FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Panasonic mirrorless FF Discussions/News/Rumours

Page  123>
Author
trainerKEN View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 16 May 2009
Country: Canada
Location: Vancouver
Status: Offline
Posts: 3801
Post Options Post Options   Quote trainerKEN Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Panasonic mirrorless FF Discussions/News/Rumours
    Posted: 03 September 2020 at 01:31
Panasonic S5 announced.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/8350421307/panasonic-introduces-lumix-dc-s5-stills-video-hybrid-camera

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1581612-REG/panasonic_lumix_dc_s5_mirrorless_digital.html



Key specifications:
24.2MP full-frame CMOS sensor with no AA filter
Up to 4K/60p (APS-C), full-frame oversampled 4K/30p all with 4:2:2 10-bit color
Panasonic contrast-detect DFD AF with improved face, body and head detection
2.36M dot OLED EVF w/ 0.74x magnification
3” 1.84M dot fully articulating touchscreen
Dual SD card slots (1x UHS-II, 1x UHS-I)
96MP high-resolution mode
7 fps burst shooting (5 fps with continuous autofocus)
2.4/5Ghz Wi-Fi and Bluetooth with one-touch image transfer
Dust and splash resistant
460 shots per charge when used with EVF


$1,997.99, but if you preorder before the end of September, Panasonic will give you a Sigma 45mm f2.8.
​​​​​​​
 



Back to Top
djfoxy View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 07 September 2015
Status: Offline
Posts: 288
Post Options Post Options   Quote djfoxy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 November 2018 at 19:25
I have asked on DPR forum and was answered that it could be like 4500$ mark.

As I am thrilled by the idea of buying a FF MILC that could one day bring me access to some high class leica lens, I am also putting into the balance is a MILC FF price tag with a price tag of a MF MILC so interesting. Especially if the idea for the MILC and its lens is to get the best image quality possible...
I don't know exactly what to put into the balance as pros and cons now for each of the system...
Objective is to get the best image quality out of the system. I wanna be wowed like I was from Sony APS-C 24mpx sensor to Sony FF 42mpx...
Back to Top
Jonas A-R View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 29 December 2007
Country: Denmark
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Posts: 1698
Post Options Post Options   Quote Jonas A-R Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 October 2018 at 09:05
Originally posted by Mestari Mestari wrote:

That's right, but I had our E-mount in mind. My impression was it started with full frame and now we're waiting for implementation in aps-c. Maybe in that new rumoured body. Unless I am wrong and bsi is in a6500.


Ahh, but it is not the Sony photographic business which develops sensor tech. It is the Sony semiconductor branch, and they pioneered BSI in small sensors long before it was feasible to implement in FF.

a6500 has the same front side illuminated sensor found in a6300
a1 20/1.8G 21/2.8 Loxia 35/1.4GM 50/1.2GM 85/1.4GM 90/2.8G Laowa 100/2.8 2:1 100/2.8GM STF 135/1.8GM 24-105/4G 100-400/4-5.6GM 200-600/5.6-6.3G 1.4x 2x TC
Back to Top
Mestari View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 20 February 2008
Country: Poland
Location: Mazowsze
Status: Offline
Posts: 679
Post Options Post Options   Quote Mestari Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 October 2018 at 00:12
That's right, but I had our E-mount in mind. My impression was it started with full frame and now we're waiting for implementation in aps-c. Maybe in that new rumoured body. Unless I am wrong and bsi is in a6500.
Back to Top
Jonas A-R View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 29 December 2007
Country: Denmark
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Posts: 1698
Post Options Post Options   Quote Jonas A-R Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 October 2018 at 18:48
Originally posted by kefkafloyd kefkafloyd wrote:

A lot of cutting edge sensor tech debuts in small sensors first because it's much easier to yield them.


And because the much bigger volume of sold small sensors.
>1.5billion cell phones which I suppose contain between 1 and 3 sensors each vs ~25million cameras (fixed lens and ILCs) in 20017

a1 20/1.8G 21/2.8 Loxia 35/1.4GM 50/1.2GM 85/1.4GM 90/2.8G Laowa 100/2.8 2:1 100/2.8GM STF 135/1.8GM 24-105/4G 100-400/4-5.6GM 200-600/5.6-6.3G 1.4x 2x TC
Back to Top
kefkafloyd View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 July 2006
Country: United States
Location: Massachusetts
Status: Offline
Posts: 2455
Post Options Post Options   Quote kefkafloyd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 October 2018 at 17:10
A lot of cutting edge sensor tech debuts in small sensors first because it's much easier to yield them. BSI and the stacked sensor tech (along with phase-detect pixels) were all small-sensor developments before they moved on to larger formats.
 



