EduPortas

Different technologies. Just wait a few years for Gen Alpha to discover old used DSLRs are almost indestructible and take even better pictures than newer more expensive MILCs and phones that break more frequently. The R50 in its different itinrations is cute, but it will never outlast a 5D. Does if offer better video quality? Yes, but only if you know what you're doing from the get go and that knowledge is becoming scarcer every day.

How much is the X100V and X100VI over there? This new model is clearly geared towards a different market in large part bc it does not have the killer hybrid OVF/EVF of the more luxurious X100 line. I have my reservations if there really is a market for a X100 sans the hybrid viewfinder. For me, it's the #1 reason I still use my now ancient OG X100.

That's a solid and bulky choice. It won't overheat any time soon! Now it's by far the most complicated Canon camera I have ever used. For me, the menus were too much. You really need to know what you're doing or you'll get lost with all the menu/button combinatios. Have fun!

You'll have to pony up for the more expensive models to avoid over-heating. I've tested my R8 in all its video modes and 4K will make the camera over-heat after long sessions or make the heat bars reach very close to it overheating and shutting off (If I'm shooting long-interviews with the R8 I just shoot FHD which is very good). I'm sure the R7 and R6M2 models have much better heat dissipation design. The R8 has none. As for the bulkier 1D models I'm sure they are almost bullet proof, but they have 30m recording limits.

Nice. Out of curiosity, could you unsharpen the included profiles in the GH2 in video mode?

That looks really good. The G7 has much nicer and warmer colors. For a doc-style scenario it could be a great option. Other than the obvious jello effect of the tortutre test it could stand up to any modern day camera. As we've said in this forum quite a lot: from about 2010-2018 Panny was a true disrupter in the videocamera world.

Photography has always been an expensive hobby. Since the SLR days there has been a clear mark of status associated with the best gear from the best brands. Wanting the best implied paying a lot more. Camera companies have clearly segmented and re-segmented the "intent" you mentioned. Want the best hybrid video-cam with RF lens? Better pony-up for the R1, R3, R5M2 or R5c. Want the speed demon? There's your R7. Want a slow full-framer but with some limitations for video, as in no IBIS? Here you go with the R8. A considerably better camera and videocamera but no as expensive as the R1 and upper tier? Ahh, we've got your R6M2. Every company out there does the exact same thing. So even if you are NOT looking for status, it's implied by your choice of gear. The only way to eschew the game is by going full retro. And I mean really retro for gear NOBODY wants to use and can't even be used with modern computers easily. I'm looking at you MiniDV, Hi8, and such.

Those RF lenses are obscenely expensive. At this point they have become "man jewelry".

Woa, there goes my interest in subaquatic photography. A coupe of years ago I checked the Nauticam prices for my 7DM2. The gear costed more than my camera and lens!

Oh you better believe it's coming, Canon would be foolhardy to leave a ton of cash on the table. As always, they'll let other manufacturers take the risk with their products and test if their is a market for it. Only then will they'll release a camera and gobble up the lion's share of it.

Well, the market is basically saturated. Since dealers are selling less units, each unit has to be sold a higher cost. That's it. Those insane prices clearly show this trend in a mature luxury market ( in the age of the cell phone a dedicated camera is a luxury). No surprise all camera manufacturers have gone the Fuji way: full "new-retro" models for Pentax, Fujifilm and Nikon. Only Canon and Sony have delayed the retro trend. So the only way for the camera market is backwards, not through, to quote a famous movie.

Original Fuji X100 and Nikon D200 For video it's almost useless, but for photos it shines with all its quirks and "personality traits". Nikon D200 is an absolute beast that has a ton o personality thanks to the CCD sensor. A truly great photo camera. No video function there. My modern cameras have zero personality (7DM2, R8, Z50) but work at such a high level that I just can't get rid of them even I want to. 7DM2 for quick focus and one of the best OVFs ever (soft video though); R8 is very very good for video, Z50 is not as good for video but I really like its compactness.

I have no idea why Panny chose to go the expensive route for their cameras. Up until the GH5 their products offered the biggest bang for the buck (GH5s was catastrophic bc it started this whole upward pricing trend). Now? Not so much. GH6-7 were considerable costs upfront for anyone, let alone indie filmmakers. Their FF lineup has been all over the place regarding prices. Why would anyone buy this new camera when the S5II and its different variations was released just some months ago? It makes NO sense whatsoever and makes us long for the GH-1-2-3-4 pricing and innovativeness. Every single one of the original GH cameras had some sort of innovation that differentiated it from the rest of the Canon-Nikon-Sony parade. All of that was lost with the move to FF. A true fall from grace.

Thanks, I see now.

No, he's talking about the 18-110mm F4 Power Zoom which is a very expensive item. Much more so than the "normal" F4 zoom of similar focal length. About 5x more expensive.