Andrew Reid

You think camera companies make profit from selling used gear?! 🙂 The store shelves are what matter... And fact is, DSLR is dead as a dodo. Customers not interested. The few that are, are well served by eBay. Why the heck would the camera companies want to cannibalise and undercut their mirrorless range by making a DSLR and new F-mount lenses? I consider this discussion a bit stupid to be honest.

They have. The Z9 is the replacement for that. Everyone at the Olympics has switched to mirrorless, all the sports pros are now R1, R3, Z9, A1. D780 was the update... Basically a Z6, with same autofocus in live-view mode. They'd be mental to do another when you can use Nikon F-mount lenses on Z mount. By the way you know they discontinued F-mount lenses don't you? Same with Canon and EF. No more being made... ever. Which means no need for any more EF or F-mount cameras either.

It's an update to the G95, and they have given both these cameras USB C. That's necessary to comply with EU law and for them to continue to ship.

Did the R&D budget get slashed by 90% or something? Reasons not to panic: They brought out the GH7, new sensor and all Firmware team is going full pelt... In-camera LUTs, phase-detect AF, lots of new features S5 II and S9 were pretty decent for the price G9 II is a nice Micro Four Thirds swan-song New L-mount lenses have continued to be released Other things give more pause for thought: The total lack of rumours or leaks about new serious cameras, such as the S1H II The big 5 year gap Leica SL3 - basically a Panasonic with a fancy badge - came out nearly 12 months ago and still no S1R II Unresponsive in face of major new products from rivals So my conclusion is that Panasonic have partially quit the market. They have quit the high-end camera market, and will leave that to Leica. And in my opinion the affordable stuff... compacts, Micro Four Thirds, S9, etc. is going to be quite short-lived before they pull out entirely. I hope I'm wrong. Either way, making people believe you're poorly committed to L-mount (and high-end cameras in general) is a very bad marketing strategy.

Because M is where the profit and sales are. It's a success, going back decades. If you look at all the L-mount cameras they are hardly selling.

You are correct, they blew it with the marketing... And sort of with the product design, because had it looked a bit more serious with an EVF as well, it would have done very well. Only Panasonic can take something as powerful as an S1H, with an image that good, give it to us for $1500 and make a big fuck up of it. That you can soon get it for under $1k used is indeed a steal. The advertising is trying to capture a market that is perfectly happy with a high-end smartphone or a Sony ZV

So much good stuff for Sony FE at the moment... Tamron with the 20-40 2.8 and 35-150mm f2 monstrosity, Sony's own lenses (GM) expensive but bloody good, and the low-price non GM ones are performant as well. Techart AF adapter for all manual focus lenses is a game changer for me who wants character + convenience at same time, why bother with manual focus on another camera when you can bang it on the adapter? Nikon Z is similar, widest range of adapters, including to Sony E! The most flexible in terms of flange back distance, Nikon's own lenses are a mixed bag but all the nice Sigma Sony stuff is usable with the Megadap adapter for $250. So to the rest... Canon RF doesn't seem to be holding back the cameras at the moment, does it? I think things are starting to change though. RF line-up is dogshit. Either massive and hugely expensive, or cheap and shows it. There is absolutely no middle ground whatsoever. There's a total lack of third party options and adapters too. The autofocus Techart Leica M adapter doesn't exist either. Fuji have no full frame lenses, and the GFX lenses I avoid even though I'm a GFX 100 owner. That's because of the clinical perfection of the damn things, and the price. The 50mm F3.5 pancake is good, but the rest I would honestly pass over for SLR stuff and manual focus, get the right match and they work really well. On X mount, things are better... I've always liked the Fuji XF range and now there's some nice Sigma options as well, best APS-C lens mount by far but it ain't full frame. L-Mount, let's just say it's a good job they have Sigma on board because Panasonic and Leica don't know what the fuck they're doing. Micro Four Thirds mount, with Olympus gone and interest fading in the format, the writing is on the wall. What a great 15 years it has been though. Voigtlander Noktons, Speed Boosters, great options from Panasonic and Olympus, they had such a wide ecosystem even in 2014 in the good old GH4 days, wider than anyone even Sony E mount... And they now have no choice but to bin it! We see how fast a mount can die... Do many people still use Canon EF lenses on a metabones adapter? That was such a dominant system, and similarly for Nikon F mount and their DSLR lenses... Some fantastic stuff in there, no longer gets used. Future predictions: - Sony and Nikon are on the path to domination and will over take Canon - Leica will focus on M mount - M43 will be officially discontinued due to lack of lenses and mount support - Panasonic/Sigma/Leica alliance will break up... Each will go their own way - Canon RF will continue but they will not achieve the domination that EF mount did in the long run - Fuji GFX and X will continue, but long term it's a bit less clear

