Leaderboard

I was joking around in response that nothing can be shot unless it is 4K 10bit! :-P But seriously, to answer the question, here are two reasons why: 1) the 1st Panasonic GH1 was my first ever camera (which was video capable, I did already have a Nikon D50), thus holds a dear place in my heart, I'll probably never sell it? 2) the GH1 holds so little value now secondhand, it is worth more to me to keep them for when needed for multi camera shoots (as they do a decent enough image, are compact, good battery life, and have unlimited recording length! All great stuff for low budget multi camera shoots)

I shoot with GH5's every day at work while all of my personal and side projects are shot on the NX1 and NX500. Obviously the 4k 60p on the GH5 is fantastic. And I quite like V-Log as well, it's far easier to grade than Sony's log profiles, and nicely preserves the dynamic range without destroying colors. I haven't really shot/graded 10-bit footage that much, as it is just overkill for the kind of work I have been doing, and the 8-bit is fine. I like how big the EVF is, and how you can switch between viewfinder and LCD screen easily while recording. There are lots of great and easily re-mappable function buttons, and you can program and save shooting modes in the custom profiles dial much easier and more effectively than you can on the NX cameras, which don't even save the video data at all. Of course, you can also move the zoomed-in focus checking area, unlike NX, and the tilty/flippy screen is preferable to the tilt-only screen. And you can't forget about the IBIS, which is just fantastic for handheld shooting, truly a game-changer for my kind of work, I need a monopod for my NX1 at all times. That being said... I far prefer the NX cameras' photo/video implementation; it is still the simplest, best camera I have ever used for switching quickly between stills and video. No specific mode dials needed. Tap the shutter button to take a picture, hit the record button to record. The NX1 seems to have quite a bit better battery life than the GH5 in my experience as well. It is also lighter and feels better in the hands- the NX1 is an insanely comfortable camera, in the fact still the best I have ever used ergonomically, while the GH5 is surprisingly heavy and a bit bulky. The GH5 also has this very annoying tendency to hesitate for just a split-second or two when you hit the record button, which doesn't sound like a big deal, but it hesitates just long enough that I have double-pumped many, many times, while the NX seems immediately responsive. I do prefer the the menu system on the NX cameras as well. As far as out-and-out IQ comparison, I have one of Luca's speedboosters on my NX1 pretty much all the time, so I have actually gotten quite used to the full frame look, especially DOF-wise, so it almost feels limiting sometimes to only have a super-35 equivalent with a Speedbooster on the GH5. Color-science wise, I can't say I prefer the one over the other - - in good light, I think both cameras look fantastic, with great skin tones and malleable colors -- basically you'll be able to get the look you're going for in post with either camera. The autofocus on the NX cameras is far, far better than the GH5, if that's important to you. And the NX1's internal 6.5k to 4k downscale is still unbeaten, detail-wise. The image is always just unbelievably sharp and detailed. The GH5 doesn't quite match that. And while the low-light and noise on the GH5 is probably preferable (clean at 1600, useable at 3200) I rarely, if ever, need these ISOs anyway, especially with the speedbooster and some fast glass to boot. Of course, I'm not mentioning stills quality at all, I haven't shot many stills on the GH5, but obviously the NX is going to win that competition hands-down, it is still, even several years later, one of the best APS-C sensors ever made, with insanely good dynamic range, especially when pulling shadows. So, bottom line, should you switch? I think that depends. If you're pure run-and-gun, then yes, the IBIS (and the 4k 60p, if you need high-res slo-mo, with the benefit of a good log profile) is a pretty unbeatable combo for video right now. Throw in the 10-bit, and it's future-proofed for quite some time. The low-light IQ is more than enough. I think the GH5 is easily the best bang-for-the-buck camera around right now, and will remain so for quite some time. But if you're already invested in the NX system, which has its own fantastic native lenses (16-50S, wow), IQ wise I really don't think you're gaining that much. Not enough to go through the hassle of trying to sell and offload all my Samsung gear. I quite enjoy the GH5. But I still love shooting with my NX cameras, and don't feel like I'm losing out of for most of the kind of work that I do. So take that as you will.

D750 is an incredible stills camera.

The new version of LR (not LR Classic) REQUIRES you to save your photos to the cloud. There is no option to not use it. In fact there is an option available to turn off saving to the local drive. It's also incredibly dumbed down at the moment; for example there's no curves tool.

