Jump to content
Andrew Reid

Shooting with the Panasonic S1 in Barcelona

Recommended Posts

EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
3 minutes ago, DBounce said:

@Towd I still believe the end days of M43 are drawing nearer. Look at Olympus's latest entry. Also the GH line will seemingly be taking a back seat to the newer S-line. At least it should given that the new S-line is Panasonics new flagship. 

Well, Olympus seems to be focusing on stills.  But the S1 doesn't seem to offer up much competition to Panasonic's two year old GH5 in regard to video.  So, saying the GH5 is taking a back seat feels premature.  Especially when Panasonic has said the S1 would not be focused on video, and now we've seen the specs that confirm that.

I understand a lot of people love the full frame look and want to use it.  Personally, I've shot some projects with full frame sensors back in the 5D mII days, and found it a huge PITA in post.  Maybe as autofocus improves it'll find some use for me again.

I personally just find so many downsides to it right now-- from slow read out speeds, to bad rolling shutter, to crop sensor recording, to difficulty nailing focus.  Just my observations and experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Towd said:

I understand a lot of people love the full frame look and want to use it.  Personally, I've shot some projects with full frame sensors back in the 5D mII days, and found it a huge PITA in post.  Maybe as autofocus improves it'll find some use for me again.

I personally just find so many downsides to it right now-- from slow read out speeds, to bad rolling shutter, to crop sensor recording, to difficulty nailing focus.  Just my observations and experience.

I will agree on that front. Full frame is to a large extent... overrated. However, it does have benefits when shooting in low light conditions. I think it's nice to have the options anyway. On a positive note, it's clear what Panasonic need to do to take the lead. Fix AF and add that dam flippy screen. If they do those two things, the S-Line will have more than a fighting chance. Like I said, the image out of the camera looks good and low-light is pretty amazing. 

Oh one last thing.... the system needs to be less costly... the price of admission is too high for what it is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@DBounceI agree, it would be nice for them to keep the costs under control for these smaller sensor offerings.  Although if the GH6 has better IBIS and some form of internal raw recording, I'd probably spring upwards of $3k for one.  😁

Of all the cameras released in the last six months, the Fuji XT3 looked like the most interesting to me.  But now that I've become a huge fan of IBIS on these small cameras, it didn't tick all the boxes for me in a way that made me want to try it.  I'm very curious to see what they offer in an X-H2 model though.   However, by the time it comes out, the GH6 may be just around the corner.

Also, based on your experience and some other stuff I've read, I'm a little wary of Fuji's build quality.  Nikon, Canon, and Panasonic all make bomb proof cameras.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DBounce said:

@Towd I still believe the end days of M43 are drawing nearer. Look at Olympus's latest entry. Also the GH line will seemingly be taking a back seat to the newer S-line. At least it should given that the new S-line is Panasonics new flagship. 

That has nothing to do with the state of M43. We're 2 years from the launch of the GH5, a M43 camera that is one of the most critically acclaimed and financially successful cameras from that period. The GH6, as long as it continues to innovate, will likely be as successful. There is no evidence that the GH series will be taking a backseat to the S series. It'd make no sense for it to. 

For whatever reason Olympus decided to release an old camera in a larger body, with hardly any new features and threw a $3000 price tag on it. It's a bummer, because it's another bad sign for Olympus, but I don't see how you can associate it with the health of M43.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that’s more Panasonic justifying their use of DfD contrast detection than the downsides of PDaf because despite image artefacts the market says people don’t seem to care or notice (or at least prefer better AF over image artefacts).

They must believe they have the capability to make DfD work. I think DfD af in the latest cameras does pretty good in most situations. I think as the processors get faster and AI rountines get better at tracking objects DfD might come into its own.

Or Panasonic is developing something else in the meantime and doesn’t want to pay licensing fees to Sony to incorporate PDAf tech in their sensors which means higher margins for them.

Its been good enough for me in the GH5s for when it made sense.

46 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

That has nothing to do with the state of M43. We're 2 years from the launch of the GH5, a M43 camera that is one of the most critically acclaimed and financially successful cameras from that period. The GH6, as long as it continues to innovate, will likely be as successful. There is no evidence that the GH series will be taking a backseat to the S series. It'd make no sense for it to. 

