Panasonic S1 II and S1 IIE

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 minutes ago, pf4eva said:

X2D hands down IMO, but it depends on what you need in terms of AF. Size and weight difference is tiny and will be offset by a lens hood on the lens. AWB and color is amazing out of the box, SL3 is not even close. Ended up selling my SL gear as it is the same size as Hassy. For AF related stuff, I have canon which is much better than SL3 anyway.

I own and use both, and, unfortunately, the choice is not that obvious to me.

[tom0511]

For me...x2d wins in regards of color and overall IQ coming out of the camera, tonal transitions and sharpness transition.

SL3 with equivalent lens is not much lighter than x2d if the wide and normal range. (16-35 vs 20-35, 45/3.4 or 38/2.5 vs 35/2.0, 75/3.4 vs 50/2.0) for eample.

But then theere are much more lens offerings for the SL system, from wide angle to 500 Sigma Tele.

The X2d is a slow pace medium format camera, with advantage of high synch speed. 

The SL3 and L-Mount is an allround flexible system from wideangle to Tele, primes and zooms, AF-C and video,...

youcan also put small M-mount lenses on the SL3 or all kind of third party lenses.

If you just shoot slow pace landscape and portrait I would recommend x2d. If you want an allround camera system from landscape, to travel, to wildlife, family, people, and some sports (not too fast) -> SL3 (or any other mirrorless)

 

[LBJ2]

Mr Richard Wong. This is the video I was waiting for. Pour yourself a cup of coffee or single malt perhaps bit of both :

• Marker 52:48 Rolling Shutter
• Marker 55:37 Autofocus

 

Edited February 25 by LBJ2

[helged]

38 minutes ago, LBJ2 said:

Mr Richard Wong. This is the video I was waiting for. Pour yourself a cup of coffee or single malt perhaps bit of both :

• Marker 52:48 Rolling Shutter
• Marker 55:37 Autofocus

 

That's quite an extensive presentation & overview of many of S1Rii's features (even with only water in the glass... 😉).

[Photoworks]

3 hours ago, SrMi said:

The differences are still tiny with +5EV:

https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-100/visual-comparisons-of-fuji-gfx-100-14-and-16-bit-raw-precision/

 

this does not look like the correct test, 

1, a bookshelf would not have all the light tones to get the extra color, the test is more like banding and noise.

but that should not be a discussion on this camera thread.

 

[SrMi]

18 minutes ago, Photoworks said:

this does not look like the correct test, 

1, a bookshelf would not have all the light tones to get the extra color, the test is more like banding and noise.

but that should not be a discussion on this camera thread.

As seen from the context, and as written in the article, the test is about noise, the only known benefit of larger bit sizes.

[pf4eva]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, SrMi said:

As seen from the context, and as written in the article, the test is about noise, the only known benefit of larger bit sizes.

Absolutely wrong, bit depth is primarily about colour depth and DR.  But DR part is tricky, if sensor cannot capture that dynamic range in a first place - having 16bits is pointless. There are also quite a few cameras who capture 14bit and put it in 16bit file wrapper with 2 bit interpolation.
 

[tom0511]

vor 14 Stunden schrieb pf4eva:

X2D hands down IMO, but it depends on what you need in terms of AF. Size and weight difference is tiny and will be offset by a lens hood on the lens. AWB and color is amazing out of the box, SL3 is not even close. Ended up selling my SL gear as it is the same size as Hassy. For AF related stuff, I have canon which is much better than SL3 anyway.

I think what I kind of miss with the Hassy is some new longer lens, a lighter 135mm or a 180mm 

 

[Chris W]

The S1RII is for a different customer.

Almost all the Hasselblad lenses cost more than the S1 RII body.

The X1DII that I use is quite slow, no IBIS no video. The images look amazing as do the colours, but if you want all the photographic aids the Panasonic offers, you aren't going to buy a Hasselblad instead.

[SrMi]

6 hours ago, pf4eva said:

Absolutely wrong, bit depth is primarily about colour depth and DR.  But DR part is tricky, if sensor cannot capture that dynamic range in a first place - having 16bits is pointless. There are also quite a few cameras who capture 14bit and put it in 16bit file wrapper with 2 bit interpolation.
 

Yes, if the bottom two bits are mainly noise, then using 16 bits makes no sense. That is why many cropMF owners use 14 instead of 16 bits.

The number of colors with 14 bits is already way too high for the human eye to discern. Therefore, going to 16 bits cannot show any improvement and has never been demonstrated to show any improvement. Post-processing occurs in the same bit size, regardless of the raw bit size.

[Smogg]

4 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Yes, if the bottom two bits are mainly noise, then using 16 bits makes no sense. That is why many cropMF owners use 14 instead of 16 bits.

