Panasonic letdown!

[unhappymeal]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

 

[Jens_ac]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

I do not use any L-mount gear yet.

Olympus left this business, thus it must be something else: To much doom in the air. MFT-Titanic touched the Smartphone-Berg, captain Olympus left and the rest of the crew does not work together well - OM System doing nearly nothing while LUMIX and Blackmagic doing better together on the other ship. Meanwhile some marketeers stear up the situation here.

Yes, one should leave. L-mount is an option but there might be better alternatives (Canon, Sony, Nikon). I am going to rethink my future needs.

 

[Yannis1976]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

I do not use any L-mount gear yet.

Olympus left this business, thus it must be something else: To much doom in the air. MFT-Titanic touched the Smartphone-Berg, captain Olympus left and the rest of the crew does not work together well - OM System doing nearly nothing while LUMIX and Blackmagic doing better together on the other ship. Meanwhile some marketeers stear up the situation here.

Yes, one should leave. L-mount is an option but there might be better alternatives (Canon, Sony, Nikon). I am going to rethink my future needs.

For me the alternatives are Fuji and Sony FF and everything has worked great.

 

[Jens_ac]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

I do not use any L-mount gear yet.

Olympus left this business, thus it must be something else: To much doom in the air. MFT-Titanic touched the Smartphone-Berg, captain Olympus left and the rest of the crew does not work together well - OM System doing nearly nothing while LUMIX and Blackmagic doing better together on the other ship. Meanwhile some marketeers stear up the situation here.

Yes, one should leave. L-mount is an option but there might be better alternatives (Canon, Sony, Nikon). I am going to rethink my future needs.

For me the alternatives are Fuji and Sony FF and everything has worked great.

 

[ikolbyi]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

I do not use any L-mount gear yet.

Olympus left this business, thus it must be something else: To much doom in the air. MFT-Titanic touched the Smartphone-Berg, captain Olympus left and the rest of the crew does not work together well - OM System doing nearly nothing while LUMIX and Blackmagic doing better together on the other ship. Meanwhile some marketeers stear up the situation here.

Yes, one should leave. L-mount is an option but there might be better alternatives (Canon, Sony, Nikon). I am going to rethink my future needs.

For me the alternatives are Fuji and Sony FF and everything has worked great.

I need hybride and thus I think Canon has the edge today, second place shared by Nikon, Sony and L-mount - each with pros and cons and changing everyday (last change: the nice new Sony macro). Fuji can not film.

No tool is perfect. No manufacture is perfect. What works for one person may not satisfy another.

for example: I find the S1R.2 AF acceptable for sports photography (as a sports photographer) but I had fellow photographers say it is way to slow for there needs.
-this is personal preference, therefore no right or wrong answer.

The problem with OM System is aside of the OM-3, all products releases under their name are actually Olympus innovations, not OM. And if we look at OM innovation the OM-3, it is nothing more than a parts canon from Olympus, so they only innovated the body style, not the technology.

Regarding LUMIX, I actually agree with their approach having the 3 current cameras and as they are designed. In many ways they have brought innovations to MFT that did not exist prior. First and foremost, we have 25mp quality sensor not to mention video specs CaNikony only dream about.

LUMIX is in a stronger position than OM, that’s why we tend to talk about OM more.

 

[ikolbyi]

.

Wow, that is way smaller and lighter than any M43 equivalent.

This is exactly why I have been discussing LUMIX L-mount approach, all the modern recently released lenses challenge MFT in size/weight eliminating the size/weight benefit.

 

[Jens_ac]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

I do not use any L-mount gear yet.

Olympus left this business, thus it must be something else: To much doom in the air. MFT-Titanic touched the Smartphone-Berg, captain Olympus left and the rest of the crew does not work together well - OM System doing nearly nothing while LUMIX and Blackmagic doing better together on the other ship. Meanwhile some marketeers stear up the situation here.

Yes, one should leave. L-mount is an option but there might be better alternatives (Canon, Sony, Nikon). I am going to rethink my future needs.

For me the alternatives are Fuji and Sony FF and everything has worked great.

I need hybride and thus I think Canon has the edge today, second place shared by Nikon, Sony and L-mount - each with pros and cons and changing everyday (last change: the nice new Sony macro). Fuji can not film.

No tool is perfect. No manufacture is perfect. What works for one person may not satisfy another.

for example: I find the S1R.2 AF acceptable for sports photography (as a sports photographer) but I had fellow photographers say it is way to slow for there needs.
-this is personal preference, therefore no right or wrong answer.

The problem with OM System is aside of the OM-3, all products releases under their name are actually Olympus innovations, not OM. And if we look at OM innovation the OM-3, it is nothing more than a parts canon from Olympus, so they only innovated the body style, not the technology.

Regarding LUMIX, I actually agree with their approach having the 3 current cameras and as they are designed. In many ways they have brought innovations to MFT that did not exist prior. First and foremost, we have 25mp quality sensor not to mention video specs CaNikony only dream about.

LUMIX is in a stronger position than OM, that’s why we tend to talk about OM more.

I am so tired to see talk about OM System. I like the lenses and I like the Olympus name but I do not see that they do anything I could need. Thus please do not bother me with all that non-information about OM System. There is no news and there will be no news from OM System. They do nothing but marketing and that is just boring.

The new LUMIX cameras I like, especially the S1ii and in MFT the GH7 - but it has not enough advantage to upgrade from a G9m2 - thus the G9m2 is close to that perfect MFT camera. The Canon R5ii I like for its hybrid quality - 8 k Video RAW is that good. Nikon has potential and Sony, too. The lenses are the more important thing. Maybe I first start to complement MFT with the most needed things (micro and low light) and then I will see. For compatibility with software and SDK reasons that limits my choice to Canon and Nikon. Thus today it should be Canon. I guess...

