Many traditional camera company fanboys try to tell us Sony or Panasonic cameras are much less reliable than traditional camera branded cameras.......and therefore they will never trust Pana Sony Samsung kind.. It is fine that they do not like Panasonic Sony or Samsung cameras, they do not want to use these, but please do not mislead the public.
I find the Panasonic cameras extremely durable and very incredibly reliable in real world use.
And their cameras have exceptional heat dissipation system and incredibly efficient power management system that allows the system run much cooler than the Nikon, Canon equivalents.
So even after 8 hours of a long video work session, they've never overheated, just worked and worked flawlessly.
Maybe surprisingly to some, but it has been the big name traditional camera brands - Olympus, Nikon , Canon and Fuji that have needed warranty support. New blow-ins to the camera world - Sony and Panasonic - those companies that've come from an electronic goods background are probably more sensitive to the costs of providing regular warranty care and do their utmost to make gear that outlasts their normal working life and not just the warranty period. I have appreciated this.
And therefore, I trust Panasonic cameras much more than anything from Nikon or Canon world, I have never had any Panasonic cameras that broke on me in the middle of a very important shooting session. And all my Sony A7RX cameras even the very original one from 2013 still work flawlessly.
I think those electronics camera companies' cameras are much more reliable than those from Nikon, Canon or Olympus. After all, all digital cameras are just pure computers with a shutter unit. But the global shutter tech will eventually eliminate the mechanical shutter too.
So no CN advantage over the rest and I think actually the electronics giants like Sony and Pana have the huge edge over them.
Why m43 is doomed 32-- speed is not their strength, they must get it(updated 7):
Many times people in many forums talk about how they wish to have f1.2 primes and some seem to think that may effectively compensate the weak sensor quality of m43 or One system to make it match the performance of FF based system, at least to the basic FF system like the D750 or the A7MK3.
But in reality , the digital sensors cannot take full advantage of a f1.2 prime, let alone a f0.95 one.
The digital sensors can't make use of an f/1.2, which is why Canon has been replacing almost all their f1.2 primes for D-SLR's with f1.4 primes. And they no longer make a f1.0 prime.
So the Meyer Optics and Voigtlander are stupid if they are producing those f0.95 primes for light gathering power, but if they are producing these for sheer DoF effect, then they are doing something interesting. Given that the microlenses on the sensor are slower than f/1.2( the fastest ones are about f1.32), there is no way that any camera can make full use of a f1.2 lens in terms of light capture, let alone an f/0.95. That is one reason why manufacturers (including Canon) have put the limit for new designs at f/1.4 for D-SLR - just no point going further brighter optics in FF based platform. Anything faster is really just a stunt (and that includes f/1.2's from 'reputable' manufacturers for smaller formats). I suppose it's possible that the new generation of BSI FF sensors can use these fast lenses quite effectively, but nothing else can. So, given that it's a stunt, the sole real question is why Olympus should waste their time creating a set of oversized super high speed optics that is not proven to be able to work effectively with the current sensor tech?
They rather should focus on designing a smaller f1.4 line primes than the current f1.2 ones that perform outstanding wide-open across the frame, or a bit slower f1.7 or f1.8 line that are all small but perform really good wide open something like the Fuji f2 line primes or Zeiss Loxia line primes.
And they should couple these with a super efficient ISO25 capable sensor, then they will be able to match the IQ of current low end FF with f2.8 optics or at least f4 optics.
The easiest way for them to optimize the system IQ is lower the absurdly high base ISO 200 to ISO25. ISO 25 would be good enough for now, it would allow m43 to get in to the same tonal smoothness as FF does at ISO 100. And then, lets have a lens choice that's fast and small, even if it sacrifices a little optical quality in the extreme edges. At the moment you choose between slow (in FF terms) and small or less slow and huge. Some f/1.4s (or maybe even f/1.2s but not the obnoxiously huge current ones) designed for compactness would be great. Olympus did just that with the original OM series, they can do it again with m43. Or if they won't, Panasonic may. The PL 25/1.4 is less huge than the Olympus offings, but it could still be smaller effectively.
