Leaderboard

As I write this I have just taken possession of a brand new Panasonic Lumix GH5. My initial thoughts are that it feels good in hand. Almost everything seems well thought out... save for the display button inexplicably located on the handgrip, which ensures it will be pressed inadvertently when handling the camera. I did not expect for the GH5 to match Canon's amazing autofocus... and it did not. Stepping away from the 1DXMk2 and using the GH5 really highlights the value that DPAF brings. It is such a powerful tool and makes even a ham-fisted user look like a pro. The 1DXMk2 is built to last. If you drop this thing you worry about the thing it hits, not the camera. While the GH5 is very solid, if they get in a fight, I know which one my money would be on. So how do the two compare as cameras?My first pictures were good. And I am certain that after some time with the camera I will be able to get near enough to the imagery that I get from the Canon 1DXMk2. But... if size is not a detractor... the 1DXMk2 is going to be my weapon of choice. There, that's it. No follow up needed. Put this one to bed. The GH5 is good. I can see the potential from only a few clicks, but the 1DXMk2 has mojo. I cannot explain it any better... there's a reason it cost 3x the money people. So why would I get the GH5? Well I needed it, because I clearly remember the 1DXMK2 takes subpar video... meaning the GH5 was a much needed purchase. So to reenforce this premise I set out to conduct exhaustive testing, pitting the two camera's back to back... using the same lighting conditions, F-Stop, and with the help of a brand new Metabones Speed Booster XL .64 (MBSB)... the same lenses. Well that was the plan, but by the time the testing got underway, it was getting pretty late... so I may have made a few mistakes... but the overall results should still stand... mostly. I lit the set with my Apeture light storms bi-color. And opted for a warmer setting. 3600k. First up was the 1DXMk2. I popped on the ubiquitous Canon 24-70mm f2.8, and shot it wide open. Then I switch to the GH5 and shot the same scene. But for good measure I also shot again with the GH5, but this time using a Veydra Mini Prime 16mm T2.2, again wide open. The Canon lens while I recall thinking of it as a medium size lens on my 1DXMk2, seemed large and unwieldy on the GH5. Was it the added weight of the Speed Booster? I don't really know, I just know it seemed a little self defeating to use this lens on an otherwise much smaller camera. So now to the moment of truth, Finally back in the editing bay... em my couch... I was now able to view the footage on my computer. Prepared to see just how superior the GH5 would look, I imported the clips into FCPX. Again the Canon would be first. I hit play... And once again was reminded of why I bought a 1DXMk2. The footage looked great. Perfectly exposed... perfectly in focus, even though I was in front of the camera and had to trust the 1DXMK2 to get the take properly. The Neutral profile produced... well glorious Canon colors. The video looked wonderful. The GH5 would have some big shoes to fill. I dragged the GH5 clips to the timeline and viewed them. The first clip was shot using the MBSB and the 24-70. All settings where the same save for ISO, which if I recall was slightly higher on the Canon. I have to tell you that the framing was off. I'm going to blame the fact that is was late, and filming yourself is hard without reliable autofocus. Well I'm just gonna come out and say it, I feel the Canon crushed the GH5. The lenses hunted away the entire time on the GH5, never settling down even when my face was detected. So the shots were never really perfectly in focus. And when I switched to the Veydra Mini Prime, frankly I missed focus. In the end I feel that it's me that failed on this shoot, not the GH5. Why do I feel this way? Well the autofocus is all Panasonic... I'm not taking the wrap for that. But the resolution and clarity with the manual lens was my fault. I know this because earlier I had shot some handheld video and pulled a frame, and that frame was tack sharp, using the same Veydra Mini Prime. Grading, I did not grade the Canon footage. I think the Canon footage is best colored in camera using a picture profile. I did however grade the bejesus out of the GH5 footage... and it did not break. I think it did great, especially considering this is the 150mbps codec. I walked away very impressed with the results, and frankly pretty excited about the creative potential of this little (I'm coming from a 1DXMK2) camera. Here is my intermediate conclusion/not conclusion: The GH5 is going to surpass my 1DXMk2 for video. It captures sharper, more detailed and more gradable footage. To my eyes the GH5's footage felt more cinematic also. Granted that my be subjective. The size is good, but I am left wondering if I should ditch the MBSB and only use M43 glass? As a amateur creative, I think we are lucky to have so many great options to help us share our vision with others. I plan to do more shooting with the GH5, as I can see the potential it has. From what I can tell, both are powerful tools. If you cannot tell your story with either of these cameras, it's you that is the bottleneck. I have only begun to explore the GH5, so I will follow up later with anything new that I learn. I am still on the fence with the Atomos Inferno... while I'm sure it would help when pulling focus, I do not like the size/weight. I am really excited about the prospects of getting into anamorphic shooting, but again size and weight are compromises that I would need to make. Feel free to post comments or questions. Video to follow... These frame grabs from GH5 shot in V-Log, shot using Veydra Mini Primes 16mm show to latitude of V-Log, as well as the potential of the GH5/Veydra Mini Primes combination:

