Davide DB

I just saw the film in a good theater. Not Imax but latest technology. I believe that, before continuing to puzzle over the whys and wherefores, one should see it 🙂 Long story short: There is so much CGI that having Atlas Mercury and P+S Technik lenses AND a good DOP, the film could have been shot with a GH2 🙂 No Spoiler The plot is not bad and the movie is not bad. IMHO if you like sci-fi, it deserves to be seen if only for not being yet another Marvel crap or third-hand Star Wars junk. The script occasionally swerves but I can live with that. There are scenes without CGI, of course but the cinematography is nothing much. IMHO the real beauty are the CGI scenes and the worlds imagined by the designers. Some of the landscapes are really striking. The futuristic Nepalese Buddhist temples are outstanding. I haven't seen such fascinating landscapes since the second Blade Runner. They reminded me of some of the gems among the DUST channel shorts. By comparison, the sets of the various Star Wars spinoff series are South American soap operas. Bottom line: perhaps we underestimate the quality that the cameras we keep in the drawer (in the right hands) can express.

Sorry I meant Venice II From: https://www.xdcam-user.com/2021/11/sony-launches-venice-ii/

Advertising aside, this series is really interesting to get info on the choices of the various DOPs https://pro.sony/en_GB/cinematography/cinematography-tips/scene-deconstruction-homepage

Does Sony A1 (IMX610AQL) use same senor of Venice?

Yes. From some BTS photos it seems they even went lighter than that https://www.provideocoalition.com/did-the-creator-use-the-sony-fx3-as-an-a-camera/

I would have the box/brain with some assignable function buttons and then more fine/direct controls on the optional handle. On Hassemblad the handle is completely separate from the body. I imagine a control handle which becomes part of the body itself. P.S. In my design team I would add a Lego engineer 😉

I would take the industrial design team and lock them in a room with: - A Hassemblad 907X 50C kit - An Insta360 One RS kit - An old Zenza Bronica with grip. Essentially I would want a camera consisting of: A squared brain with buttons, inputs and outputs, and a minimal display (like a ZCam or the front one of a GoPro) that would allow me to configure the machine. A high-resolution 3.5 inches display module to attach to the rear that can rotate as we are used to on a GH5. I am not talking about an external monitor but a module that adheres to the butt of the brain and forms a complete body capable of controlling and configuring it like an integrated display. The whole thing a parallelepiped like an FX3. A Hassemblad-style handle/grip complete with controls and wheels to add to the brain and get the ergonomics of a current camera. Throw in an adapter with ND. Put the pieces together and you have a complete camera suitable for photo and video. If you just use the brain you have a komodo/zcam/BS1H style stuff that you can configure as a cinema rig. add display and handle and you get a complete camera. Hassemblad 907X 5C has everything (but the touch display is built-in) P.S. Choose which piece costs 2K 🙂

Sony FX3, Atlas Mercury and P+S Technik Evolution Lenses (source: IMDB) recorded on a Ninja V. other bits here: https://www.provideocoalition.com/did-the-creator-use-the-sony-fx3-as-an-a-camera/ From trailer it seems all the movie has a extensive VFX work. From what I understand in my ignorance: - the camera is the least of the costs in a large production/blockbuster. - It is not the camera that makes the look of the film but the lenses. - In a big production, where a serious DOP can afford to give vent to his fantasies about lighting, the technical characteristics of a camera are less important. Ultimately, if Fraser/Edwards chose this camera, it is more because of their fixation on being minimalist as pointed out in the opening article. About minimalism.... I still remember in 2009 when Howard Hall first took an IMAX camera underwater for the documentary Under the Sea. Minimalist to the point 🤣

This seems to me to be a very lucid analysis. I imagine Lumix executives reading this article secretly in the restroom.

I agree but quoting the last excerpt from Nikkei article, they are speaking of a different segment: Finepix, Cyber-shot they are real point & shot camera. Just look at Sony: RX100 VII suggested retail price: 1300€ ZV-1 II suggested retail price 1000€ ZV-E10 (ILC) suggested retail price: 800€ (here we are in the GM range) The above are not P&S camera and in that segment that Panasonic left a whole market to its competitor. And thinking to Andrew's post it's the format/size where M43 should be king.

I agree with you except for the LX10 and LX100. They are not cameras that fall into the category that can be replaced by a smarphone. There is the whole audience of Youtubers/vloggers and both Sony and Canon have recently dropped machines aimed at this group of users. Basically a compact with perfect AF and good microphones. Speaking of my niche: Sony has sold tons of RX100s (seven generations) widely used as compact solutions for underwater shooting. Panasonic proved that both the LX10 and 100 were far superior for underwater use but then they became obsolete and left completely the market to Sony and Olympus. There are a lot of people who still use them with great satisfaction and would welcome an updated version that also competes with the newly released Olympus TG7 (another best-selling camera). In short, it is true that smartphones have eaten a chunk of the market but there are niches where there is still great demand for more specialized tools. Do all these users who buy action cams die with gopros or should they go straight to an R5C?

