Jump to content

Panasonic S5 Entry Level Full Frame seems to be real...


Recommended Posts

I don't know. I expect crippling on lower end products. Just not the extent Canon does it. Making a $4000 Camera only do reliable line skipped 4k in 2020 is silly.

The difference between the Canon C300 MK3 and the EOS R5 is huge compared to the difference between an S1 and a EVA1 imho. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 749
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Kaboom, it's arrived! Sorry, no YouTube unboxing video or reading of spec list, just an initial impression whilst the battery is charging. I've come from 8-9 years of Fuji as my main cameras

Little Photoshop size comparison between this and the S1H. Quite smaller !

...and a few days later, I'm keeping it after all. In fact, a pair of them are going to be my main workhorses as I intended. I have been trying to find a workaround and not just a 'kidding m

Posted Images

I see a difference between segmentation and crippling. Both can be frustrating, but segmentation can be fine as long as it's not abused. 

Panasonic has always done a good job, I think, when it comes to segmentation. That 2016-2018 period specifically saw a variety of options, at a bunch of reasonable price points. The G85, which is still a very good camera even today, was fairly priced, and was a great value for the time with excellent features. If you needed more control, etc. you could spend more and get the GH5, but you were still capable of doing maybe 80% of what the GH5 could do with the G85. While some would argue the GH5 was priced too high, especially once the A7iii was released, those features the GH5 had were unmatched at that price point. 

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

I see a difference between segmentation and crippling. Both can be frustrating, but segmentation can be fine as long as it's not abused. 

Panasonic has always done a good job, I think, when it comes to segmentation. That 2016-2018 period specifically saw a variety of options, at a bunch of reasonable price points. The G85, which is still a very good camera even today, was fairly priced, and was a great value for the time with excellent features. If you needed more control, etc. you could spend more and get the GH5, but you were still capable of doing maybe 80% of what the GH5 could do with the G85. While some would argue the GH5 was priced too high, especially once the A7iii was released, those features the GH5 had were unmatched at that price point. 

The GH5 was also very well featured even against their cinema cameras as is the S1 and soon to be S5

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I bought the s1 used "like new" for $1600 earlier this month. It came with v-log too! 

If the new s5 is $2000 (assuming) new then I still think the s1 was a much better buy. 

I like big camera bodies and it's one of the reasons I got an s1, although a small reason, it still mattered to me. I wanted a tanky daily driver work horse of a camera! Something with great battery life, a bright screen, big body, good evf, 

So after thinking about the s5, it honestly doesn't really sound like the camera I wanted anyway, the s1 literally is the camera I wanted, so I'm happy with my purchase. I learned I'm able to return my s1 if i want but I'm choosing not too. 

4k 60p 10bit is neat, but I hardly even care about 4k 60p, even then, 8bit 60p looks fantastic! 

I still think the s1 is the nicer more professional camera overall and its used prices are so good that it wins against the s5 when it comes to cost. Again, assuming the s5 will be $2000. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MicahMahaffey said:

Honestly, I bought the s1 used "like new" for $1600 earlier this month. It came with v-log too! 

If the new s5 is $2000 (assuming) new then I still think the s1 was a much better buy. 

I like big camera bodies and it's one of the reasons I got an s1, although a small reason, it still mattered to me. I wanted a tanky daily driver work horse of a camera! Something with great battery life, a bright screen, big body, good evf, 

So after thinking about the s5, it honestly doesn't really sound like the camera I wanted anyway, the s1 literally is the camera I wanted, so I'm happy with my purchase. I learned I'm able to return my s1 if i want but I'm choosing not too. 

4k 60p 10bit is neat, but I hardly even care about 4k 60p, even then, 8bit 60p looks fantastic! 

I still think the s1 is the nicer more professional camera overall and its used prices are so good that it wins against the s5 when it comes to cost. Again, assuming the s5 will be $2000. 

Yes we'll see. I got an S1 plus 24-105 f4 for $1900 so I am not unhappy with it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Panasonic’s L mount push still seems quixotic to me. Canon, Nikon, and Sony users won’t move as the benefits aren’t sufficient to justify repurchasing their lens stable, and the AF’s second rate. And there’s no cross-comparability with m4/3, so what’s the incentive there?

Strategically, I’d say going all in on m4/3 makes more sense. The smaller sensor has significant advantages, so long as they can capitalize on them: better IBIS, faster readout, deeper DOF, more compact body & lens packages, and, hey, less heat. Leave 135 format to the other three. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Origami101 said:

Panasonic’s L mount push still seems quixotic to me. Canon, Nikon, and Sony users won’t move as the benefits aren’t sufficient to justify repurchasing their lens stable, and the AF’s second rate. And there’s no cross-comparability with m4/3, so what’s the incentive there?

