DWOfPaul wrote:
I don't have a good enough knowledge of L mount cameras to give a full count, but I know the Panasonic S1R ii can do up to 40 fps with electronic shutter in raw and the Panasonic S1 ii can do 60fps 14bit raw or 70 fps 12 bit raw with electronic shutter.
Panasonic have 'partially stacked sensor'. Therefore sensor readout speed is much slower than A1 and Z8/Z9.
Roughly twice as long as an A9.
So for most users, too slow to be considered an option leaving adapted on Nikon as the choice if more than 15 fps is wanted.
I have not made any effort to check opinions on Panasonic AF, but they'll need both AF and Fast Sensor to really compete.
I bet Sigma is hoping Panasonic get there.
DWOfPaul wrote:
I don't have a good enough knowledge of L mount cameras to give a full count, but I know the Panasonic S1R ii can do up to 40 fps with electronic shutter in raw and the Panasonic S1 ii can do 60fps 14bit raw or 70 fps 12 bit raw with electronic shutter.
If one is a pro needing a 200/2, then one probably already has a Nikkor or Canon lens for years. I'm not sure that 15FPS is so terrible, but Sony users could buy one of those reasonably priced bodies you mentioned and dedicate it to the 200/2 Sigma.
I imagine some a7rIV or V users would happy to have 200/2 for certain portraiture and not care about FPS.
Good link, and not really surprising since Sony continues to spit in the eyes of their own customers. I think pros are at their limit with the 15fps bullshit.
Choderboy wrote:
Panasonic have 'partially stacked sensor'. Therefore sensor readout speed is much slower than A1 and Z8/Z9.
Roughly twice as long as an A9.
So for most users, too slow to be considered an option leaving adapted on Nikon as the choice if more than 15 fps is wanted.
I have not made any effort to check opinions on Panasonic AF, but they'll need both AF and Fast Sensor to really compete.
I bet Sigma is hoping Panasonic get there.
So I had the same train of taught and experience. My a7rIV has an electronic shutter readout speed of 1/10 and my Z8 has a readout speed of 1/268.
I saw people happy with the electronic shutter of the partially stacked Z6III and I decided to dig in a bit. the Z6III has a readout speed of 1/69, basically 7x faster than my a7rIV and has less than 1/2 the resolution (smaller pixels are more forgiving). But the Z6III is still about 4x slower than my Z8. But we have had many cameras with mechanical shutters of 1/200 (sync speed) and we have been happy with the results. So then the Z6III electronic shutter readout is only about 3x slower than ideal. Since rarely do we engineer right on the border of acceptable, we can probably get away with a readout / sync speed of about 1/100 - 1/150 for all but the most extreme situations. Which means the Z6III is probably only about 1.5x - 2x slower than covering almost all use cases.
So while on paper partially stacked sensors may still look quite slow compared to fully stacked sensors, they may very well be vast enough to make electronic shutters viable for a lot of photography use cases.
EB-1 wrote:
If one is a pro needing a 200/2, then one probably already has a Nikkor or Canon lens for years. I'm not sure that 15FPS is so terrible, but Sony users could buy one of those reasonably priced bodies you mentioned and dedicate it to the 200/2 Sigma.
I imagine some a7rIV or V users would happy to have 200/2 for certain portraiture and not care about FPS.
EBH
I actually went down that train of thought, wondering if it would make sense to get an SR1 II to use the Sigma 300-600mm f4 on. But I stopped after hearing that the 300-600 can do 20FPS on the Z8 and it pretty much works with Sony E TC's on the Z8.
Ideally, for me, I would like to see Megadap make an L to Z adapter, because I can't realistically see adding a third mount to the mix. Two is already fairly hard to juggle.
DWOfPaul wrote:
So I had the same train of taught and experience. My a7rIV has an electronic shutter readout speed of 1/10 and my Z8 has a readout speed of 1/268.
I saw people happy with the electronic shutter of the partially stacked Z6III and I decided to dig in a bit. the Z6III has a readout speed of 1/69, basically 7x faster than my a7rIV and has less than 1/2 the resolution (smaller pixels are more forgiving). But the Z6III is still about 4x slower than my Z8. But we have had many cameras with mechanical shutters of 1/200 (sync speed) and we have been happy with the results. So then the Z6III electronic shutter readout is only about 3x slower than ideal. Since rarely do we engineer right on the border of acceptable, we can probably get away with a readout / sync speed of about 1/100 - 1/150 for all but the most extreme situations. Which means the Z6III is probably only about 1.5x - 2x slower than covering almost all use cases.
So while on paper partially stacked sensors may still look quite slow compared to fully stacked sensors, they may very well be vast enough to make electronic shutters viable for a lot of photography use cases....Show more →
The original R5 had a readout speed of about 1/60, with no stackables. It's not so good for rapidly moving subjects like sports at high shutter speeds but fine for many average moving subjects.
EB-1 wrote:
The original R5 had a readout speed of about 1/60, with no stackables. It's not so good for rapidly moving subjects like sports at high shutter speeds but fine for many average moving subjects.
EBH
Obviously, it's up to the individual to decide what is acceptable.
R5 @ 1/60 acceptable to some.
A9 @ 1/160 acceptable to most.
Faster than A9, ie, Z9,Z8,R3,R1,A1 acceptable to everyone.
A7RIV is 1/30 sec for 12 bit, acceptable to almost nobody for fast moving subjects. A7RIV 14 bit even slower.
Anti flame disclaimer: theses comments are addressing the issue of Panasonic cameras high electronic fps as an alternative to Sony's 15 fps limitation for 3rd party lenses. Obviously only Sony cameras capable of more than 15 fps, A9,A1,A1II are relevant to this issue. In summary, the native L mount advantage of Panasonic for this and other Sigma lenses is probably not really an advantage unless slow sensor readout is acceptable. Further, this only relates to frame rate. I have no knowledge of Panasonic AF vs the AF of a Sigma E mount lens adapted to Nikon. I suppose, more accurately, I have read mostly positive comments about Sigma E mount adapted to Nikon, but I don't believe that justifies me stating that as a fact.
RoamingScott wrote:
I laugh at this stupid restriction every time it comes up in a review video...the Z9ii might be the best platform for Sigma E glass when it comes out
Drives me nuts, and it has only been exacerbated by picking up the excellent Sigma 70-200/2.8.
Scott - I know you're in the Nikon forums: do you know if anyone has tried the Megadap with Sigma E lenses on, say, the Nikon Z 1.4 TC?
Laowa says they will be ready with their 200/2 C-Dreamer (1.77kg,11elements/9gropus,9 aperture blades,1,5m mfd,grey or black finish,drop-in 43mm filters slot) by October the 1st.Rather not tempting for me.
Peire wrote:
Laowa says they will be ready with their 200/2 C-Dreamer (1.77kg,11elements/9gropus,9 aperture blades,1,5m mfd,grey or black finish,drop-in 43mm filters slot) by October the 1st.Rather not tempting for me.
For portrait use, the Laowa could be a serious contender.
I wonder what the pricing will be...
It seems like the Laowa won't have Optical Stabilization (OS) and IBIS becomes much less effective at 200mm which could be a big downside. Perhaps IBIS might only give you about 1 to 2 stops of compensation vs 6.5 stops for the Sigma.
Indeed.
It might also have less clinical rendering and cost half as much ...
Fred Miranda wrote:
It seems like the Laowa won't have Optical Stabilization (OS) and IBIS becomes much less effective at 200mm which could be a big downside. Perhaps IBIS might only give you about 1 to 2 stops of compensation vs 6.5 stops for the Sigma.
NJPhotographer wrote:
I see a reviewer calling this his "all-time favorite portrait lens". Sure, it can be used for portraits, but it's a terrible focal length for most portraits. It creates such a flat view, and puts the photographer very far away from the subject.
I couldn't disagree more. Maybe is terrible for your needs but not mine or others. We all have our own specific requirements and styles.
This lens and the 135mm 1.4 have me considering leaving Canon but no matter what body I look at, there is always a compromise for MY needs.
...