But the problem is there are too many misguided people that believe ISO 25 would need some new technologies though, as you need somewhere to convert/put all the electrons and you can't just keep making the pixels ever deeper without issues.
But the fact is pixel charge capacity has nothing to do with pixel depth. The 'well' that is talked about is a potential well, not a physical well operating in the Earth's gravity field, and even then the 'well' is anachronistic. In CCDs it was an actual potential well kept in place by an electrical potential on an electrode. In a CMOS sensor pixels are electrically isolated and the amount of charge that a pixel can store is set by the voltage swing of the pixel output transistor. To increase its charge capacity all that is needed is an increase in capacitance(maybe sounds delusional like Max Tegmark's mathematical universe theory, but it is the fact) . The Nikon D850/Z7 sensor could handle an ISO of less than 50, so a base ISO of 25 isn't a stretch and would not require any new technology to get there, nor any deeper pixels. In fact , the current Sony sensor 20mp sensor used in the Panasonic G9 would easily handle it if Pana or Oly wanted it to program it to do so.
However, they do not want to do it and just want to focus on the meaningless high ISO values--faking out a bit better high ISO and overall scores at places like DxO Mark by increasing the base ISO to excessively high 200.
This is really silly and must be rectified as soon as possible.....
Some people seem to think if lower the ISO to 25, then they would always need a tripod or underexposed even in good light..... Really?
Not really. Using 100 ISO at f/8 is pretty commonplace on a FF in decent light, so 25 ISO at f/4 would work for am43 in the same kind of light, and give precisely comparable results. Plus, the f4 of the m43 format is not excessively shallow in terms of DOF, even for landscape use.
Another big mistake the current m43 party and users make is that they think the IBIS especially the super effective Olympus one as some sort of compensation for the absurdly high ISO200 of the current highend m43 bodies.
Yeah as long as nothing in the frame is moving it does compensate the excessively high base ISO speed and thus noisy sensor(at least in an ideal dream world).
But the downside of IBIS is that you can never completely turn it off. Left to itself, the sensor flops around inside the camera. To turn IBIS 'off' actually means that the IBIS actuators are active keeping the sensor still, relative to the camera. There is an open question whether that is or isn't as effective as the sensor being solidly mounted.
Plus, the always moving sensor uses up more of battery juice than the stable sensor without the IBIS.
And the IBIS generating extra heat definitely degrade the sensor noise performance , especially the type of the noise caused by the heat and AMP gain that produces extreme bluish purple color in the black area of an long exposure or high ISO image. Many Sony bodies including the A7R3, A7R2, A7MK2, A9 and A7MK3 have this issue.
All the current Sony IBIS bodies have this heat noise issue and it is quite a lot noisier than the similar sensored Nikon bodies. I suspect the new Z7 actually has this issue and in my rough casual tests at Nikon it shows a bit of sign of having this issue.
I know IBIS is something like a bad religion or Jesus we can never logical discuss and criticize the bad side of it (cause most of the IBIS cult members think there is no down side to it , but the truth is they are just really ridiculously ignorant).
But there are goods and bads of having it and we should evaluate it more logically and honestly.
Personally , as I am mostly a tripod only shooter, I do not need the IBIS and for me it is mostly a bad thing, only good for street snaps and casual shooting indoor (in a museum for example).
If we must pick either a camera with super effective(say 7 stops)IBIS ( but with a bit of extra heat noise ) or without it, I would rather have the latter without the extra noise.
I know most of people are handheld shooters and do not really care about optimum sensor IQ , or not being anal enough to see the difference, but to me it is a huge difference.
The level of the heat noise the D850 has is significantly lower than that of the A7R3 or the Z7. But most of people even not notice it or understand the difference, thus they want the IBIS in every new camera.
So I understand that I am not a normal person and extremely critical about this noise issue, especially the heat and gain noise. So I know not many people have the same priority set as mine but I know there are a quite few people agree with me especially those hanging around at LL fora, they really are critical about technical IQ and the types of noise IBIS in general generates, or may be responsible for.
So why do they not let us choose similar bodies with the IBIS or without it.......
