Image courtesy: Imaging Resource.
Here are some more key info from the Panasonic interview at Imaging Resource.
1) The Panasonic GM1 is selling well in Asia and…France(!). Apparently French people likes the camera because it’s very “fashionable”. In Germany it is not so popular. Germans prefer the GH while UK prefers the G line. The GM1 is not doing well in USA. And it’s mostly used as second camera for professionals.
2) Resources are now spent to create small GM lenses and videofocused GH lenses. Example: The Nocticron 42,5mm lens has been developed with the GH4 in mind.
3) DFD focusing: The basic accuracy of the purely-DFD (Depth From Defocus) part of the cycle is very equivalent to what typical phase detect systems achieve currently. Sadly this doesn’t work with Olympus lenses as Olympus does not have such data in their lens, so we can’t understand about the bokeh level.
4) Panasonic decided to not offer on sensor phase detection pixels because it has some downsides. That allows Panasonic that with 4K data going through, you don’t have time to swap-out or compensate for individual pixels with lower output.
5) Depth From Defocus (DFD) could find his way in future cheaper cameras too. But it cannot be installed on current and older MFT models ia firmware update because you need a different structure of the LSI.
79 Responses
If only they made one with the possibility of an EVF . . ,
GM2. 😉
let’s hope for it . . .
They do. E-PM2
A GM2 should also have an optional grip, allowing you to “grow” the camera to handle larger lenses. These two modifications, a hot shoe to allow for an EVF and external flash, along with a nicely designed and affordable add-on grip would make for much broader appeal. That, and a price drop as well.
E-PL5.
Next big thing to happen is Global Shutter and removal of the mechanical (at least to me)! That would be nice and I would prefer that over better IQ through organic, micro-lens or what ever sensor stuff. They could use the free space in larger bodies for built-ND-filters or other cool stuff. Would that theoretically also mean that flash sync can be as high as the shutter speed or are there also other limitations?
Electronic global shutter would give flash sync at any shutter speed, eliminate vibrations, increase reliability and remove rolling shutter problems in video. It would also significantly reduce IQ which is why nobody use it in still cameras so far. It might also increase power usage and introduce cooling problems, not sure about that though.
Why does it reduce IQ?
Global shutter means CMOS get more components on itself. so S/N gonna increase.
Ah, okay. So current E shutter does not degrade IQ (except for rolling shutter)? And what would happen if it was BSI? (Sorry, for bugging you. :D)
On an ordinary sensor, the micro lenses, wiring, and the other electronic componentry required to generate an image from light is on the front of the sensor. This means that these components are blocking some of the incoming light, reducing the sensitivity of your sensor and reducing IQ. BSI means backside illumination, so that the sensor wiring is behind the sensor rather than in front of it, meaning that more of the sensor is directly exposed to the incoming light.
Potentially, if you could use a BSI implementation of a global shutter, you could get around the impacts of having the complex support electronics while maintaining the functional benefits. That would be great, and a major breakthrough.
So lets hope Pana and Fuji are doing exactly that! 😀
I’d say decrease
Global electronic shutter require support electronics on the chip for ach pixel and that takes away quite a bit of the sensor area (I’ve seen 50% mentioned). I’m sure someone will find a way around this eventually. Maybe BSI design could help, but for now you’d see IQ degradation.
Thanks for the reply.
Fairly obvious answers from Panasonic IMO. DFD needs hardware support to be fast enough, so adding it with firmware updates is out of the question unless the functions is already in older models. Which of course is extremely unlikely. However, once DFD is implemented in GH4 it’s easy to include in future models – unless Panasonic wish to differentiate as Olympus do with the E-M1 PD-sensor.
PD af and 4K, another predictable answer, and not too convincing. As long as the camera do Bayer demosaic anyway it’s hard to se how compensating for some PDAF Points would significantly increase processor load. However, if DFD really give the same performance as PDAF on the sensor then it’s certainly a better and more elegant solution.