For whatever reason Olympus decided to release an old camera in a larger body, with hardly any new features and threw a $3000 price tag on it. It's a bummer, because it's another bad sign for Olympus, but I don't see how you can associate it with the health of M43.

Yes. I thinks it’s more Olympus dropping the ball a bit. Not that M4/3 is dead. I’m actually more sure we will see a video focused GH6 in the future. 

 

2 hours ago, DBounce said:

 Oh one last thing.... the system needs to be less costly... the price of admission is too high for what it is. 

I agree. I was surprised with that agressive pricing. Maybe release high and offer high discounts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

I think that’s more Panasonic justifying their use of DfD contrast detection than the downsides of PDaf because despite image artefacts the market says people don’t seem to care or notice (or at least prefer better AF over image artefacts).

They must believe they have the capability to make DfD work. I think DfD af in the latest cameras does pretty good in most situations. I think as the processors get faster and AI rountines get better at tracking objects DfD might come into its own.

Or Panasonic is developing something else in the meantime and doesn’t want to pay licensing fees to Sony to incorporate PDAf tech in their sensors which means higher margins for them.

Its been good enough for me in the GH5s for when it made sense.

I've found the latest firmware on the GH5 to have usable auto focus when it's necessary to use it. 

I think Panasonic has decided to bet on DfD. I think that's a mistake, but I'm guessing they have faith that they can get it to be as good as the competition. I'm skeptical, even with the improvements we've seen. Still I think the entire "Panasonic's auto focus is awful" is more people repeating over and over what others have been saying, as opposed to how good it currently is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

I've found the latest firmware on the GH5 to have usable auto focus when it's necessary to use it. 

I think Panasonic has decided to bet on DfD. I think that's a mistake, but I'm guessing they have faith that they can get it to be as good as the competition. I'm skeptical, even with the improvements we've seen. Still I think the entire "Panasonic's auto focus is awful" is more people repeating over and over what others have been saying, as opposed to how good it currently is. 

It seems like AI should be able to even the playing field if done right. I mean if the AI can detect a face, contrast shouldn't matter right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DBounce said:

@Towd I still believe the end days of M43 are drawing nearer. Look at Olympus's latest entry. Also the GH line will seemingly be taking a back seat to the newer S-line. At least it should given that the new S-line is Panasonics new flagship. 

An M43 system will always have a have a a size and cost advantage over full frame systems even if it's inferior in other areas. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Shirozina said:

An M43 system will always have a have a a size and cost advantage over full frame systems even if it's inferior in other areas. 

Not true! At least in body weight/size and price. GH5/GH5s/new Olympus are bigger, heavier, as expensive - as even some dSLRs are, and definitely a lot bigger and heavier than Z/A/a/NX cameras. Go check the numbers and you will see the truth. Cost, also. Even in the lower of the low there are full frame options now.

What that indicates is, that we haven't (not even close) fight the thermal monster yet. That applies to every digital appliance, especially to the ones that have to perform at the top of our digital performance capabilities, like cameras, editing laptops, military and industrial applications, e.t.c

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

Not true! At least in body weight/size and price. GH5/GH5s/new Olympus are bigger, heavier, as expensive - as even some dSLRs are, and definitely a lot bigger and heavier than Z/A/a/NX cameras. Go check the numbers and you will see the truth. Cost, also. Even in the lower of the low there are full frame options now.

What that indicates is, that we haven't (not even close) fight the thermal monster yet. That applies to every digital appliance, especially to the ones that have to perform at the top of our digital performance capabilities, like cameras, editing laptops, military and industrial applications, e.t.c

Bodies yes - lenses no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Shirozina said:

Bodies yes - lenses no.

Correct. M43 cameras with lenses weigh significantly less than full frame cameras with lenses. If I recall some full frame lenses alone weigh more than a GH5 with the 12-35mm f 2.8. You really can't compare the two. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Shirozina said:

An M43 system will always have a have a a size and cost advantage over full frame systems even if it's inferior in other areas. 

