pdk42
Moderator
L-MOUNT Forum
Register a free account now!
If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.
Another 10% off - S9 with 20-60 now £899
- Thread starter pdk42
- Start date
As I said,... No EVF = No Love
Also, a 12-bit RAW file is a deal breaker, too.
I'd not use it, even a gifted one.
pdk42
Moderator
It's possible. But what we can sure of is that they wouldn't be doing such deep discounting if it were selling well.
That kit in the U.S. right now sells for about $1800, but it's difficult to find with the 20-60. That's quite a large discrepancy with the U.K. price. The S9 is usually sold as a kit with the 18-40, which is priced at about $1550. As for its popularity, I did an Amazon search on full-frame mirrorless cameras, bundled with a lens, and ranked them by sales. The S9 kit (with the 18-40) ranked 12th on the list, which is a bit surprising. Even more surprising, if you eliminate the two cameras that Amazon misidentified as full-frame it rises to number 10! Ahead of it are 6 Canons, 2 Nikons, and 1 Sony (the A7IV with 28-70). Of course the other manufacturers offer a much larger choice of kits, so this is a bit misleading. Nonetheless it strikes me as a decent performance. No other Panasonic full-frame kit does as well (at Amazon in the U.S.).
pdk42
Moderator
Yeah, I don't understand why Panasonic did that. It seems it's more or less the same insides as an S5ii and that does 14-bit raws with electronic shutter so I don't understand why the S9 should be restricted like that. But I guess they view the S9 are a "creators" camera, so all they're really interested in is video. That's why it's got no EVF nor hot shoe either. It's simply not targeted at stills shooters.
I don't think that it is targeted at "serious" stills shooters, but the S9 has a lot to offer a particular type of photographer: the type who shoots mainly JPEGs, who likes to have the camera do all of the processing, and who likes to keep things simple. This is the type of stills photographer who enjoys using all of those cool JPEG tricks that the S9 provides; things like those fun and artistic in-camera LUTs, and those interesting built-in crops.
For an 8-bit JPEG shooter the 12-bit raw limit is of no consequence. There are quite a few stills shooters who have never processed a RAW image, or who have tried it but didn't enjoy it. I suspect that there are quite a few S9 owners who shoot primarily stills, while sticking mainly with JPEGs. Their focus on JPEG photography might place some limitations on the final output, but it doesn't stop them from having fun with their S9 and that latest LUT. The S9 also appeals to the type of photogapher who like to use the back screen.
And then there is the issue of simplicity. The S9 is not trying to be all things to all photographers. It leaves out a lot of complexity. It targets those who may not want the extra functionality cluttering up their camera and its menus. And of course some people who usually shoot with a fully-featured camera may sometimes want to use something a bit stripped down, and so we see people who own high-end cameras reporting that they will sometimes reach for the S9 when they go out to shoot, and not because they will be shooting only videos. I hate to use a cliche, but sometimes less is more. In short, I don't think that S9 targets only videographers. It also targets a particular subset (or subsets) of stills shooters. These folks may be more common than you think.
pdk42
Moderator
Yes, all that makes sense. But adding 14-bit raw support would do nothing to inhibit any of the things you said.I don't think that it is targeted at "serious" stills shooters, but the S9 has a lot to offer a particular type of photographer: the type who shoots mainly JPEGs, who likes to have the camera do all of the processing, and who likes to keep things simple. This is the type of stills photographer who enjoys using all of those cool JPEG tricks that the S9 provides; things like those fun and artistic in-camera LUTs, and those interesting built-in crops.
For an 8-bit JPEG shooter the 12-bit raw limit is of no consequence. There are quite a few stills shooters who have never processed a RAW image, or who have tried it but didn't enjoy it. I suspect that there are quite a few S9 owners who shoot primarily stills, while sticking mainly with JPEGs. Their focus on JPEG photography might place some limitations on the final output, but it doesn't stop them from having fun with their S9 and that latest LUT. The S9 also appeals to the type of photogapher who like to use the back screen.
And then there is the issue of simplicity. The S9 is not trying to be all things to all photographers. It leaves out a lot of complexity. It targets those who may not want the extra functionality cluttering up their camera and its menus. And of course some people who usually shoot with a fully-featured camera may sometimes want to use something a bit stripped down, and so we see people who own high-end cameras reporting that they will sometimes reach for the S9 when they go out to shoot, and not because they will be shooting only videos. I hate to use a cliche, but sometimes less is more. In short, I don't think that S9 targets only videographers. It also targets a particular subset (or subsets) of stills shooters. These folks may be more common than you think.
I agree, that part does seem rather pointless. It wouldn't make the camera any more complex from a user's standpoint, and it shouldn't add to the cost, unlike the addition of an EVF and a hot shoe. 14-bit RAW should have been included even if only 5 percent of the potential buyers care. I was simply responding to your broader conclusion that the camera doesn't target stills shooters. There are many stills shooters who don't care about any of these things.