eatstoomuchjam

Probably a good choice. The codecs that you can record to internal storage on the X-M5 are much better. A used Panasonic S9 would also be a nice choice if you want FF. Edit: OR not, I guess, if you want raw. I guess the S9 doesn't support raw over HDMI. 😕

Red are (or were) made in the US... or at least, the assembly is done here. Not sure about the individual components, but if that's the concern, then Sigma is no more ethical than anybody else who uses Sony sensors. https://petapixel.com/2017/11/30/red-cameras-made/

I'm glad to see this has been more "favorite cameras" vs "favorite manufacturers" since there's almost no reason to have a favorite manufacturer. My favorites that I have right now are the GFX 100 II for stills and the Komodo-X for motion pictures. For a smaller, more portable setup, I like my EOS R5 with Canon RF consumer primes and the 70-200/4L - or with Leica M primes. I also like the C70 a lot and look forward to the C80 hitting the used market (partly because it'll be a nicer match for the Leica M stuff than my APS-C gear).

Oh, and as far as 16:9 being phone-friendly, it seems like they're stretching a bit. My new phone (iPhone 16 Pro) is 19.5:9 which is closer to 2.17:1 - so flat aspect ratio (2:1) would be the closest to full screen and scope is less letterboxed than you might expect. 😃

I've definitely shot a bunch of stuff on the GFX 100 II using the 5.8K widescreen mode - that's the full sensor width and some sort of scope aspect ratio (can't remember exactly, but 2.3x anyway). I wouldn't call it faux-anamorphic, though, because of the lack of horizontal flares or funky rounded bokeh. In most cases, I prefer just to shoot 17:9 with frame guides set for a scope frame. That's how I've shot the last... bunch of short films that were delivered in scope. That comes with the bonus that the editor can move the frame up or down a little bit without having to punch in for it. Some of my cameras (Z Cam, RED) allow shooting in scope, but about the only reason I can see for using it would be to save space - and it's just not going to make a big difference for me to save the 25% or so. I have a set of nanomorphs (25/50/80) that I keep threatening to bring to some production, but given that the main cameras that I use these days (Komodo-X/Komodo/C70) all have 17:9 sensors, 1.5x anamorphic will put me at 2.8:1 which is wider than my collaborators will enjoy so we'll just be cropping left/right instead of top/bottom. Though I recently got a Dog Schidt (Helios 44-2) with a faux anamorphic aperture and I picked up a 1.33x anamorphic adapter to go with it. I might, at some point, shoot some low-priority project with it. I sort of like the combo.

OK, boomer.

That looks literally nothing like Gary, IN... ever. And yes, it is a real concern if human artists can take months to build something, only for a bunch of untalented fakers to shit out hundreds of AI imitations overnight afterward. If you think it's a concern that melodies in pop music are similar to progressions in music that's hundreds of years old, I would urge you to familiarize yourself with the concept of public domain. Anyway, as with other things, the main thing that will or won't kill AI for this sort of thing will be whether what it produces can be copyrighted. If Musk's stupid ego-stroking horseshit videos can't be copyrighted due to being generated by AI, there's nothing to stop internet users from drawing dicks all over them and reposting the next day or competitors using them, etc.

Nice whataboutism.

You might also want to consider whether the convenience of touching your production monitor to choose focus points is worth supporting a shitty company like Atomos.

For sure! It might be the camera that finally inspires me to pick up X-mount.

That's basically why I ended up ditching my Sigma fp and fp-l. By the time they were set up for any sort of reasonable shooting (external SSD + screen), they ended up a lot bigger than my Canon R5 (internal raw, screen can be rotated).

Now it's apparently a 1" camera that will be marketed as "half frame." That makes a lot more sense, but it's nothing revolutionary. It could be a bit interesting to see a modern compact with 1" sensor - like an updated RX100/ZV-1 or similar - though for me, a bit less interesting if they actually make the sensor vertical.

Right, but we're not talking about them releasing a film camera. We're talking about a digital camera that has a half frame sensor. 23.5x15.6mm and half frame is 18x24mm. They're basically the same size with the only difference being that half frame is naturally portrait orientation and being 4:3 ratio instead of 3:2. Does Sony even make a 18x24 sensor? Or is Fuji just going to take one of the bigger APS-C sensors and rotate it 90 degrees? It would seem to make more sense for them to go APS-H (similar to Red's S35) or go fixed lens FF or MF.

It's regrettable because cameras like the GH2 and GH5 were truly industry-leading in any number of ways. I loved both of them - but failure to continue innovating has let everybody else catch up or surpass them.

At some point, the ecosystem becomes relevant. Are Panasonic's bodies in the $1,500-2,500 range price-competitive with competition in a similar bracket? Sure. Do any/many of them offer compelling features in excess of the competition? Not really. In that range, I can get an R6 Mark II, A Z6 III, or an A7 IV. Just slightly out of that range, an R5 (currently about $2,900) or even a used Komodo (I can say from personal experience that they're now available on ebay for <$3,000 - my K-X now has a cute little brother). Those options would put me in RF mount, Z mount, and E mount which are all supported by vendors who are regularly releasing new cameras and show every sign of still being in the industry in 3-5 years. Fuji X mount is also an option in that price point and excellent, though there's no FF option if that's a requirement. On the other hand, if Panasonic folds or stops releasing new cameras, what are my other options in L mount? Leica are a combination of expensive as hell and seemingly reliant on Panasonic for their electronics. Sigma haven't released a new L mount camera since the fp-l in 2021. What does Panasonic offer that the others don't? In photo terms, not much that I can think of. In video terms, internal ProRes on some models? Fuji has it too, but again, if we're only looking at FF... ProRes could be useful for some working professionals, but for a lot of the kids, they're apt to be a lot more excited by internal raw on Canon and Nikon. Panasonic still have, I think, the best IBIS in the industry. Is that enough of a selling point? Judging by the sales numbers above, a big majority of customers say no. If I have $1,500 in my pocket to buy a camera, do I buy the S9 or the FX30? But also, as far as working pros go, these days, most are going to go Sony and of those that don't go Sony, most will go Canon. That's just how the industry has gone.

