BTM_Pix

Not sure why you are couching it in such dramatic terms as people throwing their cameras out of the pram. There were no hissy fits and not all the old camera were disposed of, rather that the more the new cameras moved away from the original ethos the less inclined people like me were to replace their old ones. I didn't stop buying new Lumix MFT cameras post the GX80 in some fit of pique, its because the form factor of the new ones became increasingly at odds with the point of the system. The system appealed as a much smaller alternative to the bulkier FF and APS-C DSLRs that I had so I was less inclined to buy the newer ones as they began to expand and, of course, this became even more acute when mirrorless FF and APS-C cameras started to come down and meet them in the middle. I didn't mind making the compromise on IQ and low light when it was traded off for size but once that size increased then its advantages as a system went the other way. I didn't and haven't stopped using mine but it has diminished with each passing year over the past five years. Not because they have become unusable just that their USP is no longer anywhere near the U and there are better alternatives. The lenses were always shared with the OG Pocket and Micro and the LS300 but have also found a new home with the P4K but absolutely nothing would tempt me into buying into a new MFT camera and new lenses. I've just got three of my cameras out (GX80,S5ii and Fp) which have similar-ish focal length lenses to illustrate my broader point about MFT. If the G9ii is - as I understand it - even anywhere close to the size one in the middle then a shark has not only been jumped but pole vaulted over. Whilst the S5ii is the elephant in the room when it comes to a choice of buying into a new MFT camera, the Fp is the elephant in the room when it comes to where the system should have gone. An updated GX80 with all the bells and whistles of the G9ii in a form factor somewhere between the GX80 and Fp (which lest we forget has a proper cooling system) would have made me interested as it fits with the original ethos. The lenses are another example of where compact has gone with MFT when I look at a couple of my lenses. They are not the same focal length but still it illustrates how the size has increased from the original ethos of those original pancake lenses like the 20mm here and the 14mm if you want to take the next step up. And of course the Sigma here is actually pretty compact in relative terms to the latter primes and zooms from Panasonic. Coming ? It has been there in the DJI guise - and modesty forbids me to mention from another bijou manufacturer too - for well over three years. With regard to anamorphic, the support for aligned multi motors means that the smaller manufacturer also provides AF for dual focus anamorphic setups 🙂 All that Panasonic is doing with DJI for non manual lenses is basically what that other guy does with Blackmagic in that it uses the LIDAR to control the camera's internal focus motors. If Panasonic had opened their control protocol up in the same way as BMD then the other guy would have done the same for Panasonic cameras three years ago. So they are playing catchup more than innovating to be honest. The innovation would have been for Panasonic to integrate LIDAR into the cameras themselves. Manufacturer maybe but Sony E and Nikon Z users have been able to do this for quite a few years using the TechART such as my A7Rii with a Voigtlander here. In terms of "easy AF on MF lenses" it is actually much easier to use than an outboard LIDAR system too for several reasons as well. It also brings me back to another comparison between that A7Rii and a GX80 with a similar f1.4 focal length lens. Not only is the A7Rii full frame, it too also has IBIS too and the AF with that MF lens is far snappier than the MFT setup at a marginal overall size increase. Maybe I actually should throw that GX80 out of the pram after all 😉

Sigma really delivered for MFT with their 16/30/56 f1.4 primes but have obviously seen the writing on the wall and only offer the new 24 f1.4 and 18-50 f2.8 additions in X and L mount. Those two lenses would have really rounded out that range for a compact, fast and affordable set. The prices are getting too big as well. The 18-50 f2.8 in X or L mount is £400 while a comparable if slower variable aperture Panasonic 12-60mm f2.8-4.0 in MFT is twice that price. There is still plenty of value in the original pancakes etc of course but it gets pretty expensive pretty fast taking the step above those. That LC-1 they did way back when was a handsome bastard so I'd definitely like to see a modern version.

