Leaderboard

How would one use the audio from the GX85 regardless? It's bad audio. Good only for a scratch track to guide the sync process in post-production. The only way to get good audio for any production, from your backyard home movies to the highest level film productions, is to get a mic near your subject. This is fundamental. I'm frankly a little surprised that there are people out there that would consider buying and owning loads of production gear to create impressive IQ, but then mount some mic to a camera hot shoe and think that was appropriate...for almost anything at all beside rough ambient noise/room tone. Yet, all you have to do is watch a few vlogger youtube videos to see this ignorance. I find it quite staggering because it's so ridiculously obvious a problem to solve. A crappy mic in the proper place will be better than the most expensive mic in the world set up in the wrong place. Audio is NOT Video. You can't buy your way into an easy solution. You want better IQ on your images? A better camera/lens can do the trick. You want better audio? You better know how sound vibrations actually work --and know how to use that to your advantage.

Yes I have...the video assist works great with it! You can record simultaneously too. If I record 4k30 in the camera the Video Assist automatically changes to 1080p30. Edit: Added an image of the Video assist in action. Another plus is the focus peaking works better than the internal one.

I'm really damn impressed with the Switar 16mm wide open (f/1.8).

It's a bit lens dependant. The 35mm F2 WR and 18-50mm F2.8-4 OIS work best in AF-C mode but it's definitely not very reliable all the time. The 35mm F1.4 and 56mm F1.2 have really noisy AF motors and big heavy glass elements to shift... so don't work as well. I think the A6300 and X Pro2 share a very similar sensor and phase-detect AF is on the chip.

Much much more difficult and much more advanced, and F1.4 will give a completely different look & feel to an F2.8 on full frame, plus it's 2 stops brighter. It's not right to go around multiplying apertures by crop factor. An F1.4 on Micro Four Thirds is as a big a hole as an F1.4 on full frame. If this lens is as stunning as the Leica 42.5mm F1.2, I will be buying one. Plus... it IS a Leica you know!? It isn't a Zeiss. It's not a Panasonic. It's not a Canon. Leica designed optics cost a lot of money for a reason. No you can't dude. First of all an image is a combination of camera and lens. Tell me about that full frame sensor camera that shoots 4K for less than $1200. It doesn't exist yet. Then add the cost of the 24mm for full frame. Forget about that mythical full frame 24mm F2.8 you seem to be in awe of... the premium, sharp, low distortion optics are the Zeiss Batis 25mm F2, the Sigma 20mm F1.4 and if you can forgive the lesser sharpness and more distortion, the Canon 24mm F1.4 - all of those push you quite far past 'affordable' when paired with even the cheapest GH4-standard full frame 4K video mirrorless body or DSLR, namely the A7S II or 1D C. The GH5 paired with just two lenses, the Leica 42.5 F1.2 and Leica 12 F1.4 will have astounding image quality, likely bettering the A7S II or A7R II with the Batis 25 and 85 for FAR less money. Nobody complains about the Batis 25mm F2.0 price being $1200-ish and that is the nearest modern competitor to the Leica 12mm F1.4 in terms of image quality and modern build standards & AF. All I ever hear is full frame this, full frame that, it's like people are blinded by the pure simplification of all the arguments regarding image quality down to one spec. Not to mention the fact that if the GH5 has the GX85's in-body 5 axis IBIS, it will be stronger than a full frame camera in that respect too... And if it is Super 35mm you want, put a Speed Booster on it. You could say that for $999 you can get an A6300 but the rolling shutter and overheating really kills it compared to what the impending GH5 will likely be capable of in terms of reliability and rolling shutter less than half of what kind of skew the A6300 produces. Then add to that $999 the cost of a 16mm F1.4 E-mount lens... oh there isn't one... ok the cost of a Speed Booster and full frame Canon 24mm F1.4L, and already you are past the $2000 point... Easily. And that is why Bro... You don't knock this Leica 12.

