newfoundmass

So I just completed a trade with MPB and I actually am quite satisfied. What really impressed me is that they actually paid me MORE than the original quote, because they judged that my equipment was in better shape than I did! So in addition to getting a S5 I actually ended up getting about $200 more!

I made a bit less than if I would've sold it on eBay or myself, but it was so easy and convenient that it was worth it to me. Just thought I'd share.

😉

4 hours ago, Amazeballs said:

Here is an example for you - Tamron 28-200 2.8-5.6 which in m43 equivalent would be 14-100 1.4-2.8 and its only 550 grams. You just cant get anything similar on a MFT system. Olympus 12-100 F4 weights the same. F4 vs 1.4-2.8 pretty substantial right? Or Samyang 24 1.8 - 230 grams (12mm F0.9 on MFT - good luck finding such a lens at this weight envelope and with a working AF). Even Tamron 17-28 F2.8 weight 420 grams - again, nothing similar on MFT. So in terms of weight and size - I dont see any real advantage except telephoto, though I guess Tamron could start making F8 lenses which would be resonalby compact (like Canon did). 

You're comparing lenses that don't exist to ones that do. A f2.8 is a f2.8 regardless of whether the lens is M43, APS-C or Full Frame. You can add all the qualifiers you want, it doesn't change the fact that the full frame equivalent to most M43 lenses are substantially heavier AND more expensive. Let me know when you find a 24-70 with a constant f2.8 that is even remotely close to the 12-35 f2.8 in weight. Ditto the 35-100, or the 100-300mm f/4-5.6. 

4 hours ago, Amazeballs said:

So again, if someones wants DOF than MFT is not that exciting.

It's easy to get shallow DOF with M43 except when shooting ultrawide unless the lens has a close focusing distance. It is insane that people discredit an entire system in part because it isn't easy to get enough toneh.

3 hours ago, Amazeballs said:

I really dont see much of the size advantage for m43 xameras this days. Take a Sony a7c coupled with Samyang tiny primes or Tamron zooms and m43 just cannot compete. Yes they need to minimize the cameras but the lenses.. its physics, they wont be able to do anything about it. And yes, not eveyone is obsessed with shallow DOF anyway. For macro shots its a problem actually. But I think with current advancements in deep learning/neural networks it might be soon achievable to blur the background in post, we can already do it with depth maps in Davinci and if you already have some background separation with a natural bokeh it should be easier to expand on that with AI produced one. 

A lot of us don't like Sony cameras, and there are no comparably small full frame versions of the 12-35 and 35-100. For the 12-30 it's 305 g vs. 835 g for full frame equivalent. The 35-100 is 357 g vs. 1480 g for the full frame equivalent. Once you get into telephoto primes you're dealing with a significant size difference again compared to their M43 counterparts.

It's always weird when people insist there's no size advantage when I'm both a M43 and full frame shooter. There is such a huge difference, not in the bodies, but the lenses. 

I haven't given up hope on M43, and I still believe in the promise of it, but Panasonic needs to push the boundaries of size/specs. To me a camera the size of the GX85 with the abilities and performance of an upgraded GH5 II would be very tempting. 

The performance gap has narrowed between M43 and full frame, with IBIS being the main advantage at this point. But the added weight of lenses that I've had to deal with, I can't say that I enjoy that one bit. It's why I kept a GH5 and some lenses for my 3 camera kit. I didn't truly appreciate how tiny the 12-35 and 35-100 were until handling L-mount lenses, let alone the tiny lightweight primes! 

The ball really is in Panasonic's (and OMD, I suppose) court. If they offer a compelling option I think it can be successful, but I think it requires a compete re-evaluation of what they think M43 can be. 

4 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

Great questions. I live in NY and heat isn’t an issue!   Mostly run and gun docs for education and sports. Some sports and travel too personal not professional work.  The biggest concern for fx30 is the ISO performance vS A7iv and poor photo ability in fx30. 

I think the FX30 does pretty well in low light. But I think you'd be fine with the A7IV. 

I'm biased towards the S5 though. 🙂

What kind of video are you doing? Will you be filming long takes? Do you live in a warmer climate? The A7IV does have some overheating issues. However, if you aren't shooting long takes (say longer than 30-45 minutes at a time) or aren't in a hot climate, you'll probably be fine.

