Panasonic S1 II and S1 IIE

[rsolomon]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

11 hours ago, padam said:

https://petapixel.com/2025/05/05/using-m-lenses-on-a-panasonic-camera-sacrifice-sacrilege-or-sweet-spot/

Thanks !

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Malabito]

On 5/16/2025 at 7:46 AM, padam said:

https://petapixel.com/2025/05/05/using-m-lenses-on-a-panasonic-camera-sacrifice-sacrilege-or-sweet-spot/

If you want to use M lenses on a mirrorless camera, your only options are Leica M or SL bodies, your next compromise would be a Nikon Z mount camera. The Panasonic is as bad as Sony, only slightly better, but not significantly. A better option if you don't want to go Leica is Nikon.

[Al Brown]

On 5/16/2025 at 12:51 PM, jaapv said:

A Canon R5 Ii costs considerably more, for instance.(4900 €)

And so does ARRI Alexa. But neither the fromer nor the latter is a direct class competition. Closest competitors in the full-frame mirrorless market as of 2025 according to the best specs sum (sometimes 4K and better functions, sometimes 6K and less beef in other areas) are Blackmagic Cinema Camera 6K, Canon EOS R6 II, Nikon Z6 III, Canon R5 mk1 and Pyxis (and perhaps a7IV) and none are more expensive.
Let us wait and see. I wish Panasonic all the best, they make cool stuff.

[padam]

On 5/18/2025 at 8:40 AM, Malabito said:

If you want to use M lenses on a mirrorless camera, your only options are Leica M or SL bodies, your next compromise would be a Nikon Z mount camera. The Panasonic is as bad as Sony, only slightly better, but not significantly. A better option if you don't want to go Leica is Nikon.

While containing some truth, these are unhelpful generalizations forums are filled with instead of articles with concrete examples showing what "bad" means.
At the minimum, it should say "most wide-angle M lenses" since 50mm or above don't show much problems and certain wides work just fine.
https://phillipreeve.net/blog/
Another site doing actual testing showing that in certain unique cases, performance difference isn't significant.

I look back at old images using 35/1.4 ASPH + Sony A7II (quoted to be the "worst", outside "only" options) and they look good.
Reason is that I consciously stepped down to f/5.6-8 when needed, then the problem largely goes away.
Or when I used it for portraits, the focus is on the subject in the mid-frame, and the rest is out of focus anyway.
The A7S was even weirder, for some reason it performed a bit better still, I could use the 28/5.6 Summaron it just fine.

Point is: one can either have lenses as fixed choices and then choose bodies that work reasonably well for it.
Or the other way round, finding lenses that perform well with that body.

Regarding Panasonic, Nikon and compromises, it should be noted that:
- Panasonic has the common L-mount
- Far better stabilization incl. adapted lenses (Nikon does 3-axis even with native Z-mount lenses)
- Other differing features (video, handheld high-res) that can be way more important than corner smearing
- Color is subjective, but Panasonic is at least closer to Leica

Of course the main issue with all this argument is simply the superiority of Panasonic versus the Leica in things other than sensor cover glass, the "saving grace" for Leica besides design and handling. Technology regarding sensors stabilization etc. feels like a generation ahead even though the SL3 range was released not too long ago, and it is still smaller and lighter (that could be decreased further by ditching active cooling).

Trying to differentiate brands being in the same system (therefore spending more on development) feels like a waste of resources on both sides.
That is why L-mount "alliance" is just a total mess. Not that it has any chance of catching the big trio - but it's not even trying to...

[jaapv]

Unfortunately the link you provide does not lead to the correct blog post, but you are right. For instance I found that the corner performance of the Summilux 24 M suffered only slightly on the Panasonic S5ii. 

Your last line is a bit contradictory. Leica has never had the ambition of catching up with the big trio, so it is quite logical that they don't even try. And - a camera is more than a collection of specifications.  

[padam]

I was referring to the L-mount "alliance" as a whole. It didn't need to be so disjointed and confusing, but it just is.
All the S1II series reviews seem hyped, only briefly touching the AF system's issues, but not mentioning why it might not be wise to invest in the system as a whole.
While they have settled on smaller bodies, revising the lens lineup will take a lot of time (and they probably aren't keen on doing it anyway because of limited sales)

Out of the Panasonic models, S1RII is priced "more fairly" than these new ones (but still "ambitious").
In the past, there was a big gap between S1 and S1R (and a restriction regarding L-Log on the latter), making S1 great value.
Now the S1IIE and S1RII can be considered replacements, but one is still stuck with a similar sensor and limitations, while the other is much newer, yet for less extra cost, there is little reason not to go for that one (speed is a bit lower, but why shoot sports on this system). And there is a third one compromised in other ways,
The main reason why the S1II can be priced like it is is users having to deal with the same limitations for long (yet liking many other features Panasonic has over others), this finally looks like the one to get (and I don't feel there is much to be added in the S1HII besides an AA filter...).
But for new users, it is a different story.

