Mattias Burling

Ive never seen anyone here or on another forum claim that mirrorless isn't the future. All I see is some people who get that there are advantages to both systems today, and that one is selling better than the other today.

Im not sure what you are asking. You can use what ever lens you like. Put an equal lens on a DSLR and it will focus faster. Its one of the main reasons DSLRs still outsell mirrorless. It will track better to. For my needs mirrorless is fine. I don't use a DSLR. I shoot mostly manual focus. But full time pro photographers needs to cover a wider spectrum of styles. Not to mention in lower light situations, then my X-Pro2 and the X-T2 I had is hunting all over the place.

But they still kick the ass of all mirrorless in terms of auto focus. Both stills and video. So its not all black and white.

So no links then?

Any links? I can only find stuff like this. http://www.thephoblographer.com/2017/03/27/panasonics-digital-camera-business-named-dwindling-profit-report/ "When you look at CIPA stats though things don’t look all incredibly too bad for the industry. But Panasonic isn’t the only one hurting right now. Nikon is doing amassive restructuring to really focus on their higher end cameras."

Looked at Gopro and saw them going into the toilet. Therefore continuing with the strategy thats made them stay profitable while Panasony are in the reds.

I don't believe that for a second. I know plenty of talented pros and I'll bet you they would all have been cought of guard. Not really. They said they'd rather have it than a popup flash. And you can't go by canon rumors. The canon shooters hang out and troll sonyrumors, and vice versa

Im not really following this. Ive read both articles and this is what I can gather: The camera, like all cameras, had some issues with the lights. A blogger makes video about it. DP-Review writes an article in order to protect the Sony A9's reputation explaining what happened and that its not the cameras fault. And we are supposed to be upset that they are anti Sony? I just don't see that here.

True. The TV crew shooting a reality show where I work used an F5. They also had for example a small hd with the sidefinder. When I asked about it they had no idea what I was talking about. They where creators first, tech guys second and forum nerds last/not at all

Jared is a nice guy bringing great content imo. Long time subscriber of his channel.

"When I first got my 4K TV set and had friends come around, and showed them stuff I had shot on my NX1 which I already had at the time, they were all going "OMG! It is so clear!" without exception." They weren't very clear imo. To bad they have been removed.

They can be useful for sure. On some cameras they are truly great.

Not really, it shows they rather have 4K than a popup flash

Fujis profit comes from Instax. Im not sure Sony and Panasonics interchangeable lens cameras are profitable. I think not. At least Sony never dares to show the numbers. They always bake it in to the total company. My guess is no way they make money from the A7 and A6xx line. We know Nikon is in trouble. Canon on the other hand is in the green. HD seems profitable for them

So why mope? The X100 had the same sensor for three straight generations with not much complaint. GRii as well. But the pro photographers using the 6D got a new one, I was just pointing out that it wasn't just a swivel screen Higher ISO means that the camera sensor is more sensitive to light. You can use that in whats called the exposure triangle, but you knew that. That the 32 000 in the 6D was unusable is THE POINT of raising the ISO. If the max is 40 000 the 32 000 and everything bellow will be more usable than before. And the pro photographers using the 6D got that, I was just pointing out that it wasn't just a swivel screen So why mope? The pro photographers using the 6D got a new feature, I was just pointing out that it wasn't just a swivel screen So why mope? You say the 6D was bad in AF, this does it better. The sis something the pro photographers using the 6D is going to like, I was just pointing out that it wasn't just a swivel screen So why mope? Since when did adding a GOOD feature become something bad and what should they have done instead? Im not trying to be smart here, Im asking. Did you want two screens? Five EVFs? External screen? Whats the revolution? At the end of the day the pro photographers using the 6D might like their new swivel screen Lots of photographers hate scowl screens and would never buy one with it. So Panasonic fudged that imo, I would never buy the G80 or GH5 because they are fully articulating. Tilt or nothing for me. Yup Read my answer to point number 5 Then the camera isn't meant for you. Simple as that. Me neither. I own zero Canon cameras and won't buy this either. But Im not upset about it. In the same way that Im not upset that OBH-Nordicas latest toaster can't repaint my house Nikon vs Canon is a long and infected feud. I don't see any great numbers of pros switching from either side any time soon. And the pro photographers using and enjoying the 6D got a new one, I was just pointing out that it wasn't just a swivel screen USB 3... what is this amateur hour? Cameras with Thunderbolt hit the scene 2012 USB1, 2 and 3 are the worst connections of any type of connection in history. And that not even the super futuristic companies like Panasony have switched to C-type is a joke. What where they thinking????? I mean common Sony, its been two weeks and €1000 since the last camera. Get innovative for crying out loud. And whats with the 4K in the GH5... Hello.. 4K is already in other cameras. Old news. Don't they understand that they always have to be unique or we will piss all over them.. Time to wake up Panasonic. We don't want reliability or usable tools we want numbers on paper Any who, I better stay of this topic. It seems rather infected and not ready for a lets say nuanced discussion with a broader than 4K perspective

I wouldn't call it without issues and drama. Plenty of that imo No ML I think. The cameras that aren't hacked today like the 1DC etc is because they don't know how. Canon have better protection in them these days.

So there is one thread bashing pro video cameras and celebrating David Lynch. And one where we bash the use of a 5D because of moire... Im confused. And to be honest, I love cheap cameras and being creative with lowend gear. For sure.. ..But every time Michael Mann cuts from the film camera to some DV-cam in Public Enemies it totally rips me out of the story and makes me very aware that Im watching something fake. He loved it and said it made the movie better.. imo it made it suck ass. There are times when the creativity of a DSLR can help you. And times when you should go all in. A good story can handle a little moire (Hurt Locker slowmo scenes) and a weak story (Public Enemies) need all the help it can get. Imo.

