Jump to content

Panasonic GH6 rumours


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, kye said:

Maybe yeah.

I thought the purpose of film-making equipment was to shoot with it?

Even if Panasonic goes under tomorrow, and MFT is declared dead by everyone I know, I'll still be able to go outside and shoot images with my "worthless" GH5 and "paperweight" MFT lenses.

True, but I’d rather have a worthless GH6 to shoot 6K or 8K and HFR 4K with my paperweight MFT lenses before they float to the top of the water belly up. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 577
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

More DR, internal ProRes and external RAW would be preferably to more pixels.

At 8:50 of this video posted today the GH5 successor is specifically mentioned to be in development.      

It is interesting that the top three spots on Andrew's list of the most popular cameras on EOSHD are all M43 cameras.  Yet every day we have new posts bemoaning the impending death of the format.  And

Posted Images

47 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

True, but I’d rather have a worthless GH6 to shoot 6K or 8K and HFR 4K with my paperweight MFT lenses before they float to the top of the water belly up. 

Of course.

I just think it's strange when people get confused between buying tools to create a product and buying stocks as part of an investment portfolio.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kye said:

Of course.

I just think it's strange when people get confused between buying tools to create a product and buying stocks as part of an investment portfolio.

Speaking of stock congratulate to people who bought it yesterday as today it rebounds. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, kye said:

Maybe yeah.

I thought the purpose of film-making equipment was to shoot with it?

Even if Panasonic goes under tomorrow, and MFT is declared dead by everyone I know, I'll still be able to go outside and shoot images with my "worthless" GH5 and "paperweight" MFT lenses.

I'm a business owner, I don't have the luxury to just worry about shooting. It makes no sense for me, as a business owner, to stay invested in a system that doesn't have a future. My equipment needs to retain some value so that, should the need arise, I can sell it to help pay for upgrades. 

I want to stay in the M43 system. But I need Panasonic to give me some assurances that they're not going to abandon me. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, kye said:

Of course.

I just think it's strange when people get confused between buying tools to create a product and buying stocks as part of an investment portfolio.

I got ya. Yeah, I’m guilty of using the “investment” terminology too. But I agree, they are rarely investments except in rare circumstances of be coming a collectible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One could argue glass is sort of an “investment” if it can be carried on down the line from one model to the next. Certainly better to spend $2000 on a lens that could last 10+ years then a camera body that is obsolete or no longer becomes competitive for your needs after 3 years or even less.

Lenses (and the money I spent on them) is the primary reason I’m sticking with MFT for awhile, assuming new MFT cameras are built, because its 1) cheaper 2) still above what I use my camera for.

It’s really hard to make a decision to switch because its not just the $2000 or ($4000 in the case of the R5) its the many thousands more to be spent on focal lengths for that mount. Easily as much as a nice used car in the case of RF!

That’s why I agree with @Andrew Reid’s suggestion for Sigma to release a universally adaptable lens mount. The main problem I see sigma having is push back and lockout from manufactures mount protocols because they feel threatened by it. I feel like this is the main reason they haven’t done it. They have also probably signed licensing agreements with each mount as well that bars them from doing so. They would have to wait until the agreement was up and a whole new mount to be released where both parties know the protocol implementation hasn’t been shared with Sigma for them to be free and clear from probably being sued. Big risk. Easier to sell more lenses for all the different mounts.

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

That’s why I agree with @Andrew Reid’s suggestion for Sigma to release a universally adaptable lens mount. The main problem I see sigma having is push back and lockout from manufactures mount protocols because they feel threatened by it. I feel like this is the main reason they haven’t done it.

Or maybe because a person would only buy one lens for the foresseable future, instead of buy a new one when they change systems?

Love Sigma, but let's not forget that they are a business, and needs to sell products.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Márcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

Or maybe because a person would only buy one lens for the foresseable future, instead of buy a new one when they change systems?

Love Sigma, but let's not forget that they are a business, and needs to sell products.

