newfoundmass

I agree, but one thing I think should be noted is just how good those Lumix lenses are for the price. They're built very well and are optically excellent. I can't say enough good things about them. But they do need budget options. Most entry level users are looking at the price first and foremost. Is that $350 Lumix prime nicer than the cheaper Canon or Sony equivalent? Yes, but those just getting started don't quite understand that, the first thing they notice is price. And when you can get an RP with a 24-105 kit lens for under $1200, that's a lot more enticing than an S5 with the 20-60 kit lens for $1700 even if the camera and lens are superior in every way. Mom and Dad don't know that when they're buying their son or daughter a camera for Christmas after finding out they're interested in photography.

I agree with you that they can't beat Sony (or Canon) at their own game, but they do need to entice more users into the system and a big part of that is being aggressive with pricing and offering more entry level cameras and lenses. These aren't going to be cameras or lenses that appeal to us, but ones that appeal to those who would just be getting their foot into the door. Lumix can't just rely on us, they need a bigger market share in general. Hoping that a niche product gains mass appeal is a risky business proposition, too. Yeah, I don't see a scenario where they give up on higher end full frame cameras because I'm not sure they could survive as a company that just releases mid-range cameras. I think they are in a tough situation where they are damned if they do, damned if they don't. Would it be better to release an underwhelming S1H successor the way they did with the GH6? I learn towards "no." I think sensor tech has slowed down in general. It felt like every single day specs for new sensors would get posted, with people speculating on whether it would be used in a forthcoming camera from this brand or that brand. I know people who think Sony's sensor tech was impacted significantly from the earthquakes that have hit the country over the last 8 or so years and the supply chain issues that happened during COVID. That would kinda make sense about why almost everyone is still using a 6 year old sensor.

Honestly I'd consider dropping the S5 to near fire sale pricing as the entry level option into the L-mount/Lumix full frame family. I'd argue that it's still a great value at its current price, but there is just so much competition in that price range. The RP, R8, Z5, and A7C are all cheaper, and some of those even come with a kit lens for less. I'd definitely argue that the S5 is a superior camera to all of those, but Lumix is at an inherent disadvantage because Canon, Nikon and Sony have a much larger user base. So create a real incentive to try and entice people to dip their toe in. For all of their flaws, and there are a lot of them, Canon has always been smart when it comes to getting casual users to buy their cameras. The RP with a 24-105mm f/4-7.1 lens is $1,118. Is it a crappy lens? Absolutely, but for most people the first lens they use is the kit lens. I'd argue that Lumix's kit lenses are genuinely good lenses and are nicer than Canon and Sony, but they don't have anything comparable to the super cheap options from them.

I disagree. It's a much more honest approach, in my opinion, as you can reliably predict how long you can film with it. I am vehemently opposed to companies releasing cameras they know have overheating problems but still claim unlimited record times. Transparency and honesty should be encouraged. If I get the S9 I'll keep the recording limits on, both because I prefer predictability and because it makes me uncomfortable that by turning the recording limits off you agree that Lumix isn't responsible if you damage the camera's sensor. It's great, I guess, that Lumix begrudgingly gave users that option, but I personally don't care to risk it. I have three other cameras I can use in the event I need to film with no limits.

It wouldn't normally interest me, but on the S9 that's a nice compact set up and the images I've seen with it are pretty decent. For shooting in public where you're not trying to draw attention, that's a really nice little set up. I'm take the slow lens with variable aperture if it means I can have a small setup like that I can take anywhere with me.

Honestly, if they had released the new kit lens with it (I'm guessing it was supposed to be but it was delayed) the S9 would have been a much more compelling release on launch. I am debating getting it now, because that set up is so small and inconspicuous, something I haven't had since getting rid of my Gx85.