If the latest smoke signals coming from the Dolomites are to be believed, the new Fuji camera will be a half frame camera. If there are nominations for dumbest rumor of the decade, this might be it... and if it turns out to be true, the nomination can become dumbest camera of the decade... given that half frame is nearly exactly the same size as APS-C. Is there really so much demand for "give me a sensor that's about the same size, but 4:3 instead of 3:2?" https://www.fujirumors.com/this-is-the-mysterious-all-new-camera-to-be-launched-by-fujifilm-in-2025/

I didn't watch the presentation yet so sorry if this is a dumb question that I'll answer as soon as I've actually watched it later - So the S5D is the S5 (not the S5 II), but with some sort of integration with the DJI Lidar sensor that allows it to use the autofocus motor instead of DJI's focus gear? But since it's not the S5 II, no PDAF if you don't put on the DJI sensor? Which, to be clear, the DJI Lidar unit costs $600 on its own without the handle or focus motor ($999 for the "Creator combo" which includes all 3 and some cables and mounting hardware). Who is the target market? I get that they must have a bunch of S5 in their warehouse that they want to move, but... who wants this over PDAF in the S5 II?

Keep in mind that those numbers are for "cameras" and not for MILC. Like I've heard that the Canon V10 is is weirdly popular in some regions. What's less clear is whether that's all digital or not - I've heard that Instax sells crazy well, but I've not heard numbers associated with that.

What heresy - I can tell in both of those images that there are cupboards just a few feet behind him and he's in a kitchen! Any proper image with Toneh should be at f/0.95 and I shouldn't be able to tell if he's in a kitchen, at a lake, or mountaineering!

He just regurgitates the same rumors as are on a bunch of websites.

How dare you defame Toneh the great and Bokehfied? If he ever hears of it, he will cast a spell on you so that from here forward, every shot you take will have deep depth of field! 😆

I'm still very much of the opinion that at least some of the leaks come from the marketing departments at the camera companies. What better way to build hype for an upcoming release than to trickle out information? And what better way to gauge the reaction to upcoming new features than to watch the responses to those rumors? People are excited about something? Focus on it a lot more in your release announcement.

5.8k is full sensor width 2.35:1. I like to present in scope anyway so it's kind of perfect for me. It's also great for lenses which almost, but don't quite cover. 44x33. As far as manual focus FF lenses, I don't mind falloff much, but a hard vignette isn't great for me - and that's also where IBIS gets a bit problematic. When using lenses that just barely cover, sometimes IBIS means you'll have a weird cutoff near the edge of the frame since the sensor moved out of the image circle. The Minolta 58/1.4 that I mentioned above is one of the widest lenses that actually covers the full sensor and where I don't seem to get IBIS artifacts. I never really use it, aside from cropping the full sensor size image to panoramic/xpan, there's also the option to just use the ff mode which is still IIRC a 61-ish megapixel image. I've never had the Fringer AF adapter, but my Steelsring adapter has supported PDAF for years now - and I think my Techart might support it too (though Steelsring has been great). I don't know that Fringer's adapter was out when I bought them. I also have a Fotodiox VND adapter, but I don't think it supports PDAF. Autofocus in video mode is mediocre by modern standards. It's improved over the original, at least, but seems consistent with what people say about AF on the X-H2S and the similar. Fuji announced a firmware update the other day which seems mostly focused on improving continuous AF in video mode - supposed to come in November. I won't cry if it gets a bit closer to Canon/Sony reliability.

Completely off-topic, but that's my fault. I read the comments about fixed lens cameras and forgot it was a Panasonic thread. The dangers of reading a forum first thing in the morning! The extended DR mode 4k mode does have noticeably more DR. Unless something's moving pretty fast, I'll use it every time over the faster readout modes. Otherwise, I really like the 5.8k mode - I tend to like a wider aspect ratio. My favorite thing about the 8k mode, ironically, is that it's cropped (and I can still crop in more from there). It means that the 32-64/~26-52ish in FF terms now goes up to around 72mm in FF terms and for 4k output, around 140mm. I've been meaning to play with the Nanomorphs in 8K mode since at least some of them will probably cover it. For me, the biggest step up vs the OG is that it's a lot smaller. I left the OG behind on a number of trips because I would have needed a bigger bag. Even though I like it, unless there were a really specific reason to bring it, if going on set, I'd pick up the K-X (and soon the OG Komodo too unless that ebay seller sends me a box of bricks) or the C70 any day. The GFX still feels pretty clunky in comparison. But for travel/personal stuff, I'll grab it just about every time. It's by far the best hybrid camera I've ever touched. For my upcoming trip to Peru, I'm bringing it with the 32-64 and 23. If I weren't trying to travel really light, I'd bring the 110. The trip make my usual travel kit (sometimes with the 63/2.8 or a Minolta 58/1.4 to use at night). I find myself more apt to leave telephotos home, at least partly because I can crop a lot and still have something that would easily print to 8x10. I'm also bringing an Osmo Pocket 3 since I'll feel a lot less paranoid about leaving it propped up on something to film myself and my travel companion than I would the Fuji.

My GFX 100 II already records 8K. It's with a heavy crop and with unimpressive RS, but it's 8K at least.