Lumix S9

[kye]

9 hours ago, Davide DB said:

And I can't believe that with my GH5 I can't do what the gopros have been doing for years which is to download the videos in lightweight format to my phone immediately to get a preview.
This would be a very useful thing on a boat with the housing still wet since I can turn on the wifi from the underwater housing.

Yeah.

I have spent time in tech startups, app design, user experience circles, and "proper" cameras are basically dinosaurs, and the thinking from the manufacturers is pre-historic as well.

It's not getting better that quickly either, because there's this background mentality that "it works for the pros".  In practically any camera forum you see it with discussions that go like this:

1. Hi, I'd like a small and convenient camera with great image quality..  what do you recommend?
2. Use your phone
3. Actually, I'd like great image quality too, that's important to me
4. Oh well then, you'll need this 5kg rig that is manual everything and needs lighting and external audio
5. Actually, I need it to be small and convenient too
6. Use your phone
7. ........
8. Actually BOTH are really what I need
9. <mumble mumble...> so you know better than the pros do you? well....  hey everyone, this guy is shitting on Deakins!!

 

7 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Am I the only one seeing a ninja in the cold shoe of the S9? I wonder if they meant that? I can't unsee it now.

It totally is!!!

[kye]

8 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Camerasize.com now has the S9, just so you know. I only saw that just now. Here, we have a proper comparison to a camera and lens I own:

Sooooo...   Does it have a 2X crop mode, and can you adapt MFT lenses to it?

😉 

[IronFilm]

10 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

The latest Fuji mobile app can do the same thing or at least something similar, even with the GFX series.

oh damn, I need to check out if that works with my old Fujifilm X-A3, would certainly get me using it more again

As you just can't deny the damn ultra nice convenience of shooting everything with your cellphone (even if it's just a sh*tty $199 phone's camera)

[John Matthews]

1 hour ago, kye said:

Sooooo...   Does it have a 2X crop mode, and can you adapt MFT lenses to it?

😉

Wishful thinking. That would have great idea though.

[ac6000cw]

15 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Camerasize.com now has the S9, just so you know. I only saw that just now. Here, we have a proper comparison to a camera and lens I own:

This is S9 versus some similar size MILC alternatives that you can buy new (from the left, ZV-E1, A7C ii, S9, OM-5, X-S20). Paired with what I think are the most compact mid-range zooms currently available from each camera manufacturer.

The small size of the 28-60mm f4-5.6 lens on the ZV-E1 and A7C ii does rather make the point that the S9 really needs the upcoming 18-40mm lens (and maybe a compact 28-70mm or 35-100mm). 

[ND64]

Well, apparently they used one stock photo for their marketing material, and one taken by a Nikon camera, by a Nikon ambassador:

https://photorumors.com/2024/05/28/more-bad-news-for-panasonic-lumix-s9-product-page-controversy-and-the-use-of-stock-photos

I mean its like Shark do a deep carpet cleaning test, and use a Dyson 😅

 

[kye]

1 hour ago, ac6000cw said:

This is S9 versus some similar size MILC alternatives that you can buy new (from the left, ZV-E1, A7C ii, S9, OM-5, X-S20). Paired with what I think are the most compact mid-range zooms currently available from each camera manufacturer.

The small size of the 28-60mm f4-5.6 lens on the ZV-E1 and A7C ii does rather make the point that the S9 really needs the upcoming 18-40mm lens (and maybe a compact 28-70mm or 35-100mm). 

Yeah, it really does need that 18-40mm lens.  That 28-60 Sony lens is so much smaller than practically any other zoom in their lineup.

The gap I don't think they'll potentially ever close is a super-zoom.  For MFT, you have the 12-35mm F2.8, 12-60mm F2.8-4 and the 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 which are all roughly the same size.  This makes sense, as the 12-60mm gets extra reach without getting larger by having a slower aperture, and the 14-140mm does the same trick again.

Unfortunately, the FF systems can only get this kind of size by starting with a short AND slow zoom, so there's nothing to trade-off, and so the existing super-zooms don't trade anything off and are just enormous by comparison.  Unless they trade off the same amount of aperture on top of an already slow lens and make something like a 24-240mm F5.6-11, but I can't see anyone being willing to admit such a lens would even deserve to exist, let alone be desirable.

This is the gap that I don't think will get closed between MFT and FF.

[ac6000cw]

40 minutes ago, kye said:

Unfortunately, the FF systems can only get this kind of size by starting with a short AND slow zoom, so there's nothing to trade-off, and the super-zooms are just enormous by comparison.  Unless they trade off the same amount of aperture and make something like a 24-240mm F5.6-11, but I can't see anyone being willing to admit such a lens would even deserve to exist, let alone be desirable.