We all, myself included, were hounding Lumix about the GH6. Their silence was deafening at the time. Eventually what they released was a pretty decent camera, but one that also simultaneously left many of us underwhelmed. Then a few months later the G9 II comes out with PDAF. It was terribly confusing for users and, in many ways, self-sabotaged their own flagship camera. Was the GH6 rushed out to be a stop gap because the community was pressuring them so much? I don't know, but it kind of looks like that with hindsight. It would also kind of explain why they were content with not fixing some of the ghosting issues that people had, which was not a typical response from a company that has very much been attentive to users and known for improving their cameras even years after their release. If that was what happened it could've been avoided with more communication. Laying out a road map would've saved them from releasing a camera that would be overshadowed almost immediately and made almost irrelevant within a year. People just wanted to know what the future held, whether they should stick with Lumix or look towards a different system. The other companies don't have to convince people that they will be around for the long haul. Lumix does. Lumix also needs to increase their market share. The way to do that is to collaborate with users (and, I hate to admit it, try to win over the influencers) and be more transparent. That includes telling people that follow ups to the S1 lineup is in the pipeline instead of just absolute silence.

I think Lumix is damned if they do, damned if they don't. I think we only have to look back to the GH6 to see why they may be holding back. Just months after releasing it they then released the G9 II with PDAF. Within a year they'd go on to release a GH7 with PDAF. With hindsight it feels as though the GH6 was rushed out. I think Panasonic might be in a similar situation with their higher end offerings. I hope that Lumix works towards improving their marketing and becoming more transparent with the photo/video community. When you're that far behind the other companies there really isn't a reason not to be. Even if you cannot be specific, letting it be known that you're not abandoning higher end users would probably help.

Might it be because they are trying to avoid another GH6 situation and are on the cusp of something big that has delayed it? I'm not sure what that could be, but people certainly weren't very happy when the G9 II was released with PDAF not long after the GH6.

Delivering in 4K isn't very important to me but there's no real reason not to shoot in 4K even if you are delivering in 1080p. That's not to say that you can't get great results with a good 1080p image (the og Pocket gave me my favorite image out of every camera I've ever owned) and can even deliver in 4K with most people not even noticing (i know people who do it with their C100s), but there really isn't an argument for 1080p actually being better than 4K. People that say that are just being contrarians.

Crappy probably wasn't the right word to use on my part. I wouldn't say they're great, though. There are better options out there for not that much more money, that have better preamps and features. The Portacapture line from Tascam are much better and competitively priced, for example. I have the x8 and it was a game changer for me as a one or two person crew. I wouldn't recommend the H4n (including the latest version) either. Zoom has essentially released the same recorders, preamps and all, repeatedly over the last decade plus with only minor improvements. To Tascams credit they've at least avoided that and just kept the same pieces of kit for sale. I can respect that, because at least they aren't trying to sell their customers the same recorder with minor feature upgrades every 5 years. Still though, can't say I'd recommend the DR-60 or any of that generation of recorder. Save up a little more money and get something better. Most cameras today have "good enough" preamps, I think. I use the XLR adapter on my S5s and S5II X and am quite satisfied with it. There are obviously instances, especially with older cameras, where the camera preamps are bad but we're actually quite fortunate that they've gotten as good as they have. We're a long way from the T3i.

I feel like there's a huge difference between fans that are part of the camera's body (where it gets hottest) and fans that are attached externally to a camera's body. I'm not saying that it won't help, just that it seems inefficient compared to putting active cooling right into the body itself. Certainly for the price I don't see why they couldn't, as I refuse to believe that the extra parts needed would significantly raise manufacturing costs. Panasonic did it for a camera that is half the cost, afterall.

It's old and the pre amps are pretty crappy.

I guess it's good that they provide a solution but having to drop $400 to get a handgrip with a fan in it raises a lot of red flags. I don't even know how that even will work to cool the camera body, honestly.

I'll be interested to see how the autofocusing works. I think Panasonic's 1.8 primes are decently priced, as they are better built than their Canon and Sony counterparts, but I also don't think it'd be a bad idea to release more affordable compact primes that are more competitively priced. A third party manufacturer probably shouldn't be the ones releasing a nifty fifty in the sub $200 range when your competitors have ones.

I use a Tascam Portacapture X8 to record from the mixer in 32-bit float to one track and then have a stereo mic with a long XLR cord placed somewhere it won't be disturbed going into another track. When the mix doesn't have all the instruments it's not ideal, because it can pick up too much audience noise, but it's better than nothing. Thankfully most venues I've filmed in have all the instruments mic'd. For instruments that aren't in the mix you might even be able to set up a second recorder and mic them yourself?

