Panasonic S5 II (What does Panasonic have up their sleeve?)

[ntblowz]

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

A. Stick with the Lumix/Nikon mix for ‘24

B. Go fully Nikon but perhaps the Zf plus a pair of Z6ii’s

C. Zf, Z8, Z6iii

D. Pair of Nikon’s plus a single Sony

I would and will be happy with any of these options which is why I am heading in this direction, but I think B mostly likely, then C, then A and least likely D…though that option still makes huge sense.

As always it is a juggling act but all the options are great now, so it’s a case of which suits me best.

At the moment I m half Sony and half Canon which is E1, FX30, R8, R7 

Problem with Sony is there no hybrid cam with non crop 4k60p and 24mp+ sensor with full mechanical shutter and do not overheat crazy for under $2000...

On jobs that need both photo and video I have to use Canon cause the Sony i got is useless in that regards.

Unfortunately I already have Canon flash system in place so going over to Sony system will be expensive 🙃  

But I always have Panasonic in my mind cause my usual colab people use Canon or Panasonic cams, and me coming from GH1 it always have a place in my heart lol.

[ntblowz]

8 hours ago, kye said:

Sounds like he needs to learn about colour management.

 

You mean a bunch of them lol 😆 

Usually it's the colorist who fix the colour if they have budget for that.

Otherwise it will be up to the editor themselves for colour grading, and unfortunately not all editor are good at colour grading.. 

[IronFilm]

7 minutes ago, ntblowz said:

At the moment I m half Sony and half Canon which is E1, FX30, R8, R7 

Problem with Sony is there no hybrid cam with non crop 4k60p and 24mp+ sensor with full mechanical shutter and do not overheat crazy for under $2000...

On jobs that need both photo and video I have to use Canon cause the Sony i got is useless in that regards.

What's your ratio of video to photo work?

7 minutes ago, ntblowz said:

Unfortunately I already have Canon flash system in place so going over to Sony system will be expensive 🙃  

A convertor doesn't exist?

https://www.amazon.com/Pixel-TF-334-Flash-Adapter-Converting/dp/B01LQ24CTA

??

7 minutes ago, ntblowz said:

and me coming from GH1 it always have a place in my heart lol.

Same! 🙂

I still own both of my GH1 bodies, although haven't used them in years

[ntblowz]

3 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

What's your ratio of video to photo work?

A convertor doesn't exist?

https://www.amazon.com/Pixel-TF-334-Flash-Adapter-Converting/dp/B01LQ24CTA

??

Same! 🙂

I still own both of my GH1 bodies, although haven't used them in years

I dunno why on this thread you keep pushing for FX3 and on my thread with FX3 you keep pushing not using FX3 😂

 

As I said i have colab with company/ppl that use Canon so I have to use Canon cameras if I shoot with them.

[IronFilm]

1 minute ago, ntblowz said:

I dunno why on this thread you keep pushing for FX3 and on my thread with FX3 you keep pushing not using FX3

My naturally contrarian attitude? ha

Pushes myself and others to consider hard the alternatives, as a way to calculate if their original preference is right vs the alternatives. 

[ntblowz]

My other alternatives will be Panasonic if I didn't try Sony, I was this close getting S5II but the no pdaf on 1080p kinda kill it me for me.

 

Maybe I will get back to Pana MFT in the future who knows.

[MrSMW]

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Still don't quite understand why you'd get a single Sony?? 

Brevity, for clarity, as follows: 😜

Was/am very happy with L Mount for video but less so for stills and as stills are 50% of my work, I needed a solution after several years of trying to wrestle a solution within L Mount...but failed, hence going back to Nikon.

My work is near 100% hybrid and I can either partition off stills and video into separate units as I am doing with Nikon and Lumix, ie, there is zero crossover/compatibility other than in an emergency, or have all units designated 'hybrid'.

So Lumix for the video capture and Nikon for stills but together on a single job, the overall result is 'hybrid', ie, full video coverage and full stills coverage.

It would make more sense though to have cross compatibility with lenses.

Other than a single cheap 40mm f2 that came with the Zf, I have/am going over to Tamron for lenses as they are the manufacturer of the closest to my ideal when it comes to focal ranges, size, weight, cost etc.

