Panasonic S5

[Peter C.]

I shoot with deep focus to avoid this issue. Also, most people realize that part of a live event is focus pulling, even in television you see this often. So....

The point I was trying to make, if you get a full frame camera like the S5, the dof is a lot shallower and then you either need something like a Ninja V monitor to be able to pull focus or you rely on the AF and facial tracking. 4k full frame you start to notice if the focus is off. Everything is trade offs. Full frame with a fast lens gives you low noise under existing lighting but tricky maintaining focus. There's a reason the S5 is that cheap because the AF isn't as good as Canon or Sony. Is their AF worth the extra money...?

 

[NorBro]

FF doesn't automatically = shallow DOF at all times. And he said he shoots deep.

A lot of MFT cameras are used with Speed Boosters or very fast primes at faster speeds - f/1.2, f/1.4 - and I see FF cameras being used at f/2.8, f/4+ (either by choice or by lens), and the difference actually ends up being less in the grand scheme of things than you'd expect on paper.

Where full-frame becomes unmatched is for photographers with portrait lenses shooting wide open with excellent AF, and also at wider focal lengths and faster speeds where S35 or less can't compete (like a 20mm FF f/1.4 lens).

 

[Tom Roper]

I'm one who does use the BMD Pocket 6K for weddings. From the right side grip I have full control of Iris, Shutter, ISO, WB, One Push AF, Focus Peaking, Focus Magnification, False Color Metering, Off Speed Recording (slo-mo), and Record/Stop, Single Photo. Never have to touch a menu or even move a hand from the grip. Most of the settings can be changed in mid shot without stopping. My left hand rides the zoom and focus rings, all the time. For stabilization my "rig" rides on top of a Benro monopod with feet and fluid head, quick release latches, and I carry just two Canon zoom lenses, 17-55 F2.8 IS and 70-200 F4.0L IS. There is an Amaran F1 on-cam led w/variable 3200-9500K and dimmer 0-100% for daylight fill, the sunset photos, the sendoff, or anytime it could be helpful or wanted. I can shoot 400 minutes of continuous 4K-UHD 24p Prores LT onto a 1 TB SSD without changing a battery or a media card; power supplied from V-mount battery with D-tap attached to the monopod, 7 hours run time without ever switching the camera off. My back, arms and wrists are not aching because the monopod is supporting the weight, 3 steps; lift, place and shoot. There's a place for it wherever I have room to stand, even the seats. I can raise it overhead for the Horah (chair lift), or Hindu ceremonies, can even bring it down on top of your head to get your attention, :smile:

I'm paid to deliver the whole event, not just highlights. Gimbals are nice for walking, so too the monopod has a degree of stabilizing influence to pick up and walk with it but the main advantage again, is that it's a mobile camera support so that I don't get brutalized by holding its weight for the duration of the toasts, which can run on and on...just like this post.

 

[ahalpert]

I put my Ronin-S on a light stand for the toasts and parts of the ceremony and use it like a tripod. Then I can detach the stud from the stand and quickly start gimballing around.

Another good reason for FF is low-light. I never use an on-camera light and never need off-camera lights. Some companies request them and some companies insist that I dont use lighting because they do fly on the wall shooting.

I shoot long takes and nobody has ever complained about not being able to cut a full-length edit from my footage. It's not that difficult to keep your subjects in focus at reasonable DOF (say 50mm f/2.8-4). But selective focus is an excellent compositional tool to have at your disposal.

Usually during the rest of the day besides the ceremony, I will have 2 cameras: one on tripod/70-200 and one on gimbal on a normal prime or midrange zoom. Between those two rigs I can get basically everything I want.

Gimbal is not just useful for walking. what if you want to circle your subject or track in in them/it? Or just reposition quickly and while maintaining a perfectly usable shot?

I also use the gimbal much like a monopod when I want to be stationary. I can reposition it and frame it very quickly and then maintain a stable position. You lose the control of the fluid head but there is decent pan/tilt control with the joystick. And the other camera is on the tights anyway.