It'll be interesting to see what happens with Hasselblad, as at the moment they are a phone badge and a DJI subsidiary more than they are a medium format camera maker. Yes the occasional hit, but never more than about 5% market share which considering the hits is quite bad. - First mirrorless lens mount in the digital era (non-rangefinder) - First mirrorless camera (if you don't count rangefinders) - First hybrid camera - First affordable 4K mirrorless camera (GH4) - First to Mini DV - First with 10bit on a mainstream mirrorless camera (outside of Blackmagic niche) - With Leica and the original SL, only the second full frame mirrorless camera system after Sony a7 - Generally very good value for money So add it all up and you get jack shit thanks to Mr Marketing Geniuses with their MBAs. Too big, too fugly, too heavy, wrong AF system, and too long left on the shelf with no evolution in sight. They better have something proper special coming in 2025 or it's game over. I agree wholeheartedly. It will be a very sad day if Panasonic call it quits but the way it is going, they may be forced into it. Panasonic are a good company. The overall bosses have given the camera division a lot of leeway and time, the engineers themselves have been superb... marvellous... especially firmware and featureset... the problem lies purely in the product planning and marketing.

Coke is profitable, that's just sugar in water. Leica are a very small fish compared to bottled sugar. It's a vulnerable position, one change in the wind and it's dead. 80% of their customers are fickle. The other 20% are hardcore photographers who understand that the product isn't just a fashion symbol.

The thing with Fuji is they are not so much consciously targeting hipsters and the camera designs are not a fake clone of a prior era. They are designing photography tool classics in good taste, for the modern era. Would be great it Canon could do the same and not a separate niche line, but an EOS R5 Mark II which FEELS more like a camera and less like an inkjet fucking printer.

Bump

Leica should have been bought out. It would have benefited them a lot to have the investment. Panasonic should have dived in and bought them outright, worth it for the brand alone. Then, carefully, they should have retired the Lumix brand and gone full on Leica. Their high-end cameras would now have much greater appeal and branding sexiness, and their lower-end cameras would be like mini Leica Ms in terms of looks, but Fuji X100 VI in terms of price and specs. Yes, you do have to be careful when coming out with less than high-end stuff with a Leica badge. But nobody seems to have told Leica that. At the end of the day I think there's a lot of brain rot at these companies. Nobody is prepared to implement a clear vision or strategy, it's all done by committee so nobody has to take the blame if it doesn't work. Look at Olympus. What a great brand flushed down the toilet that was.

The product strategy has been a mess as well, for a long time. They diluted the brand with too many cheapo compacts and low-end mirrorless cameras, a bit like how Samsung did. The GH line was their saving grace, a lot of pros took the GH4 seriously as a small 4K camera. It also came along at a time when video was becoming a serious deal on stills cameras, a must-have feature. Panasonic was leading in hybrid video/stills, until Sony brought out the a7s. There was more competition not long afterwards from Blackmagic, and even Nikon with the D750 and D850 DSLRs. Before Z mount even existed. Then before long, everyone wanted a piece of the pie. Even Fujifilm, who had been staunchly pro-stills and anti-video for the longest time. Then the X-T2 and X-T3 were introduced, along with F-LOG and they have only grown in specs since then, and eaten Panasonic's lunch. In this time, Panasonic continued to persist with Micro Four Thirds... We had the GH5 3 times over with different variants rather than a proper follow-up, and when that follow-up arrived it was without the one thing everyone asked for - phase-detect AF and the GH6 has been a total flop, as one look at the current second hand used prices will tell you. The S series came too late to save them. Full frame is a commodity now, you can take your pick from all the manufacturers at less than $1500. People will tend to go with what they have lenses for... Which is Canon, Nikon, Sony. That's why Fuji stayed out the market. They decided to own the medium format market, and skim off some of the high-end full frame customers as well who were enticed by the larger sensor and higher resolution. Panasonic should have come out all guns blazing with a full frame S1H just after the launch of the GH4, then they might not have bled out to the Sony a7s and A7s II quite so badly. They should have repositioned Micro Four Thirds as a Fuji X100 / Lumix LX100 style product - as small as possible, super small prime lenses, or fixed, and stylish as fuck to appeal to a younger audience. But where Micro Four Thirds did at least generate a sizeable ecosystem for lenses that didn't exist before... In full frame, the decision to use L-mount with Leica and Sigma is not a good solution. Too much cannibalisation and not a coordinated approach. The Sigma 50mm F1.4 has to compete against the Panasonic 50mm F1.4 and visa versa... especially on price. So they have been idiots and not done as Sony has done, which was to focus on a single mount for both crop sensor and full frame cameras from as earlier a date as possible and bring onboard not just Sigma third party lenses but Tamron and more. You don't need an alliance for this. They were never going to achieve Canon levels of dominance and lock-in with lenses... But they would have at least have a chance and could have competed with lower prices and a better range when Zf and Rf launched. Instead from 2018 onwards Panasonic has been practically starting afresh with a mount that isn't even under their control. In terms of the marketing... Clearly there's been a desire to go for vloggers with shit like the G100, a complete waste of plastic, a desire to claim that the S9, much better camera, is for social media twats when it actually should have been a higher-end camera for street photography and cinema (just compare to Sigma's much better marketing of the Fp and Fp-L), and there's been some really public blunders too like inviting people to see the GH7 in Japan and then showing them an F8 lens cap lens instead. And why the fuck did the GH1 not evolve into a LUMIX CINEMA line?? They had the perfect chance to do a Cinema EOS business and chose to give us a GF5 instead.