I understand what you mean, your point and why you are upset. But to many still photographers the above line simply isn't true. What they got is, New 26.2-megapixel CMOS sensor DIGIC 7 image processor ISO 40,000 from 32,000 Dual Pixel autofocusing system 45 cross-type autofocus points at its disposal, a step up from the 6D’s paltry 11. 6.5 frames per second, but there’s a short runway there: the maximum burst is 21 frames for RAW photos, and 150 for JPEGs. Touchscreen Swivel Weather resistant Wi-Fi, NFC, Bluetooth, and GPS radios. And Canon’s done all this while only adding a few grams to the original weight of the 6D. I can name 5 pro photographers just among my closest friends that would choose a simple thing as weather sealing over 4K any day of the week. This isn't the next video marvel. It never was. It never wanted to. The 6D wasn't anything to write home about regarding video, so why would this? Its like being upset about the lack of video features in a X100f or Leica M9. Its not supposed to have that.

I could go on about how Canon base their decisions on what actually sells, what makes money and what still shooters actually want, what the 6Di was all about in the first place... but there is no point. I might go bash a Sony thread about not being a DSLR or Instant film camera instead. Makes about as much sense

The Raw out of the M leaves a lot to be desired imo. But as a stills camera its very fun and ML gives it a distance scale for zone focus.

I guess, sensor doesn't really effect the images as much as other features in a camera for me. I rather have a 5mp picture of Elvis than a 50mp of the door he went into.

I think you need to reread my post without a pair of defensive glasses on. I have not pigeon-holed anybody nor anything else that makes me look silly. I just added a couple of thoughts to what could be a meaningful discussion about the problem all people that hang out here, including nerds like myself, face. We risk the chance to be "home blind" and forget about the real people out there, you know the audience, the non nerds... They are at the end of the day our bosses. What they like goes. But to answer your questions, yes they do, its starting to drift a little. But that's normal with any trend. If we look at the last 20 years so what you call "heavy-handed grading, blurry images, harsh lighting and distracting out of focus backgrounds" have been considered "professional" looking. That's merely because the real non nerd people haven't been able to get those looks with their own equipment. Its been unobtainable and different = professional an likable. When they hire someone to shoot video they want something different than what they can get them self. Before it was easy. Just use a tripod and good audio and you kicked their ass. Today the world is different. Everyone and their cat has a tripod or stabilized lens. A large sensor and a decent mic. So today we must once again look at what we can offer to our clients and audience. But there are of course a few things that never go out of style. Story, good music, great acting, good exposure and to some degree contrast. People seem to enjoy contrast. But please note that I haven't even commented on the video at hand nor the response to it. I just commented that contrast isn't always a bad thing and shadows can be both crushed or not and still look good. Why do you think every new camera that's ever been mentioned on this forum gets a dedicated thread with people bashing the crushed shadows. Just to a make a new thread a few weeks later celebrating the shadow detail? Its not because Panasony doesn't know that "nerds" like raised shadows. Its because they know that the big chunk of non nerds out their like it their way. And they are more important.

It was a result of an analysis of needs/wants I guess. For my stills shooting I'm 90% satisfied with a premium compact like a X70/GRii/DP1. It covers me for all hobby use. But I needed an interchangeable lens camera for my vintage glass and general tele shooting occasions. After loosing my beloved Leica T I had to buy another camera and made the following criterias: Short flange EVF or OVF APS-C or FF AF External controls Video (good enough for youtube) Nice colors/image So the true contenders where Fuji XE2, XT1, Xpro1, A7, NX1, etc, etc. Something like the X-T1 is just a few hundred dollars and almost a no brainer. But since its for mostly tele shots I wanted high resolution so I can crop more. Normally I'm all for 12mp, or even lower being enough for 90% of all use. But this camera is for the other 10%. At the same time I was tasked to buy new equipment for the company I work for. Its supposed to cover "in house needs". I ended up settling for an X-T20. During the research I came to the conclusion that it ticked all my boxes as well. Happy as one can be I stepped into the local camera store in my home town. Its a small place but we are still fortunate to have a camera shop that carries all brands. Even Pentax. As soon as I put my hands on the X-T20 I remembered why I sold the X-T10.... That awful grip. I just cant stand it. Next to it was the X-T2. Same camera with some added features but a better grip. So I bought it. I like the camera, it is truly great. For video its really nice. Ever since I updated and got the histogram and ability to change ISO while recording I really don't have any complaints. My major doubts about it have all been on the stills side. I like it but cant seem to love. That's why I'm giving the X-Pro2 a go instead. But I can add that I've stopped using my camera at work and instead used the X-T2 professionally for articles, marketing material, etc. And for that its absolutely splendid. If I was a full time pro photographer and not a producer I would have an X-T2. No doubt in my mind. Sports, news, event, all that.. perfect camera. But that's not what my interchangeable camera is supposed to do.

When the BMPCC was new and I posted test footage I often got asked about the look I got. They used the same lens, same film convert but didn't get as "nice", "sharp" or "filmic" results. The reason was that I always used the levels tools to slightly crush the shadows and blow some highlights. People, and Im talking about real non nerd people, still like contrast.

Nice set. Fuji handles lowlights very well. Even if pushed the noise is pleasing imo. Im getting the Xpro2 today.. cant wait