Panasonic G9 mk2

[kye]

7 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

No - the base sensor resolution is the same, it's how the data is read out from the photo sites and processed that changes in different modes. If you sub-sample a digital image to reduce it's resolution without low-pass filtering it first (to keep the frequencies under the Nyquist limit), you'll get aliasing-related artifacts (like moire) at some point dependent on the image content.

Video (and film) suffers from temporal aliasing as well, which we reduce by introducing motion blur (a form of low-pass filtering).

Moire can be caused at many points in the process.

You are talking about moire being caused by the camera not downscaling the image from the entire sensor, which is what is happening in the 1080p example of the A6600.  This happens.

What also happens, and what I have been trying to explain, is that it can also occur as a function of the native sensor resolution and the real world, which means that the patterns of light that the sensor detects will have moire in them, and it won't matter what happens after that - no amount of good processing can fix it.  The cure for this is some kind of optical mechanism to spread the light between the photosites.  This could be an OLPF, clever design of the micro-lenses, combination of these, or other things as well.

This is why people keep talking about AI - it's the only way that moire could be fixed after being captured.

[Marcio Kabke Pinheiro]

On 10/30/2023 at 1:04 AM, j_one said:

With the success of the x100v, I wonder why there hasn't been a large sensor compact refresh from Panny. The LX100 ii was barely an update too, I just don't understand...its one of my favorite cameras.

I'm telling this for ages - there is a hole in the market because of lack of availabitlity of the X100v, and Panasonic could easily enter with a new LX100. In fact, I still have the OG LX100, and for some time I had a X100S too. The LX100 crushed the X100S (the old X100 lens is crap in short distances - and the biggest surprise was the LX100 being MUCH better in low light).

A LX100 III with PDAF, a better EVF (could be the 2.36mp panel that a lot of cameras uses today), a tilt screen like the one in the X100V, and make some color profiles with their partnership with Leica. Would sell a lot.

But no - just discontinued the LX100 II and, guess what, the used prices now are the same as new (sometimes even higher).

[kye]

52 minutes ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

I'm telling this for ages - there is a hole in the market because of lack of availabitlity of the X100v, and Panasonic could easily enter with a new LX100. In fact, I still have the OG LX100, and for some time I had a X100S too. The LX100 crushed the X100S (the old X100 lens is crap in short distances - and the biggest surprise was the LX100 being MUCH better in low light).

A LX100 III with PDAF, a better EVF (could be the 2.36mp panel that a lot of cameras uses today), a tilt screen like the one in the X100V, and make some color profiles with their partnership with Leica. Would sell a lot.

But no - just discontinued the LX100 II and, guess what, the used prices now are the same as new (sometimes even higher).

What do you feel is the advantage of the LX over something like the GX range?  Is it the size?  It definitely is much smaller with a roughly equivalent lens (even though I suspect the LX100 lens would extend once turned on)!

[j_one]

2 hours ago, kye said:

What do you feel is the advantage of the LX over something like the GX range?  Is it the size?  It definitely is much smaller with a roughly equivalent lens (even though I suspect the LX100 lens would extend once turned on)!

The lens itself. The compact body was just a bonus.

[MrSMW]

 

Not much in it…

X100v vs LX100ii vs Sony A7CR with full frame 61mp sensor and massive ability to crop in camera or post.

Plus the ability to switch out that pancake walkabout lens for anything that takes your fancy.

Pound for Pound performance, I’d take the 61mp full frame sensor every single time.

[John Matthews]

11 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

Pound for Pound performance, I’d take the 61mp full frame sensor every single time.

I think this is more about a threshold of "pocketability". Sure, there's not much difference, but it's there. I'm thinking more along the lines of a Ricoh but with video.

[kye]

41 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

X100v vs LX100ii vs Sony A7CR with full frame 61mp sensor and massive ability to crop in camera or post.

Plus the ability to switch out that pancake walkabout lens for anything that takes your fancy.

Pound for Pound performance, I’d take the 61mp full frame sensor every single time.

If you're talking video then "massive ability to crop" wouldn't be how I'd describe it.

You're also correct that you can swap the lens for anything you'd like, but the non-abbreviated quote is more like "anything you'd like, as long as it's enormous in comparison".

