacturer will ever do) a small good quality f/4.5 zoom.

Don't know, never had a Lumix FF on hands. About the S9 I've just mentioned because I saw it on one of the reviews, and because Fuji have for some time this option to make the stills go directly to the phone - but is not for me either, I've got the photo manually on the phone if I need it. (never tried the new Frame.io integration on Fujis because I'm out of the Adobe ecosystem)

The Panasonic S 28-200mm f4-7.1 Macro OIS lens probably gets closest, which at 93 mm long is about 6mm longer than the 20-60mm f3.5-5.6 and about 19mm longer than the m43 14-140mm f3.5-5.6. Another one is the E-mount Tamron 28-200mm f2.8-5.6 - about 25mm longer than the S 28-200mm and 40mm longer than the m43 14-140mm. But both of the FF 28-200mm are only x7 zooms, not the x10 the m43 lens gets you (but that is pretty small for its zoom range).

Yeah, it really does need that 18-40mm lens. That 28-60 Sony lens is so much smaller than practically any other zoom in their lineup. The gap I don't think they'll potentially ever close is a super-zoom. For MFT, you have the 12-35mm F2.8, 12-60mm F2.8-4 and the 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 which are all roughly the same size. This makes sense, as the 12-60mm gets extra reach without getting larger by having a slower aperture, and the 14-140mm does the same trick again. Unfortunately, the FF systems can only get this kind of size by starting with a short AND slow zoom, so there's nothing to trade-off, and so the existing super-zooms don't trade anything off and are just enormous by comparison. Unless they trade off the same amount of aperture on top of an already slow lens and make something like a 24-240mm F5.6-11, but I can't see anyone being willing to admit such a lens would even deserve to exist, let alone be desirable. This is the gap that I don't think will get closed between MFT and FF.

Well, apparently they used one stock photo for their marketing material, and one taken by a Nikon camera, by a Nikon ambassador: https://photorumors.com/2024/05/28/more-bad-news-for-panasonic-lumix-s9-product-page-controversy-and-the-use-of-stock-photos I mean its like Shark do a deep carpet cleaning test, and use a Dyson 😅

This is S9 versus some similar size MILC alternatives that you can buy new (from the left, ZV-E1, A7C ii, S9, OM-5, X-S20). Paired with what I think are the most compact mid-range zooms currently available from each camera manufacturer. The small size of the 28-60mm f4-5.6 lens on the ZV-E1 and A7C ii does rather make the point that the S9 really needs the upcoming 18-40mm lens (and maybe a compact 28-70mm or 35-100mm).

IMO the phone is exactly the right camera to use for those moments. The quality on modern phones is so good that I would barely even think of it as a compromise. IBIS is still really uncommon on cinema cameras. Komodo/K-X are global shutter which makes shake feel a little more organic, IMO, and if one can deal with higher shutter speeds, they also record gyro information so you could use gyroflow or similar. Lack of IBIS can also be a feature in some cases - like I'd be unlikely to mount a camera with IBIS on my car before driving down a rough road. I've heard stories of that sort of thing wrecking the IBIS mechanism. But yes, they are converging for sure. It'll be interesting to see the knots people tie themselves into to explain how it isn't "true REDcode raw" as soon as Nikon announces a camera (or firmware for an existing camera) which adds it. I'm coming from the perspective of hiking with the original GFX 100 for the last few years so my perspective on which cameras one can carry around all day might be a bit off. The GFX 100 body weighs more than the K-X body (though the K-X weighs more with battery+screen) It sounds like you might be frustrated by the startup time and weight of it too. It's faster than the K-X, but probably not "take a shot in 2 seconds" fast. I still would say "a bit weird," but not so much "surprising." 😄

Wishful thinking. That would have great idea though.

oh damn, I need to check out if that works with my old Fujifilm X-A3, would certainly get me using it more again As you just can't deny the damn ultra nice convenience of shooting everything with your cellphone (even if it's just a sh*tty $199 phone's camera)

Sooooo... Does it have a 2X crop mode, and can you adapt MFT lenses to it? 😉

Yeah. I have spent time in tech startups, app design, user experience circles, and "proper" cameras are basically dinosaurs, and the thinking from the manufacturers is pre-historic as well. It's not getting better that quickly either, because there's this background mentality that "it works for the pros". In practically any camera forum you see it with discussions that go like this: Hi, I'd like a small and convenient camera with great image quality.. what do you recommend? Use your phone Actually, I'd like great image quality too, that's important to me Oh well then, you'll need this 5kg rig that is manual everything and needs lighting and external audio Actually, I need it to be small and convenient too Use your phone ........ Actually BOTH are really what I need <mumble mumble...> so you know better than the pros do you? well.... hey everyone, this guy is shitting on Deakins!! It totally is!!!

