NorBro
Major Contributor
Pretty much everything here is wrong or already mentioned besides the last part about why overheating exists and purchasing another camera.
Yes, tell your friend that.
GH5 How interested are you in a GH6 anymore?
- Thread starter filmguy123
- Start date
Pretty much everything here is wrong or already mentioned besides the last part about why overheating exists and purchasing another camera.
Yes, tell your friend that.
Peter C.
Veteran
Yes basically the practice of taking the same sensor/inner tech and segmenting it into multiple specialized cameras so model x is for video, model y photography, cinema raw model z, hybrid model h. But they don't want to sell you one camera that can do all three.
R5/R6 primarily photos with limited video. I think the primary target of R5/R6 was news agencies and freelancers who are required to take photos and videos.
R5c will be Canon's equivalent to Sony A7s3 or Fx3. the video version of their FF photography centric camera
Last edited:
NorBro
Major Contributor
Canon's high-end mirrorless' have a lot of great features which make them very close to doing it all besides having ND filters and professional connections some people may need.
But a camera like a R3 has more video resolution than any of their cinema cameras (for now), better AF, RAW recording, IS, etc. - and of course it's a stills masterpiece (for most purposes).
But it's $6,000 (as mentioned above) and that's the kind of money they want you to spend for a stills camera that shoots video...not $2500 chump change in their eyes.
Unlike Panasonic (for the most part), you need to spend more money with Canon to have everyday features you might already be expecting.
Before the R5/R6, they were absolutely the worst at giving you anything for little money.
But a camera like a R3 has more video resolution than any of their cinema cameras (for now), better AF, RAW recording, IS, etc. - and of course it's a stills masterpiece (for most purposes).
But it's $6,000 (as mentioned above) and that's the kind of money they want you to spend for a stills camera that shoots video...not $2500 chump change in their eyes.
Unlike Panasonic (for the most part), you need to spend more money with Canon to have everyday features you might already be expecting.
Before the R5/R6, they were absolutely the worst at giving you anything for little money.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
What is your problem? Some of us are trying to have a conversation and you are extremely rude and aggressive. I am here to share information just like everyone else. If you don't like it you don't have to read it. I'm not harassing you and you need to chill out a bit. You act as if only you have the answers and nobody else can have an opinion.
Peter C.
Veteran
He rudely dismisses everyone's opinion out of hand.
NorBro
Major Contributor
Yeah, I dismiss yours a lot because you never think outside the box.
Your opinions are almost always questionable.
Like in the last post...
- The information stops writing on the card long before the battery is pulled.
- You don't pull the battery while recording!
- You have a long warning when overheating comes on giving you plenty of time to do whatever you need.
- You can offset the camera on a cheese plate to access the battery door without removing it. (If it's on a gibmal, OKAY, more of an issue.)
But you don't consider that, do you?
NorBro
Major Contributor
There are like 4 people. The forum is dead.
I apologize, but I've lost my patience with you because I don't think you're very smart.
Do you want me to show you how many times you've quoted me going against something I'm saying or saying something that was inaccurate? (Like a non-opinion that you thought was an opinion but it's because you didn't know otherwise?)
Or show me how many times I've quoted you going against something you're saying when you haven't initiated contact first.
I've repeatedly tried to drop it and said things like "whatever you say", or told you that you write too much to maybe discourage you in continuing the "conversation".
I promise you won't be hearing from me anymore so you can have the last word and it will end there.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
You have been reported four times now for your rudeness and aggressive attitude. I made sure to quote you here in case you delete your posts.
Your attitude is uncalled for. You and I have been here long enough to know what is acceptable and civil discussions. I'm not sure what suddenly got into you but it really is uncalled for. I'm not sure what I said that pushed your buttons. I thought we were having a nice dialogue but apparently you didn't feel the same way. In all my years on this forum I don't think I have ever once had someone tell me they don't think I am very smart. Pretty sure that violates a lot of the rules of the forum.
You are the one that insists the GH6 will fail and is over priced. Some of us point out cold hard factual reasons why that may not be true and you immediacy shot that down as stupid and foolish. If you want the GH6 to fail so badly why are you even here? If you think I'm not very smart because I think the GH6 has a future and because I think some affordable RF lenses are good options then I really don't know how to respond to that. I'm not going to get into a fight you clearly want to have.
NorBro
Major Contributor
See, Thomas, those are the kind of things that pushed me...you write whatever you want to write and it's not right.
It's like you sometimes write the exact opposite of what I'm saying.
I never wanted the GH6 to fail. I just told you a few pages back I want it to succeed. Post #1370.
Thinking it might fail (or could be overpriced) for various reasons is different, but I love Panasonic and I so badly want the GH6 to be amazing.
There are a lot of things said above that are misrepresentations or based on hypothetical thought-processes (and I mentioned the camera was $2K and it drops to $1700 every month), but it's all good...whatever you say. I want the GH6 to succeed.
Even in that post/thread section above, I said the S5 was $2K and the first thing you answer back was telling me the camera is $2K.
You don't listen. And you don't learn. And you've pushed me to this reaction, multiple times.
___
I've seen you "report" like 6 people on this forum so at some point it's probably best to save those for something more substantial.