Strategically, I’d say going all in on m4/3 makes more sense. The smaller sensor has significant advantages, so long as they can capitalize on them: better IBIS, faster readout, deeper DOF, more compact body & lens packages, and, hey, less heat. Leave 135 format to the other three. 

There are some advantages, as you have mentioned. But on the flip side of the coin, there are disadvantages not easily overcome. Event work in low light is a big one. Getting shallow DOF without f/.95 glass in another. If you are shooting controlled narratives, it may not be a big deal to you as you can always light your talent. But in event work, you gotta deal with what light is available. 

I have the Panasonic GH5S and the S1H so I currently shoot with both, but if the S5 checks enough boxes, I'll go full frame all the way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Origami101 said:

Panasonic’s L mount push still seems quixotic to me. Canon, Nikon, and Sony users won’t move as the benefits aren’t sufficient to justify repurchasing their lens stable, and the AF’s second rate. And there’s no cross-comparability with m4/3, so what’s the incentive there?

Strategically, I’d say going all in on m4/3 makes more sense. The smaller sensor has significant advantages, so long as they can capitalize on them: better IBIS, faster readout, deeper DOF, more compact body & lens packages, and, hey, less heat. Leave 135 format to the other three. 

For me m/43 is just too small, More often than not when doing narrative work we usually end up in really tight spaces due to budget limitations and having a full frame FOV is necessary for capturing the whole frame. At least for the work I do. 

I switched from my A cam being a sony to now being a panasonic. Ive already been using manual focus on canon glass for years so the switch to pany was pretty easy.  especially with their IBIS. 

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

For me m/43 is just too small, More often than not when doing narrative work we usually end up in really tight spaces due to budget limitations and having a full frame FOV is necessary for capturing the whole frame. At least for the work I do.

Oh, you have (dedicated) wide angle lenses on MFT end as well! ;- )

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

For me m/43 is just too small, More often than not when doing narrative work we usually end up in really tight spaces due to budget limitations and having a full frame FOV is necessary for capturing the whole frame. At least for the work I do. 

I have seen this argument "for" FF35 for many many years, and it is just ridiculous and wrong to say "I need a full frame FoV". 

All it proves is you made poor lens selections going into the project. 

Did you have a 12mm? How about a 10mm or 8mm?  All of these are easily accessible and even quite affordable. Don't blame the tools for user errors. 

Because you can get almost any FoV that you wish with MFT! From the Laowa 7.5mm f/2 (or even wider if not going rectilinear, there is a 2.3mm fisheye lens for MFT!) to the Olympus 150-400mm f/4.5 (or even longer!!). 

When did one of us last need greater than 800mm FF35 or wider rectilinear than 15mm FF35? (that's the same as 10mm S35!!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Baseless/clueless/nonsense indeed ; ) There's nothing crippled on MFT, as matter of fact, we cannot say the same on FF side today... LOL ;- )

To be straightforward... with the sensor used on GH5s/P4K, not even to justify the sensor size to achieve low light performance.

Coupled to fast glass, DOF applies too, so what is left? Only the price of the cameras and glass, that's it. The same way we have a defective offer on the new toy just arrived: strictly commercial reasons.

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

Baseless/clueless/nonsense indeed ; ) There's nothing crippled on MFT, as matter of fact, we cannot say the same on FF side today... LOL ;- )

To be straightforward... with the sensor used on GH5s/P4K, not even to justify the sensor size to achieve low light performance.

Coupled to fast glass, DOF applies too, so what is left? Only the price of the cameras and glass, that's it. The same way we have a defective offer on the new toy just arrived: strictly commercial reasons.

I agree, when I got my GH5 I did a lot of research and discovered the Voigtlander 17.5mm f 0.95 which has become my favorite video lens of all time. The shallow DOF that you can achieve on that lens is incredible and it turned my GH5 into a lowlight capable camera. For real estate and landscape I got the Olympus 7mm-14mm which nicely aligns with my Canon 16-35mm FF lens.

The main thing I dislike about the GH5 is the highlight rolloff...I'm not sure if it is so bad due to the sensor size or some other factor. I know my C200 with it's S35 sensor has incredible highlight rolloff. If the bad highlight rolloff is due to the sensor size then I would agree a larger sensor would be better but still would not need FF. If it is just due to the sensor in the GH5 then there is hope for a MFT sensor with better highlight rolloff. 