I don't know the future, but judging from actual development rate/state, m43 has at least 1, or even closer to 2 year advanced (in comparison with FF hybrids) technology implementation in some very important areas for video shooting. So, it seems that m43 users at least have 2 years for dying preparation after last product achievements - which maybe it is not so bad.

(In that regard it is easier to digest the fact of absence of possibility to buy-it-now Pocket 4k until next New Year.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, anonim said:

I don't know the future, but judging from actual development rate/state, m43 has at least 1, or even closer to 2 year advanced (in comparison with FF hybrids) technology implementation in some very important areas for video shooting. So, it seems that m43 users at least have 2 years for dying preparation after last product achievements - which maybe it is not so bad.

(In that regard it is easier to digest the fact of absence of possibility to buy-it-now Pocket 4k until next New Year.)

Indeed -  the GH5 has been out for a while now and it's still as good or better than newer cameras in terms of key features like codec (400mbps 10bit 4.2.2) and IBS not to forget the low cost. I've got a P4k but it isn't a replacement for my GH5 by a long way.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Shirozina said:

Indeed -  the GH5 has been out for a while now and it's still as good or better than newer cameras in terms of key features like codec (400mbps 10bit 4.2.2) and IBS not to forget the low cost. I've got a P4k but it isn't a replacement for my GH5 by a long way.....

I'd be glad to buy and test/play P4k from you - and so to help you to survive from unpleasant feeling of living-close-to-dead-system :) 

The more cameras are coming I'm more astonished with mistake that Panasonic made with GH5 that so miscalculatingly overshadowed future products... luckily, they put in it that ugly-wobbling IBIS for preventing really professional shooters to use it and ruin their precious pure cinema art achievements.

But, then right from nowhere came mr Sage with his GHa lut and inject in stubborn GH5 vampire fresh blood...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Shirozina said:

Bodies yes - lenses no.

The new order will be:

APSC, Full Frame and Medium Format. Those preferring smaller lenses will have APSC. It just makes sense. M43 sounded great, but in practice, you loose a fair amount of light with those smaller lenses... so what to do? You buy a speedbooster so you can use full frame lenses... and there goes any advantage of smaller lenses.

Seriously, of those that own an M43 camera... how many of you also own a SB or are contemplating purchasing one?

46 minutes ago, anonim said:

(In that regard it is easier to digest the fact of absence of possibility to buy-it-now Pocket 4k until next New Year.)

That’s an excellent example of management that has zero idea how to run a business. This is why startups often replace the original founders with professional management once business picks up.

BMD is a joke of a company. In contrast, look at Atomos... the Ninja V is a pretty popular accessory... you can buy them at all the usual places and get one in hand today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, DBounce said:

The new order will be:

APSC, Full Frame and Medium Format. Those preferring smaller lenses with have APSC. It just makes sense. M43 sounded great, but in practice, you loose a fair amount of light with those smaller lenses... so what to do? You buy a speedbooster so you can use full frame lenses... and there goes any advantage of smaller lenses.

Seriously, of those that own an M43 camera... how many of you also own a SB or are contemplating purchasing one?

I have Voigtlanders, had SB's...

But, please, Mr, when you start statements with "The new order will be"... or "BM is joke of company" it seems to me that it is not quite logical to expect answers - because you are so sure you know everything and in advance make impossible any exchange of arguments.

(Moreover, I must admit that, personally, I'm especially sensible to such attitude in conversation - but, of course, that's my own problem and I'm sure someone else will applaude to such tough-definitive close-the-door words. Unfortunately, I'm so tender, soft, even meek, so always ready to recede in front of such authority... )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, DBounce said:

but in practice, you loose a fair amount of light with those smaller lenses

Huh - an F2.8 lens lets in the same amount of light per sensor area on an M43 camera as it does on a medium format camera. Yes I have a speed booster for times I may want a bit less DOF or want a faster lens for low light - and I have a speedbooster for my full frame and APS-S systems too for the same reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Shirozina said:

Huh - an F2.8 lens lets in the same amount of light per sensor area on an M43 camera as it does on a medium format camera. Yes I have a speed booster for times I may want a bit less DOF or want a faster lens for low light - and I have a speedbooster for my full frame and APS-S systems too for the same reason.