Of course a camera must be excellent in the $1000-$6000 price range. When compared to other consumer items, that's a lot of money They need to get the consumers back and stop this myopic focus on only existing camera users. The way to do this is to get real about price and offer a very capable, well made camera for high-end smartphone prices. But until there's a revolution in optics, it won't happen. It might do when DJI get into the game with AI lenses, using the smartphone tech of the future. Then you would have a camera using smartphone technology, multiple sensors, depth maps, AI and so on... But in the form factor of a Sony a7 minus the big chonk of glass on the front.

I think part of it is that there's just too much choice and competition, and people one just one body that does it ALL. The camera market is a bit odd at the moment, because of such high prices. If I were a new customer, wanting to upgrade from a smartphone - let's forget the used market, and the dumbed down cameras that treat smartphone users like idiots... I would go on Amazon and see a bunch of $1000+ stuff and spend that money on a new iPhone instead. Things have got ridiculously expensive and it surely doesn't cost a manufacturer so much to ship a sensor in a box with a screen, and some glass on the front. I think it's all a bit of a Japanese cartel really.

That's quite funny as this summer I got hold of an Amiga 1200, then went down the rabbit hole of building a 1990s PC to accompany it. Next task to is to get the old firewire Macbook laptop up and running again for FCP 7 and import my MiniDV tapes. The fact is with sensor size, there are great lenses on all formats... from Super 16mm to medium format, and the sensor size only enables you to use more of them. There's also a point where full frame lenses all start to look very similar, with a few standouts... and it's the same on all formats, so it's better to have a crop sensor and a standout superb optic with rendering character and versatility, than it is to have a larger sensor and a boring modern lens on it. Small sensors also enable a deep DOF for telephoto shots which can be quite creatively interesting... for example there's nothing you can put on full frame that mimics the long telephoto reach of a Huawei P40 Pro 135mm along with such a deep DOF and so much in focus in the frame. I like the 60MP sensor in the Sigma Fp-L as it performs very well at 1.0x, 1.5x and 2x crop for RAW video. So you can go from shooting full frame one moment to Super 16mm the next with the same camera. Or rather... From a Leica Noctilux to a Kern Switar 26mm F1.1 within seconds. In the old days that would have required two cameras. This with the Pana S9 is even better as the IBIS on maximum-crop for maximum stability is like using a tripod. Except you can just walk around, frame up and go, from the palm of your hand. It's such a nimble and quick way to shoot compared to how the pros and crews operate on location and how miserable they are.

We clearly have a difference of opinion 🙂 Olympus did the same in 2012 with the body-cap lens (15mm F8) https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-bcl-15mm-f8 And the internet did not hang them for - nor did anyone claim that the E-M5 was useless as a result. Too much importance in my opinion attached to a pancake. The image in the S9 competes with an FX3. Everyone with an FX3 seem to be attaching large lenses to it. Why is it that in Sony land this isn't even a discussion about flash guns and pancake lenses... Because it's a cinema camera first, that happens to also be a full frame stills camera. Rather than Konica 40mm f1.8 which has a long flange back and is no longer a pancake on an adapter to L-mount, you'd be better off with a Jupiter 12 35mm F2.8 or something LTM screw mount which will go on a Leica M-L adapter. That will keep the overall appendage shorter than Trump's piddle widdle. And if you really want to be brave, use it in 2x crop mode with a c-mount lens. This way you get best of both worlds... a very portable pocket cinema camera with top of the league IBIS... which just so happens to be a full frame camera at the change of a lens and a press of a button. I definitely think that a lot of the hate comes down to the branding and marketing. If Sony brought out an FX3 at £1500... call it FX300, and it was exactly the same spec as the S1H but with phase-detect AF and Sony e-mount, people would be falling over themselves to buy one. If Leica had brought out a Q with L-mount, for photography and cinema, for £1500... the same. Because it is a LUMIX nobody gives a toss.

