newfoundmass

I also bought a set of the Comica WM100 Plus dual transmitter and receiver kits for $55 that runs on UHF. They were in "like new" condition. They have decent reviews, so for that price I figured "why not?" We'll see how they work, but we really don't need anything fancy. As long as the audio is ok we'll be set. I looked at both the Sennheiser G3 and Sony UWP-D11 but I couldn't find any in what I thought was acceptable condition for under $300 and was trying to stay under the $150 price point if I could, since these are for a particular project (pro-wrestling) where they could get broken pretty easy. I'll probably end up buying the UWP-D11 for my own professional work, but these will do for now.

Not a Black Friday deal but a deal none the less: i needed a wireless mic system but refuse to buy one of those ones with non-replaceable batteries, so decided to see how much the old Rodelink Filmmaker Kits were going for on ebay... I bought one from a reputable seller that is listed as in "excellent" condition for $25 with free shipping. I bid, thinking it would probably get higher than that but nope, I won it for $25 and it'll arrive Friday. I'm quite happy!

https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/11/final-cut-pro-11-begins-a-new-chapter-for-video-editing-on-mac/ Looks like it's a free update for FCPX users. It will be a while before I risk the upgrade, haha

A 1.5x crop on APSC? 😬

I don't think there's a better value out there than the S5ii (and the X) except maybe the original S5, which is an absolute steal on the used market. Having used the FX3 and the FX30, I just don't think either is a better camera than the S5II X. The only real benefit I can think of is Sony's larger user base and lenses.

It really is. It's the first kit lens that I'll often use professionally and not even bat an eye at the thought of it. It's not just "good for a kit lens" it's a good lens period.

That is probably why my experience hasn't been too bad with the S5 AF, as I use the Lumix lenses. The S5II X is leagues better, for sure, but I've always found the S5's auto focus to be pretty decent once you realize the limitations. The only time I'd consider it unusable is in low light and when you shoot wide open with a faster lens and are trying to track a subject that is moving around a bit. With my event shooting though I'm not shooting wide open very often unless I really need the light, because I don't really need/want shallow depth of field.

The S5 is a really great value, especially used. The AF isn't nearly as bad as people say, and manual focusing is a dream. There are better cameras out there but none of them are a better value. There has never been a better option for budget filmmaking IMO and I'd be hard pressed to say that any other camera out right now is worth the price difference on what you'd pay for this camera used. Think about what we paid for our first "real" camera and then think about how you can get a used full frame camera with pretty much every pro feature you could ask for for like $1000 USD used. 10 years ago my mind would have been unable to comprehend the value that is the S5 in 2024. I very much like my S5II X and will likely switch out my two S5 bodies for two S5II bodies in the next couple of years, but I do like the image out of the original S5 more. It's just really pleasing. No longer needing to color match them and enjoying the quality of life upgrades on the S5II outweighs the better image, but the S5II image is more than "good enough." I think I'll also end up probably getting an S9 as a personal/super low profile camera. It's actually nearly the perfect BTS/social media camera for my event shoots. Being able to hand it off to someone to film content for our IG, Facebook, and YouTube reels would be really great since it can shoot in open gate and be cropped for each platform.

The whole external fan thing rubs me the wrong way. You shouldn't have to spend hundreds of dollars to get consistent and reliable record times. But as we saw with the S9, if you put recording limits you get bashed. Still, it's insane to me that you have to buy an external device to ensure reliability.

Ideally it'd have better image quality than that, haha. But if they need to sacrifice build quality and some optical quality to hit a certain price point then there aren't a ton of reasons not to. Yes, people should save money in the long run and jump straight to the nicer lenses since they're one and done purchases, but that's just not the way it works most of the time.

It'd be the death nail for M43 so it wouldn't make sense in that regard. It's kind of a bummer that they didn't make the M43 lens mount larger when introducing it. I imagine they never thought they'd go full frame, but it'd have been really nice.

I agree, but one thing I think should be noted is just how good those Lumix lenses are for the price. They're built very well and are optically excellent. I can't say enough good things about them. But they do need budget options. Most entry level users are looking at the price first and foremost. Is that $350 Lumix prime nicer than the cheaper Canon or Sony equivalent? Yes, but those just getting started don't quite understand that, the first thing they notice is price. And when you can get an RP with a 24-105 kit lens for under $1200, that's a lot more enticing than an S5 with the 20-60 kit lens for $1700 even if the camera and lens are superior in every way. Mom and Dad don't know that when they're buying their son or daughter a camera for Christmas after finding out they're interested in photography.

I agree with you that they can't beat Sony (or Canon) at their own game, but they do need to entice more users into the system and a big part of that is being aggressive with pricing and offering more entry level cameras and lenses. These aren't going to be cameras or lenses that appeal to us, but ones that appeal to those who would just be getting their foot into the door. Lumix can't just rely on us, they need a bigger market share in general. Hoping that a niche product gains mass appeal is a risky business proposition, too. Yeah, I don't see a scenario where they give up on higher end full frame cameras because I'm not sure they could survive as a company that just releases mid-range cameras. I think they are in a tough situation where they are damned if they do, damned if they don't. Would it be better to release an underwhelming S1H successor the way they did with the GH6? I learn towards "no." I think sensor tech has slowed down in general. It felt like every single day specs for new sensors would get posted, with people speculating on whether it would be used in a forthcoming camera from this brand or that brand. I know people who think Sony's sensor tech was impacted significantly from the earthquakes that have hit the country over the last 8 or so years and the supply chain issues that happened during COVID. That would kinda make sense about why almost everyone is still using a 6 year old sensor.