The number of colors with 14 bits is already way too high for the human eye to discern. Therefore, going to 16 bits cannot show any improvement and has never been demonstrated to show any improvement. Post-processing occurs in the same bit size, regardless of the raw bit size.

I only shoot in 14-bit, it minimizes blackout. I don't see any advantages in 16-bit, only disadvantages.

[Richardgb]

OK, sorry to be the party-pooper... well, not really sorry.

The S1Rii is about a year too late. I'd been S1 owner since the end of 2019 and, in the way of digital cameras on the 4th anniversary, had been wondering what Pansonic were going to do. The S5ii had an upgraded focusing system (not that the S1 had let me down in any way that I could definitely blame on the camera), and there was speculation that a similarly-upgraded S1R was in the pipeline. And there was the SL3. So I waited... and waited... and waited...

During my time with the S1, it had become clear than Panasonic were going out to cater for the videographer, with straight photography, if mentioned at all, almost an afterthought. This was quite a turn-around since the early digital photography days when stills cameras had video features added. So I waited... and waited... and waited...

Yes, the S1 was rather a beast to carry around, but I liked the S1 interface, it had an excellent viewfinder, and the files were very usable. So I waited... and waited... and waited...

Visiting The Photography Show in March last year, everything on the lumix stand was S5ii and MFT. I told the Lumix guys told my feelings and that I'd give them 6 months to show me something for photographers to succeed the S1. So I waited... and waited... and waited...

By September the rumour mill was continuing to speculate, but by then, Carole King's words were haunting my thoughts:

It's too late, baby, now it's too late
Though we really did try to make it
Something inside has died
And I can't hide and I just can't fake it.

Yes, Carole King had also sung:

It used to be so easy living here with you
You were light and breezy and I knew just what to do...

But there comes a time for change, so without shedding any tears it was bye, bye S1.

[LD_50]

1 hour ago, Richardgb said:

OK, sorry to be the party-pooper... well, not really sorry.

The S1Rii is about a year too late. I'd been S1 owner since the end of 2019 and, in the way of digital cameras on the 4th anniversary, had been wondering what Pansonic were going to do. The S5ii had an upgraded focusing system (not that the S1 had let me down in any way that I could definitely blame on the camera), and there was speculation that a similarly-upgraded S1R was in the pipeline. And there was the SL3. So I waited... and waited... and waited...

During my time with the S1, it had become clear than Panasonic were going out to cater for the videographer, with straight photography, if mentioned at all, almost an afterthought. This was quite a turn-around since the early digital photography days when stills cameras had video features added. So I waited... and waited... and waited...

Yes, the S1 was rather a beast to carry around, but I liked the S1 interface, it had an excellent viewfinder, and the files were very usable. So I waited... and waited... and waited...

Visiting The Photography Show in March last year, everything on the lumix stand was S5ii and MFT. I told the Lumix guys told my feelings and that I'd give them 6 months to show me something for photographers to succeed the S1. So I waited... and waited... and waited...

By September the rumour mill was continuing to speculate, but by then, Carole King's words were haunting my thoughts:

It's too late, baby, now it's too late
Though we really did try to make it
Something inside has died
And I can't hide and I just can't fake it.

Yes, Carole King had also sung:

It used to be so easy living here with you
You were light and breezy and I knew just what to do...

But there comes a time for change, so without shedding any tears it was bye, bye S1.

I can’t deduce from what you wrote why you needed to switch systems? If you liked the S1 and don’t need upgraded AF what forced a switch?

What about the S1Rii is worse for your photography than the S1 or S1R or S5 cameras? 

I’ve been considering switching from SL system to Nikon Z system, but only because what I’m shooting has changed and I’d value the Nikon AF capability that I can’t get from Leica. I’m hesitant to change because of the L-mount lenses I own. The S1Rii might be a good compromise, but I’m not a big fan of the smaller camera body.

I read a lot about people changing systems and constantly comparing the newest top options from Nikon, Canon, and Sony but it seems like switching systems is a lot of wasted time and money if it’s done whenever these companies leapfrog each other (every new generation, staggered).

[MediaFotografie]

vor 13 Stunden schrieb Richardgb:

The S1Rii is about a year too late.

but - as far as I know - it is the first camera using Sony's new IMX366 - even before Sony itself has one; that's very good

[Richardgb]

18 hours ago, LD_50 said:

I can’t deduce from what you wrote why you needed to switch systems? If you liked the S1 and don’t need upgraded AF what forced a switch?

What about the S1Rii is worse for your photography than the S1 or S1R or S5 cameras? 