Here's the FX3 with 24-70mm F4, the A7C with the 28-60mm F3.5-5.6 and the LX100:

 

[John Matthews]

Ok. I've decided to wait a little longer for the G9 ii. I want to see how things shake out. Also, this camera is so popular that I'm fairly sure demand will be high and I won't even get it till mid November at the earliest... when I'll be heavily into work. I'll just go a little longer with the E-M1 ii and GX800. Other than the slow motion, they fit the bill for me right now. Make no mistake, I really want this camera though. It'll be available soon enough.

[Beritar]

1 minute ago, John Matthews said:

Ok. I've decided to wait a little longer for the G9 ii. I want to see how things shake out. Also, this camera is so popular that I'm fairly sure demand will be high and I won't even get it till mid November at the earliest... when I'll be heavily into work. I'll just go a little longer with the E-M1 ii and GX800. Other than the slow motion, they fit the bill for me right now. Make no mistake, I really want this camera though. It'll be available soon enough.

I did the same. I'm pretty sure the camera will be available very soon and I prefer to wait for more users reviews. 
The price is relatively high for a M43 camera so I want more information on the DR, RS, and if they removed or not their digital low pass filter (intelligent detail filtering) like on the GH6. 

[MrSMW]

1.5x APSC crops and then there is the clear zoom crop?

Turns any prime into a zoom.

[ac6000cw]

The LX100 size comparison is interesting (I own the original version, but usually use a micro4/3 ILC instead):

From L to R: Sony ZV-1, Pana ZS100/TZ100, LX100 and G100+12-32mm

The LX100 is actually quite chunky in comparison to the ZV-1 and ZS100/TZ100 (the LX10/LX15 is about the same size as the ZV-1 and shares it's lack of viewfinder).

I think the LX100 is a very nice stills camera, but the video C-AF is poor, the OIS is only 'OK', there's noticeable aliasing in 1080p, the power zoom isn't very smooth, the rear screen is fixed and if you look at a spectrum analysis of the audio it's got a deep, narrow notch in the mid-range. But at least it has a viewfinder.

I'm actually quite tempted by a used G100...but it's probably just GAS really...🙂

[MrSMW]

The only other problem I have with these smaller cameras and Sony is a prime example, is low quality rear screens. I think you need to get to A7RV before you get a half decent screen with a Sony?!

My eyesight is not what it once was and when I got my S5ii which is 1.84 million dot, I was disappointed, mainly because I had been spoiled by my S1H rear screen which is 2.1 I think.

Doesn't sound much, but in reality, it's pretty huge.

Another reason why I have switched from S5ii to Zf for stills is the larger and far better clarity of the 3.2 inch, 2.1 that the Nikon has. Pity it's not a tilt and is a flippy, but it is what it is...

I can put the two side by side right now (keeping one of my S5ii's for video) and the difference is appreciable.

I had the ZV1 and didn't really get on with it, nor the RX100V I had prior to that, - just too small and light.

I guess I just prefer a bit of chunk in my hands which is probably why I prefer bodies of around the OM-1/XH2/Zf/X Pro2/S5ii/FX30 size & weight, albeit, not with large zooms which for me, anything above about 900g, ideally needs a battery grip.

Pretty much nailed it down going forward now to:

S1H with Lumix 70-200mm f4 on sticks but waiting to see what the next Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 is going to be. If they can get it in under 1kg, I'll go for it. If it's over 1kg, I can't see any point in trading. It only has 2 jobs to do; record full length ceremonies and full length speeches and in between/after, goes to sleep in a corner.

S5ii with the Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 lens. The 'Art' lenses are supposed to be a little sharper and if this was a photo unit, then maybe I'd be looking elsewhere but for video work, IMO, it is superb. Relatively compact, barely extends much when zoomed out and if shooting in S35 mode, is like having a 40-105mm. I have always liked my S5ii's for video work but just nit got on with them for stills/hybrid work so for now, separated my kit into 2 systems; stills and video.

I could easily flip both of the above two around in their roles of static and roaming units and though the S1H has a nicer output, it makes more sense to use the S5ii in the run & gun role, plus the S1H has the bigger battery AND the battery pack, so something like 4 times the duration whereas anything over about 40 mins gets tricky with the S5ii...

For stills, we don't care what I am using do we? 😉 A pair of Nikons and 3 prime lenses, enough said other than I will be and already am using them like slightly larger fixed lens compacts which is my preferred method of shooting stills. Glad to be rid of the zoom approach I was using all this year! No more 2.8kg unit! 1.4kg is my heaviest new friend!