 

[HicHic]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

I do not use any L-mount gear yet.

Olympus left this business, thus it must be something else: To much doom in the air. MFT-Titanic touched the Smartphone-Berg, captain Olympus left and the rest of the crew does not work together well - OM System doing nearly nothing while LUMIX and Blackmagic doing better together on the other ship. Meanwhile some marketeers stear up the situation here.

Yes, one should leave. L-mount is an option but there might be better alternatives (Canon, Sony, Nikon). I am going to rethink my future needs.

I'm hoping Sigma comes out with something...the CEO said they're making a body just for that 300-600/4 lens. People report great AF performance with the Sigma BF, so there's a good chance that the wildlife body they're making will perform. Sigma has so many great telephoto lenses right now for L mount, they're just missing a body with good AF.

 

[mmartel]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

I do not use any L-mount gear yet.

Olympus left this business, thus it must be something else: To much doom in the air. MFT-Titanic touched the Smartphone-Berg, captain Olympus left and the rest of the crew does not work together well - OM System doing nearly nothing while LUMIX and Blackmagic doing better together on the other ship. Meanwhile some marketeers stear up the situation here.

Yes, one should leave. L-mount is an option but there might be better alternatives (Canon, Sony, Nikon). I am going to rethink my future needs.

For me the alternatives are Fuji and Sony FF and everything has worked great.

I need hybride and thus I think Canon has the edge today, second place shared by Nikon, Sony and L-mount - each with pros and cons and changing everyday (last change: the nice new Sony macro). Fuji can not film.

No tool is perfect. No manufacture is perfect. What works for one person may not satisfy another.

for example: I find the S1R.2 AF acceptable for sports photography (as a sports photographer) but I had fellow photographers say it is way to slow for there needs.
-this is personal preference, therefore no right or wrong answer.

The problem with OM System is aside of the OM-3, all products releases under their name are actually Olympus innovations, not OM. And if we look at OM innovation the OM-3, it is nothing more than a parts canon from Olympus, so they only innovated the body style, not the technology.

Regarding LUMIX, I actually agree with their approach having the 3 current cameras and as they are designed. In many ways they have brought innovations to MFT that did not exist prior. First and foremost, we have 25mp quality sensor not to mention video specs CaNikony only dream about.

LUMIX is in a stronger position than OM, that’s why we tend to talk about OM more.

I am so tired to see talk about OM System. I like the lenses and I like the Olympus name but I do not see that they do anything I could need. Thus please do not bother me with all that non-information about OM System. There is no news and there will be no news from OM System. They do nothing but marketing and that is just boring.

The new LUMIX cameras I like, especially the S1ii and in MFT the GH7 - but it has not enough advantage to upgrade from a G9m2 - thus the G9m2 is close to that perfect MFT camera. The Canon R5ii I like for its hybrid quality - 8 k Video RAW is that good. Nikon has potential and Sony, too. The lenses are the more important thing. Maybe I first start to complement MFT with the most needed things (micro and low light) and then I will see. For compatibility with software and SDK reasons that limits my choice to Canon and Nikon. Thus today it should be Canon. I guess...

Jens, I'm curious what you find attractive about 8k RAW compared to, say, 5.8k RAW open gate which I believe you have in your GH9ii. Do you plan to extract stills from 8k? Or would you use it for cropping into for 4k? Or for oversampling into 4k?

For professional use cases I totally get the draw of 8k (assuming you can keep the camera cool). As a hobbyist, though, it seems like wild overkill and even more massive files for relatively marginal gain over 5.8k open gate on a GH7 or GH9ii or S5ii etc.

Tastes very and one person's good enough is another person's not good enough. Just curious to hear because there are so few videos shooters here on the forums it's interesting to hear from others who do shoot video sometimes.

 

[UsherFellig]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

Nothing is being "hijacked." This is a micro-four-thirds forum. One of the two principal m43 brands [clue: The brand name begins with "P"] seems not to be producing new m43 cameras or lenses, to the point that there is speculation in the m43 community and the larger photo gear industry-watcher cohort, that Panasonic may be abandoning m43.

With no sign of m43 activity by one of its main producers, and new cameras and lenses issuing from the other main m43 brand . . . which of the two might one expect to be dominating discussion of their recent new products? In a thread whose topic and focus is disappointment in the m43 brand who is not producing? The fact that Olympus is offering new cameras and lenses is not "main character syndrome." They are the m43 brand that appears to be active at the moment.

 

[Jens_ac]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

I do not use any L-mount gear yet.

Olympus left this business, thus it must be something else: To much doom in the air. MFT-Titanic touched the Smartphone-Berg, captain Olympus left and the rest of the crew does not work together well - OM System doing nearly nothing while LUMIX and Blackmagic doing better together on the other ship. Meanwhile some marketeers stear up the situation here.

Yes, one should leave. L-mount is an option but there might be better alternatives (Canon, Sony, Nikon). I am going to rethink my future needs.

For me the alternatives are Fuji and Sony FF and everything has worked great.

I need hybride and thus I think Canon has the edge today, second place shared by Nikon, Sony and L-mount - each with pros and cons and changing everyday (last change: the nice new Sony macro). Fuji can not film.

No tool is perfect. No manufacture is perfect. What works for one person may not satisfy another.

for example: I find the S1R.2 AF acceptable for sports photography (as a sports photographer) but I had fellow photographers say it is way to slow for there needs.
-this is personal preference, therefore no right or wrong answer.

The problem with OM System is aside of the OM-3, all products releases under their name are actually Olympus innovations, not OM. And if we look at OM innovation the OM-3, it is nothing more than a parts canon from Olympus, so they only innovated the body style, not the technology.

