newfoundmass

Has Panny boy ever implemented anything that wasn't at a top level though? Obviously it has gotten significantly better, but when you look at their implementation of IBIS, for example, it was always class leading. Even autofocus, before everyone switched to phase detect, was better than or at least on par with the competition (minus Canon and their PDAF, which beat everyone.) At this point I pretty much expect Panny boy to deliver on whatever new tech or improvements they make.

Me after watching all the S5ii coverage... "Panny boy... you did it!"

Yeah, I never bothered trying out my c-mount lenses for that reason and have debated selling them. You'd think it would be pretty easy to implement crop modes like BM has done, but I'm guessing they just don't see the demand or appeal.

So I just completed a trade with MPB and I actually am quite satisfied. What really impressed me is that they actually paid me MORE than the original quote, because they judged that my equipment was in better shape than I did! So in addition to getting a S5 I actually ended up getting about $200 more! I made a bit less than if I would've sold it on eBay or myself, but it was so easy and convenient that it was worth it to me. Just thought I'd share.

😉

You're comparing lenses that don't exist to ones that do. A f2.8 is a f2.8 regardless of whether the lens is M43, APS-C or Full Frame. You can add all the qualifiers you want, it doesn't change the fact that the full frame equivalent to most M43 lenses are substantially heavier AND more expensive. Let me know when you find a 24-70 with a constant f2.8 that is even remotely close to the 12-35 f2.8 in weight. Ditto the 35-100, or the 100-300mm f/4-5.6. It's easy to get shallow DOF with M43 except when shooting ultrawide unless the lens has a close focusing distance. It is insane that people discredit an entire system in part because it isn't easy to get enough toneh.

A lot of us don't like Sony cameras, and there are no comparably small full frame versions of the 12-35 and 35-100. For the 12-30 it's 305 g vs. 835 g for full frame equivalent. The 35-100 is 357 g vs. 1480 g for the full frame equivalent. Once you get into telephoto primes you're dealing with a significant size difference again compared to their M43 counterparts. It's always weird when people insist there's no size advantage when I'm both a M43 and full frame shooter. There is such a huge difference, not in the bodies, but the lenses.

I haven't given up hope on M43, and I still believe in the promise of it, but Panasonic needs to push the boundaries of size/specs. To me a camera the size of the GX85 with the abilities and performance of an upgraded GH5 II would be very tempting. The performance gap has narrowed between M43 and full frame, with IBIS being the main advantage at this point. But the added weight of lenses that I've had to deal with, I can't say that I enjoy that one bit. It's why I kept a GH5 and some lenses for my 3 camera kit. I didn't truly appreciate how tiny the 12-35 and 35-100 were until handling L-mount lenses, let alone the tiny lightweight primes! The ball really is in Panasonic's (and OMD, I suppose) court. If they offer a compelling option I think it can be successful, but I think it requires a compete re-evaluation of what they think M43 can be.

I think the FX30 does pretty well in low light. But I think you'd be fine with the A7IV. I'm biased towards the S5 though. 🙂

What kind of video are you doing? Will you be filming long takes? Do you live in a warmer climate? The A7IV does have some overheating issues. However, if you aren't shooting long takes (say longer than 30-45 minutes at a time) or aren't in a hot climate, you'll probably be fine. The FX30 eliminates overheating issues like that, which is why you'd want to go that direction if you're primarily a video shooter. It's a video ("cinema" 😏) camera, so it's meant to be a reliable video camera.

Yeah, at this point in camera development I think resolution is less an issue you'll have and really just shooting at an appropriate shutter speed and hitting focus is what you'll need to worry about. Especially for social media use. The examples above aren't amazing by any stretch, especially given the lighting, but the performers will often geek out over the shots and use them on their social media accounts too. No one seems to notice, or really care, that they are stills taken from a video file. Most people at our level in pro-wrestling are using pictures taken on phones, and I'd argue our stills from videos look better than most pictures taken on a phone because they still have the characteristics of a larger sensor image.

I would say, if you're not a pixel peeper, then absolutely. Motion though might be a problem, depending on your shutter speed. Here are some stills I took from a pro-wrestling event I filmed on the 3rd that I used for promotional purposes on social media. These are from 8-bit 4K 30p video files using a 180 degree shutter angle shot on the S5 with zero editing outside of the watermark. We don't have a professional photographer taking photos (a lot of pro-wrestling events of this size don't since it's not in the budget) so we use stills like this instead. Obviously they aren't perfect, but for social media they are more than adequate, and depending on the shot a 4x6 print would be fine. Static subjects will of course work even better! It should also be noted that 4K & 6K photo modes on Panasonic cameras are essentially just video files that allow you to pick a frame.

The most challenging part is just getting used to manual focusing. It can be intimidating at first, but it's really not that difficult. It's pretty easy with focus peaking and with cameras that allow you to set the focus to linear so that you can repeat focusing consistently (a very underrated feature of the S5 after years of using the GH5.) Manual focusing is such a rewarding experience, at least it is for me. I like that feeling of control.

