Shooting with the Panasonic S1 in Barcelona

[anonim]

30 minutes ago, KnightsFan said:

Yes, brightness will match because ISO is designed to make the same brightness across devices. It's crucial that the reading of your light meter match ANY camera you use, so equal ISO should always provide the same exposure on the final image. However, ISO does not equal gain. That is, if you take a ten year old sensor with terrible low light, you might need 12 dB of gain to get ISO 800, whereas you might have a modern sensor that only needs 3dB of gain for ISO 800. And probably that new sensor will have a higher SNR, despite producing the same "brightness".

 

Actually, I've read that also (pretty used to be reader) and controlled it as variable. After that, I think I never shoot above ISO 800  I felt in love with Voigtlanders - I recognized them as my choice, albeit pretty little and compact, they are proudly constructed and smoothness capable, so to say if you understand...

[KnightsFan]

3 minutes ago, Shirozina said:

Downsampling - as you said it improves the S/N ratio. It also improves resolution over 1:1 sampling. So 2 aspects or the image quality that are improved. 

The larger sensor with the same photosite size has the same signal per pixel, but more pixels. Thus, more total signal across the sensor. And that's something we can directly measure as SNR when downsampling, which combines several signal samples into one larger signal sample. I'm not sure how this is a different concept altogether, but maybe I am misunderstanding you? It all leads back to capturing more total signal to begin with.

6 minutes ago, anonim said:

Actually, I've read that also (pretty used to be reader) and controlled it as variable. After that, I think I never shoot above ISO 800  I felt in love with Voigtlanders - I recognized them as my choice, albeit pretty little and compact, they are proudly constructed and smoothness capable, so to say if you understand...

The only voigtlander I've used extensively is an old 50mm f2.8 from West Germany. A true character lens. I hear good things about the modern ones, too.

[Video Hummus]

I own a GH5S. It's brilliant. Low light is not a problem. DoF is really not a problem. I can shoot in C4K at 60p with a 1.8x crop factor. I have the creative freedom to shoot at 180 FPS for a particular shot. I can put a speedbooster on it and slap a Canon EF lens on it and have a 1.15x crop factor (a 70-200mm F2.8 will be a 80.5-230 F3.2 DoF)! I have a great lens selection, because I can adapt almost ANY LENS onto my camera! I have great built in preamps. I have a great native XLR hotshoe adapter for my camera. I have VERY useable autofocus for vlog style shots or something that doesn't need precision AF. I can slap on a 100-400mm f2.8-4 MFT (full frame eq.) telephoto lens that can fit in my f*king pocket and cost 80% the price and 40% the weight.

Micro 4/3 is a great system. I think it's best strengths are in video, especially. I think thats why Olympus is a hard sell anymore. Look at the Kinefinity Terra 4K. It's got basically the same sensor as the GH5s / BMPC4K and can do up to 4K 100fps and 2K up to 240fps. The video is gorgeous. The mount options are extremely flexible. And it's under $10K.

People that say M4/3 isn't good don't know what they're talking about or are so biased they can't admit there are things out there that rival whatever they like.

It can do lowlight (and as sensors improve this won't be an argument anymore)
It can do extreme telephoto inexpensively and without much bulk
It has DoF advantages for telephoto shots
It can be adapted to do shallow DoF if you need it
It allows more creative frame rates in a smaller package (smaller sensor, less heat, etc...)
It can do built in IBIS better than larger sensors (smaller sensor, less inertia, better IBIS...look at the Oly E1X for example...it's basically a built in gimbal)
It can still take great photos
It can take 50MP to 80MP photos of landscapes with Pixel shift tech.

It can't do anything larger than 8K.
It can't replicate exactly the "full frame look".
It can't boost your ego if all you care about is sensor size.
 

Yes, I'm a M4/3 fanboy because the GH5S is a great video camera. The mount is very flexible. The tech in the latest rounds of M4/3 cameras makes it even more flexible. But in general the entire M4/3 system has an image problem because people just can't seem to get over that tiny looking sensor.

At the same time I can see the benefits of full frame cameras and I see advantages in owning both systems. I really wanted Panasonic to knock it out of the park with the S line. I hope they can improve upon the initial launch specs, because it looks like a great camera.

[KnightsFan]

@Video Hummus There are plenty of great M43 cameras, I agree. I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from using it. I jumped into the conversation only to point out that the "spreading light" wasn't really true.

