MrSMW

I want a red GM5 now… 🫶

And you don’t want the guy who did the Millenium Falcon. Just ONE cup holder. MAJOR oversight.

Just as long as he, she or they (you can never truly tell with Lego people) doesn’t have the standard Lego hands. Which are rubbish.

In terms of pure design aesthetics and handling, I also want this @Davide DB

And, "Hey Siri, do earwig's have arseholes?" . . . Apparently they do. The knowledge that is gained from this place either directly or indirectly...

What, the Arri matte box?

Not a 'problem' as such for me, but yes, would definitely prefer something larger, but how large is possible without increasing the camera size? 3.2" I think is the larger size on even the best FF mirrorless although the MF may have larger and the BlackMagic definitely does, but then it's. much bigger camera. I will take resolution over size any day though, with ability to pinch and zoom in ideally.

I have no idea what the market wants, only what I would like. I'm selfish like that. The S5ii is the closest thing right now along with maybe the R6ii? The only things I don't like about the S5ii are; the rear LCD could be higher res, I don't like the shutter button feel or sound and don't like the files (photo) as much as those from the S1H. Might be an OLPF thing, but I suspect it is more than that... What does their market want? Well quite a few the new Zf, me included.

My recent purchase decisions have very much been lens driven and the R3 has been on my radar for a while as the near perfect body for me as I prefer a built in grip to a detachable one, but at the same time do not care for the weight. So Z9 vs R3 = a win for the R3. But then it falls apart for pretty much the reasons Andrew stated. My favourite lenses are the Tamron; 20-40, 28-75 G2 and 35-150, only available or can be adapted to Sony & Nikon, ie, I could stick all of those on a Z9 but none on a Canon. Also, the Sigma Contemporary line; 20, 35, 65, 90, 105 and 28-70. Sony or L Mount only. I like these for video work as they have both an aperture ring (well the primes do) and a manual focus switch which is part of the overall combo why I shoot L Mount for video. The only lens I actually like in Canon RF mount is the 28-70...but it is monstrous...and if I was to choose the R3 as my next stills camera, although I could live with this combo, it's not a 'one and done' combo because I could live without going wider than 28mm, but need longer than 70 and there isn't that much scope to crop with the R3. But having said that, it's still a near 2.5kg combo when the Sony A7RV + Tamron 28-75 is only about 1.5kg and can be cropped hard. Lenses have been my issue for well over a decade, partly because I have avoided Sony and to be fair, with good reason as until recently, I have found Sony cameras to be a bit meh. The A7RVa was the first that actually ticked the box and the A7RV even more so and I am struggling to see a better option for me for stills than that A7RV + Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 G2 combo as it ticks...well every single box. Canon though, they have never been able to entice me into spending any money with them. Owned probably 50+ cameras but never a Canon.

Those lens are 'only' 10k each. Probably makes a difference 😉

Possibly because it kind of demonstrates that one of the least most important components of movie making is the camera itself? Beyond a certain point. I’m sure they were not using the f4-5.6 kit lens but some 20k$ cine lenses and maybe less than in some other productions, but whatever lighting etc was needed. We know that even just in commercial jobs, the type of camera you have can get you or at least deny you, the job. ’Average’ tool in skilled hands etc… In terms of sensor though, just how far off a Venice is that of the FX3? Barely anything.

Very unlikely though the Samyang equivalent of the 35-150 is supposed to be coming. The only thing about that lens is it is slightly bigger than the Tamron and suffers from awful lens creep.

