eatstoomuchjam

Part of the problem is that the difference in prices is enough that the impatient might just decide to ditch their Lumix gear and buy Nikon. "You can have the same sensor, but with worse RS and a little more DR, and btw, it costs almost 2x as much" is not the selling point that one might think.

To be clear, the specs of the camera, as understood from leaks, are fine. They're not bad and they're not doom and gloom. They're just... not great and they're mostly not too exciting. Put the spec sheet for this camera against the spec sheets for most other cameras in the same price range and reactions will generally range from "Oh, OK" to "Well, that's alright." That's the real problem. There's nothing in that spec sheet that makes people want to sell their Sony to move to Panasonic. There's nothing in that spec sheet that makes people want to sell their Canon and jump to Panasonic. There's nothing... etc Nikon ... etc.

Which sites? The stuff I see on l-rumors.com basically matches up to what's been posted here - an incredibly mediocre camera which, if the price rumors are true, will not be at an extremely competitive price.

I think I fell asleep reading that. It'll be interesting to see if having the first native ISO at 100 juices the tested DR numbers a bit, but as MrSMW said, having the second native ISO as low as 800 is both weird and not what a lot of people are going to want. That seems to be dooming the camera to shitty low-light performance, either because of a ton of noise or because the camera eats the noise internally and there's no detail (and that's coming from the owner of at least one camera with a single native ISO of 800!). (Edit: Just saw MurtlandPhoto's response and 640/5000 would be a lot more appropriate/useful!) Otherwise, not a single one of those specs really stands out from a bunch of cameras that are already on the market. The fact that the 4kp120 options are only in APS-C mode or 2.4:1 is even a bit sad, given that the Z8 and R5 II can do it in 16:9 and even the ZV-E1 can do it with only a small (10%? Something like that) crop. This seems to be another entry in the "if you already have a big investment in L-mount lenses, maybe you don't have to sell them, but it's not going to bring you into the system" category.

Well, other than 32-bit audio, Fuji. And often at a much lower price. And honestly a lot of people, me included, have no reason to give a shit whether the camera captures 32-bit audio. Most of my shoots are on sets with separate sound being captured and we sync by timecode so other than hopefully not sounding awful for viewing dailies, the sound captured by the camera is mostly ornamental. I should also add that most of those audio engineers, despite having 32-bit capable recorders, just record 24-bit anyway because "the files get too big" (which usually gets a sad laugh from me, looking at my camera recording 6k or 8k raw). In short, I don't need my camera to become a better sound recorder. If I were doing more run and gun interview sort of stuff, then maybe. Plus, as far as I can remember, 32-bit audio requires an extra device sold for $500. At that point, it's not all that meaningfully different than the cheaper and similar-sized Zoom F3 ($300) which I could just mount on any camera, record secondary 32-bit audio, and feed a clean signal from it into the camera's mic/line in to record at 24-bit in-camera. Then I would have perfectly decent audio in the camera and if something clipped in such a way that I wanted 32-bit, I could just pull the SD card from the F3. Anyway. Keep in mind that if we're talking about a $3,800 camera like the S1R II, it's also in competition with cameras like the (cheaper) Komodo which does open gate (though with a 17:9 sensor, but it can also crop down if you want anamorphic), allows baking in a LUT, can record ProRes, has nearly every monitoring tool (including the surprisingly useful traffic light monitoring system). And a $3,800, the S1R II is really not that far off from the Ronin 4D ($5,000), Canon C80 ($5,500), and Sony FX6 ($6,000). It's a great and capable camera - and I've seen at least one filmmaker who bought it to pair with his R4D (as I expected since the sensors are identical or close to it) as a much more portable travel camera, but Panasonic really either need to focus on the value for money segment (S9 being a good example) or offer cameras with truly compelling features that others don't have in the same range (internal ND, etc). Otherwise, not only isn't there a compelling reason to pick them up, there's also less time spent educating people on why you're not using Sony.

