(Rumored) Panasonic FF mirrorless
- Thread starter KrocanX
- Start date
filmguy123
Veteran
As I understand, lowlight and dynamic range abilities are not actually dictated so much by HOW much sensor area is utilized, rather, the specifics of the photosites on the given sensor. Is that true?
If so, if there is an APS-C / S35 Crop Mode on the FF S1 (lower resolution) camera (1.5x crop from full sensor), would this maintain the full dynamic range and lowlight abilities of the FF sensor?
Just thinking if with it's IBIS and with an EF to L Mount adaptor, an S35 crop mode, and the Sigma 18-35 1.8 if the S1R could be a beast in run and gun lowlight and dynamic range, besting anything seen on market by Sony A7SII or GH5s to date?
If so, if there is an APS-C / S35 Crop Mode on the FF S1 (lower resolution) camera (1.5x crop from full sensor), would this maintain the full dynamic range and lowlight abilities of the FF sensor?
Just thinking if with it's IBIS and with an EF to L Mount adaptor, an S35 crop mode, and the Sigma 18-35 1.8 if the S1R could be a beast in run and gun lowlight and dynamic range, besting anything seen on market by Sony A7SII or GH5s to date?
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Of course it would. The sensor doesn’t get worse at capturing light just because you crop it. It doesn’t suddenly grab less light or see less range in that light just because it’s cropped. Cropped is just that, cropped. Same as taking a photo in photoshop and cropping it. It doesn’t suddenly add more noise or more contrast just because you cropped the image. Same exact image just cropped smaller. A sensor is what it is and the amount of cropping has absolutely nothing to do with how sensitive it is. You could crop 720x480 from it and the light gathering would still be exactly the same.
filmguy123
Veteran
So how about a m43 size sensor crop area to allow for an EF to L Mount Speedbooster giving an extra stop of light, just with a cropped FOV but the same lowlight and DR?
G
Guest
Guest
I thought the FZ was a pretty decent concept. Nikon Z mount is also looking good. Anything shallow and wide wins on strength and options.
With mirrorless, lens mounts seem less of an issue than they used to be. Who would, in their right mind go with EF mount these days.... oh, yeah.
With mirrorless, lens mounts seem less of an issue than they used to be. Who would, in their right mind go with EF mount these days.... oh, yeah.
filmguy123
Veteran
The part I don’t understand is how is it that it’s the same light gathering?
I was under the impression that larger sensors gathered more light due to more surface area. Cropping essentially reduces the sensor surface area does it not?
How is it that one could crop to an SD portion of a FF sensor - essentially using a portion smaller than a m43 sensor - but retain the full light gathering benefits of a sensor with a larger surface area even though a small percentage of it is even being used?
I was under the impression that larger sensors gathered more light due to more surface area. Cropping essentially reduces the sensor surface area does it not?
How is it that one could crop to an SD portion of a FF sensor - essentially using a portion smaller than a m43 sensor - but retain the full light gathering benefits of a sensor with a larger surface area even though a small percentage of it is even being used?
filmguy123
Veteran
Well it’s more about ubiquity. EF Mount can work and be adapted to almost everything. And it’s common so lots of support.
Disregarding that, native mirrorless Mount of course would be better. But then you’re not as flexible. With my EF Mount glass I can swap to Panasonic, Sony, Nikon, BMD, RED, or of course canon - or others - with no extra considerations. I can rent and borrow glass that works with my EF adapters with ease. And I can ensure resale because EF is very popular.
Disregarding that, native mirrorless Mount of course would be better. But then you’re not as flexible. With my EF Mount glass I can swap to Panasonic, Sony, Nikon, BMD, RED, or of course canon - or others - with no extra considerations. I can rent and borrow glass that works with my EF adapters with ease. And I can ensure resale because EF is very popular.
stoneinapond
Veteran
No, but it does make the noise present more visible. I don't think that's a good example.
When you crop a sensor in-camera, the photo sites as still the same size, there are just fewer of them.
Samuel H
Major Contributor
Per pixel, it's the same sensor and it will show the same noise and dynamic range. But per image, it's a completely different story: keeping the whole area and downsampling to the lower resolution will clear up noise, and it does give you more dynamic range and low-light capabilities. Going from FF to APS-C is usually a loss in terms of noise of around one stop, going from APS-C to m43 is another stop. And yes, that's exactly how many more photons the sensor area is capturing: half as many with every 1.42x crop.
