Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Mirrorless Cameras => Topic started by: John Camp on September 20, 2018, 05:23:36 pm
-
Rumors around the new Panasonic FF are getting interesting -- the most recent rumors suggest that the new camera will use the Leica SL mount and that Panasonic, Leica and Sigma are all involved in the new system. The rumors suggest that there will be substantial number of native lenses at launch, that the sensor, designed by Panasonic, will probably have as many or more MPs than the Z7. Some of the rumors also suggest that the m4/3 lenses may be used in some manner. I don't follow camera rumors too closely, since there's usually a pretty large BS factor, but I've had a Panny m4/3 system for years and really like what they've done with it. If these rumors are true, the new camera could be one I'd be interested in. (I have a Nikon system in addition to my Panasonic GX8s, and I'm going to get a Z7 if the new Panasonic turns out to be less than rumored. But now, I'm waiting.)
-
Interesting indeed!
I hope that the lenses are more appealing than the SL ones that I find way too bulky, way too expensive and not that amazing image quality wise.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I had thought the Z7 was so perfect for me that nobody else could possibly match (Canon certainly didn't). But this rumor at least gives me pause. I'd expect a Panasonic body to be the most mature of all the entrants crowding in; they've been doing mirrorless for a long time now. And they'd have the ability to get a wide range of lenses produced, too, from Sigma. What I think could really set it apart is a Foveon camera. It's a neat tech that hasn't really found a clear home yet; and I don't know if it can match a Bayer as the *primary* camera. But having a Pansonic body for general purpose and a Sigma Foveon for when the situation calls for it? Could be very interesting, especially if Olympus joins in--they're a clear leader in tech.
-
What I think could really set it apart is a Foveon camera. It's a neat tech that hasn't really found a clear home yet; and I don't know if it can match a Bayer as the *primary* camera.
I can't imagine we'll see the Foveon sensor from anyone except Sigma. Too many problems with color balance, with acceptable skin tones being particularly hard to achieve.
Panasonic will be going after the broadest possible market is they choose to enter FF and it will need to be a very good sensor with all the latest technologies incorporated.
-
The Organic sensor possibly ????
-
The Organic sensor possibly ????
The announcement of the prototype is quite new : https://m.dpreview.com/news/1440456457/panasonic-unveils-industry-first-8k-organic-image-sensor-with-global-shutter , so... it will depend how far they are to mass produce it, Panasonic didn’t comment that in their press release, and rumors say nothing. Adding a extra step in a CMOS process line can take some time (years)... but maybe they were already working on that for some time...
P.D.: there was already a thread opened about this Panasonic FF rumor...
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
If the rumors about Sigma being a part of this are true, they have two built-in sources of excellent lenses . The fly in the ointment is that the Sigma Art lenses are heavy and bulky, and their FE-mount versions are just DSLR lenses with a permanent extension tube, not lenses actually designed for the shorter flange distances of mirrorless cameras. There has been some speculation, notably by Lloyd Chambers,that the front-heavy Art lenses might put a lot of torque on the camera side of the mount (big, heavy lens hanging off an extra inch or more of tube away from the mount). Sigma is certainly capable of designing native mirrorless lenses, but they haven't chosen to do so yet (with the exception of a few very compact APS-C/Micro 43 primes that are rarely seen).
The second concern beyond potential lens bulkiness (if they're starting with the Sigma Art plus Leica SL lineup, there's not a small lens in the bunch) is that the SL mount is originally an APS-C mount, and has a relatively small diameter - it's 2mm larger than the Sony E/FE mount, but 6 mm behind Canon and 7 mm behind Nikon. The difference in size between Nikon's new Z mount (the largest of the FF mirrorless mounts, although Canon is not far behind) and the medium format Hasselblad X mount is actually smaller than the difference between the SL mount and the Z mount. Like Sony, they may be trapped by a small APS-C derived mount, with a harder time building fast lenses and very compact lenses.
Neither Sony's nor the Panasonic coalition's decision to use existing mounts made all that much sense (Sony's stuck now, because of all the great FE lenses that exist - but they could have introduced a new mount with the original A7 series - there weren't NEX lenses that people really cared about on the A7). Unless there are a lot more ($5000 each, twice the weight of Canon/Nikon/Sony equivalents) SL lenses out there than I'm aware of, the SL mount also offers little in the way of extra compatibility.
Things are certainly getting interesting - not least because this is going to be a superb video camera! No IBIS is a real pain for that application! 4Kp60 with a data rate high enough that the fastest SD cards can't handle it is the latest rumor - if true, there is nothing short of a RED that does that (the Sony FS7 series comes very close with a smaller sensor).
One important question is how good the high pixel count sensor is in factors other than pixel count. Both the Nikon D850/Z7 sensor lineage and the closely related Sony A7r mkII/III sensor lineage are really excellent. They have very high dynamic range (DxOMark claims over 14 stops at base ISO, which is impossible in a 14 bit file, while Photons to Photos says around 12 really usable stops, which is believable) and excellent color. The even higher-resolution Canon 5Ds sensor loses a consistent couple of stops of dynamic range to the Sony/Nikon duo at all ISOs below about 1600, where it catches up. At base ISO, the Canon sensor actually falls behind the best APS-C cameras. Canon has closed the gap somewhat with the sensor in the 5D mk IV and EOS-R, but there's no high-resolution version of that yet. Will the new LeicaSigmaSonic sensor perform more like the Sony/Nikon, or more like the 5DsR? To be credible as an ultra-high resolution still camera, it has to perform like Sony and Nikon
Dan
-
They have very high dynamic range (DxOMark claims over 14 stops at base ISO, which is impossible in a 14 bit file
Why is this impossible?
-
Absent any compression (these cameras are all 14-bit uncompressed, and compressed options that some have start with a 14-bit signal), it takes 1 bit of data to represent 1 stop of dynamic range (per pixel, and per color channel). The only theoretical way to get more than 14 stops of signal is to use a 16-bit (or higher) analog to digital converter, which is much more expensive, slower and unnecessary for all but a few medium format sensors.
According to a prior discussion on Luminous, the only current sensor to have a 16-bit data path is the Sony 100 MP "645 full-frame" sensor in a few Phase One backs. Previous medium-format sensors that claimed "16-bit" files were apparently just taking a 14-bit output and adding a couple of zeros on the bottom (you could take an iPhone image with about 7 bits of real data, add 9 zeros and claim it as 16-bit) Since that discussion was last year, the very latest 150 MP sensor in the high-end Phase backs was not around yet, but I would guess it's also 16-bit. Another candidate that we should see soon is the new 100 MP 33x44 mm sensor that will show up in the successors to the Hasselblad H1D and Fuji GFX - that is unclear, because it is much more of a mass-market sensor - sort of. The medium format mirrorless cameras probably sell in the low tens of thousands per year, while the top Phase backs sell in the hundreds or maybe low thousands - for comparison, Nikon can make 240,000 Z7's per year, and I suspect A7rIII's, EOS-R's, etc. are in the same range, as are top-end DSLRs - say a million total cameras at or over 36 MP annually. Also, no medium-format camera shoots much over 1 FPS - there's time to move the extra data around.
The current Sony 24x36mm sensor seems to be right on the verge of producing more than 14 bits of real, usable data. Measurements of photographic dynamic range (which can underestimate - there are decisions in determining where the signal fades into noise, and Photons to Photos is conservative) show over 12 stops of highly usable dynamic range, and you can stretch another stop in the shadows. A 16-bit converter won't help this generation, but it might be necessary for the next generation.
One possible approach is that the Nikon D3x, the first camera outside of medium format to actually need 14-bit processing (because it could record more than 12 bits of real data) didn't have a true 14-bit converter, but it had some way of reading the analog values several times on the same exposure and running it through the analog to digital converter at different gains. It slowed the camera down by a factor of four, but it got 14-bit data out of a 12-bit converter. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see someone do that with an upcoming sensor. The D3x in slow mode was something like a 1.3 fps camera, but it sure produced a nice file... By the time the D800 came along, Nikon had a true 14-bit converter that ran at a more standard frame rate.