Back to Top
Jonas A-R View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 29 December 2007
Country: Denmark
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Posts: 1698
Post Options Post Options   Quote Jonas A-R Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 October 2018 at 09:34
Originally posted by Mestari Mestari wrote:

Well, the backside illuminated sensor was one such example, but generally you are right.


Backside illuminated sensors were not developed first in large sensors if that is what you are saying?

This was the first BSI sensor available for consumer electronics: Sony press release
It had an area of ~16mm2

It was implemented in cell phones from at least 2011:
cell phone BSI

1" and APS-C BSI sensors were implemented in cameras from at least 2015:

Nikon 1 J5
Samsung NX500

Edited by Jonas A-R - 04 October 2018 at 09:43
a1 20/1.8G 21/2.8 Loxia 35/1.4GM 50/1.2GM 85/1.4GM 90/2.8G Laowa 100/2.8 2:1 100/2.8GM STF 135/1.8GM 24-105/4G 100-400/4-5.6GM 200-600/5.6-6.3G 1.4x 2x TC
Back to Top
eldonito View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 November 2006
Country: Sweden
Location: Norrköping
Status: Offline
Posts: 711
Post Options Post Options   Quote eldonito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 October 2018 at 07:45
I didn't know that -- thanks for pointing it out!
Back to Top
Mestari View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 20 February 2008
Country: Poland
Location: Mazowsze
Status: Offline
Posts: 679
Post Options Post Options   Quote Mestari Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 October 2018 at 20:29
Well, the backside illuminated sensor was one such example, but generally you are right.
Back to Top
eldonito View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 November 2006
Country: Sweden
Location: Norrköping
Status: Offline
Posts: 711
Post Options Post Options   Quote eldonito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 October 2018 at 09:16
Originally posted by 5thElefant 5thElefant wrote:


Apsc always was the ‘I want a camera and have plenty of money’ class of camera. The 90% who only had the kit lens and never left Auto. Many of those are now ‘I don’t need a camera my smartphone is great’.


Can't argue with that, I certainly know the type. But the same pressure could be exerted to FF or any ILC system -- especially since a FF camera with a kit lens isn't as expensive as it used to be. A7's have auto mode too :-)

Another thing contributing to the longevity of crop sensors is that they always precede FF in tech advancement: from digital SLRs to begin with, then SLTs and mirrorless: a crop sensor will always require less power and processor speed than a FF one, so it's a springboard for innovations.

Of course, many photographic innovations are also happening in smartphones; the software-based ones should be relatively easy to translate to a FF system, but hardware tech will benefit from maturing in a crop-sensor system before getting implemented into FF. I would think that it's much rarer that tech developed in FF "trickles down" to crop-sensor systems.
Back to Top
Miranda F View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
Posts: 4074
Post Options Post Options   Quote Miranda F Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 October 2018 at 08:29
Originally posted by 5thElefant 5thElefant wrote:


Apsc always was the ‘I want a camera and have plenty of money’ class of camera. The 90% who only had the kit lens and never left Auto. Many of those are now ‘I don’t need a camera my smartphone is great’.

Hardly. APS-C was always the cheapest 'proper' digital ILC.

But doubtless there are lot of users like that (my daughter is one. I've lent her different lenses but she rarely uses them) but there are plenty of people using APS-C cameras 'properly' with lots of lenses, and many (including myself) who have either tried FF and found no benefits to it, or have never bothered because it doesn't give them anything they can't do on APS-C and the extra cost step is a deterrent (though perhaps it may not be for ever - FF mirrorless does look like a fashion statement to me rather than an actual need).

I put it to you that only a small proportion of photographers regularly use the narrow-DOF capability of their cameras, and very few use the fast-action low light capability either. In more than 40 years using film cameras, I never did either, despite having lots of cameras and fast prime lenses which would do both. If I was following fast action, I panned the camera and got the background blurred, and in low light I used a tripod and a time exposure to make the people disappear ...