The MFT size has plenty of benefits over FF such as better battery life, lighter weight, no overheating issues, better rolling shutter control, much smaller lenses, easier for gimbal work, etc. This is why I wish Panasonic were announcing a GH6 right now instead of an S5; a GH6 with 4K120 and better highlight rolloff is far more interesting to me vs investing in yet another camera and lens system.

I have yet to be in a situation where my GH5 simply could not get a job done that could have been completed with a FF sensor. The one place though where I will always prefer my 5DIV over the GH5 is photography.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, herein2020 said:

I agree, when I got my GH5 I did a lot of research and discovered the Voigtlander 17.5mm f 0.95 which has become my favorite video lens of all time. The shallow DOF that you can achieve on that lens is incredible and it turned my GH5 into a lowlight capable camera. For real estate and landscape I got the Olympus 7mm-14mm which nicely aligns with my Canon 16-35mm FF lens.

The main thing I dislike about the GH5 is the highlight rolloff...I'm not sure if it is so bad due to the sensor size or some other factor. I know my C200 with it's S35 sensor has incredible highlight rolloff. If the bad highlight rolloff is due to the sensor size then I would agree a larger sensor would be better but still would not need FF. If it is just due to the sensor in the GH5 then there is hope for a MFT sensor with better highlight rolloff. 

The MFT size has plenty of benefits over FF such as better battery life, lighter weight, no overheating issues, better rolling shutter control, much smaller lenses, easier for gimbal work, etc. This is why I wish Panasonic were announcing a GH6 right now instead of an S5; a GH6 with 4K120 and better highlight rolloff is far more interesting to me vs investing in yet another camera and lens system.

I have yet to be in a situation where my GH5 simply could not get a job done that could have been completed with a FF sensor. The one place though where I will always prefer my 5DIV over the GH5 is photography.

I have the GH5 and the A7III and I find the highlight roll off of the A7III worse compared to the GH5. In most gammas, the highlight rolloff is terrible (better with S-LOG3 though)

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

I have seen this argument "for" FF35 for many many years, and it is just ridiculous and wrong to say "I need a full frame FoV". 

All it proves is you made poor lens selections going into the project. 

Did you have a 12mm? How about a 10mm or 8mm?  All of these are easily accessible and even quite affordable. Don't blame the tools for user errors. 

Because you can get almost any FoV that you wish with MFT! From the Laowa 7.5mm f/2 (or even wider if not going rectilinear, there is a 2.3mm fisheye lens for MFT!) to the Olympus 150-400mm f/4.5 (or even longer!!). 

When did one of us last need greater than 800mm FF35 or wider rectilinear than 15mm FF35? (that's the same as 10mm S35!!)

You're not wrong, you can slap a wide angle lens on a m/43 sensor. 

I've shot with plenty of m/43 cameras and we were always able to make it work. 

But.. for narrative work I dont want to just "make it work".. I want an optimal image without spending a long time trying to frame while maintaining some kind of dof. 

We have tight schedules on set and every second really does count. No matter what we'll always be working within our limitations as indie filmmakers and even industry pros. It's just how it is. So imo it's really important to reduce the number of things on set that are unneededly taking up more time than they should. 

The reality for me is that m/43 just isnt worth the hassle for most situations. 

Cant tell you how many times we've filmed in small 3 foot spaces and were forced to smash our m/43s camera up against the wall with a 10mm lens to get the shot. But even then the shot we wanted is so distorted from that 10mm that the emotional response we wanted from that scene is completely off. 

Its passable and obviously usable. But with a full frame camera it just opens up more flexibility in lens choice and framing option on set, which does make a huge difference, even more so than resolution and codecs. 

My view point is that the tools you use shouldn't compromise the final result or cost you more time on set. You should have creative freedom to shoot scenes how you want rather than just getting by with a work around. 

With that said, sometimes I still shoot on 4/3s because the aesthetic is great for some projects. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why you have to struggle with a 10mm lens and not with a 20mm one on FF : D I sincerely don't. Pardon me but looks like mere prejudice and misconception going on here. There's nothing limited on MFT, on the opposite, it is a much more affordable format and you have many more glass options. 

Codecs?!! WTH this should be or actually is connected with the sensor format??

Only resolution can justify a larger sensor size, not else! Not even low light today.

E :- )

 

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

I have the GH5 and the A7III and I find the highlight roll off of the A7III worse compared to the GH5. In most gammas, the highlight rolloff is terrible (better with S-LOG3 though)

That is interesting to hear, I've never owned a Sony so I have nothing to compare it to. I've also wondered if I bought the GH5 VLOG upgrade if it would help with the highlight rolloff, but as newer cameras came out I didn't want to keep investing in the GH5; it also irked me a bit that they included it with the GH5s yet wanted you to pay for it in the GH5.