Dan
-
You could, given capable tech, create a sensor with a dynamic range of 20 stops and then run its output into an 8-bit ADC. There's no law that says your converter can't be coarse in its processing of voltages. :)
-Dave-
-
Do you know of any camera that remaps values at the ADC stage? A sort of analog domain compression... Wouldn't adjacent voltages, by definition, look alike, creating banding instead of blowing highlights or blocking shadows. You still have only 256 values per color channel on an 8 bit ADC, you're just stretching them over a wider range, reducing resolution between them... Or am I missing something? I thought all cameras tried to be linear at the ADC stage (then they apply a curve at the JPEG engine, as do all RAW converters - a linear image looks very dark).
Dan
-
I'm not saying 8-bit conversions of 20-stop DR image data would look good. :D Tonally they'd be rough: imagine undithered 6-bit conversions from a 14-bit source. (Or have a look if you've got software capable of undithered down-conversion.) In the real world I can't imagine why anyone would do such a thing. But it is technically possible.
-Dave-
-
Arguably the situation on desktop monitors is something like that--8 bit color isn't really enough for modern wide gamuts, but 10 bit support is still spotty. If you go looking, you'll find banding--but of course most people don't look.
-
I'm not saying 8-bit conversions of 20-stop DR image data would look good. :D Tonally they'd be rough: imagine undithered 6-bit conversions from a 14-bit source. (Or have a look if you've got software capable of undithered down-conversion.) In the real world I can't imagine why anyone would do such a thing. But it is technically possible.
-Dave-
Dan, what Dave is saying is that DR response of a camera is an analog thing, independent latter on of the precision of the digatilization process you put behind of it: 8 bits, 12 bits, 14 bits, 16 bits...
For example, for video people this is quite normal, they notice when the camera has better DR, 12 stops instead of 14 stops even if the output is 8 bits or 10 bits video...
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
With the SL lens mount, virtually every Leica M lens ever made will work in manual. This makes the “new FF” camera pretty compelling.
-
With the SL lens mount, virtually every Leica M lens ever made will work in manual. This makes the “new FF” camera pretty compelling.
But will they work well with the Panasonic sensor?
-
But will they work well with the Panasonic sensor?
Well, if the Leica SL lenses work which should be a fairly safe bet, then the M lenses will work. No?
-
Well, if the Leica SL lenses work which should be a fairly safe bet, then the M lenses will work. No?
The SL lenses are different optical formulations than the M lenses, where the light rays exit the back of the lens more parallel to the sensor. With the M lenses, particularly the wide angle ones, the light rays exit at steep angles, and unless the sensor microlenses are designed to accept light arriving at such steep angles, as is the case with the digital Ms and the SL, there will be smearing. We don't know whether the Panasonic sensor microlenses will be optimized for M wide angle lenses.
-
Well, if the Leica SL lenses work which should be a fairly safe bet, then the M lenses will work. No?
Depends on what you mean by “work”. They’ll fit on the camera, most certainly, but Leica sensors have their micro lenses turned a bit to mitigate the off-axis smearing that wide lenses designed for film exhibit. It’s one of the reasons why Leica M lenses work better on M cameras. If you trust Sean Reid, better than on the SL, even. The other is that the glass stack is thinner.
-
While it is possible to fit over 14 stops of DR into 10 or even 8 bit output, that requires nonlinear encoding _after_ ADC: the gamma of 8-bit JPEG or the similar processing with LOG video encoding.
But the ADC itself is giving linear output, and that can only preserve as many stops of DR as the raw ADC output has bits.
-
If Sigma is involved and adds its lens collection to the lineup, this becomes a lot more interesting than Panasonic alone, or Panasonic with Leica.
Rumour has it that the first three lenses are a 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8 and 50mm prime. If the AF is up to standard, that gives it a much more robust set of capabilities at launch than either the Z7 or EOS R, which will be lens-limited for a few years.
-
If Sigma is involved and adds its lens collection to the lineup, this becomes a lot more interesting than Panasonic alone, or Panasonic with Leica.
Rumour has it that the first three lenses are a 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8 and 50mm prime. If the AF is up to standard, that gives it a much more robust set of capabilities at launch than either the Z7 or EOS R, which will be lens-limited for a few years.
Hum... we would have to see their actual specs, but bulky f2.8 zoom lenses are not what I would expect as introductory lenses for a mirrorless system whose compactness should be a major aspect.
But I agree that the most important one will be the potential of the system regardless.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Well, if the Leica SL lenses work which should be a fairly safe bet, then the M lenses will work. No?
Not necessarily, at least not in the corners, where the slight smearing has occured with the wides.
What would be great is if Pana produce a FF Leica knock-off - referring to build & heft - that would ‘contrast’ with the mid-range, somewhat medioce build quality, of Canon and Nikon ‘s first efforts.
I don’t know who has licensed whose AF tech, but the good news is that they have licensed it out to Sigma, as have Sony with theirs. Not a wise move to keep this tech proprietary (as Nikon are prone to do).
-
medioce build quality, of Canon and Nikon ‘s first efforts.
I have seen a long list of criticism about the Z7, but you are the first to call its build quality anything short of outstanding. ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I have seen a long list of criticism about the Z7, but you are the first to call its build quality anything short of outstanding. ;)
If you’re going to quote , quote in full.
What i said was
... if Pana produce a FF Leica knock-off - referring to build & heft - that would ‘contrast’ with the mid-range, somewhat mediocre build quality, of Canon and Nikon ‘s first efforts.
Read any of the hands on field reviews, everyone has an opinion, but the one consensus is that neither cams are rivals for D5, 1DX II, Leica SL pro-build quality - and their price reflects that. They are mid-range cams.
Relax, Bernard , the post wasn’t a criticism and wasn’t ‘aimed’ at the Z7 ... and this thread is on the rumoured Panasonic.
-
mirrorless system whose compactness should be a major aspect.
Canon did a fine job there with super compact 28-70/2 and 50/1.2 ... and yes, Nikon too - is this a compact one ?
(https://1.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~TS590x0~articles/8167832602/Z7_And_Lenses_handson_01.jpeg)
or this humongous 50/1.8 ?
(https://3.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~TS590x0~articles/8167832602/Z7_And_Lenses_handson_18.jpeg)
-
Canon did a fine job there with super compact 28-70/2 and 50/1.2 ... and yes, Nikon too - is this a compact one ?
(https://1.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~TS590x0~articles/8167832602/Z7_And_Lenses_handson_01.jpeg)
or this humongous 50/1.8 ?
Yes, it is a compact super high quality lens.
It should be compared to Sony GM and Canon L.
But yes, apologies for the out of topic comment.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Canon did a fine job there with super compact 28-70/2 and 50/1.2 ... and yes, Nikon too - is this a compact one ?
The Nikkor Z 35mm f1.8 isn't compact, but it is only 86mm long and weighs in at only 370g (vs 60mm and 340g for the Zeiss Loxia 35mm f/2). Sigma seems to think we need a 40mm f/1.4 lens that weighs 1200g and is 131mm long... and that's the DSLR version, add some weight and length for mirrorless?
-
Sigma seems to think we need a 40mm f/1.4 lens that weighs 1200g and is 131mm long... and that's the DSLR version, add some weight and length for mirrorless?
Aren't you glad Sigma is teaming up with Leica and Panasonic. ;)
-
Aren't you glad Sigma is teaming up with Leica and Panasonic. ;)
Reminds me of the line from Jurassic Park where Dr. Malcom (Jeff Goldblum) says: "Yeah, yeah, but your scientists lens designers were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.