I get that, it seems like you already know your answer... crazy or not. I started with video and a t2i. I eventually bought an eos-m and for a good 2-3 years I was happy. And then I decided I needed 4K and since Canon is Canon, I had to look elsewhere. And after testing almost every brand of consumer 4K, my old eos-m videos were still amongst my favorite. I also had a D5500 for a while and that was the closest image I could find to the Canon as far as enjoyable colors, but it didn’t have IBIS and I still thought I needed 4K... so... Eventually while deciding I was going to buy a GH5, I came across a 5D3 ML Raw video and I was hooked... Everything I loved about the Canon colors yet in Raw video... So instead of going with the new, shiny camera with every feature I could ever need, I spent more on a 5 year old camera... and I haven’t looked back. Now I am just a hobbyist, so obviously you have to base your decision on other things, so selling off the D750 may make the most sense, but in the process you will probably miss those Nikon colors with every photo you process and every video you edit/grade. But if I was doing RE or event work, I would be primarily concerned with AF, so I would most likely buy a Canon 80D and do as much work as possible until I could afford a 5D4 or a 1DXii. Or I’d get an 80D and a C100ii and expand my business from two fronts. I would imagine a dedicated video camera could be a marketable package to potential clients?

Unsure, why this was quoted. This site acts funny sometimes. Anyway, I don’t know if you wrote this somewhere but what lenses do you own for either system or both? I still think the D850 may be the smartest investment for you, or a 5D IV if you’re interested in the Canon ecosystem at all.

Digital Bolex, such a one of a kind camera!

I don't know that the Canon is a "luxury status item". The 1DXMk2 is a real workhorse of a camera. Low-light is great and reliability is first rate. The only negative would be the size. The Leica is certainly more of a luxury item... I checked one out at the Leica store in DC... it's a lovely beast... money should not be a issues if you are considering a Leica system camera. So as I always say, why does one have to be mutually exclusive of the other? If you want a Leica and you want a EVA1... or FS7... just buy both.

As far as I know, the NX1 is the only camera south of the Canon Cinema line to have dual pixel autofocus. For anyone on a gimbal, this is a gargantuan feature that can’t be overlooked. I pick up other cameras and forget that I have to control focus, simply because I run around with my NX1 on a Ronin every day and never even touch focus. I’ll second that the battery life is very good, and add that powering/charging over USB is extremely handy. Not only can I charge three batteries at a time (internal/grip/external charger), but I can power the camera off of my Ronin M with a simple little jumper cable. The one thing it is not is a low light camera, but then compared to a Sony, most other cameras aren’t. I plan to pick up Luca’s NX-L soon to help with this, and to get that full frame look when called for. Truth be told, I am considering retiring my NX1, and getting another NX1 just because I’ve used this one so much. For the price, it’s an extremely powerful tool that can pull its weight in almost any situation, and having two for multi cam shoots will be useable far into the future, even if I do switch to something else for an A-cam. I’ve been waiting for dual pixel AF to show it’s face on another DSLR in order to switch, but I suspect I may wait a fair while longer still. I know I’ve not been compelled to switch just yet.

I doubt that will happen. Indeed, with their current pricing it seems Adobe will provide a $10/month PS/Lightroom app forever (because a lot of people simply can't pay that $50/month). Adobe can't afford to give the competitors unfettered access to beginning photographers. As it is, there already are a lot of great alternatives. If all Adobe offered was PS or LIghtroom for $10/month I think no one would bat an eye. It's the jump to other products that makes people feel abused. I believe that's the case with the OP because as others have pointed out, there's no real reason not to keep with Lightroom when you compare it one on one with other products. I had PS for a year or two, $10, then wanted Premiere. To add it on was another $20/month. I flipped my lid. Talking to Adobe on the phone further aggravated that. It took me months to calm down enough to bite the bullet. I even CANCELLED PS for a few months. So I COMPLETELY understand where the OP is coming from.

I'm sure he's not going to stick around doing that one job forever, and he's already said for what he does the Sony does a better job for him. A theoretical D900 is when his cashflow is in a better state to afford a luxury like that, and when he can plan on expanding his business to a more profitable segment.

Also, for the vast majority of us, they're purely luxury status items. A better buy for a videographer would be a Sony FS5, or heck you're almost getting into territory of a Panasonic EVA1 or secondhand FS7 (which would be a real workhorse).