As mentioned before, cost no object, I'd go Canon...but that is another story entirely and an 18k one I cannot justify, never mind afford, so can forget that!

Now if I was to trade the pair of Lumix cameras with their pair of L Mount lenses, and for a single Sony, because all of my kit would now be cross compatible, whilst that single Sony body (in whatever flavour) could be my sole dedicated video unit, the pair of Nikon's that were designated as 'Stills Only', could be used in a hybrid manner to fill in some of the holes not covered by the single dedicated Sony unit.

But then, the more logical conclusion is why even bother with any Sony unit when a third Nikon would provide the same solution but actually probably better as it would have matching (or much closer) results.

The total collection of kit would then be as follows; 3 bodies, 4 lenses with those lenses being; 20-40, 40, 28-75, 70-180.

If the next gen Nikon Z6iii gets launched any time soon/before March 2024, it makes the most sense because then the:

40mm f2 lives on the Zf as my candid hybrid unit which is around 50% say of my work, so low-key, small, light, discrete etc.

One Z6iii has the 20-40 welded to it for hybrid.

The second Z6iii has the 28-75 indoors and flips to the 70-180 out, all also hybrid.

It would then probably be the most capable and compact full-frame set up for my needs.

Or that second Z6iii, I go with the Z8 which is arguably a little more 'pro' and would allow me to try out 8k raw, assuming the Z6iii will not have that capability.

Or as I was mooting, the FX3 or FX30, but I guess neither make as much sense as a third Nikon...

Plus I'd be giving up L Mount totally and the S1H plus S5ii combo just works...so it comes down to the question of:

4 cameras + 5 lenses that are not totally compatible vs 3 cameras + 4 lenses that are compatible and the cost is equal.

With my current direction back towards, smaller, lighter, faster, with no lenses above 1kg, the latter option makes more sense and has more appeal...but I would be VERY sad to have to give up L Mount.

Not much brevity after all 🤪

[MrSMW]

I should add, I did try this 3 camera/4 lens set up based around 3x S5ii's but could not get it to work...

Sigma 16-28mm f2.8 on one was great.

Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 on another was also great.

Lumix 70-200mm f4 on the third, not so great. Unwieldy without a battery grip and the battery grip was/is designed for the S5 not the S5ii ands doesn't quite fit right.

So I swapped the 3rd S5ii for my S1H which has a battery grip but then it's one massive unit with less than stellar AF.

So I tried the Leica 24-90mm f2.8-4 as a kind of longer 28-70, but it wasn't much longer as it was never going to be and again, just a whopping amount of size and weight.

I was kind of hoping the new Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 might be the answer and be a compact, lightweight answer to Tamron's 900g 70-180, but nope, it's 1.35kg and do I really need anything as long as 200mm ands the answer is not really and 150 is about as long as I need.

Plus I hated the S5ii for stills and that was the overall killer for me.

The flip out side screen I learned to tolerate, but the cheap sounding and feeling shutter button not.

The newly acquired Zf has a flip out screen and I think that was an error on Nikon's part, but the rest makes up for it.

The best camera platform in existence IMO, for my needs, is the Canon R3, but hey, life is a compromise isn't it?!

But as I said, ALL of these options work for me, - it's simply a question of which works best and I don't want to go into another year, juggling kit and trying to find solutions to situations when I can start as I mean to go on with zero mid-season changes.

If there's no Z6iii available before March and assuming it is 'right' for my needs anyway, then I'll either stick with my current combined L Mount/Nikon mix for a year, or flip the L Mount for a single Sony.

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

So I tried the Leica 24-90mm f2.8-4 as a kind of longer 28-70, but it wasn't much longer as it was never going to be and again, just a whopping amount of size and weight.

Would the Panasonic Lumix S 24-105mm f/4 make sense for you, or too slow?

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1455076-REG/panasonic_s_r24105_lumix_s_24_105mm_f_4.html

Or would maybe a prime lens work for your telephoto coverage?

Sigma 16-28mm f2.8 for the 1st camera

Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 for the 2nd camera

Sigma 135mm f1.8 for the third camera. 