Hi, I'm Eddie. I designed the Bolex Log color specification and the image processing pipeline for Digital Bolex towards the end of its production run. Also wrote the plugin that lets people process CineForm Raw color in Davinci Resolve as if it were DNG. And I'm not saying this to get into a pissing contest. I'm saying this as someone who is on the manufacturer side of things and has to know the ins and outs of the product and how it's used with other tools. Shoot 8-bit H.264 from a Canon C100 or any of their DSLRs for that matter, then compare it to ProRes recorded over HDMI to an external device. You'll often seen that the ProRes has more noise and fine details/texture. This is because H.264 smooths out the noise in camera and HDMI outputs uncompressed data. You're speaking as if the main reason detail is lost in 8-bit is that it's the log curve, when in reality, the main loss of detail has been heavy compression. I already agreed that using a log curve in 8-bit will redistribute code values so that more space is given to the mids and shadows, meaning less codes per stop when storing HDR data. We're not debating sensor data, otherwise we'd be talking analog stages, 16-bit, 14-bit, uncompressed. So, in this case, compression has everything to do with the image data. If you apply a logarithmic gain at the analog stage (ignoring the electron multiplying case), noise would be much higher than if you applied the log curve after digitization. It's not pretty. Definitely not philosophical in any measure. And these log curves can't pull data that isn't there. It's well known that using a log curve will boost the appearance of recorded noise in any bit depth, color space, etc. I'm not arguing that log fixes noisy data. I'm arguing that recording log allows you to record data in a way that keeps more detail across the range and expose in such a way that allows you to better minimize the appearance of noise in post (ETTR). Trust me, I let out a heavy sigh any time I try to see someone compensating for low light scene or poor scene lighting by recording log. I didn't say you said they don't. But you said professionals are lighting within 6-stop ranges. They have millions to pour into set design, lighting, and wardrobe. I was just pointing out the fact, that in spite of them lighting like that, they still shoot log or raw (which is later interpreted as log in the grading tool). Also, they're gonna be shooting 10-bit, 12-bit, and 16-bit more often than not, so they aren't worried about losing code words per stop, which takes away the main argument of using a standard profile. I didn't say you did. But it isn't nonsensical. Canon raw has C-Log applied to it before being sent over SDI to external recorders for being saved as rmf. ARRI, BMD, CineForm, all write their raw formats with log as part of the specification. While it's not the Cineon-type log they use, it's log nonetheless. But you can grade in a log color space. Hence Davinci Resolve Color Managed timeline and ACEScc/ACEScct. Whenever you grade on top of log image data, your working/"timeline" color space is log. This is where we get out of the realm of objectivity. Because there are technical trade-offs for both sides, it's up to who's shooting as to which is preferable. There is no clearly defined technical mathematical winner in this case (which is one of the reasons I'm happy I don't have to deal with H.264 compressed, 8-bit recorded data anymore). And I'm not saying there is one that checks all the boxes in this case. When I say "retain detail through compression" I'm talking about codec compression. Like I stated earlier, a standard profile combined with high levels of compression will reduce texture in the low mids and lows. It reduces flexibility and the overall naturalness of the image. That is an issue of grading, not the source material. When I grade log material, I have no issue getting thick colors from it. Again, log doesn't add noise. It just increases the appearance. Once the image is graded, the appearance of the noise will look similar to that of the standard profile, but the texture of the shadows will look more natural, especially in motion. But you didn't grade to match which means the higher contrast and extra sharpness of the standard profile will have increased perceived detail of the aliasing and text. And in spite of that, we can see that the aliasing that you point out in the standard profile is present in the log image! When graded down to match, you'll get similar, if not exact sharpness from the log image. The difference between the two being flexibility. I took the log one you posted and graded it down more closely to what your standard profile looked like without the boost in saturation and you can see the apparent sharpness is similar and the noise isn't as much as you were making it out to be.