[John Matthews]

1 hour ago, ac6000cw said:

I'm actually quite tempted by a used G100...but it's probably just GAS really...🙂

The viewfinder royally sucks- might as well not have it. I also had many moiré problems with it. IBIS is better than what people say with IS in the lens. Colors are wonderful.

IMO, the cameras that are truly small for what they are: 1) GR, 2)A5100, 3)GM1/5. I just want a GR that does video, even better with a zoom and IBIS. It won't happen though. To be really small, it needs to be a POS; although the GM1 + 14mm f/2.5 comes really close.

[MrSMW]

Ricoh GR3x would be my pick of today’s crop.

Not too tiny but still pretty small, 40mm equivalent fast enough lens.

[ac6000cw]

1 hour ago, John Matthews said:

The viewfinder royally sucks- might as well not have it. I also had many moiré problems with it.

What's the problem with the viewfinder?

Is the moire mainly producing 'false colour' or just patterning (like the 'jeans' example you posted earlier), and is it an issue in both 1080p and 4k?

[John Matthews]

1 hour ago, ac6000cw said:

What's the problem with the viewfinder?

Is the moire mainly producing 'false colour' or just patterning (like the 'jeans' example you posted earlier), and is it an issue in both 1080p and 4k?

Sorry I wasn't clear. I feel like there are more problems with moiré in 1080p than with the GX800. The 4K is fine, except for the crop. The EVF is bad, only due to its optics. The EVF is sharp only in the center; everything else is slightly blurry. I've have many EVFs and the G100 has the worst, including the one in the GX80. I really hope Panasonic ditches the poor EVF.

[kye]

15 hours ago, MrSMW said:

1.5x APSC crops and then there is the clear zoom crop?

Turns any prime into a zoom.

I previously reviewed the options on the A7iii and concluded that you could do up to about a 2.5x zoom (1.5 APSC crop and the rest with Clearimage zoom) before it started really degrading.  I would guess with the extra MP sensor that maybe that's more like 3-4x, which isn't bad.

The issue with that comparison is that the FF/40mm prime combo is similar size to the other cameras which have zoom lenses so are doing 3x optically and are therefore still 4K at 3x and extra cropping could be done in post.

The A7Cii sensor is ~7000 pixels wide, so at 3x it's only looking at an area ~2300 pixels wide, which obviously puts it at a disadvantage in terms of digital zooming.  Sure, having 3x digital zooming in camera is great, but it's hard to compete with optical zooms.

12 hours ago, MrSMW said:

I guess I just prefer a bit of chunk in my hands which is probably why I prefer bodies of around the OM-1/XH2/Zf/X Pro2/S5ii/FX30 size & weight, albeit, not with large zooms which for me, anything above about 900g, ideally needs a battery grip.

It really depends on what you're used to.

There was forum member on here years ago who was an ex ENG camera operator, so was used to handling a full-sized shoulder-rig in emergency situations and was also used to pissing people off while shooting (which is an integral part of ENG work).

He and I used to disagree on what "small" and "large" meant, because to him a 1DXii was a "small" camera and to me it's absolutely enormous!

11 hours ago, John Matthews said:

The viewfinder royally sucks- might as well not have it. I also had many moiré problems with it. IBIS is better than what people say with IS in the lens.

I was going to mention before, but forgot, that now my eyes are ageing I now need reading glasses to be able to see the LCD when shooting, which is a major PITA considering that if I'm out shooting I'm likely wearing sunglasses and swapping glasses just isn't practical, but I discovered the EVF on the GX85 has that diopter adjustment and what a great feature that is!

I'm under no illusions though.  It means raising the camera to my face which puts lots of people on high alert in public, and it also means having to take my sunglasses off, both of which are serious downsides.  Sadly, some googling yesterday around how to carry reading glasses without looking like an octogenarian revealed there are no good options, so in a pinch the EVF is good for more than just bright situations.  I'd never thought if it before, but it's another plus for using it.

I definitely agree that the poor resolution and implementation of them is often unfortunate.  I've criticised the screen on the GH5 before, because I think the focus peaking calculations are done on the screen resolution, not on the actual image being captured by the camera, which in some situations leads the peaking to outright lie to you, showing the background to be in focus when it isn't and the subject to not be in focus when it is.

[MrSMW]

38 minutes ago, kye said:

I previously reviewed the options on the A7iii and concluded that you could do up to about a 2.5x zoom (1.5 APSC crop and the rest with Clearimage zoom) before it started really degrading.  I would guess with the extra MP sensor that maybe that's more like 3-4x, which isn't bad.