Logic says this should not be the case, but it does seem to be. At least in certain instances... More on the stills side, but the first 2 Fuji X cameras, the original X100 and then the X Pro-1, produced the nicest files IMO. There was something intangible about them that is difficult to define other than 'organic' and 'filmic'. The cameras themselves were slow clunky though and with each new gen, that got better, but somehow the files worse. There was a brief blip when it came good again, not 'as good', but better with the X Pro-2 and XH1, but then backwards again. I left Fuji after the XT3 so can't comment further re. later Fuji cameras though views seem to be mixed. Similar issues for me with S1H vs S5ii. The S1H is supposed to be primarily a video-orientated camera with decent stills capability. The S5ii, a hybrid. The stills from the S1H are sublime. The stills from the S5ii are a bit shite. For my 17th wedding of the season a few weeks back, I thought I'd give my S5ii's a run out as my stills units instead of my S1H. Same settings, same shooting style, same processing workflow. Shite shite shite. What a mistake. Is it the same sensor just with PDAF? I don't know, but I do know this and that is the S1H is in another league when it comes to stills compared with the more modern S5ii. So was the S1R and that definitely had a different sensor and possibly the best one the full-frame Lumix's have had to date, photo and video. I want to change my S1H because in order to use my lens of choice, the Leica 24-90, I have to use the battery grip and that means 2.8kg or in old money, about 6lbs. I have been looking at all kinds of options but 2 contenders now rising to the top, especially after editing this S5ii shot wedding which I am doing right now, is the S1H and the S1R. I might just get another S1H, ditch the grip, ditch the Leica 24-90 and instead run a pair of the things gripless and with the much smaller and lighter Sigma 28-70mm on one and the Sigma 105mm prime on the other. OK, it means a pair rather than a single unit, but smaller and lighter units which have more range (I have the Sigma 16-28 also) and better in low light. And cheap as chips on the used market now, relative to their performance. Or I could go back to S1R's, but despite the extra megapixels (desired), I much prefer shooting the S1H but did not care fir using the S1R despite it producing extremely fine results. Most folks seem to prefer the video quality that came out of the original S5 over the S5ii. I'm not sure about that one as I am getting better results from the S5ii, but that could be down to current technique and use case... Which just goes to show that at least in my experience, newer stuff does not equal better and in some cases, just plain not as good.

It would be interesting to see a face off between the Zf and the XT5 which to me looks like the closest competitor? Not just on paper specs, but how they actually shoot and the results they produce. Someone I am sure will do that head to head shortly...

Branding/image. Canon = cameras. Maybe printers and back in the day, photocopiers. Panasonic & Sony = electronics. Tough to get past that though Sony have helped themselves with their marketing and YouTube etc. Panasonic... Well Panasonic or Lumix as we should call them, haven't really played that ball very well. Fuji came (back) on the scene in 2011 and have been gaining popularity in their niche ever since. Nikon for a while were on the ropes but with the Z9, then Z8 and now Zf, have hits on their hands. If you can manage to buy any of their products... Olympus has fallen. Pentax. 64 million years BC.

For me it would be a pair of Zf’s with primes, or a single Z8 with a zoom…except I’d go for a Z9 actually over a Z8. I like both approaches about equal really but other than Lumix making me my S2R/H, it’s more like a pair of Zf’s with a set of primes vs a single Sony A7RV with a single zoom lens for the smallest, lightest, most croppable, flexible, package around. I really don’t wish to change my S5ii’s and lens sets for my video work because they just work. It’s stills only (with occasional hybrid use) for the 3rd unit. Or back to 4 units with the Zf’s…but if they are small and light enough…and with primes they would be, I could swing that. At least my options are narrowed down to just 3 now but we’ll see, it all hinges on The L MOUNT ALLIANCE.

Agree with you there Django, but the Zf is a photo-centric camera and the folks that buy these kind of things are not really into rigging stuff out for external RAW etc. Or even video full stop in a lot of cases other than occasionally. I don't know about the overheating, that one remains to be seen, but definitely if video was my primary focus, this camera would not be on my list. Certainly not 'professionally'. As a 50:50 hybrid shooter, I have tried using the same bodies to do both and come to the conclusion I can do it, but I prefer having dedicated units to each. I have pretty much settled on the 3 body approach now, one for stills, one for (considered) filming and one for (mainly static) video. The downside with this approach is it really requires zooms in order to limit the compromises and I'd rather shoot primes so I might flip back with my next gen kit to having 3 identical bodies that can fulfil all 3 roles in a hybrid manner. If I do, the Zf would NOT be a contender for this. I don't think anyway... But I am considering the possibility of a pair of Zf's with some primes, purely for stills and go for that classic pairing of something like the 35mm f1.8 on one hip with the 85mm f1.8 on the other with something wider and something longer in the bag for those times when I need it. I'm going to be in Paris in mid November so hopefully some of the stores like FNAC will have at least demo units so I'll have a play if I can.

That is also true, though I would expect to see more larger vertical video in the future for the simple reason that we are becoming increasingly used to using these smaller devices in the vertical orientation, that it makes sense (to me anyway) that by the time we get to Bladerunner 2049 times, more devices such as tablets and laptops etc, plus video advertising, will be taller than it is wide. A square 8k or even 6k sensor would still suit my needs very well!

It makes perfect sense to me that ALL sensors today, other than that intended for cinema/TV should be square because then best of both worlds! Just set up custom overlays on the screen and it's easy to see what is possible from any scene. With my photography hat on, I'd MUCH prefer to shoot this way without having to continually rotate the camera physically, but see the projected result/cropping on the screen instead.