But I'm LOLing it's me.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Oh I thought you were done.
What is incorrect to you? Just because you don't like something I post doesn't mean its incorrect. Earlier I said the 50mm f1.8 gets better as its stopped down which is true. I was off by a stop when it starts to look closer to the f1.2. I'm not sure how thats incorrect to the point of you getting aggressive and being rude telling people they are not smart. Not even sure why this is an argument worth having right now. I know exactly how lens optics works. Sometimes there is more to a lens than just detail. Of course I would love to have the f1.2 but I cannot afford it right now. For a budget 50mm the f1.8 is better than expected, thats all.
I never said the 24-240 was a perfect lens. I said its a good lens and surprisingly does very well for what it is. Other professional reviews have said the same thing. We all know there is better. Again how am I incorrect in that statement?
I listed reasons why I think the GH6 can compete with an equally priced FF body. You think I'm incorrect in that. You can have an opinion that those points are not valid but you can't be rude about it. I think new system lens cost is a huge factor. Pretty sure Panasonic feels the same way about it. Again you think I'm incorrect in that which is your opinion but you doin't have the right to be offensive about it.
If I don't believe you are correct I will write the opposite of it. Thats not an attack on you. Its called debating details. You are not the end all voice of all things camera related. You might like to think you are but trust me you are not. Neither am I. I use my 20+ year experience to give information and opinions to help people. Sometimes I'm right and sometimes I am wrong. What I would never do is tell someone they are not very smart just because they do not agree with me.
This is the one and final warning. Stop the personal attacks back and forth immediately, or risk being barred from this thread.
Talk about issues, not people.
You all know the rules, so please follow them.
Thank you.
Talk about issues, not people.
You all know the rules, so please follow them.
Thank you.
NorBro
Major Contributor
A tiny bit from a Japanese magazine:
“the market is shrinking significantly or is in a structural recession. Many companies are in the red or have a significant decline in profits.”
https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/som...ions-for-2022/
___
Can't confirm if that quote is 100% pulled from the magazine (or translated correctly), but it's interesting the word 'many' was used.
There are only a few Japanese [camera] companies and although a decline in profits is assumed, I wonder who's really in the red, or what that may mean in a certain non-traditional, adjusted context.
“the market is shrinking significantly or is in a structural recession. Many companies are in the red or have a significant decline in profits.”
https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/som...ions-for-2022/
___
Can't confirm if that quote is 100% pulled from the magazine (or translated correctly), but it's interesting the word 'many' was used.
There are only a few Japanese [camera] companies and although a decline in profits is assumed, I wonder who's really in the red, or what that may mean in a certain non-traditional, adjusted context.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
I'm not sure if there is a specific advantage to RF lenses, but I think that newer lens designs are better in general. Im assuming that computers are to thank and that engineers haven't yet squeezed all the improvements they can get out of software- and computer-aided design. Then there are AF motor improvements.
But I do think there may be advantages for wide angle lenses from a short flange length. And maybe they can make telephoto lenses smaller for the same reason, I'm not sure
Last edited:
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Agreed, but can you program a wheel to do it? I have shutter speed wheel programmed to WB, aperture wheel as is, and rear dial for ISO
NorBro
Major Contributor
Something tells me 'no', but I don't remember, to be honest. Or I think you could program it to a button but you can't exactly use it as a dial/wheel, but you just use a button to initiate the setting and then you have to use the dial again, IDR.
But I can tell you Sony's and Panasonic's mirrorless camera button/dial/wheel programmability is elite compared to Canon's.
Canon's was atrocious before the R5/R6, which are much better, but still hindered.
a6300 was the beginning for Sony's brilliance with this followed by Panasonic's GH5/S.
I was really impressed with the GH5S options...so many, in so many places...almost whatever you want.
But I can tell you Sony's and Panasonic's mirrorless camera button/dial/wheel programmability is elite compared to Canon's.
Canon's was atrocious before the R5/R6, which are much better, but still hindered.
a6300 was the beginning for Sony's brilliance with this followed by Panasonic's GH5/S.
I was really impressed with the GH5S options...so many, in so many places...almost whatever you want.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Have you used Black Frost? It's a very sexy look. Just a bit of gloss and halation. I haven't used it in a long time because I have a 4x4 which means matte box.. plus it cuts a lot of light. But it's hardly a gimmick.
Now you've got me thinking of using my screw-in Black Satin filters on my new years eve wedding.. they're even more subtle,, but perfect for smoothing skin.. I'm largely happy with what I'm getting at weddings, but I think my close-ups could use some extra kindness, especially on folks who aren't in their 20s. Maybe I can use these filters for daytime. We'll see how the AF handles it.
I've noticed a lot of wedding videos have kind of harsh looking skin, especially if they're going for a high-contrast look, which seems to be the style these days. (Not my preferred style... Instagram influence? I've noticed a lot of wedding photographers doing sharp, high-contrast stuff with strong rim light or backlight. I imagine they do it to pop off a small screen better...)
Papert, for example, says he's partial to using Black Diffusion FX or Glimmerglass. You may not have influence in the edit. Softening skin can take time. Etc