Geoff CB

Lack of front dial is a mistake. Especially at the rumored price.

yeah DR is important but I've seen so many cameras with great DR that fall apart and the shadows or the highlights in terms of image quality. Like my A7rII that turned green in the highlights right before clipping (thank God they fixed this on later models).

Lack of front dial is a mistake. Especially at the rumored price.

Nothing to be shocked about. The FS7 image looks like hot garbage with its bad tonality and horrible processing, while the FX9 looks fantastic.

Lack of front dial is a mistake. Especially at the rumored price.

Lack of front dial is a mistake. Especially at the rumored price.

And this thing cost more than A7III with way less spec!?  What was Sony thinking?! I bet price will drop to below A7III next year. 
And 28mm?! Good luck try to vlog with it, too bad Panasonic have the best lens for vlogger but the crappiest AF.

First picture leaked.


Looks like the result of a Panasonic GX85 and a Sony A7III having a date and forgetting to use condoms. 

Talking seriously - as in the A6xxx line, no front dial AGAIN, Sony?
 

So if you are trying to get 60p out of this camera make sure you have a 6G SDI cable! I thought an older SDI would work and was constantly having issues getting 60 FPS, switches to a 12g cable and much much better! 

If you need it yes, if you don't that no. Don't get it because it's a good deal.

For me it's not necessary but it comes down to the lenses I'm investing in. At this time I'm not willing to buy any glass that doesn't cover full frame. So by extension I lean towards full frame camera purchases in the future because that takes the most advantage of the lenses I have and will continue to buy.

Its such an individual thing, its an impossible discussion to have - hence the millions of mind-numbing arguments about equivalence. They're all tools that can get the job done. IMO the best balance of IQ with camera/lens size and cost is FF for stills and now - for me - video too. I need great AF, and really don't want to juggle two (or more) sets of lenses anymore. Now that FF cameras have some mind blowing video specs, its all come together - again for me. Personally I like the look of a fast wide, my 24 or 28/1.4 is my favorite, and I can only get that on a FF. Fuji's 16/1.4 and various m43 options come close, but its just not the same. I can't imagine the size of a Fuji equivalent to Sony's minuscule 24/1.4 GM since they said the 33/1.0 needed a tripod collar for support and was too large/expensive to make a reality. The new 50/1.0 is huge. I like the creative options with shallow DOF at times too, and again its much easier with FF. But I recognize everyone has different needs, I'm not trying to say one is better, I just prefer the IQ and aesthetic options FF gives me.
The arguments against FF years ago - mainly big/expensive lenses and bodies - are a thing of the past when you look at the Tamron zooms and lenses like the Sony 20G, 24GM, 85 1.8 and so on - compared to Olympus Pro primes or something like that new Fuji 50/1.0. Unless you shoot Panasonic's S lenses LOL! Its easy to go small/light, or no compromise with IQ or speed and thanks to so many jumping in on the E-mount, there are more 3rd party options than anything on the mirrorless side. I'm deliberately ignoring DSLR stuff because I don't shoot anything with a mirror anymore. But when you look at the popularity of speedboosters, lots shooting sensors smaller than FF are still looking for that FF aesthetic. IDK, just my perspective.
As always YMMV.
Chris

Your needs aren't everyones. I just sent some stuff to an agency for print/digital work, a cropped image from the a73 that was about 16mp and they asked if I had a larger version. Sometimes I need a heavy vertical/horizontal crop for things like banner or sidebar type ads, so most of the image is thrown away. Even with 24" prints there's a noticeable difference between 42mp files from the a7r2/3 and the 12mp files from a7s2, I shot both extensively and its easy to tell which camera shot which image. This "normal viewing distance" stuff people constantly throw out is bullshit. I've found people constantly get right up against a print and look at the details, for me more is better and it has zero to do with poor composition. Its about getting the end product I want, even if I need to crop. Sometimes I look at a shot and see a second image that's completely different just by cropping a large chunk out. I shot tons of safari stuff and cropping to get details like a tight shot of a face or texture in feathers gives an entirely new perspective, same when I shoot automotive stuff. I do the same thing with landscapes too, lots of times you can just crop the foreground and get a dramatic sky shot without wasting sunrise/sunset light trying to reframe to get different angles. Most of the time I'm chasing a short window of perfect light, I don't waste it reframing and moving around, I just crop. I like the creative freedom more mp gives me. The s3 - for me - is going to be for video and social photos only. I need more mp for my regular work, the a73 is minimum for my stills work. YMMV.
Chris

It's not needed, but right now it's the direction the industry seems to be moving in. Only Fujifilm and, weirdly enough, Canon really seem to be pushing the boundary in terms of APS-C sensors right now, and things have been even slower on the m4/3 front.

