newfoundmass

Good for him! Takes a lot to recognize you have a problem. Still, he looks a lot healthier (and younger) in that video than he does now. Sometimes people who lose weight tend to go overboard.

I was waiting for your thoughts!

100 pounds is a gross exaggeration, but I did notice he started to lose weight about a year ago. He wasn't a big guy to begin with, but looks to have lost at least 20 pounds, which I think is way too much. I too hope he's okay.

I am kind of surprised that it's "only" 44MP. I'm not complaining, it's just not common that you go with less resolution in a mark II vs. the original is it? Granted it's only like 3 MP difference. Will S1R shooters be angry? I've never been someone who takes/needs to take high resolution photos, so I'm genuinely curious.

https://www.l-rumors.com/exclusive-first-specs-of-the-new-lumix-s1rii/ Updated article.

I could see this being popular with small businesses/marketing companies who use their iPhone currently but are interested in higher quality photos and videos to post, in addition to the zoomers that are interested in compacts right now. I talk to people in those fields every day and they are interested in "upgrading" but are confused/intimidated by the offerings out there. One of the people I work with at the Chamber of Commerce was asking about cameras the other week and when I mentioned Sony* they said they had so many options they didn't know which one to get, and that they also would prefer Canon because in their mind Canon = the best camera company. They've also mentioned in the past that they are intimidated by interchangeable lens cameras. If this is decent I'll probably end up recommending it to her. * it's kinda damning that when someone asks a Lumix user about compact cameras I mention Sony and not Lumix.

I think the only thing that a S2H could have that would make me even think about it would have to be internal ND. Honestly the S5II X does everything i need and then some.

Very true. I've long said that most of us don't even have a television large enough to make the most out of 4K so the push for high resolution is kind of pointless. I agree in principle, THOUGH I do think the ALEXA still has more advantages than just dynamic range. People I know who work with it always tell me it's the easiest to get the grade they are looking for and for my eyes there is something about the image that feels more organic. I am, though, open to the idea that there is a level of bias when looking at footage you know is from an ALEXA.

I thought it was obvious that the first was the Alexa as the image just looks more organic, though I can't put my figure on why. I don't think either looked particularly great though. I assume that has more to do with location and lighting.

The Alexa 35 came out in 2022. There were instances where I thought the FX3, a camera I do not particularly care for, looked better than the Alexa, like in the outside handheld shot. I was genuinely shocked when he showed the results there. And in the interview scene it was wild how close the FX3 was to the Alexa 35, though the Alexa did stand out more. Ultimately the Alexa 35 is gonna have that secret sauce that helps make it stand out above every other camera in most situations, but in 2025 someone could absolutely take a sub $5000 camera, film a feature with it, and 99% of the people viewing it wouldn't know whether it was shot on an Alexa or Canon R5 II. Bo Burnham filmed his Netflix special "Inside" on a S1H and used other budget film equipment you can get on Amazon to do it. No one, outside of us camera nerds who paused and rewinded reflections of the camera and equipment like it was the Zapruder film, noticed or cared.

I mean it's not really fair to compare an Alexa to any of these more affordable cameras. It's an Alexa for a reason. When you buy one you aren't just paying for the camera itself, you're paying for the decades of research and development that went into the image processing and color science that gives it that Alexa look. That's what you're paying for when buying any of those higher end cameras. The other part comes down to the sensor, too. Higher end cameras have sensors that are specifically developed for them. That's a huge difference. While these lower end cameras have software and processing that is tweaked to work with sensors they buy, the higher end cameras use sensors that were designed specifically for those cameras. Finally, there is a Luca Forsyth video that compares several cameras, ranging from the FX3 all the way to Alexa 35. His results were pretty surprising.

I actually think the camera body itself looks quite decent (I hate the logo/name though) but the reviews all seem to indicate that it shares a lot (if not most) of the same internals as the OM-5. Other than a cash grab I don't really understand why this camera exists.

I'm more optimistic about Lumix than a lot of people. I think they will continue to release the best value cameras out there, the issue will be not just retaining their current users (regardless of which system they are invested in) but growing it. I think they can achieve that. I have seen signs that they've accomplished the latter somewhat with the S5II X. It has been more of a trickle than a flood, but there are people out there who switched from Sony to Lumix because of it. To continue that, they need to continue on the current path but radically change the way they communicate and market their product. That, for them, seems to be the hardest thing to overcome.

It's not the lack of releases that is the issue, at least not for me, it's the lack of communication. They don't need to be like Sony, who releases a new camera every time there is a minor upgrade that could've been released as a firmware update. In fact I'd prefer they don't! But simply giving people an idea on what is in the pipeline would sure be welcomed. Tell people that S1, S1R and S1H successors are in the pipeline and give people a little meat to chew on. There's no reason not to, especially when the user base and many in the industry are nervous about the company's future in the marketplace. The silence reminds me of period between the GH5 and the announcement of the GH6 and why I moved on from M43 to begin with.

I'd still go with the S1. In the US the GH5s still goes for about $700-750 on eBay vs. $1000 for the S1. The S1 is such a better camera in every way, it's worth the extra $250. And you can start a pretty good lens lineup for pretty cheap between the excellent kit lens and the primes on the used market. My primary reason for looking at the S1R is that I've already got the L-mount glass. Buying into another lens system just doesn't make sense since I've got so many great lenses already. Once the S1R hits sub-$1200 it'll be hard not to pick one up.