The FX30 eliminates overheating issues like that, which is why you'd want to go that direction if you're primarily a video shooter. It's a video ("cinema" 😏) camera, so it's meant to be a reliable video camera.

Yeah, at this point in camera development I think resolution is less an issue you'll have and really just shooting at an appropriate shutter speed and hitting focus is what you'll need to worry about.

8 hours ago, MrSMW said:

Can it be done? Yes and I'm surprised more are not doing it.

Especially for social media use. The examples above aren't amazing by any stretch, especially given the lighting, but the performers will often geek out over the shots and use them on their social media accounts too. No one seems to notice, or really care, that they are stills taken from a video file. Most people at our level in pro-wrestling are using pictures taken on phones, and I'd argue our stills from videos look better than most pictures taken on a phone because they still have the characteristics of a larger sensor image.

4 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

If most photos are of athletes and friends and family (some motion but mostly static), could a user prioritize video in a camera and pull screen grabs for social media and a few prints ?

I would say, if you're not a pixel peeper, then absolutely. Motion though might be a problem, depending on your shutter speed. Here are some stills I took from a pro-wrestling event I filmed on the 3rd that I used for promotional purposes on social media. These are from 8-bit 4K 30p video files using a 180 degree shutter angle shot on the S5 with zero editing outside of the watermark. We don't have a professional photographer taking photos (a lot of pro-wrestling events of this size don't since it's not in the budget) so we use stills like this instead. Obviously they aren't perfect, but for social media they are more than adequate, and depending on the shot a 4x6 print would be fine. Static subjects will of course work even better!

It should also be noted that 4K & 6K photo modes on Panasonic cameras are essentially just video files that allow you to pick a frame.

11 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

what’s the most challenging part of manual focus for run and gun you think? I was considering a7iv, xh2s, and s5

The most challenging part is just getting used to manual focusing. It can be intimidating at first, but it's really not that difficult. It's pretty easy with focus peaking and with cameras that allow you to set the focus to linear so that you can repeat focusing consistently (a very underrated feature of the S5 after years of using the GH5.) 

Manual focusing is such a rewarding experience, at least it is for me. I like that feeling of control. 

On 12/29/2022 at 3:21 AM, MrSMW said:

Marginally…in some cases. 

Some of the Sigmas are in fact better!

I do think L Mount has one of the strongest lens lineups available now with perhaps only Sony having stronger?

Not including old(er) ef Mount.

If the new rumored AF is good, then ladies and gentlemen, I would suggest we’re going to have an extremely strong system.

This is speculation, but I'm guessing the primes do better than the zooms? I really debated picking up two 28-70 f2.8 but I ended up getting two of the 24-105 f4 Panny lenses because of the ability of having dual IS.

5 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

Why fx30 over a7iv? 

I think a lot of folks would go with the FX30 over the A7IV because it's more video focused and won't overheat. It's a very compelling option if you're not obsessed with full frame. 

If the X-T4 had better IBIS and didn't have the recording limits I probably would've switched as I was in decent position to do so when it came out. Then COVID dragged on and killed my year, so I am glad I didn't! But I am quite fond of those Fuji colors straight out of the camera, though I am pretty pleased with the S5's colors. I'm glad that I ended up with the S5.

The X-T4 has IBIS, but it's not very good. If you decide to go that route I'd honestly probably just get the X-T3 since there wasn't much different between the two outside of that.

I'm biased, but I'd go with the S5. I prefer the look of the video out of the three, and it takes very good photos too.

3 minutes ago, A_Urquhart said:

Yep but I don't care. Function over form every day of the week. 

'Filmaking' has become all about the pose factor recently. 

If the way a camera looks deters you buying it tge your priorities are wrong and I'd question your ability too. 

I don't think there's anything wrong with wanting a camera to "look nice." It shouldn't be a deciding factor, but I don't think most people are using that as their deciding factor anyway, at least not professionals/enthusiasts.

I think you can also connect camera design to functionality. I didn't like the way Sony cameras felt in my hands and that was, in part, because of the overall design and Sony's emphasis on making things as compact as possible. They've improved it somewhat by making deeper grips for people like me that have big paws, thankfully, but I still don't enjoy holding and using them.

I don't mind the way Panasonic cameras look but I don't fault anyone that does. 

3 hours ago, Davide DB said:

I'm not trying to beat a dead horse here but what's wrong with 4K@60p being APSC?

Full of S35 cinema camera out there.