Problem is greater than 24megapixels is kinda a pain for high volume real estate photography. (I'd happily do it with the 12 megapixels of an a7Smk1 or D700) Thus from that perspective, either the D5 (which is crazy overkill!! Bad idea) or the D750 is the perfect FX Nikon DSLR for him. Personally if I was the OP I'd stick out with the D750 forever, until a suitable upgrade comes along. Then still keep the D750 as a B cam / back up camera (as a pro should always have at least one back up. Heck, I might even recommend buying a D5200 right *now* so as to at least have "something" as a back up!).

i have read the interview and he's certainly talking about the stills series, not the footage. So 7D and 50mm 1.2 is for the photography series. I know what you're saying and i couldn't agree more. That's one of the reasons i am refuse to upgrade my NX1 for a couple of years now. It's just that i like the look so much, it feels organic and it's the kind of look that i wish a mirrorless would give yet, but i am afraid it's not happening. Looking at the slow motion quality and the full frame aspect of the image i can't think of a mirrorless that has that quality in slow motion - just one of the features i have noticed.

I'm gonna join the D750 fan brigade here, I've been shooting that camera now for the last 3 years and there is something really special about that camera. If Nikon put the internals into a stronger weather sealed body, even with absolutely no other upgrades I'd buy it all over again. If you need to save a bit I'd suggest getting the Sigma 70-200 2.8. I got mine for like AU$1100 and it's at least 85% as good as the Nikon version which is more than twice the price.

Prada or Gucci? Ferrari or Lamborghini? Tough choices man!

There you go, that's the right decision then! Once you become more established and have cash to spare you can always come back for a much nicer Nikon camera, like say, a D900.

Thanks everyone!! We ended up picking up a Sony A3000 for $149 USD at a pawn shop, it came with a 18 - 55mm kit lens, two batteries and a bag. (New Condition) Shes new too photography/Video and so I thought this was perfect! Tested it out earlier and am actually quite surprised by this camera! Probably the best $149 we have spent on an entire shoot ready camera! 20 Megapixels, decent low light! 1080p video that's basically on par with Canon rebel cameras (Different color but gradable) and with decent auto focus, even during video! Thanks again everyone

ok i watched that trailer again... SOME of those shots are clearly with a different camera. the 7d shots are obviously different

OHHH NOOOOOO OMG LMAooooo im deleting this account

Nice find and repurpose--looks part tank now! :D

given the clarity and look i would guess that fb clip isnt from a dslr – maybe one of the mirrorless cams, but id say CX00 if i had to guess but COULD you use a dslr for a piece like this? OF COURSE! if ive learned anything about filmmaking, its that NO ONE CARES about stuff like that but us theres never been anything shot on a dslr that was unsuccessful BECAUSE it was shot on an dslr so im just sayin... dont let the gear be a barrier between you and making great content. only nerds like us notice that stuff lol while some people are sitting on the couch wishing for a camera that costs as much as a new car, others are making films with what they have, and getting their work seen by the whole world online i want UTA to represent me as a commercial filmmaker and fine artist. do you think those folks have ever passed around something really great, and then it gets to the big boss, and hes like "Its good but the highlights clip like shit" looool me neither thats a funny idea tho

I agree that if you are a professional, sucking it up is the norm. Irritating as hell, but true. As buggy and slow Adobe programs are, the are very powerful compared to the competition and we pay for it. Other programs really need to step up their game if they want a piece of the money cake that Adobe keeps enjoying. What annoys me most with the Adobe suite is that you cannot easily move to another program. I would say that it is even harder than switching OS. I have so many projects in Premiere, or thousands of pictures with edits in Lightroom that I will not be able to go back to. Even though in reality I might do that for maybe 1% of those, that feeling keeps me from dropping Adobe. For example, Capture One is a good alternative to Lightroom, but it is even more expensive so I am not feeling ready to jump the ship just yet.

Yeah I also see the usefulness of internal raw as fairly limited. A very good high bitrate 10bit implementation should be enough for most productions. RAW is more useful for shorts/feature/video clips that usually have a set + a larger production and in which you can afford an external recorder. Shooting docs/events/corporate in RAW is just masochism most of the time. Thats why the direction that Panasonic took with EVA1 codec wise, makes more sense that what Canon did with the C200.