All fair points. And the Z8 also supports 8kp60, I think, and probably with similar DR/RS/etc to the R5 or R5 II. My default is to think in terms of RF mount because I have some cameras with it. There are some small native autofocus lenses, FWIW, but everybody ignores them... and not without reason. They're about as interesting as a loaf of bread. I don't hate the 35/1.8 or the 50/1.8, though. The used prices are what's tempted me on multiple occasions. Yes, and using it with my M mount lenses is the specific thing that I find tempting. The body size and shape is very Leica-like and I don't have much desire to spend $6,000 on a Leica body which has specs identical to a Lumix that is half the price which, in turn, has specs identical to a camera I already own (or could buy for $1,800 on the used market). 😅

And not to belabor the R5 II, but... the R5 II can also do 4kp120 in some sort of line skipped or pixel binned full sensor width mode. And for video, it can do 8kp60 raw internally with 15.5ms readout, great dynamic range, and nice colors SOOC. It's not a perfect camera and specs aren't everything, but outside of people who are already invested in L mount, it's still hard to know which users are going to run out and buy the S1 II, just based on what specs I've seen so far. Sure, the S9 could absolutely be better! But at least Panasonic went out for a segment that really didn't include a lot of cameras and where there's demand. Tiny full frame 6K camera with a nice sensor for $1,400 brand new? Fantastic. And form factor that looks a lot like a Leica M and can use M mount glass? Also fantastic. I've been really close to buying it a few times and every time, I talk myself out of it by looking at camera size comparisons to my R5 and reminding myself that the S9 isn't so much smaller (and most of what makes the R5 bigger is the EVF which, as you've pointed out, is a really nice thing to have). That'd be even weirder - a brand new $5,000 camera to "compete" with a $3,900 camera that's already 4 years old. Meanwhile, there's a Pyxis 12K out there for about the same price and also available with L mount - which shoots super high quality 8K footage or 4K footage with no crop and without binning. Or a C80 available for only $500 more shooting 6K with triple native ISO, fantastic DR, professional I/O, and internal ND's. That'd be another "who's this camera for?" release.

At $3,800, I can't really figure out who is the target market. If I have $3,800 in my pocket and want a hybrid camera, I'm not buying the S1 II. If in the Panasonic ecosystem, it'd be the S1R II. And if not, the R5 II or the Z8. If I don't want a hybrid camera, now they're competing against a Komodo (plus accessories). Komodo isn't full frame, but it's closer to APS-H than APS-C and has global shutter and records in a raw format that I can import to my editor without converting to cDNG. So... what would be the selling point for a camera that will be apparently in an S5-like body, but cost just about the same as a different higher-resolution camera also in an S5-like body? I guess it'll have less rolling shutter if it's the Z6 III sensor. Is "come get a little less rolling shutter" a big selling point in 2025? I get the S9 - cheap full frame with great image quality. I get the S1R II - high resolution full frame with 8k video to compete with the other major players. I could even somewhat get the S1 IIe - if they add "professional" I/O ports like SDI and dedicated timecode, then it's an S5 II that fits better into mid-range shoots. But the S1 II, if described as above? I'm boggled.

I have no idea how marketing really works or what effective marketing looks like (sales, of course, but I have no insights there). But in theory, leaks get people all psyched to watch the release video. It gets them free airtime on dozens of podcasts, discussions on tons of message boards, etc. The real problem comes when the hype has been cranked up to ... well, a solid 7.3 (it is Panasonic, after all) and the release is a 4. If people are hoping that Panasonic is about to drop an S1H II and they come out with the S9, there's instead unhappiness and backlash and almost all of the release day coverage is people complaining about the camera. And then, like the S9, people start to come around and say "Oh, that's actually a nice camera." If Panasonic just teed up "we have a new ultra-small camera for creators coming," the day 1 reception might be delight instead of dismay!

In many cases, I'm pretty sure that the leaks are actually part of the marketing strategy for the manufacturers. They just want to be able to control how and when the leaks come out. Look how the trickle of leaks has inspired discussion on this forum. If Panasonic simply said they were releasing a camera on May 14 and then released it on that day with no leaks, it would be discussed here for maybe a week after (maybe less judging by the reactions above) and then a bit more when real people start receiving them. Instead, it's discussed for more than 2 weeks. The latam leak seems legit accidental, though - and I can't see it now. Judging by the discussion around it, I don't think I care much about that. Guessing it'll be a 6K camera that looks a lot like a camera (to judge by the leaked photos) and will have some fans and some detractors.

> Let alone replaced the S1H II I had on loan, which promptly bricked itself. @Andrew Reid This a typo or a hint of something to come?

Does it have to be a camcorder with integrated lens? If not, you might consider a Sony FS5 II, Sony FS7 II, or Canon C300 II. With a little more budget, it might look like a C70. I'm not sure of the price of entry-level power zooms for any of them, though. I'm also not sure if the Canons support LANC, but I think it's really likely that the Sonys do.