Regarding LUMIX, I actually agree with their approach having the 3 current cameras and as they are designed. In many ways they have brought innovations to MFT that did not exist prior. First and foremost, we have 25mp quality sensor not to mention video specs CaNikony only dream about.

LUMIX is in a stronger position than OM, that’s why we tend to talk about OM more.

I am so tired to see talk about OM System. I like the lenses and I like the Olympus name but I do not see that they do anything I could need. Thus please do not bother me with all that non-information about OM System. There is no news and there will be no news from OM System. They do nothing but marketing and that is just boring.

The new LUMIX cameras I like, especially the S1ii and in MFT the GH7 - but it has not enough advantage to upgrade from a G9m2 - thus the G9m2 is close to that perfect MFT camera. The Canon R5ii I like for its hybrid quality - 8 k Video RAW is that good. Nikon has potential and Sony, too. The lenses are the more important thing. Maybe I first start to complement MFT with the most needed things (micro and low light) and then I will see. For compatibility with software and SDK reasons that limits my choice to Canon and Nikon. Thus today it should be Canon. I guess...

Jens, I'm curious what you find attractive about 8k RAW compared to, say, 5.8k RAW open gate which I believe you have in your GH9ii. Do you plan to extract stills from 8k? Or would you use it for cropping into for 4k? Or for oversampling into 4k?

For professional use cases I totally get the draw of 8k (assuming you can keep the camera cool). As a hobbyist, though, it seems like wild overkill and even more massive files for relatively marginal gain over 5.8k open gate on a GH7 or GH9ii or S5ii etc.

Tastes very and one person's good enough is another person's not good enough. Just curious to hear because there are so few videos shooters here on the forums it's interesting to hear from others who do shoot video sometimes.

 

[mmartel]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

Nothing is being "hijacked." This is a micro-four-thirds forum. One of the two principal m43 brands [clue: The brand name begins with "P"] seems not to be producing new m43 cameras or lenses, to the point that there is speculation in the m43 community and the larger photo gear industry-watcher cohort, that Panasonic may be abandoning m43.

With no sign of m43 activity by one of its main producers, and new cameras and lenses issuing from the other main m43 brand . . . which of the two might one expect to be dominating discussion of their recent new products? In a thread whose topic and focus is disappointment in the m43 brand who is not producing? The fact that Olympus is offering new cameras and lenses is not "main character syndrome." They are the m43 brand that appears to be active at the moment.

Please correct me if I'm wrong on any of the following.

Number of new flagship cameras launched since mid-2024:

- P: 1 (GH7)

- O: 1 (OM3)

Number of new flagship cameras launched since mid-2023:

- P: 2 (G9ii, GH7)

- O: 2 (OM1ii, OM3)

OMDS has been busier on the glass front, which I applaud.

O 50-200mn f2.8 looks like excellent glass (if heavy and expensive). Meanwhile Lumix already had the weather sealed (and lighter) PL50-200mm f2.8-4 for its users for years.

Good on O for weather sealing the 17mm and 25mm. It would be nice if Lumix weather sealed the 15mm f1.7 but on the Lumix side we've already had a weather sealed 25mm f1.4 for years.

In some sense, Lumix simply had much less work to do over the last couple years and what you're seeing is O playing catch-up to fill niches, not Lumix lying dead as a doormat.

--
"Gentlemen, it has been a privilege playing with you tonight." - Titanic musician before their final song

 

[mmartel]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

I do not use any L-mount gear yet.

Olympus left this business, thus it must be something else: To much doom in the air. MFT-Titanic touched the Smartphone-Berg, captain Olympus left and the rest of the crew does not work together well - OM System doing nearly nothing while LUMIX and Blackmagic doing better together on the other ship. Meanwhile some marketeers stear up the situation here.

Yes, one should leave. L-mount is an option but there might be better alternatives (Canon, Sony, Nikon). I am going to rethink my future needs.

For me the alternatives are Fuji and Sony FF and everything has worked great.

I need hybride and thus I think Canon has the edge today, second place shared by Nikon, Sony and L-mount - each with pros and cons and changing everyday (last change: the nice new Sony macro). Fuji can not film.

No tool is perfect. No manufacture is perfect. What works for one person may not satisfy another.

for example: I find the S1R.2 AF acceptable for sports photography (as a sports photographer) but I had fellow photographers say it is way to slow for there needs.
-this is personal preference, therefore no right or wrong answer.

The problem with OM System is aside of the OM-3, all products releases under their name are actually Olympus innovations, not OM. And if we look at OM innovation the OM-3, it is nothing more than a parts canon from Olympus, so they only innovated the body style, not the technology.

Regarding LUMIX, I actually agree with their approach having the 3 current cameras and as they are designed. In many ways they have brought innovations to MFT that did not exist prior. First and foremost, we have 25mp quality sensor not to mention video specs CaNikony only dream about.

LUMIX is in a stronger position than OM, that’s why we tend to talk about OM more.

I am so tired to see talk about OM System. I like the lenses and I like the Olympus name but I do not see that they do anything I could need. Thus please do not bother me with all that non-information about OM System. There is no news and there will be no news from OM System. They do nothing but marketing and that is just boring.

The new LUMIX cameras I like, especially the S1ii and in MFT the GH7 - but it has not enough advantage to upgrade from a G9m2 - thus the G9m2 is close to that perfect MFT camera. The Canon R5ii I like for its hybrid quality - 8 k Video RAW is that good. Nikon has potential and Sony, too. The lenses are the more important thing. Maybe I first start to complement MFT with the most needed things (micro and low light) and then I will see. For compatibility with software and SDK reasons that limits my choice to Canon and Nikon. Thus today it should be Canon. I guess...

