Panasonic Lumix S5

[BDR-529]

Personally i think DFD is OK for photo, have not shoot any really fast action with DFD though.

The fastest sport I have shot with Panasonic DFD is soccer but that is actually as difficult as it gets for contrast autofocus. In soccer you want to take photos of where the action (ball) is and this is usually somewhere in the middle of players, some of which are running closer and some further away from you than the actual target.

Real problem is how to configure CDAF settings so that camera focuses on the correct spot between moving players and maintains focus during entire burst when the target is moving as well. I have achieved best overall results by
1) setting a fairly small AF box somewhat above the center of image (around where players heads would be in the final picture)
2) sacrificing burst speed for accuracy by selecting focus priority (there's no point to get more pictures if they are all out of focus)
3) shooting short bursts and making sure that each time I press shutter, target is exactly inside AF box and stays there during entire burst
4) selecting AFF instead of AFC.

Speed of AF per se is not a problem with any high end panny MFT body if you use new-ish panasonic/leica lenses which are optimized for DFD. Achiless heel for DFD has been C-AF which is really annoying especially when shooting video. Even when it doesn't lose focus entirely, you can see clear artifacts on out of focus areas like fences, buildings and other grid like surfaces when DFD checks whether the target is still in focus by quickly "blinking" slightly out of focus and back again. Based on reviews those new DFD algorithms on S5 are providing hughely improved C-AF performance and can be re-used on any sensor size and type as long as camera has enough processing power.

This problem is not present in stills if focus priority is selected because camera only takes pictures when they are in focus whether it takes few milliseconds more or not.

 

[ralf-11]

Why buy this when you could buy a used Nikon body? or even a Canon?

 

[Macroramphosis]

I know. And some people even like Sony or Pentax. Go figure that one out. Sigh

 

[Robstar1963]

Why buy this when you could buy a used Nikon body? or even a Canon?

I know. And some people even like Sony or Pentax. Go figure that one out. Sigh

Just a brief attack of GAS - I think I‘m getting over it quite quickly
Don’t think the DFD would be good enough on this one - some testers are saying that the AF would be inferior to the G9 for sports and action which is already inferior to the Olympus EM1X

 

[memzinla]

I'm tempted by this camera. :/

 

[saladin]

Anyone end up buying one? These new small Sigma primes with aperture rings are adding to the temptation.

 

[DickB]

Anyone end up buying one? These new small Sigma primes with aperture rings are adding to the temptation.

I have the S5. It's a very good camera, especially if you also shoot with the G9 or other Lumix gear, as it will be familiar in handling and menus. I have the kit 20-60 that came with it and bought the 24-105 f/4, still a fairly small and versatile combo. I'm pleased with the clean and detailed images. What more could I want? Probably not the Sigma primes, but looking forward to the 70-300 that's on the Panasonic L-mount roadmap.

 

[RAH]

@DickB Have you had a chance to compare the hi-res mode of the G9 vs that of the S5? Sulantoblog YouTuber has a video on it:

But I'm wondering if you have tried it. DPReview has highly praised the S5 hi-res mode recently, especially the mode where there might be subject movement:
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pa...tm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source
"We think that of all the high-res modes on the market today, Panasonic's is the one to beat," so that is interesting, I think.

 

[BDR-529]

I have the S5. It's a very good camera, especially if you also shoot with the G9 or other Lumix gear, as it will be familiar in handling and menus. I have the kit 20-60 that came with it and bought the 24-105 f/4, still a fairly small and versatile combo. I'm pleased with the clean and detailed images.

Have you tried shooting video with your S5 and 24-105 f/4 Macro OIS?
How does the Dual-IS work? Is it good enough for macro shots as well?

The biggest improvement in this body was the totally new DFD system which is said to work pretty well even when shooting video which is the key selling point of pretty much every panny body and this is the main reason why S5 is on top of my short list at the moment..

This very kit: S5 + 24-105 f/4 is exactly the one I'm planning to buy before summer if GH6 is not launched soon. Even if GH6 finally arrives, it might be something utterly stupid like $2500€ 8k body with 41MP sensor and therefore provides no substantial improment in low light performance while also ending up in higher price category.

 

[DickB]

@DickB Have you had a chance to compare the hi-res mode of the G9 vs that of the S5? Sulantoblog YouTuber has a video on it:

But I'm wondering if you have tried it. DPReview has highly praised the S5 hi-res mode recently, especially the mode where there might be subject movement:
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pa...tm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source
"We think that of all the high-res modes on the market today, Panasonic's is the one to beat," so that is interesting, I think.