The Panasonic S 28-200mm f4-7.1 Macro OIS lens probably gets closest, which at 93 mm long is about 6mm longer than the 20-60mm f3.5-5.6 and about 19mm longer than the m43 14-140mm f3.5-5.6.

Another one is the E-mount Tamron 28-200mm f2.8-5.6 - about 25mm longer than the S 28-200mm and 40mm longer than the m43 14-140mm. 

But both of the FF 28-200mm are only x7 zooms, not the x10 the m43 lens gets you (but that is pretty small for its zoom range).

[Marcio Kabke Pinheiro]

20 hours ago, John Matthews said:

I think the Olympus E-PL9 did something similar as well as having the ability to download at your discretion when the camera's OFF. Honestly, it's probably not for me. I've always hated phone and never really put much money in them, but that's just me.

In the videos, I saw some reviews looking through thumbnails on their phone and that's the situation I least like.

Since you might know, can you configure the S5ii to upload directly to creative cloud via frame.io and after to your mobile lightroom? I think that would be even more preferable. I'm not sure the S9 can do that but I asked the question on B&H.

Don't know, never had a Lumix FF on hands. About the S9 I've just mentioned because I saw it on one of the reviews, and because Fuji have for some time this option to make the stills go directly to the phone - but is not for me either, I've got the photo manually on the phone if I need it. (never tried the new Frame.io integration on Fujis because I'm out of the Adobe ecosystem)

[Marcio Kabke Pinheiro]

3 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

This is S9 versus some similar size MILC alternatives that you can buy new (from the left, ZV-E1, A7C ii, S9, OM-5, X-S20). Paired with what I think are the most compact mid-range zooms currently available from each camera manufacturer.

The small size of the 28-60mm f4-5.6 lens on the ZV-E1 and A7C ii does rather make the point that the S9 really needs the upcoming 18-40mm lens (and maybe a compact 28-70mm or 35-100mm). 

Yep, lens size is what prevents me to go FF - a collapsible zoom shoud be mandatory to all FF cameras.

But with good quality. The compact Sony zooms have bad rep (as, for some degree, the Fuji 15-45 and the Olympus). Or (this is my dream that no manufacturer will ever do) a small good quality f/4.5 zoom.

[kye]

25 minutes ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

Yep, lens size is what prevents me to go FF - a collapsible zoom shoud be mandatory to all FF cameras.

But with good quality. The compact Sony zooms have bad rep (as, for some degree, the Fuji 15-45 and the Olympus). Or (this is my dream that no manufacturer will ever do) a small good quality f/4.5 zoom.

Yeah, size is a consideration for sure.

You have to be careful about what constitutes a bad reputation and make sure that 1) the people saying such things aren't idiots, 2) that the weaknesses of whatever it is are things you actually care about, and 3) that you actually understand what you like.

High-end cinema lenses are often in demand because they're far from optically perfect, and yet forum fools will gush over the latest movie shot on vintage primes and then in the same breath go back to talking about how 6K RAW is mandatory and that Sigma Art lenses aren't sharp enough.

AF might not be the best, but how would it impact you and how you shoot?  Maybe the AF isn't so quiet and can be heard with the on-board mics, but is this important to you? and should you be using the in-built mics anyway?

Maybe they're not weather sealed, but how many times do you actually need that? and if you buy one that is weather sealed, are you going to pay more than simply being willing to break and re-buy the cheap lens in the very unlikely event it dies.

etc..

[kye]

Here's my manifesto for the humble zoom lens.

In my tests the expensive lenses looked vibrant and clean and sharp, which is to be expected.  The Helios looked high-resolution but not sharp, and had a softer rendering which people love, and the 14-42mm kit lens looked somewhere in the middle...  

From my post:

"Then, the mighty 14-42 kit lens.  It has some of that vintage look going on.  It's kind of like somewhere between the Helios and the other two.  It raises the shadows a bit, but isn't uncontrollable in direct sun, and the edges are a little softer.  A happy medium perhaps?  It's also a zoom, has OIS, and if you break it you can just go get another one from a friend or on eBay or for $5 at a market somewhere with a GF2 with a dead battery."

... and yet, the expensive lenses and the Helios are ultra desirable, but I'm probably the only person to ever live that thinks the kit zoom might offer the best of both worlds.

[ac6000cw]

43 minutes ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

Yep, lens size is what prevents me to go FF

Me too (so far).

43 minutes ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

Or (this is my dream that no manufacturer will ever do) a small good quality f/4.5 zoom.

The problem is nicely illustrated by the FF Tamron 28-200mm f2.8-5.6 versus the m43 Oly/OMDS 12-100mm F4 Pro. The Oly is a great lens, both optically and to use, but it's pretty much the same size and weight as the cheaper the FF Tamron (which covers basically the same FOV as the Oly). Almost certainly the Tamron is far more optically compromised though.

[Marcio Kabke Pinheiro]

4 hours ago, kye said:

Here's my manifesto for the humble zoom lens.

In my tests the expensive lenses looked vibrant and clean and sharp, which is to be expected.  The Helios looked high-resolution but not sharp, and had a softer rendering which people love, and the 14-42mm kit lens looked somewhere in the middle...  

From my post:

"Then, the mighty 14-42 kit lens.  It has some of that vintage look going on.  It's kind of like somewhere between the Helios and the other two.  It raises the shadows a bit, but isn't uncontrollable in direct sun, and the edges are a little softer.  A happy medium perhaps?  It's also a zoom, has OIS, and if you break it you can just go get another one from a friend or on eBay or for $5 at a market somewhere with a GF2 with a dead battery."

... and yet, the expensive lenses and the Helios are ultra desirable, but I'm probably the only person to ever live that thinks the kit zoom might offer the best of both worlds.

Had the two 14-42 kits from Panasonic - the first and bigger one, that was the kit zoom on the GH2, and the second smaller one. The older was not grat, but the smaller was very ok. Using in f/5.6 (where I used all my m43 lenses when travelling with sun), plenty good indeed.

In the last trip with m43), used the "little gem", the pancake 12-32. Was one of the m43 lenses that I did not sold, very good, sharper than the 14-42. Is exactly what Panasonic should do in FF.

I asked for a small f/4.5 zoom lens for FF because in terms of DOF, is like a "f/2.9ish" in APS-C - and I'm using the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 and in most cases the DOF is ok for general use.

The manufacturer that makes a FF small body with a small 24-60 or 24-70 f/4.5 (collapsible, if possible) with good (don't need to be very top) image quality, probably will get me in the future.

[John Matthews]

I have a feeling the next Lumix Live Thursday is going to be a shit show. People are already leaving rather agressive comments. I think it's going to be a must watch! Let's see how they handle it.

[eatstoomuchjam]

From what I read, they handled it poorly.

[Marcio Kabke Pinheiro]

The discover that Pansonic used stock photos (even one from a Nikon Ambassador) in the S9 brochures is not helping either.

Tie this PR disaster with the Asahi reports that Panasonic camera division could be axed...

[ac6000cw]

Actually, I suspect the S9 has got more coverage online and on social media than they hoped, even if it hasn't happened as planned. A lot of the adverse comments fueling this seem to be coming from a photography enthusiast base it isn't really targeted at anyway, and from video enthusiasts who seem disappointed it's not the S2H or S2R they'd prefer to be discussing.

(Not referring to people on this forum) I don't really understand why so many people seem to be upset/annoyed by the S9 - it's just a consumer camera at the end of the day.

[MrSMW]

21 minutes ago, ac6000cw said:

I don't really understand why so many people seem to be upset/annoyed

Because it's 2024 and everyone is entitled, including to be upset about something that has no bearing on them whatsoever.

56 minutes ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

The discover that Pansonic used stock photos (even one from a Nikon Ambassador) in the S9 brochures is not helping either.

Really? Someone's head is coming off at Lumix Towers!

That's almost as bad as some wedding photographers using others images until such time as they can shoot their own.

Another form of 'entitlement' that exists.

[John Matthews]

54 minutes ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

The discover that Pansonic used stock photos (even one from a Nikon Ambassador) in the S9 brochures is not helping either.

Tie this PR disaster with the Asahi reports that Panasonic camera division could be axed...

Honestly, I'm more at ease after watching the livestream for the S9 with Sean. I think he explained better and smoothed it over a bit. It's easy to get caught up in the hoopla of M43 is finished, Panasonic is getting axed, "this is the best they could do".

23 minutes ago, ac6000cw said:

Actually, I suspect the S9 has got more coverage online and on social media than they hoped, even if it hasn't happened as planned. A lot of the adverse comments fueling this seem to be coming from a photography enthusiast base it isn't really targeted at anyway, and from video enthusiasts who seem disappointed it's not the S2H or S2R they'd prefer to be discussing.

Maybe it's me, but I can't remember the releases of any camera manufacturer, but I think I'm not the only one to remember the S9. Almost universally, people like the looks of it but are disappointed with specs, except for the people that this camera was designed for, camera phone users. I'm also rather disappointed but recognize it isn't really aimed at me.