Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How interested are you in a GH6 anymore?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by Zim View Post

    yes on a DSLR, but a phone doesn't and it has a real camera.
    can you change your exposure settings as quickly on a phone as you can on a DSLR? rhetorical question
    www.VideoAbe.com

    "If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech." - Noam Chomsky

    Comment


      Originally posted by NorBro View Post
      He's saying he wants the buttons (which many people do), presumably even on a phone if he had to use one for work.
      correct, although this tangent got started with a discussion of what an Apple-made CAMERA camera would be like. I'm sure it would have more than one button. I'm just a little apprehensive of how their neurotic design philosophy would interact with the operational requirements of an actual camera
      www.VideoAbe.com

      "If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech." - Noam Chomsky

      Comment


        There is nothing that's faster to operate than a mirrorless with dedicated dials and buttons which control 4-8-12 features in seconds.

        A phone will never compare until you can control it with your brain.

        Comment


          Originally posted by NorBro View Post
          There is nothing that's faster to operate than a mirrorless with dedicated dials and buttons which control 4-8-12 features in seconds.

          A phone will never compare until you can control it with your brain.
          For sure ,yes on the last point, yes on the first point as well- in comparison to a phone. But either is still far more painful than a camcorder configuration IMO. I'm apparently quite the (dwindling) minority.

          Comment


            I think many would agree with you but they are a part of the older generation, especially the ones who grew up in the business using shoulder cameras.

            Camcorders can be fast like with with aperture or zooming, but still can't dial in WB as quickly or shutter speed, IMO. (Although preset WBs with switches is fast, and you could do the same with mirrorless' and programmed buttons, I like a dial that can variably control it, or a ring like on a RF lens.)

            And most camcorders don't have quick controls to operate/engage certain functions like eye-AF (or which eye), or IBIS, or S35mm crops from full-frame sensors, or S&Q - but to be fair most camcorders don't get those features.

            The new camcorders probably are better, but they still aren't as blazing fast as mirrorless' for those born into those cameras. And the IQ is still pretty poor, IMO.

            Comment


              Originally posted by NorBro View Post
              There is nothing that's faster to operate than a mirrorless with dedicated dials and buttons which control 4-8-12 features in seconds.

              A phone will never compare until you can control it with your brain.
              Right, and James once put up a dissection of various proper video cameras showing how the primary exposure controls and other functions were all located around the hand positions
              www.VideoAbe.com

              "If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech." - Noam Chomsky

              Comment


                Originally posted by hotchkiss View Post

                For sure ,yes on the last point, yes on the first point as well- in comparison to a phone. But either is still far more painful than a camcorder configuration IMO. I'm apparently quite the (dwindling) minority.
                I broadly agree with you

                I don't know about FAR more painful. The things the mirrorless can control on body are just as fast or faster. When you have to menu dig, it's painful.

                Part of it is real estate--theres more space on a camcorder for audio controls, etc. Part of it is rhat mirrorless are designed first for photo. It is what it is
                www.VideoAbe.com

                "If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech." - Noam Chomsky

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Ron Evans View Post

                  With lens those are at least twice the cost of a GH5. Also they are 3 years younger than the GH5. Of course the GH5M2 can do those things too and again half the price of those cameras. In fact you could buy 3 GH5M2 for the cost of a single Canon C70. Price has to come into the equation.
                  Well the lenses will generally cost more because they
                  have to cover a full frame or APSC sensor and not the relatively small m4/3 sensor. But you are severely overstating
                  things. Plenty of the lenses cost much less than ‘twice
                  the cost of a GH5.’ And the GH5M2 can’t do everything
                  those cameras can too as it doesn’t have anywhere near the
                  low light ability, these do. Can it shoot 4K 120 at 10 bit 4.2.2? Can it shoot full frame? Can it’s autofocus live up to the Sony
                  and Canon standard? No? Well then no wonder it’s half
                  the cost. It’s older technology. And price only comes into
                  the equation for those that can’t afford the more expensive
                  one…. Like with most things. Why would anyone ever
                  buy a Sacher tripod? I mean, you could buy 3 Benro’s
                  for the same price…..

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by alaskacameradude View Post

                    Well the lenses will generally cost more because they
                    have to cover a full frame or APSC sensor and not the relatively small m4/3 sensor. But you are severely overstating
                    things. Plenty of the lenses cost much less than ‘twice
                    the cost of a GH5.’ And the GH5M2 can’t do everything
                    those cameras can too as it doesn’t have anywhere near the
                    low light ability, these do. Can it shoot 4K 120 at 10 bit 4.2.2? Can it shoot full frame? Can it’s autofocus live up to the Sony
                    and Canon standard? No? Well then no wonder it’s half
                    the cost. It’s older technology. And price only comes into
                    the equation for those that can’t afford the more expensive
                    one…. Like with most things. Why would anyone ever
                    buy a Sacher tripod? I mean, you could buy 3 Benro’s
                    for the same price…..
                    I think you missed my point completely., You were being very specific about 10bit, etc and quoting a set of cameras. My response was specific to the points you made not to the other attributes of those cameras. Clearly something that costs almost 4 times as much had better excel at something ! It obviously depends on what you want the camera to do. If it does things you do not need or use it is clearly not the camera for you. Especially if it cost 3 times as much. For me the Nikon Z9 is the perfect example. I would like 8K ( it will do that next year sometime ! ) It has a whole lot of stills features I will never use. From a technology point of view I can appreciate what a lovely piece of equipment but I have no intention of even considering it for my use. I have no need for shallow depth of field so actually a full frame camera could be more work for me making sure I have good depth of field. Shutting down the iris to get that depth of field will of course also change the low light capabilities. Faster lens on MFT is a better solution for me. Same comment on tripods. If the application is fixed with no movement then maybe the Benro's are the best choice. They will be lighter to carry around !!