Jens, I'm curious what you find attractive about 8k RAW compared to, say, 5.8k RAW open gate which I believe you have in your GH9ii. Do you plan to extract stills from 8k? Or would you use it for cropping into for 4k? Or for oversampling into 4k?

For professional use cases I totally get the draw of 8k (assuming you can keep the camera cool). As a hobbyist, though, it seems like wild overkill and even more massive files for relatively marginal gain over 5.8k open gate on a GH7 or GH9ii or S5ii etc.

Tastes very and one person's good enough is another person's not good enough. Just curious to hear because there are so few videos shooters here on the forums it's interesting to hear from others who do shoot video sometimes.

I like RAW because it is so much easier to get nice colors with. I prefer the in camera RAW of the R5ii over the recorder needed with the G9m2, because the recorders battery is heavy and nasty and thus most of the time it is not with me. Also all the cables are difficult to use in bad weather or in wild nature.

Makes sense. I'm less fussy about color personally so I'm not interested in RAW.

I prefer the 8k because it is open gate 60 FPS

Got it. I love 60fps so I can see the appeal of that spec.

while in G9m2 I have 60 FPS only with nasty crop (16:9 or 4.4k). Maybe I could also use the higher resolution, especially for focus stacking and stills I want to crop later.

Ok, I thought the G9ii had the GH7s 5.8k 60fps open gate raw but it doesn't. Guess a fan is needed to support that kind of processing and the G9ii doesn't have it.

That makes the G9ii slightly less appealing to me personally as a long-term upgrade path as I do like 60fps and also like open gate video (I sometimes use the 6k photo mode open gate video hack on my OG G9 but I am limited to 30fps... The G9ii wouldn't get me to 60fps in open gate).

 

[Jens_ac]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

I do not use any L-mount gear yet.

Olympus left this business, thus it must be something else: To much doom in the air. MFT-Titanic touched the Smartphone-Berg, captain Olympus left and the rest of the crew does not work together well - OM System doing nearly nothing while LUMIX and Blackmagic doing better together on the other ship. Meanwhile some marketeers stear up the situation here.

Yes, one should leave. L-mount is an option but there might be better alternatives (Canon, Sony, Nikon). I am going to rethink my future needs.

For me the alternatives are Fuji and Sony FF and everything has worked great.

I need hybride and thus I think Canon has the edge today, second place shared by Nikon, Sony and L-mount - each with pros and cons and changing everyday (last change: the nice new Sony macro). Fuji can not film.

No tool is perfect. No manufacture is perfect. What works for one person may not satisfy another.

for example: I find the S1R.2 AF acceptable for sports photography (as a sports photographer) but I had fellow photographers say it is way to slow for there needs.
-this is personal preference, therefore no right or wrong answer.

The problem with OM System is aside of the OM-3, all products releases under their name are actually Olympus innovations, not OM. And if we look at OM innovation the OM-3, it is nothing more than a parts canon from Olympus, so they only innovated the body style, not the technology.

Regarding LUMIX, I actually agree with their approach having the 3 current cameras and as they are designed. In many ways they have brought innovations to MFT that did not exist prior. First and foremost, we have 25mp quality sensor not to mention video specs CaNikony only dream about.

LUMIX is in a stronger position than OM, that’s why we tend to talk about OM more.

I am so tired to see talk about OM System. I like the lenses and I like the Olympus name but I do not see that they do anything I could need. Thus please do not bother me with all that non-information about OM System. There is no news and there will be no news from OM System. They do nothing but marketing and that is just boring.

The new LUMIX cameras I like, especially the S1ii and in MFT the GH7 - but it has not enough advantage to upgrade from a G9m2 - thus the G9m2 is close to that perfect MFT camera. The Canon R5ii I like for its hybrid quality - 8 k Video RAW is that good. Nikon has potential and Sony, too. The lenses are the more important thing. Maybe I first start to complement MFT with the most needed things (micro and low light) and then I will see. For compatibility with software and SDK reasons that limits my choice to Canon and Nikon. Thus today it should be Canon. I guess...

Jens, I'm curious what you find attractive about 8k RAW compared to, say, 5.8k RAW open gate which I believe you have in your GH9ii. Do you plan to extract stills from 8k? Or would you use it for cropping into for 4k? Or for oversampling into 4k?

For professional use cases I totally get the draw of 8k (assuming you can keep the camera cool). As a hobbyist, though, it seems like wild overkill and even more massive files for relatively marginal gain over 5.8k open gate on a GH7 or GH9ii or S5ii etc.

Tastes very and one person's good enough is another person's not good enough. Just curious to hear because there are so few videos shooters here on the forums it's interesting to hear from others who do shoot video sometimes.

I like RAW because it is so much easier to get nice colors with. I prefer the in camera RAW of the R5ii over the recorder needed with the G9m2, because the recorders battery is heavy and nasty and thus most of the time it is not with me. Also all the cables are difficult to use in bad weather or in wild nature.

Makes sense. I'm less fussy about color personally so I'm not interested in RAW.

I prefer the 8k because it is open gate 60 FPS

Got it. I love 60fps so I can see the appeal of that spec.

while in G9m2 I have 60 FPS only with nasty crop (16:9 or 4.4k). Maybe I could also use the higher resolution, especially for focus stacking and stills I want to crop later.

Ok, I thought the G9ii had the GH7s 5.8k 60fps open gate raw but it doesn't. Guess a fan is needed to support that kind of processing and the G9ii doesn't have it.

That makes the G9ii slightly less appealing to me personally as a long-term upgrade path as I do like 60fps and also like open gate video (I sometimes use the 6k photo mode open gate video hack on my OG G9 but I am limited to 30fps... The G9ii wouldn't get me to 60fps in open gate).