Very true.

they could do a limited edition run, with a hefty value markup added, and a line of accessories for each mount (vND adapter etc...) To take advantage of the flange distances on the mirrorless mounts. Sounds like a lot of work and hassle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

I'm a business owner, I don't have the luxury to just worry about shooting. It makes no sense for me, as a business owner, to stay invested in a system that doesn't have a future. My equipment needs to retain some value so that, should the need arise, I can sell it to help pay for upgrades. 

I want to stay in the M43 system. But I need Panasonic to give me some assurances that they're not going to abandon me. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask. 

I've known people who bought cars that were 1-2 years old with low kms, drove them for a year or so, then sold them and bought another 1-2 years old.  They were essentially buying once the car had lost its "brand new" value and then sold them a year later for basically the same price, because the value of the car was essentially a flat spot during that period, so it was a way of kind of 'leasing' a car for free.  I say 'leasing' as they had to be super careful and not get any marks on them or anything, otherwise the value goes down.

Do you employ a similar logic in your camera equipment?

Technology goes down in value so quickly that I basically assume that if I'm going to own something for long enough to use it in any meaningful way then it's going to reduce in value to the point where it's not worth my time to sell it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kye said:

I've known people who bought cars that were 1-2 years old with low kms, drove them for a year or so, then sold them and bought another 1-2 years old.  They were essentially buying once the car had lost its "brand new" value and then sold them a year later for basically the same price, because the value of the car was essentially a flat spot during that period, so it was a way of kind of 'leasing' a car for free.  I say 'leasing' as they had to be super careful and not get any marks on them or anything, otherwise the value goes down.

Do you employ a similar logic in your camera equipment?

Technology goes down in value so quickly that I basically assume that if I'm going to own something for long enough to use it in any meaningful way then it's going to reduce in value to the point where it's not worth my time to sell it.

You're simplifying it too much. 

I've owned both versions of the 12-35 f2.8 for years. If I were to sell both of them right now I'd still be able to get at least 75% of what I paid for them. That value should hold steady for as long as the system is competitive and popular. If the system though looks like it has no future, the value of those lenses will plummet because unlike other glass they aren't easily adaptable. Could I run the cameras and lenses into the ground? Yeah, but it doesn't make sense if I can sell them and instead use them to invest in a system that will stick around. 

I want M43 to stick around and to thrive, I'd just like concrete assurances from Panasonic that it has a real future for professionals. That's not unreasonable, and I'm unsure why you think it's unnecessary. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

You're simplifying it too much. 

I've owned both versions of the 12-35 f2.8 for years. If I were to sell both of them right now I'd still be able to get at least 75% of what I paid for them. That value should hold steady for as long as the system is competitive and popular. If the system though looks like it has no future, the value of those lenses will plummet because unlike other glass they aren't easily adaptable. Could I run the cameras and lenses into the ground? Yeah, but it doesn't make sense if I can sell them and instead use them to invest in a system that will stick around. 

I want M43 to stick around and to thrive, I'd just like concrete assurances from Panasonic that it has a real future for professionals. That's not unreasonable, and I'm unsure why you think it's unnecessary. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Makes sense, if you're finding flat spots in the value of things then sure.  

I don't think it's unnecessary for you to want some assurances from Panasonic, but I do think it's unrealistic.  

There's a reason that 'corporate speak' exists, just like there's a reason that there's 'politician speak'.  Politicians are trained in PR and phrase things so that no small snippet or sentence fragment can be quoted out of context, because if that happens then there's a media storm and it's bad for them, because that's how politics work.  It's a similar thing for corporates, there is a different set of rules, somewhere between the PR implications of perception and the sharks in the water of whatever political environment that anyone with power is inevitably swimming in.  From the outside things often make no sense, but if you're aware of the complex dynamics involved internally then things make sense.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hoodlum said:

At 8:50 of this video posted today the GH5 successor is specifically mentioned to be in development. 

Excellent observation.

I am also guessing, the next GH model may be slightly smaller and have much higher frame rates (4k at 120 to 240fps). The resolution may remain similar. 

 

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...