Personally , I want to get a A7R3 without it and without the 10 frame per second shooting capability for 2300 USD or less. As you can see the D3X vs theA900, the slower read-out chain they use the less noisy the end result would be even though the sensor is the same.
So if the A7R3 is programmed to be a bit slower shooter, then it would be less noisy.
I also want a G9 without the IBIS and the super fast AF capability for 1k.
For me the quality of end result is everything. Even everything else is much better , if the sensor is not great, it is a junk. For me the A7MK3 is a crap, honestly nothing really interesting and sold it because the sensor in it was a really bad , low-resolution anachronistic 24mp sensor. Yeah everything else in it is better than the A7R2, but the sensor in the A7R2 is far far far better than the 24mp junk, that is what really counts and everything else is extraneous.
Personally, I think m43 should get a new sensor with at least 43mp of resolution and true ISO25 capability, that is the only way to save the system.
And in order to do that, they need some one else than Sony , maybe TPSCo or someone else, maybe the organic sensor that Panasonic has been working on.
Sadly, we have to conclude Olympus has been wasting their very limited resources on useless techs..........
UPDATE: Now we know the actual sells numbers for this month and the last month at our shops and the rival shops here and the results are really surprising.
The no1 selling camera now is the D750 especially after the price for the Z7 announced. And the A7MK3 is selling better than before too, maybe because people got hugely disappointed with the new Nikon pricing strategy?
Another important trend I have write about here is that we have got so many A7R3 and A7R2 cheap from the people moving back to Canon or Nikon mirrorless for D-SLR system.
Also, now at the discounted price, the 5DMK4 is also doing very well.
After the last series of FF mirrorless announcements in last month, actually DSLR sells seems to be increasing quite a bit, and I think this is a sign of many people thought the Nikon Z7 and Canon R were a huge disappointment.
I do not think the camera itself was so bad , actually good, but the lens lineup is really lousy. And the Z7 is really overpriced. It is about 500 US more than the D850, and it has only 3 lenses currently. And the biggest issue with the Z7 as a system is the new adapter does not work well with many F mount lenses.
So how can Nikon expect to sell that body?
UPDATE2: Many people now know that both Panasonic and Olympus will go FF, but their approach to get there seems to be very different.
Olympus seems to be waiting a couple of years or so to see which one of the 4 current systems will survive. Then , they will finally decide what mount system to join or go their own- proprietary system. A big newspaper here reported that in last week. In their interview article,Olympus also says they do not know how it'll change after the dust settles, so they just wait to see how everything will change after the Leica Panasonic team work actually starts out in this winter.
And they also mentioned the new Panasonic sensor is actually more appealing to them than the Sony 45mp sensor used in the Nikon Z7 because the new Pana chip runs cooler and they think it is more power efficient. So they will have to wait to see which sensor team will win Pana or Sony or maybe Canon as they have been investing more money than any one else on sensor fabs recently. Canon has renewed their sensor fabs recently and they did many times already(at least a several times in the last couple of years or so). So maybe Olympus is right, Canon may eventually win the sensor race.
If that actually happen, then many Sony fanboys would try to switch to either Panasonic Leica or Canon R system.
Olympus seems to be very much concerned about the Sony E mount will become the losers' system then.
But even if Canon eventually wins the sensor race, Sony will always have more lenses, more flashes and more accessories of any kind since Sony has the big 5 year time advantage.
So I think both E mount and R mount will be fine for at least a few more years.
Panasonic's approach to this matter is clear they focus on a tough hybrid FF camera system and make the risk smallest possible by joining the already existing mount.
Panasonic also says they will also keep using EF mount for some pro video cameras. And everybody in Japan knows Pana and Canon are close friends and they are not close to Sony and Nikon. Olympus is close to both Panasonic and Sony. Actually, most of people here already knew that even before the news paper article. What many people do not know about Olympus is actually they are very close to Fuji and having run many joint projects in medical area.
So it is possible Olympus may work with Fuji, Pana-Leica team, Sony or Canon for their inevitable FF system.