Honestly I'd consider dropping the S5 to near fire sale pricing as the entry level option into the L-mount/Lumix full frame family. I'd argue that it's still a great value at its current price, but there is just so much competition in that price range. The RP, R8, Z5, and A7C are all cheaper, and some of those even come with a kit lens for less. I'd definitely argue that the S5 is a superior camera to all of those, but Lumix is at an inherent disadvantage because Canon, Nikon and Sony have a much larger user base. So create a real incentive to try and entice people to dip their toe in. For all of their flaws, and there are a lot of them, Canon has always been smart when it comes to getting casual users to buy their cameras. The RP with a 24-105mm f/4-7.1 lens is $1,118. Is it a crappy lens? Absolutely, but for most people the first lens they use is the kit lens. I'd argue that Lumix's kit lenses are genuinely good lenses and are nicer than Canon and Sony, but they don't have anything comparable to the super cheap options from them.

I disagree. It's a much more honest approach, in my opinion, as you can reliably predict how long you can film with it. I am vehemently opposed to companies releasing cameras they know have overheating problems but still claim unlimited record times. Transparency and honesty should be encouraged. If I get the S9 I'll keep the recording limits on, both because I prefer predictability and because it makes me uncomfortable that by turning the recording limits off you agree that Lumix isn't responsible if you damage the camera's sensor. It's great, I guess, that Lumix begrudgingly gave users that option, but I personally don't care to risk it. I have three other cameras I can use in the event I need to film with no limits.

It wouldn't normally interest me, but on the S9 that's a nice compact set up and the images I've seen with it are pretty decent. For shooting in public where you're not trying to draw attention, that's a really nice little set up. I'm take the slow lens with variable aperture if it means I can have a small setup like that I can take anywhere with me.

Honestly, if they had released the new kit lens with it (I'm guessing it was supposed to be but it was delayed) the S9 would have been a much more compelling release on launch. I am debating getting it now, because that set up is so small and inconspicuous, something I haven't had since getting rid of my Gx85.

We all, myself included, were hounding Lumix about the GH6. Their silence was deafening at the time. Eventually what they released was a pretty decent camera, but one that also simultaneously left many of us underwhelmed. Then a few months later the G9 II comes out with PDAF. It was terribly confusing for users and, in many ways, self-sabotaged their own flagship camera. Was the GH6 rushed out to be a stop gap because the community was pressuring them so much? I don't know, but it kind of looks like that with hindsight. It would also kind of explain why they were content with not fixing some of the ghosting issues that people had, which was not a typical response from a company that has very much been attentive to users and known for improving their cameras even years after their release. If that was what happened it could've been avoided with more communication. Laying out a road map would've saved them from releasing a camera that would be overshadowed almost immediately and made almost irrelevant within a year. People just wanted to know what the future held, whether they should stick with Lumix or look towards a different system. The other companies don't have to convince people that they will be around for the long haul. Lumix does. Lumix also needs to increase their market share. The way to do that is to collaborate with users (and, I hate to admit it, try to win over the influencers) and be more transparent. That includes telling people that follow ups to the S1 lineup is in the pipeline instead of just absolute silence.

I think Lumix is damned if they do, damned if they don't. I think we only have to look back to the GH6 to see why they may be holding back. Just months after releasing it they then released the G9 II with PDAF. Within a year they'd go on to release a GH7 with PDAF. With hindsight it feels as though the GH6 was rushed out. I think Panasonic might be in a similar situation with their higher end offerings. I hope that Lumix works towards improving their marketing and becoming more transparent with the photo/video community. When you're that far behind the other companies there really isn't a reason not to be. Even if you cannot be specific, letting it be known that you're not abandoning higher end users would probably help.

Might it be because they are trying to avoid another GH6 situation and are on the cusp of something big that has delayed it? I'm not sure what that could be, but people certainly weren't very happy when the G9 II was released with PDAF not long after the GH6.

Delivering in 4K isn't very important to me but there's no real reason not to shoot in 4K even if you are delivering in 1080p. That's not to say that you can't get great results with a good 1080p image (the og Pocket gave me my favorite image out of every camera I've ever owned) and can even deliver in 4K with most people not even noticing (i know people who do it with their C100s), but there really isn't an argument for 1080p actually being better than 4K. People that say that are just being contrarians.

Crappy probably wasn't the right word to use on my part. I wouldn't say they're great, though. There are better options out there for not that much more money, that have better preamps and features. The Portacapture line from Tascam are much better and competitively priced, for example. I have the x8 and it was a game changer for me as a one or two person crew. I wouldn't recommend the H4n (including the latest version) either. Zoom has essentially released the same recorders, preamps and all, repeatedly over the last decade plus with only minor improvements. To Tascams credit they've at least avoided that and just kept the same pieces of kit for sale. I can respect that, because at least they aren't trying to sell their customers the same recorder with minor feature upgrades every 5 years. Still though, can't say I'd recommend the DR-60 or any of that generation of recorder. Save up a little more money and get something better. Most cameras today have "good enough" preamps, I think. I use the XLR adapter on my S5s and S5II X and am quite satisfied with it. There are obviously instances, especially with older cameras, where the camera preamps are bad but we're actually quite fortunate that they've gotten as good as they have. We're a long way from the T3i.

I feel like there's a huge difference between fans that are part of the camera's body (where it gets hottest) and fans that are attached externally to a camera's body. I'm not saying that it won't help, just that it seems inefficient compared to putting active cooling right into the body itself. Certainly for the price I don't see why they couldn't, as I refuse to believe that the extra parts needed would significantly raise manufacturing costs. Panasonic did it for a camera that is half the cost, afterall.

It's old and the pre amps are pretty crappy.

I guess it's good that they provide a solution but having to drop $400 to get a handgrip with a fan in it raises a lot of red flags. I don't even know how that even will work to cool the camera body, honestly.