If it's 20mp, DFD, 4K, mic input, Dual I.S. 2, battery grip available, metal bodied and a few other features, I'll happily get out from under my EM5.2, which has never impressed me quite to the level of the fan hype.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
New Pana MFT camera in a few weeks - from the horse's mouth
- Thread starter brentbrent
- Start date
-
- Tags
- fujifilm finepix s1
Blueshound
Well-known member
Have been on the verge of pulling the trigger on a G9 for awhile now. What holds me back is the size and weight. If it worked out that I could get most of what makes the G9 special, less 2 card slots, the extreme speed, a smaller battery hence reduced battery life, and at least close to the experience of that gorgeous EVF, at slightly less size and weight, I'd be all in.
I'm happy if only moderately smaller and lighter, but not terribly crippled relative to the G9.
A native 16:9 EVF would be a deal breaker for me, also if the EVF isn't at least a hair bigger than the one on my A7Riii.
Brian
I'm happy if only moderately smaller and lighter, but not terribly crippled relative to the G9.
A native 16:9 EVF would be a deal breaker for me, also if the EVF isn't at least a hair bigger than the one on my A7Riii.
Brian
Harold66
Forum Pro
OK
OK
YES
SURE
Of course
well I hope NOT
AGREED
sure whatever
YES
could not care less how much they downgraded the video specs
It makes sense but if a G90 is supposed to be a mini G9, keeping the same battery would be a HUGE plus if they intend to sell it to G9 owners as a back up body
Yes reasonable as long as the card slot is
WHY ? the G80 I believe is 505grs with battery , the G9 685grs so I would expect a new G90
to be somewhere in between
at least
that is a good idea
YES
Not sure if the pipeline for the Panasonic cameras using Sony sensors are like that, but for the Panasonic sensors it seems to have a dedicated 4K readout mode that may do the resampling inside the chip (similar to the low res modes used for EVFs).
https://industrial.panasonic.com/content/data/SC/ds/ds8/c2/FLY000036_EN.pdf
6K is referring to the 6K Photo modes (not to 6K video) in both the GH5 and G9. It's basically a 4992x3744 H.265 video at 30fps.
If IMX269 is really capable of full width 4K 30p and that's what they use in the G95, then we'll be able to differentiate based on the existence (or non-existence) of the 6K Photo mode. So far none of cameras suggestive of the IMX269 have been able to do 4K without an extra 1.25x crop (not even matching the Panasonic 16MP's 1.1x).
Edit: the leaked photos of G85 successor show there is no 6K drive mode, making the likelihood this is the IMX269 extremely high. I guess we'll see if this would be the first 20MP camera with cropless 4K (or at least with 1.1x) while having no 6K drive mode.
Last edited:
Eric Nepean
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 5,686
- Solutions
- 8
- Reaction score
- 4,069
What would one have done with a 4/3 only DSLR that couldn't be done with an E-M1??
Further .. an E-M1 supports both M43 and 4/3. What would have been the point of a 43 only camera?
They didn't. They are still introducing new cameras in 2019 that support 43 lenses. They stopped selling 43 lenses in 2018.
Support and continue selling the lenses for over 10 years ....
OM lenses can be adapted to 4/3 mount. What exactly would one do with an OM only camera after 4/3 is introduced??
Unlimited loyalty is merely your strawman. It's not my expectation.
I'm sorry, but that's your strawman, and a HUGE one too!!! So the fact fact that something is compatible wipes out the reality that the actual thing is discontinued??!
And why did you just utterly waste my time with such garbage?!
The rest of your post is just repeat of the same self-backpatting blather, 'I'm right nobody else is'.
pannumon
Veteran Member
Apart from 20Mp sensor, you almost described the G80.
pannumon
Veteran Member
No-one is taking G9 away.
I agree. Compared to G9. Or even compared to G80, as I suggested. In that case the improvement in computing power should not be huge (but I would still expect some).
Or perhaps more processing power with the same TDP (power consumption/heat production) by using more recent technology.
Basically yes, compared to G9.
They could fit a larger battery if they would utilize the grip space.