Wow, that's a lot to go through, but I'll do my best to cover your complaints. I like how there aren't a bunch of 'good job' posts on this forum, posters actually take time to give constructive criticism. Firstly, while I am a big fan of the FS5, I'm hardly fixated on every shoot I go on. It gives me reliable results (except for the 'flickergate' saga), and it's the tool I've chosen for capturing most TCSTV episodes. I realize that many viewers preferred when we shot the show on more affordable cameras, and I empathize with that. The FS5 just lets me work faster, which is key when I'm shooting and editing an episode a week on my free time. Reviewing the FS5 is at the very back of my mind when shooting episodes, I'm busy getting the shots I need for a coherent review. I'm sorry I didn't see your request for a review of HDMI output. It was discussed, but the number of shooters using a 4K recorder on a camera at this price range seemed too small a market for us to devote a lot of time to in the review. As well, the benefits of improved colour space are most noticeable after heavy grading. The lack of a log profile or Cine profiles mean a lot of information is already baked into the files. There will be advantages to shooting 4:2:2 out, but they won't be nearly as noticeable as if the footage was shot log and properly graded. As far as the Canon 80D, that is a flawed camera that is targeting the Vlogging audience (not pros) extremely well. The dual pixel AF is a great thing for people inexperienced at shooting video, and eliminated one of the major hurdles of large sensor capture. The stabilizer in the GX85 is also a powerful tool for people who won't use a tripod, gimbal, steadicam, etc but those users also probably won't have much interest in syncing sound. At the end of the day, I love the image and stabilization of the GX85, but I feel like the features have been put together haphazardly. It is a very exciting preview of the GH5, which is hopefully where Panasonic will stop with any artificial handicapping and give us the 5 axis stabilizer, a great internal codec, nice preamp, and maintain the great battery life and stability. It should be an exciting Photokina!

I see the NX1 and NX500 have an MJPEG codec, but it's only used for the 640x480 recording mode. But the codec is there, right? Maybe we could persuade it to record at a higher resolution and bitrate in 4:2:2 like the Canon 1D C. (Ok, wild leap there, but any improvement would be an interesting discovery). Also the silent shutter, in this mode it does raw from a rolling shutter scan of the sensor, just like a video mode... the raw data must be lurking in the buffer somewhere whilst it runs in video mode... now what we need is a genius to dive in a grab it

long presses are not supported by Otto's keyscan... How about double click on the button to illuminate top lcd?

Luckily, we're both wrong on our previous assumption! And it's very simple: Just push the shutter adjustment wheel and the camera does the "punch-in." Pull your focus and half press the shutter release to pop back out to full screen. Easy and nice. BTW, near as can figure at the moment, this only works when a dumb lens is on the mount.

I like RED but I wouldn't automatically think it's an upgrade from Blackmagic. I don't know about the new sensors, but my Scarlet was a lot worse than the BMCC in low light. Not even close - the was much better s/n from the Blackmagic, and the actual noise pattern was very organic on the blackmagic, not the Red. I'm sure you could have cleaned it up a bit in post, but the RED isn't something you can get away with underexposing at all. Again, maybe the new sensors are different, but I bailed out of that RED ecosystem full of expensive propriety support gear. I'm not surprised that Blackmagic is having some issues - RED did too. There's actually a much easier way for Blackmagic to exercise better quality control, service, and reliability, etc. It's price. They have been the cheapest (and have been) for their market segments, and the best image quality per price ratio, and in fact have disrupted the industry in some ways because the competition is lowering prices and offering similar products. Blackmagic has been trying to offer pro-level gear at consumer prices. Their game is pushing resolve and post-production products, not protecting lines of cameras. I'll say this, it's a lot more realistic to expect Blackmagic to fix some of their issues than Sony or Canon to offer cinema features in their consumer cameras.

We all relate to the world differently, eh? I'll still argue that knowing the why of an issue (even from a grumpy old cuss like me) is more important than being offered a subjective solution. That way you can figure out an answer that works for your specific problem. After all, it's your problem and you have the best insight on the nuances of it. Agreed. I do like the camera as well. But it's hard to step down from a really good EVF like the EM5II.