The Canon 5DsR vs Canon 80D is a good comparison in this respect because, looking at SNR (noise at each ISO level), they have a very similar performance in "per pixel" terms (what dxomark calls "screen") but the 5DsR pulls ahead in "per image" terms (what dxomark calls "print").
The Canon 5DsR vs Canon 80D is a good comparison in this respect because, looking at SNR (noise at each ISO level), they have a very similar performance in "per pixel" terms (what dxomark calls "screen") but the 5DsR pulls ahead in "per image" terms (what dxomark calls "print").
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Depends on the size of the image one needs. Yes the noise could be more visible if one were to crop and then blow up or print at the same intended size.
That however doesn’t change the dynamic range capable on that sensor or how much light is gathered by that sensor.
Many of us crop photos all the time without having noise plague the images. If the image is cropped too much then yes it could become more noticeable but what Filmguy is asking here is a slight crop from FF to APSC size. Unless the FF Panasonic sensor sucks royally I would not expect that to introduce a lot more visible noise by cropping. Also depends on the intended view of that image. In the case of 4k video we are not blowing up the image anyway. We would crop and still view the image as 4k. The reduction of oversampling could make noise a little more visible but we are talking a subtle amount here.
That however doesn’t change the dynamic range capable on that sensor or how much light is gathered by that sensor.
Many of us crop photos all the time without having noise plague the images. If the image is cropped too much then yes it could become more noticeable but what Filmguy is asking here is a slight crop from FF to APSC size. Unless the FF Panasonic sensor sucks royally I would not expect that to introduce a lot more visible noise by cropping. Also depends on the intended view of that image. In the case of 4k video we are not blowing up the image anyway. We would crop and still view the image as 4k. The reduction of oversampling could make noise a little more visible but we are talking a subtle amount here.
Bassman2003
Veteran
I think cropping in post is a different thing than cropping the sensor before acquisition. One benefits from the entire sensor already being baked in and the other has fewer pixels to work with. I agree with Samuel, more pixels gives the processing engine more to work with. How much it really matter in video compared to stills is debatable though.
Samuel H
Major Contributor
If you're not using the information from the cropped pixels, it doesn't really matter if they were there to begin with or not (i.e. if it's a digital crop or a smaller sensor).
Also: the crop does affect DR, because downsampling clears out noise, and that's what you're measuring (how deep into the shadows you can go, from the highest un-clipped highlights, before noise becomes too bad). In this site you can see measurements of DR of a lot of digital cameras, and for many of them (e.g. the a7RIII or the a7SII) you can compare the full-frame mode with the APS-C crop mode. The difference is approximately one stop.
Also: the crop does affect DR, because downsampling clears out noise, and that's what you're measuring (how deep into the shadows you can go, from the highest un-clipped highlights, before noise becomes too bad). In this site you can see measurements of DR of a lot of digital cameras, and for many of them (e.g. the a7RIII or the a7SII) you can compare the full-frame mode with the APS-C crop mode. The difference is approximately one stop.
NorBro
Major Contributor
If it will have 4K/60p plus a bunch of other video features then it would sit between the 1DX Mark II @$5500 and the rumored a7SIII @$3500-ish.
It's uncommon for large sensor cameras to be too inexpensive besides the oddball a7III for $2000, which turned out to be the best selling camera of the year (so far).
Last edited:
Bassman2003
Veteran
It would need to have the image and feature set of a 1DX to be considered as well and I judging by the GH5 stills, it has a long way to go imho. Not bad at all but not up to a 1DX by any means.
NorBro
Major Contributor
There is still no 4K/60p full-frame non-cinema camera available (no crop) so it will garner some interest, but it just does not have the right mount as mentioned.
Every company needs to put an EF-mount on any big sensor product because no one for the rest of this life will ever sell more lenses than them.
Every company needs to put an EF-mount on any big sensor product because no one for the rest of this life will ever sell more lenses than them.
filmguy123
Veteran
To me personally AF is a specialty shot feature (ie gimbal, sports action) so a native AF lens or two for that isn't a bad investment, then utilizing an adapter for all other glass (similar to what sony e-mount requires) I think is fantastic.