So why might Panasonic worry about L-Mount so much? No doubt that they have to recover their R&D and other costs fairly quickly. Leica could hardly care as anything that happens with L Mount is a bonus to their involvement.
Most of Sigma’s involvement is in lenses and they have played at making cameras so far. It is a boutique maker camera wise and I can see no real need for them to continue otherwise. Indeed if the FF ML Sigma is a run-away success Sigma might have to beef up their production process or sub-contract manufacture to Panasonic if all else failed.
Unlikely to take the path of consumer mythology and invest millions to upgrade capacity on new plant/buildings to produce a product that could lose popularity overnight.
Lens-wise I envisage a batch of lenses racked up and not fitted with mounts until orders are received for them. So they might have a big range of lenses on offer for L Mount but they may not have many specifically L Mount lenses in stock until they can be sold. If L Mount does not take off then they can always be sold to the other mount systems.
So there will be a base-line expectancy for Panasonic L Mount camera body sales and if that is met then all will be sweet. But the base-line sales required are not necessarily that high (other than “pride high”) as there is more profit in selling into the FF ML market and sales need not be run-away to be worth making and still profitable.
The measure of corporate success is how much profit garnered from how many sales and not just volume of sales alone. Companies have gone broke selling huge quantities of product at silly levels of margin.
The M4/3 mount is bigger volume but the higher priced end is the jewel where the profit lies - hence the push to make bigger higher priced bodies and exotic expensive lenses at higher margins. Nevertheless when volume is the longer term necessity it will be easier to get the volume from the wide ranging portfolio already marketed for M4/3.
As the camera market falls off the companies have to find ways of making more margin on the product that they actually sell.
That is why I think that after all the singing and dancing about FF ML systems in the end the market will come to realise that a good FF ML system might be wonderful if you can afford it. But a good M4/3 system will be more affordable and give just as much pleasure.
There will be cheap entry level FF ML gear, but maybe not for a while. Only Nikon does not have a second system in play and Olympus/Nikon to me seems to be a marriage made in heaven.
Just a minute - I have to count on my fingers how much the cost of half a dozen might be.
Nothing wrong with the evf on my GM5 - I have never been a complainer about an evf that has always worked to my needs satisfaction - unless I need to use it like a telescope
when of course I simply take a picture and magnify it ....Neither do I need 4k or video or even an articulted LCD screen - how easy can I be?
I will accept IBIS at any level as a bonus and a 20mp sensor would sit well. A global shutter would be interesting.
Going backwards it seems that the present GM5 is still quite a beautiful thing and I don’t have to find a pot of gold under a rainbow ....
How replete can one be - years down the track and I still love the old codgers ....
If the camera industry is about to die it will because people buy niche cameras and keep them because no company makes another camera that fills that same niche.
Did you catch 2 relevant m43rumors posts, that all Lumix may be rebranded as Leica, and that 2 Olympus lenses are actually patented under Sigma? So Sigma's association with m43 is already there, and (maybe) a future plan for Lumix which (proposed) explains the high-end product focus and related prices.
These comments get trotted out regularly.
More to the point is how the corporate overhead gets treated. This includes all sorts of issues such as finance costs, factory capacity and machine overhead, the list can be quite comprehensive.
So Olympus camera might make losses when it carries its share of the overhead. But if Olympus camera were not longer there and the overhead that Olympus Camera currently carries could not be 100% eliminated then the overhead not eliminated would have to be carried by Olympus Medical and that division may then appear to be a whole lot less profitable - in fact Olympus Corp thereafter might be worse off when the results are consolidated without the sector input by Olympus Camera. So when is a technical loss in fact a real loss to the company?
However perhaps if the “not-profitable” camera division were sold to an unsuspecting buyer who might think that they have another way of making the company more profitable then maybe the debt reduction might seriously reduce the cost of capital overhead. That might work, but then I don’t know the facts. Other companies interested in buying up non-profitable divsions might be a little scarce out in the field.
This is technical accounting and even accountants culd not hazard a guess from published figures without some serious internal knowledge which is obviously not forthcoming.
Therefore hazarding a guess based on home budgeting cannot be particularly useful.
