Jorginho

Lives in Netherlands Netherlands
Joined on May 10, 2008

Comments

Total: 823, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

All nice and well. I bought an as new Gm5 as a companion of my Em1.2. For 250 euro. Seems worth it. There is never going to be an GM7 and I never want a cam like this. Its so called "replacement" or that is how I imagine this thing in reality is.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2017 at 21:23 UTC as 7th comment
On article Sony a9: more speed, less dynamic range (609 comments in total)
In reply to:

KyleSlamchez: I noted this at the announcement that this would likely be the case, along with the fact it will be unable to sync with strobes without the (5fps) mechanical shutter. The A9 is looking more and more like an A7 with dual card slots and better ergonomics. That's great--Sony's needed that for a long time for wedding photographers--but is it worth $4,500?

The Olympus EM1 ii can shoot at 18fps with full af, and it launched at $2000. Yet all I heard in forums was that "$2000 is outrageous for such a camera." Yet here Sony is charging $4,500 for the A9 and the internet sings their praises. Marketing geniuses, these guys.

Let just be honest. This camera is not competing directly against the D5 ($6,500) and and the 1DX II ($6000). It's competing directly against the Canon 5D IV ($3,300), Nikon D750 ($1,500), the Panasonic GH5 ($2000), the Olympus EM1 ii ($2000), and the Fuji X-T2 ($1,600).

The A9 may prove to be one of the best cameras in that class, but let's try to keep it in perspective.

I am not really interested in how much you like me.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 15:11 UTC
On article Sony a9: more speed, less dynamic range (609 comments in total)
In reply to:

KyleSlamchez: I noted this at the announcement that this would likely be the case, along with the fact it will be unable to sync with strobes without the (5fps) mechanical shutter. The A9 is looking more and more like an A7 with dual card slots and better ergonomics. That's great--Sony's needed that for a long time for wedding photographers--but is it worth $4,500?

The Olympus EM1 ii can shoot at 18fps with full af, and it launched at $2000. Yet all I heard in forums was that "$2000 is outrageous for such a camera." Yet here Sony is charging $4,500 for the A9 and the internet sings their praises. Marketing geniuses, these guys.

Let just be honest. This camera is not competing directly against the D5 ($6,500) and and the 1DX II ($6000). It's competing directly against the Canon 5D IV ($3,300), Nikon D750 ($1,500), the Panasonic GH5 ($2000), the Olympus EM1 ii ($2000), and the Fuji X-T2 ($1,600).

The A9 may prove to be one of the best cameras in that class, but let's try to keep it in perspective.

If they understand what is written here in the first place they know how to interpretate the information I think.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 14:38 UTC

What the article DOES indicate indirectly is that a smaller than FF sensor is not up to semi-pro let alone pro standards. Sigh...well have fun.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 09:00 UTC as 72nd comment | 3 replies
On article Sony a9: more speed, less dynamic range (609 comments in total)
In reply to:

KyleSlamchez: I noted this at the announcement that this would likely be the case, along with the fact it will be unable to sync with strobes without the (5fps) mechanical shutter. The A9 is looking more and more like an A7 with dual card slots and better ergonomics. That's great--Sony's needed that for a long time for wedding photographers--but is it worth $4,500?

The Olympus EM1 ii can shoot at 18fps with full af, and it launched at $2000. Yet all I heard in forums was that "$2000 is outrageous for such a camera." Yet here Sony is charging $4,500 for the A9 and the internet sings their praises. Marketing geniuses, these guys.

Let just be honest. This camera is not competing directly against the D5 ($6,500) and and the 1DX II ($6000). It's competing directly against the Canon 5D IV ($3,300), Nikon D750 ($1,500), the Panasonic GH5 ($2000), the Olympus EM1 ii ($2000), and the Fuji X-T2 ($1,600).

The A9 may prove to be one of the best cameras in that class, but let's try to keep it in perspective.

@Rishi: while I very much agree woith you on sensorsizes here is the first part of the GH4 article. In which dpreview actually compared GH4 head to head with an A7s. A FF sensor.... "As video cameras go, the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 and Sony Alpha 7S are very DSLR-like in shape. A four-fold difference in sensor size, and a significant gulf in price suggests this may be the only similarity. However, in terms of intent, they're not as different as all this might lead you to expect." Well...we can say Em1.2 and A9 in terms of intent are in the same way. Do you actually believe a team of dpreview reviewers only 2,5 years ago saw it fit to do what you now seem to find incredible (in a dumb way)?
@Kyle: I think if you compare it that way, then I agree. If you are a person who wants a very good cam adn, like most people, have a limited budget of course you can compare different cams with sensorsize and see which one gets you the most bang for the buck in your particular case.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 08:32 UTC
On article Sony a9: more speed, less dynamic range (609 comments in total)
In reply to:

KyleSlamchez: I noted this at the announcement that this would likely be the case, along with the fact it will be unable to sync with strobes without the (5fps) mechanical shutter. The A9 is looking more and more like an A7 with dual card slots and better ergonomics. That's great--Sony's needed that for a long time for wedding photographers--but is it worth $4,500?

