newfoundmass

On 10/10/2024 at 1:41 AM, MrSMW said:

S9 = lukewarm release

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. 

5 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

It's very odd what Panasonic have prioritised over releasing the S1 Mark II, S1R Mark II and S1H Mark II.

They have updated the G9, because that's an insane best seller of a camera isn't it? And it really was crying out to be updated in an S5 Mark II body, hence G9 II and it is now languishing at something like 58th in the sales chart for 2024.

They have updated the GH6, as the GH7 being part of a dead system is obviously more important than an S1H isn't it!

And now we have the new box cameras, aimed at the cinema market which is currently in a huge downturn, maybe Panasonic want to capitalise on the raving success of the first box cameras, which sold a mammoth 5 units.

At this rate we are going to see a Panasonic CM1 Mark II, a GM1 successor (S9 anyone?) and a sequel to the long line of sales chart toppers known by their initials G... as in G100, the vlogging camera.

The S9 really nobody wanted it, I don't know why it exists.

The GH7 I can just about understand, I'm glad the GH series will die AFTER getting autofocus and not before.

The G9 II doesn't need to exist, just use a GH7.

The S5 Mark II probably should not have come out BEFORE the S1 Mark II.

The box cameras, I really couldn't give a hoot about.

Somebody wake me up when Panasonic rejoins the camera market and stops messing about.

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.

3 hours ago, IronFilm said:

The preamps are great for its (very low) price. 

Much better than the Zoom H4n, or DSLR preamps.

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.

1 hour ago, herein2020 said:

Actually, I think it will be pretty effective. The Cinema line all have a similar fan setup and I have never had my C70 or C200 overheat. The way it works in the R5 II is that it has passive cooling vents on the bottom with the exhaust out to the side. If you add a cooling grip it will pull air through the grip, push it through the bottom intake and vent out the side....this is how they managed to keep weather sealing for the actual body but also offer an active cooling option.

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.

On 7/16/2024 at 1:37 AM, EduPortas said:

What? No love for Tascam's DSLR recorder?

Menus are close to impossible to understand but lots of YT videos out there to make it work.  

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?

13 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

Brother, no offense, but aside from being a bit funny, that's a really dumb statement and your overall attitude on this seems like typical internet forum spazzing. 

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!

13 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

I haven't shot Sony in years - but I've seen/heard nothing about this camera that makes it seem unreliable, other than that it overheats on long takes.  And now you, as an informed consumer, know that if you'd like to record longer takes, you would be better served by either purchasing a camera that doesn't overheat or using one of those modes on this one which doesn't.  For a majority of people in it's target market of internet content creators/vloggers, it will give them something like 60-80% of the features of the FX30 at 60% of the price.

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!

10 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Everything comes at a cost. 

Look at hosting costs when you demand 99.9% uptime vs 99.999% uptime vs 99.9999% uptime

That increased reliability comes at a very very hefty cost. 

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.

3 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

But it also shouldn't be expected for free.  😄

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.

8 hours ago, MrSMW said:

Obviously you don't live in France where it's so shite, I've stopped going.

It is no longer 1976.

52" 4K screen with surround sound and the kitchen next door is the way to go. Plus a pause button so you don't have to go in an empty popcorn carton.

But seriously, last few movies I went to see, they looked MUCH better at home.

Though as above, this may be a 'living in rural France' thing...

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.

13 hours ago, IronFilm said:

I guess for their use case (vlogging, so mostly short clips of a few minutes at a time) of Sony's target market then they think stats like this (getting nearly a whole hour or more in most cases for 4K 24fps) is perfectly fine. 

If you need professional reliability then there is an easy solution: spend twice as more and get a Sony FX30 

Reliability shouldn't be reserved strictly for professionals.

8 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

It'll do it if you are shooting the event through a window 😉

I think the 10 minute record limit will help in terms of limiting the impact in respect of giving it less opportunity to roast the balls off it (likely intentional) but those tests are at 4K30 so your particular mileage may vary as you will be using higher frame rates.

Of course, there is no "gold standard" (sic) review as he threw his toys out of the pram with regard to the S9.

 

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. 

3 hours ago, zlfan said:

i think s9 is much more enticing, as it is only $500 more expensive than this one, but with the best full frame ibis, and is full frame if only ibis no eis high. if go ibis plus eis high, s9 is s35, but very usable for handheld footage. 

$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.