Or a 105mm lens if you feel the jump to 135mm is too big (and you just crop in from 105mm in post if need be??):

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/Mirrorless-Camera-Lenses/ci/17912/N/4196380428?sort=PRICE_LOW_TO_HIGH&filters=fct_a_focus-type_5738%3Aautofocus%2Cfct_fixed-focal-lengths_2207%3A105mm|135mm%2Cfct_lens-format-coverage_3332%3Afull-frame-lenses%2Cfct_lens-mount_3442%3Aleica-l-mount%2Cfct_zooms-primes_5903%3Aprime-lenses

That Sigma 105mm f/2.8 would be very lightweight, and cheap. (only 715gm and sub $700)

[MrSMW]

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Would the Panasonic Lumix S 24-105mm f/4 make sense for you, or too slow?

Yes, had it for over a year, too slow in low light.

Otherwise, yes, had and still have one of those lenses, the 28-70 which is my workhorse, the 105 not quite long enough, the 135 OK but a very limited lens compared with say a 70-180 or 70-200 or even Tamron's 35-150...which was going to be my 'lens to build a system around', except I decided it was too big and too heavy and actually more limiting than having the 20-40 and 70-180 I opted for. 40-70 is kind of a dead focal area for me, so no loss for me not being able to cover it.

But it's all moot anyway as I dislike the S5ii as a stills camera, never bought the 3rd unit, already sold the second unit and MUCH prefer the Nikon Zf for stills.

I know I will prefer the Z6iii and/or Z8 also for stills having had a play with a Z6ii.

Comparing the Z6ii with the S5ii as direct rivals, the Z6ii felt better in the hand and I prefer the Nikon files, but the S5ii is the better pure video unit and probably the better hybrid. In fact I'll say the Lumix is the better hybrid.

I think the Z6iii will still be better for stills, perhaps even better and at least equal for video and probably the better hybrid.

Total guestimation but pretty sure.

And the Z8 is just of course better, in the hand, at least for stills, possibly video...

Whatever L Mount did or can offer now doesn't matter to me anymore as the decision has already been made to go Nikon (at least fro stills, possibly for hybrid, maybe even full video also...) gear has been sold, gear has been purchased albeit I am still as things stand, 50% in the L Mount camp having; an S1H, S5ii, 28-70 and 70-200.

It's just a question of where I commit to next, but it will not not be back to L Mount (for stills), mainly due to the lenses available. Not having something equivalent to the Tamron 35-150 or 70-180 is a massive issue to me and has been the core of my issues for the last 2 years.

I could even live with the S5ii for stills had the lenses been available. And a battery grip that actually fits properly...

[newfoundmass]

@MrSMWhave you considered adapting Canon lenses for both the Lumix and Nikon bodies? The Sigma adapter seems to give native (or near native) level performance in video. It might be a solution to help cut down on how many lenses you have to carry.

I'm debating selling my two other S5 bodies to get a S5ii to go with my S5iiX and getting the adapter and some EF lenses. It never made sense to before because it didn't really work well for video with the S5 but with the adapters and some used EF lenses it will be cheaper to get a matching set up for multicam shoots than it would to go with native lenses. I'd like to get 2 Sigma 28-70s but it'd be considerably more expensive, I think. 

If nothing else I'm fascinated in seeing how the adapter opens up possibilities for me.

[MrSMW]

31 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

 

@MrSMWhave you considered adapting Canon lenses for both the Lumix and Nikon bodies? The Sigma adapter seems to give native (or near native) level performance in video. It might be a solution to help cut down on how many lenses you have to carry.

 

I doubt if there is any combo I have not considered!

Maybe some are reading too much into this, but I am more than happy with the direction things are taking.

I like L Mount for video but not for stills.

The lenses Canon offer do not offer anything over what anyone else offers other than the hugely expensive and heavy 28-70 f2 and the new 24-105 f2.8 ie, the only lenses from Canon that interest me are these RF lenses and these of course are not L or Z Mount compatible. 

These are examples of >1kg lenses I WOULD give a pass to because with a pair of R3’s would give me everything I need in a 2 body, 2 lens combo.

Arguably, Nikon could with a Z8 plus the Tamron 20-40 and an R9 with the Tamron 35-150, but the latter is back up to being a 2.7kg combo which is too much.

