New L-Mount Lumix (cinema?) Camera

[berkenboom]

21 minutes ago, Simon Young said:

If you have access to the white papers then share them here.

or wait untill tomorrow, when its the official release.

[MrSMW]

55 minutes ago, ND64 said:

Dual native ISO100/800

Is that correct?

If so, doesn’t interest me and much prefer my 640/4000 on the S5ii etc. 

The new camera at least has FF 60p instead of the crop and yes, I’d like that, but then again, I really like my 6k 30p OG which I have already.

 

[MurtlandPhoto]

13 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

Is that correct?

If so, doesn’t interest me and much prefer my 640/4000 on the S5ii etc. 

The new camera at least has FF 60p instead of the crop and yes, I’d like that, but then again, I really like my 6k 30p OG which I have already.

 

I'm seeing folks on other forums say in VLOG it's 640/5000

[eatstoomuchjam]

1 hour ago, ND64 said:

So here is the deal:

 

15-stop dynamic range V-LOG (dynamic range enhancement mode on)

14+ stops dynamic range V-LOG (dynamic range enhancement mode off)

24M new sensor

Full frame 6K30p OG, 5.9K60p 17:9, 5.1K60p 3:2, 4.8K60p 4:3, 4K120p 16:9/17:9, FHD240p

APS-C 3.3K 120p 4:3, 4K120p 16:9/17:9, FHD240p

S&Q 6K 60fps, 4K 17:9 75fps, 4K 2.4:1 120fps, FHD 240fpsFF

120Hz 5.76 million dot EVF

779-point phase focus

Dual native ISO100/800

Five-axis image stabilization with 8 stops in the center and 7 stops in the periphery

1/8000s mechanical shutter

70fps continuous shooting with electronic shutter, 10fps mechanical shutter

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.

[ND64]

1 hour ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

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.

Its amazing that this situation doesn't change a bit with every new product announcement.

[MrSMW]

It’s all just a bit, well to be blunt, a bit fucking odd, what is going on on Planet Lumix right now.

[Thpriest]

Looking at the rumours on other sites I think tomorrow might be a lot more positive than some think.

[eatstoomuchjam]

9 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

Looking at the rumours on other sites I think tomorrow might be a lot more positive than some think.

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.

[Thpriest]

12 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

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.

In the comments there are some links etc. Buuuuut, it all seems to have been translated from Chinese so there is probably a lot of room for error!

[Andrew Reid]

38 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

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.

https://www.eoshd.com/news/full-panasonic-s1-ii-and-s1-iie-specs-leak-as-usual-all-18-pages-of-it/

Mediocre is the word...

So it's just an S5 II with a faster sensor then...

A mediocre slightly unergonomic mid-range body that feels and looks like it should cost £1500.

A high-end price £3500

Also very high-end lens pricing

No eND.

No ND of any description.

I also think that the lack of proprietary raw format aka Canon Raw, N-RAW, Redcode, BRAW is holding Panasonic back. Get in there with your own codec my dear. Oh, wait, they didn't buy RED so have lost that game already.

I do have a soft spot for the overall feature-set though...

The wide-aspect ratios in both video (2.4:1) and for stills.

The dual dynamic range modes and anamorphic.

Open gate and stuff.

Real-time LUTs.

But it's in such a badly marketed uninspired package, which is a real shame as I am passionate about Panasonic and their remaining unique features.

[berkenboom]

1 hour ago, Thpriest said:

Looking at the rumours on other sites I think tomorrow might be a lot more positive than some think.

Maybe the camera itself is a lot better then the doom and gloom forums suggest,
However, I just cant see the the suggested current price point being "reasonable"

The market has changed, the first EOS R and Nikon Z were not feature rich, I think they wanted to protect the dlsr market.

Nowadays however, why buys an dslr?  Almost everybody I know shoots mirrorless, and Canon Nikon and Sony make great camera's, for competitive prices. Its like Panasonic expects people to pay a hefty premium for features that "could have been a firmware upgrade"

Maybe thats a bit of a hyperbole, and that Panasonic also innovated with hardware, but my point still stands: if features like arri log, luts, shutter angle, etc, are not commonly found on other brands, then why are those still selling like hot cakes?
 

[eatstoomuchjam]

17 minutes ago, berkenboom said:

Maybe the camera itself is a lot better then the doom and gloom forums suggest,

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.