It is like having a home with five kids. They grow up and leave home - you still have to fund the house. Of course sensible people could downsize (it might not even be cheaper to do so) but they still need to have a house and technically per person “the cost” is more “per person” - in any case you might kind of like where you live and you also have room for when the kids visit with the grandchildren. Older people might rationalise this, especially if the mortgage is paid off, but corporations can always have a considerable amount of debt to service and they are not as flexible as a family could be.
I would also wonder just how much optical R&D might be necessary for medical optics once the base technology was worked out.
I have sometimes wondered why Panasonic cameras didn’t go whole-hog and be called “Lumix” anyway - as branding goes it does seem more up-market than “Coolpix” (for example). Ricoh dropped “Caplio” and eventually turned “Pentax” into just a brand name.
If Panasonic was going to use “Leica” alone it would almost seem to indicate that Panasonic would make the move to buy the complete Leica assets. I doubt that they could truly use “Leica” otherwise. For some tme they have used “Leica” in conjunction to show their association with Leica quality control and perhaps expertise. Even though the product was made by Panasonic in Japan. Furthermore I doubt if Panasonic really needs Leica expertise and the use of name is as much as differencing “de-luxe” models from “standard” models inasmuch Canon has put red rings on the lenses that they wish to announce as “better quality”.
On the other hand it would be very possible that Panasonic could follow past practice and make “Leica” branded camera bodies based on the S1/S1R. I would not be surprised if the S1/S1R also gets a jersey to accomodate the Sigma foveon senosr works inside that prospective Sigma FF ML body. This follows under “economy of scale”.
For as long as camera lenses have been made some lens companies have made lenses in other company’s livery. It is a guessing game in legacy MF lens forums as which company was the actual manufacturer of whatever lens.
Vivitar and others who made no lenses of their own and were marketing firms used lenses made by quite a few different source companies all branded “Vivitar” or whatever.
It could be common pracitce for companies - even as august a lens manufacturer to co-opt another lens manufacturer to fill a lens-slot that they choose not to make themselves (for any of quite a few rational normal reasons that I could think of).
I see no particular agenda in thse rumours - only a new iteration of what has already been happening.
Try the GX9. It is cheaper as well.
peppermonkey
Veteran Member
...that was clearly utterly rude and uncalled for.
peppermonkey
Veteran Member
Thanks, had no idea. Food for thought, albeit, old thoughts, lol.
peppermonkey
Veteran Member
very interesting and generally agree.
Strangely, picked up an L1 recently, just to play around with since it was something I lusted after when it first came out...even though it was during a time when I had no real intentions of getting a systems camera...well, no, that's not true...was contemplating on getting the then, newly announced Oly E-400. Somehow, instead of all that, ended up with a Panasonic TZ3 as my first digital camera. And now that an L1 is selling for peanuts, well, couldn't resist, just to play with...albeit, haven't had any time to play with since my son was born. Now that he's 3, getting some time (not much mind you) to maybe bring it out to play.
peppermonkey
Veteran Member
Only the GX's (and some optional external EVF's I think) had native 16.9 EVF's. All the G's don't as far as I know, so you should be fine. If the new camera has an EVF at least as good as the one on the GX8...would be pretty awesome I would assume.
peppermonkey
Veteran Member
a 16:9 EVF is a deal breaker.
Eric Nepean
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 5,686
- Solutions
- 8
- Reaction score
- 4,069
I have attributed no strawman arguments to you.
It is fact that Olympus had a final sale of 4/3 glass in 2018, and that the E-M1, E-M1ii and the E-M1X support 4/3 lenses. And that the E-M1X was introduced in 2019.
It is also fact that E-5 was introduced in September of 2010 and was sold until 2013, when the much better E-M1 was introduced (with full support of 4/3 lenses)
This was long after the G1 was released in September of 2008
Olympus continued making cameras that fully supported 4/3 lenses, and continued selling 4/3 lenses.
At what point in time did Olympus not have for sale a camera with full 4/3 support?
Your choice to engage; your choice to disengage. Your choice to be rude. Being rude only convinces those who can be intimidated.
Try digging up some facts.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum