MrSMW

I’d ignore the 300 euro difference (pretend it does not exist or they were the same price) and then decide which suited my needs best. If I had any of the f1.2 or 1.7 lenses, probably the G9. If I shot an equal amount of stills and both stills and video in low light, the S5.

Yes I know and am not disagreeing but also curious if this feature is anything more than a dedicated dial…which I suspect it is, rather than what you get with a dedicated mono camera. Regardless, how much difference can there be and a conversion from raw is probably going to offer more anyway?

Many small cheap LED lights have built in options like this. I use it all the time shooting dancing pictures and video at weddings. There are single colour flashing options, multi colour, lightning effects, emergency services, fire… I’d buy 2 and have one set to lightning flashing one angle and the other set to a colour of your choice flashing from another angle. The randomness of the pair should achieve what you are looking for?

I’m still trying to decide if this feature is a gimmick or not because of course you can set any modern camera to shoot raw + Jpeg and then select any B&W option any model offers. With the Zf, they have made it a feature by having it at the flick of a switch. I used it for my first photo walk actually and then edited the colour raw files side by side with the B&W Jpegs. The B&W Jpegs were/are really nice but on a typical shoot, I want every…or at least the greater majority in colour so makes more sense to me to see and shoot in colour and then do my B&W versions from select colour edited pics. But then again, there is something to be said for seeing an entire shoot in B&W through the viewfinder and only later revealing the results in colour… Not decided yet. I’m off to Ireland for a week later today and am planning on taking the B&W approach and may very well continue with this approach if only as one more point of separation between shooting stills and video on the same job. I will also be testing out it’s video capability and especially the IBIS because if it is better than that of the S5ii as on paper it is supposed to be, there is a chance I might shoot Nikon video in 2024 when as things stand, the plan is Nikon stills and Lumix video…

That's really all that's missing for the Zf, ie, the most recent lenses don't look the part, apart from the 28 and 40 SE versions. It would be great if they could pop out a 70 and a 90 at least, even if just f2.8 OK, there is some older F Mount stuff with the optional adapter and it all looks the part but without modern AF, coatings etc, not what some folks are looking for. I'm one of the latter and currently toying with what I do for my second companion camera option and have narrowed it down to so far: Option 01 = A used Z9 + Tamron 35-150mm f2-2.8 with the Tamron (adapted unless they bring it out in Z Mount) 20-40mm f2.8...but we're talking 8.5k euros minimum to purchase, or, Option 02 = A used Z6ii with battery grip + adapted Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 G2 (because it's better than the Tamrikon 70-180) + the 17-28mm f2.8, which is around 4.5-5k euros, or, Option 03 = A second Zf body with pairing of Nikkor Z 105mm f2.8 and 28mm f2.8 SE at around 3.5-4k euros as both of the lenses are available used. The first option has the most all round potential and longevity built into it and is the ultimate hybrid set up, so perfect for me. The second option ticks most of the above, but has less flexibility trading essentially the 35-150 for the 70-180. At certain points in the day, this is not ideal. The third option on one level, perhaps even the most important one, is the most photo-centric and really the point of my at least partial switch from fully Lumix to a Lumix (video) and Nikon (stills) set up. The whole point of the Zf for me is not to wallow in some kind of nostalgia at the expense of usability, but actually get back that feeling of actually being a photographer again at the same time as being a videographer. Hence my separation of the two systems. I'm not a fan of zooms for stills though they make better sense for me for video, so a 2 camera + zoom video kit plus 2 camera + primes stills set up, works for me. I'm still researching the 105mm, but it doesn't look entirely out of keeping (a factor) and it's looking like Option 03 is probably the one I will settle on, ie, 2x Zf + 28 + 40 + 105 primes. If only the 105mm worked with the 1.4x and 2x adapters, but unlike the Sigma equivalent, it doesn't sadly 😔

Hello 👋

In a study by Me et al, earlier this evening, my conclusion is that some folks over-analyse some things and as a result, spout BS. I on the other hand, had an enjoyable walk/photoshoot this afternoon that neither made me feel ‘warm’ or ‘cold’ or ‘fuzzy nostalgic’, with the side benefit of some exercise, fresh air and Vitamin D. Which is probably more than some sad fcuker got bashing his keyboard in his parents spare bedroom. I did however have Pet Shop Boys greatest hits on Spotify earlier and wallowed in a bit of late 80’s / early 90’s musical nostalgia 😉

I meant more along the workflow lines as in raw workflow with photography is to coin a phrase, a piece of piss to me as I have been doing it so long and I was wondering if because of that, I might find a raw video workflow something I could easily adapt to. One day, I'll have a play...