-
Hum... we would have to see their actual specs, but bulky f2.8 zoom lenses are not what I would expect as introductory lenses for a mirrorless system whose compactness should be a major aspect.
But I agree that the most important one will be the potential of the system regardless.
Cheers,
Bernard
Small size was a selling point 5 years ago. Not any more, when everyone has options for small size. Better to release a full-featured body with dual slots and f/2.8 zooms, which aren't matched by anyone other than Sony, than to add yet another system into that crowded marketplace. Add in a decent flash system and it would surpass the Sony.
-
Small size was a selling point 5 years ago. Not any more, when everyone has options for small size.
That's odd - small size (and weight) was why I ordered it (despite the mediocre - sorry, somewhat mediocre - build quality).
-
That's odd - small size (and weight) was why I ordered it (despite the mediocre - sorry, somewhat mediocre - build quality).
Thing is, if you're after small size, you can choose Sony, Nikon, Canon, Leica or any of the crop sensor formats. Panasonic adding another one doesn't change much.
If you're after a high-end camera, with solid AF, dual slots and fast zooms in the 24-70 and 70-200 ranges - the staple lenses of a large proportion of paid photographers - your only mirrorless choice is Sony, whose flash system leaves a lot to be desired. A Panasonic alternative with dual slots and f/2.8 zooms would completely change the high-end landscape and make it much more competitive. And we know Sigma can deliver the lenses - that's pretty much all they make.
-
That’s exactly the problem. Sony has nearly no high quality lenses that are actually small. In that regard I think Nikon is the first company actually doing the right thing with their small but amazing lenses.
I don’t mind it the other way around, but most companies produce great 2.8 zooms, but there f4 versions suck.
If I ever would buy such a camera it would have to be light and small with a good range.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
That’s exactly the problem. Sony has nearly no high quality lenses that are actually small.
Apart from the entire Batis range.
In that regard I think Nikon is the first company actually doing the right thing with their small but amazing lenses.
I don’t mind it the other way around, but most companies produce great 2.8 zooms, but there f4 versions suck.
If I ever would buy such a camera it would have to be light and small with a good range.
By prioritising small size over other factors, you're already accepting compromises in performance which wouldn't have to be made if the size/weight restriction weren't there. A slower, smaller lens that matches the optical performance and build quality of a faster lens with no such size restriction isn't likely to be much cheaper than the faster lens.
Besides, making the initial lens lineup small and light rather than fast and with no compromises locks out large swathes of high-end users, at the very time in the product cycle you want to be locking in these users making long-term investments in a new system. With f/4 zooms in the 24-200mm range and slowish primes (by prime standards), they'd preclude most photojournalists, event photographers, wedding photographers, portrait photographers and many other groups from choosing them almost completely. Anyone who wants/needs strong subject isolation is never going to choose a slow lens, no matter how sharp or light. These photographers would likely go and buy another mirrorless system that offered them the fast lenses and never look back, even if Panasonic/Nikon/whoever later caught up and offered similar lenses. Nikon discovered this, to its detriment, when it was slow out of the gate with CMOS and high ISO, and slow again with full frame - they later caught up and surpassed Canon performance-wise, but never regained the market share with DSLR that they had in the film days. Essentially, they'd be left with cashed-up amateur landscape photographers and soccer mums/dads, which, while a lucrative market in its own right, is never going to have the star power of higher-end users that is so valuable for advertising and brand promotion. Witness Canon's big white lenses at sporting events and in press galleries for an example.
Sure, it's great to have a strong suite of smaller/lighter, but still super-sharp, lenses for this market, but it can't come at the expense of the larger, pro-grade (utility-wise) lenses which are the poster-boys, if not necessarily the cash cows, of your brand. Many photographers would probably end up using a combination of the two - sharp and lightweight 14-24/4, 24-70/4 and 100-400/4.5-5.6 lenses ('lightweight' being a relative term in the last case) would make for a great portable kit if combined with a fast 35/50/85/1.2, 105/1.4 or 135/1.8 prime to cover the portrait focal lengths where you really want the subject isolation only a fast lens can bring. You'd then have lightweight, slower but still super-sharp lenses from 14-400mm (560mm with a 1.4x TC) for subjects where you want everything in focus, as well as a fast lens for those focal lengths where you tend to really need background blur, but would have a hard time getting it with a slower lens. But it's not the slow, lightweight lenses which build the brand - it's the large, fast lenses seen in the hands of pros shooting news, sports and events.
-
Thing is, if you're after small size, you can choose Sony, Nikon, Canon, Leica or any of the crop sensor formats.
Sure, but I don't want a crop sensor format.
Sure, it's great to have a strong suite of smaller/lighter, but still super-sharp, lenses for this market, but it can't come at the expense of the larger, pro-grade (utility-wise) lenses which are the poster-boys, if not necessarily the cash cows, of your brand.
This goes back to a question I asked a while ago - who exactly the market is. Are wedding photographers really dropping multi-thousands of bucks on a new camera at the drop of a hat? And replacing their lens investment at the same time? Rhetorical question.
-
This goes back to a question I asked a while ago - who exactly the market is. Are wedding photographers really dropping multi-thousands of bucks on a new camera at the drop of a hat? And replacing their lens investment at the same time? Rhetorical question.
Not established photographers - they change gear slowly, generally as it wears out or becomes thoroughly obsolete. But new photographers are starting out/moving into paid work all the time, and these people often buy $5k-10k of gear (full-frame body, 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8, flash) in one go. And, once they buy into a system like that, they tend to stay with the system for a long time. Very common with hobbyists moving into paid gigs and part time/full time paid photography, usually shooting events (whether parties, live music or nightclubs), weddings and portraits - when they were unpaid hobbyists, many had crop bodies with kit lenses, but, once they made the move into paid work, they needed the full-frame bodies and fast lenses, and bought them.
Then there's the question of what gear a company makes most money selling vs what gear gives the company the name to sell that gear. They're two different things. Canon makes much more money selling low-end Rebels and kit lenses to people shooting in green box mode than it does selling 1Dx bodies and supertele primes (or even 5D4s and 70-200/2.8 lenses) to pro photographers. But it's the brand visibility of the top-end gear that gives them the audience to sell that low-end gear in the first place. Without the high-end users, they wouldn't have much of a customer base.
-
Small size was a selling point 5 years ago. Not any more, when everyone has options for small size. Better to release a full-featured body with dual slots and f/2.8 zooms, which aren't matched by anyone other than Sony, than to add yet another system into that crowded marketplace. Add in a decent flash system and it would surpass the Sony.
Amazing what one can deduce from just some marketing propaganda...Sony is almost surpassed by yet an unreleased system.
-
That's odd - small size (and weight) was why I ordered it (despite the mediocre - sorry, somewhat mediocre - build quality).
I got into the Sony system because of reduced size and weight. Reductions are quite substantial if you shoot a lot of wide angle...which I do.
-
Thing is, if you're after small size, you can choose Sony, Nikon, Canon, Leica or any of the crop sensor formats. Panasonic adding another one doesn't change much.
If you're after a high-end camera, with solid AF, dual slots and fast zooms in the 24-70 and 70-200 ranges - the staple lenses of a large proportion of paid photographers - your only mirrorless choice is Sony, whose flash system leaves a lot to be desired. A Panasonic alternative with dual slots and f/2.8 zooms would completely change the high-end landscape and make it much more competitive. And we know Sigma can deliver the lenses - that's pretty much all they make.
Yes, if you want big, heavy and bulky, you can choose any of the many DSLR systems already fully setup with big, heavy professional grade lenses. Why would I as a wedding shooter go out on the limb using a Panosonic camera for my weddings when I can get a totally proven DSLR system from Canon or Nikon?
I went to mirrorless because I wanted ( needed ) a more compact system for extensive traveling and did not want to sacrifice the quality of my images...so the crop avenue was out for me.