It is a lot of weight to manage but I'm stronger than average (though not like those jacked legit steadicam ops). If I can get to a place where I'm supporting the Ronin-S with two hands instead of just one with the other operating the focus wheel, I will be so set.

 

[Tom Roper]

I'm with you Abe, was just somewhat disputing notions that BMD were all that unwieldly when it can be quite effective. I wouldn't be doing it if otherwise. My hands are a bit large and I've had some problems especially with small body M43 and lenses and servo focus. Also, I didn't say I needed an on-camera light, just that I have one on there. The Pocket 6k is not a slouch in low light, dual iso is clean at 3200. I don't use it like a key which would be ugly, but more like a fill which adds beauty to daylight shots, twilight or anytime you think it would add something, switch it on and use the dimmer to add just the desired fill. I have a Zhiyun Crane, I put a quick release plate on the handle so I can put it on a tripod and stow it with a GH5S mounted. You're right, for what a gimbal does nothing else really can, but I had decided except for some b-roll or circling the bride as you said, it's not always essential, and my priority has morphed into a strategy for trying to make do with less equipment. For the P6K, I keep a quick release plate on it but also on the Canon 70-200 lens ring mount. When I want to shoot something with it from a fixed angle, I leave the lens attached to the tripod and just attach the camera body to it, and maybe then shoot with the gimbal/GH5S rig. Some recent weddings shot at farms and ranches, wedding ceremony is in a pasture, reception in a courtyard, dinner in the barn, parking in left field, spread out all over the place, use a utility wagon to cart stuff around, it's hard to keep an eye on everything or close at hand as it is, toting around several audio recorders, mic's, XLR cables, spares, DJ's, house PA, lavaliers, extension cords, backups. That's the reason behind the focus on going minimalist, doing the most with the least equipment, saving time from swapping cards and batteries, having what I need with me all the time, on my rig and a small shoulder bag. I used to carry around a pair of LED panels with remote control for the reception or sometimes toasts, but this was a hassle and a distraction when I could be shooting b-roll. And much of the time it was for the benefit of the other shooter, and to the dismay of the DJ who would want me to switch them off so he could light. The other benefit of on-cam light, is when it can help clear the guests from getting in front of the camera blocking my shots. They see the light, and it's the miracle of the parting of the Red Sea.

 

[Thomas Smet]

The point I was trying to make, if you get a full frame camera like the S5, the dof is a lot shallower and then you either need something like a Ninja V monitor to be able to pull focus or you rely on the AF and facial tracking. 4k full frame you start to notice if the focus is off. Everything is trade offs. Full frame with a fast lens gives you low noise under existing lighting but tricky maintaining focus. There's a reason the S5 is that cheap because the AF isn't as good as Canon or Sony. Is their AF worth the extra money...?

I don't think that is true at all. There are still lots of people that do not believe in auto focus. I'm not sure when auto focus became some kind of norm in the professional world. The S5 is more affordable because of lots of reasons. Auto focus is not typically a reason for a camera to be cost more or less than others. The S5 is more affordable because it utilizes technology the R&D has already been covered for with the other models using the same sensor and components. Its a remix of some of those components/features and cuts a few corners so it can cost less.

 

[Thomas Smet]

The point I was trying to make, if you get a full frame camera like the S5, the dof is a lot shallower and then you either need something like a Ninja V monitor to be able to pull focus or you rely on the AF and facial tracking. 4k full frame you start to notice if the focus is off. Everything is trade offs. Full frame with a fast lens gives you low noise under existing lighting but tricky maintaining focus. There's a reason the S5 is that cheap because the AF isn't as good as Canon or Sony. Is their AF worth the extra money...?

Keep in mind there are people shooting run&gun weddings with cinema and BMD cameras with absolutely no continuous autofocus and they do great. We should be spending more time to learn to focus vs complaining about not having perfect autofocus.