19 hours ago, zlfan said:

I think olympus will stay in m43, as olympus is always for small camera bodies and lenses, ever since the film camera days. not sure about panasonic. gh7 is already very mature. gh8 needs in camera nd and 6k 60p prores raw hq to justify upgrading. i will not upgrade to gh8 unless it has nd. i think gh7 will last me at least 10 years, even further. i like to buy gear last very long term, because i don't like the hassle to sell my gears on ebay. 

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.

1 hour ago, zlfan said:

seems to me that in the current paradigm small formats are getting more and more popular, due to the better stabilization and smaller total rig size, m43 cams, 1 inch cams and iphones, half inch go pros, etc. 

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.

5 hours ago, zlfan said:

 

this is the last one. I will not post YouTube test any more. 

seems to my eyes, ibis wise,

1. s1h is significantly better than s5

2. surprisingly, gh5 is significantly better than s5 (gh5 ibis is really out of my expectation)

3. s5 is better than Nikon and Sony. 

IBIS on Panasonic M43 cameras will always be better than the IBIS of their full frame counterparts because of the smaller sensor. Still the IBIS in the original S5 was very good. The S5II cut the IBIS gap, but it still couldn't compete with the GH6, G9 or the GH7. Panasonic full frame IBIS is still head and shoulders above everyone else though.

9 hours ago, zlfan said:

this guy tested s5ii using the latest firmware. his conclusion is that if the talent is just walking, s5iix ibis using e-stab high at s35 crop can be gimbal like. the footage seems smooth to my eyes. this is really good. as I remember that the steadicam can only do 50mm well, over 50mm it is hard to stabilize. 

I say this as a S5II X owner... a lot of people saying this (and there are more than one) are Panasonic shills.

The stabilization is great, it's why I own the camera, but we're getting a bit ridiculous. 

Less youtube shill videos plz.

21 minutes ago, kye said:

It's like this:

AF step 1: analyse the frame and choose a thing to focus on
AF step 2: adjust the focus motor until that thing is in focus

PDAF and CDAF are in step 2.

The pulsing is a symptom of CDAF in step 2, because it goes back and forth looking for the point where the thing is least blurry.

All the subject recognition such as person-AF, eye-AF, animal-eye-AF, etc are all part of step 1.

I suspect that CDAF systems are using a lot of processor time to do the CDAF analysis, and that takes processor time away from the subject recognition that happens in step 1.  This would explain why CDAF tends to move the focus point slower than PDAF.  I suspect that if you had a dedicated processor for step 1 then the overall differences in performances would be greatly reduced, which would mean that the majority of issues are economics, not CDAF vs PDAF.

Don't get me wrong, we should be choosing the best focus system, which is LiDAR > PDAF > CDAF, but saying that the differences in real use are CDAF vs PDAF is about as correct as saying that the differences between 13Mbps 4K on YT and 3Mbps 1080p on YT is because of the resolution difference.

I agree with pretty much all of this. Honestly we dumb the conversation down when we just talk about PDAF or CDAF, as if each implementation is equal to one another when that simply isn't true. Look at Fuji. It switched to PDAF what, 6 years ago? Yet it still isn't very good. We also ignore that CDAF's hit rate in stills was pretty much on par with PDAF, meaning the issue was largely video related and that issues like pulsing were issues with CDAF in general.

Panasonic built on years and years of fine tuning their auto focusing algorithms and technology, which were always pretty solid, and merely switched how the focusing is done. Do I wish they'd done it earlier? Yes, if only because I got sick of people (mostly people that were never going to use their cameras anyway) complaining about it. 

50 minutes ago, zlfan said:

the best of the old mirrorless may have good enough resolution, but lacks in dr severely. also the evf and lcd resolution are outdated. 

I don't even think they lack in resolution. There are old cameras with 1080p that still look good to me, among them the original BMPCC, C100, and the GH3 (and hacked GH2). They might not have the higher resolution or the DR of cameras today, but they have pleasing images that hold up. In fact, from a pure image standpoint, the BMPCC was my favorite camera I've ever owned. It's the other quality of life things that made me move on more than the resolution or dynamic range. Other cameras had a "good enough" image, but better battery life, IBIS, auto focus, audio preamps, etc. were all worth the trade off. I could pull out my GH5 with minimal rigging and get 2 hours of record time, amazing IBIS, good enough auto focus, and all the other things that made my job significantly easier.

5 minutes ago, zlfan said:

wide dr is Sony's traditional strength, especially the fx line.

The gap has really closed, and the fx3 is just an A7sIII, which at this point is a 4 year old camera. A camera that came out last year should be close to a 4 year old one!