Marty4650: "paid firmware upgrade"
I hope this isn't the wave of the future.
You are mixing up two things. The time limit is a completely separate issue to V-Log update. First of all, this paid update will not remove the time limit. If it does and tax authorities get wind of it, Panasonic will be in a world of hurt. Maybe if Panasonic predicted how popular GH4 would become for serious uses, they would have released more expensive limit-free version in EU together with the "normal" GH4.
The V-Log on the other hand, is not a simple fix or minor feature update. It had to be developed first. It had to be extensively tested as well. Do note that this is a feature normally available in way, way more expensive Panasonic broadcast cameras. It's not exactly the same (hence the L), but from the information available it's fully compatible (probably a big deal for multi-cam shoots).
Exactly my point. The ones complaining the most about this are on the most part people that don't even have a GH4, and maybe some GH4 users that wouldn't really make use of V-Log anyway.
D 503: This is the end for the camera industry. Soon you will be buying cameras with drm and with half the features missing at release. You can of course purchase upgrades at £100 a pop.
End for the camera industry? Hyperbole much?
It only shows that Panasonic aims this feature at professional shooters. You know, those that will actually know what to do with this V-Log. Those that are aware that you usually pay big bucks for major features like that.
So no, it's not the end. It's business as usual as far as I can tell.
Not that I would not like this to be a free update. That'd be nice.
It's not uncommon in the pro video world. Both Canon and Sony did it as far as I know.
The thing is that Panasonic had the audacity to do this for a product aimed at consumer market. Most consumers probably won't need this V-Log feature and will have no idea how to properly use it. On the other hand, GH4 is often used by pros who know how big of a deal this is. And most of them will gladly pay only $100 for this. I mean, Sony charges $1000 for a firmware update that adds 4K recording to their F5 (but this is a $16k camera).
The problem here is with perception among consumers and the expectation that all firmware updates should be free. If that GH4 was a strictly professional camera that costs $10k, there would be no complaints. But since pretty much anybody can get a GH4, it is viewed in the same way as as any other consumer grade camera.
Maybe Panasonic should have set those expectations straight in some earlier communication?
Astrotripper: Seeing how Canon came up with the 11-22mm and 22mm lenses, it's actually a shame EOS M is what it is.
The lens line up is extremely limited, but if Canon could offer more lenses like that, and actually release a decent body to mount them on, they would give the likes of Olympus, Panasonic and Sony a run for their money.
*rant mode on* E-M10 II might be a superior camera in every single way, but once you realize that the cheapest wide angle zoom is a plastic toyish looking collapsible that Olympus prices at $700 and doesn't even bundle a lens hood with, it kinda stops looking like a good deal. Sure, Olympus will throw discounts at you from time to time, so that you feel it's a bargain at $500. But it's really not. It's about time they did a cosmetic redesign of that and released it at a lower price point. *rant mode off*
In case you hadn't notice yet, I'm jealous of EOS M users having such an affordable (and actually good I hear) wide angle option. I want that too.
No such problems with Canon, though. All EF-M lenses are very affordable here, and I don't have to look at foreign retailers to see if I'm getting ripped off.
Oh, I know about all the nice MFT lenses, I have and love some of them, and I crave for some more. However, some are so ridiculously priced that it's not even funny.
It actually gets pretty weird sometimes. For example, Oly 40-150 R is a bargain at its asking price of $200, and a real steal at $100 when on sale. But on the other hand, you have 9-18 for $700 ($500 when on sale) which is pretty ridiculous. Especially considering that 7-14/2.8, a lens ten times better, is only twice as expensive. Their 12mm f/2 prime is not exactly a great deal when other systems have similarly priced 24mm-e lenses, but at f/1.4.
And don't get me started on their regional pricing shenanigans. While Americans get to buy the 40-150 R for $100, Olympus is charging $400 for the same lens here, where I live. But thankfully, retailers are not as stupid as to try to sell at this silly price. Hell, even when Olympus comes up with a promotion, it's usually still cheaper to buy on Amazon in a neighboring country.
Seeing how Canon came up with the 11-22mm and 22mm lenses, it's actually a shame EOS M is what it is.
Very nice overhaul. Looks and works great.