-
The 24–70 & 70–200mm zoom ranges are poorly suited to the way I use zooms. With a 135 format camera I'd much rather have a 28–90 & 100–300mm set. Make 'em high quality and not too big. Variable max aperture would be fine, say f/3.5–4.5 for the shorter one and f/4.5–5.6 for the longer.
Less convention and more experimenting, please.
-Dave-
-
The 24–70 & 70–200mm zoom ranges are poorly suited to the way I use zooms. With a 135 format camera I'd much rather have a 28–90 & 100–300mm set. Make 'em high quality and not too big. Variable max aperture would be fine, say f/3.5–4.5 for the shorter one and f/4.5–5.6 for the longer.
Less convention and more experimenting, please.
-Dave-
Personally hate variable aperture zooms and 28 is just not wide enough for me.
-
Amazing what one can deduce from just some marketing propaganda...Sony is almost surpassed by yet an unreleased system.
Easy enough to say from specs. And, like everything else in any field dealing with preliminary/incomplete information, it's an 'if... then...' case. If you can't understand that, then there's no point even discussing rumours and predictions.
Sony has dual cards, solid AF and fast zooms/fast primes, but the flash system (right down to the hotshoe) is crap. If Panasonic can match the first three and release a decent flash system (or even just a decent hotshoe) then, by definition, it would beat the Sony in that role. Rumours point to 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8 and a 50mm prime as the first lenses. It wouldn't take much to put in two card slots instead of one - and the f/2.8 zooms at launch suggest they're going after the high end and pro users, who would demand dual slots - and Panasonic has an established history of working with mirrorless AF. And, given their partnership with Sigma, lens selection is unlikely to be a problem.
-
And, given their partnership with Sigma, lens selection is unlikely to be a problem.
Only if you actually want the Sigma lenses.
-
Yes, if you want big, heavy and bulky, you can choose any of the many DSLR systems already fully setup with big, heavy professional grade lenses. Why would I as a wedding shooter go out on the limb using a Panosonic camera for my weddings when I can get a totally proven DSLR system from Canon or Nikon?
Because you wouldn't be buying it until the system was proven by the early adopters and the right lenses and accessories were available.
SLR may be proven, but it's also hit its peak. For further improvement- things like eye AF, real-time WYSIWYG composition and exposure (invaluable for event photographers shooting JPEG in order to sell prints during an event), better video and AI-based AF modes - you need to move to mirrorless. And Canon/Nikon are going to slowly reduce their support for the SLR lines, as their mirrorless options gain traction.
Mirrorless is now a proven technology, able to match SLR capability-wise - Sony broke that ground with the A9/A7r3/A7III. All that is left for Panasonic to prove is that their new system can match the Sony performance-wise. And that's something that will become apparent within a few weeks of product availability. When that happens, you won't be 'going out on a limb' by buying it - you'd be buying a new system, but one based on proven technology and with proven capability, with much better prospects for future ongoing support and future bodies with expanded capabilities than if you bought an EF or F-mount system instead.
I went to mirrorless because I wanted ( needed ) a more compact system for extensive traveling and did not want to sacrifice the quality of my images...so the crop avenue was out for me.
Which is a typical reason for amateur use (this includes pros shooting in a hobbyist capacity, e.g. pro sports shooters going on holiday).
Right now, the game is not in winning over amateurs and hobbyists. It's in winning over a core group of pro/paid shooters, encouraging them to move on from SLR. When they come, the amateurs will come with them. A manufacturer with a loyal following of amateur landscape photogrsphers, but no pros visibly using their systems at events, concerts, weddings and sporting matches, has no brand power or brand visibility at all.
-
https://photorumors.com/2018/09/24/leica-panasonic-and-sigma-to-form-a-new-l-mount-alliance/
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Only if you actually want the Sigma lenses.
What I mean is that they will have no problem releasing the lenses they want to release for the system. Panasonic and Sigma together have more than enough capacity to design and make whatever lenses they want (tapping into Sigma's preexisting models for optical designs). When, and whether, to release small/light models is up to them.
If you value small size over performance, just buy an Olympus or a Leica.
-
A line of light, sharp zooms, as sharp and well-built as the faster lenses and probably not much cheaper, would make sense and have appeal among a wide subset of users, but not before and not at the expense of the faster, more all-purpose f/2.8 zooms which can do everything the slow zooms can do, plus more.
Light options make much less sense for primes, since one of the main reasons for using primes is for DOF control, which you can't get with a slower lens, no matter how sharp.
-
Unsurprisingly, I have the exact opposite view.
Most potential buyers of pro zooms are DSLR users who own large pro zooms already. As Shadowblade tried for pages in the Nikon Z thread to convince the world that there would be close to zero value to go to the Z eventhough they could reuse their existing lenses with very good performance, now we should believe that they will find it appealing to throw away their existing DSLR pro zooms to replace them by equally bulky Pana f2.8 zooms???
No, the value for DSLR users is first compactness. Not 5 years ago, but today as we speak.
I expect Pana to have understood this just like Nikon has.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Mirrorless is now a proven technology, able to match SLR capability-wise - Sony broke that ground with the A9/A7r3/A7III. All that is left for Panasonic to prove is that their new system can match the Sony performance-wise.
But, with Nikon D810 selling used for >$1,500 and a vast number of high quality lenses selling used on ebay, mirrorless has not caught up value wise. Don't get me wrong--I'm not a fan boy of any system. Last weekend I was shooting a Nikon D800E with Sigma's best ART lenses, a 1954 Rolleiflex film camera, and an 1890s half plate field camera with dry plates--all interchangeably. They all did the job.
Kent in SD
-
Unsurprisingly, I have the exact opposite view.
Most potential buyers of pro zooms are DSLR users who own large pro zooms already. As Shadowblade tried for pages in the Nikon Z thread to convince the world that there would be close to zero value to go to the Z eventhough they could reuse their existing lenses with very good performance, now we should believe that they will find it appealing to throw away their existing DSLR pro zooms to replace them by equally bulky Pana f2.8 zooms???
No, the value for DSLR users is first compactness. Not 5 years ago, but today as we speak.
I expect Pana to have understood this just like Nikon has.
Cheers,
Bernard
The thing is, SLR is a technology that's reaching the end of its service life, to be mostly replaced over the next decade by mirrorless systems (of whatever size).
The value for current SLR users is to be able to move into a new system that's able to replace, not supplement, their current systems, while, for those who do not currently own a full-frame system, it is in the ability to move straight into a full-capability, future-proofed mirrorless system rather than having to temporarily buy into a system that's likely to become dated and suffer from reduced manufacturer support in the near future. That calls for f/2.8 zooms and fast primes which can entirely replace their SLR counterparts, not slow lenses.
Mirrorless needs to be a full-capability system, first and foremost. Those buying into the system shouldn't also need an SLR system if they want the full gamut of capabilities. They need to be able to get it all with just a mirrorless system. The small lenses can come later.
-
But, with Nikon D810 selling used for >$1,500 and a vast number of high quality lenses selling used on ebay, mirrorless has not caught up value wise. Don't get me wrong--I'm not a fan boy of any system. Last weekend I was shooting a Nikon D800E with Sigma's best ART lenses, a 1954 Rolleiflex film camera, and an 1890s half plate field camera with dry plates--all interchangeably. They all did the job.
Kent in SD
It's not a future-proofed system, though. I didn't buy the D800 in 2012 for that reason when Canon failed to deliver IQ-wise, and wouldn't buy an SLR today for the same reason.
Any lenses you buy for a second-hand SLR system, even if they are cheap, are likely to be obsolescent in a few years, usable on mirrorless bodies only via adapters (likely with minimal support in terms of software-based lens correction profiles, etc.) and on increasingly-infrequent legacy SLR body releases.
Anyway, the D810 is nothing to write home about AF-wise. Any of the current-generation Sonys beats it thoroughly.