So to my point, overall volume of light is less on M43. And if you are downsampling or shooting high res stills the difference is real. Also, clearly size and weight advantages are things you yourself have admitted may need to be sacrificed for certain shots. So in practice you just end up carrying even more lenses... and having to switch between SB and native... occasionally forgetting that the SB is attached between lens switches...  been there... done that.

These silly arguments might make sense for someone who has never shot with M43, but frankly I've shot with M43 for years. So I am fully aware of the strengths and weakness of the system.  Native M43 glass always seems lacking when compared to full frame. I'm not saying good imagery cannot be produced with M43; I'm simply saying, it requires a bit more effort. It might appear strange, but I like when a camera is so easy to shoot with, it feels like cheating. That's a feeling I get with the 1DXMK2. It's just that dam good. Can't say the GH series ever instilled that level of confidence in me. 

Here's my concern with M43... it's becoming a harder case to make. Fuji's S35/APSC X-T3 offers better coverage... without the need for a SB, outputs 10 Bit and is $1300 bucks. If there is a size/weight cost advantage to be seen in this example, all three must go to the more affordable Fuji. There are some markets that seem to be heating up... I would say those would be Full Frame, with the release of mirrorless offerings from most of the major players... then APSC... with the runaway success of the X-T3, and lastly Medium Format... which is seeing some quite affordable offerings being released. I do not have a crystal ball, but if I were a betting man, I would not be betting on M43 to be a force moving forward. I also think Panasonic did themselves a disservice by holding back on S1/R... No flippy screen was a nail in the coffin for many would be purchasers. Poor AF for video was a terrible decision. IMO, usability trumps ultimate image quality; as the former means you actually produce content, whereas the latter means you get to please pixel peepers that spend their time blowing up frames to 400%... who watches movies like that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DBounce said:

So to my point, overall volume of light is less on M43. And if you are downsampling or shooting high res stills the difference is real. Also, clearly size and weight advantages are things you yourself have admitted may need to be sacrificed for certain shots. So in practice you just end up carrying even more lenses... and having to switch between SB and native... occasionally forgetting that the SB is attached between lens switches...  been there... done that.

These silly arguments might make sense for someone who has never shot with M43, but frankly I've shot with M43 for years. So I am fully aware of the strengths and weakness of the system.  Native M43 glass always seems lacking when compared to full frame. I'm not saying good imagery cannot be produced with M43; I'm simply saying, it requires a bit more effort. It might appear strange, but I like when a camera is so easy to shoot with, it feels like cheating. That's a feeling I get with the 1DXMK2. It's just that dam good. Can't say the GH series ever instilled that level of confidence in me. 

Here's my concern with M43... it's becoming a harder case to make. Fuji's S35/APSC X-T3 offers better coverage... without the need for a SB, outputs 10 Bit and is $1300 bucks. If there is a size/weight cost advantage to be seen in this example, all three must go to the more affordable Fuji. There are some markets that seem to be heating up... I would say those would be Full Frame, with the release of mirrorless offerings from most of the major players... then APSC... with the runaway success of the X-T3, and lastly Medium Format... which is seeing some quite affordable offerings being released. I do not have a crystal ball, but if I were a betting man, I would not be betting on M43 to be a force moving forward. I also think Panasonic did themselves a disservice by holding back on S1/R... No flippy screen was a nail in the coffin for many would be purchasers. Poor AF for video was a terrible decision. IMO, usability trumps ultimate image quality; as the former means you actually produce content, whereas the latter means you get to please pixel peepers that spend their time blowing up frames to 400%... who watches movies like that?

Since when has 'volume of light' been a factor in image quality ( or any factor at all)? I never shoot stills on my GH5 so it's not an issue with high res. I carry far less lenses with M43 than I do with my full frame kit. 12-40 + 35-100 can cover everything and is way smaller and lighter than 24-70 and 70-200 EF lenses on my full frame still kit. I have shot with M43, APS-C,full frame and Medium format but  I've never come across an instance when I have found glass 'lacking' due to it being a particular format. There is good and bad glass in all formats. Naturally if you like shallow focus shots this is harder on the smaller formats but so is getting deep focus on larger formats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...