Here's a Quick review from someone that owns a GX7, EM5II, GX85 and likes to shoot with manual lenses. The GX85 has great IQ. Love the 4k and the colors are an improvement. Ergos stink. The EVF is a mess and, for lack of a better word, "terrible." I would have thought it couldn't be any worse than the GX7, and I was right. Unfortunately, it's the same. Yikes. On the EM5II, the EVF is so clear and clean that a user can actually use it to find manual focus. It's not viable on my LUMIX cams, and to step backwards from that luxury is a shame. The body grip of the GX85 is not comfortable (or reassuring in one's hand) and it's actually worse than the GX7 in that regard. However, exposure controls are easily accessed and exposure monitoring is impressive. This end-user ergos might not matter to you if you're not shooting a ton of footage, but once you try to get through full day shoots while handholding the GX85, it's something to seriously consider. For now, the GX85 IQ is so superior to a camera like the EM5II, that it's a worthwhile tradeoff. But, since the egos are so much better and nicer in the EM5II, at this point I would not hesitate to return to an Olympus camera once they finally adopt 4K. *sigh* it's never perfect, eh?

@Greg Block Thanks for sharing the image of your rig! I'm thinking about getting a 5" or 7" monitor myself. I'm having a hard time deciding between VS-2 Fine HD, Ikan DH5e or DH7... I didn't think of the HDMI cable positioning as a problem as it's on the left side on my GH4. Here's how my rig could look when I decide which monitor to get. That's a 5" smartphone on top mounted with Shoulder Pod S1 and a ballhead screwed on to a SmallRig handle. I need the handle on the GX85 because of the HDMI is on the left but on the GH4 I won't need it so it can actually be an even smaller setup.

I was not using audio from the GX85. The fan is audible for sure on the Video Assist, but it wasn't so loud that the lavaliere mic picked it up on the main camera (G7). Like you said handheld is not optimal with the external monitor. I have a small shoulder mount system I use for that.

I bought the Lens Turbo I 4 months ago, since that I had no problems with the IQ. I use with a 50mm Pentax SMC f1.7, 85mm Canon f1.8, Tamron 24-70. This is a great comparison: Here are my latest two videos shot with it (there are also some canon shots)

This shop did the declicking for 25 Euro per lens on my Zeiss ZF and they did a great job! http://kameralanger.de Alas, it's located in the south of Germany.

I use Movie Studio Platinum and rate it almost as highly as you do. However there is one big problem that has driven me away from it into the arms of Resolve, which I also rate highly. The problem is that the UI is not compatible with 4K display resolutions so I struggle to see and use the interface on my Windows 10 laptop with a 4k display. I hope the new owners of these excellent Sony products sort this issue out soon, but I am very happy with Resolve 12.5.

A little off topic, but I am looking at a couple AT-X lenses... Which ones do you have? I'll also pick up a Turbo II as well, so this topic came up at the perfect time. I also have a few MInolta lenses. And am looking at the Turbo II. Which lenses do you use with yours and have you noticed that the turbo looks better with certain lenses?

I've had 2 x Elmoscope II, 2 x 8Z and 1 x B&H. One 8Z had Gold flares, one Blue flares. The Blue one flared the easiest of any lens I've owned. Both Elmo Scopes were Gold flares, Both B&H were Gold flares. The Elmo IIs I had seemed to flare a bit easier than the B&H. The one I kept and use the most now is an Elmo II, but I think it's really dependent on production factors as to which is the sharpest/ best. They all can be good.