 

[mmartel]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

I do not use any L-mount gear yet.

Olympus left this business, thus it must be something else: To much doom in the air. MFT-Titanic touched the Smartphone-Berg, captain Olympus left and the rest of the crew does not work together well - OM System doing nearly nothing while LUMIX and Blackmagic doing better together on the other ship. Meanwhile some marketeers stear up the situation here.

Yes, one should leave. L-mount is an option but there might be better alternatives (Canon, Sony, Nikon). I am going to rethink my future needs.

For me the alternatives are Fuji and Sony FF and everything has worked great.

I need hybride and thus I think Canon has the edge today, second place shared by Nikon, Sony and L-mount - each with pros and cons and changing everyday (last change: the nice new Sony macro). Fuji can not film.

No tool is perfect. No manufacture is perfect. What works for one person may not satisfy another.

for example: I find the S1R.2 AF acceptable for sports photography (as a sports photographer) but I had fellow photographers say it is way to slow for there needs.
-this is personal preference, therefore no right or wrong answer.

The problem with OM System is aside of the OM-3, all products releases under their name are actually Olympus innovations, not OM. And if we look at OM innovation the OM-3, it is nothing more than a parts canon from Olympus, so they only innovated the body style, not the technology.

Regarding LUMIX, I actually agree with their approach having the 3 current cameras and as they are designed. In many ways they have brought innovations to MFT that did not exist prior. First and foremost, we have 25mp quality sensor not to mention video specs CaNikony only dream about.

LUMIX is in a stronger position than OM, that’s why we tend to talk about OM more.

I am so tired to see talk about OM System. I like the lenses and I like the Olympus name but I do not see that they do anything I could need. Thus please do not bother me with all that non-information about OM System. There is no news and there will be no news from OM System. They do nothing but marketing and that is just boring.

The new LUMIX cameras I like, especially the S1ii and in MFT the GH7 - but it has not enough advantage to upgrade from a G9m2 - thus the G9m2 is close to that perfect MFT camera. The Canon R5ii I like for its hybrid quality - 8 k Video RAW is that good. Nikon has potential and Sony, too. The lenses are the more important thing. Maybe I first start to complement MFT with the most needed things (micro and low light) and then I will see. For compatibility with software and SDK reasons that limits my choice to Canon and Nikon. Thus today it should be Canon. I guess...

Jens, I'm curious what you find attractive about 8k RAW compared to, say, 5.8k RAW open gate which I believe you have in your GH9ii. Do you plan to extract stills from 8k? Or would you use it for cropping into for 4k? Or for oversampling into 4k?

I have the Z9 with 8K and I have only really used it for small clips. It eats up memory cards I did test it out of curiosity to see how it goes regarding very long clips. For unknown reason ( to me ) they have a 2hr 5min limit . Though if you just press the red record button it will run till your battery runs out or more likely your card fills. At best 8K settings you get roughly 40min on a 1TB card

RIP STORAGE SPACE

The 8K footage from it looks fantastic on a 75" 8K with the proviso that you need to view from a much closer distance than inormal.

To appreciate 8k native detail on a tiny 75" screen you have to sit about 1.5-2 ft (0.5-0.8 m) away.

I'm fine with 4k, thank you very much.

From a typical TV viewing distance it still look excellent but so does good quality 4K. Though TV's have very good upscaling

The 8K stills are pretty decent , if you are shooting for stills you need to use an appropriate shutter speed etc

Yes, I'm aware of this compromise. Occasionally I'll shoot some 6k of sports at 30fps and depending on the shutter speed I'll either get better looking video or better looking stills but it's tricky to have both.

This 8k still is captured from the video stream but it was set for shooting video so not an ideal example

Looks good to my eyes. But I'm an m43 only shooter so that really doesn't mean much.

An example from the DPreview tests of the Z9 , crops of Z9 8K compared to OM-1 RAW base ISO with an appropriate shutter speed for the subject

Would you say... They are *equivalent* (he asks him knowingly, know what I mean, wink wink hint hint nudge nudge...)?

Why or why not? Please explain in great detail.

If you set it to 8K 60fps with the correct shutter speed for still capture you could generate approx 216,000 frames an hour Sorting through that would be a real PITA.

For professional use cases I totally get the draw of 8k (assuming you can keep the camera cool). As a hobbyist, though, it seems like wild overkill and even more massive files for relatively marginal gain over 5.8k open gate on a GH7 or GH9ii or S5ii etc.

I think it is way over kill for most use cases but it does offer a lot of post processing option ( zoom, panning, etc ) . I process the files using proxies which speeds up things considerably . I think most folk use 8k to produce excellent 4k with the handy capabilities the large file size offers.

Absolutely. Hence the pro use case I mentioned.

Tastes very and one person's good enough is another person's not good enough. Just curious to hear because there are so few videos shooters here on the forums it's interesting to hear from others who do shoot video sometimes.

Yep, not a lot of video content in the forum Which is unfortunate as m43 especially Panasonic has a lot to offer the best IBIS around , compact lens options etc

In addition to still, I just love video and there are so many occasions that having moving pictures and sound to look at and listen to give me happiness. It's also technically fun to shoot.

I feel stills only shooters are totally missing out. But, as with so many things, to each their own.

--
"Gentlemen, it has been a privilege playing with you tonight." - Titanic musician before their final song

 

[mmartel]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

I do not use any L-mount gear yet.

Olympus left this business, thus it must be something else: To much doom in the air. MFT-Titanic touched the Smartphone-Berg, captain Olympus left and the rest of the crew does not work together well - OM System doing nearly nothing while LUMIX and Blackmagic doing better together on the other ship. Meanwhile some marketeers stear up the situation here.

