Post here if you've ordered an S1Rii

[xaviergut]

This rolling shutter in video I think gets blown out of proportion. For a few it is important, 99% of video it simply isn't. Those pan tests violently panning the camera are rather ridiculous as where would you actually do this?

I totally agree. The rolling shutter is not a problem when recording a wedding, for example. You can make a video without having to record the orchestra's drummer and the curved drumsticks. Really. The reviewers are exaggerating with this story.

It may also affect if you want to record a hitter in a baseball game or someone playing golf, but it doesn't matter if both the bat and the golf club have a bit of a curve, for Christ's sake, what need do people have to create drama...

 

[Oíche]

It may also affect if you want to record a hitter in a baseball game or someone playing golf, but it doesn't matter if both the bat and the golf club have a bit of a curve, for Christ's sake, what need do people have to create drama...

Yeah sports, mine is cycle racing and for some years I hated the bendy wheel spokes era. For this it is important if using ES, I don't know why some cycling photographers were even using ES as for most it wasn't required. Maybe the first mirrorless for sports or something but it ruined the photos IMO. They could have used mech shutter, maybe they didn't know.

It wouldn't be unsurprising for pro sports photographers to not know as you'd be surprised how a proportion of them have no tech knowledge or interest. They just took the photos from sitting on the back of a motorbike for 7 hours a day which is a nighmare!

Famous cycling photographer Graham Watson never took RAWs ever, only jpeg even back in the early years of DSLR. I know similar sport/journalistic photographers nowadays.... Never RAW as they don't have edit time for 5000/day and are not doing artwork prints either... Just good enough for web publishing. All of them on Canon

 

[RBecker]

!

Famous cycling photographer Graham Watson never took RAWs ever, only jpeg even back in the early years of DSLR. I know similar sport/journalistic photographers nowadays.... Never RAW as they don't have edit time for 5000/day and are not doing artwork prints either... Just good enough for web publishing. All of them on Canon

In the past the usage of JPG was not only related to editing, also to the limited transfer rates of phone connection from stadium to the office. And even for full pages in newspapers the JPG is fine, if you take a bit care with your settings. Sports photographers from the analog area where used to expose their film correct! Even today the transfer of hundrets to thousands RAWs would take some time! And then it still needs to be developed somehow. So the output and processing of JPG is still so simple, that there will be no change in the near future…

My wifes smartphone can only save JPG. From a trip to Norway I created a calendar in A2, also containing pictures from my wife. They look great, even in A2. So very often the JPG OOC would be enough, we only don‘t want to hear this…

 

[dirk]

So very often the JPG OOC would be enough, we only don‘t want to hear this…

I agree. Nobody does postprocessing, because you have too mucg time and bired.

It is the same like in the analog times. 95-99% of the photographer made prints externally. Only a few had a darkroom.

With the massive improvements of modern sensors, matrix metering and jpeg engines, the need for postprocessing decreased dramatically. Fuji proved this very well already 10 years ago. Others catched up.

This is why some PP software companies have decreasing sales. There is less need for this.

 

[pdk42]

100% of my photos get post-processed. I never shoot JPEG.

 

[AlanC]

100% of my photos get post-processed. I never shoot JPEG.

Same here. And 100% electronic shutter as well.

 

[Nevyn72]

100% of my photos get post-processed. I never shoot JPEG.

And it shows in your photographs. You don't just capture images—you create art.

Too many so-called "pictures" today are merely snapshots without soul. People cherish their own photos because they're attached to the memories of those moments.
But true photography bakes emotion directly into the frame, allowing even strangers who weren't present to feel something profound when they gaze upon your work.

Your images don't require context or explanation—they speak their own emotional language that resonates with anyone who sees them.

 

[Jonathan-Mac]

I use the electronic shutter when I need to be quiet. Sometimes that's photographing my kids without disturbing them, other times it's events at school (or even work) where the sound of the shutter might bother people. I understand that on most cameras using ES reduces the dynamic range by a stop or so but I don't understand why.

I'd order an S1R II if I was willing to spend that amount of money on a camera right now - it seems pretty much perfect for me although all the video options would not be needed. A heavier duty, higher resolution S5 without the bulk of the original S1 line.