 

1 hour ago, Emanuel said:

I don't see why you have to struggle with a 10mm lens and not with a 20mm one on FF : D I sincerely don't. Pardon me but looks like mere prejudice and misconception going on here. There's nothing limited on MFT, on the opposite, it is a much more affordable format and you have many more glass options. 

Codecs?!! WTH this should be or actually is connected with the sensor format??

Only resolution can justify a larger sensor size, not else! Not even low light today.

E :- )

 

If the GH6 comes out with the rumored 41MP sensor then even resolution won't be able to justify it. I think the only thing that will justify FF is if you want to use it as a hybrid camera.  Call me biased, but I could never see the GH5 replacing my FF body for photography. If you need a great hybrid then I can see using FF for both photography and video; but we all know how well these "hybrids" are working out so far.

I always find it interesting when people say they need FF for video when $50K Reds, top of the line cinema Canons, and $50K Arris still have a S35 sensor in them. But hey, to each their own, if FF works for you then that's great. MFT is working for what I need...until that perfect hybrid comes along.

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

I don't see why you have to struggle with a 10mm lens and not with a 20mm one on FF : D I sincerely don't. Pardon me but looks like mere prejudice and misconception going on here. There's nothing limited on MFT, on the opposite, it is a much more affordable format and you have many more glass options. 

Codecs?!! WTH this should be or actually is connected with the sensor format??

Only resolution can justify a larger sensor size, not else! Not even low light today.

E :- )

 

A 10mm has a very drastically different look than 20mm. Infact, a 10mm 2.8 lens on a m/43 body ends up being a 20mm 5.6 "look". Which is much different in visual style. Which affects EVERYTHING about how the story is perceived by the audience and their emotional response. So in order to capture the shot the way I imagined it, Its a struggle. If not impossible. More often than not, id just scrap my original vision and work with what I have. When using full frame, I find im MUCH less likely to end up in this type of situation. 

If all I had was a M/43 camera then id use it and I doubt most people would see a big difference. But If I had the choice, I wouldn't go smaller than 35mm full frame. 

I used to exclusively shoot super 35mm with M/43 as B cams and never even considered larger formats. I was happy with super 35 and mft cameras together.  So obviously I get what everyone is saying. Full frame is not "needed" but neither is 4k. Neither is good low light, neither is a fast PC. You can technically make a film with a phone and still have a great image. If all you have is a mft camera then don't hesitate to use it. 

I want to clarify that just because you use a m/43 camera doesn't mean you'll get low res or bad low light. Because let's be honest, that's kind of irrelevant now with how good camera have become. I'm just saying that if I had to choose between 1080 or 4k id choose 4k 99% of the time.  just like id pick full frame. 

But part of picking tools is picking the ones that help get your vision or your clients vision captured the quickest with the least amount of compromises made. For me, full frame does that. So do things like really good IBIS, really good low light, high resolutions for reframing and so on. Funny enough I don't use auto focus for anything except gimbal work, even though it can speed things up, Its just not my style. 

One day I plan to buy a medium format video capable camera and then who knows, I might think full frame is too small 😉 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, herein2020 said:

I've also wondered if I bought the GH5 VLOG upgrade if it would help with the highlight rolloff,

Absolutely. 

Any time you see a log profile with a higher than base ISO (400 in the case of GH5 V Log L versus 200 in the regular profiles) the camera is "underexposing" and then lifting to give more highlight headroom.

So aside from differences in the contrast curve (which might crush highlight detail in regular profiles), you will also get one more stop before clipping with V Log L. It has 4 stops above middle grey and many more below. And you can trade clean shadows for more highlights by intentionally underexposing further and lifting in post.

So it's worth it IMO

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, MicahMahaffey said:

For me m/43 is just too small, More often than not when doing narrative work we usually end up in really tight spaces due to budget limitations and having a full frame FOV is necessary for capturing the whole frame. At least for the work I do. 

I switched from my A cam being a sony to now being a panasonic. Ive already been using manual focus on canon glass for years so the switch to pany was pretty easy.  especially with their IBIS. 

Get a Speedbooster?

I'm using the Pocket4k (also M43 sensor) on jobs as a B Camera next to FX9's, Alexa Mini's, C300's, UMP G2's etc and haven't heard any complaints either on set or from post.

DP's have often commented on how nice the P4K image looks.

There are so many great lens choices from native anamorphic's to easily adapted full frame and cine lenses and everything in between.

I actually really like the M43 format for video capture, it's extremely versatile although if stills was my main game, i probably would go larger.

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...