 

[ahalpert]

I don't think that is true at all. There are still lots of people that do not believe in auto focus. I'm not sure when auto focus became some kind of norm in the professional world. The S5 is more affordable because of lots of reasons. Auto focus is not typically a reason for a camera to be cost more or less than others. The S5 is more affordable because it utilizes technology the R&D has already been covered for with the other models using the same sensor and components. Its a remix of some of those components/features and cuts a few corners so it can cost less.

One of the reasons it's more affordable is because full-frame Lumix cameras are in low demand. One of the reasons they're in low demand is the relatively poor autofocus. autofocus became useful when it became good. I don't think it's the norm in the "professional" world....yet. but $2k is not the norm either.

 

[Peter C.]

I don't think that is true at all. There are still lots of people that do not believe in auto focus. I'm not sure when auto focus became some kind of norm in the professional world. The S5 is more affordable because of lots of reasons. Auto focus is not typically a reason for a camera to be cost more or less than others. The S5 is more affordable because it utilizes technology the R&D has already been covered for with the other models using the same sensor and components. Its a remix of some of those components/features and cuts a few corners so it can cost less.

Keep in mind there are people shooting run&gun weddings with cinema and BMD cameras with absolutely no continuous autofocus and they do great. We should be spending more time to learn to focus vs complaining about not having perfect autofocus.

You're looking at AF in old school terms. Which is fine but your views don't reflect the marketplace or the current style of shooting. The target audience for these cameras are vloggers, youtubers, and video freelancers. Most of the time you will be shooting solo and might not be even be operating the camera because you're filming yourself. Same holds true for event work, in low light, outdoors, gimbal. Under these conditions AF is big benefit and selling point. People are now use to great AF on their smart phone, so to spend 3-5x the price on a high end camera that can't perform as well...

In addition to AF, the lens cost and options are not great. Panasonic had to offer a lower price to stay competitive.

All that said the color and image quality is tempting at this price. For the same price you could buy a Sony A7iii. I haven't made up my mind about the S5 AF. I have seen some videos where it's terrible and others its great. If I got it, it would be for event gimbal work.

 

[Thomas Smet]

One of the reasons it's more affordable is because full-frame Lumix cameras are in low demand. One of the reasons they're in low demand is the relatively poor autofocus. autofocus became useful when it became good. I don't think it's the norm in the "professional" world....yet. but $2k is not the norm either.

I think that's kind of speculation. There are lots of reasons why these cameras are in low demand. The fact that they are Panasonic and use a brand new L mount and the lenses cost a ton are much bigger factors than the autofocus. It may be true that autofocus is a factor for some people but the m43 GH cameras had the same autofocus and were very popular for video. I know a lot of people that preferred shooting with the GH5 over a FF Sony camera due to look, menus and features. Back then the GH5 wasn't really any more affordable either.

I would love a S5 for many of the same reasons why I love Panasonic GH cameras. Only thing holding me back is the lens cost and the potential future of the L mount.

 

[Thomas Smet]

You're looking at AF in old school terms. Which is fine but your views don't reflect the marketplace or the current style of shooting. The target audience for these cameras are vloggers, youtubers, and video freelancers. Most of the time you will be shooting solo and might not be even be operating the camera because you're filming yourself. Same holds true for event work, in low light, outdoors, gimbal. Under these conditions AF is big benefit and selling point. People are now use to great AF on their smart phone, so to spend 3-5x the price on a high end camera that can't perform as well...

In addition to AF, the lens cost and options are not great. Panasonic had to offer a lower price to stay competitive.

All that said the color and image quality is tempting at this price. For the same price you could buy a Sony A7iii. I haven't made up my mind about the S5 AF. I have seen some videos where it's terrible and others its great. If I got it, it would be for event gimbal work.

I have shot solo for event work with no autofocus for years. There is a huge wedding market that shoots with cinema cameras with absolutely no autofocus options.

While it may be true that there is a larger market today that wants to cut corners and use autofocus that does not apply to every user. Maybe I am old school in the fact that we actually practiced and developed skill to call ourselves professional.