That’s about as much as I wish to do also. Shoot for as consistent output as I can, then drop on a LUT that takes me most of the way and then fiddle with the exposure, temp, contrast, lows, mids, highs, add my subtle grade LUT, final tweak, done. Having said that, the photographer in me is intrigued by the use of raw for video because maybe with 20+ years of experience shooting raw for stills… Or maybe raw video doesn’t work quite the same?

Full circle achieved... Starting 36 years ago, I spent 5 years shooting and in the dark room with the camera on the left and then after a 10 year break from the industry, returned to it shooting weddings with one camera loaded with colour and the other, B&W. How far have we come now that it can do both, without ever having to load or change a roll of film and the cost of doing the equivalent, absolutely nothing. And at a flick of a switch, 4k video with up to 8 stops of IBIS. Other than a quick set up and play, not had a chance to properly put it through it's paces yet but it's got some mojo...

Which reminds me... 😘

I find that it is pretty rare these days to find any kind of real connection with something that is arguably, just a lump of metal of metal and plastic. Says the person who has not even handled one yet... As mentioned once or twice before, despite having owned dozens and dozens of cameras, the only time I have ever felt a camera was 'made' for me, was the original X100. Nothing has even come close since. Liked a few and even 'loved' a few others, but never with quite that same degree of connection. The spec aside (which is great), having come from that almost grip-less X100 and rangefinderesque background of X Pro bodies with small lenses, I already know. Sometimes, you just do. And like that original X100, it kind of came out of nowhere. If the Zf is not a 'X100 on steroids' experience for me, then I will gladly eat large mouthfuls of keyboard humble pie. Isn't going to happen.

1 of 3 has revealed himself in public.

D Day is tomorrow Amazon France assures me, after several delays due to stock. It will then become my principal stills camera with the 40mm f2 for every day and candid work, the Tamron 35-150mm f2/2.8 for ceremonies, speeches and couple stuff plus the Tamron 20-40mm f2.8 (adapted unless they bring out a Z Mount option within the next 5-6 months) for my wide requirements, but I will not now be getting a Z9 body to accompany it. At least not until next Winter soonest. Finances more than anything with even used Z9's still at 5.5k+ here in France, I can't justify it after a stupidly high unexpected tax bill due to a mistake on the tax people's side 😒 It comes down to a year of occasional lens swaps, maybe 5-6 times over a 12 hour typical shoot, or spend 5.5k. My head says I can't swing that. Ideally, I'd flip everything and go all in on Nikon as my heart has gone back to them and for me, it ticks all of my boxes, but instead, 2024 will now be a hybrid year of Nikon for stills and Lumix for video. This is no bad thing as Lumix did and still does shine for me. The all singing all dancing wunderkind that is the S1H is going back into primary video unit role with one S5ii for longer static stuff and gimbal, and then selling the other S5ii and 3x now redundant lenses. It's a slightly tighter, but more capable set up, especially on the stills side and whilst not the absolute ideal, ticks all my boxes. Over the course of next year, I will try out some Zf video capability though just to see how it stacks up against the S5ii. Anyone else getting a Zf? I can think of at least 3 other people who I think will be tempted at the very least...

@OleB I've just started watching your series on the Sigma FP and it's really great what you have done and shared so big thumbs up from me. I'm almost tempted with the FP (or L) but just one or two, 'too many' little quirks and issues that I can't quite get around for my needs. Love the form factor with the Smallrig cage with wooden grip...which is as much as I'd want to rig it out and I know there is an aftermarket tilt option, but then I compare it to the S5ii and for my needs, sadly the Lumix 'wins'. Sadly, because I'd switch to...or rather, would already be using the FP (or L). Your series is still interesting however so thanks for that.

One other factor to consider of course is how sensor size affects light gathering capability and for my needs why I draw the line at APSC/S35 and prefer full frame sensors. With 4/3rds and smaller, you generally are forced to shoot as wide open and on as fast as you can get primes, especially in lower light. I'd rather have the option to choose...so 6k 30p is my new default which also allows me to do a 80% slight slow mo often referred to as 'the dreamy look' where it's only slightly slower than reality, - again within my ethos of 'slightly enhanced reality' alongside a shallower DOF and tweaked colours, ie, no extremes of anything.