-
Strategically speaking, it seems clear that China will overtake Japan at some time. Investing in any of the Japanese brands does’t seem very futureproof to me Shadowblade.
I would wait if I were you.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
The thing is, SLR is a technology that's reaching the end of its service life, to be mostly replaced over the next decade by mirrorless systems (of whatever size).
The value for current SLR users is to be able to move into a new system that's able to replace, not supplement, their current systems, while, for those who do not currently own a full-frame system, it is in the ability to move straight into a full-capability, future-proofed mirrorless system rather than having to temporarily buy into a system that's likely to become dated and suffer from reduced manufacturer support in the near future. That calls for f/2.8 zooms and fast primes which can entirely replace their SLR counterparts, not slow lenses.
Mirrorless needs to be a full-capability system, first and foremost. Those buying into the system shouldn't also need an SLR system if they want the full gamut of capabilities. They need to be able to get it all with just a mirrorless system. The small lenses can come later.
Again you are focussed on the much smaller professional market that somehow needs big heavy expensive lenses. The real market is still the consumer and I know they don't want the size and bulk of a DSLR system...if they did they could just get a DSLR system for 1/4 the price.
I think Sony did it right by addressing the consumer market first, getting established and then going after the shrinking professional market. My town of about 20,000 has lost over 1/2 of its professional photographers over the last 10 years or so...not a healthy market to address.
-
Strategically speaking, it seems clear that China will overtake Japan at some time. Investing in any of the Japanese brands does’t seem very futureproof to me Shadowblade.
I would wait if I were you.
Cheers,
Bernard
Not a valid comparison. Japan isn't going to disappear. SLRs, mostly, will - just as TLRs and film SLRs mostly have. There's no point investing in a system likely to have minimal support in 10 years' time (within the expected service life of any lenses you buy now).
-
The thing is, SLR is a technology that's reaching the end of its service life, to be mostly replaced over the next decade by mirrorless systems (of whatever size).
The value for current SLR users is to be able to move into a new system that's able to replace, not supplement, their current systems, while, for those who do not currently own a full-frame system, it is in the ability to move straight into a full-capability, future-proofed mirrorless system rather than having to temporarily buy into a system that's likely to become dated and suffer from reduced manufacturer support in the near future. That calls for f/2.8 zooms and fast primes which can entirely replace their SLR counterparts, not slow lenses.
Mirrorless needs to be a full-capability system, first and foremost. Those buying into the system shouldn't also need an SLR system if they want the full gamut of capabilities. They need to be able to get it all with just a mirrorless system. The small lenses can come later.
Future proof might be the most overused word in photography. Red saw to that a decade ago.
Your scenarios all seem to suggest all this switching is going to happen the day the cameras are released, and that it’s going to happen all at once, and that all the systems are defined by what’s available when the first piece hits the shelves. None of these is true. People rarely dump an entire system and pick up another with no overlap. That takes time. And during that time, all the manufacturers will be releasing new lenses, and new bodies as well if the trial is long enough.
You talk as if Leica/Sigma/Panny will have a whole line of professional lenses available when the body hits stores. And that that invalidates all the other manufacturers’ strategies. Neither of those is true either.
By the time the Panny camera hits stores, Nikon will have more S lenses available. Canon will have more R lenses available. Depending on what the delivery timeframe turns out to be, Nikon’s trinity of 2.8 zooms you’re so concerned about may be available in the S line. And who knows what’s on Canon’s roadmap?
Meanwhile, there are a few dozen Nikkors that will that will autofocus well with the FTZ adapter, and more manual focus lenses. There are a few dozen Leica manual lenses that will work with the M-L adapter, and a few autofocus lenses. And there are a few dozen Canon lenses that will focus well via the R adapters. The adapters work. (Well from all reports.) And that means real photographers have real choices.
I’m very happy with the direction Nikon has mapped out. I’m intrigued by the L/S/P alliance, and interested in the Panny FF announcement (but not because of f2.8 zooms). And I’m sure of only one thing regarding the future—the evolution from DSLR to mirrorless cameras will be a lot more chaotic than the writing on this forum suggests. Right now, I own four camera systems, and have another on order, and I sometimes rent stuff. That may be above the mean, but having different cameras for different purposes is not uncommon.
18 months from now, I expect we’ll have three new and pretty interesting camera systems that will serve the vast majority of serious users with emphasis on different things. They will all have very good, but still basic, lens lineups. Sony will still have more native lenses, and that will matter to those for whom those more exotic lenses are important. Nikon will not have gone under because it offered f/1.8 primes, and Canon will not have ridden to world dominance on the back of a two-kilo f/2.0 zoom. And I might still own both the Sony and the NikonZ systems. Or one may have been gone to eBay. Or maybe both will have gone and been replaced by some L/S/P kit. What will determine that? It won’t be the native lenses; I’m confident all three systems will have a pretty fair selection by then, with more on the way. It’ll be the responsiveness of firmware updates, the ergonomics and UI, and how well the bodies and their various adapters work with third party, mostly manual-focus lenses, including vintage Cine lenses and specialty technical lenses that are important to me. That’s where “future proofing” lies (if it lies anywhere at all). It lies in the firmware, the usability, and the compatibility with legacy glass that provides unique looks. All of them will have very good native optics in the usual specs, along with a few showpiece lenses.
-
Just confirmation of rumors mostly:
https://leicarumors.com/2018/09/24/press-release-for-a-new-l-mount-alliance-between-leica-panasonic-and-sigma-just-leaked-online.aspx/#more-54013
But one item is news to me: the L mount diameter is given as 51.6mm, bigger (and probably better) than the previously-reported 48.8mm. Along with Nikon Z at 55mm and Canon R at 54mm, Sony E mount's 46.1mm is now quite an outlier, which does add to the suspicion that it could be an impediment for a few ambitious, fast lens options.
-
Again you are focussed on the much smaller professional market that somehow needs big heavy expensive lenses. The real market is still the consumer and I know they don't want the size and bulk of a DSLR system...if they did they could just get a DSLR system for 1/4 the price.
I think Sony did it right by addressing the consumer market first, getting established and then going after the shrinking professional market. My town of about 20,000 has lost over 1/2 of its professional photographers over the last 10 years or so...not a healthy market to address.
And what do you think drives the consumer market? Do you think Canon would have sold nearly as many low-end Rebels and other crop bodies (inferior in almost all respects to their Nikon counterparts) if it weren't for all the big white lenses and big, red-ringed lenses that the non-photographer public see everywhere? The vast majority of consumer-end sales don't go to people who read camera forums and pore through spec sheets. They go to people who might want a better camera for a holiday or to shoot their children, who see pro users shooting a Canon/Nikon/Sony, think 'the pros use it, so it must be good' then go out and buy one. Without pro users, a brand has no visibility and less ability to penetrate the consumer market.
Put simply, pro users don't generate much income directly - instead, they generate sales, from which the real income is derived
-
The 24–70 & 70–200mm zoom ranges are poorly suited to the way I use zooms. With a 135 format camera I'd much rather have a 28–90 & 100–300mm set. Make 'em high quality and not too big. Variable max aperture would be fine, say f/3.5–4.5 for the shorter one and f/4.5–5.6 for the longer.
Less convention and more experimenting, please.
-Dave-
I find it sad that only Leica had the 'courage' to design lenses of a non-conformist range. IMO, Leica SL's 24-90 and 90-280 are much more convenient ranges than 'classic' 24-70 and 70-200. Variable aperture would be fine for me as well.
-
And what do you think drives the consumer market? Do you think Canon would have sold nearly as many low-end Rebels and other crop bodies (inferior in almost all respects to their Nikon counterparts) if it weren't for all the big white lenses and big, red-ringed lenses that the non-photographer public see everywhere?