Yeah, I really think of it in terms of the priority. Cinema cameras are divas - the things in front of the camera are changed to suit the camera. You need lighting to suit native ISO, you have to wait for the camera to be ready, you have to start/stop if there's an issue with focus etc, they need external stabilisation. Hybrid / mirrorless / video cameras aren't divas - they adapt to the things in front of the camera. They are designed to operate at non-native ISOs and often have dual-native ISOs, they turn on quickly, they try to keep up with the scene with AF and AE etc, and they often have stabilisation built-in to reduce need for external rigging or tripods etc. Obviously this isn't a perfect description, but in general terms I feel like these are the "stereotypes" of each genre perhaps. Over the last 10 years both camps have started integrating the features and benefits of the other camp, with cinema cameras getting better ISO performance and now AF and IBIS, and video cameras basically getting a nicer image. If you shoot in relatively controlled environments I think it's easy to think that everything is mixed up now, but I shoot my friends and family during travel in available light with no direction and no retakes. Often I will see a moment about to occur and I have 2s to start recording and by the 4s mark the moment is over. I miss lots of these because the camera is in my hand by my waist and I can't get it turned on and in focus in 2s. Lots of my clips have the first 5 frames of the clip being the nice moment and then the smiles fade as people turn away etc. My situation is obviously extreme, and I'm 100% aware of this and that almost no-one is operating like this, however it throws the situation into very clear focus for me, because: 1) my iPhone can operate under these situations just fine and can turn on and do AF and AE before I've composed the frame properly, and apart from delays in getting the camera app started from the Lock Screen, it's basically faster than I am 2) my GX85 is almost as fast as my iPhone, being easier to turn on, but AF and AE are a tiny bit slower 3) BMPCC / BMMCC..... good freaking luck with that!! By the time you turn them on (and the monitor of the BMMCC), get the ND adjusted, get focus, start rolling, then frame, the moment is all but a memory. and these don't have a 60s turn on time! Yes, I could walk around with the camera turned on, but I remember the day my wife and I went to Pompeii - we walked around looking at this and that for 3 hours, had lunch, then went for another few hours again. Carrying a cinema camera around with batteries large enough to last that long simply wouldn't have worked. I carried the GH5, F0.95 prime, and Rode Videomic Pro in one hand that day, and my arm was sore for a couple of days afterwards. From this perspective, a C70 might be a camera I could work with, but a Komodo would simply not be anywhere near flexible enough for me. Thus, I am very aware of the differences in general approach, and thus thus, these "I just bought a RED!!!!" and then "Why I'm selling my RED" aren't surprising at all 🙂

That may depend on the camera. I have no experience with their older stuff, but DSMC3 isn't nearly that slow to use. I've even been taking the K-X on hikes and from my shoulder bag to recording takes about 2-3 minutes. Of course, I'm not running with a sound person, video village, etc. If I were on a half day indoor natural light docu-type shoot with it, I'd bring it with the EF 24-70/2.8 on a focal reducer. Camera setup and teardown time would account for 5-10 minutes of the day. I'd probably have to swap a battery midway through. The problem may not be the camera in this case, but the person who is using it. 😉 That said, if someone didn't insist that I use it, I'd be far more likely to grab my C70 for that kind of shoot (also with 24-70/2.8 and focal reducer). It's hands-down a better camera to use in a fully uncontrolled environment. Setup/teardown time would be almost identical.

My eyesight is not as good as it once was but I see Batman. 💥KAPOW💥

It's all marketing. There is no such thing as "tech press" in YouTubeland. And even if there were something akin to it, companies would find a way to grease editor's hands, as the auto world has shown. No one in their right mind trusts car magazines anymore. And with good reason. "Ad-mags" I think they call them? Well, the ad-mag for the camera world is now YouTube. Those guys in Tokyo allocate some $$$ for Marketing and they want/need results in their investment. It's just a spreadsheet. But that Excel file has a clear line between Marketing budget and Journalism/Media budget. Two different beasts completely. It's incredibly strange youtubers are asking journalist's rights when they have played the Marketing game for a long time now. Why would they ask the respect journalists command when they have not won that respect in the slightest?

That's true. It also points out to the clear way any of YT personalities can semi-guarantee being objective. "I paid my cash for this thing. Here's what I think about it". Put your money where your mouth is and all that.

Am I the only one seeing a ninja in the cold shoe of the S9? I wonder if they meant that? I can't unsee it now.

Camerasize.com now has the S9, just so you know. I only saw that just now. Here, we have a proper comparison to a camera and lens I own:

It helps standardise and unify the content, so for example Tokyo is one of the most photogenic places on the planet... That breathtaking beauty is going to be plastered all over the launch footage and test shots on the day the embargo lifts. It's why Canon took their bros to Hawaii, and not a carpark in Slough. Couple of days on a trip you can tell a lot about a camera, but it usually isn't final firmware and you can't compare very much to rival models. Although I did once bring my Leica SL to the Panasonic S1 launch 🙂 So you're right that you need longer to really get a long term insight into whether it's worth a serious investment and how it compares to a myriad of other options. So what usually comes out on YouTube is a range of quite glossy stuff that shows off the camera in the best light possible, in some of the most aesthetic situations. This has replaced the Vimeo tests of old where you had a filmmaker and model, or perhaps a videographer and a duck in the pond. And herein lies the marketing.

One thing about these YT'ers and their marketing, they are actually offering looks at interesting imaging products, which does make things a bit of grey line in some legitimate film production. For instance, I just convinced a neophyte documentarian I'm working with to stop invading the space of his subjects with his "A Crew" Which is him, his cinematographer with a RED and all the rigging gak-gak that goes with it, a sound guy with boom pole and harnessed multi-mixer, an RF video village, and assistant producer. Trying to parachute in and get useful naturalistic footage of a person ON A HALF DAY SHOOT with that nonsense? C'mon. By the time they're in and out they maybe put in the can only about 30 minutes of footage, it's all stagey as hell, and if there's 10 seconds that's compelling it's a minor miracle...they got lucky with what the subject's personality delivered, not with the process of their craft. RED gear and crews are built for certain situations. Docs of a certain type? I say nope. No, just allow a savvy and talented 1 man band w/a mirrorless to go into the situation and keep it chill. Trade the marginally and slightly more advanced IQ for BETTER F'IN FOOTAGE. If an image looks better, but is inauthentic, what have you accomplished? Not much. The easiest path to some sort of normalcy in cinema veriti doc filming is to do one's best to mitigate the disruption of that normalcy. Boys and their toys. Always thinking that more is better.