Thinking a company should, at bare minimum, release products that are reliable isn't internet forum spazzing, haha. "They shouldn't offer that for free" is some bootlicking type behavior, whether it's people excusing Sony, Canon, or whoever. You're not asking for it for free, you're paying a $1000 for a camera! It really isn't relevant what brand you shoot, it's that you make that excuse for ANY company that is the problem. I really can't believe though that we're in 2024 and people are justifying overheating, particularly for cameras that are targeting video creators! People surely shouldn't have to watch a 20 minute video to watch some dude sitting in his "studio" tell you that the camera overheats. As much as it bummed me to have a recording limit, at least with my original S5s I knew how long I could record and bought the camera knowing that limit directly from the manufacturer. That recording limit also at least told me how much video I could reliably record in 60fps, too. I also didn't experience overheating with it even in 98 degree weather under direct sunlight, imagine that! Again, those hosting companies are clear about it up front. If a camera company can't guarantee reliability past a certain time then recording limits should be imposed so people can reliably judge how long they can record. Transparency and honesty doesn't cost these companies a thing, some just don't care about their customers enough to give it. I can kind of see why, because people are all too happy to make excuses for them.

Brother, no offense but I think you should rename yourself to EatsTooMuchBoot cause this kind of attitude toward any company is ridiculous. The least they owe you is reliability.

It's all digital projection now, unfortunately. The drop off in quality is significant. I've only gone to the theaters because my nephew wanted to; it still is a semi magical experience for him. But I'm very much over it.

Reliability shouldn't be reserved strictly for professionals.

To me, putting a recording limit on a camera that is likely to overheat is the way to go. Whether it's a large issue for most users or not, not giving people an idea on how long they can actually record before it overheats is something that can easily be avoided with a simple limit, certain companies just don't do it because they remember the complaints they got from the 30 minute recording limits. At least Panasonic is being honest in telling people heating is an issue and here is how we are attempting to mitigate it while giving you an idea on how long you can actually film with it.

Is dynamic range important? I don't know, is it for you? Cause that's the only person that can answer this question.

$500 is a lot of money. ---- I think the hype for this is (as usual) overblown BUT there aren't a ton of options at this price point, making it enticing for a very specific audience. I do feel as though we are moving backwards and heading towards Canon cripple hammer territory taking things like IBIS away (not that Sony IBIS is very good to begin with.) What I really wish Lumix would take from this release is THE POWER ZOOM. GIVE US SOME, PLZ.

I don't know that their current business model is sustainable with a constantly shrinking market and being a niche system. So the question is really "how long can OMD stay in business?" It'll really boil down to how long OMD wants to stick around before deciding enough is enough. Panasonic has seemingly slowed down their decline and possibly even reversed it a little, so their long term future is less in doubt I think. But M43's future is still up in the air and really depends on whether Panasonic decides to keep going with it if it's just not a profitable part of their business. Even if it does stick around I don't know that we'll ever really see the true promise of M43s, which was small cameras and small lenses with powerful features. The lenses are smaller, but the bodies aren't that much smaller than their full frame counterparts. Still I'll always have a soft spot for the M43 system and wish I'd kept a couple lenses.

I don't think so at all. iPhones (and phones in general) are obviously very popular, but M43, 1-inch compact cameras, and action cameras have all been on the decline for a long time. Really the whole industry has been, but GoPro for example lost $75 million last year. Their stock has plummeted something like 97%. The action camera market is not doing good, even though DJI and Insta360 have been pretty aggressive in releasing new cameras. They just don't have the burdens GoPro has, since they are Chinese companies and action cameras aren't their only products. Sony put out vlogging cameras in the ZV and RX100 series of cameras, but they didn't really set the world on fire. It sounds like Panasonic is going to release something similar but I have my doubts that it'll be successful. Vlogging just doesn't seem to be nearly as popular as it used to be, with a lot of people transitioning to different content and even before they did that a lot were using APS-C and full frame cameras for YouTube, and many others have transitioned to using phones for the short form content they post to TikTok, Facebook, and IG. M43 will exist as long as OMD and Panasonic want it to, but the GH7 could realistically be either the last stand or it could breath new light into the system. Too early to tell, but it got a lot of praise but whether or not that translates to people actually buying it, who knows? I kind of regret getting completely out of the system, but I'm not entirely sure I wouldn't have ended up having to in a couple years anyway.