I mean, it's a full frame camera. It'd be nice to be able to do 4K 60p without a crop. I like to have the choice between full frame and APS-C. It's one of the benefits of full frame that has won me over, as I can extend the reach of my lenses. 

3 hours ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

https://www.l-rumors.com/fully-leaked-s5ii-s5iix-and-14-28mm-specs/

Looks like that the X have ProRes and IP streaming functions. Still, strange to have a specific model just for that.

Guessing they want one that's Netflix approved that they can charge extra for? Very strange. I hope it doesn't mean the S5ii is lacking some video features like shutter angle, etc. 

Everything looks good, but that crop in 4K 60p makes me shake my head. I'd much prefer full frame 4k 60p over 6K. That is a bit of a bummer. 

Looks very good to me, though 4K 60p with a APS-C crop? 

The primary difference seems to be ProRes? 

2 hours ago, herein2020 said:

Sony does it and Canon definitely does it but at least that is to be somewhat expected when buying into a vendor's ecosystem. The difference with the alliance though is that the customer's expectation is that everything will just work and if you don't dig in past the marketing material you will have no idea why things aren't working later.

I haven't seen a ton of complaints honestly about using Sigma lenses with Panasonic bodies. My primary reason for not getting Sigma lenses is due to the dual IS that I can get with Panasonic lenses. The complaints I have seen, and it's kinda hard to call them complaints because the people I've seen weren't that angry or anything, is that autofocusing on Panasonic bodies in VIDEO is slightly better with Panasonic lenses. I'm not saying there shouldn't be more cooperation, and that lenses shouldn't work flawlessly regardless of the body manufacturer, but I don't really think that there are that many people out there who feel like their expectations weren't met, especially if they follow the camera industry. I also think there's some confusion about what the alliance means/meant: they are still camera companies that are in competition with one another, fighting for the same customers (well, maybe not Leica.)

2 hours ago, herein2020 said:

I think if one of the members does go the PDAF route the cracks in the alliance will become even more obvious because newcomers and existing users would expect all of the features they see out of Canon and Sony to just work after buying a L mount body with PDAF (eye tracking, low light tracking, face/head/body/car/animal detect AF, CAF, etc. when in reality it would probably be very hit or miss depending on what alliance member made the lens. I believe even @MrSMW reported first hand that the Sigma L lens was significantly worse at AF than the native Panny lenses and that is just DFD.

Sigma, if I'm not mistaken, already has PDAF on their fp L don't they? So one of the members already has gone in that direction. @MrSMW would know better than me, but in videos like this I've seen that the AF performance with Sigma lenses isn't that much worse than with Panny lenses in video. And maybe my trust is misplaced, but I think if Panny goes the PDAF route they'll pretty quickly end up at the Sony/Canon level. They have a track record of delivering when implementing new technology into their cameras.
 

2 hours ago, herein2020 said:

So @Amazeballs no I didn't just make such a statement lightly, a lot of research went into me reaching that conclusion. The ability to mount a lens to a body and how many lenses can perform this feat are just two small parts of the equation, the total user experience is the rest and IMO the "alliance" cannot currently offer a user experience equivalent to the E mount on Sony cameras, or the EF or RF user experience when mounted to Canon bodies.  Personally, I decided not to buy into a mount that "might" turn around one day when making my body and lens purchasing decisions.

I don't think anyone faults you for your purchasing decisions, I think people just are a bit confused about your insistence that it's a "dead" mount/alliance when your complaints for why honestly apply to every other camera manufacturer. I guess those issues aren't as significant because they're not in a formal "alliance?"

I think you went with Canon, right? I feel like I'd be a lot more annoyed buying into a system that decided four years in to clamp down completely on third party manufacturers than I would be on the L-Mount alliance's issues. With some luck Panasonic will finally go PDAF, and we'll start seeing some of those really affordable Viltrox and other third party lenses finally getting released for the L-Mount. Maybe even Tamron! There are a lot of possibilities on the horizon.

25 minutes ago, herein2020 said:

What I found in my research was that sure tons of lenses and multiple vendors; but each one was tweaking their lenses to work optimally with their own native cameras. So the "Alliance" is primarily in name only and yes the physical mount is the same across cameras, but in reality unless you owned a Sigma body and got Sigma lenses or a Panasonic body and got Panasonic lenses then there was no guarantee that you would have the best user experience. 

