Tyrbiter

That is a marketing decision isn't it? Technically possible but why give away any special sauce you have to make your system sell as an integrated whole.

It's only a little smaller, I have an S5 and it isn't very different. I bought it for wide-angle photography when close to aircraft or inside buildings such as hangars. The S1 body is too big for me. ...

But they offer me no advantage, I need reach with small sensors and long lenses for aviation photography in the main. That's why the G9 is so good for me. And, behemoth? I've tried smaller MFT ...

If you look here: https://l-mount.com/en/q-and-a there are 2 answers that relate to your question. Essentially there is a guaranteed level of function by making a lens that conforms to the L-mount ...

You need both to be in the RAW file and OOC JPGs, then you can do what you want in post.

The G9 fits my hands perfectly, if a diet means making it smaller then I don't approve of that. Making money I suppose, so they had better get their product positioning and marketing right.

That pesky 1% will still leave you fuming. Back in the day all focusing errors were my fault on early 80s Canons.

It's your view and you're fully entitled to it. I hold a different view, in a way I suppose I see it as harm by omission or diversion of emphasis. I would be more than happy if the camera firmware ...

It's certainly true that a lot of people, especially the video types, say this. Well, yes, this is also true, but there are some people who are not sure that the S5II PDAF is actually capable ...

It seems that this has been done in a major rush and coordination across the various Panasonic entities is non-existent. Someone has made a significant error, perhaps the S5II launch was pulled ...

At least they show a tog with an S5II, in the UK it's a G9 which is not on the supported list.

In the UK there was apparently an email notification in December that stated there were changes in the levels of support but without specifying what this involved. Prior to this there was MFT gear ...

Compare the GH5II/G9 with the GH6 on photonstophotos. With that GH6 sensor I can't see equivalent low ISO dynamic range being possible, 14 bit RAWs or not, in a putative G9II. I also don't see how ...

Yes, indeed, but it's not clear what is happening and as has been mentioned those of us in the UK are unable to register our MFT kit nor in fact the S5II.

Well, that's a view. I don't know how it works internally but I doubt there are two entirely separate development teams which means that the sudden appearance of the S series had to result in a ...

If that happens it will require a sensor with PDAF sites that is as good as the IMX272 sensor in the G9. I don't know if that could be done with a metal mask change on the base sensor (that's ...

Did you turn the zoom ring so that the lens was at the 12mm end? I don't know if you can update it until the camera sees the lens as active.

They say that they will continue with MFT but only mention hybrid cameras, many people would like some photo-centric products, I have a suspicion that the G9 is going to be an orphan because what ...

I don't know if this is going to arrive, recent Panasonic interviews seem to be emphasising MFT for hybrid products, so I see that as the GH series and really the G9 is a product 'line' all on its ...

A RAW developer package would be the modern equivalent. I know a few togs who want to achieve the equivalent of the pictorialists, some of it is very interesting to me. It's not my style of imaging ...