newfoundmass

I don't expect this to be another S5ii variation. I think they view the S5 line as their affordable entry level full frame camera and a high resolution version would be anathema to that, even if it was competitively priced in the $3000-3500 range.

Even if the content wasn't always great, it's a shame when stuff just disappears and isn't preserved somewhere.

It's a damn shame that it was all deleted, and completely unnecessary. Shams on whoever made that call. 

8 hours ago, MrSMW said:

A straw thatched buffoon vs an old man

Plz don't remind me!

10 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

Sorry to hear about your medical issues and great to hear you are on the road to recovery.

I echo your thoughts about this place.

My last few weeks have been spent at my Mother’s bedside as she drifted away to her passing.

In times like that of huge change and trauma we look for constants to keep us connected to “normal” life.

In that respect, checking into here every now and again to find everyone having the same circular arguments was oddly comforting.

And I honestly mean that with love.

I'm so sorry for your loss! And I understand completely!

11 hours ago, seanzzxx said:

But how would a 28-70 2.8 improve your photography/videography over a 24-70 2.8? I'm genuinely asking, I've had multiple photographers at work who shoot Canon rent it, try it out, and NOT buy it because it's 1) really really really massive and 2) the 4mm on the wide end is actually more useful than a stop of extra light. I'm not being argumentative, I'm genuinely curious, because it sounds a bit like GAS to me.

A f2 will give you an extra stop of light over a f2.8. That can be quite handy when you're a wedding or event shooter. I suspect that's the primary reason why he'd want it.

@MrSMWhave you considered adapting Canon lenses for both the Lumix and Nikon bodies? The Sigma adapter seems to give native (or near native) level performance in video. It might be a solution to help cut down on how many lenses you have to carry.

I'm debating selling my two other S5 bodies to get a S5ii to go with my S5iiX and getting the adapter and some EF lenses. It never made sense to before because it didn't really work well for video with the S5 but with the adapters and some used EF lenses it will be cheaper to get a matching set up for multicam shoots than it would to go with native lenses. I'd like to get 2 Sigma 28-70s but it'd be considerably more expensive, I think. 

If nothing else I'm fascinated in seeing how the adapter opens up possibilities for me.

8 minutes ago, ntblowz said:

And my friend who shoot with Panasonic does have people laugh at him for using old piece of gear (the EVA1), on this one job after seeing the result (it's a livestream job and they have a dedicated people that does lut and facial beauty thing done in real time as well) they said Panasonic looks nicer than the Sony's they used and need much less time on tweaking.

I hear that a lot too, and I see it with my own eyes. Panasonic just has a much nicer image, in my opinion.

I do wish Panasonic would ditch the traditional DSLR body and do something different when releasing these video focused cameras.

I think it is easy to think the grass is greener on the otherside, but having had the opportunity to use the FX3 there were just so many little things, in addition to just not liking the image as much, that I just didn't enjoy the overall experience. Something as simple as not having shutter speed was enough to drive me nuts! Granted, these are things that I am sure that you would get over eventually, but I just want to make the entire process as easy as possible. And no one really does that as easily as Panny Boy.

I am definitely in the camp of people who thinks ProRes' time has passed. There are not a ton of reasons to use it outside of it being the current industry standard for larger productions. That isn't to say that I think support for it should be completely dropped, merely that releasing a camera with it, even ones touting themselves as cinema cameras, is fine if it cuts costs or makes development easier. The more I thought about it the less I cared about whether or not it this camera had regular ProRes recording. 

Outside of its ubiquity in the industry there aren't a ton of reasons why it is better than h.265 or why it'd be difficult to switch to h.265 in 2024 and beyond. The biggest issue, outside of people hating change, I think would be the impact on those running older hardware that can handle ProRes but would struggle or not be able to handle h.265. But I'm not sure that's enough of an argument to keep things the way they are. 

I began the process of transcoding most of my archived ProRes footage to h.265 in 2021. 

14 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Widely implemented in NLEs and other post tools? 

Kinda. 

Widely implemented in cameras? 

Definitely not! Only Blackmagic does it internally. 

Widely used? 

Definitely not!

Yeah, I think BRAW is significantly trailing when it comes to ProRes RAW, or at least that has been my experience when dealing/talking with professionals that have a reason to shoot it.

Even ones using lower end mirrorless cameras, I see Atomos Ninjas for RAW recording more than BMD Video Assists. I think it's to their own detriment that they don't support ProRes RAW if they are able to, especially as it pertains to Final Cut users who are increasingly getting fed up with how outdated the app feels and would switch to Resolve.