Haa that's hilarious. Just the way it should be - Creativity always wins over prejudice and appearances. I've been thinking that actually the vanity of Leica holds them back as a business. It prevents a more modern evolution of the M series with autofocus, for example. It prevents them utilising the brand in a broader price bracket... i.e. competing with Sony, Panasonic, Canon and the rest of them at all sub $3000 for brand new mirrorless cameras and lenses. And that is a huge market they are missing out on... all under the pretence of 'protecting the brand'

Some of the smaller L-mount lenses off the top of my head. There are loads Yes Panasonic made a stupid mistake with the F8 pancake, they wanted something maximally small and cheap. Whereas something like the Sigma 35mm F2 is a much more exciting choice, or a Panasonic pancake with equally fast aperture. Panasonic are messing up on the lenses side, although the recent zoom is an interesting choice it's still very slow. That said I don't get the obsession with rigging up these small bodies. We had it with the Blackmagic Pocket OG when that came out... People adding huge amounts of gear to it. I can only assume it is only there to look more impressive at work. Rather than for any genuine creative purpose. The S9 is in my opinion a really creative tool... How about it gets used bare bones like that?

Ah yes you're right, and SL2-S does a RAW video output over HDMI. SL2 and SL2-S biggest downsides are the weight, and lack of articulated screen. And some might say that L-mount lacks the range of stuff you can put on a Sony. But I think for $2.3k either the SL2 or SL2-S are great options for hybrid shooting, but very different to something like an EOS R5 C as well, which makes life easier for video shooting professionally. Whereas the Leicas are nicer as personal cameras.

What about the S9 as a video cam? Nobody complains that you can't add a flash to a Blackmagic Pocket Camera

It's definitely not aimed at traditional photographers with their flash guns as a main camera (maybe as a second body). Cinema and storytelling are the main purposes of the S9. With it being so small and light I think it defeats the purpose putting a flash on top, or anything else for that matter! The goal here is a full frame sensor in the palm of a hand, nimble, quick and discrete, no fuss, cheap. The very essence of what a GH2 was back in the day, but now it's a vastly higher-spec and larger sensor. You can use it with crop sensor lenses no issues. It even has a photo crop mode for shooting 3k RAW stills for example. In that sense and for Super 16mm it packs into the deal one of the main selling points (for me) of the micro four thirds cameras... that is to say... the Kern Switar 26mm F1.1 That lens is the work of a space alien. So to have the best of S16 and S35 and full frame optics in one body, and such good low light capabilities, that is very nice for natural light shooting. Now on the other-hand you could say Panasonic are missing out on a big market by not making a more traditional high-end photography camera to rival something like a Nikon Z9. And you'd be right. But obviously, at £1k this ain't it. Why would it be? Maybe in time there will be a higher-end version with new sensor, EVF, mechanical shutter, weather sealing, and tilt screen rather than fully flippy. I hope they do that as the concept is fundamentally great for the price.

You can save 100,200,300g it doesn't matter, it depends mainly on what lenses you're going to use with it. Some these can add 2kg, and are obviously the wrong choice. But with the small manual focus M mount stuff from Voigtlander or a smaller autofocus Sigma prime it makes much more sense and you feel the weight saving over the S5 II which is already itself incredibly light compared to the S1H. It is true that when you put it side by side with your average Sony a7 body, it's not significantly smaller or lighter - it is not a GM1. What it is, is an S1H in a Leica Q size camera with interchangeable lens mount, 10bit 6K and IBIS. It could also be considered a strong alternative to the Sigma Fp since it has the all important articulated screen and IBIS. One thing it is not, is the same as all the other mirrorless cameras... and that is a good thing. I admire the speed and simplicity of it, and the burned in LUTs. And the palm of hand descrete handheld shooting as pioneered by the GH1. It is in that mould. IBIS makes it even more capable for handheld enjoyment, as adding a tripod defies the point of it being small and light. The fun factor is huge with this trust me. It feels amazingly fast and responsive during a shoot. Sure there's no EVF, mechanical shutter, but I can't think of much else the S5 II offers for photograph aside from those two features? So to say it lacks numerous features is overplaying it a bit in my view.

It is the Fotasy C-LL adapter I use... Infinity focus is ok. 3.3K is the resolution at the crop required for Super 16mm on the Panasonic S9 and S5 II. But you also need to enable IS + E stabilisation HIGH to get from 1.6x 3.3k to over 2x This is to avoid a vignetting which moves about with IBIS. And the image is 4:3, close to the 1.65:1 of an actual Super 16mm film camera, so you have to crop it in post if you want 16:9 and so on.

3.3K 4:3 10bit 422 Super 16mm crop mode C-mount lens adapter for L-mount Pleased to report - No vignetting.