For me, though, I am really looking to get a FF camera next because it goes better with my lenses. I love that old voigtlander I mentioned above, but it's really tough to use vintage lenses on anything smaller than FF, simply because that's what they were designed for. Speed boosters... I'd rather not tbh. A new GH5s with a speed booster was more expensive than an S1. Might as well just . And while Olympus have great pixel shift cameras, none of the M43 cameras with phenomenal video have it. The fact that pixel shift exists in one camera, and that another camera has good lowlight just means that M43 has produce a camera that does both.

The way it's shaping up, the S1 beats the GH5s for low light, takes 24MP photos out of the box, AND has pixel shift. And it's certainly cheaper than getting a GH5s, an Olympus, and a speed booster. So at this point it looks like a better system for my needs and I'm pretty excited for the future of Panasonic's full frame lineup.

[DBounce]

20 minutes ago, KnightsFan said:

The way it's shaping up, the S1 beats the GH5s for low light, takes 24MP photos out of the box, AND has pixel shift. And it's certainly cheaper than getting a GH5s, an Olympus, and a speed booster. So at this point it looks like a better system for my needs and I'm pretty excited for the future of Panasonic's full frame lineup.

The S1 is cheaper than just the GH5S with SB... which goes back to my original point... M43 is a tough sell with all the new mirrorless cameras that are out/coming out with larger sensors for similar, and in some cases less money. The Nikon Z6 is under $2k... as is the Sony A73. The Canon EOS R is right at the same $$$ as a GH5S body only. I've owned all of these cameras... I think I miss the Nikon most, but feel comfortable with my choice. The GH5S was a big step up in terms of low-light when compared to the GH5, but their full frame contemporaries IMO have an edge. If the price is near enough to the same, I just cannot see a reason to opt for M43. That might change with the GH6... but any advantages could quickly swing back in favor of the FF options once the Sony A7S3 is released.

[thebrothersthre3]

IMHO smaller sensors will always have an edge with better features. Neither Olympus or Panasonic have taken full advantage of M43 yet IMHO. 

Panasonic has been conservative keeping their bodies from overheating but if they pushed them as much as Sony has they could do more while sacrificing reliability. 

We'll see how much they push the GH6, if its as big a jump as the GH5 was to the GH4 it could be something very compelling. 

[KnightsFan]

10 minutes ago, DBounce said:

M43 is a tough sell with all the new mirrorless cameras that are out/coming out with larger sensors for similar, and in some cases less money.

Agreed.

However, newer features will come to smaller sensors first. Right now, if you want internal 10 bit (S1 isn't shipping yet), or 4k120, or global shutter, there is no FF option anywhere near the price for those features in smaller sensors. While I'm sure all of those features will eventually come to FF, they're still a few years out. And I know from other discussions that many of those features don't speak to you personally, but everyone's got different priorities. That's why I'm not out here saying FF is objectively better than M43.

[DBounce]

7 minutes ago, KnightsFan said:

Agreed.

However, newer features will come to smaller sensors first. Right now, if you want internal 10 bit (S1 isn't shipping yet), or 4k120, or global shutter, there is no FF option anywhere near the price for those features in smaller sensors. While I'm sure all of those features will eventually come to FF, they're still a few years out. And I know from other discussions that many of those features don't speak to you personally, but everyone's got different priorities. That's why I'm not out here saying FF is objectively better than M43.

We can both agree that most if not all of the features of today's M43 sensors will one day come to Full Frame... but the reverse is not true... and likely never will be.

 

[KnightsFan]

4 minutes ago, DBounce said:

can both agree that most if not all of the features of today's M43 sensors will one day come to Full Frame... but the reverse is not true... and likely never will be.

I completely agree. However "one day" doesnt help anyone who is shooting now. So until then, many of us are stuck with smaller sensors as the best option.

[thebrothersthre3]

One could also argue one day M43 will be good enough where the practical advantages of full frame are little(Depth of field) while the M43 system could have the advantage of being smaller. 

[Simon Young]

https://www.l-rumors.com/atomos-ninja-v-offers-4k-10-bit-422-hdr-recording-with-the-panasonic-lumix-s1/

[KnightsFan]

2 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

One could also argue one day M43 will be good enough where the practical advantages of full frame are little(Depth of field) while the M43 system could have the advantage of being smaller. 

On some level, anything is good enough. It's like saying 16mm film is good enough compared to 65mm. If the price and weight of 65mm dro the way FF cameras are, no one would shoot 16mm anymore.

[anonim]

1 hour ago, KnightsFan said:

On some level, anything is good enough. It's like saying 16mm film is good enough compared to 65mm. If the price and weight of 65mm dro the way FF cameras are, no one would shoot 16mm anymore.