Supposing that to be true, for the sake of argument, it bodes well for the sales of consumer-level Canon MILC, since those pros with their big white lenses will still be there at the court-side for some time to come.
-
And what do you think drives the consumer market? Do you think Canon would have sold nearly as many low-end Rebels and other crop bodies (inferior in almost all respects to their Nikon counterparts) if it weren't for all the big white lenses and big, red-ringed lenses that the non-photographer public see everywhere?
Supposing that to be true, for the sake of argument, it bodes well for the sales of consumer-level Canon MILC, since those pros with their big white lenses will still be there at the court-side for some time to come.
I suspect the EOS R will do very well, partly because Canon is a known quantity with universal brand recognition in photography, but also because the EOS R with 24-105 kit lens is a solid, if unspectacular mirrorless product for the enthusiast market, effectively being a 5D4 updated for the mirrorless age, with its chief downside - a single card slot - being less of a handicap for this group of users than for paid shooters or higher-end users.
-
I find it sad that only Leica had the 'courage' to design lenses of a non-conformist range. IMO, Leica SL's 24-90 and 90-280 are much more convenient ranges than 'classic' 24-70 and 70-200. Variable aperture would be fine for me as well.
Yes, those ranges look more interesting to me...
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
Yes, those ranges look more interesting to me...
http://dgpfotografia.com
Variable aperture in that focal length range kills it.
When shooting quickly, at a number of different focal lengths to compose for the same subject in different ways, or in a setting with lots of different subjects but constant lighting, it is very frustrating to set your aperture and exposure for one focal length, only to have it change once you zoom in or out.
If you're shooting slowly and deliberately, it probably isn't an issue, but that effectively limits it to static subjects and low-pressure shooting.
-
Variable aperture in that focal length range kills it.
When shooting quickly, at a number of different focal lengths to compose for the same subject in different ways, or in a setting with lots of different subjects but constant lighting, it is very frustrating to set your aperture and exposure for one focal length, only to have it change once you zoom in or out.
If you're shooting slowly and deliberately, it probably isn't an issue, but that effectively limits it to static subjects and low-pressure shooting.
The key words in my comment were "for me". I'm mainly doing landscape, usually at f8, the variable aperture will be an issue for me in like 1% of my photographs... and the extra range without changing lenses will be more useful for me. So, again, for me, the drawbacks are none.
-
No more rumors... the L alliance it is official now: https://www.engadget.com/2018/09/25/panasonic-leica-sigma-l-mount-alliance/
Let's see if Panasonic announces now their rumored camera.
-
Honestly, I'm watching the live stream right now and it looks great. Let's wait for the price and how it works, but specs wise it shames both canon and Nikon.
-
Honestly, I'm watching the live stream right now and it looks great. Let's wait for the price and how it works, but specs wise it shames both canon and Nikon.
Yes, it is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuxXBRLaqyw
-
From what I'm seeing on the screencast... probably missing a lot of things:
- Two cameras: S1R (47MPx) and S1 (24MPx)
- Contrast AF.DFD (this is the same as GH5, I think it could be the weakest point of the camera)
- Video 4k60P
- Two card slots, one XQD and one SD
- In body IS
- 3 axis tiltable LCD
- Weather proof
Three lenses Lumix at launch time (I think release date it is Q1 2019):
- 50mm f1.5
- 24-105mm
- 70-200mm
10 more lenses before the end of 2020 (Lumix lenses... there is also the Leica lenses that are compatible with the camera and whatever Sigma releases).
I didn't see any mention to the global shutter sensor (I couldn't watch the whole presentation... so maybe I missed it).
EDIT: More info: https://www.l-rumors.com/these-are-the-new-panasonic-sr1-and-s1-full-frame-cameras/
EDIT 2: More info:
- https://www.dpreview.com/news/3187253376/panasonic-s1-and-s1r-what-we-know-so-far
- https://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/panasonic-s1r/panasonic-s1rA.HTM
-
Honestly, I'm watching the live stream right now and it looks great. Let's wait for the price and how it works, but specs wise it shames both canon and Nikon.
Video wise, as expected it should be great, for still, the only aspect that I find superior to the Z is the double memory slot.
The lens announced seem very middle of the road, the access to SL lenses is irrelevant considering their bulk, cost and not that amazing level of performance.
All in all, I don't really get the hype.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Well, we’ll see but honestly it is a great choice. Especially as it will take all of them a while to get a good lens line up. Neither canon or Nikon managed that.
On the other side all of them aren’t really interesting when I can have much better IQ with the new GFX and not much more weight.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Video wise, as expected it should be great, for still, the only aspect that I find superior to the Z is the double memory slot.
The lens announced seem very middle of the road, the access to SL lenses is irrelevant considering their bulk, cost and not that amazing level of performance.
All in all, I don't really get the hype.
Cheers,
Bernard
For me the hype it is Panasonic going to FF market together with Leica and Sigma. That it is quite interesting for the camera ecosystem. I see the same level of hype or non-hype as Nikon or Canon announcements. New mirrorless system (or maybe old if we consider it is Leica SL system), some first new lenses and the promises of more lenses in the future.
-
Variable aperture in that focal length range kills it.
Several posts have expressed disdain for variable aperture zoom lenses, even apparently for f/2.8-4 ones like the Leica 24-90/2.8-4. I do not see how this is inferior to a constant f/4 (e.g. Nikon's 24-70/4), so is the complaint just about speed: not being constant f/2.8, or f/2 (or f/1.7 in the forthcoming Panasonic 10-25/1.7)?
Or is it a hangover of the long-ago resolved problem that on purely mechanically coupled lenses, the f-stop varied as one zoomed, and so did not match the value on the aperture ring except at minimum focal length? Staying at f/4 or above on a f/2.8-4 solve that, and leaves one no worse off than with a constant f/4.
Or is it — as with Nikon's new f/4 zoom and f/1.8 primes — that some people have it stuck in their minds that such lenses are also inferior designs in other ways, because that used to be the case?
-
FI see the same level of hype or non-hype as Nikon or Canon announcements. New mirrorless system (or maybe old if we consider it is Leica SL system), some first new lenses and the promises of more lenses in the future.
I agree that more diversity is good, no question here. What I don't see is what this adds to the table that other players don't already do or have announced they will do in a more appealing way?
Well, at least Nikon and Canon are proposing some clearly unique lenses and their mount characteristic has the potential to help design better optics. In the end it's all about lenses.
From an AF standpoint, I have never heard great things about the GH5 be it for still or video.
At least they do have IBIS, which is a good thing obviously.
Even if you start from scratch with no existing lens investment in any system, how does the past track record of Panasonic in the still segment motivate you to invest a large amount in this system over Sony, Nikon or Canon? Since it probably doesn't, then what spec of the announced lenses or body does that?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
That 24-105 F2.8 is interesting. I thought it will be huge considering the Leica 24-90 but unless the scale in those shots is off it looks quite manageable.
-
That 24-105 F2.8 is interesting. I thought it will be huge considering the Leica 24-90 but unless the scale in those shots is off it looks quite manageable.
Who said it is an 24-105 f2.8?
The Panasonic slide doesn't specify the opening of the 24-105 and 70-200.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Well, at least Nikon and Canon are proposing some clearly unique lenses and their mount characteristic has the potential to help design better optics. In the end it's all about lenses.
Yes, it is all lenses... I don't see bad start options from Panasonic. With difference of Canon and Nikon they can not use adapted lenses from MFT (well, they can, but with reduced resolution if they make an adapter). Panasonic is releasing some typical and very used zooms and a prime, it is a good start for those that can not afford Leica alternatives.
From an AF standpoint, I have never heard great things about the GH5 be it for still or video.
At least they do have IBIS, which is a good thing obviously.
Yes, as I commented the AF could be the weak point in Panasonic offering. It is my understanding that firmware updates improved the AF system in the GH5 (since it is all done in software), but not sure if it is enough to make a Contrast AF system as quick as a PDAF system or as smooth as Canon Dual Pixel...