…and with the 61mp A7CR?

Ditto the Sigma FP-L which also has 60mp and a prime lens ‘zoom’ option.

If I remember correctly, I think it is with the A7RV (so same sensor size) that even in APSC/S35 crop mode, you end up with a more detailed 26mp duke better than the equivalent 24mp sensor file from another camera.

I like this concept. Cameras and lenses that are not massive but we can use sensor size and tech instead of size and weight.

Pity the FP-L has banding issues. And no IBIS. And no tilt screen. And less than great battery life and…or I’d have been all over it.

The size is perfect with the Smallrig cage and wooden grip.

The build is exceptional.

I loved the concept but could not live the reality of it when I had one for testing.

[kye]

56 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

…and with the 61mp A7CR?

Ditto the Sigma FP-L which also has 60mp and a prime lens ‘zoom’ option.

The A7CR sensor is ~9500 pixels wide, so at 3x it's only looking at an area ~3170 pixels wide, so almost 4K but not quite.  

The elephant in the room is that it's a 40mm - 120mm, instead of the wider range on the others.  Of course, the Sony 24mm F2.8 lens is also very small and the same math would apply to zooming with it.

The level of detail visible is due to the processing of the data from the photosites, not the number of them.  

I do really like the idea of having a high-resolution sensor and cropping digitally to emulate a longer focal length, as I have repeatedly mentioned when talking about the 2x digital zoom on the Panny cameras, but ultimately I want all the flexibility I can get out of focal lengths.

My dream setup now is the GX85 and 14-140mm lens.

At only a little larger this setup is still 4K at 10x and isn't missing the 24-40mm zoom range either.  Your FF setups are approaching SD at these zoom levels....

I have also found that when cropping into a lens you magnify all the aberrations of that lens.  I'm comparing quite optically compromised variable aperture zooms with your (likely) highly tuned and very sharp primes, but when the image is blown up to 3x size then I'm not sure which would win - zooms are compromised but not necessarily that compromised.

I also realise these comparisons don't take into account the low-light performance of the camera, the AF, DoF capabilities, and lots of other advantages of full-frame, but believe me when I tell you that users of smaller-sensor cameras are all very very aware of these compromises, but size is of such priority that it takes precedence.

One of the things that I find hugely ironic is that if I had $10K to spend on a camera, the GX85 might still be the best choice.  If I had $100,000?  Still the GX85.  If I had $1,000,000?  Maybe I'd call up Panasonic and ask for them to CUSTOM MAKE me a camera!  
Seriously, when size is your primary limitation, your options really are very limited.

[IronFilm]

On 10/28/2023 at 4:46 PM, John Matthews said:

This is quite serious stuff. I don't know if you've seen any on P. Bloom's videos from last year, but the guy had massive lower back pain. IMO, humans are not meant for carrying significant weight 8 hours a day for a career. I'm not actually sure can work anymore.

Yes, it's sadly a very very common thing for people of his age and older, who are/were Camera Ops or Sound Mixers / Boom Ops. 

I know several of my Sound Mixer friends who have been forced into retirement in recent years due to injuries. 

It's definitely a major worry for myself, even though we're thankfully no longer living in the era when you were expected to wear around your neck for many long hours a Sound Devices 552 / 788T + a stack of heavy Lectrosonics UCR411 receivers in your bag. 

I got into sound mixing just at the tail end of this era. It was around this time period when many established pros were moving over into all in one mixer/recorders such as the Zaxcom Nomad or the Sound Devices 664, and using lighter dual receivers such as the Lectrosonics SR series. 

But as I was just starting out, I went for the "older" (and cheaper, as I got my 552 for a really amazing secondhand bargain!!) setup of mixer + recorder paired together. 

This was my first ever "real" sound bag which I owned: 

 

 

As you can see from a couple of my more recent bag setups, I've got it to a low more compact now: 

 

  

On 10/28/2023 at 9:56 PM, ntblowz said:

I also need a day rest to fully recover from previous day, if I did back to back shoot I will be very tired on 3rd day.

The days of flying C70 with 18-35mm 1.8 on Ronin all day is definitely past my time.

You can imagine how it feels doing 5 or 6 day weeks (often 7 days for me... during busy patches, if I'm filling in the weekends with other gigs) when you're working on a TV Series! For month and month of weeks like this. It's absolutely brutal on your life 😕