One thing we all know for sure is they will never work with Nikon since Nikon always hates Olympus as it is the biggest rival in their scientific lab optics business.
As for the new FF mount sells, it is really clear a big loser seems to be Nikon. Honestly, after the Panasonic Leica Sigma announcement and Zeiss's new exciting camera launch, no one talks about the Z any more.
We've got many people canceling their preordered the Z7.
By contrast, the R is doing quite well, it is the current no 1 selling FF body world wide. But what really surprises me is that the majority of the R buyers are adding it in addition to their Canon EF system or Sony FE system. IOW, they seem to be going triple mount system to try to avoid the risk of becoming a victim of a loser's mount system.
I think it is the safest way to play the game for now,but I also think they should at least wait for the new Pana to be actually out in next Feb. I think the new Panasonic S1R will be amazing, and the Zeiss ZX1 is extraordinary, and it clearly shows us how anachronistic and wrongly designed all the current Japanese cameras are. These Japanese cameras really need a clean 21st century minded menu system.
So in any case m43 will survive for the foreseeable future, at least.
UPDATE3: Now we all know Thom Hogan is actually a avid Nikon fanboy at his heart. He seems to be strongly biased towards Nikon, I think his new articled called, 'The FF lens race' has just proved that.
In that article , he says Sony has just 26lenses and their lens lineup will grow to about 60 by 2021 or so, and it is including Zeiss Batis and Loxia line. In comparison he says Nikon will have the total 18 and they have the F mount catalog of total over 60 lenses that will work flawlessly on the Z. It is a huge lie, and not very fair to fair to Sony , Pana and Canon. Since the FTZ adapter does not work as well as Sigma or Metabones plus Canon EF on Sony. Or Canon's own ETR adapter, which really works well without any issue with their EF lens lineup, plus it has a drop-in filter.
He also says Canon will have 12 lenses or so by 2021, and it is what he is guessing. I think if Nikon can crank out an incredible set of 18 lenses in just a matter of a couple of years , then Canon will make more lenses than that since Canon is about 13 times larger than Nikon.
If anyone thinks otherwise, I think he/she cannot deny he is a Nikon fanboy, or fangirl, at least as with many famous camera commentators, he/she is strongly biased towards Nikon.
In addition to that, Mr. Hogan also says both the Canon R and the Nikon Z can just use their respective old mount existing lenses flawlessly.......it is not true.
Canon can do that, but Nikon Z needs new more sophisticated Sony A to E type adapter with SLT tech or something similar to fully utilize all the past Nikkor lenses with mechanical aperture lever in the mount.
And he really underestimates Panasonic Leica team, and he definitely thinks they will be a less interesting or less influential mount system than the Nikon Z.
I do not agree with him on that at all, the Panasonic has tremendous potential with the new organic sensor, which will come in their Pro body sometime in 2019 or 2020.
Plus, unlike Nikon, they have global shutter and 8k tech in- house and it is a huge edge over Nikon since Nikon is the only one in the FF mirrorless players not have it or have no access to it.
Global shutter is the next biggest thing in FF mirrorless game and Sony , Pana and Canon all have it in-house and Nikon does not. If he is honest, he should not call CN or CaNikon since Nikon is just too small to call a rival of Canon now.
If his 'the lens race' article had been written in the early 2009 or so, I would have understood why he used the term,'CN'.
Nikon was huge at in late 2009. But they have failed to keep that huge 32 percent market share they got with the D700/D7000 duo.
I mean Nikon's ILC share is just 23 percent globally today and Canon over 49.3, and they are about 13 times larger than Nikon in terms of revenue.
This CN or CaNikon notion Nikon fanboys push through over a decade or so is really an outdated term and should not use the term any more. It is now Sony vs Canon vs Panasonic L mount alliance, and it is really difficult for Nikon to compete well with those much bigger companies than they are.
Any even a bit rational person can see it. Of course, Thom knows it, he is not stupid. But he has chosen to dismiss it because most of his readers are Nikon fans and so is he himself.