FF gives me cheap wide angles and cheap entry into all focal lengths. Nuff said. Thank you for dropping the wisdom. Spend money on camera body, save money on lenses, if AF does not matter. Just the thought of putting a 28mm or a 50mm Canon FD on my S1 makes my heart rush. Beautiful! Now, Panasonic, give your beautiful Lumix S1 a free 10bit VLOG update, 10bit 4k60p included. Put out a paid update for 10bit 120fps HD and your ALL Intra Codec for 799 EU and S1, S5 and S1H will coexist and all become megasellers. S2H, SDI and internal NDs for 4499EU in 2022.:) So, FF is great.

That's not correct. The free version can do 99% the same as the studio version for most users, you're only missing out on resolutions bigger than UHD, it doesn't have the noise reduction and film grain OFX, etc. For normal editing and grading, it's widely the same.
I don't think it makes sense to invest any money into your system if you haven't actually identified a bottleneck. I would edit/grade a project and run resource monitoring to find out if you every approach a limit regarding CPU, GPU or storage. There's no benefit to increase e.g. GPU performance up to 200% of now when you maybe never reach over 60% currently.

I think it depends on what you're trying to achieve.
A video showing test shots of brick walls, charts, high DR scenes, and scenes where a colour gradient is pushed in post to expose any banding would be very useful to a technical film-maker, but would be useless to the expressive film-maker who wants to see the aesthetic potential of the camera.
Likewise, an emotional and dreamy creative piece where the composition is an interpretive dance between cast and crew can tell a creative everything they need to know about the texture and refinement of expression that the camera possesses in pure potential, and would tell the technical operator very little.
The older I get the more I realise that people dramatically underestimate how different we all are to each other.  Put more simply, what doesn't work for you might be useful for someone else.

That's what I thought as well.
It doesn't directly talk about your setup, but there are a bunch of articles on Pugets website talking about what benefits you get from having multiple GPUs, like this one:
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/DaVinci-Resolve-14-GPU-Scaling-Core-i9-vs-Xeon-W-vs-Dual-Xeon-SP-1121/
Of course, buying a second GPU also means buying Resolve, so it's more of an investment.
I found with my system that the CPU was the bottleneck until I added an absolute ton of processing, so I had to upgrade to my new laptop.
You can use the Activity Monitor application under Utilities to see the load on your system (go to Window and enable CPU History and GPU History then go do things in Resolve and see what got maxed out).
I would definitely upgrade to Resolve Studio.  IIRC the free version of resolve only lets you have a single node?  If that's the case then having the ability to have more than one node let's you do a few killer things:
Choose what order your effects get applied in by separating them into different nodes You can start to work with selective adjustments where you take a key and adjust only certain ranges of colour (eg, skin tones) or certain areas within the image (eg, track a moving window on someones face) Apply multiple OFX plugins Use Temporal Noise Reduction that compares multiple frames to do NR instead of blurring just one frame at a time

Honestly just save up for new rig mate it would be better option
Or get another ti and have it sli .

I can tell the difference between 4K YouTube and 1080p.
Just not in Safari!

At $2000 I would much rather buy a used S1 with it's better battery, EVF, and handling. The only thing it lacks is the 10-bit 60p. 

Edit: And unlimited record time and a full size HDMI instead of micro.  

Agreed, the 30 minutes limits and micro HDMI are pretty bad cripples. There's also the weaker EVF and LCD screen and poorer IBIS to add into the equation (I've watched a few videos now and it definitely looks worse). It's definitely crippled quite a lot compared to the S1 although it adds loads of stuff too. I'm still impressed by the size of it and the price is more than reasonable (basically the same as I paid for my S1s).

I care! You made a brilliant point about the smoothness of the Panasonic S series V-Log compared to what other manufacturers are doing with their profiles at the same price point. That's worth more to me than AF.

Voigtlander 40mm f2 on Panasonic S1

Those look great! Awesome setting.


Some from me, these are all Prores 422 LT