Late 80’s into early 90’s so after a quick Google, looks like the FM2. I know it wasn’t one of those big blocky one’s…

Indeed. If it Had not been for that very issue with the Z9 in the second half of '22 and first half of '23, I'd have been shooting Nikon all this year as that is where I was going. Except couldn't buy one until out was too late (for me) 😒 Another thing about the Zf, I cut my teeth on FM3's I think they were back in the day. 2 years and college and 3 at uni and all we had were those and rolls of Ilford HP5 so no guesses what I bought as my first pro camera. FM3/F3, whichever was the smaller one...but it was 30+ years ago so the memory is a bit foggy. They weren't available in orange, blue, red or any other colour skin however...

Well it would have to be is what I mean and with more features or folks will WTF it's existence even more than they will regardless. I've been eying up the new Cookes...and came to the conclusion, I'd need to be Coked up to do that properly, but the Dulens Micro Primes look the business and the entire set of those costs less than one new Cookie...

There's nothing wrong with being the son of God 😉 Hadn't thought of that though, 6k internal only from the 8k sensor. That is probably what they will do then. I keep flip-flopping over whether I want to really explore only shooting video and pulling stills from that, but I keep ending up in the same place which is I am 50% a photographer and love editing as much as shooting stills, but pulling stills from video I think would get tedious very quickly and become a process rather than anything creative... So I am back in the camp of finding a new champ to succeed the S1H. Why succeed it if I like it so much? 2.8kg. It doesn't weigh 2.8kg? Yes it does, I'm not the son of God and just a very naughty boy as I've got a battery grip on it to balance out the Leica 24-90mm beast that's doing the lens bit. I need to get that level of quality ideally below 1.5kg. Which it would be or thereabouts with that A7RV and the Tamron 28-75, or could be even more so with a pair of Zf's and a pair of primes... Or Lumix gifts me that 60 megapixel S2R and I can then just use the Sigma 28-70 and I don't need a grip or a longer lens because I can crop.

That would be logical and my thinking except Panasonic said very recently, they are not entering the 8k arena. They did not say what they were doing instead, but it would have to be a development of their existing 6k surely...but that is at odds with the 8k and the whole Leica tie up/Q3 internals/precursor to an SL3. It's a bit odd... In a heartbeat providing they solved the banding issue in certain lighting conditions because I tried the FP-L and it absolutely could not be trusted in this regard. And didn't have IBIS. Or shoot 4k 50/60p. Or any form of tilt screen. Apart from that, fucking (with an added grip) brilliant 😉 One with a 35mm f2 and the other with a 65mm f2. They make both of these lenses so... But then one could simply add these lenses already so... This was actually going to be my run n' gun hybrid set up had the FP-L not had the 97 missing features I needed to make this possible...but maybe the next gen might? If there even is a next gen and there are zero rumours other than the endless speculation over Foveon but as you say, nothing solid, just diarrhoea...

I don’t have buyers remorse over getting a pair of S5ii’s either because for the 50% side of my work that is video, they are stellar. But as hybrids, I am a bit dissatisfied because I just don’t find them great stills units. Compared with the S1H, they are just clunky in that regard. Ultimate image quality, little difference, but to use, zero joy. I had intended after buying a single S5ii unit, to get a pair of S5iiX’s and indeed had preordered them but cancelled one and returned the other box unopened. I really had hoped and thought the 3 identical body approach would work for me…and it would, just not with these 3 bodies. Principal issues = modest res rear LCD (which is how I work) and annoying shutter button feel and sound. (Spoiled with that of the S1H). So I don’t know about the shutter button on the Zf but the rear screen is much better so scores on at least 1 of my 2 niggles. If purchasing today, hands down the Zf. I happen to be one of those people that like dials also rather than buttons so another win there. But my best financial option and honestly I’d be 100% over the moon if Lumix, or even Leica or Sigma pop something out in time as it will simply then be a case of swapping one single body within an existing system than an entire system swap which I would rather avoid. The middle road being swapping the stills unit and a few lenses which at this point in time would be: 1. Z9 + Tamron 20-40 adapted and Tamron 35-150, or, 2: A7RV + Tamron 28-75 as the more compact unit, skipping the longer lens for cropping using those extra megapixels and accepting I’m not shooting any wider than 28mm. Or an entire system swap for 3x Zf with the choice of 4 primes and 1 zoom. Musing on a very wet off day somewhere in SW France…