I got a couple of Back-Bones-modified action cams - one was a Hero 7 and the other, a modified Insta360 1" edition. The one I should have got was the RX0 II since it's also a 1" sensor. The main problem is that the tiny action camera screens are awful for focusing. The Insta360 has no HDMI output so I end up monitoring with my phone and the connection has a lot of latency. The image can be really nice once I get the focus right, but it drives me crazy to get there so I only rarely take it out. It's too bad because the camera's a really nice match for C-mount and D-mount lenses. The Hero 7 (or maybe it's a Hero 8?) does have an HDMI port, but the latency is even worse than the Insta360 over wifi. Also the sensor is smaller which makes even wide angle C mount lenses into telephoto. The RX0 II has a usable HDMI port, but after not really using the other two, there's no way I could bring myself to spend $1,500 for it. I also had ripped the lens off of another old GoPro and got some M12 (or whatever size it is) lenses to use with it. It had the same problem with being hard to use, though I liked the look of somewhat less wide M12 lenses a lot more than the one that the camera had some with.

That said, if a new one comes out, my YouTube feed will definitely let me know - and there's not a lot of interesting conversation to be had around a new action cameras. "So this one is a bit better than the last one and still has an obscenely wide angle lens? Cool. Cool cool cool." (That and since I already have a couple of 1" edition Insta360 One R's (upgraded to the RS brain), it's also really unlikely that I'll be in the market for a new action cam any time soon, not unless someone comes out with something crazy good - 5.7k not-so-wide angle with a "Leica" lens on a great big (comparatively!) sensor is more than enough for the above mentioned gimmick shots)

Your site, your rules, of course! Though I would say that depending on the definition of action cam, I've used them on set any number of times - even more now that the Osmo Pocket 3 is so good. But even for the more GoPro style... Someone's going to open up an old wood furnace door and peek in? Chuck in an action cam. It gets covered in soot? No biggie for an action cam. Director wants POV of a fist hitting someone's face and their POV as they fall to the ground? Action cam. Director wants to get the wheels of a car rolling through the mud from up close? Action cam. Really, just about any shot that I think has a high chance of breaking a nicer camera or where a better camera simply won't fit, I'll just drop in an action camera. Half the time, the shot never gets used, but the other half the time, the director loves it. There's no way in hell I'd use any current model action cam (except the Pocket 3 if that counts) to shoot more than a cutaway/b-roll bit, but they keep getting better and it's easier and easier to match their footage in a way that's not too jarring. There are a lot of creative uses - many of which are arguably gimmicky or hacky, but that comes down to a matter of taste.

The used OG FX3 might also cost less when the next gen is announced, even more so after a bunch of current FX3 shooters trade in toward the fancy new model.

Either the next gen will cost substantially more or they'll keep selling the 3a at a lower price after announcing the next generation for close to the same price. But your main point of "don't buy an FX3 right now" is fully valid. It's a 4-year old model. Other vendors have cameras that are highly competitive and arguably better. Sony needs to understand that failure to innovate (or slowness in innovation) is how they took so much business from Canon in the first place - and if their best idea for a "new" camera is to swap the display on an old one, the pendulum will be swinging back in short order.

One could make the argument that it should be the Sony Beta FX3. 😉

That's not necessarily different from now. I spent a decent amount of time in Sao Paulo, Brazil since I'm dating somebody from there - and the prices for most media there are a lot lower than in the US, even pre-tariff. It makes sense - in a country where a lot of people make the minimum wage of $300/month, asking people to spend $20 to rent a new release movie is just going to result in a lot of piracy. Asking people to spend $1-4 to rent it will result in a lot less piracy and a lot more people paying to see your film. Basically, do you want 100% of $2 or do you want 100% of $0. So - movie rental is already a sliding scale price-wise, depending on the country/region - presumably based on some inflection point, real or perceived, where people will either just bootleg or not watch it at all.