The R5 was a bit of watershed moment because we proved that there was a deliberate obfuscation by Canon but it also shod light on the shilling and/or powderpuff testing aspects of a swathe of the YouTube bros. The reaction from many of them to the original report by @Andrew Reid was particularly vicious and then, sans apology, they then made shameless hay by doing the shock faced testing videos. Never once acknowledging that not only was the camera on fire but also their pants. I think it then died off because it was belatedly addressed through firmware and people shrugged and said "well no one is going to risk releasing an overheating camera again". Neither aspect was re-dressed fully though so it has been waiting to come back again, not least because a lot of the bros have invested serious crypto into those stock footage flames to do the follow up "honest re-test" videos after they've surfed the wave of the initial "reviews". I might be being a bit cynical there though 🙂

That is where I'm going with this to be honest and, despite all the hand wringing on here about it, I don't think the motivation for change will come until the 10% become the 90%. Maybe the EU will come galloping (or more likely sashaying considering the pace they work at) to the rescue with a standard rating system for cameras denoting the number of overheating shutdowns per hour. Call it the Sum of Heat Induced Terminations and measure it on a 1-10 scale with the higher number obviously being the worst. It would offer more clarity and might actually shame them into doing something about it. "So, Mr Sony, regarding overheating, what is the SHIT rating for this new camera ?" "Oh, its very SHIT indeed."

The amount of heat (boom tish) the thermal issue is generating recently is quite interesting to me. Its always been there in the background of course and the R5 was a wild ride while we were investigating it but it’s back with an increased vengeance recently. What interests me is if anyone on here actually works in a camera shop and if so how much cut through does this issue have with the average customer? How far down the list - if it even appears anywhere - is it on the list of questions posed by customers when they are running through a product? And how many cameras do you have returned by customers due to them, for example, going on holiday and discovering their new toy needs more sunscreen than they do? I’m curious because manufacturers seemingly show no interest in tackling it definitively and I would have to guess that it is because they are comfortable with the amount of, erm, heat they receive from dealers and customers about it. Looked at another way, how many more ZV cameras would Sony get returned for ingress of water/sand/avocado if they adopted a vented cooling system than they do now from the inconvenient but recoverable overheating issues.

Nikon and Fujifilm need to slow these releases down. I never got round to buying the previous three nailed on forever cameras and now a new one turns up. It does look to be the last word so maybe this time I’ll jump in before forever runs out !

I’ll preface this by saying that that is some spec and it will likely be a very decent camera. However…. A smaller sensor inside a smaller body with smaller lenses at a smaller price was the whole raison d’etre of the Micro Four Thirds system. The clue was right there in the name. Panasonic seems to have looked what BMW has done since it acquired the Mini and thought “yeah, that’s the path for us too”. In a world where their own full frame S5ii exists, let alone the compact APS-C feature laden cameras from all the other manufacturers, I don’t get where they are coming from with their latter day MFT releases and, in my opinion, they have completely lost their way with the system, particularly in terms of attracting new adopters. Even for the old guard, you’d have to be pretty attached to that native lens collection to go in again. Panasonic seem to have a borderline kinky reluctance to refresh the two cameras that would actually cause a resurgence in the ideology of the system as well as sales. Namely, the GX80 and the LX100. Putting a mic jack on them and giving them 10 bit 4:2:2 internal and VLOG would be a piece of piss for Panasonic and they could sell them all day long at their equivalent launch prices. They might have to push the boat out and put IBIS in the LX but I don’t even think that is a deal breaker. I’m at loss to where they are getting their market research from that’s telling them there is. Bigger demand for small sensor cameras in large sensor bodies at large sensor prices.

Its just different naming conventions between different manufacturers - or, more specifically, a lack of naming conventions - but they amount to exactly the same thing functionality wise. So, no doubt there are manufacturers out there who landed on a different part of the thesaurus and have named theirs Adjusters or Modifiers etc. Prefixing whatever term they use with "Wide Angle" is also a bit of a misnomer anyway as it doesn't convert or adapt a lens into a wide angle lens (commonly defined as having a focal length of say 24-35mm) but just reduces the focal length by the 0.8/0.7/0.6x indicated on it. So whilst a 50mm lens with a 0.7x can be considered to effectively have "become" a 35mm and therefore a "wide angle" lens in common terms, putting the same 0.7x on a 200mm lens will only make that "become" a 140mm, which is very much not a "wide angle" lens in common terms. Basically, for "Wide Angle" read "Wider Angle".