I very much understand, and even respect that BMD has created an entire pipeline from acquisition to editing, I think it's a smart strategy overall, but I don't think it does them any favors to shun other technologies that they view as competition. They don't have that kind of strength/market dominance. 

If you don't need the auto focus the S1H is also an excellent video AND stills camera with very good stabilization.

I think there are a lot of reasons to stick with M43 and go with the G9II, namely the stabilization and the lightweight lenses. I don't totally regret switching to the S5 (not the S5II) but I really, really miss the lower profile and smaller lenses.

If you are looking to switch, though, I agree with PannySVHS. I think that the Lumix S5II (or S5IIx) is a great option particularly because of the stability. You would have great low light and versatility, with the best stabilization, along with really good auto focus. 

4 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Sports is the main target for the A9 III for Sony and the reason they went global shutter. Lots of pesky LED advertising signs which can cause banding, lots of fast action at the end of long lenses, fast pans, and also sometimes the need for complete discreetness and silence, no mechanical shutter or flash.

So for sports photography, they are getting ahead of the Canon EOS R3.

Also the very fast burst rates, small size of the body, smaller lenses (sort of) put it ahead of any mechanical shutter camera or 1D X Mark III.

They want to challenge Canon's dominance in football, F1, olympics and so on. Big money riding on it.

I think in this regard it is really well targeted and innovative, it's just a bonus that they eliminate rolling shutter for filmmakers as well, but not as big a deal for us as it is for sports shooters.

This. The ability to shoot at such high frame rates without any rolling shutter is a huge deal for sports photographers. It's a genuine game changer for them. Read out speeds have gotten very good, yes, but it's just no match. 120fps, even for a short burst, is just a killer feature and I suspect almost every sports organization and team will be buying several for their production and social media teams. I know that people in the combat sports bubble I am in sure will be.

Global shutter is cool and all, but not having it really hasn't impacted my work given how good RS has gotten. 

I see this as being a much bigger deal for photography than video. 

It should be okay in good lighting. Never heard much about it's rolling shutter being too bad. It's used by some of the pro-wrestling videographers I know and I've never noticed it being too bad.

Canon was always going to have an advantage because of their legacy lenses and near native performance on their RF cameras. Plus the name is just massive.

I think though that camera sales are only part of the picture. Are those people buying new lenses, or are they using their legacy lenses on the new bodies?

Also, what is the regional break down? I see A LOT Sony cameras these days, especially professionally. Most social media and web content teams use them for photo and video, from local companies to national companies (my friends working for WWE, All Elite Wrestling, and the UFC all shoot on Sony, for example.) The social media teams for most major venues in my neck of the woods, like TD Garden in Boston, also are using mostly Sony. But I'm also located in the Northeast United States/New England, so it might be different in other parts of the world or even other parts of the country. I also want to, but cannot for certain, say that Sony has the edge here for wedding shooters, though Canon has a heavy presence there too, especially amongst older professionals.

I love the retro body so much.

What excites me is them moving to the L-mount and also what their future plans could be. I could definitely see myself picking up a Blackmagic camera for my non-event work now that it's using the L-mount. Their price of entry is low enough as it is that I could easily justify it since I'd be able to use all my lenses I've gotten since switching completely to the L-mount.

Agreed. Aside from just being ugly, it's just not a very practical design for a video centric camera. My guess though is that's how they save money on development and manufacturing costs.

Full frame sensor, too!

They did it. They went with the L-mount. Nice! Still ugly as sin though haha.

I don't think anyone is arguing that it isn't a very good camera, I think people just feel like the system is moving away from what it's potential is/could be.

It's a radically different time than 2017 and the years before spent developing a the GH5. You could overlook the larger size, compared to previous M43 bodies, because it was so much more advanced than anything else out there. 4K 60, 10-bit, IBIS, etc. were all groundbreaking features for the mirrorless market. 

Now though, releasing a camera that is the size of a full frame camera but with a smaller sensor and features that are not significantly better than what is already out there is a harder sell.

Like I said in a previous post, Panasonic probably has the marketing information to back up their decision making, and I absolutely understand that in many ways they are in a no win situation, but I just don't think they are able to compete when it comes to specs, at least not in a significant way. But size and affordability? Those are two things they absolutely could embrace and win some people over. An updated GH5 in a small, compact body at a very competitive price is a more compelling option for a lot of us vs. something like this. But again, it just might not be a feasible thing for them to do.

Whatever it is, it'll be incredibly ugly, unwieldy, and have terrible battery life. 

Can't wait!