I haven't tried the hi-res mode on either camera. It's just not something I normally need or think about. I do some printing, but only up to 13x19, so 20/24 Mp is plenty. I'm normally a run and gun type of photographer so don't like hauling a tripod around. I briefly had an Oly E-M1 Mark 3 and tried the HHHR, but even that wasn't worth the effort. I'm now Panasonic-only (S5, G9, GX85, ZS50). The ZS50 is always in the car and gives surprising good results when called upon.

 

[DickB]

Have you tried shooting video with your S5 and 24-105 f/4 Macro OIS?
How does the Dual-IS work? Is it good enough for macro shots as well?

The biggest improvement in this body was the totally new DFD system which is said to work pretty well even when shooting video which is the key selling point of pretty much every panny body and this is the main reason why S5 is on top of my short list at the moment..

This very kit: S5 + 24-105 f/4 is exactly the one I'm planning to buy before summer if GH6 is not launched soon. Even if GH6 finally arrives, it might be something utterly stupid like $2500€ 8k body with 41MP sensor and therefore provides no substantial improment in low light performance while also ending up in higher price category.

Sorry, I don't do video, strictly stills. For them, including close-ups, the S5/24-105 dual-IS is very good. Of course I'm used to having it on the G9, which I use with the PL 50-200 and 100-400.
I doubt very much that Panasonic would try to put 41Mp in a m43 body. Possibly 24? Now a 41Mp S5R would be perfect!

 

[Macroramphosis]

Anybody with both the S5 and the G9 like to give a personal appraisal of pros and cons now that they've had some time with the S5 to play with? I don't like Youtube videos when someone else may have a better viewpoint with real use. Any info much appreciated....

 

[pdk42]

Anybody with both the S5 and the G9 like to give a personal appraisal of pros and cons now that they've had some time with the S5 to play with? I don't like Youtube videos when someone else may have a better viewpoint with real use. Any info much appreciated....

I have neither an S5 nor a G9. But I did a few months of using a Z7 last summer in preference to my Oly EM1.2 kit. I'm back with Oly now! What I can absolutely guarantee is this:

- You won't take any better photographs with the S5
- The S5 as a kit will end up being bigger, heavier and more $ than a m43 kit
- You'll feel less inclined to use the S5 kit because of its size
- You'll start looking at reviews of smaller cameras for when you don't want to take the S5

The nice thing about m43 is that you can get a camera as small as the GM1 or as big as the G9 and use lenses as small as the little pancake primes or as big as the new Oly 150-400 and yet remain with the same system.

 

[DickB]

I have neither an S5 nor a G9. But I did a few months of using a Z7 last summer in preference to my Oly EM1.2 kit. I'm back with Oly now! What I can absolutely guarantee is this:

- You won't take any better photographs with the S5
- The S5 as a kit will end up being bigger, heavier and more $ than a m43 kit
- You'll feel less inclined to use the S5 kit because of its size
- You'll start looking at reviews of smaller cameras for when you don't want to take the S5

The nice thing about m43 is that you can get a camera as small as the GM1 or as big as the G9 and use lenses as small as the little pancake primes or as big as the new Oly 150-400 and yet remain with the same system.

Well, I DO have the S5 and the G9 and to be blunt, your statements are way off base, which makes sense since you don't have them.

My S5 takes better photos than the G9, although I use them for different purposes. The S5 and either the 20-60 or the wonderful 24-105 are used for general landscapes and walk-around. The G9 with either the 50-200 or the 100-400 are used for wildlife, birds, and intimate landscapes.

The S5 is smaller and lighter than the G9, given the above lenses for each. The G9 and its lenses cost more than the S5 and its lenses.

I use each one, the S5 and the G9 about equally, but of course it depends on what I'm going out to shoot. I sometimes take both, because who knows what you will run into? I also have a Lumix GX85 and 14-140 for those times when I want to go really small and light.

If I had to choose only one, it would be the S5, but let's hope it doesn't come to that.

 

[RAH]

It seems to me that this is talking about 2 different issues. I agree with the idea that is in the post by @DickB - use both systems and use them each for their best purpose (with lenses to match that purpose). @pdk42 is more talking about just having one of the systems, and then it comes down to what is most important to you.