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by ahalpert View Post
                      The demand for interchangeable-lens cameras has not changed much in the last 10 years. Presumably, this is the pro segment that can't effectively replace their gear with a phone.
                      ILC sales in units went from about 20 million in 2012 to about 5 million in 2021. From the general coverage, it appears that the low end/sub-$1,000 MFT and APS-C models have almost disappeared. Sony even paused the production of A6100 and A6400 at the moment. The cartel is pretty much committed to the $1,000-$2,500 range as their bread&butter.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Ron Evans View Post

                        I think you missed my point completely., You were being very specific about 10bit, etc and quoting a set of cameras. My response was specific to the points you made not to the other attributes of those cameras. Clearly something that costs almost 4 times as much had better excel at something ! It obviously depends on what you want the camera to do. If it does things you do not need or use it is clearly not the camera for you. Especially if it cost 3 times as much. For me the Nikon Z9 is the perfect example. I would like 8K ( it will do that next year sometime ! ) It has a whole lot of stills features I will never use. From a technology point of view I can appreciate what a lovely piece of equipment but I have no intention of even considering it for my use. I have no need for shallow depth of field so actually a full frame camera could be more work for me making sure I have good depth of field. Shutting down the iris to get that depth of field will of course also change the low light capabilities. Faster lens on MFT is a better solution for me. Same comment on tripods. If the application is fixed with no movement then maybe the Benro's are the best choice. They will be lighter to carry around !!
                        The reason I was being specific about 10 bit
                        etc and quoting a set of cameras is because
                        you had made a claim that there wasn’t a camera
                        that had great autofocus and could still do what the
                        GH5 could with its 10 bit codecs etc. So I thought
                        ‘maybe he’s unaware of these cameras, they just
                        came out in the last year after all and not everyone
                        keeps up on every new camera release.’
                        But maybe it seems maybe that wasn’t the case
                        after all. I do wonder about the comment that
                        ‘closing down the iris to get the deep depth of
                        field will of course change the low light capabilities.
                        Faster lens on MFT is a better solution for me.’
                        Wouldn’t that then give you the shallow
                        depth of field you are trying to avoid? Seems to
                        me that the larger sensors can do the same things
                        MFT can but you have the option to open up and do
                        other things that MFT cant. The FX9 will even allow
                        you to crop in on its FF chip to a pretty small
                        portion if you want to use certain lenses on
                        it, gain more reach or whatever. Obviously that
                        camera is in another league but it just illustrates
                        the point that bigger sensors have the flexibility to do what
                        a smaller sensor can do, plus much more. Maybe
                        you personally don’t care about the extra features,
                        but the industry as a whole does…which is why
                        larger sensors are ‘the new rage’ and MFT is
                        slowly fading away.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by DLD View Post

                          ILC sales in units went from about 20 million in 2012 to about 5 million in 2021. From the general coverage, it appears that the low end/sub-$1,000 MFT and APS-C models have almost disappeared. Sony even paused the production of A6100 and A6400 at the moment. The cartel is pretty much committed to the $1,000-$2,500 range as their bread&butter.
                          not sure of the numbers, but the decline doesn't look that steep in this chart

                          5782.jpg
                          www.VideoAbe.com

                          "If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech." - Noam Chomsky

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by ahalpert View Post
                            not sure of the numbers, but the decline doesn't look that steep in this chart
                            These are the exact numbers from CIPA (should I bother with arithmetic, 'cos I am just eyeballing the totals) for the first 10 months of 2021 but one could project the last two months just by averaging the percentages). DSC (i.e., P&S) are first, then ILC's. It looks to be around 5.5 million for 2021. Now, granted, the chart is up and down because of the post Covid recovery but the ILC's look to be about 50% off 2019.

                            https://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/dw-202110_e.pdf

                            https://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d_2012_e.pdf

                            The last line is for 2012, 98M total, 78 DCS + 20 ILC.
                            Last edited by DLD; 12-10-2021, 10:45 PM.

                            Comment


                              Looks like 20 million ILCs in 2012 down to 8.5ish in 2019. About a 60% collapse. P&S camera shipments declined from 79 million to 6.7 million in the same time period, a 91% decline.

                              Camera companies are currently shipping nearly twice as many ILCs as P&S's. No wonder they love the pros so much suddenly!

                              I'm not willing to include 2020 and 2021 numbers in a trend analysis because there could be a rebound after the pandemic. If there is an after.
                              Last edited by ahalpert; 12-10-2021, 11:18 PM.
                              www.VideoAbe.com

                              "If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech." - Noam Chomsky

                              Comment


                                I haven't looked at the charts or graphs but do we know the price brackets?

                                Because if we don't, any analyzations are muddy. There are a good amount of ~$500-ish ILCs that replaced P&Ss by default and they may be clumped together with the pro sales.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X