For M42 lenses, there are plenty that have clickless apertures (they call them Pre-Set Apertures), mostly the Russain lenses, the classics - Helios 44-2, Jupiter 9, Tair 11a etc... It depends where you are in the world, but in the UK this guy de-clicks lenses to a very high standard: http://www.thelensdoctor.co.uk/index.html

I've got the RJ Focal reducer M42 to M4/3 & its just fine - no blue spot that everyone goes on about & have even fooled people thinking that it was the official SpeedBooster. However, I've heard/seen some pretty awful example footage of both the Mitakon & RJ - so all I can think is that QC isn't the best or that some lenses don't play well with these cheaper versions. Personally, i'm using Vintage M42 lenses in combo with Anamorphic lenses (Isco 54 & WS 2000) with no problems encountered (perhaps they hide the ugly stuff?) and I do believe that the newer sharper lenses just exaggerate all the defects inherent in the cheaper SBs. Or are the M42 cheap SBs just not experiencing the troubles - don't know. Then again, people have had issues with the official SpeedBoosters too, so go figure. Are the official SBs worth so much more, that's between you & your wallet. I need a Nikon to M4/3 version for my Tokina AT-X Pro/Nikon Ai-s lenses & am on the fence between the Mitakon & the RJ - so much debate about which ones are better & it has become soooo confusing. Anyone had experience with Nikon to M4/3?

So Pansonic is already discounting the GX80+12-32 zoom or with double-lens kit by £50 (€70) cash back until September 5: http://promotions.panasonic.co.uk/promotions/promotions/view_terms/133

I have both an RJ FOcal reducer (MD -> FX) and Mitakon Lens Turbo II (MD -> M43) and here is my thought on both of them. The RJ, is cheap and fun to use. But corners of the image gets very soft and it is not good for fast aperture lenses (my 50/1.4@1.4 is dreamy like with the RJ adapter). Built quality is good enough though. I'll just think that the RJ focal reducer is good if you are not seeking sharpness and contrast. (Plus the RJ suffers from "blue flare" which was also present on the first versions of the lens turbo but corrected on the lens turbo II. The Mitakon is very good in terms of quality. No loss of contrast or sharpness. Build quality is good except that the mount is not stiff enough. The lens can move on it by a degree. Which makes follow focusing a hell ... I do not know if it is a QC problem as I do not know anyone else with a Lens Turbo II MD -> M43. I used the Metabones once. I dont think it worth the extra money compared to the lens turbo II. Build quality is a bit better, but thats it. Image quality wise, both are very good.

Review with test shots - looks nice, would like to see more... be aware the presenter is being filmed on a FS5 with Sigma lenses (and a speedbooster)

I recognize a bit of rationalization there to try and talk ones self into a purchase. amiright? ;-). Been there.

I'll just add my 2 cents. What makes a lens great: high micro-contrast high sharpness across the field excellent IS low distortion round bokeh balls low chromatic aberration no vignetting maintains colors easy-to-use and handle withstand torrential rainfall durable reasonable size aperture ring distance markings perhaps more?... The above looks mathematical, but if you like the look, you like the look. It's more subjective than people think. This lens checks a lot of boxes (no IS, but no big deal with a GX80). So, why does this lens cost so much? It doesn't. I'll argue in favor of buying this lens on the sole criterion: "I like the look." Lenses can range from free (someone gave me one once) to millions (think NASA). Now, the cost of ownership could be actually quite cheap (provided you don't break it). At $1299 (retail full price), it seems expensive, but how much can you sell it for later? I bet you could sell it for more than $600 by the time you move on to something else. Meanwhile, you've just shot a bumload of photos and videos with the "look" you like. How much would that be worth to you? In short, the Panasonic Leica 12mm sounds like a state-of-the-art lens for 2016. And, if you were to put your money in a lens for MFT, a fast wide one would be a good place. They're the more difficult ones to design and manufacture... period. Also, this thing is quite small (which is arguably THE POINT OF MFT). "But it's not full frame!" Who cares? People get caught up in this argument all the time and it's quite meaningless. Can I get shallow DOF on MFT? YES!!! "But I want only the cornea of the eye to be in perfect focus and the rest to be a beautiful bokeh ball!" Really? If there's one argument not often made against full-frame, it's that it lacks DOF (especially for videography)... just saying. It's no wonder that film industry rarely uses them.

