John Matthews

The killer IBIS is the feature of this camera that everyone will be chasing. Personally, I think e-mount will have technical limitations to match. After watching Gerald Undone, I'm guessing the AF will simply be good enough that no one will care anymore. Finally, l-mount is relatively open for all manufacturers to join... unlike the recent Canon bullshit... I see some people moving to l-mount soon. This camera is going to sell like gangbusters IMO.

There's one other thing I thought of: don't check that "use lossy compression" box. Many programs cannot read any compressed DNGs.

I'm always curious about 16mm lenses as I'm always looking for new ways to use my grandfather's Bell & Howell set of lenses: 4", 1" and .7" trio, pictured here next to my GH6. I would like to get them cleaned and re-lubed, but I'm not sure about how to go about that.

Do you think l-mount could support c-mount lenses?

Good. Back to "Panasonic and what they have up their sleeve." ... not M43 vs. FF. Thank you!

Ok. Can you cover 16mm-ish to 600mm (FF equiv.) in under 1kg with ANY single FF mount kit? How about 2kg? 3kg? That's what I'm saying. There are lenses in M43 with simply with no equivalency in FF in terms of weight. When you do find a lens, you won't find the other lens you need in the same mount.

I really don't get the reason why people who have FF cameras are so disturbed by the mere existence of M43. Can't we let M43 be M43 and FF be FF- it's all good. If you like the image format and size, great! Why does one have to be inferior? They both do things that the other cannot do. I think there's the inconvenience. It would seem that people want simplified answers- bigger sensor, more megapixels, high bit rate, etc. I'm not saying those thing don't matter, but there are other things too. Cameras have ergonomics, exposure tools, ports, EVF's, image fidelity, etc. None of that is "Full-Frame" or "xx megapixels" or "intra-frame compression". So many cameras produce great images these days, even good enough for Hollywood. After, it becomes the best tool for the job and needs.

If I were going small FF, I'd rather go Sigma FP than anything Sony. The OM-5/ E-m5 iii would destroy the A7C in IBIS, a much less expensive camera. With the 17m f/1.8, you get similar DOF. Both are 8bit. The Sony can seriously bust out great performance on the DR chart, but I personally don't like that image. The Olympus combo would be lighter too. The real advantage for M43 is with longer lenses, where FF cannot compete in terms of size. Like you say, it's just physics.

According to a recent interview, they mentioned a smaller M43 camera is on the horizon. This year, not sure but I’m ready. Their last lens release was the Leica branded version of the 12-35 f/2.8? Or are you referring to the 9mm (which I now have)? I’d also like this camera, but I’m fine without the evf altogether… I want the small size above all.

I'm waiting to see what they have in store for M43 before I'd ever jump on a camera like the S5ii or S5iix. I still have hopes for a small M43 camera with PDAF, great colors, solid codec, and decent rolling shutter.

I haven't done it recently, but I have converted GH6 RW2 to DNG successfully. I used the latest version of Adobe's DNG converter (because it wouldn't work if you didn't have the latest version). I don't use Davinci anymore, but I thought you could do it. I suppose you're trying to use the photos from the 75fps mode on the GH6? @Andrew Reid did something similar with the E-M1 ii a few years back. I've also tried it, but I think I resorted to exporting the files to jpg from lightroom and then using ffmeg to put them together. Theoretically, Davinci should be able to handle DNGs. Not completely sure what's going on here. However, in my limited time with the GH6, I've discovered that this camera has uncanny slow-mo abilities, yet mediocre photo capabilities (except the 100MP mode and 75fps). You really cannot shoot it like any other M43 camera I've used (protect the highlights and raise the shadows in post). You really need to nail exposure and increase ISO whenever necessary as you need that info in the shadows. The GH6 shines around 800-4000 ISO. Under 800 hasn't been better than almost any of my M43 cameras. In fact, I think you could just shoot video all the time and extract stills from it and I bet the results would be almost as good.

If I were you, I'd try converting them to a older version of DNG to assure compatibility... I've never really seen any real difference in the output. With your GH5, you were probably using Lightroom 4, so make it compatible with that and I bet it'll work.

This will all be assuming that any of this LiDAR tech is any good... remains to be seen.

As a $500 accessory, pros will buy it. As a $200 accessory, prosumers will buy it. As a $99 accessory, everyone would get it along with a new compatible Panasonic lens if it works well. Speculation is fun sometimes, but I might be going off the deep end here. Maybe, this device has nothing to real-world AF and is prohibitively expensive. Who knows at this point? Again, I'm decently happy with the limitations of DFD, but I also believe that PDAF should not be the endgame as it just adds much more complexity to the sensor.