L Mount… For the video side, great, but until something comes along to replace the S1R, the bodies don’t exist and nor do the lenses.

OK, at the wider end they do, but it’s the longer end where it does not and it’s actually a case of needing MORE lenses and needing more swaps to make it work as the last 2 years have proved to me.

And whilst I have not tried every combo, I have most viable options and there have been too many compromises.

As always, for me and my specific needs.

 

 

 

[John Matthews]

16 hours ago, MrSMW said:

I doubt if there is any combo I have not considered!

Have you considered the Panasonic 70-300? I've actually heard a lot of good things about that lens, even though it's a little slow. It probably does ok at ISO 4000 indoors.

[MrSMW]

4 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Have you considered the Panasonic 70-300? I've actually heard a lot of good things about that lens, even though it's a little slow. It probably does ok at ISO 4000 indoors.

Yes, FAR too slow. The 70-200 f4 is borderline as it is, plus zero requirement for anything longer than 200mm and 150 would be enough for my needs and that is why I have the 70-200 f4 which is under 1kg, not much heavier than that 70-300 but nowhere near the size & weight of the f2.8’s

I’m not looking for anything else in L Mount as I have all I need and it’s simply a question of whether I carry on with L Mount at all for my video needs.

That’s the only fence I am currently on and I’m just sitting on it right now waiting on news on the Nikon Z6iii as that is now the pivot point.

[John Matthews]

34 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

That’s the only fence I am currently on and I’m just sitting on it right now waiting on news on the Nikon Z6iii as that is now the pivot point.

As always, we all seem to chase the latest and greatest. Panasonic will most likely release something just after- round and round we go. It sounds like you "settle" for one season and then move on, always staying ahead of the curve.

38 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

Yes, FAR too slow. The 70-200 f4 is borderline as it is, plus zero requirement for anything longer than 200mm and 150 would be enough for my needs and that is why I have the 70-200 f4 which is under 1kg, not much heavier than that 70-300 but nowhere near the size & weight of the f2.8’s

L-mount seems a little heavy on telephoto, except for the 70-300. M43 makes more sense for most of that stuff but only in good light as they aren't great at high ISO. Only the 75 f/1.8 on a GH5s trumps that (a little), but it's a prime and not great AF. Maybe the Sigma 135mm f/1.8- never tried it though? You probably already thought of it.

[Beritar]

6 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Have you considered the Panasonic 70-300? I've actually heard a lot of good things about that lens, even though it's a little slow. It probably does ok at ISO 4000 indoors.

Yes, the 70-300mm is a nice "little" zoom. I have both the 70-300mm and the 70-200mm S Pro f2.8.

The 70-300mm is sharp across all focal lengths, maybe a bit softer at 300mm but still very good.
The difference with the 70-200mm F4 is not so huge since the S cameras have excellent low light performances.

The 70-200mm S Pro f2.8 is a different beast.  Yes, it's sharp, but the rendering is outstanding, maybe because of the implication of Leica (or not), one of the best lens I own with the 24-70mm and 50mm S Pro. 

[MrSMW]

13 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

It sounds like you "settle" for one season and then move on, always staying ahead of the curve.

Maybe but not really…

5 years, Nikon film cameras, 2 in 5 years, followed by Nikon D2x I think it was until the D3 came out.

Stuck with those until the S model came out as it was quantifiably better.

But then, around 2011/2012, getting a little fed up with lugging around 2 huge/heavy units when paired with the 24-70 and 70-200, - something like 2.5 and 3kg each (?) so when the Fuji X Pro-1 came out, jumped to that small, lightweight, prime based system.

But then, every couple of years, Fuji did keep moving their game forward and I was also moving into video so needed more specific gear than my stills-orientated set up.

XT3 was my pinnacle of Fuji and was great for stills but less so for video with no IBIS and limited stabilised lenses so during the Covid era, took a leap of faith into L Mount and full-frame with the S5.

Wrestled with it ever since, (S5 AF wasn’t good enough for my needs, S1R great for stills but didn’t have the video spec, S1H has been great but iffy AF and S5ii great for video, but don’t like it for stills) never managing to find the right balance of; types of bodies, number of bodies, types and number of lenses…for my very specific niche in the market which is offering a 100% stills service at the same time as a 100% video one. As a one man band.