Why on Earth is a vlogger using a FF camera anyway? I see little to no advantage of using a FF camera for that.

I also choose a camera based on the overall look and not auto features. Sony may have amazing autofocus but I absolutely can not stand the Sony look or the user experience of using their cameras. Panasonic cameras to me just feel right and natural to use. Yeah better autofocus would be nice at times but not at the expense of sacrificing the other aspects of a camera.

I'm actually now considering getting a S5 and a EF adapter to use more affordable EF lenses. I will use the bundled 20-60 lens when possible and switch to EF lenses for now. Eventually I might buy more L lenses but to be honest I don't see that mount going very far. Thankfully EF lenses can be electronically controlled so there is hope for the body. Since I would adapt EF lenses to a GH5s for about the same price, the S5 seems like a killer gain over the GH5s which adds the missing IBIS and vastly better stills. The two things that held me back from getting a GH5s.

 

[ahalpert]

I have shot solo for event work with no autofocus for years. There is a huge wedding market that shoots with cinema cameras with absolutely no autofocus options.

While it may be true that there is a larger market today that wants to cut corners and use autofocus that does not apply to every user. Maybe I am old school in the fact that we actually practiced and developed skill to call ourselves professional.

Why on Earth is a vlogger using a FF camera anyway? I see little to no advantage of using a FF camera for that.

I also choose a camera based on the overall look and not auto features. Sony may have amazing autofocus but I absolutely can not stand the Sony look or the user experience of using their cameras. Panasonic cameras to me just feel right and natural to use. Yeah better autofocus would be nice at times but not at the expense of sacrificing the other aspects of a camera.

I'm actually now considering getting a S5 and a EF adapter to use more affordable EF lenses. I will use the bundled 20-60 lens when possible and switch to EF lenses for now. Eventually I might buy more L lenses but to be honest I don't see that mount going very far. Thankfully EF lenses can be electronically controlled so there is hope for the body. Since I would adapt EF lenses to a GH5s for about the same price, the S5 seems like a killer gain over the GH5s which adds the missing IBIS and vastly better stills. The two things that held me back from getting a GH5s.

Ah so you like IBIS? Why not practice and develop the skills to hold the camera steady? (Jk)

Autofocus isn't about cutting corners. It's about performance enhancements. I just used the A7SIII for the first time last weekend and I've never had a good video AF camera before. The AF let me move through shots faster, get my frame rolling sooner, catch impromptu moments (smiles, etc) that I usually miss or catch the end of, nail difficult focus pulls without buzzing focus, and also lessen the mental energy I put into focus, leaving me more processing power for framing and preventing me from getting mentally fatigued as quickly. (After all, at some point they started making lenses with 2 CPUs, 1 to handle AF and 1 to handle IS to reduce strain on the single CPU.) It literally made shooting a more joyful experience for me (marginally).

And if the AF wasn't working for the shot, I just switched it off and went back to pulling manually with my DJI focus motor. I used to AC and I'm a good focus puller. But I've seen the best focus pullers buzz focus on shallow DOF walk and talks that Canon/Sony AF would have nailed. It's just another tool in the toolbox. I had good footage before, I'm just trying to make it better.

I have a GH2, GH4, and a GH5. I had an S1 but sold it because it didnt have no-crop 4k60 or good AF. (There were no options available at the time that did.) I prefer Panny color or, better yet, Canon, but I think that the advantage is overhyped.

The main issues I've always had with Sony mirrorless were low bitrate and bit-depth and slow rolling shutter. Those are all fixed now. The IBIS is still worse but I can live with that.

So, don't mistake the reasoning or underestimate the usefulness. (Plus, Komodo is essentially a cine camera and it has PDAF, and future REDs are almost certain to follow.)

But there's little sense arguing over our respective needs and approaches. Nobody will budge there or need to budge. And, in a way, we'll each be vindicated. You by having more pleasing color (at least sometimes). And me by nailing tougher focus pulls (at least sometimes).