Prompted by a tweet from @Andrew Reid about BBC drama production in the 70s/80s, I remembered this gem of a YouTube channel where the production staff of the era discuss and reproduce their work. The videos are a combination of bitesize and longer form and covers every stage of the production process such as these. It is a fascinating collection of pieces and much can be learned and applied to shooting and editing today. Not least of which how lucky we are to have what we have at our disposal. Full collection here https://www.youtube.com/@AdapttvhistoryOrgUk/videos

As someone who went to the extent of writing an app to test every single permutation, I couldn't agree more !

Funny you should mention Cinelike V.... A couple of years ago, I did a test with the Profile Stepper app that I wrote for Lumix cameras to do a bit of analysis on their colour profiles. The idea was to create a video for each profile that contained every permutation of contrast between -5 to +2 combined with saturation between -5 to +3 to see if there were any hidden gems that might bely the received wisdom of "Cinelike D with everything set to -5". The original post (and thread about the app) is here The overall conclusion was that there weren't any hidden gems in amongst the standard profiles but, perhaps more surprisingly, I also found the Cinelike V versions to be more appealing than the Cinelike D ones. Likely nothing that couldn't be equalised in post but for an out of camera look (which is what I was after) I definitely preferred it. The test scene was nothing elaborate but was set up to contain enough sky, white textured wall, primary colour and black elements in a bright daylight to subjectively evaluate colour and contrast. Each video is annotated with the profile name and Contrast/Saturation levels which update accordingly as the Stepper App changes them every 2 seconds. It was shot on an FZ2000/2500 as that is what I was targeting with the test but will be applicable in relative terms to all Lumix cameras. If you are bored enough to want to plough through them, this link contains a zip with the individual videos for each profile. https://mega.nz/file/06QmwYJb#6R8aADqvKMKgG0jaWtX1e-vdTYco019KHJxl66EduoQ

Currently waiting for a gig to start tonight with my Pocket. Fashionably early though ! Nice to have a stabilised anamorphic camera that raises absolutely zero eyebrows from security staff either on the way in or when you are using it.

To mount Sony E mount lenses on Z cameras. Some desirable lenses (such as the Tamron 20-40mm f2.8 and the Sigma contemporary line) are not available in Z mount but are available in E mount.

Far be it from me to encourage you to have more immediate gear angst but Megadap have just released the v3 Pro version of their E to Z adapter which promises even better compatibility with the Tamron lenses and improvements in AF generally, plus the ability to update its firmware directly from the camera. So even if they don't immediately produce the 20-40mm f2.8 you could pick up an E mount version and attach the Megadap to it in the meantime to go with the native Z mount 35-150. Opens up the a lot of other lens possibilities too from the E mount world, particularly the Sigma contemporary range. My experience of the Megadap on @Andrew Reid's Z9 was that it was already near native performance so any advance on that will make it well worth checking out. https://megadap.net/product/megadap-sony-e-to-nikon-z-autofocus-adapter-etz21pro/

No news on price but expected to be released in the Autumn. https://www.tamron.com/global/consumer/news/detail/a058z_20230725.html