I am interested in the 2-system idea, since I am considering buying an E-M1.3 as a more stay-at-home camera while using my current E-M5.3 as pretty much a travel camera. But adding an S5 (instead of the E-M1.3 ; or G9) would make sense in this scenario too, and probably easier to justify (which I don't have to do, but stilll...).

 

[RS86]

I have neither an S5 nor a G9. But I did a few months of using a Z7 last summer in preference to my Oly EM1.2 kit. I'm back with Oly now! What I can absolutely guarantee is this:

- You won't take any better photographs with the S5
- The S5 as a kit will end up being bigger, heavier and more $ than a m43 kit
- You'll feel less inclined to use the S5 kit because of its size
- You'll start looking at reviews of smaller cameras for when you don't want to take the S5

The nice thing about m43 is that you can get a camera as small as the GM1 or as big as the G9 and use lenses as small as the little pancake primes or as big as the new Oly 150-400 and yet remain with the same system.

I'm interested in how did you find the DR in Z7 vs E-M1ii as a landscape photographer? (I assume you're mostly that, as I have seen some of your great photos recently.)

Did you still have to often take brackets with Z7, or how much did that bigger sensor help in this area?

 

[Brownie]

G9 and its lenses cost more than the S5 and its lenses.

Can you expand on this? Are you talking about comparable lenses, or specifically those lenses you own, such as: "My G9 and lenses cost more than my S5 and lenses."?

In other words, does the 12-60 cost more than the similar FL 24-105?

 

[RS86]

Well, I DO have the S5 and the G9 and to be blunt, your statements are way off base, which makes sense since you don't have them.

My S5 takes better photos than the G9, although I use them for different purposes. The S5 and either the 20-60 or the wonderful 24-105 are used for general landscapes and walk-around. The G9 with either the 50-200 or the 100-400 are used for wildlife, birds, and intimate landscapes.

The S5 is smaller and lighter than the G9, given the above lenses for each. The G9 and its lenses cost more than the S5 and its lenses.

I use each one, the S5 and the G9 about equally, but of course it depends on what I'm going out to shoot. I sometimes take both, because who knows what you will run into? I also have a Lumix GX85 and 14-140 for those times when I want to go really small and light.

If I had to choose only one, it would be the S5, but let's hope it doesn't come to that.

Nikon Z-system has quite small lenses too for a FF I think, so he knows a bit about the subject. The idea behind the "don't take better photos" was likely that better gear very rarely makes one a better photographer.

And depending on the output (unless making huge prints etc.) no one else will know/care that the photos are of better quality, meaning if the photos are mostly shown in internet.

 

[pdk42]

Well, I DO have the S5 and the G9 and to be blunt, your statements are way off base, which makes sense since you don't have them.

My S5 takes better photos than the G9, although I use them for different purposes. The S5 and either the 20-60 or the wonderful 24-105 are used for general landscapes and walk-around. The G9 with either the 50-200 or the 100-400 are used for wildlife, birds, and intimate landscapes.

The S5 is smaller and lighter than the G9, given the above lenses for each. The G9 and its lenses cost more than the S5 and its lenses.

I use each one, the S5 and the G9 about equally, but of course it depends on what I'm going out to shoot. I sometimes take both, because who knows what you will run into? I also have a Lumix GX85 and 14-140 for those times when I want to go really small and light.

If I had to choose only one, it would be the S5, but let's hope it doesn't come to that.

Hey Dick - I honestly wouldn't want to argue with anyone's choice of gear - it's a personal thing and in any case our connection with the camera, and the enjoyment it gives to us, needs no justification from anyone. Having said that, I'd like to elaborate my comments a little more.

• By "take better photos", I mean in terms of their impact at an artistic level. In other words, would an impartial but informed observer say "wow - that's a good photograph"? Against that definition, I maintain that NO CAMERA can possibly, on its own, do that for you. It's as absurd as saying that an expensive pen will let you write better novels. If you want to be a better photographer, gain more plaudits, win more competitions, be accepted by other photographers and judges as "top dog" etc, then it needs to come from within - not from an FF camera and expensive lenses. Let's face it, look at any Leica forum and chances are you'll be confronted with snaps that could have been taken with an iPhone!