Hi Ethan, couldn't agree with you more! As soon as I get a break from my "real" work I'm going to fire up the C100, A6300 and a Ninja Blade so I can analyze un-compressed HDMI data, as Eddie suggests. We all want the same thing. We all agree high dynamic range shooting in 8 bit has issues. How much? That's the question. Again, for all I knew when I started this post, I'm completely off. But I think the issue remains so I will continue work on it with everyone's help here.

Use patreon, I know some are sustainable but some still got a few miles ahead by using patreon. Subscription (or monthly contribution) is the way to go. There is different mindset of paying to support and get content vs paying to buy content, which I doubt many want to spend to buy just the content, I know I wouldn't. (look at honest trailer, their $1 subscription end in epic failure, if they do it on patreon that will be a complete different story)

I'm a wedding shooter and just moving to GH5. Got a body by my desk and awaiting the two lenses I've ordered to arrive. I've gone for the 12-35 and 35-100 f.2.8ii models to give me the old favourite 24-70 and 70-200 equivalent. I'll be buying some Primes later in the year, probably the Leica ones. I've heard good things on the 12-60 as well. A couple of years ago I did have a GH4 with Speedbooster plus Sigma 18-35 and had issues with it. A number of times it'd cut out and just say 'lens not attached', happened during a ceremony once. Sort of lost my trust in using them, hence I've gone native glass this time. I've also used the Xume adapters before and have got some for this kit. Best things I've ever purchased, makes changing NDs or filters between lenses really easy.

Maybe you might want to look at the Aputure Lens Regain system as an alternative. It'll give you the lower light and FOV reduction and aperture control of the EF lenses and if you're used to manual focus only anyway then the focus control might be a good halfway house for you. Yes its essentially manual but the two programmable hard stops might work well for you for zone focusing as well as being creatively useful for focus pulls. If nothing else it will give you hands off focus control of the Sigma which is no bad thing for a few reasons with that lens. Its a lot cheaper than the Metabones as well but its a bit bigger because of the wireless interfaces. I have both and if I only had to have one then, for me, the AF of the Metabones isn't impressive enough to choose it over the Aputure.

@Mattias Burling There is a lot of envy and hate today out there. Most pixel whores and armchair experts simply don't honor others people WORK. Filming / photographing is not only fun, it's some work too. And most people working quite hard (as many SERIOUS reviewers/filmers/photographers do) get rewarded: personal satisfaction, public appreciation, financial compensation, etc. Bored pixel peepers don't like others people success, because - in fact - they hate themselves for just hanging around and/or acting completely useless.... We don't have to agree with all the conclusions or methodology of every reviewer, but we should respect his/her efforts and work, considering that most of them offer us considerable informations FOR FREE...

another test wit the Mentter Pro variable ND filter, HardcoreDNA, Bolex 16/32/1.5x, Ultron 40mm and Samsung NX1.

I would ditto that, and add depending on the speed you need, that the Panny Leica 12-60 is outstanding to...and at the 35mm point only a 1/2 stop slower than the 12-35, but with a. Additional 35 mm of reach available....undoubtedly shooting with native lenses will yield more footage during a live event...plus you can have the 4K ETC enabled on a function button 12-60 changes to a 16.8-84 by pushing a function button twice!...of course you have the same crop of 1.4 to apply to the 12-35 with ETC...I've never used the 12-35 but the balance between the Camera body and 12-60 is one of the best I've ever used just in terms of feel.

hahaha….we will be in jail just minutes after we contacted any of these guys!!!!!