Yes, one should leave. L-mount is an option but there might be better alternatives (Canon, Sony, Nikon). I am going to rethink my future needs.

For me the alternatives are Fuji and Sony FF and everything has worked great.

I need hybride and thus I think Canon has the edge today, second place shared by Nikon, Sony and L-mount - each with pros and cons and changing everyday (last change: the nice new Sony macro). Fuji can not film.

No tool is perfect. No manufacture is perfect. What works for one person may not satisfy another.

for example: I find the S1R.2 AF acceptable for sports photography (as a sports photographer) but I had fellow photographers say it is way to slow for there needs.
-this is personal preference, therefore no right or wrong answer.

The problem with OM System is aside of the OM-3, all products releases under their name are actually Olympus innovations, not OM. And if we look at OM innovation the OM-3, it is nothing more than a parts canon from Olympus, so they only innovated the body style, not the technology.

Regarding LUMIX, I actually agree with their approach having the 3 current cameras and as they are designed. In many ways they have brought innovations to MFT that did not exist prior. First and foremost, we have 25mp quality sensor not to mention video specs CaNikony only dream about.

LUMIX is in a stronger position than OM, that’s why we tend to talk about OM more.

I am so tired to see talk about OM System. I like the lenses and I like the Olympus name but I do not see that they do anything I could need. Thus please do not bother me with all that non-information about OM System. There is no news and there will be no news from OM System. They do nothing but marketing and that is just boring.

The new LUMIX cameras I like, especially the S1ii and in MFT the GH7 - but it has not enough advantage to upgrade from a G9m2 - thus the G9m2 is close to that perfect MFT camera. The Canon R5ii I like for its hybrid quality - 8 k Video RAW is that good. Nikon has potential and Sony, too. The lenses are the more important thing. Maybe I first start to complement MFT with the most needed things (micro and low light) and then I will see. For compatibility with software and SDK reasons that limits my choice to Canon and Nikon. Thus today it should be Canon. I guess...

Jens, I'm curious what you find attractive about 8k RAW compared to, say, 5.8k RAW open gate which I believe you have in your GH9ii. Do you plan to extract stills from 8k? Or would you use it for cropping into for 4k? Or for oversampling into 4k?

For professional use cases I totally get the draw of 8k (assuming you can keep the camera cool). As a hobbyist, though, it seems like wild overkill and even more massive files for relatively marginal gain over 5.8k open gate on a GH7 or GH9ii or S5ii etc.

Tastes very and one person's good enough is another person's not good enough. Just curious to hear because there are so few videos shooters here on the forums it's interesting to hear from others who do shoot video sometimes.

I like RAW because it is so much easier to get nice colors with. I prefer the in camera RAW of the R5ii over the recorder needed with the G9m2, because the recorders battery is heavy and nasty and thus most of the time it is not with me. Also all the cables are difficult to use in bad weather or in wild nature.

Makes sense. I'm less fussy about color personally so I'm not interested in RAW.

I prefer the 8k because it is open gate 60 FPS

Got it. I love 60fps so I can see the appeal of that spec.

while in G9m2 I have 60 FPS only with nasty crop (16:9 or 4.4k). Maybe I could also use the higher resolution, especially for focus stacking and stills I want to crop later.

Ok, I thought the G9ii had the GH7s 5.8k 60fps open gate raw but it doesn't. Guess a fan is needed to support that kind of processing and the G9ii doesn't have it.

That makes the G9ii slightly less appealing to me personally as a long-term upgrade path as I do like 60fps and also like open gate video (I sometimes use the 6k photo mode open gate video hack on my OG G9 but I am limited to 30fps... The G9ii wouldn't get me to 60fps in open gate).

Also the GH7 does not have 5.8k 60 but only 16:9 crop 5.7k 60 with the external recorder. With internal RAW it is only 30fps.

I guess it is due to the processor. Cooling helps for longer recording (G9m2 in the sun can do only about 15 min. ProRes 4:2:2 60fps on ssd).

Oh ! Well that's disappointing, no wonder you're looking at the R5ii.

 

[James Stirling]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

I do not use any L-mount gear yet.

Olympus left this business, thus it must be something else: To much doom in the air. MFT-Titanic touched the Smartphone-Berg, captain Olympus left and the rest of the crew does not work together well - OM System doing nearly nothing while LUMIX and Blackmagic doing better together on the other ship. Meanwhile some marketeers stear up the situation here.

Yes, one should leave. L-mount is an option but there might be better alternatives (Canon, Sony, Nikon). I am going to rethink my future needs.

For me the alternatives are Fuji and Sony FF and everything has worked great.

I need hybride and thus I think Canon has the edge today, second place shared by Nikon, Sony and L-mount - each with pros and cons and changing everyday (last change: the nice new Sony macro). Fuji can not film.

No tool is perfect. No manufacture is perfect. What works for one person may not satisfy another.

for example: I find the S1R.2 AF acceptable for sports photography (as a sports photographer) but I had fellow photographers say it is way to slow for there needs.
-this is personal preference, therefore no right or wrong answer.

The problem with OM System is aside of the OM-3, all products releases under their name are actually Olympus innovations, not OM. And if we look at OM innovation the OM-3, it is nothing more than a parts canon from Olympus, so they only innovated the body style, not the technology.

Regarding LUMIX, I actually agree with their approach having the 3 current cameras and as they are designed. In many ways they have brought innovations to MFT that did not exist prior. First and foremost, we have 25mp quality sensor not to mention video specs CaNikony only dream about.

LUMIX is in a stronger position than OM, that’s why we tend to talk about OM more.