In my experience, if you're editing on a laptop - and especially if you want to do it while not plugged in, modern Macbooks are really hard to beat. My M2 Max is good enough that I no longer see any reason that I'd keep a desktop computer around (I still have one for gaming and if selling it wouldn't be a big pain, I'd probably do that since I boot it up about once per month). On the other hand, if you want the highest price to performance (and absolute highest performance) on a desktop computer, PC hardware is more powerful - and in many cases, you will be able to upgrade pieces instead of needing to upgrade the entire unit. As far as your proposed spec, I think you'll be unbalanced in favor of a very high-end processor and a mid-range graphics card. You might consider a somewhat lesser CPU, again knowing that upgrading in the future will be an option if needed. Do you plan to overclock the CPU? If not, there's not much benefit to a K vs non-K variant. One other consideration might be whether you plan to use any of the "AI" features that are being added to Resolve. If so, it might be worth considering one of the newer Intel Core Ultra chips (if the price difference isn't huge) since the main "benefit" of them over 14th generation is that they have a coprocessor for machine learning. I have no idea if Resolve can even use it yet, but even if it doesn't yet, it's a safe bet that BMD will add support in the near future. Anyway, that setup will be night and day faster than what you're using now. You definitely won't be going wrong with it.

They finally put up the new video about the Eve cameras. I didn't watch yet, but I expect most of the content will be similar to before.

There's been some discussion on this here today. The main takeaway is that nobody even understands what it means. How in the fuck can you put a tariff on a film? It doesn't even make sense. And what is a "foreign import?" If I drive across the border to Canada, shoot 3 minutes of footage, and add it to a 90-minute film that was otherwise shot and edited in the US, what's taxed? FWIW, it also would be a torpedo to the Canadian industry - and I suspect the tariffs were partly driven by spite at Canada for voting so strongly against his agenda. Anyway, the major studios are going to hate this. Aside from reducing costs by producing abroad, if other countries retaliate in kind, International returns on films are going to crater - and that's a huge percentage of their profits.

The latest episode of PetaPixel is "Shot on ????????" so... probably this camera. The footage looks about as usual for Chris and Jordan.

... and this is part of the problem. A lot of people will think that they just need to pick up a Ronin and they'll remake Adolescence. And yet, they won't be working with 3-4 camera ops, an entire lighting crew, huge drone + operator, car crane + operator, multiple sound engineers, etc. Local film competitions next year should be a little wild. 😅

That's simply not true. The focus motor is an additional $270 purchase. The 6K version of the Ronin 4D also doesn't come able to shoot ProRes RAW or 4444 XQ. For that, you'll need to add the ProSSD mount ($200) and a 1TB ProSSD ($800). For most MF lenses, you'd also need to buy a mount other than the one included with the camera - I haven't seen many DJI DL mount to anything else adapters. A Leica M mount costs $300 new. Used prices on most of the above are about 2/3 of new cost. The 8K version of the camera includes the mount and a ProSSD, but (if I remember right) not the motor. And while almost none of the cameras that I mentioned include ProRes RAW (except the S1R Mark II), a majority of them are capable of shooting raw (many of them in a format that works in Resolve without conversion (additional $80 fee for Raw Convertor license if PRR). For those that don't, you can buy a used Ninja V or Video Assist 12G for $200-500. For stabilization, you can add a $400 gimbal - though compared with using the R4D, it will be much more of a pain in the ass. On the other hand, most of the other cameras can support lenses weighing more than about 1000g which is about all the R4D can support if you want to use the 4th axis. External 5" screen? If you don't already have one sitting around, you can get one of equal or better quality to the R4D screen for about $200-300. Any of those other cameras can also be set up in such a way that they will be small/light/unintrusive. That's simply not possible with the R4D. The closest you'll come is the Flex unit which costs $900 and then you'll be in a backpack ($200-300 if you buy the official PGY Tech one) and still carrying a pretty big/obtrusive camera. The main advantage of the Ronin 4D is the integrated 4th axis which eliminates a lot of footstep motion and helps smooth things out on a car mount, etc. In my experience, it's better than using an EasyRig with the springy arm or a ReadyRig Nimbus - and can be used with either for even more smoothness. The second advantage of the R4D is that everything is tightly integrated. If you get a Gimbal with subject tracking, that'll be on a separate screen and is usually driven by a second camera rather than through the camera's lens. If you get a DJI Focus Pro or other Lidar-based manual focuser, that'll also be driven through a second camera and another screen. With the R4D, you can draw a box around a subject and turn on AF and when you start tracking, it will do so uncannily well... about 95% of the time, and randomly lose the subject the other 5%. It's a great single operator camera - but again, it's far from the device I'd choose as my only camera. If I could have only one, I'd take something else for sure. It would be my first choice for my second camera, though... hands down.