Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Panasonic FF Mirrorless to be announced on September 25th

Elderly

Elderly

Well-known member
ptomsu said:
2) while I love Fuji I still find their marketing behind APSC is not right anymore - it was 6-7 years ago when they reentered digital cameras again and started building a system from scratch - but hey FF brings so many advantages over APSC and if you really want to go small then m43 is the answer.Could go on with that endlessly but the fact is that for me APSC is dying and mirrorless FF and m43 will be the dominant systems for the years to come.
Click to expand...
I bought my Fuji s5Pro in 2007 and I think the s3 came out about three years prior to that (14 years ago) - doesn't time fly :D. I agree that FF has so many advantages - it's what I'd have if I was still working as a photographer, I also agree that if you want small it's m43 - which is what I now have as an antidote to years of having to carry about huge amounts of gear. But I'm beginning to think that APSC could be the 'Goldilocks' size for many many purposes.
 
iiiNelson

iiiNelson

Well-known member
biglouis said:
Interesting. Over at the Fuji Rumors site (my other system is Fujifilm) 43% of respondents to a poll asking the question should Fuji 'Keep their focus on APS-C and MF and stay out of FF?' responded 'Yes!'. In fact the total of responders who reject the idea of Fuji going FF, out of a list of questions is a resounding 77%.

I feel the same way about Panasonic. Why go FF?

I believe over time FF (e.g. 36x24mm) will be seen as a major disadvantage for mirrorless. The bodies will be small but the lenses will be relatively large and unbalanced (just like Sony and the forthcoming Nikon Z6/7).

At the weekend I went to a family event but for once left my camera at home. Why? My Huawei P9 takes good enough photographs - and a relative who was using her latest iPhone for group shots produced the most amazing photographs (and showed me a panorama made from one iPhone image which stretched across her hallway wall and was better than some panoramas I have shot with my digital cameras).

This thirst for FF is to my mind the same empty marketing ploy of 'more megapixels' (which used to mean more noise). In fact, the control of s/n in sensor technology seems to have been cracked for all practical purposes which is why photos from the tiny sensors in the latest smartphones looks so damn good.

So what is the point of FF and indeed what is the point of limiting yourself to an antiquated film standard when Pentax, Fuji and Hasselblad have all demonstrated that you can now go MF and it is increasingly affordable?

Just my two cents.

LouisB
Click to expand...
I 100% agree Fuji should skip FF and that they made the correct decision in going to cropped MF as an upgrade to APS-C for the same reason that I believe Panasonic to FF (or even better would be Vista Vision sized which is about 41mmx22mm which is larger that FF but smaller than cropped MF) would make a lot of sense due to their video heritage. Fuji was really smart to go upmarket but undercut to top end by so much that they were essentially forced to drop their prices to compete. I noticed Phase One seems to have dropped the cropped MF sensors entirely at this point (unless they plan to use them exclusively for a Phase One Mirrorless camera). Hasselblad seems to have essentially brought the price of the X1D to match the GFX and it looks like the newer body style may be priced as low as $3500-4000 which puts it in the territory of mid-range DSLR/Mirrorless system cameras.

I would also agree that cellphones are the biggest threat to smaller sensors in system cameras with the cost of FF cameras being more attainable being the second largest threat. We are at the reality where we see Fuji reducing the price of the XT3 (likely due to competition from people jumping into FF Mirrorless systems from Sony and soon Nikon/Canon) and we see cameras like the G9 being discounted by 25% or more. Really the only Micro 4/3 camera I don’t see being discounted regularly is the GH series and I suspect that has more to due with uniqueness and the capability it has at a level most others can’t meet yet.
 