Maybe this would be a fun kickstarter etc. project, just to see who tries to stop us and why. Since there is nothing 'official' going on down there, no one should care if we fly drones in to have a peek for ourselves. Surprised Steven Greer hasn't proposed this, or any of the folks over at Gaia.com. Get Steven Greer, Graham Hancock, Art Bell, George Noory et al to get behind it I'd bet interesting things could happen for disclosure, long before any private drone would be allowed to venture there.

I still think the Amazon Prime deal is pretty good. Especially once you realize that there are over 80 million Prime subscribers worldwide and you are getting money even if the viewer only watches 5 minutes of your movie. And since it's listed for free, most viewers will give it 10 or 15 minutes. How many places can your movie be listed right next to a Hollywood movie?

I think we all want to be agreed with That said, why is it I who is not listening? What am I wrong about? He has said himself he doesn't dispute much of what I've said. He says that compression has more to do with noise than shooting S-LOG, fine, but that's his opinion! He hasn't shown me any of his tests. Why should I take his word for it over my experience? Anyway, I've had to challenge him (us) to get that articulated. We still have a ways to go because so far there are no facts about that, that we can both agree on. We're getting there. A little piss never hurt nobody If I have to play the bad guy in this thread, so be it I'm sure he's happy to continue playing the good guy!

The solution to that problem for Panasonic cameras is that the Tascam mic has a slate tone it outputs when you press record on it which can be used to automatically put the camera into record. I just haven't released it yet .....

I have the pocket and the GH4. Both are great for walk around shooting. Which one I take depends on how much I also want to take stills. For video, I prefer the pocket. Shooting raw is so nice for run and gun outdoor stuff. Rokinon 12 f2 is my goto lens. I'd opt for the 12-35 panasonic if I had it. SLR magic Vari ND. I have 5 batteries, but even with that many, it's annoying to have to swap batteries all the time. I recently started bringing the juicebox magic power with me. It's a bit unsightly, but it does mount on (or below) the camera. The added weight helps with handheld shooting, and I can just leave the camera on all day. It's so much nicer to just pick up and shoot at a moment's notice without turning it on and off to conserve the tiny batteries.

You are very helpful, and yes, so do I. I tend to enjoy seeing great work on cheap or unconventional cameras more so than good work on (more) expensive, proffessional cameras. ("great" in this sense is of course both subjective, as well as relative). You did turn me onto bridge cameras, and I have been researching them for the last couple of hours. Both the RX10 ii and the FZ2500 are very attractive with their log profiles. And as you say, the original RX10 would save me quite the bit of cash, I found an auction for it and I will be watching it carefully. Nikon is a world of cameras that I've never explored before, but oh my, the ones you suggested really does produce stunning video. I am able to borrow Canon 70Ds and 80Ds from the University, and I do like them, especially the 80D since it has a headphone jack. They do seem to have a long "shelf life" though, and hard to find good deals on. I really liked that video aswell, reminds me of the opening of The 400 Blows.

What I would say about the Ninja Star is the same objection you've come up with yourself which is that it'll undermine the rocket in your pocket aspect of the GX80. Its a compact solution for a DSLR like a Nikon D800 etc but not for a GX80! The other drawbacks are carrying an additional battery (though it does only sip power) and charger if you're traveling and although the CFAST cards are cheaper now but still not without cost. There is a third option if all you want to have is your GX80 to have a mic input for a small shotgun mic and that's to get a Tascam DR10SG integrated shotgun mic and recorder. If you want to use other sources like lav mics then its obviously not going to do the job for you (although they do a version that is exactly that as well) but if you are just looking to get a G85 or Ninja Star to record a small Rode shotgun with or some such then this is a much cheaper solution (about £130). As it automatically records two streams at different levels, it will also be a bit easier to use if you are running about solo grabbing shots on the GX80. Quality wise its much of a muchness with the cheaper Rode ones IMO. It can be used without the additional mount arm if you want to keep it lower profile by the way.

The misunderstanding is from a misalignment of ultimate goals: I think you're just going about this as "how do I get the most saturated, punchy look?" in which case you can't really beat shooting a standard profile. But to my eyes, the last one of your examples looks like shit, and my goal in filming is rarely to make people's eyes bleed with color like that. I'm being hyperbolic here, but really it's a matter of goals, and that's why people are disagreeing with you, @maxotics. Feature films don't look like rec709. They just don't. A lot of this has to do with the fact that movies are NOT supposed to look like real life. There's an art to how the colors of the set, wardrobe, lighting, and color grade create feelings, and S Log and wider color gamuts allow for this creativity whereas shooting a standard profile will make it look like a live TV production.