That's not just an L-mount issue though. Sony is starting to do the same thing, where if you're not using Sony lenses you miss out on things like focus breathing correction. A big selling point for Sony was how open the mount was, which resulted in tons of third party lenses when Sony themselves didn't have much of their own lens selection. We're now seeing them becoming a bit more closed off with features that only work with their lenses. And Canon is trying to cut out every other third party completely. Granted, they aren't in any "alliances" but the end results are the same: if you're not using their lenses you're taking a hit with capabilities/performance.

The thing about the L-mount alliance is that things can literally turn around in a moment for them. IF Panasonic finally go the PDAF route, I think you'll start seeing a ton of third party lenses for the mount, like you've seen for Sony and Fuji. Ideally the alliance would have more cooperation, and I hope there is more of it moving forward, but even if there isn't it's not really any different from what every other camera manufacturer is already doing.

I just picked up another Lumix S5, making my kit two S5s and a GH5. I sold my G85 and GX85, along with one of my 12-35mm lenses. It was time. I'll miss the GX85 the most, because honestly that camera with the 35-100mm lens is such an awesome combination, but I just didn't use it as much as I should.

If it has PDAF that rivals Sony it'll be very, very interesting to see if people switch. The S5 really was/is the most underrated camera out there right now. The images I get out of mine, and the stabilization with the 24-105 lens, are amazing. I don't regret selling my G85 and GX85 to pick up a second S5 even with a mark II coming out, but I definitely look forward to trying it out and eventually buying one in a couple of years on the used market!

To me, the best camera out there right now is pretty darn close to my perfect camera, and that's the Z9. Of course that's way out of my price range and would require switching systems. 

I have never enjoyed using Sony cameras. They are utilitarian to a fault. So it's always so wild to me when people say Sony is the closest to being "the perfect camera" for them. The IBIS is pretty much useless unless you're standing still, their ergonomics aren't good (some like them though), I don't like their color, S-log is harder to grade vs. V-log, they lack the video focus features that entry level Panasonic cameras have (how are you going to release a "cinema camera" that lacks video features?!), and ultimately I don't get any joy out of using them. That last one is the most important. To me the biggest selling point for Sony is that they're arguably the most stable brand right now, and so I wouldn't have to worry about investing into the system and it being sold or shuttered as the market shrinks and companies decide to get out of the camera business. If I was just an enthusiast that wouldn't matter so much, but as someone that makes a living using this equipment it is a huge factor.

The S5 honestly is really, really close to being all I'll need for the next 5 years, short of some huge breakthrough in technology. I feel like most cameras are more than enough these days when it comes to capabilities. On the S5 there are so many little things that I'd like to see improved upon, but they're more "quality of life" type things. I'd LOVE to get that S1H screen on a S5. I like flip screens, but there are absolutely times when it'd be nice to just tilt it down or to the right in tight spaces. A full sized HDMI port should be standard on ALL cameras by now. E-ND would be nice, but I honestly don't mind using variable ND on my lenses. Better autofocus would be nice, but again I've made the autofocus work for me. A bigger EVF would be nice, but again, not a dealbreaker. I wish the rubberized texture was on the SD card door. I hope that the GH6 not having a battery grip was an oversight and not the direction they are moving in, so I hope whatever iteration that comes next has a battery grip. Related: I don't know if Panasonic made it difficult for third party manufacturers to make their battery grips or if the S5 just wasn't popular enough, but if they did make it difficult for them to make one I hope they don't do that going forward because while the S5 has very good battery life, it's still nice to have more. The DSTE grips I got for the G85 and GH5 were wonderful.

Cloud back up is fine for short term purposes, or if you're not dealing with TONS of data, but unless you're paying a significant amount for some enterprise level service or building your own back up workflow using AWS S3 Glacier storage or something, you're inevitably going to run into issues, whether it's limitations or price increases. 

Ultimately it is a case by case thing, and you're mileage will vary. If you're only dealing with 1 or 2 TBs of data that's one thing. But most everyone I know has had nothing but bad luck when it comes to larger amounts of data, due to price increases or limits being imposed. And when you've got a massive amount of data it's not that easy to switch from one cloud storage server to another. The only exception has been those who can afford or work for companies that can afford enterprise solutions with companies. Most of us though don't have thousands of dollars to spend on online storage. 

Photos are also a lot easier than video when it comes to cloud storage. Consumer level services like Dropbox or Google Drive are often enough for a lot of photographers.