It depends on the project/desired outcome, so with say a documentary or talking head piece or certain commercial pieces, something closer to real life might be more appropriate, but for someone like me who shoots weddings, we might want to slightly distort or ‘enhance’ reality. We might want to do this by pushing a slightly narrower DOF and tweak those colours just enough to no longer be ‘real’ but at the same time, because our eyes (brains) adjust to other realities fairly quickly, these ‘not real life’ tweaks become reality. There’s pushing things well beyond reality and then there is capturing reality as accurately as possible, with everything else in between and it comes down to personal preference or client wishes. My personal preference is ‘slightly beyond reality but not so far that it jars’. It’s all very subjective of course…

Ha, I was about to say the same, this having been my main approach for around 5-6 years now. But I should add, more by default than design based on certain camera choices. Some would argue, I should have chosen my cameras based around other factors and not let this be a default, but overall, for me, it’s about balance and compromise not outright ‘what I’d do in an ideal scenario with the necessary funds’. On the topic of SDOF, I have always been a fan. I have always liked and been drawn to a shallower DOF throughout my 23+ year career in photography and 13+ in video. I’ve never been a fan of hardcore uber-shallow DOF in my own work, but probably more because I have rarely owned anything faster than f1.4 lenses in full-frame terms. For the last few years, I have shoot FF stills and a mix of FF and S35 video, but in 2024, reducing the amount of S35 dramatically as I am moving away from using so much 50% slow mo in my work which due to my kit choices, has meant using S35. I’ve decided I prefer the full frame look and that coming from 6k, so that’s where I am going. Lenses/DOF, with S35, I was mostly shooting f2/2.8/4 and I will continue to do the same but with even less apparent DOF using FF instead of S35.

Same as it’s ever been, people buy people. Unless it’s groceries or on-line or one service is waaaaay more expensive than the rest and cannot be justified. My industry is full of venues and planners who don’t have referral lists of the best of the best, or balanced lists for various budgets, but instead, their chums. But in many service rather than goods situations, many if not most, will go with the first person they connect with. In my experience.

Well, going to have to skip the movie…unless I can find it on in Dublin next weekend as the only cinemas in my region of Northern France showing it in original language, are doing so next week for one night only, while I am away. It’s ‘Flowers’ tonight instead. All 3.5 hours of it 🤔

Yes I know and agree. I simply mean a better starting point conversion LUT than most brands supply, ie, to get it in the ballpark in the first place. For instance, in my experience, the conversion LUTs from Gamut and Phantom, are both waaaaay superior to the one Lumix provide. I am just surprised that as this is an ongoing situation with every camera release, they don’t just do a deal with someone like Gamut or Phantom and have them do their base conversion LUT for them? Ultimately I don’t care as I’ll go use the alternative and pay a few bucks for that but it surprises me the big boys don’t do better in house in the first place… Yes I know and get that just as above, never can quite get my head round why most manufacturers basic conversion LUT’s are just a bit shit! The reality is for every 1 of you Kye,,ie, someone who wants to DIY, there are 19 others who are not necessarily lazy and not expecting a single magic one click approach, but somewhere in between. I have an outdoor (so much easier) almost one click approach nailed down but it’s the interior where mixed lighting mainly, is less consistent. My approach this year has been: Log outdoors, log indoors during daylight, flat profile in and out after dark/extreme low light. I’m either going to go log outdoors in daylight + profile everywhere else, or back to profile all the time. Consistency at the point of capture (as much as possible anyway and for most of my work, I have to work with the conditions I am given as either I don’t have the time to set up or control situations, or those situations are so short and varied, there isn’t any point anyway) and then in the edit as in of course I want my work to have a certain look, but within a certain timescale because you know, time is money!

The latter. Handling is for the entire day, battery swaps mere seconds.

Not sure about the first part of your statement there Mark but agree with the second. Lumix’s option for the S5ii and S1H is not great and I recently took a look at Nikon’s on the basis I might be going there for video (possibly) on top of the stills (definitely) and from the examples of theirs, it was horrendous. I’m not sure why they don’t just pay someone with clearly far more skill than they do for this kind of thing as after all, what would it cost (very little) and we’re talking global releases here. I’m sure if any brand popped out a stellar conversion LUT and a series of great conversion LUTS, they’d sell more cameras. Which is kind of the point is it not, to sell more stuff?! I am interested in this topic, though not quite to the level of some, but will be exploring it more over my off season whether I stick with Lumix or go Nikon for my video needs. Especially if I go Nikon actually as I’d be starting from scratch and at a place I am mostly happy (or know what I need to do) with Lumix.

I think we are long since past the point where your average Sony/Canon/Nikon/Fuji/Whatever mirrorless is more than a few simple clicks or sliders away from being indistinguishable on-line. I've seen so many side by side comparisons and can't see any difference at all such as in, "look how much better Y is compared with X!" and it looks near enough identical to me. Same with the stills side. Waaaay too much emphasis on SOOC unedited files. Comparing like for like across brands. Of course we can find an increasing proportional difference if we start comparing apples with kumquats... Now things like difference in IBIS capability or wobble etc, some very clear differences, but modern sensors these days? Nah.