Here's scenes from a feature I'm shooting on the NX1. All using the tracking autofocus. I hope this camera lasts a LONG time, because even after all these years, its footage and capabilities are gorgeous and unmatched. https://vimeo.com/225352203

The Fotodiox WonderPana system will let you mount filters on it. https://fotodioxpro.com/products/wpcore-tmr1530 If you get the FreeArc Core package you can then put 6.6 square filters in. Welcome to the world of expensive filters though

Thanks for the info! I'm in Madrid.

Sorry, I just reread my own post and I'm unsure I was helpful at all. But apparently I do like to talk about cheap camera options. And with that I should add... since you do have a Canon background, you would probably find the 80D as a great option as well. Better 1080p than your t3i with its high bitrate all-i, great lens adaptability, the best AF around with Tracking and Touch AF that could rival a Hollywood focus puller. I know I probably shouldn't have said the C word around here, but I have recently found this video that was shot with the 80D and think it looks great and is just more proof that any camera, in the right hands, is probably good enough nowadays...

I'm not much of a pixel peeper myself. I went through all of the 4K cameras, I can afford, and found I actually like 1080p better. It really just comes down to features that are important to you. If IBIS is on the top of your list, then the e-m5 Mark ii is probably your best choice at that price point. And yeah, with the grip, that's a really good price. But I must say, although the image is nice, there isn't anything particularly special about it either... it's better than a lot of choices because it feels more organic than digital, but it's also a little vanilla. But in a good way. With my brief time with it, I was left feeling unsure about the overall image quality. I guess it wasn't an inspiring image and it didn't wow me like other cameras do. But that's really subjective because I have seen some great footage shot by John Brawley with one. The RX10ii is a lot of fun and there is some really good footage out there to prove it. If you don't need the 4K, sLog2 and cine profiles, or 120fps, you could save some coin and get the original RX10. It has the same lens, same build quality with mic in and headphone input. As I said, in the end I became spoiled by Full Frame Raw, so it is hard for me to get excited about other cameras... or to keep my excitement, which is why I keep bringing up the D5500. It's hard to recommend it because with video, it really is an utterly, stupid implementation by Nikon. But it also is a really nice video file in the Super 35mm format. The colors are brilliant with great dynamic range. And it will also natively mount some of the best manual lenses of all time... with some limitations and yet again... some annoyances as well. In the end it feels more cinematic than a lot of the other choices at its price point. Also, another factor is lens choice. Almost any lens ever made can be adapted to the Olympus, so that's a big plus as well. At this low budget, there isn't a perfect camera, trust me... I have tested 17 cameras over the past two years and weirdly enough, my two favorites are my most expensive purchase... and my least expensive purchase. I know you weren't asking this, but if I had your budget, I would probably get two cameras... the original RX10 (unless I could find a steal on the RX10ii to get 4K and the extra pictures profiles) and a D5500. With those two cameras, anything could be filmed. If I were choosing one, I'd obviously go with the D5500/D5600, or if IBIS was my most major concern, the Olympus can't be beat. And finally, if I wanted an all in one camera and lens, I'd choose the FZ2500 over the RX10 i and ii.

I agree that prores and or DNxHD would be the best but can you name at least one camera that does 4k ProRes or DNxHD that does not have a cooling fan? Arri, Red, Canon Cxxx, Blackmagic, DJI all have cooling fan and if I'm not mistaken only BM ursa can do 4k 60p in prores the others they all max out at 4k 30p (for higher framerate they use other codec mostly raw...) The problem is that currently there seems that there is no chip that can do ProRes, DNxHD and even XF AVC at 4k without needing a fan. h264 has become so common on consumer devices that the HW implementation is easy to find and are so efficient that they don't require a cooling mechanisms. I'm not an expert in external recorders but as far as I know all the portable recorder that do Prores have fan, but if you know some that do not have a fan or a super large external heat sink and happy to know. I hate Canon for crippling stuff and omitting feature like no CLog on 1Dx II, no zebra, no peeking on higher models, no live waveforms or histogram... my Phantom 4 Pro has all these feature... but considering that nobody else has managed to put a pro codec on a DSLR I strongly believe it is a technical challenge. Of course they could put a fan on a DSLR but then it would be better to spec up the C100.... a C100 that does 4k 60p even only at 8bit XF AVC 300 Mbits/ 500 Mbits for 4.5k would sell much more than a DSLR with a fan for 3.5k.... I would agree that they could have offered both h264 100 mbits or so and MJPEG so you can chose by your needs. Expecting a large sensor DSLR fully weather sealed to do 4k 60p ProRes maybe at 3k usd when all the very expensive top of the line cameras have fan and cannot even do 4k 60p in prores is non realistic. We will get there but not yet.