[Photoworks]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

56 minutes ago, padam said:

I was referring to the L-mount "alliance" as a whole. It didn't need to be so disjointed and confusing, but it just is.
All the S1II series reviews seem hyped, only briefly touching the AF system's issues, but not mentioning why it might not be wise to invest in the system as a whole.
While they have settled on smaller bodies, revising the lens lineup will take a lot of time (and they probably aren't keen on doing it anyway because of limited sales)

Out of the Panasonic models, S1RII is priced "more fairly" than these new ones (but still "ambitious").
In the past, there was a big gap between S1 and S1R (and a restriction regarding L-Log on the latter), making S1 great value.
Now the S1IIE and S1RII can be considered replacements, but one is still stuck with a similar sensor and limitations, while the other is much newer, yet for less extra cost, there is little reason not to go for that one (speed is a bit lower, but why shoot sports on this system). And there is a third one compromised in other ways,
The main reason why the S1II can be priced like it is is users having to deal with the same limitations for long (yet liking many other features Panasonic has over others), this finally looks like the one to get (and I don't feel there is much to be added in the S1HII besides an AA filter...).
But for new users, it is a different story.

I am confused about what your point is.

L-Mount has many lenses, and is adding more and more. M lenses are not part of it, they fall in adapted lens categories, just like EF and Cinema.
L-mount is evolving, newer lenses have improved motors and better performance.

The S1II is exactly what  many people were asking for years from the developers, a capable video hybrid camera that can record stunning 4k60p.
It is a camera for all-around photography and not competing with a sports camera, which has all the other requirements.

 

If you don

[BernardC]

What some people find confusing about the Lumix lineup is that it isn't a "specifications ladder" like the big 3 Japanese brands. You get world-class video and IBIS right from the cheapest model (S9), and each model has its own personality and purpose. This makes it hard to compare to other brands where you need to get to the very top of the ladder before all features are unlocked (at which point you end-up with a camera that is too bulky for casual use).

This is especially hard on influencers, because they are used to describing cameras in terms of "market segment." You can palpably feel the frustration as they struggle with new concepts! They can't just waste 20 minutes explaining why you should spend more for the next model up the ladder, like a car salesman.

Perhaps that's why Panasonic chose such a confusing naming convention. All three cameras are named "S1", because they share the same body and basic specifications. The only difference is the sensor. There is no good-better-best, it's just a matter of picking the one that matches your style and vision.

[Al Brown]

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

This makes it hard to compare to other brands where you need to get to the very top of the ladder before all features are unlocked (at which point you end-up with a camera that is too bulky for casual use).

Not true for Sony. Some of their top tier cameras do not even have 4K50 video, let alone all the gimmicks of lower tier models. Their ecosystem is much more thought of and specific than Lumix L mount, not to forget they keep (mostly) all old models alive. Better not to generalize like that.
 

[padam]

2 hours ago, Photoworks said:

I am confused about what your point is.

L-Mount has many lenses, and is adding more and more. M lenses are not part of it, they fall in adapted lens categories, just like EF and Cinema.
L-mount is evolving, newer lenses have improved motors and better performance.

The S1II is exactly what  many people were asking for years from the developers, a capable video hybrid camera that can record stunning 4k60p.
It is a camera for all-around photography and not competing with a sports camera, which has all the other requirements.

Yes, but it is still in a system that has very few lenses that I actually want to invest in.
All their standard range zooms (as well as that one single higher-end fast prime) were designed in the "big body" era, bulky and heavy for a small body.
The small primes look unimpressive to my eyes for video, autocorrected distortion causes visible corner warping in the image during focus pulls.
(admittedly, this "feature" is visible in other lenses, but in this system there aren't many alternatives)
Ok they just released a smaller f2.8 zoom, but the range is a bit odd...the L-mount lens system just does not make sense (to me least).



Yes M lenses aren't part of "anything" but they are far the best option to me to carry every day. It is just sad that even though they are universally adaptable, there isn't one (preferably small but premium) body purposely made tor them that is actually seamless and fun to use (and a fair amount of it is actually just the software implementation, which is even more annoying).