AF remains to be seen but it is AI based which is the future, whether or not its good enough in 2019 is another issue.
For me at least the S1 is the most compelling (sounding) camera out there for so many reasons:
1. IBIS. 1DX2 can't touch this. Can I put this for 1, 2, 3, 4? It's enough to rule anything and everything else out.
2. Internal Codecs, remains to be seen, but would be surprised if not great as usual. Should destroy Canon & Sony here.
3. GH5 size VS 1DX2 size (that thing is a brick). This is a vital stat for a non-cinema camera setup. Just right. The Sony A7 series is stupid small.
4. Short Flange mount = tons of compatibility
5. Reliability on par with the best, if past panny trends maintain. Can't touch this, BMD. Good battery, good reliability, no overheating, no file size limits, weather sealing, etc.
AF is a variable and there is potential if the AI system can impress. For me personally I don't care that much (though I admit to being very impressed with the creative options a 1DX M2 on a gimbal opens up).
Regardless I think as a long term platform this actually has more potential than most things for high end video years. It's got the cachet of the Leica partnership and L-Mount and ecoystem, a short flange mount which for many is a boon (not withstanding some possible AF issues for adapted glass), the professional robustness of the Panasonic name, the color science to fit into a pretty great line-up of the GHx and EVA1 line, likely killer codecs, a perfect size (and likely weight). I am anticipating a great audio solution to boot and a fast, intuitive UI.
I also personally love that they are the underdog as it generally lends to better products VS canon who is annoyingly conservative and restrictive with their features. I expect Panasonic to come out swinging with codecs and framerate modes. We may also see Dual ISO.
And, in conclusion, IBIS. Did I say IBIS? Like really good, Sony-shaming, IBIS, on a full frame camera*. Yes. Please.
(* assuming it lives up to the GH5 implementation).
Fully expecting this to be my favorite camera ever owned. Don't let me down Panny.
AF remains to be seen but it is AI based which is the future, whether or not its good enough in 2019 is another issue.
For me at least the S1 is the most compelling (sounding) camera out there for so many reasons:
1. IBIS. 1DX2 can't touch this. Can I put this for 1, 2, 3, 4? It's enough to rule anything and everything else out.
2. Internal Codecs, remains to be seen, but would be surprised if not great as usual. Should destroy Canon & Sony here.
3. GH5 size VS 1DX2 size (that thing is a brick). This is a vital stat for a non-cinema camera setup. Just right. The Sony A7 series is stupid small.
4. Short Flange mount = tons of compatibility
5. Reliability on par with the best, if past panny trends maintain. Can't touch this, BMD. Good battery, good reliability, no overheating, no file size limits, weather sealing, etc.
AF is a variable and there is potential if the AI system can impress. For me personally I don't care that much (though I admit to being very impressed with the creative options a 1DX M2 on a gimbal opens up).
Regardless I think as a long term platform this actually has more potential than most things for high end video years. It's got the cachet of the Leica partnership and L-Mount and ecoystem, a short flange mount which for many is a boon (not withstanding some possible AF issues for adapted glass), the professional robustness of the Panasonic name, the color science to fit into a pretty great line-up of the GHx and EVA1 line, likely killer codecs, a perfect size (and likely weight). I am anticipating a great audio solution to boot and a fast, intuitive UI.
I also personally love that they are the underdog as it generally lends to better products VS canon who is annoyingly conservative and restrictive with their features. I expect Panasonic to come out swinging with codecs and framerate modes. We may also see Dual ISO.
And, in conclusion, IBIS. Did I say IBIS? Like really good, Sony-shaming, IBIS, on a full frame camera*. Yes. Please.
(* assuming it lives up to the GH5 implementation).
Fully expecting this to be my favorite camera ever owned. Don't let me down Panny.
Bassman2003
Veteran
Good chances for a positive video implementation but we all know that they make their money on the stills sales. I am unclear how successful this product will be in the still camera universe. It will no longer be given credit for being an underdog like M4/3rds cameras get. It would need to go head to head with the best and be comfortable on ALL levels of professional shoots to swim in those waters. To be honest, I don't see it. But we will see. I wish the best for Panasonic as they are really trying.