I'm not sure that example of equivalency is the most appropriate

Actually, in regard to upper announcing post about S+Ninja V future (paid) combination, maybe it is even more realistic to say that one nice day FF will be good enough for saying that practical advantages of M43 in video shooting field become very little (codec quality)  (Let's to forget for a moment minors, as time limit here, of overheating problems, RS or IBIS there...)

But I really can't totally understand reason for that sensor size endless discussion and prophetic trying, especially from people that, luckily, could afford to buy and change cameras with not too much budget-suffering effort. What is so exciting in perpetual claiming that something that obviously works excellent once will be dead, what sort of quasi-competent satisfaction is hidden in guessing what will exists 3 years after Blackmagic bigpocket raw camera becomes affordable at the begining of 2020?

[liork]

14 hours ago, DBounce said:

Is this a trick question? Since... FOREVER! As an extreme example... ever shoot with a smartphone? Ever shoot with a 4 x 5 camera? Photography is ALL about capturing light. And Cinema is moving Pictures.

Talking about sensor size and capturing light. So this is why the huge crop of EOS R in 4K is so stupid. 

[DBounce]

6 hours ago, liork said:

Talking about sensor size and capturing light. So this is why the huge crop of EOS R in 4K is so stupid. 

I’m certainly not pro 4K crop. Of course I would prefer no crop. But that said all things are not equal. For whatever reason the Canon produces a more filmic/organic image that it’s contemporaries regardless of crop. 

Let me put it this way... if there was another mirrorless full frame Canon with 10 Bit output, DPAF in 4K, 30MP + sensor, flippy screen and no crop in 4K... I would be all over that. But that is not yet available.

With the introduction of the S1, the above scenario is a reality within the Panasonic lineup. So it would seem the argument for purchasing the GH5/S is diminished. Especially when the body is near to the same price. The problem is Panasonic seems to have kept some of the weaknesses of the GH5 and removed some of the strengths when creating the S-line. I cannot understand why they didn’t just pull out all the stops.

[thebrothersthre3]

1 hour ago, DBounce said:

I’m certainly not pro 4K crop. Of course I would prefer no crop. But that said all things are not equal. For whatever reason the Canon produces a more filmic/organic image that it’s contemporaries regardless of crop. 

Let me put it this way... if there was another mirrorless full frame Canon with 10 Bit output, DPAF in 4K, 30MP + sensor, flippy screen and no crop in 4K... I would be all over that. But that is not yet available.

With the introduction of the S1, the above scenario is a reality within the Panasonic lineup. So it would seem the argument for purchasing the GH5/S is diminished. Especially when the body is near to the same price. The problem is Panasonic seems to have kept some of the weaknesses of the GH5 and removed some of the strengths when creating the S-line. I cannot understand why they didn’t just pull out all the stops.

They do have a cinema line to protect like Canon and Sony.

[DBounce]

1 hour ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

They do have a cinema line to protect like Canon and Sony.

Yes... sad but true. The GH4 and then later the 5 sort of gave hope that perhaps Panasonic wasn't going to play those games. But now it appears that the real money maker they are protecting might be the GH5/S... and saving the real goods for the upcoming GH6. I think it's possible the real progress will come from Fuji. Their upcoming XH2 and Medium format monster look to be very interesting. Imagine 4k downsampled from a medium format sensor ?Fuji claims the upcoming GFX100S will do just that. Plus, I am certain these two top tier models will be manufactured in Japan... so build will likely be much better. I like the Fuji lenses also. 

Nikon also seems determined to be counted as a force in the mirrorless hybrid world also. I would bet good money their upcoming offerings will be serious contenders. 

 

[anonim]

4 hours ago, DBounce said:

For whatever reason the Canon produces a more filmic/organic image that it’s contemporaries regardless of crop. 

Genius! You are really tireless fan

[androidlad]

1 hour ago, DBounce said:

Yes... sad but true. The GH4 and then later the 5 sort of gave hope that perhaps Panasonic wasn't going to play those games. But now it appears that the real money maker they are protecting might be the GH5/S... and saving the real goods for the upcoming GH6. I think it's possible the real progress will come from Fuji. Their upcoming XH2 and Medium format monster look to be very interesting. Imagine 4k downsampled from a medium format sensor ?Fuji claims the upcoming GFX100S will do just that. Plus, I am certain these two top tier models will be manufactured in Japan... so build will likely be much better. I like the Fuji lenses also. 

Nikon also seems determined to be counted as a force in the mirrorless hybrid world also. I would bet good money their upcoming offerings will be serious contenders.

4K 30p on GFX100S is derived from vertical line-skipping and horizontal pixel-binning, plus 11bit ADC. Quality won't be good at all, but it keeps the medium format FOV.

[Lars Steenhoff]