One disadvantage is that it only works with Panasonic lenses for now. That’s unfortunately also one of the most predictable comments. We’ve seen again and again – Olympus and Panasonic don’t cooperate well when it comes to metadata in the lenses (or lens lineup). It’s the same With CA-corrections, and it’s just BS to protect their own lines of lenses. And why can’t Panasonic supply the data for Olympus lenses? Data can be loaded thru firmware updates or even better with using Wifi. It’s not as Olympus have a large number of lenes. Even profiling the most interesting FT-lenses wouldn’t be a big job, and would (provided i works well) make the GH4 competitive with E-M1 in FT-lens AF-performance.
Same could be said for Olympus not sharing 5 axis ibis.
5 axis IBIS is not a spec. What would Olympus gain if they would just give the modules or even IP to Panasonic? I am sure at the right price they would sell it. On the other hand, Panasonic would gain fast AF with all m43 lenses, not just with their own. But in reality, DFD requires too much processing – given that an object can take almost all the frame, separating it from background requires looking at the whole frame, not just a few focusing points, so it never can be as fast or as energy-efficient as OSPDAF in principle.
Still, what ever Pana is doing in the GH4, it is hell of an AF beast! (Remember Peter Greg video!)
Personally, I would love the G6 body with E-M1 built and weather sealuing, 5-axis IBIS, GH4 sensor and processor. That would be THE m43 camera! Pretty caompact, yet fully feature packed.
never as fast… never as energy efficient (how long one needs to think to come up with that?). Any other predictions? May some lottery numbers?
And computers will never be fast enough to render 3D graphics in real time…
In principle, that’s perhaps valid. In practice, it’s irrelevant. The camera needs an extremely powerful image processor to generate high bitrate 4K video. It’s not using that image processor when you’re framing/focusing an image before taking it, so DFD can use all the computational resources it requires without any consequence to you as an end user.
Panasonic makes the OSPDAF sensor that goes in the EM1. They clearly have the technological and manufacturing know-how. So maybe they have legitimate reasons to prefer DFD to OSDPAF on their cameras, no?
” The camera needs an extremely powerful image processor to generate high bitrate 4K video.”
If it does not do corrections of the video, it does not have to have powerful processor. Compression is usually done on separate hardware, how it hardware video codec is going to help you with DFD? And what it has to do with focusing, you need focusing in video too so it cannot in principle be done ON THE SAME hardware even IF it could be done on similar hardware. Using 16 mpix for focusing is 160 times less efficient and slower than using even 100,000 OSPDAF points (which is already overkill), even IF the process is as simple as PDAF (which it is not), no matter how you spin it.
You seem to forget that Olympus and Panasonic are competitors. They developed a standard together, that’s all. In the market, they are rival companies, just like some companies have developed memory card standards together, but still are competitors.
Of course they are competitors, but their main competition is other brands and one of the advantages with MFT are that you can mix and match bodies and lenses. What’s the point of Panasonic beating Olympus (or the opposite) i MFT fails as a system?
MFT has a real opportunity right now to gain market share while Sony change direction all the time, Fuji’s system still incomplete, an Canikon not getting the point of mirrorless yet. Why waste it on poor interoperability?
Why should MTF fail because of Panasonic vs Olympus competion? Why should Panasonic support Olympus? If DFD is great the customers will come for DFD and should come to the inventor.
Because MFT needs the cooperation of both camera companies to be successful. Once they start essentially forking the MFT standards, you end up with something similar to what Amazon is doing to Android. Android’s success over Apple is largely because there are a ton of manufacturers and they all share the same unified app store.
Why both companies needs to be sucesfull? And tell me when or where Olympus did anything to help Panasonic?
A lens is agnostic of how the camera calculates defocus amount, MFT standard doesn’t require to have such data.
You might ask Panasonic to add support for Oly lenses, but it’s like asking to add DFD focusing to all already released models.
Panasonic didn’t invent DFD AF. It was known decades ago — though, of course not to general public
I don’t know about that. Who has invented it and where I can see it working?
I don’t know who invented it, it’s evident to any person with mathematical background.
Google finds a publication from 1994
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02028349#page-1
Canon and Nikon came late, yet hold more market share than m43. Seems they got the point just fine.
…who writes this stuff.
“The GM1 is not doing well in USA. And it’s mostly used as second camera for professionals.”
What professional is going to use a camera with no viewfinder?
There are a lot of small (very small compared to FF Pro equipment) MFT cameras available that would be great assets to a pro…….I just don,t see a pro selecting a GM1 as a second camera??? What on earth is the basis for that statement other than pure whimsical fabrication????
Some professionals have learned to frame their images using the miraculous technology known as Live View that lets you see what your sensor sees on an LCD display!
In any case, I suspect Panasonic knows who is actually buying their cameras to a greater extent than your preconceived notions of what or what isn’t a “professional” camera.
Read Soundimageplus to get a sense of how real professionals are using the GM1. And happily, at that!
I am a professional.
It is very difficult to frame anything on any LCD in broad daylight.
I at least want the option of a VF. It’s important.
Do you work for Panasonic?…or just a fanbois.
Perhaps that’s why they said “as a second camera” for professionals? Not all photography takes place in broad daylight. Imagine that?
And no, I’m not a fanboy. I am equally covetous of the amazing A7r, XT1, EM1, and GH4. But I also recognize that the GM1 is a remarkable device that has lots of benefits, they just aren’t the same ones as those other cameras.
Basically, you like the stupidest cameras on the market. You probably wasted a fair amount on your toys already, and you may never learn. I find the reverse easier and cheaper: first learn, then buy, as it was earlier on with analog cameras.
Actually, the only camera that I have is a Panasonic GX1 that I bought open-box for $330 with the kit lens. More than half of my lenses are inexpensive adapted 35mm lenses that have taught me the value of fully manual metering and focus.
But hey, thanks for judging me based on nothing at all except your own pretentious assumptions.
And I think you’ll have a hard time convincing anyone except a dyed-in-the-wool DSLR or Leica user that those are the “stupidest cameras on the market.”
Good job then, keep the good money, because you don’t know enough to make an intelligent purchase yet. And stop coveting gear, covet the pictures instead.
I’ve shot with fully manual film SLRs and a variety of fixed lens digital cameras for many years before deciding to go with M4/3 mirrorless, so I know quite a bit, I just never invested in more expensive gear. But once again, thanks for your baseless condescension.
He is pretty good at baseless condescension, even for the interwebs, you have to admit.
The GX1 is a nice camera and there’s incredible deals out there on old manual lenses. Sounds like a pretty solid plan to me.
You forgot to tell us about your amazing intelligent purchases.
A pretty solid plan? Really? You wouldn’t see on if it came in a large bag with written “solid plan”.
I make my living doing production on the corporate level. I’m not high-end, but my biz manage 6 figures a year gross. Suppose I’d be a “pro” if that’s a reasonable qualification. I also make my own documentary films. The GM1 is my 2nd camera. Anyway, there’s my anecdotal testimony.
“Sadly this doesn’t work with Olympus lenses as Olympus does not have such data in their lens, so we can’t understand about the bokeh level.”
Do not try to spin it, admin, What Panasonic said is that they only collected the data for their own lenses and put it into GH4’s firmware, and their FUTURE lenses will contain that data internally, and they WILL NOT give the structures for the data to Olympus and Sigma to prevent compatibility and push their own [overpriced] lenses on GH4 owners. It is just like with CA correction – Olympus cameras correct both in Oly and Pana lenses while Pana cameras correct only Pana lenses.
How is that spin? You restated the facts but admin expressed his opinion that he is sad about it. Big deal.
Who has pverpriced lens? Olympus 12 2.0? Olympus 7-14 2.8? Olympus 75-300? Olympus 25 1.8? List is long…
1.8/25 is over priced?