The Olympus EM1 ii can shoot at 18fps with full af, and it launched at $2000. Yet all I heard in forums was that "$2000 is outrageous for such a camera." Yet here Sony is charging $4,500 for the A9 and the internet sings their praises. Marketing geniuses, these guys.

Let just be honest. This camera is not competing directly against the D5 ($6,500) and and the 1DX II ($6000). It's competing directly against the Canon 5D IV ($3,300), Nikon D750 ($1,500), the Panasonic GH5 ($2000), the Olympus EM1 ii ($2000), and the Fuji X-T2 ($1,600).

The A9 may prove to be one of the best cameras in that class, but let's try to keep it in perspective.

I have the Oly Em1.2. I like what it can do, great IQ, fast, responsive etc. Am not anal about sensorsize at all. But you cannot compare a FF sensor with a sensor 1/4 the size. It makes things a lot easier.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2017 at 14:56 UTC
On article Sony a9: more speed, less dynamic range (609 comments in total)

In sort: the cam is not perfect. We already knew. But very good and informative article I have to say. Remains anamazing cam. Perfection seems elusive and it always will be.

Link | Posted on May 18, 2017 at 14:54 UTC as 93rd comment

The end of the GM series, even if I did not buy one, is a very sad thing. I started a poll over the mFT forum about a week ago and out of about 7 future developments of Panny a GM7 together with a superlative GX9 cam out on top. Panasonic would do wise to reintroduce it. What held back GM5 sales, I think, is the somewhat lacklustre EVF (we understand it on one hand. but still). Also some other things were not as good as other mFT cams. But with current tech, a better EVF and 20 MP sensor with DFD things might (drastically) change.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2017 at 14:24 UTC as 147th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Bambi24: With no viewfinder and small 4/3 sensors, I don't know what these things offer over a smartphone. The noise beyond ISO 800 is terrible.

These things maybe made a little bit of sense before smartphones came out with dual sensors, but they are pointless in 2017.

"I don't know"...that is basically it, Bambi.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2017 at 20:22 UTC
In reply to:

LFPCPH: This for hipsters - not for serious photographers. (My contribution to the collection of jokes).

I don't think you need to prove P1 you are a "hipster" to obtain it. In reality this is for everyone who thinks he can afford it and make (good) use of it. And according to P1 there is a large enough group, a.k.a. a market, that will buy it.

Skilled photogs will shoot extremely nice Fine Art with it I'd say..for instance.

But you are free to restrict yourself to whatever box you have undoubtedly put yourself in.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2017 at 15:56 UTC
In reply to:

AngularJS: Great job Panasonic. Very cool stuff!

Can some one please tell how does DFD compare to traditional DSLR PDAF in terms of speed?

Very good for stills, action and static subjects and it works to very low light unlike OSPDAF, For video it is less than stellar since video shows how it gets their and a little pumping effect can be seen in video (for instance) but of course not in stills.

Link | Posted on May 9, 2017 at 19:01 UTC
In reply to:

Kiril Karaatanasov: 8K nice! So Panasonic will ditch m43 finally? Nice to know GH5 is last of it's kind.

8K simply requires bigger sensor, probably bigger than APS-C. The only 8K camera sensor today is in Sony A7R2 although it cannot shoot 8K video. However e see the need for 42MP in 3:2 ratio. 43 ratio would need to be around 50MP which means diffraction artifacts at f/2.8......

@ eno2...while we seem to agree it is not substantial I'd like to add that DxO does show the improvement the way I noted.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 19:19 UTC
In reply to:

Mike FL: 'That article was more like gossip' Panasonic's head of cameras talks downsizing,"

sounds like:

That article was more like gossip Samsung 's head of cameras talks closing

No. Samsung never ever responded in any such way. Even when asked they aid nothing. So it is surely not the same. We'll see over time what it all means. May be it is still byebye Panasonic mirrorless. Who knows, but this all does not sound at all like a byebye.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 19:15 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Technically, DFD can be better than PD. The catch is that it is computationally intensive and highly lens dependent for best performance. I don't know how lens dependent this implementation is, nor how they get the lens OOF PSF modeled (it could be lens data or it could be automatically determined, but I suspect they don't make it very lens dependent).