If the goal is to renovate all the cameras.... They started with the FF line. They probably were not ready for the flagship so they started with the entry level S5 model (perhaps the best selling). They revamped the older flagship G9. In my opinion even if they had started with the GH6 the result would not have changed in terms of total destruction of sales of the other models. Following this logic, the next step could be: - a new PDAF machine in the rangefinder line (GX80 etc.) OR even in the smallest line, LX10 or LX100. - new SH1x II flagships with PDAF

I completely agree with Andrew. On the appropriateness of firing on the ambulance given its influence, I do not comment. If Panasonic's policy is focused on saving money, what will be the next camera? A GH7 with the body of an S1H? An S1HII eith the same S1H ? Finally a GX80II ? I can't believe they decided to rationalize camera bodies in this way. Maybe they fired everyone in the industrial design department? Of course with this speed, when they complete the cycle we will have a Sony A7SV a Sony A2 a Nikon Z11. Let's be clear, the speed with which Sony churns out new machines is evil but Panasonic's business policy is truly a mystery.

R.I.P. then

It seems to me a suicide decision. It is bad enough that cameras receive fw updates, let alone hw. It would be the first time in history. I simply believe that the sensor is a derivative of that of the GH6 and the marketing sells itself that they are identical. But the devil is in the details. I've read too that they have the same sensor but who is the source? I guess it's just a PR statement. Nobody disassembled it.

It's simply not possible thay are the same sensor. A modern PDAF sensor ha specialized pixels on it. It's not something you are adding later. Only old real DSRL had the space to implement PDAF out of the sensor. If G9II and GH6 have the same image It means that the G9II sensor is a derivation of the GH6 sensor but it's a completely different one. So I think I'll pass the mic to Harry Callaghan https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/124306/confusion-about-the-principle-of-on-sensor-pdaf-technique

I don't understand how it could be a firmware update. Any paper on PDAF technology (on mirrorless/phones) explains that the sensor must have specialized photodiodes. The number varies with the accuracy and speed of the autofocus.

Nobody cares but from a underwater video operator POV (mine 😁) Pana budget choice of reusing the same body could be a good one. It happens once in a blue moon that two camera share the same body and control layout and this seems to be the case. Nauticam has already a reasonably priced uw housing for the S5 II (3350€ vs 4050€ of GH6)and this seems to be fully compatible. To be seen the 120mm port diameter for the FF lens. https://www.nauticam.com/collections/panasonic-mirrorless-housings/products/s5ii-underwater-housing-for-panasonic-lumix-s5ii-x-camera

Yes I was too dramatic and I know you like to play devil's advocate 😉 but the substance of the argument does not change: what is the point of having an M43 sensor inside a full frame body? Certainly a huge saving in design and production costs (which unfortunately will not be passed on to the end customer). But what many are saying is that the route taken so far takes away a lot of the appeal of the M43 system.

On the contrary, I smell the marketing department here. "If 40 percent choose Canon it means what they offer is good so let's copy them!" And now we find ourselves with M43 sensors in the body of a 1DX. This is where Panasonic stopped dreaming and being innovative by betraying what were the peculiarities of the M43. They will be forced to launch a GH7 as soon as possible otherwise the timing chosen is simply suicidal.

You have enough material for a spicy new episode on youtube 😉

Sorry Kye, I agree but I have to disagree 🙂 I always forget to include a disclaimer that I use the M43 system underwater 99% of the time. My fault. Unless those rare cases where you are looking for an artistic effect, underwater, "razor sharp" is ALWAYS better. Now the best underwater imaging is achieved with additional wet lenses. These are designed to work with specific focal lengths and diameters. For example, this one is designed for the 14mm. With a 12mm it vignettes. A 1,3 Kg chunk of glass https://www.divephotoguide.com/underwater-photography-scuba-ocean-news/nauticam-releases-next-generation-wet-wide-lens-wwl-1b Unfortunately, the only M43 compatible lenses are the two old 14-42mm. Discontinued lenses that have never been updated because the equally mediocre and perhaps three times as large 12-60 now goes. The 14-42mm (also the PZ pancake version) is very good up to 20mm then the definition degrades a lot and with two wet lenses in front the effect is very evident. The 12-35 is the most beautiful lens I have ever used underwater but unfortunately it is too narrow* and too wide when inserted behind a wet lens. * Lens FOV behind a dome decrease a lot: https://www.subspace.ch/uw-optics-expertise To conclude this rant that no one will give a damn about.... I agree with @Andrew Reidwhen he writes: Same applies to lens too. I would like to have a 14-42 pancake marked Leica. It's crazy that a GH5 with 12-60mm is bigger than a Sony FX3 with the 28-60mm. Sony FE 28-60mm is becoming the new underwater standard to be use with wet lens.

All the tiny lens are not updated anymore. Kit lens and new ones are huge. In this regard Pana failed to comply with the original M43 promise.

Any review from Canada?

90% of customers do not care about overheating. Otherwise GoPro would have gone out of business five years ago.