I'd agree with everything you just said too. LiDAR had better offer something that PDAF can't or show everyone exactly why LiDAR is superior. I do know my iPhone 12 can detect my identity in pitch black lighting and no PDAF could ever do that. They might find something even if it's more for pros. We might also be forgetting all the other types of sensors that could interact with a processor to get better images. I'm not sure how or what, but I could imagine there's something.

Well, this is Panasonic, not that other company. My guess it WOULD work, but the S5, S1, G9, GH5 are all multiple years old (even if they're still currently selling them); so this could be sketchy by my logic. Also, the processors were good in their day, but I'm not sure if that matters so much. This device could also be to sell more Panasonic glass which could also be very good for them in general. Recent promotions have shown excellent glass to be packaged with new bodies. A LiDAR system would, without any doubt, increase the need for native lenses IMO, just like on any other system. Let's hope we know more soon.

Given the size of this gathering, a photo of the GH6 (especially with the hotshoe cover off), and, after doing some research, the complexity of setting up a LiDAR system, I'm going to conclude that Panasonic will be showing off a LiDAR system (made by DJI) with compatibility for at least the GH6 and native Panasonic lenses, using their internal focusing motors. It will be a simple connection via the hotshoe or USB C jack (most likely) where the Venus processor communicates with the DJI LiDAR System to achieve near-perfect tracking of objects and people. The process to connect the camera and LiDAR system will be seamless and simple (unlike the current crazy process IMO). I cannot see what else would get this much attention. To be determined.

Wouldn’t it be nice to use cinema glass with flawless AF? Or even anamorphic? No one is offering that. There is something to be said for LiDAR. It will most likely surpass what is possible with PDAF, especially with car manufacturers investing so much.

Hoping for a hotshoe enabled LiDAR system for multiple current cameras. I’d probably get it if it’s amazing. Otherwise, I’ll just stick with serviceable DFD AF.

I learned a lot from this video (probably already posted). Presented by The great Driftwood himself (kudos to Panasonic for hiring him to do this). For you millennial noobs, Driftwood was the Englishman who gave us many important hack settings for the hacked GH2, arguably one of the cameras that really started everything for mirrorless cameras.

I couldn’t help noticing (after filming this weekend) that the IBIS on the GH6 was much better with wobbly corners with my Panasonic 9mm f/1.7. It easily rivals my Olympus EM5 iii or EM1ii ( and same lens) with enhanced mode on (stab 1 setting with extra crop). This big difference is the GH6 was in NO CROP mode. Wow!

For photos, I actually almost never see any noise on any of my M43 cameras with DXO. It does absolute magic for any ISO chosen to remove noise. In my real-world tests the GH6 does well. I'm also quite happy with the real-world DR for photos, but you need to expose more for the scene or ETTR as the ISO invariance on this camera doesn't really exist for photos- even though they are rather big in size(35-42mb). For video with DR Boost on, it goes above and beyond with me filming unlit interior shots with sunlight and sky hitting outside light-colored walls. Somehow, it still keeps highlights within the limits of VLOG and I can see details on the sunlit wall. This is not really how I would do things normally, but it's still impressive.

The GH6, from my limited experience, doesn't behave the same as other cameras (at least in photo mode). The first thing I noticed right off the bat was that you need to expose more like the final image you intend on getting, not just shooting for the highlights. Also, you should know that the DR Boost mode is always ON in photo mode (Panasonic confirmed that in a live stream). 13 stops in video mode is probably generous on the GH6, but so is 15 stops on the A7sIII. Anyway, I think anything above 10 stops is AMAZING for rec709 and current viewing possibilities! 13 stops way more than what was going on just 10 years ago, and on a M43 sensor. I don't think we're going to get much more real differences with CMOS sensor tech anyway. Of course, there's still room for improvements, but we're not going to get 27 stops DR 20bit gigapixel images without a major change. In the meantime, we've got AI.

I sell most of my gear on the leboncoin.fr in France (not helpful). If you want to sell fast and actually be paid, try KEH or MBP. All other sites don’t offer ANY protection to sellers. The best option is to sell to a friend or in-person and cash on the barrel. This is a real problem with no good solutions.

I’m not too bothered by the current Panasonic AF system. For me, it’s been serviceable, not the best. For stills, I find it great. I really like the idea of a focus limiter, but I’d like to see an improvement in the interface or methodology to set it. If you watch YouTubers, you’d think contrast AF is more out of focus than in focus, which is total BS. Also, you’d think it works like crap in stills, which is also not the case. LiDAR sounds interesting, but I don’t know enough about it to comment.