This is speculation, but I'm guessing the primes do better than the zooms? I really debated picking up two 28-70 f2.8 but I ended up getting two of the 24-105 f4 Panny lenses because of the ability of having dual IS.

I think a lot of folks would go with the FX30 over the A7IV because it's more video focused and won't overheat. It's a very compelling option if you're not obsessed with full frame.

If the X-T4 had better IBIS and didn't have the recording limits I probably would've switched as I was in decent position to do so when it came out. Then COVID dragged on and killed my year, so I am glad I didn't! But I am quite fond of those Fuji colors straight out of the camera, though I am pretty pleased with the S5's colors. I'm glad that I ended up with the S5.

The X-T4 has IBIS, but it's not very good. If you decide to go that route I'd honestly probably just get the X-T3 since there wasn't much different between the two outside of that. I'm biased, but I'd go with the S5. I prefer the look of the video out of the three, and it takes very good photos too.

I don't think there's anything wrong with wanting a camera to "look nice." It shouldn't be a deciding factor, but I don't think most people are using that as their deciding factor anyway, at least not professionals/enthusiasts. I think you can also connect camera design to functionality. I didn't like the way Sony cameras felt in my hands and that was, in part, because of the overall design and Sony's emphasis on making things as compact as possible. They've improved it somewhat by making deeper grips for people like me that have big paws, thankfully, but I still don't enjoy holding and using them. I don't mind the way Panasonic cameras look but I don't fault anyone that does.

I mean, it's a full frame camera. It'd be nice to be able to do 4K 60p without a crop. I like to have the choice between full frame and APS-C. It's one of the benefits of full frame that has won me over, as I can extend the reach of my lenses.

Guessing they want one that's Netflix approved that they can charge extra for? Very strange. I hope it doesn't mean the S5ii is lacking some video features like shutter angle, etc.

Everything looks good, but that crop in 4K 60p makes me shake my head. I'd much prefer full frame 4k 60p over 6K. That is a bit of a bummer.

Looks very good to me, though 4K 60p with a APS-C crop? The primary difference seems to be ProRes?

I haven't seen a ton of complaints honestly about using Sigma lenses with Panasonic bodies. My primary reason for not getting Sigma lenses is due to the dual IS that I can get with Panasonic lenses. The complaints I have seen, and it's kinda hard to call them complaints because the people I've seen weren't that angry or anything, is that autofocusing on Panasonic bodies in VIDEO is slightly better with Panasonic lenses. I'm not saying there shouldn't be more cooperation, and that lenses shouldn't work flawlessly regardless of the body manufacturer, but I don't really think that there are that many people out there who feel like their expectations weren't met, especially if they follow the camera industry. I also think there's some confusion about what the alliance means/meant: they are still camera companies that are in competition with one another, fighting for the same customers (well, maybe not Leica.) Sigma, if I'm not mistaken, already has PDAF on their fp L don't they? So one of the members already has gone in that direction. @MrSMW would know better than me, but in videos like this I've seen that the AF performance with Sigma lenses isn't that much worse than with Panny lenses in video. And maybe my trust is misplaced, but I think if Panny goes the PDAF route they'll pretty quickly end up at the Sony/Canon level. They have a track record of delivering when implementing new technology into their cameras. I don't think anyone faults you for your purchasing decisions, I think people just are a bit confused about your insistence that it's a "dead" mount/alliance when your complaints for why honestly apply to every other camera manufacturer. I guess those issues aren't as significant because they're not in a formal "alliance?" I think you went with Canon, right? I feel like I'd be a lot more annoyed buying into a system that decided four years in to clamp down completely on third party manufacturers than I would be on the L-Mount alliance's issues. With some luck Panasonic will finally go PDAF, and we'll start seeing some of those really affordable Viltrox and other third party lenses finally getting released for the L-Mount. Maybe even Tamron! There are a lot of possibilities on the horizon.

That's not just an L-mount issue though. Sony is starting to do the same thing, where if you're not using Sony lenses you miss out on things like focus breathing correction. A big selling point for Sony was how open the mount was, which resulted in tons of third party lenses when Sony themselves didn't have much of their own lens selection. We're now seeing them becoming a bit more closed off with features that only work with their lenses. And Canon is trying to cut out every other third party completely. Granted, they aren't in any "alliances" but the end results are the same: if you're not using their lenses you're taking a hit with capabilities/performance. The thing about the L-mount alliance is that things can literally turn around in a moment for them. IF Panasonic finally go the PDAF route, I think you'll start seeing a ton of third party lenses for the mount, like you've seen for Sony and Fuji. Ideally the alliance would have more cooperation, and I hope there is more of it moving forward, but even if there isn't it's not really any different from what every other camera manufacturer is already doing.

I just picked up another Lumix S5, making my kit two S5s and a GH5. I sold my G85 and GX85, along with one of my 12-35mm lenses. It was time. I'll miss the GX85 the most, because honestly that camera with the 35-100mm lens is such an awesome combination, but I just didn't use it as much as I should.