Of course. Check prices in competitors – Canon, Nikon – you pay 150$ for similar lens at most. Panasonic 25mm is 100$ more expensive but that’s very small premium for light 1.4. You normaly pay mouch more for such difference.
Go ahead then, buy a Canon or a Nikon to put on your m43.
“Check prices in competitors – Canon, Nikon – you pay 150$ for similar lens at most.”
In all fairness, Canon nifty fifty is not similar at all. It is a slow focusing design with all elements moving and NOWHERE NEAR sharp at f/1.8 or even f/2.8, while Oly 45/1.8 is sharp from wide open. Play with the Canon sharpness yourself:
http://slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/canon50f18/ff/tloader.htm
there is a difference between overpriced and expensive. I agree they are not cheap. (the fabuloes 45mm f/1.8 excluded)
They are if comered to what competition outside of u4/3 offers.
“Who has pverpriced lens?”
Panasonic. Compare $1300 MSRP (including in a kit with GH3) for $12-35/2.8 vs $1000 ($800 in a kit, even $700 in a kit with E-M5 right now) for much better 12-40/2.8. Compare $900 for 45/2.8 macro vs $400 for much better (longer working distance, weather-sealed, with focus limiter) 60/2.8. Oly 75-300 II is $550 MSRP, cheaper than the Pany 100-300. Oly 7-14/2.8 is not even out yet (including price is not announced), and what are you comparing it with? 12/2 was certainly overpriced at launch too, now at $699 is more reasonable, although what other 12/2.0 to compare it to? Certainly cheaper than Fuji 14/2.8, despite being a whole stop faster.
peevee, you are wrong. “Olympus cameras correct both in Oly and Pana lenses” nope only the EM1 does you liar.
And if I remember correctly, it also just supports the Oly lenses.
The first (E-M1) firmware update contained this, ”
Compensation for chromatic aberration is supported when using the E-M1 and Panasonic’s LUMIX G VARIO 14-140mm/F3.5-5.6 ASPH./POWER O.I.S. (H-FS14140) together.”
Great, thanks. So maybe more Pana lenses will be added. Maybe this also means that they will coorporate more strongly with eacht other from now on for lens data to compete with the other systems.
In the recent interview, Panasonic clearly said they are not going to cooperate and support non-Panasonic lenses for DFD.
Okay, thanks for the info.
“And if I remember correctly, it also just supports the Oly lenses.”
You remember incorrectly. Read the review on DPR:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-om-d-e-m1/12
“The E-M1 becomes the first Olympus camera to conduct lens-specific corrections (beyond the designed-in correction of distortion in some lenses). Olympus says the E-M1 will attempt to tune its sharpening to suit the attached lens, as well as correcting lateral chromatic aberrations…
The E-M1 also appears to be fully capable of correcting lateral CA with Panasonic lenses – something Olympus has been a little vague about. The comparison below shows this, using the Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm F2.8 ASPH OIS on both the E-M1 and E-M5. Again, the E-M1’s removal of fringing results in a visibly cleaner image.”
You can see on page 14 that E-M1 corrects CA on Panasonic 14/2.5 too.
“only the EM1 does you liar.”
Cameras before E-M1 (with TruePic VI and earlier) did not correct for CA in Olympus lenses euther. They added the feature in TruePic VII, and correct both for Oly and Panasonic now. I bet E-M10 (with TruePic VII) does that too. Show me a single Olympus camera with purposely degrades performance when used with Panasonic lenses, like Panasonic does with respect to CA correction and autofocus?
Or, you could just sell optically corrected lenses in the first place. Heck, you’re already charging for it.
Another place where micro 4/3 cost savings should have been passed to customers.
No thanks, full optical correction would increase size and price without any benefits.
Size and price are already up there…
Needs to come in all black to the USA
The GM1 would benefit from that look, rather than the silver and orange version.
I almost bought the GM1 and kit zoom the other day, but I really wanted an all-black version with the 15mm lens. The price was amazing, at about $150 off, but I’m not sure I’d use the lens enough, once I would buy the 15mm lens.
> Sadly this doesn’t work with Olympus lenses
Does Pana talks to the Oly about it?
Or why not buy several popular lenses, analyse their OOF profiles, put them into a firmware and push out the update?
Or ask GH4 owners: they’d gladly lease for some time their Oly lenses to Panasonic to create the OOF profiles.
> But it cannot be installed on current and older MFT models ia firmware update because you need a different structure of the LSI.
As always. Use crap hardware. Later blame it for inability to add highly requested features. (From the past: zebras, focus peaking, customization of Fn/etc buttons. Now DFD.)
They never think forward. That’s why it makes no sense to buy premium enthusiast cameras like GX7: they do not hold their value and new features largely become available soon in entry-/mid-tier models. You can cycle through them often and still come out ahead financially.
I do not need new PC or Mac when new OS becomes available. I do not need new smartphone when new version of iOS/Android(Cyanogen) becomes available. I do not need new version of OS when new version of LR becomes available. Or new smartphone to update an app. That’s why ironically I’m on my second smartphone now, while I’ll keep my GX7 for much longer (aka Pana/friends will not see my money any time soon): I trust the smartphone manufacturers more, than the camera manufacturers. Every new phone I bought always brought something new to the table. While every time I buy a new camera, something always is missing.
You cant run the latest OS on an old computer. ios7 cant run on iphone 3g. You will have to buy a new phone. There are some apps that use a new phones new features and you have to buy that new phone to update to that app. Eventually the next version of LR will require you to update your OS which will then require you to update your computer. New cameras dont bring anything new? GF1-GX1 brought touch screen and better sensor. GX1-GX7 brought tilt screen, evf, and ibis.
GH4 users already have GH4. Now they should buy anothe rPanasonic product. There is no benefit for Pana when Gh4 buy Olympus lens.
I know its its redundant and has been said over and over again. no EVF, neither built in nor attachable, sadly is a deal breaker to me.
Replace the pop up flash with a hotshoe and then sell it in a bundle with a mini flash unit as well as a EVF piece. Justify the price the way you want it, to me it becomes far more compelling while remaining small as desired.
And for lots of people having to use a separate mini flash unit is a dealbreaker. It’s sort of the antithesis of something designed to be as small and self-contained as possible…
And if its so aimed at a specific market, why not just find what lens they want and offer a fixed lens solution?
I know that it will never be 100% satisfactory no matter what and that there are some users that values more a pop up flash then to carry a unit, even a mini one, hardly more powerful. I know that and I don’t even blame them. But I don’t agree with them 😉
for me its not a dealbreaker, if i really need an evf on such type of camera(i prefer to adapt and use the lcd instead, great for relaxed candid modelshoots) I use a lcd 2,5-3x magnifier with attachment clipframe when needed. which offer better eye relief then prob any built in viewfinder. The GM might be a future option for me, but since i do video during modelshooting I prefer stabilation….maybe a lens with IS would be great for this but have not tried that yet. anyone have experience with it in the 12-45mm range?
I’ve never said anything about you and deal breakers. Ever. I don’t even know you. 😉
Panasonic are in competition with Olympus they don’t want you to buy another companies lenses they want you to buy theirs. They also have limited resources if they are cancelling the new zoom I don’t see them making other people lenses DFD friendly.
It is not ” making other people lenses DFD friendly”, it is making their own product (camera) better by being fully compatible with the whole system. They don’t want to make better cameras? We will buy something else.
And making DFD profiles for all m43 AF lenses (including Oly and Samsung and even Kodak) would take them just a few man-days, I bet. And giving the spec (structures to be put into lens firmware) to Oly and Sigma for inclusion in their lenses would take seconds. If it is not done, it is not done for a purpose.
GM1 is selling in France because of their presence in ligue 1 , France’s main football league…..so many times I see banners of GM1 in the stadium……so good marketing indeed helps MFT to grow haha