The original A7?... hmm. Similar results to a GH3? Not really. It has bags of aliasing, moire, pathetic codec and a soft image. Not my cup of tea. If you're going to use the 55mm F2.8, why not put it on an A7S for 1080p? Yes 4K has a lot to do with it. You need better lenses for it. I have this lens. An ok cheap lens, nothing unique or special really, aside from it being nice and compact. However you're not comparing kit that's even in the same league. When you say 'very sharp and well corrected'... not compared to the Batis 25mm F2 or the Leica 12mm F1.4! This is my entire point. It's not overpriced. It's just fucking good. The absolute cutting edge comparable with Leica's $$$ M lenses. The Olympus OM lenses are all soft in comparison, designed for film SLRs and a long flange distance. The Leica 12mm is designed for digital, short flange distance mirrorless like a rangefinder M lens. BIG difference. Lovely. But your argument seems to be that this would be as 'sharp' and as highly corrected as a GH5 + Leica 12mm F1.4, which thus makes the Leica overpriced because it isn't any 'better'. Nope. You have lost your own argument! I have seen the samples.

starts at 2:30 - [Video How-to Guide] Pro Suggest Market-Setup and Customize Films http://www.samsung.com/ae/support/skp/htv/16258

Yep the X Pro 2's colour is effortless, you don't need to do anything to it in post and if you just want 1080p, it's a lovely simple solution. The magenta cast in the S-LOG 3 footage though is down to the user not being knowledgable enough with grading tools to correct it. S-LOG is a bitch to work with, so it is partly the camera's fault and partly the user's. I don't blame anyone who has trouble getting the colour from Sony cameras to match Fuji! It's hard!

ev+ok work perfectly in my nx1, never problems.

well i guess i'm fucked cuz i just bought that c100 today! seriously though i can tell you none of my clients have yet required 4K and i've got some pretty damn big clients on the corporate side (i'm not in the US though). and i doubt i'm the only one left delivering 1080p in 2016. in 6 months or a year things could be different. my mate has an A7S2 and has only yet delivered 1080p with it. if i need 4k tomorrow i can borrow or rent whatever 4K camera the budget allows. as for Ursa Mini 4.6K, did you read my previous post? cuz i state quite clearly it's the best IQ for the money. but a rigged up UM 4.6K will run you $7-8K minimum, has a native iso of 800, no ND's etc... and that's without counting the magenta issue plaguing 99% of the units out there. weight wise, i'm sorry but with the EVF, handle and V-mount battery it weighs a ton and would be super impractical for a wedding type event.. i got the C100 for run & gun. stripped down it's friggin tiny yet offers NDs, waveform assist etc.. got it for dirt cheap too so i couldn't pass on the deal (basically the price of a nice lens) at some random camera store that had no clue about video stuff.. they didn't even realise it had dual pix upgrade. i'm not oblivious to the fact i'll probably outgrow it sooner then later, just didn't wanna drop loads at this point on gear i'm not 100% feeling (i.e current Sony / BM products). that's just my opinion though, to each their own...

You're clueless buddy.

I do not know - on my camera EV always generates double events and it is impossible to combine it with OK :-( I could change it in the release but it would be untested by me - or I could put in a disclaimer that it does not work for me.

I really liked the ev + ok on nx1. Never gave problems.

You can try these from Helicoptersean on ebay: http://stores.ebay.com/Follow-Focus-Gears?rmvSB=true or the ones from Lux Gears, if you are located in the U.S.: http://store.cool-lux.com/collections/luxgears#_l_1o How about these? http://www.ebay.de/itm/FLEX-Seamless-Follow-Focus-Gear-for-DSLR-Lens-50-93mm-/291784263189?

Did a sky shot yesterday evening as was recommended by fuzzy Internal Vector (Contrast pushed up) External Vector (Contrast pushed up) Internal Screenshot External Screenshot

