GH6 MONSTER Sensor Rumour by Adroidlad

[Thpriest]

12 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

No, the 50-200 is harder to manually focus for me. I really wish Panasonic would add linear focus by wire support like the S1. The 10-25 has much better control with the focus clutch for whatever reason.

Well Panasonic has shown it can do IBIS with dual gain sensor tech in a full frame. So, they would be smart to try for that in the GH6.

I love my GH5S. If I had an option to get GH5S with IBIS as a second camera...I'd be all over it.

Exactly my thoughts.

The 10-25 1.7 has really opened up the possibilities for m43. But I think Panasonic needs to apply the same logic (manual focus clutch, aperture ring, etc) to it's flagship zoom lenses. This lens shows there is an appetite for larger faster zooms for m43. A 50-100 (or 35-100) f2 with a manual clutch and we are all smiling. 

The problem with the GH5S is that there are no fast wider zooms with IS and a manual clutch (fly by wire is useless for run n gun video). Although the Olympus 12-100 f4 IS could be interesting. I wish their 12-40 had IS. It's a very nice lens.

[Video Hummus]

6 hours ago, Thpriest said:

The 10-25 1.7 has really opened up the possibilities for m43. But I think Panasonic needs to apply the same logic (manual focus clutch, aperture ring, etc) to it's flagship zoom lenses. This lens shows there is an appetite for larger faster zooms for m43. A 50-100 (or 35-100) f2 with a manual clutch and we are all smiling. 

I agree. It appears they are incorporating a few features in all the new S lenses. Manual focus clutch with a linear focus choice and parfocal abilities by using the AF system to “fake” an optically parfocal lens.

11 hours ago, Thpriest said:

The problem with the GH5S is that there are no fast wider zooms with IS

I get it. But OIS in a wide lens didn’t really make sense. I suspect adding OIS to the 10-25 just made it too bulky, especially when the GH5/G9/EM1.2 cameras have such good IBIS already.

Bottom line is if DoF is on the top of your list then MFT is not your best option.

For me, MFT makes all the right trade offs for what I need and want. And as camera phones have shown the future is in computational photography. I’m sure there will be a time where I can shoot on a MFT camera and select a few extra stops of DoF in camera with a push of a button.

 

[kye]

On 9/29/2019 at 4:42 AM, Video Hummus said:

Bottom line is if DoF is on the top of your list then MFT is not your best option.

True, but some people are after better low-light rather than shallow DoF.  In this sense, MFT is better than FF because an MFT lens at F1.4 will have an exposure around T1.4 and the DoF equivalent of a FF F2.8 lens, whereas the FF lens at F1.4 will have an exposure around T1.4 and the DoF of an F1.4 lens.  This means that (ISO performance being equal, which is another whole topic) the MFT lens will have a deeper DoF than the FF equivalent lens at the same exposure, or you can stop down the FF lens to match the DoF but now you need a higher ISO on the camera.

This is why people say that FF lenses are harder to focus manually, it's because if you match exposure values then the FF lens has a much thinner DoF than cropped sensors.  In low-light this is an advantage of MFT lenses over FF.

 

[Thpriest]

34 minutes ago, kye said:

True, but some people are after better low-light rather than shallow DoF.  In this sense, MFT is better than FF because an MFT lens at F1.4 will have an exposure around T1.4 and the DoF equivalent of a FF F2.8 lens, whereas the FF lens at F1.4 will have an exposure around T1.4 and the DoF of an F1.4 lens.  This means that (ISO performance being equal, which is another whole topic) the MFT lens will have a deeper DoF than the FF equivalent lens at the same exposure, or you can stop down the FF lens to match the DoF but now you need a higher ISO on the camera.

This is why people say that FF lenses are harder to focus manually, it's because if you match exposure values then the FF lens has a much thinner DoF than cropped sensors.  In low-light this is an advantage of MFT lenses over FF.

 

This is important. It's not so much dof (the Voigtlanders offer that anyway) but general low light performance that I think many people are after. If the camera has good lowlight you can then use the lens of your choice rather than being forced to use the Voigtlanders or Speedboosted lenses.

[Yannick Willox]

On 9/28/2019 at 8:42 PM, Video Hummus said:

I agree. It appears they are incorporating a few features in all the new S lenses. Manual focus clutch with a linear focus choice and parfocal abilities by using the AF system to “fake” an optically parfocal lens.

I need to correct this. The new lenses ARE parfocal. The 12-60 on the P4K is still parfocal, without continuous AF.

[Video Hummus]

5 hours ago, kye said:

True, but some people are after better low-light rather than shallow DoF.  In this sense, MFT is better than FF because an MFT lens at F1.4 will have an exposure around T1.4 and the DoF equivalent of a FF F2.8 lens, whereas the FF lens at F1.4 will have an exposure around T1.4 and the DoF of an F1.4 lens.  This means that (ISO performance being equal, which is another whole topic) the MFT lens will have a deeper DoF than the FF equivalent lens at the same exposure, or you can stop down the FF lens to match the DoF but now you need a higher ISO on the camera.

This is why people say that FF lenses are harder to focus manually, it's because if you match exposure values then the FF lens has a much thinner DoF than cropped sensors.  In low-light this is an advantage of MFT lenses over FF.

 

Thanks for pointing this out kye. I haven’t often thought of this advantage. I think it’s also one of the reasons having exceptional AF system on full frame and medium format are even more important. 

5 hours ago, Yannick Willox said:

I need to correct this. The new lenses ARE parfocal. The 12-60 on the P4K is still parfocal, without continuous AF.

I’m talking about the S lenses.

Watch this interview with Matt from Panasonic. At 54:00 minutes in Matt addresses how they are making the new S lenses.

https://youtu.be/lQ2cuFfcWB8?t=54m

The pro lenses Matt specifically says they are not parfocal but have parfocal abilities because they are doing some focusing tricks with the focusing elements, even in manually focus, to achieve parfocal behavior (timestamp at 56:00)

A true optically parfocal lens would be huge. Like the fujinon cine lenses.