I think there'd be a pretty big market for it. For people with LX100 or GX80 you're getting edit ready ProRes and an audio recorder. That takes both of those cameras to another level, particularly the GX80. For everyone else, the edit ready ProRes would be very attractive even just based on how many threads pop-up on here recently for workflows/computer requirement headaches to handle 4K. Having ProRes from the get go takes care of a lot of that pain. Well, until you have to buy all of those hard drives ! The drop in CFAST prices since the original Ninja Star appeared also means the timing is better for it now as well. As far as I'm concerned, BM have the right spec with the wrong screen size with their VAs as 4K on 5" would be better for compact cameras and Atomos have the right spec on the Ninja Assassin but the wrong screen size too as maybe it shouldn't have one at all like the Ninja Star. So for me at least, whichever of them does 4K on a 5" screen or 4K on a no screen will win.

I'm on my phone so apologies for this abbreviated set of answers: Highlight clipping - protect highlights when exposing and it's not an issue. GH5 has slightly more dynamic range than 5D3 IBIS on manual lenses works very well If you want softer footage blur it VLOG is a must - more DR and control in post 5D is more malleable. There may be cases where you can't get the same look with GH5.

I just reread your post and I wanted to add that I have the D5500 and have considered selling it once a month for the past 3 or 4 months, but then I use it, or look at some old footage and I realize why I keep on keeping it. The Nikon Flat Profile is so nice with just enough latitude to handle some grading. The image is clean, with good dynamic range. However, it does not have a headphone input but the D7200 does and basically has the same IQ as the D5500 with a couple extra bells and whistles. I've also had 2 FZ2500s and the all-I 1080p out of that camera is really nice. Both times I've returned it, because I didn't think I wanted it or needed it and both times I have regretted it. It's seriously a little cinema camera with a built in lens. It has decent IS, a mic and headphone input, 4K and 1080p, high frame rates that can be recorded/exported at 24p. It has a slow/quick function that with the push of a button can go from regular speed to slow motion, or regular speed to fast motion, while recording for as long as you press the button. You can set the shutter speed to the shutter angle of 180 degrees so if you want to change to 60p or 72p or 96p, etc... it will always be in the proper shutter speed for cinematic motion blur, it has 3 strengths of built in, body selectable NDs, decent AF Tracking... not great but not bad. The small sensor and lens can be kinda annoying for shallow depth shots, but they are possible. For a travel camera or run and gun cinema camera, it is pretty cool. Dang, now I want another one... LOL. Thw Olympus I bought out of boredom one day because the price was so low. I was very impressed with the IBIS... it really is that good. The 1080p was decent, it just felt kind of redundant with my D5500 and 5D3, so I sold it. But it's small and well built with a good screen and as mentioned before, amazing IBIS. If you're into color grading, the RX10ii is a nice choice. sLog2, high frame rates, good audio, well built, decent image stabilization. I'm not a great colorist and in the end I decided against it. The GX85 is a fun little camera but it doesn't have a mic input, let alone a headphone input, so it may not be of interest to you. But the IBIS is good with manual lenses and the recent CineLikeD hack is really nice as well. And it's cheap. Anyway, I hope this helps and good luck in finding a camera that fits your needs.