Last edited:
iiiNelson

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Vivek said:
Is that how a Panasonic user who claims to be a Nikonista is described? :rolleyes:

Loved my G1. Still have a couple of them around..
Click to expand...
I still have my G1 too though my battery charger seems to have been misplaced in the move. If I can’t find it then eventually I’ll just need to get another one.
 
iiiNelson

iiiNelson

Well-known member
k-hawinkler said:
BREAKING: Fujifilm X-T3 Specs Leaked – Blackout Free EVF at 30fps Continuous Shooting


https://www.fujirumors.com/breaking-fujifilm-x-t3-specs-leaked/
Click to expand...
I saw that but it looks like that’s limited to the 1.25x crop mode which would probably put it in the territory of the Micro 4/3 sensors. Even still it could be very impressive and brings us even closer to the days where we will just burst fire, and select the image we want essentially from short video clips.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Not everyone. The culprits are easily identified. Chief among them are the so called Zeiss lenses made by Cosina and Tamron. :thumbdown:

iiiNelson said:
That seems to be the standard for everyone and everything these days unfortunately for better or worse.
Click to expand...
 
iiiNelson

iiiNelson

Well-known member
ptomsu said:
Not interested at all - 30fps is only possible with 1.25 Crop - and that from an APSC sensor :thumbdown::thumbdown::thumbdown:
Click to expand...
I think you will find everything has a trade off somewhere. With the A9 it’s comparative dynamic range, with other Sony cameras it’s readout speed, with Nikon it’s card slots and limited native lens selection, with Canon it looks to be card slots and IBIS, with a Micro 4/3 it’s limited high ISO capability and smaller sensor size, with Medium Format it’s price and shooting speed... sometimes you just gotta pick a camera or be without one.
 
iiiNelson

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Vivek said:
Not everyone. The culprits are easily identified. Chief among them are the so called Zeiss lenses made by Cosina and Tamron. :thumbdown:
Click to expand...
Ehhh... I still find those Cosina/Tamron lenses to be excellent whether they say Zeiss, Voigtlander, Tamron, or whatever.
 
Jorgen Udvang

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
iiiNelson said:
Well there’s certainly a lot of opinion mixed into the history lesson but I’ll try to understand where you’re coming from.
Click to expand...
Of course there's opinion involved. That's the case for all history lessons. The conclucion however remains: Sony seems stuck at just over 10% market share, which isn't much more than they had with their DSLR effort, and far less than what they stated as their aim back then. That can't be satisfying, particularly after having had the full frame mirrorless market for themselves for several years.

As for claiming to be this or that, like a Nikonista, I'm a gear agnostic as well as a format agnostic. I use digital cameras from Panasonic, Olympus, Nikon and Fuji and film cameras from Nikon, Olympus Fuji and Mamiya, format varying from 4/3 to medium format 6 x 8. In a digital world, I find the "full frame" debate absurd, and Fuji is the proof of that. They live very well with their combination of APS and a cropped medium format. They never intended to go into 35mm, something their representatives have stated repeatedly. The 35mm format is a legacy from film, and even back then it was more of a coinsidence than a result of planning. Leica started using it because it existed as cinema film.

At the moment, I mostly use Panasonic, and I use their cameras because I like their ergonomics. I paid around $400 for each of my last two camera bodies (a GX8 and a GM5), and I'm reluctant to pay more, so a 35mm Panasonic will probably be on wait for a few years. I've done critical paid work the last three days with those cameras and mostly with cheap Panasonic plastic lenses. No state-of-the-art full frame wonder with $2,000 lenses would have done any difference whatsoever for that job.

And this is one of the reasons why the market shares in the camera market aren't likely to change much. People are mostly very happy with the gear they have. The few surprises we see mostly come from marginal players like Panasonic and Fuji, who have enough money in the bank to play these games and who don't risk losing huge market shares if they fail. Canikon will continue to deliver low risk products, and those who find their latest offerings boring should think a bit about what their actual market shares are. Together, they control almost three quarters of the ILC market, and they obviously want it to stay that way.

The new Panasonic camera is great news because it's unexpected, but I don't think it will do much for their market share, other than getting a few converts from Sony and Canon. What could be fun though would be if they chose a non-standard sensor size, like 16:9. That's obviously perfect for video, but would also be a potential digital X-Pan. In that case I might have to eat my words about only buying cheap, second hand camera bodies :facesmack:
 
iiiNelson

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Jorgen Udvang said:
Of course there's opinion involved. That's the case for all history lessons. The conclucion however remains: Sony seems stuck at just over 10% market share, which isn't much more than they had with their DSLR effort, and far less than what they stated as their aim back then. That can't be satisfying, particularly after having had the full frame mirrorless market for themselves for several years.