 

[Peter C.]

I've noticed when someone is getting ready to buy a camera they get very defensive any criticism of that camera. It's like a replay of the R5 only replace over heating with bad AF. There is no perfect camera. If you love manual focus and want the S5 then go for it. We all don't do the same work or film in the same way, so it's only natural we like different cameras. If it makes you feel better 90% of my work I don't use AF, but I don't consider that a badge of honor. It's a tool that you use when it's needed.

 

[Samuel H]

If this was only about image quality, I'd have very little incentive to ever buy another camera: my p4k is not only "good enough", it's way better than I actually need.
But yes I would like to get a new camera at some point: one that has good AF and frees me from a task that requires a lot of dedication and attention but 90% of the time has no artistic value added (for the other 10% I can still switch to MF if the AF is not good enough).

 

[Thomas Smet]

I've noticed when someone is getting ready to buy a camera they get very defensive any criticism of that camera. It's like a replay of the R5 only replace over heating with bad AF. There is no perfect camera. If you love manual focus and want the S5 then go for it. We all don't do the same work or film in the same way, so it's only natural we like different cameras. If it makes you feel better 90% of my work I don't use AF, but I don't consider that a badge of honor. It's a tool that you use when it's needed.

My only criticism is I don't think its fair to say the autofocus is why the S5 costs less. The S1H has the same type of autofocus and costs a lot more. I realize autofocus is important to some people but I don't think it factors into camera price at all.

 

[ahalpert]

My only criticism is I don't think its fair to say the autofocus is why the S5 costs less. The S1H has the same type of autofocus and costs a lot more. I realize autofocus is important to some people but I don't think it factors into camera price at all.

Sure, I don't think it's directly related to cost. Supposedly the S1H has sold better than expected but the S1 and s1R have not. I sort of thought that the S5 was a loss leader to get more people invested in the system. They're trying to rush out more affordable lenses as well.

I think the S5 is a great deal and looks good. I like Panasonic. It's just a question of what features you need.

 

[jdv]

So has anyone in North America actually received one of this mythical cameras yet?

There's virtually no actual purchaser footage on-line, and none from this continent. Is this typically how Panasonic rolls out a camera, particularly one meant to save the line-up?

It's still not listed on Amazon, while B&H and Adorama apparently have no clue when they'll be getting units.

I remain interested in this camera, but time waits for no man... or his small production company.

 

[NorBro]

Best Buy has the kit in stock again (for shipping).

 

[Peter C.]

My only criticism is I don't think its fair to say the autofocus is why the S5 costs less. The S1H has the same type of autofocus and costs a lot more. I realize autofocus is important to some people but I don't think it factors into camera price at all.

In the case of mirrorless full frame cameras that shoot video, Sony has been miles ahead of the competition. The Sony A7iii that was released 2 years ago is selling for the same price. It is a highly desirable camera based on features it offers at that price. In comparison the S5 has some features that are better and other that are not. So the price makes sense. Panasonic is in a difficult position with the lens mount. All those people who bought the GH4/5 can't easily transfer over. If Panasonic wants to sell its L mount lenses they have to offer a camera body that a larger amount of people can afford. When people invest in a lens eco system it is difficult for them to change.

In regards to AF, it limits who would want to buy this camera and how it could be used. We are always thinking of our uses (video) but there is an equally large if not larger group of potential buyers are looking to take photos with these cameras.

 

[NorBro]

Sony's glory years were 2014-2018. The a7III was great for its time (even just 2.5 years ago) but it's now bottom of the barrel by today's standards; 8-bit, no 60p, just okay AF, weak IBIS, questionable color.

Panasonic sells its cameras for those prices because it wouldn't be able to go any higher with its current formula.

IMO, Sony and Canon gave Panasonic 1 year with the S1H and now it's their turn. Even if the S1H had an EF mount, it would be a very tough sale for many considering other options.