Caerolle: Well, they did have a lot of fire sales. I expect that moved a lot of volume. However, if they still made a profit even with the lower prices, awesome! I want to see Olympus do well and continue to make camera equipment!
Strong dollar vs yen probably made it possible to actually turn a profit on those sales.
Astrotripper: So, I guess this is the A7000 everyone was waiting for :)
Do people really expect A7000 (assuming Sony ever makes it) to focus DX lenses at native speeds? I never heard of it.
Are there any non-Nikon bodies in existence that can focus DX lenses at native or near-native speeds? Is this even possible to do reliably?
Does imaginary Sony APS-C body do that?
mosc: What's this camera's biggest drawback? To me it's the thought of a similarly priced APS-C version of the A7Rm2 which will focus EF-S/DX glass and match it's 4K/IBIS headline features. Sony's recent 1" sensor releases also have sensor tech that seem already well ahead of what will likely be the best m43 has to offer for years to come.
I have to say I find the ample grip, viewfinder, and especially fully articulated screen in the rangefinder layout all very close to ideal. Hard to fault panasonic of late on the physical layouts of their cameras like the LX100, G7, and GX8.
Makes me hope an LX100m2 is close behind featuring the GX8's sensor, the LX100's lens, and some other polish without matching the GX8's large $1,200 pricetag.
The thing is that "similarly priced APS-C version of the A7Rm2 which will focus EF-S/DX glass and match it's 4K/IBIS headline features" does not exist.
And it's not coming either.
So, I guess this is the A7000 everyone was waiting for :)
ManuelVilardeMacedo: Why do people think they need such an unusable maximum aperture? I have an f/1.4 lens and seldom use it wide open: colours fade, contrasts disapeear and sharpness is compromised. What's the use, then?This lens is clearly aimed for people with more money than sense.
But the problem is that extreme vignetting and huge coma make shooting stars wide open with this lens kinda pointless. Unless you're specifically going for that kinda look.
At f/1.4, however, both coma and vignetting are much more under control (still noticeable, though), and I could see myself making use of it. It could probably be usable at f/1.2 for 16:9 shots.
The closest you can get to that is 12mm f/2, which is at least one stop slower (assuming f/1.2 or f/1.4 as usable apertures for Nokton), and not as wide.
But the biggest appeal of this lens will probably be for video, where you need all the light you can get, and you often have to deal with additional crop factor (like the 2.2 crop for 4K video on GH4). And extreme corner performance is insignificant for video.
A lot. The sample shots of stars on Lenstip show this effect in full force. At f/0.95 and ISO 200, the image is visibly darker than the same shot at f/1.4 and ISO 400. And not only in the corners, where vignetting is the strongest, but also in the centre. Also, more stars are visible on the f/1.4 shot as well.
It looks like there's really no point shooting it at f/0.95 for better exposure, as you're not gaining as much as you loose. It looks like wide open would mostly be used for shallow DOF.
This is probably a lens that would benefit hugely from the organic sensor, which promises to handle wider range of incidence angles.
Kerensky97: I'd like to see some astrophotography with this lens. Wide lends and gathering lots of light is ideal to take pictures of the sky.
The guys at Lenstip posted some star shots. Coma is a problem even near the centre. And there's no point in shooting at f/0.95, as there's not much benefit from such wide aperture. Looks like it may be usable at f/1.4, though, at least if you're not pixel peeping.
Nice set of samples. Not only are many of them actually nice photos, they are really nice for evaluating the lens. The fact that some of them show a version with corrections turned on and off is very helpful as well.
My only complaint is that I'd like to see more shots with apertures wider than f/2.
Anyway, those images confirm that CA and purple fringing is probably the biggest (as in, most obvious) problem. As evidenced by some samples, this can be removed in post. But for video, that might be a problem.
It's still a fascinating lens and I would love to try it out for my night-time photography.
Astrotripper: That's actually pretty interesting. Too bad it doesn't offer a standalone mode for a true point and shoot experience.
Thanks, I have missed that. Nice.
That's actually pretty interesting. Too bad it doesn't offer a standalone mode for a true point and shoot experience.
Interesting, full sensor readout in super 35 mode. I did not expect video to be much of a deal in RII.
Now, let's wait for reviews to see if Sony didn't mess anything up.