As for claiming to be this or that, like a Nikonista, I'm a gear agnostic as well as a format agnostic. I use digital cameras from Panasonic, Olympus, Nikon and Fuji and film cameras from Nikon, Olympus Fuji and Mamiya, format varying from 4/3 to medium format 6 x 8. In a digital world, I find the "full frame" debate absurd, and Fuji is the proof of that. They live very well with their combination of APS and a cropped medium format. They never intended to go into 35mm, something their representatives have stated repeatedly. The 35mm format is a legacy from film, and even back then it was more of a coinsidence than a result of planning. Leica started using it because it existed as cinema film.

At the moment, I mostly use Panasonic, and I use their cameras because I like their ergonomics. I paid around $400 for each of my last two camera bodies (a GX8 and a GM5), and I'm reluctant to pay more, so a 35mm Panasonic will probably be on wait for a few years. I've done critical paid work the last three days with those cameras and mostly with cheap Panasonic plastic lenses. No state-of-the-art full frame wonder with $2,000 lenses would have done any difference whatsoever for that job.

And this is one of the reasons why the market shares in the camera market aren't likely to change much. People are mostly very happy with the gear they have. The few surprises we see mostly come from marginal players like Panasonic and Fuji, who have enough money in the bank to play these games and who don't risk losing huge market shares if they fail. Canikon will continue to deliver low risk products, and those who find their latest offerings boring should think a bit about what their actual market shares are. Together, they control almost three quarters of the ILC market, and they obviously want it to stay that way.

The new Panasonic camera is great news because it's unexpected, but I don't think it will do much for their market share, other than getting a few converts from Sony and Canon. What could be fun though would be if they chose a non-standard sensor size, like 16:9. That's obviously perfect for video, but would also be a potential digital X-Pan. In that case I might have to eat my words about only buying cheap, second hand camera bodies :facesmack:
Click to expand...
I never accused you of being a Nikonistista myself but I think you will find most people here own and shoot multiple camera formats. I own Micro 4/3 and Sony on digital and Mamiya and Minolta for film that I still shoot.

The key being that Sony is trending in the correct direction for themselves. They may own a lower market share today BUT that will easily organically increase in an already declining market. For better or worse Sony is on a mission to be #1 and maybe they won’t get there but maybe they will. Earlier you brought up Sony killing innovation with the purchase of Toshiba sensor business... Sony May be many things but not innovating is something few would ever accuse them of. If anything there were complaints about innovating too quickly. No need to go round and round on this issue though.

I have no doubt Panasonic will make a great camera. I’ve long said there aren’t many bad cameras being made the last 5-10 years and I stand by that. I have no doubt you can make “professional images” with a consumer camera... many wedding shooters get by with the mid range Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. cameras on a daily basis.
 
pegelli

pegelli

Well-known member
Jorgen Udvang said:
Of course there's opinion involved. That's the case for all history lessons. The conclucion however remains: Sony seems stuck at just over 10% market share
Click to expand...
While your fact on Sony's market share is correct it's my opinion this has nothing to do with the 4 mistakes you mention, which in my book aren't even mistakes. So I don't buy your "history lesson" and classify it as just another opinionated rant. If they would not have made these "mistakes" (as you call them) their market share would be a whole lot lower or they might even have stopped their camera business. That would really have been a mistake ;)

Like Tré said, NEX were proof of principle for their mirrorless technology, everybody who wanted it learned the menu easily, only Sony bashers who didn't really try weren't able to figure it out :lecture:.
SLT's weren't to everone's liking but with the A99, A77ii and A99ii people who stayed with A-mount and liked (or didn't mind an EVF) have some very competent cameras to use their lenses on. Market share might be low but the people I know who have one like them a lot.
And without the A7 I firmly belive that today there would not have been Nikon Z, Canon FF mirrorless or Panasonic FF mirrorless announcements. I don't think Leica SL and/or Leica M would have accomplished a similar mirrorless FF revolution.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top