When Sony was the only one in the game, he said no adapters or adapted lens solution would not do anything for any serious work, and all the adapted lens solutions for the E mount system. But now he is saying the Nikon Z already has over 60 plus lenses(at the very launch of it) because it can take all Nikkor S and E lenses. Isn't this logic very contradicting to what he has been preaching about Sony lens lineup? He has said, "Any one buying into the E mount eco system should focus on the native lenses, any adapted lens solution is just a temporal thing." But prizing the Nikon Z for its easy adaptability of the Nikkor legacy lenses.
If Sony or Canon or any one needs an adapter solution, he trashes it. But if it is a Nikon, then forgiven or even prized for it. It is really amazing how contradicting he has become and some other Nikon fanboy reviewers like Lloyd Chamber has also saying similar things over and over again.
They should be a bit more consistent and trying not to be contradicting.
UPDATE4: Now we all know that Canon Nikon new FF mirrorless cameras are both doing not that great , as many of us predicted. Nikon has already started discounting the Z7 price and now it is about 20 percent cheaper than it was in the second week of the last month October 2018.
Even after the usually fast huge discount, it is still not selling well here. The Canon EOS R is also not moving fast because most of potential EOS R buyers now know they will announce something bigger more interesting at CES or CP+ show next year. But at least the Canon is selling better than the Nikon Z7, as opposed to all those DPR spec sheet obsessed experts predicted.
And we think the main reasons for that are:
1 the EOS R is significantly cheaper , especially if you just use existing EF lenses with the perfectly designed EOS E to R adapter. The Canon adapter costs only about 9800 yen with the drop-in ND filter.
2 the Canon is more practical as a system. The R can take all the EF lenses since 1987 without any serious compatibility issue. The Nikon Z cannot say the same, it can only use the E line of the expensive Nikkor without any issue. It can take the G line too, but the AF functionality and speed of the Z will be severely compromised when used with the G or D line lenses. So there are not many lenses the Z can take without any usability related issue.
3 the Nikon F to Z adapter costs much more than the Canon EF to RF adapter. And the Canon adapter comes with a clever drop-in ND filter.
4 the initial lens lineup of the R is more practical for any CN based wedding or any event /documentary photogs.
5 In Nikon land the majority of people seem to still prefer the D850 since it is more matured with many more lenses and accessories available.
Many Nikon fanboys claim how good the Z7 and the D850 really is at base ISO(at least) and many of them trash the Canon R for having a bit worse sensor with respect to sheer resolution and DR at base ISO.
But all Nikon advantages they claim the Z7 has over the Canon R are borrowed techs from Sony or Panasonic.
There is not much Nikon about it in that body, or even in the D850 that all Nikon fanboys raved about before the Z7.
And even we admit the sensor of the Z7 is better than the Canon R sensor, the difference is really minor, it is more like an academic study case rather than a practical difference.
The DR of the R and 5DMK4 sensor is just about less than a stop worse than the Sony sensor in the Nikon Z7 at the very base ISO. And from ISO 200 or so they are all basically identical in terms of DR and color sensitivity.
Also, many people read Japanese camera industry news already know it but many Western camera medias decidedly dismiss is that Canon has renewed their CMOS plants(in 2017) and expanded their production capacity(in 2017) because they know they need more sensors for automobile and robotics business they own and also for security camera use.
In addition to that, some news papers here have reported they would sell many types of sensors for industrial use including car, security, robotics and airplane.
Panasonic has also announced their first mass production organic sensor based 8k cinema camera is coming very soon.
It will be very expensive, not affordable to most of potential FF mirrorless buyers for sure. But the point is the 8k and organic sensor tech will start trickling down to consumer grade bodies soon after the 2020 Olympics.
This means now Nikon is the only one still using the borrowed sensor tech and that will severely restrict them in many ways.
If the' Nikon will start using TPSCo sensors soon' rumor is true, then Nikon will be fine, but if they will keep depending every single core tech of their cameras on Sony , then they will have no future. Plus, many online camera sites never seem to realize this very fact but Nikon is the smallest camera company of all and least diversified one, it is a big concern for them.
I think the future of the Z system looks very bleak, and I am afraid it may be ending up to be another failed attempt from Nikon just like their Nikon One system.