I am so tired to see talk about OM System. I like the lenses and I like the Olympus name but I do not see that they do anything I could need. Thus please do not bother me with all that non-information about OM System. There is no news and there will be no news from OM System. They do nothing but marketing and that is just boring.

The new LUMIX cameras I like, especially the S1ii and in MFT the GH7 - but it has not enough advantage to upgrade from a G9m2 - thus the G9m2 is close to that perfect MFT camera. The Canon R5ii I like for its hybrid quality - 8 k Video RAW is that good. Nikon has potential and Sony, too. The lenses are the more important thing. Maybe I first start to complement MFT with the most needed things (micro and low light) and then I will see. For compatibility with software and SDK reasons that limits my choice to Canon and Nikon. Thus today it should be Canon. I guess...

Jens, I'm curious what you find attractive about 8k RAW compared to, say, 5.8k RAW open gate which I believe you have in your GH9ii. Do you plan to extract stills from 8k? Or would you use it for cropping into for 4k? Or for oversampling into 4k?

I have the Z9 with 8K and I have only really used it for small clips. It eats up memory cards I did test it out of curiosity to see how it goes regarding very long clips. For unknown reason ( to me ) they have a 2hr 5min limit . Though if you just press the red record button it will run till your battery runs out or more likely your card fills. At best 8K settings you get roughly 40min on a 1TB card

RIP STORAGE SPACE

The 8K footage from it looks fantastic on a 75" 8K with the proviso that you need to view from a much closer distance than inormal.

To appreciate 8k native detail on a tiny 75" screen you have to sit about 1.5-2 ft (0.5-0.8 m) away.

I know unless you are an eagle 8K video is well beyond what is needed at normal viewing distances.

I'm fine with 4k, thank you very much.

From a typical TV viewing distance it still look excellent but so does good quality 4K. Though TV's have very good upscaling

The 8K stills are pretty decent , if you are shooting for stills you need to use an appropriate shutter speed etc

Yes, I'm aware of this compromise. Occasionally I'll shoot some 6k of sports at 30fps and depending on the shutter speed I'll either get better looking video or better looking stills but it's tricky to have both.

Yep it is an either or deal

This 8k still is captured from the video stream but it was set for shooting video so not an ideal example

Looks good to my eyes. But I'm an m43 only shooter so that really doesn't mean much.

It was just to show a random grab when the settings are for video

An example from the DPreview tests of the Z9 , crops of Z9 8K compared to OM-1 RAW base ISO with an appropriate shutter speed for the subject

Would you say... They are *equivalent* (he asks him knowingly, know what I mean, wink wink hint hint nudge nudge...)?

Why or why not? Please explain in great detail.

I am already on a 100 ignore lists best not make things worse

If you set it to 8K 60fps with the correct shutter speed for still capture you could generate approx 216,000 frames an hour Sorting through that would be a real PITA.

For professional use cases I totally get the draw of 8k (assuming you can keep the camera cool). As a hobbyist, though, it seems like wild overkill and even more massive files for relatively marginal gain over 5.8k open gate on a GH7 or GH9ii or S5ii etc.

I think it is way over kill for most use cases but it does offer a lot of post processing option ( zoom, panning, etc ) . I process the files using proxies which speeds up things considerably . I think most folk use 8k to produce excellent 4k with the handy capabilities the large file size offers.

Absolutely. Hence the pro use case I mentioned.

Even for fun use being retired I have lot of time to waste utilise productively . It does come in handy

Tastes very and one person's good enough is another person's not good enough. Just curious to hear because there are so few videos shooters here on the forums it's interesting to hear from others who do shoot video sometimes.

Yep, not a lot of video content in the forum Which is unfortunate as m43 especially Panasonic has a lot to offer the best IBIS around , compact lens options etc

In addition to still, I just love video and there are so many occasions that having moving pictures and sound to look at and listen to give me happiness. It's also technically fun to shoot.

Yep, we have recently gotten or first grandchild , and videos of her Hijinks make for some great memories. The only videos of myself and brother and sister when young were taken with my uncles bolex 8mm . My kids growing up in the late 90's so their childhood footage is much better than mine

I feel stills only shooters are totally missing out. But, as with so many things, to each their own.

I agree though it shares a lot of settings with photography it does take a bit more effort to get video right. And processing can put folk off

--
Jim Stirling:
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." - Thomas Paine
Feel free to tinker with any photos I post

 

[JakeJY]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

Nothing is being "hijacked." This is a micro-four-thirds forum. One of the two principal m43 brands [clue: The brand name begins with "P"] seems not to be producing new m43 cameras or lenses, to the point that there is speculation in the m43 community and the larger photo gear industry-watcher cohort, that Panasonic may be abandoning m43.

With no sign of m43 activity by one of its main producers, and new cameras and lenses issuing from the other main m43 brand . . . which of the two might one expect to be dominating discussion of their recent new products? In a thread whose topic and focus is disappointment in the m43 brand who is not producing? The fact that Olympus is offering new cameras and lenses is not "main character syndrome." They are the m43 brand that appears to be active at the moment.

Except that narrative is laughably false/misleading. Panasonic just came to with the G9 II stills flagship 2 years before (alongside updated 35-100mm f/2.8 and 100-400mm), and the GH7 video flagship and G100D refresh 1 year before. The refreshed G97 (their OM5 II equivalent) shipped this year. That does not point to a "non-active" brand. Camera update cycles do not need yearly releases.

 

[Jens_ac]

You are right in pointing out that this thread has ceased to be about Panasonic failures, focusing on Fuji & Nikon offerings.

Sadly, this is further evidence that Panasonic is losing existing & potential buyers :-(

It's been hijacked by the usual Olympus posters who have main character syndrome. Come over to the L-mount forum. It's way more chill. People are happy to discuss Panasonic, Sigma and Leica without any chips on their shoulders.