I really liked the e-m5 Mark ii. And have seen some great stuff shot with it. The IBIS is better than the Panasonic's version and the 1080p is decent. So if you don't need 4K, it's a solid choice with a good Flat Profile for some post work. Another benefit, if you decide to shoot dual sound later on, the em5m2 will send a tone signal to the Olympus LS100 Field Recorder for ease of synching the audio and video in post. Plus it has a really nice organic look with good color. The D5500 or D7200 are good choices with clean 1080p and good DR. For 4K and your budget, the GX85 or G85 are good. The internal audio isn't going to be great but none of the cameras at this price point will be. Maybe a GH4.., I've heard it's internal audio is decent, probably better with a preamp. Oh yeah, if you don't mind smaller sensors, both the RX10ii and the FZ2500 are good cameras and they both have headphone inputs. The RX10ii audio sounded pretty good with the Rode Video Micro plugged directly into the camera.

I have a few Minolta MD lenses and Zhongyi Lens Turbo Adapter II (Minolta MD - MFT). Work well for me.

jcs I am somewhat familiar with subjects such as religious world views, physics, science and things like that. Your sentence I quoted earlier indicates you are not familiar with the concept behind velocity and it's simple definition, despite being quite capable in it's mathematics. This is how an anti-science magic worldview such as yours can take on the language of science and end up confusing people or even sounding like you know what you're talking about. It's quite fascinating to meet a UFO believer who denies UFO's but, again, nothing new.

If you have a few minutes, i think this lecture, given from Rudolf Steiner on 1921, is a key text for all UFO and extraterrestial believers. Keep in mind it was given in 1921. You can see clear references to internet also and its danger. I have see endless photos, videos and "proofs" from UFOs and more than 99% are clearly hoax, but a few can be real. http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/Places/Dornach/19210513p01.html

About 4 weeks ago I talked a guy owning a camera store and a small photo studio. He told me, he doesn't close his store <ONLY because his family owns the building and he doesn't want to rent the store to other people. But in fact, he should close, because it doesn't pay at all. He is very friendly and knowledgeable, but most nowadays customers don't honor this. (A small town with about 25.000 residents 30km far from Frankfurt/Germany) Most people try to abuse his store as a free camera test location: They come in, put an own card in a camera, shoot a little bit around and go home...They never return to buy, probably they buy online for much cheaper...To stop this mess, he started to charge 50 Euros for testing and consulting (for about 30-45 minutes) - when people buy the tested gear/camera in his store, he refunds this fee...After starting this, there are about TWO people per week who want to test and get some advice, he said...He is glad having stopped the "test-mania", cheapo-parasites stealing his time at his costs...

Nope, depends on the flavour of ProRes. ProRes LT for example is considerably smaller than MJPEG 500MBit/s, yet is 10bit 4:2:2. MJPEG is only 8bit! It's a shit codec. It truly is!

*munch munch much* uhm @jcs? the one guy said you dont kno what quantum mechanics is *munch munch*

Just finished the first customized engraving metal jacket. More customized jackets & jackets for Bolex 16/32 & Kowa C35 are coming.

Thanks BTM_Pix for this discovery and release! Here's a quick test that I did. Nothing fancy. I also didn't have my laptop at the time but I wanted to see how I can grade it. Transferred the 1080 files to my iPhone 6 and edited and graded to taste there using VideoLut App. For shooting and quick grading on the go (for social media posts, etc.)This setup will prove to be very valuable!

For anyone who wants to try Cinelike V as well, just use this updated html file and you'll now be able to switch between Cinelike D, Cinelike V and back to Standard. Just a heads up to anyone who is about to try this for the first time is that you may have to initiate the handshake procedure twice when you first connect to your camera but every subsequent connection after that will only require it once. The situation with vlog by the way is that the camera is pretty much acting like my missus when I ask her to make a cup of tea. Hears the request, replies 'OK' so appears to understand it and then does absolutely nothing about it There is maybe something there with trying to persuade it to do higher bitrate HD though but don't build your hopes up. DEPLOY CINELIKE D AND V.html

..Kinshasa I agree with you completely. I have both, Samsung NX1 and Sony A7s II, and no doubts.. I love, really love the NX1. It is able to make me want to shot video every day. In few words: under the 1600 iso is now, in 2017, still unbeatable!

Holy sliders!!! GX80 files AMAZING with Iridient Developer 3!!! I've never got those kind of results Lightroom on any camera. Blown away!