• Now we need to ask the question as to whether an FF camera will deliver photos that are technically better. Will my cat photos be better on an S5 than a G9? I contend that for many photo situations and output media the answer is still "no". Sure, if you're shooting at ISO 12800 and printing at A1 then it might matter. But most amateur photographers never do that. So, I'm definitely not saying that an S5 won't deliver better technical results - because I would expect it would; but I think that for most people in most situations, that technical superiority doesn't matter. This is a point that lots of hobby photographers don't always fully explore until they've gone and spent a lot more money than needed. As they get into the art, they strive for bigger and better kit without ever asking the question as to whether it's needed based on what they are shooting and the output they are producing. I've been swept up into this endless striving for more and more "IQ" because that's what the market is pushing us to do. This is often compounded by peering at shots on computer monitors at 100% (or higher) magnification. That's not how anyone apart from the photographer him/herself ever does and it's corrosive.

• So FF is unnecessary then? Absolutely not - there are many use cases where FF makes a lot of sense. Shallow DOF on wide lenses (e.g. environmental portraits), noise performance at high ISO, access to wide tilt/shift lenses, very large prints, extreme cropping, and many more. If I were heavily into indoor sports for example, my weapon of choice would be FF. So, actually whenever someone says "how does the S5 compare to the G9", no answer should be forthcoming without first asking "for what purpose?" And incidentally, after a lot of experimentation, I'm not convinced that better DR for landscapes is necessarily a great reason for FF. For sure it will give you some additional latitude in post processing, but nature often throws DR at a scene that's more than any digital camera will cope with so good technique and knowing your camera is more important than whether it's FF.

As to my other points - I guess there are my personal opinions as someone who values compactness and I do find that bulky kit gets left in the drawer.

However, to re-iterate my opening paragraph - gear choice is personal and using gear that you like and are familiar with is definitely an important part of maximising artistic skills.

 

[RS86]

Hey Dick - I honestly wouldn't want to argue with anyone's choice of gear - it's a personal thing and in any case our connection with the camera, and the enjoyment it gives to us, needs no justification from anyone. Having said that, I'd like to elaborate my comments a little more.

• By "take better photos", I mean in terms of their impact at an artistic level. In other words, would an impartial but informed observer say "wow - that's a good photograph"? Against that definition, I maintain that NO CAMERA can possibly, on its own, do that for you. It's as absurd as saying that an expensive pen will let you write better novels. If you want to be a better photographer, gain more plaudits, win more competitions, be accepted by other photographers and judges as "top dog" etc, then it needs to come from within - not from an FF camera and expensive lenses. Let's face it, look at any Leica forum and chances are you'll be confronted with snaps that could have been taken with an iPhone!

• Now we need to ask the question as to whether an FF camera will deliver photos that are technically better. Will my cat photos be better on an S5 than a G9? I contend that for many photo situations and output media the answer is still "no". Sure, if you're shooting at ISO 12800 and printing at A1 then it might matter. But most amateur photographers never do that. So, I'm definitely not saying that an S5 won't deliver better technical results - because I would expect it would; but I think that for most people in most situations, that technical superiority doesn't matter. This is a point that lots of hobby photographers don't always fully explore until they've gone and spent a lot more money than needed. As they get into the art, they strive for bigger and better kit without ever asking the question as to whether it's needed based on what they are shooting and the output they are producing. I've been swept up into this endless striving for more and more "IQ" because that's what the market is pushing us to do. This is often compounded by peering at shots on computer monitors at 100% (or higher) magnification. That's not how anyone apart from the photographer him/herself ever does and it's corrosive.

• So FF is unnecessary then? Absolutely not - there are many use cases where FF makes a lot of sense. Shallow DOF on wide lenses (e.g. environmental portraits), noise performance at high ISO, access to wide tilt/shift lenses, very large prints, extreme cropping, and many more. If I were heavily into indoor sports for example, my weapon of choice would be FF. So, actually whenever someone says "how does the S5 compare to the G9", no answer should be forthcoming without first asking "for what purpose?" And incidentally, after a lot of experimentation, I'm not convinced that better DR for landscapes is necessarily a great reason for FF. For sure it will give you some additional latitude in post processing, but nature often throws DR at a scene that's more than any digital camera will cope with so good technique and knowing your camera is more important than whether it's FF.

As to my other points - I guess there are my personal opinions as someone who values compactness and I do find that bulky kit gets left in the drawer.

However, to re-iterate my opening paragraph - gear choice is personal and using gear that you like and are familiar with is definitely an important part of maximising your artistic skills.

I came across this quote, and remembered your reply:

“A camera, like a guitar, is just a box with a hole in it. Until it is placed in the hands of a true artist, it will not make music, only noise. What do you want your music to sound like?” – Tim Mantoani