Bitrate is 100mbps fixed which is near as dammit the upper limit of the variable bitrate that my iPhone 12 uses (a typical comparator for what people would use a Pocket for) and I don't find it lacking for the purpose. More important for me is that the Osmo Pockets have Cinelike D which is a good compromise and very easy to grade. I had to do a little project at the weekend using the LX10/15 (with my Cinelike D hack activated) and the Pocket and they matched easily both in terms of colour and acceptably enough in image quality. On the Pocket 2, it is derived from a 4.6K sensor which is giving about 1.2x lossless zoom when shooting in 4K and roughly 2x and 1.6x in 1080p and 2.7K respectively. In the edit, I punched in to around 2x on a 4K file from my weekend project and was comfortable with the result so I wouldn't be bothered going up to say 1.5x as a safety and then adding the rest in the edit. A big advantage of the Pocket is adding the control stick which will give you full pan/tilt/zoom controls right from the handle. That usability trumps a small loss of image quality for the purposes I use it for. The 24mm in that spec is coming from it being a drone camera though. The actual lens on a Pocket 2 is 20mm f1.8. On of the beauties of this camera though are the magnetic clip on wide angle adapters (which gives you 15mm) and of course the anamorphic versions too. As well as also simultaneously being able to us magnetic ND filters too. If DJI do bring a new version 3 out with an optical zoom and/or with 10 bit capture then that would be great but I have to say that even as it stands now the Pocket 2 is a very compelling camera for travel and, for me, it is a vastly superior proposition to my iPhone for that role. Its not only because of the creative possibilities it has with having an integrated gimbal so you are not only stabilised but can do tracking etc or the anamorphic and NDs or the ability to have real hardware controls with the control stick. Its that you can take it out of your pocket, hold the power button on and be ready to shoot 2 seconds later rather than titting about unlocking the phone, opening an app and making sure you are in the correct mode. Another bonus is that if do have a need for remote shooting or self shooting with tracking then you can operate it from your phone which you can't do with your phone as you are already using it to film with 😉

Long shot but are the USB cables that you’ve tried definitely both data ones rather than charge only ones?

Oh 🙂

There will still be negotiation between the camera and the adapter if the pins of the adapter are exposed to the camera mount that can be causing it. I have two Fotodiox EF to M42 adapters that I've just tried on my S5ii with the MC21. The EF to M42 adapter that has contacts on it does exactly as you describe with the really slow startup and the one without is an instant startup straight to the IBIS selection screen. Fotodiox has some dire warnings about using their L mount adapters with Leica bodies (the MC21 has this problem to with my SL and T and has to have the pins taped over) so I'm not sure they are fully compliant with the L mount protocol which may be complicated further with later cameras and any changes they have made.

If you are stacking it with the Fotodiox, try putting some electrical tape over the contacts on the Fotodiox. In my experience, the delay you are seeing is the camera trying to handshake (multiple times) with the adapter to get lens information to automatically set the IBIS focal length. Taping over the contacts will stop the attempts and you should get straight to the set focal length process. If that works, stacking a dumb EF to L mount adapter onto the CY to EF will provide a permanent solution absent the variable ND that the Fotodiox was providing. If you don't need to have an electronically controlled EF lens on the same day (or even at all) then the tape solution will suffice.

I dunno. I honestly think that the same techniques and skill they were applying to work within the parameters of the medium then would have been adapted and transferred to work within the parameters of the new medium now. Of course, I'm not saying it doesn't look good. Far from it actually. But, in my opinion, its because they are proper productions and, again, its the skills of everyone and everything from the back of the lens forwards that is making the biggest contribution to that. In those terms, and its only my opinion of course, the difference made by what is behind the lens capturing the image is almost negligible compared to the difference that is made in what is coming into it. I've shot absolutely horrible looking stuff on both film and digital so I should know 😉

Looks good. I could certainly do with another product that isn't compatible with my Atomos Connect 😉

If you google the net worth of family then they could make a decent fist of buying a fair chunk of Arri in its entirety let alone one of their cameras 😉

There were over 500 people involved in the creation of Born On The Fourth Of July. It was nominated for 8 academy awards. The writer, director, editor, cinematographer, composer and sound department have all won at least one academy award. The actual camera and film stock only captured the end result of the direction production design, lighting, composition and performance of what was in front of it. As such, it was the least influential aspect of what you were watching. Resolution matters, "colour science" matters but being realistic matters most of all. Waft the same camera loaded with the same film stock around without any of what they had in front of it and it will look as shit as if you did it with whatever the next great thing in cameras is. We've all got the means now to capture a great image but still lack everything that goes into creating that image in the first place. In this case, what we would be lacking would be the other 499 people.