[Photoworks]

3 hours ago, padam said:

Yes, but it is still in a system that has very few lenses that I actually want to invest in.
All their standard range zooms (as well as that one single higher-end fast prime) were designed in the "big body" era, bulky and heavy for a small body.
The small primes look unimpressive to my eyes for video, autocorrected distortion causes visible corner warping in the image during focus pulls.
(admittedly, this "feature" is visible in other lenses, but in this system there aren't many alternatives)
Ok they just released a smaller f2.8 zoom, but the range is a bit odd...the L-mount lens system just does not make sense (to me least).



Yes M lenses aren't part of "anything" but they are far the best option to me to carry every day. It is just sad that even though they are universally adaptable, there isn't one (preferably small but premium) body purposely made tor them that is actually seamless and fun to use (and a fair amount of it is actually just the software implementation, which is even more annoying).

Welcome to the Ranting Forum, where you have choices.

To me, they are just tools. I buy whatever I think may work for me, and everyone uniquely spends their money.

Technology moves very fast, some is good and some is ok. 
You don't have to buy any of it, you may be just as happy not even looking at what is new out there.

[Malabito]

12 hours ago, padam said:

While containing some truth, these are unhelpful generalizations forums are filled with instead of articles with concrete examples showing what "bad" means.
At the minimum, it should say "most wide-angle M lenses" since 50mm or above don't show much problems and certain wides work just fine.
https://phillipreeve.net/blog/
Another site doing actual testing showing that in certain unique cases, performance difference isn't significant.

I look back at old images using 35/1.4 ASPH + Sony A7II (quoted to be the "worst", outside "only" options) and they look good.
Reason is that I consciously stepped down to f/5.6-8 when needed, then the problem largely goes away.
Or when I used it for portraits, the focus is on the subject in the mid-frame, and the rest is out of focus anyway.
The A7S was even weirder, for some reason it performed a bit better still, I could use the 28/5.6 Summaron it just fine.

Point is: one can either have lenses as fixed choices and then choose bodies that work reasonably well for it.
Or the other way round, finding lenses that perform well with that body.

Regarding Panasonic, Nikon and compromises, it should be noted that:
- Panasonic has the common L-mount
- Far better stabilization incl. adapted lenses (Nikon does 3-axis even with native Z-mount lenses)
- Other differing features (video, handheld high-res) that can be way more important than corner smearing
- Color is subjective, but Panasonic is at least closer to Leica

Of course the main issue with all this argument is simply the superiority of Panasonic versus the Leica in things other than sensor cover glass, the "saving grace" for Leica besides design and handling. Technology regarding sensors stabilization etc. feels like a generation ahead even though the SL3 range was released not too long ago, and it is still smaller and lighter (that could be decreased further by ditching active cooling).

Trying to differentiate brands being in the same system (therefore spending more on development) feels like a waste of resources on both sides.
That is why L-mount "alliance" is just a total mess. Not that it has any chance of catching the big trio - but it's not even trying to...

These are not generalizations. M lenses do not work well on Panasonic cameras; it is as bad as on Sony. This is mostly for lenses 50mm or wider. If you want to use m lenses on a mirrorless your best option is an sl, and second is Nikon z or using one of those kolaris mods. Pana and Sony are as bad 

Edited May 19 by Malabito

[BernardC]

15 hours ago, Malabito said:

These are not generalizations. M lenses do not work well on Panasonic cameras; it is as bad as on Sony. This is mostly for lenses 50mm or wider. If you want to use m lenses on a mirrorless your best option is an sl, and second is Nikon z or using one of those kolaris mods. Pana and Sony are as bad 

That's a strange place to draw the line. Nikon's Z sensors may be slightly better than Panasonic and Sigma with M lenses, but they aren't acceptably good. I haven't seen any examples where a lens didn't suffer from the same issues on Z as it did with other non-Leica cameras, even if the Z was marginally better at pixel-peeping magnifications.

On the other hand, any generation of the SL will work well with all supported lenses, which is to say all M lenses except for the Super-Angulons.

Before people protest, I should mention that by "acceptably good," I mean that the lens performs like a high-quality lens would on film. m lenses on digital sensors can have their own unique look, and I use the effect of exaggerated sharpness falloff from time to time. It can be very effective when you want a "blur vignette" portrait look, or as a poor-mans recreation of of the "circa 2000 food photography" look. It's an effective tool, albeit one that I use sparingly. You can achieve that look with any of the non-Leica brands listed earlier (or in post-processing, but that's never quite the same).