Even if you start from scratch with no existing lens investment in any system, how does the past track record of Panasonic in the still segment motivate you to invest a large amount in this system over Sony, Nikon or Canon?
Well, starting from scratch I will be carefully considering buying any of Canon, Nikon or Panasonic new systems. I didn't jump ship to Sony mirrorless system until I saw that they have natively all possible lenses that I wanted to use.
Panasonic is very well loved for video people, I think they are going to first make GH5 and G9 owners to think to jump FF with their system, instead to going to something like an Sony A7s and them, building the system to attract more users to it. I don't think they will be trying to become market leaders.
Also, don't forget Sigma... They announced that they plan to release cameras for this system, it will be interesting to have lenses that can be used with a foveon type camera.
-
Who said it is an 24-105 f2.8?
The Panasonic slide doesn't specify the opening of the 24-105 and 70-200.
Cheers,
Bernard
I cann't locate the article now, but DPReview was saying that... although I think it was a typo on their side...
-
I agree that more diversity is good, no question here. What I don't see is what this adds to the table that other players don't already do or have announced they will do in a more appealing way?
Well, at least Nikon and Canon are proposing some clearly unique lenses and their mount characteristic has the potential to help design better optics. In the end it's all about lenses.
From an AF standpoint, I have never heard great things about the GH5 be it for still or video.
At least they do have IBIS, which is a good thing obviously.
Even if you start from scratch with no existing lens investment in any system, how does the past track record of Panasonic in the still segment motivate you to invest a large amount in this system over Sony, Nikon or Canon? Since it probably doesn't, then what spec of the announced lenses or body does that?
Cheers,
Bernard
For video shooters (and Panasonic has a lot of those) FF with 60fps 4K is a big deal, especially if you assume 10-bit internal recording.
-
For video shooters (and Panasonic has a lot of those) FF with 60fps 4K is a big deal, especially if you assume 10-bit internal recording.
Yes, for sure.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Who said it is an 24-105 f2.8?
The Panasonic slide doesn't specify the opening of the 24-105 and 70-200.
Cheers,
Bernard
I've seen it like that on one of the sites, can't find it now. It does make sense that it's not a 2.8 though with that size.
-
Personally hate variable aperture zooms and 28 is just not wide enough for me.
That's fine. I'm advocating for more options, not replacement ones. In particular: high-end quality smaller, lighter, slower zooms.
-Dave-
-
Sigma confirms a new Full Frame Foveon camera with L mount, together with an SA-L and EF-L adapter: https://www.dpreview.com/news/4798649806/sigma-to-take-foveon-full-frame-and-move-to-l-mount
-
Sigma confirms a new Full Frame Foveon camera with L mount, together with an SA-L and EF-L adapter: https://www.dpreview.com/news/4798649806/sigma-to-take-foveon-full-frame-and-move-to-l-mount
Now we're talking !!!
It will be interesting to see what they're done with the Foveon to bring it to FF.
-
Now we're talking !!!
It will be interesting to see what they're done with the Foveon to bring it to FF.
If it can tether to LR or C1 or at least process the RAW files, it would be a contender!
-
Now we're talking !!!
It will be interesting to see what they're done with the Foveon to bring it to FF.
I hope that they went back to a true foveon merril approach and not the quattro like sensor. I didn’t keep mine very long.
A 24mp true Foveon sensor with top lenses would be very appealing. Base ISO only, ideally max 50.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I hope that they went back to a true foveon merril approach and not the quattro like sensor. I didn’t keep mine very long.
That's exactly my point, ...it's going to be interesting to see...
I'm hoping they learned their lesson with the quattro. It had to be a complete failure financially while the DPs are still in demand in the used market.
Many interesting products still to be introduced in the next day(s). Particularly the Broncolor announcement tomorrow.
-
Specs, much less actual images, are scarce... The few available pieces of info suggest a rather odd camera. Every site that's seen the mockup mentions that it's big and heavy, and state that it's larger and heavier than a GH5... By how much? The Leica SL is mirrorless (and not medium format), but it's the size and weight of a D850. Is the S1/S1r in that class, or is it somewhere in between the larger of the ordinary-sized mirrorless cameras (the GH5 is the largest of a class that includes the A9, A7rIII, Z6/Z7, EOS-R, X-H1 and E-M1 mk II) and the D850/Leica SL class?
It seems to have no phase-detect AF - an odd choice in a world where phase-detect performance on mirrorless cameras is increasing so rapidly. As to be expected from a Panasonic, video features look excellent - 4kP60, although with no mention of data rate (and the SD slot hanging around concerns me on that account - only the very highest-end SD cards can keep up with the GH5, and any hope for a much higher data rate seems to be quashed by the SD slot unless there are some video modes that are XQD only).
The two most important questions are going to be the quality of the sensor, and of the lenses. Is the (Samsung? Panasonic?) sensor going to be comparable in quality to the Sony sensors in the same pixel-count range? The EOS 5Ds (the only camera we've seen with a very high resolution non-Sony sensor) was a disappointment in this regard. While its resolution is superb, its dynamic range and noise capabilities are quite a bit lower than the Sony-sensor alternatives, including the older generation of 36 MP sensors as well as the newest 42-46 MP generation. Will the new sensor be similar to the Sonys? More like the Canon 50 MP sensor? Possibly even better than the current Sony sensors (unlikely - I would expect that anything that significantly outperforms the A7rIII sensor and the D850/Z7 sensor would require a 16-bit ADC, and there's no sign of one here)?
I haven't seen anything about the Leica SL lenses that justifies their size, weight or cost. While Sigma Art lenses are nearly always big and heavy, you get a lot of performance for the weight...Will the new Panasonic-branded lenses be a more compact option while maintaining quality? Another line of reasonably priced, but heavy lenses to go with the Sigmas (which I'm assuming will show up on L-mount pretty quickly)? More expensive lenses like the Leicas? A line of cheap consumer zooms? I hope for the first option...
-
Yes, it is a compact super high quality lens.
it is not compact, it is big for it's aperture and "mirrorless system whose compactness should be a major aspect."... but no - Nikon decided to make big lenses to achieve "better" images from the said lens - so why do you have issues with Panasonic here, but not w/ Nikon ? you have issues with bulky 2.8 zooms but not with bulky 1.8 primes ? do you expect Nikon to deliver less bulky 2.8 zooms ?
-
The Nikkor Z 35mm f1.8 isn't compact, but it is only 86mm long and weighs in at only 370g (vs 60mm and 340g for the Zeiss Loxia 35mm f/2). Sigma seems to think we need a 40mm f/1.4 lens that weighs 1200g and is 131mm long... and that's the DSLR version, add some weight and length for mirrorless?
the issue is not with Sigma - the issue is that prev. poster was OK with big lenses for dSLMs from C&N, but strangely not with big lenses from Panasonic... that's it.
-
it is not compact, it is big for it's aperture and "mirrorless system whose compactness should be a major aspect."... but no - Nikon decided to make big lenses to achieve "better" images from the said lens - so why do you have issues with Panasonic here, but not w/ Nikon ? you have issues with bulky 2.8 zooms but not with bulky 1.8 primes ? do you expect Nikon to deliver less bulky 2.8 zooms ?
The definition of what is compact or not compact is obviously subjective. I find the bulk of the Nikon S 35mm f1.8 and 50mm f1.8 to be compact enough.
What is clear is that a high quality 24-70mm f2.8 zoom lens is going to be significantly more bulky than a high quality f1.8 prime lens. And who needs average quality f2.8 zooms?
