Personally I feel if the S1 or S1R for example used a top flight hybrid autofocus it would be playing with the big boys currently as a top line product. Sadly Nikon, Canon and Sony eclipsed it completely due mostly to that lack. But as you say Panasonic doesn't care. It's their privilege. and the market will pass on them as a result for stills.
The G9 fits my hands better than any other camera I've ever held. I have no interest in a smaller version if it doesn't have the G9's near-perfect-for-me ergonomics. I tried a G100--no go for me.
I too have an R4. It's 7g heavier than the G9 and a tiny bit smaller. The lenses are what make a difference, so it depends on what you choose. I'm pretty happy with my Tamron 17-28 & 28-75 pair but the whole kit is very heavy thanks to lenses like the 24mm TSE II, 90mm macro, the massive Samyang 135/2 and Tamron 35/1.4. Not to mention using a tripod and a Lee filter set.
I also have a grip extension that adds a bit of weight to the A7RIV. The G9 is near-perfect as-is.
Yes, indeed. That's where the MFT really helps; I don't make any attempt to get fast (heavy) MFT lenses; that would defeat much of my purpose.
I used to have the Samyang 135/2; that was indeed one heavy puppy. Nowadays I mainly use the 24-105, and have a few primes for occasional use.
Compared to the front element on that 24-105, all my MFT lenses are unobtrusive.
I also have a grip extension that adds a bit of weight to the A7RIV. The G9 is near-perfect as-is.
Yes, indeed. That's where the MFT really helps; I don't make any attempt to get fast (heavy) MFT lenses; that would defeat much of my purpose.
I used to have the Samyang 135/2; that was indeed one heavy puppy. Nowadays I mainly use the 24-105, and have a few primes for occasional use.
Compared to the front element on that 24-105, all my MFT lenses are unobtrusive.
I agree about the IBIS; I've had surprising (to me) good shots indoors handheld with relatively low light; DxO PhotoLab 5's DeepPRIME NR helps a lot.
Some time ago the director for the photography curriculum at Ringling College of Art whose graduates are sought after by high end media companies allowed that to graduate, all student had to be proficient in video as well as still photography because these multimedia outlets demanded both. I suspect in the future still photography may actually become simply of a derivative of video, whether we like it or not.
As I've said upthread, want stills oriented? ...shoot OM. Want video?.. shoot Panasonic. It's good we have both to choose from.
Too small for me; as I mentioned earlier, I had a G100 for a few days, but couldn't get used to the ergonomics.
Both my cameras have shoulder straps, a habit that saved the Sony when I didn't properly secure it to my tripod; it would have fallen on solid rock at Arches.
it is now ,i shot a full gig of my daughter (19) in 4k ,i just left the camera recording and told her that she can extract very good stills from it, i went around and shot stills with FF she has just posted images on her social media sites and all the images are extracted stills from video, and i must say they are very nice and she triptych them
That is why I stocked up on 4 GM bodies for my basic everyday go anywhere kit. Common spare parts are readily available, free service manuals too. I am good for many years to come. And thereafter, I bet phones will have improved to the point of making that switch for me palatable too.
I am happy with this as long as all camera bodies released are not primarily video purposed. Despite my grumbles I am reasonably confident that this will happen. After all the G9 was effectively a GH5 with its video capability seriously toned down and backgrounded.
I prefer the general tenor of the Panasonic interface and am not unhappy with the G9 - it will be a hard camera to even make me feel that it needs updating - so the OM-1 despite its deserved popularity holds no attractions for me.
Yes, you read me well. My last purchase was the Panasonic 25-50/1.7 lens. Very expensive. Physically large but not overly heavy. Brilliant lens. I have been using it on my G9. But I must give it a go on a GM5 .... why? Because I can. That is one of the least appreciated advantages of M4/3.
The odd reality is that if a ultra fast processor and new algorithms could be applied it would indeed be possible for DFD tech to catch up to phase detection. But an engineer friend of mine made it plain that the costs of developing such a processor and the time involved with development of said algorithms would be perhaps a bit prohibitively expensive. Guess we'll have to see if Panny decides to throw the towel in on DFD and join the phase detection crowd. Or if they decide to completely separate themselves from the crowd and take the big dive into the tech needed to elevate their precious DFD to current levels. We shall see.
Why can't they just use one of these gaming computer CPU and put that into the camera? I wouldn't mind an 8 core or even 16 core CPU.