There are of course many ways a thing can be done, but some are better than others and there is no such thing as a ‘right’ way, only the way that works best for us as individuals.

Plus no manual or training so I have very much had to teach myself through trial and error and that has meant trying stuff/kit/combos that have not worked or not worked as well as I hoped.

We are now at that point however where the tools exist.

For me there is no more, “if only my cameras could shoot at 1600 iso”, then 3200, then 6400, or “I wish I had IBIS”, or 4K 50p internally or… spec-wise, I am more than done and I don’t know but I could make maybe 10+ different cameras work these days?

For me, it’s no longer chasing anything I NEED, simply what I WANT and what I want, is quite simple and that is…

A more compact set up that covers all my needs without compromise (at least anything significant) and is more enjoyable to use.

To that end, Canon have the best option for me, a bit heavier than I’d like, but I could live with that, but without trade in, it’s an 18k investment and I don’t have it and even if I did, that would be a BIG commitment.

So musing/fantasy aside, I have to scrap that non-starter!

Sticking with what I had was not an option. Too big, too heavy, great for video, less so for stills, not enjoyable to use.

Back to Nikon for stills with adapted Tamron lenses and it ticks every single box.

My only debate is whether I continue with L Mount for video, which is great and I love it, but am I not better off trading 2 bodies and 2 lenses for 1 body and 1 lens to have everything in the same system, ie 100% Nikon?

I think probably yes but not if that 3rd body was a Z9 because that would be overkill. Z8 maybe… Z6ii no because it’s not as good as my Panny S5ii never mind my S1H so any change has to be at least sideways, if not forwards…and I suspect the Z6iii will be better than the S5ii…and if it is, I will almost certainly go that route, but not because it’s simply better as a camera, but because it makes more overall sense as part of a total system.

And part of me hopes it isn’t so I can stick with L Mount for video as I am not exactly trying to flip for the sake of something that might be better, ie, grass greener elsewhere, but only if it actually is!

[John Matthews]

35 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

And part of me hopes it isn’t so I can stick with L Mount for video as I am not exactly trying to flip for the sake of something that might be better, ie, grass greener elsewhere, but only if it actually is!

Yeah, who knows with the Z6iii? And you know, if it's great, we'll something decent from Panasonic. In fact, I'm fairly sure all of them sit on cameras to the last minute, trying to wait until the other guy markets their camera; this way, they can either quickly add a feature or include something to get a USP. I think Panasonic is savvy at least in terms of value, especially in France where the price is even below US prices.

[John Matthews]

55 minutes ago, Beritar said:

Yes, the 70-300mm is a nice "little" zoom. I have both the 70-300mm and the 70-200mm S Pro f2.8.

The 70-300 seems especially good with dual IBIS. I've seen some really decent footage. It's the only telephoto lens I'd consider. I'd much rather have it because you get an extra 100mm and only lose a stop over the 70 200 F4. That's an easy tradeoff; also, it's a bit lighter.

57 minutes ago, Beritar said:

The 70-200mm S Pro f2.8 is a different beast.  Yes, it's sharp, but the rendering is outstanding, maybe because of the implication of Leica (or not), one of the best lens I own with the 24-70mm and 50mm S Pro. 

I've heard good things about it terms of IQ, but apparently it's rather heavy for what it is.

[Beritar]

31 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

The 70-300 seems especially good with dual IBIS. I've seen some really decent footage. It's the only telephoto lens I'd consider. I'd much rather have it because you get an extra 100mm and only lose a stop over the 70 200 F4. That's an easy tradeoff; also, it's a bit lighter.

I've heard good things about it terms of IQ, but apparently it's rather heavy for what it is.

Yes, IBIS is very good on this lens, especially with the S5II and S1. Sometimes you can get it for about 800€ in Europe with cashback. It's a fine lens, even the colors are pretty nice.

The 70-200mm is pretty heavy yes, but the Sigma is not so much lighter. The bokeh is nicer on the S Pro. And I just love how the light renders on this lens, the local contrast and colors, this is truly beautiful, it's similar to the 24-70mm S Pro and it is why I prefer the S Pro lenses over the Sigma DG DN.