Now, it appears that Pana is in fact releasing a 24-105 f4, not a 24-70 f2.8, which makes a lot more sense to me as a first lens.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
The definition of what is compact or not compact is obviously subjective. I find the bulk of the Nikon S 35mm f1.8 and 50mm f1.8 to be compact enough.
there is nothing subjective here : FE 55/1.8 is an example of way more compact lens (49mm + 64.4 x 70.5 mm + 281 g) vs Z 50/1.8 (62mm + 76 x 86.5 mm + 415 g) .. it is humongous 1.8 lens... humongous certainly for a reason - Nikon clearly and rightfully does not care about "compactness should be a major aspect", and so Panasonic has their own reasons to start with the lenses they started with and their are no less valid than Nikon's or Canon's... at least Panasonic is not saving on memory card slots ;D
-
there is nothing subjective here : FE 55/1.8 is an example of way more compact lens (49mm + 64.4 x 70.5 mm + 281 g) vs Z 50/1.8 (62mm + 76 x 86.5 mm + 415 g) .. it is humongous 1.8 lens... humongous certainly for a reason - Nikon clearly and rightfully does not care about "compactness should be a major aspect", and so Panasonic has their own reasons to start with the lenses they started with and their are no less valid than Nikon's or Canon's... at least Panasonic is not saving on memory card slots ;D
What you need to compare is the size of the FE 55/1.8, Z 50mm f1.8 and GM 50mm f1.4 from the point of view of size and image quality.
You will understand that the Z 50mm f1.8 is indeed very compact compared to other lenses offering the same level of image quality. Yes, the FE 55mm f1.8 is more compact (about 1.5cm more so) and a very decent lens, but it is not in the same category image qualitywise as the Z.
A 1.5cm difference doesn't really match my understanding of humongous... but it seems to match yours. This difference of understanding of the meaning of words is objectively subjective.
Note that in the end, contrary to the forecast of our friend Shadowblade who has vanished in the meantime, Panasonic has indeed chosen a strategy similar to that of Nikon with their 24-105mm f4, and not a bulky 24-70mm f2.8. Now, it is true that the 50mm f1.4 is very bulky though so they fall somewhere in between. ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
What you need to compare is the size of the FE 55/1.8, Z 50mm f1.8 and GM 50mm f1.4 from the point of view of size and image quality.
No GM version of the 50 mm, the f1.4 is a Sony-Zeiss branded one... quite bulky...
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
Very interesting that Sigma and Panasonic are joining up with Leica on a new full frame mount. That gives all three access to high quality lenses and lets them share the development cost too. This puts all of Sigma's Art, Sports and Consumer lenses into a whole new light as many of those lenses will be able to be converted to L-mount by Sigma.
Any thoughts I had about Canon's EOS R are definitely shelved. Very interested to see what these two deliver in terms of a camera.
-
I'm sort of with dreed, but from a Nikon perspective -- I was all hot for the Z7, but now I'm kinda tap-dancing, waiting to see exactly how the Panasonic gets reviewed. I have a large Panasonic m4/3 system and I have to say, I've enjoyed it from the start. I really don't need anything better for what I do, but GAS is GAS. (I point out that there are at least a half-dozen f/0.95 lenses for the m4/3 system, so I'm not wildly impressed that Nikon is going to make one, even though I'm basically a Nikon guy when it comes to FF.)
I gotta say, every time I get on these forums I'm somewhat amused and/or distressed by the ridiculous tech-peeking. All of these new cameras strike me as extraordinary. That dragonfly photo in the link that Bernard put up? You want something better than that? What for? I really doubt that there's *anybody* on these forums who would really need *more* than *any* of these cameras provide. Of course, I did forty years of film photography before we even got to digital, and I thought Kodachrome/F5 was already great.
-
This Panasonic camera was almost too good to be true …. until I noticed that it doesn’t have phase detection AF, only contrast detection. I’ve lost my appetite with this.
Regards,
Jaap.
-
The premise was ( at least for me ) that a MILC system would free me from carrying heavy loads across the globe. It is not necessarily the camera body but the system ( lenses and all ).
That is not going to happen if one expects wide ( f1.4 and below ) lenses to be small and perform to what we have become accustomed to on a 35 FF.
Small ( less bulky and lighter than 35FF ) for me currently is a happy compromise of the Fuji x-trans, and XF 23, 35, 50 lenses. Add the XF 14/2.8 for a bit wider fl. But I remain skeptical about X-trans treatment of foliage in certain circumstances.
All this talk about lenses being bulky n heavy...what did one expect?
I shall retain my Nikon Df and my f1.8s. Onto PHOTOKINA 2019!
-
until I noticed that it doesn’t have phase detection AF, only contrast detection.
Panasonic has DFD as their alternative for PDAF... http://eng.faq.panasonic.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/26478/~/what-is-dfd-%28depth-from-defocus%29-technology%3F---dmc-gh4
it does not seems to work as reliably as PDAF and limited only to lenses supported by Panasonic (probably only their own), but still it is not "only contrast detection"
-
What you need to compare is the size of the FE 55/1.8, Z 50mm f1.8 and GM 50mm f1.4 from the point of view of size and image quality.
I exactly do not have a big Sony 1.4 because FE55/1.8 works well and is way smaller and cheaper... Z is a way bigger lens than FE55/1.8 in that quest to get extra few percent of goodness...
You will understand that the Z 50mm f1.8 is indeed very compact
it is a humongous 1.8 lens ... as I noted the reason is to get few percent better results - at no point Nikon was/is after any compactness in Z system - neither with cameras nor with lenses
but it is not in the same category image qualitywise as the Z.
only when you want to invent categories to suit yourself
-
... Z is a way bigger lens than FE55/1.8 in that quest to get extra few percent of goodness...
it is a humongous 1.8 lens ... as I noted the reason is to get few percent better results - at no point Nikon was/is after any compactness in Z system - neither with cameras nor with lenses
The 24-70/4 and Z bodies themselves seem reasonably compact for the sensor size — but so far that is where it ends. I would like to see something like a 70-200/4 or ??-300/4 zoom lens so as to extend that balance of compactness and performance further into the telephoto range, in addition to the 70-200/2.8 on the current Z lens roadmap. I would also like 24-105/4, 24-120/2.8-4 or such, which would greatly increase the number of outings for which I could leave the telephoto zoom behind.
But why is this discussion in this thread?! Panasonic, take these as suggestions for your L-mount lenses!
-
The 24-70/4 and Z bodies themselves seem reasonably compact for the sensor size — but so far that is where it ends. I would like to see something like a 70-200/4 or ??-300/4 zoom lens so as to extend that balance of compactness and performance further into the telephoto range, in addition to the 70-200/2.8 on the current Z lens roadmap. I would also like 24-105/4, 24-120/2.8-4 or such, which would greatly increase the number of outings for which I could leave the telephoto zoom behind.
But why is this discussion in this thread?! Panasonic, take these as suggestions for your L-mount lenses!
I get the feeling the compactness ends around 105mm if you look at what seem still reasonable sized 24-105 F4 from Canon and Panasonic, for their 35mm mirrorless offerings that is (Panasonic already has a very compact 24-120 equiv for their m43), depending on the image quality. Sony already has a still acceptable sized 24-105 that seems good quality but from what I'm reading not that much better than the Nikon 24-120 F4.
It seems the advantage is on the wide end, see the future 15-30 for Nikon Z or the current 12-24 on Sony.
-
armand,
I agree in the sense that once one goes much beyond "normal" FOV, camera compactness is almost entirely about lens compactness through imposing limits on the effective aperture diameter (focal length divided by aperture ratio), either by accepting a higher minimum f-stop (f/4 or f/5.6 or beyond) and/or by using a smaller format, with smaller photo-sites then a key driver in the down-sizing. Only the wide to normal FOV range benefits much from body design changes like removing the SLR OVF assembly.
-
I'd like to see more long lenses like Nikon's new 500/5.6. For a 500mm lens it's tiny. Put the best tech into slower, smaller, more practical packages.
-Dave-