used the gx80 with 12-32 for first time on actual shoot and wanted to share a few thoughts: - ibis works well to keep camera shake and jitter at bay in run n gun situations like the ones I am used to. If you can manage to walk smoothly you can even pull off some "sort of" gimbal shots. - resolution, dynamic range and color has greatly improved from gh1 and gh2 (my previous panny cameras) - the 12-32 lens is a good all rounder for my type of situations, with ETC you get the extra reach when needed. I do really miss a manual focus gear. - single AF defining the area with touch screen and focusing with half shutter is my preferred way of using this lens. I do wish peaking was enabled also for AF just to be sure. I did miss a couple of out of focus shots looking at the lcd, which confirms my personal hate towards filming with lcd, I much prefer looking into an evf. - i missed several recordings, because sometimes you need to press twice the rec button, it seems that after 1 min of inactivity the camera goes into a half standby, removing info from screen. - hdmi ouput is clean and does not impact lcd or evf output as many panny cameras do - battery life is rubbish. I had only 1 battery with me and only lasted around 30mins continuos use. Not being able to recharge in camera with the camera on really sucks. With the Blackmagic pocket I could use an external power pack to recharge internal batt and power the cam at the same time and could go on the whole day. - using standard profile with -5 and shadow +2 I am happy with shadow level and highlight rolloff. I still am not convinced about skin tones, I guess the Blackmagic has spoilt me in this area. - i cannot make timelapse function work. I just don't get it. I also tried reading the manual but all I can do is set starting time, interval and image count ( I presume you need to put 0 to have infinite takes). But then how do you actually start the function? with shutter it only takes 1 pic.... Here is a pic of my handheld rig I have been using since the GH1 ages, it gives me the flexibilty I need to move quickly and adds some mass to smooth out movement. There is an old 8mm camera pistol grip, a chest pad made out of a metal L bracket with foam and vinyl, Fotga rod with baseplate and manfrotto ballhead with quick release. Here is a quick selection of clips from the weekend.

Thanks everyone. My biggest takeaway from all of these replies is that it can work in a pinch but I shouldn't be the basis for every shot. I'll stick with NDs.

Thank you everyone for the great feedback you guys are really helping out ! The combo I use is the Nikon D750 + Tamron 24-70mm F/2.8 and in terms of lighting everything is Aputure. The C500 I have yet to find one in that price range, but then again if im going to invest so much in a new camera id much rather get a new unit with warranty, and somewhere close in case there's any problem I can just hop to the place i bought it and get it fixed. Yeah size is a concern, Id hate to have something like excess weight slowing me down. Starting to lean more towards the C100 II but haven't really made up my mind yet.

Haven't used the mini, but to this day, the C100 has been the most pleasant "get out of the way and shoot" camera I've ever used. A joy to work with. Quality was always great, despite the weak codec. Doesn't need much tweaking in post because the Canon color is so pleasant out of the box.

Which lenses do you have? This is true. The C100ii is the most hands-off camera I've ever used. If you're in situations where you don't have time to make adjustments then it's a life saver. Yes I forgot to put low light as an advantage for C100. It's incredible. The 4K ursa is mainly usable at 400 ISO but the 4.6K is perfect at 800 ISO and usable at 1600 ISO. That is still a far cry from 10,000 ISO but if you're using fast lenses it's not a big problem.

Chant said he might look into increasing resolution and maybe bitrate for the MJPEG, honestly I think the focus should be more on the MJPEG rather than the HEVC which is just painful to work with already and any higher bitrate will make it even more painful to work with than it already is, so instead of having a thorn in our bums, MJPEG would be the better pick here for easy editing.

A7S + Shogun 4K in S-LOG exposed for highlights. 1D C the same, but 4K internal (Canon LOG). 1D C seems to have a dynamic range advantage. Maybe of 2 stops more usable information. I don't understand why the A7S is dumping so much data in the shadows. Big holes in it and lots of noise. Blacks should not be crushed like that in a LOG profile! When you have a shot without a really hot area (like a window or light you want to expose for) you MUST bring S-LOG 2 up away from those lows to get a good image, even if it means putting the ISO to crazy levels. The 1D C is different. It's applying ISO at an analogue level, and ISO 200 seems to have the same dynamic range as the other ISOs. A7S needs to be at ISO 3200 as we know. Not trying to justify my purchase here, just giving you some of my research early ahead of the blog post for commenting on. Will add depth to the final article to hear your thoughts. But it seems 1D C is looking like a real bargain if the price keeps dropping...