I’ve been considering switching from SL system to Nikon Z system, but only because what I’m shooting has changed and I’d value the Nikon AF capability that I can’t get from Leica. I’m hesitant to change because of the L-mount lenses I own. The S1Rii might be a good compromise, but I’m not a big fan of the smaller camera body.

I read a lot about people changing systems and constantly comparing the newest top options from Nikon, Canon, and Sony but it seems like switching systems is a lot of wasted time and money if it’s done whenever these companies leapfrog each other (every new generation, staggered).

@LD_50 Thanks for your understanding - I concur with much of what you say about changing systems, so it wasn't a decision taken lightly.

Briefly, high on my 'desirable' list was increased resolution, and the (original) S1R was not an option, and rather lighter in weight if possible.

I'd looked at alternatives but ruled out a few as 'missing' some essentials: the Nikon Z8 has no co-ax flash sync socket; there's a long wait for the Canon R5Mkii, and its noise reduction is not able to be turned off. In the end plumped for a Sony A7RV...

[Richardgb]

6 hours ago, MediaFotografie said:

but - as far as I know - it is the first camera using Sony's new IMX366 - even before Sony itself has one; that's very good

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make - neither I nor anyone else had have a crystal ball to tell me what Lumix was preparing or when it would be available.

[Planetwide]

Not sure if this has been posted else where...

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[LD_50]

I went and handled an S5ii today to get a feel for what the S1Rii will be. I really like the specs of the S1Rii and I’ve been debating whether to move to SL3-S or potentially moving back to Nikon for the AF capability. The Panasonic gave me hope for Nikon Z8/9 level AF performance in L mount.

I took with me my SL2-S and also handled a Nikon Z8 and Sony A7RV at the same store. 

I shot Nikon for about 10 years before moving to Leica M and SL cameras. I also own a Sony RX1. 

Unfortunately I really disliked the S5ii body! I wear a North Face Large/9 glove and it’s small and cramped in my hands.

I’ve read and seen many videos that praise the small size of this camera but I just can’t see why. The SL2-S and Z8 are far better ergonomically, with space for all fingers on the grip, spacing between buttons, and space for the top screen. I know grip and button layout is subjective but this one seems obviously worse than the original S1R and the Leica. I even preferred the Sony, which I normally don’t care for. What a disappointment. If they had done the S1Rii in S1R size I would buy it.

I’m back to Leica vs Nikon for now. 

[helged]

For the mainly photo-centric folks (like me...):

 

And for those inclined to shoot jpg with LUT, in this case with Lumix S 50mm f1.4 (a lens that I like, next after SL 50Lux, that is...):

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Stuart Richardson]

12 hours ago, LD_50 said:

I went and handled an S5ii today to get a feel for what the S1Rii will be. I really like the specs of the S1Rii and I’ve been debating whether to move to SL3-S or potentially moving back to Nikon for the AF capability. The Panasonic gave me hope for Nikon Z8/9 level AF performance in L mount.

I took with me my SL2-S and also handled a Nikon Z8 and Sony A7RV at the same store. 

I shot Nikon for about 10 years before moving to Leica M and SL cameras. I also own a Sony RX1. 

Unfortunately I really disliked the S5ii body! I wear a North Face Large/9 glove and it’s small and cramped in my hands.

I’ve read and seen many videos that praise the small size of this camera but I just can’t see why. The SL2-S and Z8 are far better ergonomically, with space for all fingers on the grip, spacing between buttons, and space for the top screen. I know grip and button layout is subjective but this one seems obviously worse than the original S1R and the Leica. I even preferred the Sony, which I normally don’t care for. What a disappointment. If they had done the S1Rii in S1R size I would buy it.

I’m back to Leica vs Nikon for now. 

I think it is interesting that the first model of something often gets it right in a way that others do not. I think this is because the designers have a brief and they informed by carefully selected professionals, and they come up with a design that has a discrete purpose and clearly articulated reasons for being the way it is. But for the second, third and fourth models they are taking into account customer opinions. It is not that this is wrong, but it tends to remove specialization and purposeful design and drag things back to the average and customary. I think this happened very clearly in the SL cameras. The original SL had the most unique design, using the 4 button interface and the more brutal aesthetic. The SL2 brought many very real practical benefits, but the 4 button design was abandoned and the looks softened.

I think the same happened with the S1 and S1R. To me, they were truly excellent photographer focused cameras, designed for professional working photographers. The cameras were big, but they were sized in a way that made them really excellent to handle. But since other makers landed on smaller cameras, the market howled that they were too big. So what we have now is a more average design that is probably more passable for more people, but not as fantastic as the first design was for those who appreciated it. This process is not always bad, but it has to be kept in careful check.

Edited March 2 by Stuart Richardson