I do not use any L-mount gear yet.

Olympus left this business, thus it must be something else: To much doom in the air. MFT-Titanic touched the Smartphone-Berg, captain Olympus left and the rest of the crew does not work together well - OM System doing nearly nothing while LUMIX and Blackmagic doing better together on the other ship. Meanwhile some marketeers stear up the situation here.

Yes, one should leave. L-mount is an option but there might be better alternatives (Canon, Sony, Nikon). I am going to rethink my future needs.

For me the alternatives are Fuji and Sony FF and everything has worked great.

I need hybride and thus I think Canon has the edge today, second place shared by Nikon, Sony and L-mount - each with pros and cons and changing everyday (last change: the nice new Sony macro). Fuji can not film.

No tool is perfect. No manufacture is perfect. What works for one person may not satisfy another.

for example: I find the S1R.2 AF acceptable for sports photography (as a sports photographer) but I had fellow photographers say it is way to slow for there needs.
-this is personal preference, therefore no right or wrong answer.

The problem with OM System is aside of the OM-3, all products releases under their name are actually Olympus innovations, not OM. And if we look at OM innovation the OM-3, it is nothing more than a parts canon from Olympus, so they only innovated the body style, not the technology.

Regarding LUMIX, I actually agree with their approach having the 3 current cameras and as they are designed. In many ways they have brought innovations to MFT that did not exist prior. First and foremost, we have 25mp quality sensor not to mention video specs CaNikony only dream about.

LUMIX is in a stronger position than OM, that’s why we tend to talk about OM more.

I am so tired to see talk about OM System. I like the lenses and I like the Olympus name but I do not see that they do anything I could need. Thus please do not bother me with all that non-information about OM System. There is no news and there will be no news from OM System. They do nothing but marketing and that is just boring.

The new LUMIX cameras I like, especially the S1ii and in MFT the GH7 - but it has not enough advantage to upgrade from a G9m2 - thus the G9m2 is close to that perfect MFT camera. The Canon R5ii I like for its hybrid quality - 8 k Video RAW is that good. Nikon has potential and Sony, too. The lenses are the more important thing. Maybe I first start to complement MFT with the most needed things (micro and low light) and then I will see. For compatibility with software and SDK reasons that limits my choice to Canon and Nikon. Thus today it should be Canon. I guess...

Jens, I'm curious what you find attractive about 8k RAW compared to, say, 5.8k RAW open gate which I believe you have in your GH9ii. Do you plan to extract stills from 8k? Or would you use it for cropping into for 4k? Or for oversampling into 4k?

For professional use cases I totally get the draw of 8k (assuming you can keep the camera cool). As a hobbyist, though, it seems like wild overkill and even more massive files for relatively marginal gain over 5.8k open gate on a GH7 or GH9ii or S5ii etc.

Tastes very and one person's good enough is another person's not good enough. Just curious to hear because there are so few videos shooters here on the forums it's interesting to hear from others who do shoot video sometimes.

I like RAW because it is so much easier to get nice colors with. I prefer the in camera RAW of the R5ii over the recorder needed with the G9m2, because the recorders battery is heavy and nasty and thus most of the time it is not with me. Also all the cables are difficult to use in bad weather or in wild nature.

Makes sense. I'm less fussy about color personally so I'm not interested in RAW.

I prefer the 8k because it is open gate 60 FPS

Got it. I love 60fps so I can see the appeal of that spec.

while in G9m2 I have 60 FPS only with nasty crop (16:9 or 4.4k). Maybe I could also use the higher resolution, especially for focus stacking and stills I want to crop later.

Ok, I thought the G9ii had the GH7s 5.8k 60fps open gate raw but it doesn't. Guess a fan is needed to support that kind of processing and the G9ii doesn't have it.

That makes the G9ii slightly less appealing to me personally as a long-term upgrade path as I do like 60fps and also like open gate video (I sometimes use the 6k photo mode open gate video hack on my OG G9 but I am limited to 30fps... The G9ii wouldn't get me to 60fps in open gate).

Also the GH7 does not have 5.8k 60 but only 16:9 crop 5.7k 60 with the external recorder. With internal RAW it is only 30fps.

I guess it is due to the processor. Cooling helps for longer recording (G9m2 in the sun can do only about 15 min. ProRes 4:2:2 60fps on ssd).

Oh ! Well that's disappointing, no wonder you're looking at the R5ii.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

The much-advertised Lumix updates turn out to be a special edition of the FF S9 & an App update.

Why doesn't Panasonic come clean & say that they are abandoning MFT ( 'MICRO' FT ) so that potential new buyers can look elsewhere & not buy into a dead system?

I did post a link to Robin Wong's video and for an hour he did discuss the worsening position of OM System. Of course die hards will not discuss his points:

In a nutshell.

• OM System market share is shrinking year by year.
• Nikon, Sony and Canon autofocusing system is better than OM System.
• Full Frame give pros more megapixels and gives everyone low light shooting.
• OM System maybe going down the wrong path by aiming at bird photographers.
• OM system isn't making a profit!

Now if you factor in Lumix position. There are more OM/Olympus posters here than Lumix. If we head to Lumix reddit page there are a lot more post from Full Frame owners than M43.

One former Lumix ambassador said about the then release of the G9ii. It's for the people who had too many M43 lenses and haven't moved to Full Frame.

With friends like these and threads like these I wonder what those manufacturers are supposed to do ....

Obviously a new GM5 and GX8 update anything else is just daft

Yes I think that there is a vacant consultancy position or three on the Panasonic staff for a few daft old sods like you and I .....

However bad-news posts continue to proliferate - this cannot be good for the mount system and those that might take their advice seriously from some of the negativity on this forum.