... and on those occasions when I wanted narrow DOF I moved back and used a telephoto lens. I do the same now quite effectively on APS-C because getting narrow DOF on a tele lens is so easy you don't need an FF sensor.

Edited by Miranda F - 03 October 2018 at 08:35
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A7Rii, A58, Nex-6, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras ...
Back to Top
5thElefant View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 19 September 2008
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Posts: 3242
Post Options Post Options   Quote 5thElefant Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 October 2018 at 22:05
Originally posted by eldonito eldonito wrote:

Originally posted by 5thElefant 5thElefant wrote:

With the ever upward pressure of smartphones and downward pressure of full frame I doubt apsc figures much in anyone’s future strategy.




As for smartphones, for all their increasing capabilities (including recent ability to simulate a shallow DOF), it's not so obvious how they would ever match camera aesthetics (admittedly a subjective opinion) or camera ergonomics: human anatomy (hands, a solid grip, etc) largely contributed to the shape cameras have evolved to today, while phones have been shaped by design pressures for different handling, not as pertinent to taking photos. So I would hope that camera formats with a solid enthusiast appeal (4/3, APSC) aren't on their way out in a hurry.



Apsc always was the ‘I want a camera and have plenty of money’ class of camera. The 90% who only had the kit lens and never left Auto. Many of those are now ‘I don’t need a camera my smartphone is great’.
Simon α900|A7|RX10|DXO
Back to Top
eldonito View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 November 2006
Country: Sweden
Location: Norrköping
Status: Offline
Posts: 711
Post Options Post Options   Quote eldonito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 October 2018 at 20:56
Originally posted by 5thElefant 5thElefant wrote:

With the ever upward pressure of smartphones and downward pressure of full frame I doubt apsc figures much in anyone’s future strategy.


Yikes, I get your point, and I hope it doesn't turn out that way. IMHO, APS-C represents such a sweetspot in terms of portability, sensor DR/noise, processing/power demands, overall system price and (with the right lens) DOF. I say this having never used 4/3 so I'm aware that the above points could also apply there.

As for smartphones, for all their increasing capabilities (including recent ability to simulate a shallow DOF), it's not so obvious how they would ever match camera aesthetics (admittedly a subjective opinion) or camera ergonomics: human anatomy (hands, a solid grip, etc) largely contributed to the shape cameras have evolved to today, while phones have been shaped by design pressures for different handling, not as pertinent to taking photos. So I would hope that camera formats with a solid enthusiast appeal (4/3, APSC) aren't on their way out in a hurry.

A bit more on topic, I would think one reason for FF desirability is its perceived pro appeal, and associated prestige. Panasonic announcing a FF camera could be as much a financial call ("we'll make $$$ out of this") as a move to appease shareholders and fans ("all serious pros use FF, and we're a serious company in it for the long run"). Nevertheless, it's a big achievement, so kudos to them!
Back to Top
Miranda F View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
Posts: 4074
Post Options Post Options   Quote Miranda F Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 October 2018 at 12:57
Originally posted by 5thElefant 5thElefant wrote:

With the ever upward pressure of smartphones and downward pressure of full frame I doubt apsc figures much in anyone’s future strategy.


If that is so, I guess it represents the apparent market view of FF as still the leading target to meet. But given how different the technology of film and semiconductor, there is no obvious reason why a new camera system should use the same size sensor as pre-WWI cinema film.

Or indeed the standard 3x2 format. Smartphones mostly use a wider format, and some compact cameras use 9x16 or 4x3. Even if we stick to 3x2, APS-C does most of what people actually need, and if they want more DOF then arguably a larger format will do it better still.

And whatever your own personal preferances are on the sensor size issue, surely there is an end in sight to the concept of a single sensor size which is best? Most of us have cameras with two, three, or four different sensor sizes in them*, and for good reasons.

FF, APS-C, ppossibly 1" or 1/1.7" compact camera, and 1/2.3" smartphone camera.



Edited by Miranda F - 02 October 2018 at 13:00
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A7Rii, A58, Nex-6, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras ...
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Camera Talk > Other camera systems Page  123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.