Sure. Still a host of Oly lenses just work fine for action with a DFD cam. Look reviews up that test it....

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 19:14 UTC
In reply to:

virtualreality: Small lenses, big camera. What's the point?

S1rfn. I have the very same cam. I haven't found 10bit 4K video on it. Also could you tell me where the 400 Kbps is on my Em1.2 otherwise I have to file a complaint.
May be you should first look some facts up as to why GH5 is the way it is. You'll find that the lacking inbuilt flahs is also a sacrifice to get the cam cool enough. So it can run as long as the battery lasts.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 19:08 UTC
In reply to:

justmeMN: "The development costs for this kind of sensor would be huge." - Panasonic

So, Panasonic has to pretend that DFD is good, because they can't afford the alternative?

DFD in video is still very good. It is not bad at all. Some people demand perfection. Well even A6500 or Canon 80D doesn't get you that, but these two are indeed a bit better than GH5 still.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 19:06 UTC
In reply to:

BrightTiger: Panasonic... for your p̶h̶o̶t̶o̶g̶r̶a̶p̶h̶y̶ video needs. He tries to placate the photo side but as one reads the rest of the article, there's no warm fuzzy that photography is anywhere near a priority. Yes the world is more video driven - no problem there. But for straight photography.. meh. Sort of the opposite of Canon and Nikon. But the trends favor videography so it's a money play.

The IQ out of GH5 seems to be virtually on par with XT2 etc. JPGs also according to dpreview have been greatly improved. It seems an excellent stills cam too. The problem is more with people over here. If it is so good at video then. in a bw style, photo must be worse. Well...it seems to have the best still IQ of all mFT cams I think from what I saw in RAW even a tad better than my Em1.2.
A 3,6 MP EVF does not hurt also and the best CDAF easily helps too. IBIS that is second only to Oly but by a small margin...Good batterylife. Dualcard slot. Great menysystem, good custumaisation, a good array of manual controls on the cam....What is not to like? May be for some who want FF or MF of course the sensor just won't deliver that kind of IQ. But all others will not be disappointed at all.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 19:05 UTC
In reply to:

FrankS009: An interesting interview, but it didn't tell us much about stills oriented cameras coming up except a revised LX100 sometime. Looking forward to a new GM camera, and a new GX9 - but not too soon since I just bought a GX8! A soiid company with a solid product, and I prefer their industrial design to many others.
F.

I wonder how well the GX9 will perform. Sad about no OSPDAF though. I understand what they want, they are getting there but it ain't there (DFD).

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 18:59 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: so since customers perceive log as having separate and distinct value from a camera body , they don't want to "devalue" log by simply incorporation it into a camera body by design

did he actually say that , more or less ?

wow .... just ,.....wow .... is there an understanding or agreement in the industry as to the stsatus of log, what exactly would explain that mindset against the fact
that multiple makers see it as a profit producing software enhancement ?

wow

I heard they make a profit too. A return on investment...that is how he codes it. But it seems profit. Unbelievable.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 18:57 UTC
In reply to:

Jorginho: An interesting read. Still if he wants to listen to customers than please..at least this one customers appreciates DFD a lot. But as long as it still behind OSPDAF especially in the video department go for sensors (all of them to keep the volume high enough) with OSPDAF and DFD (these two can go together well).

So we do not have to wait until DFD is better, but you can develop DFD and drop OSPDAF once the goal is reached. I am pretty sure I am not the only one thinking of this....

The negative remarks on GH5 video AF, even if exagerated here and there, are something you should not want.

Oh and finally: I think very few Canon 5D Mark III of MarkIV users think of GH5 and then think "and it delivers on the still side also, so why not?"

Don't get me wrong: I have GH4 and I have Em1.2 (so that is the best mFT sensor eqaul to GH5 in all likelihood)...Love it. But I am not so delusional that it somehow matches especially 5DmarkIV...And most users aren't like that either....

Miki....XT2 from what I have seen and read is actually not a much better still camera at all. All in all it is probably worse. Since still IQ is considered just slightly better than EM1.2 (which serves as a good proxy for GH5) and it does not have IBIS the endresult in general is not much better at all.
On top of that the GH5 has a superior EVF (3,6 MP OLED) and much better batterylife I think?
I don't know about bufferrates etc Fuji might be better here.

You can look up countless and very thorough reviews but it is APS-c in general that needs to do better because based on sensorsize it should and it isn't. So my expectation is that A6700 or XT3 or whatever will broaden the gap with current m43 sensors for instance. Adding 1/3 of a stop or so would bring it inline with what we can expect. All in all not a lot but noticable still.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 16:22 UTC
Total: 823, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »