Poll: Should Panasonic Stop Making MFT Cameras and Concentrate on Building Full-Frame Only?

Poll

by Johnnie BehiriFebruary 14^th, 2024

In today’s poll, we’re eager to know your thoughts on Panasonic manufacturing Micro-Four-Thirds cameras alongside full-frame models! In the past, making smaller bodies and at times cheaper hybrid cameras accommodating smaller sensors made a lot of sense, but how does it still hold? If you look closely, the new LUMIX G9 II (MFT sensor size) is currently more expensive than the LUMIX S5 II (Full-Frame) at B&H. (Heck, even the LUMIX S5 II together with a 50mm kit lens is cheaper than the LUMIX G9 II)… True, the LUMIX S5 II is currently being offered at a special reduced price, but this has been the case for some time now.

Many of the respected camera manufacturers in our industry are offering multiple choices when it comes to sensor sizes. Sony and Canon are offering full-frame and APS-C hybrid cameras, and FUJIFILM has APS-C next to medium format recording devices. Even Blackmagic Design offers MFT, S35, and full-frame cameras, and the list goes on. As a matter of truth, designing cameras is a lengthy process, and when it comes to working on multiple choices, it can become ever more challenging. After all, it’s not that these companies all have unlimited resources.

In today’s poll, we are putting Panasonic in the spotlight. Without a doubt, the company is a pioneer when it comes to hybrid cameras, especially those that are targeted toward filmmakers. The “GH” and “G” series of cameras have been at the forefront and represented the “Panasonic spirit for innovation” in a great way. The same can be said about Panasonic’s “S line” of full-frame sensor cameras. Many of those are video feature-rich and come at a great value for money. Pansonic was also clever enough to finally move forward and update the autofocus functionality in many cameras from both lines, so these happen to be even more attractive for creators. Now, the question is, should Panasonic continue and produce both – full-frame next to MFT sensor size cameras – OR, is it time to move forward and concentrate on building full-frame sensor cameras only? I have to be completely clear here, this question is coming up from me and not from Panasonic in any way! This is something that has been on my mind every time a new MFT camera is introduced to the market. Here at CineD, we respect the manufacturer’s effort to cater to us with both, although we do tend to believe that MFT has stiffer competition than ever before. Therefore, is it time to recalculate the next step?

In the past, Micro-Four-Thirds cameras had a clear advantage over larger sensor sizes when it came to the actual camera size and the size of lenses accommodating it. But now, this advantage is negligible, if it exists at all. For quite some time, full-frame cameras from different manufacturers have been smaller in size than their MFT counterparts. (Sony FX3 /FX30 or a7C are good examples).

But what do YOU think? Should Panasonic continue to support both sensor sizes, or concentrate all of their R&D development effort on creating fabulous, full-frame cameras only?

This poll uses Javascript. If you cannot see the poll above, please disable “Enhanced/Strict Tracking Protection” in your browser settings.

Please share your thoughts with us in the comment section below. We are extremely curious to hear where the wind blows…