Considered the Rokinon TS? A fraction of the cost of the Canikon ones! https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/926394-REG/rokinon_tsl24m_n_24mm_f3_5_tilt_shift.html Personally, if I was making a little money with real estate then I'd go with this on my current Nikon D5200: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1165600-REG/venus_optics_laowa_15mm_f_4_macro.html But if I was to go all out and get a new body (which I'm not! As I don't earn money in the real estate world), then it would be either the Nikon D750 + Rokinon 24mm TS, or a secondhand Sony a7S mk1 (as 12 megapixels is plenty for low budget real estate shoots! And lighter file sizes will speed up workflow) + Laowa 12mm f/2.8 Zero-D lens with their Laowa Magic Shift Converter (turning it into a 17mm F4 TS! :-o ). https://***URL not allowed***/laowa-magic-shift-converter-wide-angle-lenses/

Adobe's pricing is irritating. You can pay $10/month for Photoshop, then an additional $20/month for something else meaning it makes more sense to buy the full CC for $50 a month. So one is between $120/year or $600/yr. I went the full CC, but have a client pay some of it. If you do any amount of professional photo or video work I suggest just sucking it up (as most of us do) and pay for the full CC. A friend of mine's Dad calls it "just pay the freight". If you were just starting out, yeah, maybe look at all the alternatives, but you already have time invested. Anyway, money aside, the value of the full CC suite is quite good--I must say. Yeah, it's a lot of money, but it's one nice dinner a month with friends and I'd rather spend the money alone with my photos and Photoshop There are so many economies of scale, so many great tutorials on CC that will save me time versus other products. Competition is good. I'd buy other software if I need it. For core stuff though, PS is the software to use. The CC suite is quite comprehensive. I did some podcasts for friends and Audition worked real well so CC felt like a bargain to me. A few months ago I was really annoyed at Premiere's new "Essential Graphics". Now that I've figured it out I'm really happy with it. Adobe keeps innovating. CC DOES keep getting better. Tough decision. For me I decide based on how much photo/video I do every day. As long as I keep doing it every week, and they keep adding functionality, I'll keep paying. When I don't or they don't, I won't.

Unfortunately for real estate video this is not unusual, in fact in the market I'm in for the people I know, that would be higher than average!

Thanks so much. Yes, I really do think that letting go of the D750 is probably the right thing for me. Then I can free up some cash for other things. Thanks again, and thanks for the tips on hustling.

It sounds like the a6500 is a better option for the way you work. Just find a video profile you like, the G-Film thread here has a nice look. As far as finding other gigs, you just have to keep hustling and find other potential clients. Outside of RE, maybe food stuff for restaurants, corporate headshots or corporate videos. Lots of local business have events, I've been fortunate enough to find work shooting for a local spa that throws monthly parties. They have a very wealthy clientele, and from that I've gotten a number of gigs shooting various functions and such. Cheers chris

I'll wait for Photo Joseph to tell us how brilliant it is before not getting one.

I'd like to see the 80mb mode (from the G9) for stills on the GH5 please Panasonic!

It depends on what you need to do with the camera. If you want to shoot a video with standard colors and sunlight, the advantage is minimal. If you want to use the DR profile to get a better workflow in post production then the hack is highly recommended because it drastically reduces compression issues. h265 200Mbps it's like a 400Mbps on h264 codec, my opinion it's that the h265 hack it's better, similar to 10bit ProRes.

I've always enjoyed Matt's work and he's always come across as a genuine guy who loves what he does. I find it hard to think of another person who's shared so much usable information about cameras, lighting and techniques with downloadable files for FREE. He doesn't need to do that. It sounds like a genuine mistake on his behalf. It's just a shame that there are so many people/creatives out there who are ready to be Judge & Executioner at a drop of a hat. Maybe they should concentrate on working on their own issues rather than projecting it onto someone like Matt. - B.

I have used the GH5 a few times professionally (major TV networks), I prefer the NX1 in every way (battery, ergonomics, menu system). There is an interesting time lapse feature though, and especially 10bit are good for some specific pro jobs. I didn't edit the footage but my impression is that there is a lot more noise than NX in low ISO, and the oxymoron here, but in high bitrate files, higher ISO seem more organic, 3200 is usable, while in NX is not, but in no way is a low light camera, I would take C100mkII anytime for high ISO.

Dunno, but sharing a link for context for others: https://www.facebook.com/honytheseries/videolist/2352311818327650/ If I was you, I'd start by hunting around to see if you can spot BTS pics. Such as maybe on their instagram. Check out the credits at the end of who shot it, then check out their social media as well. Etc

Forget about it. Not a realistic approach for most people to shoot always in ML raw. And the 100D is not a good choice for ML raw anyway. So what? Nothing ultra super special about Canon lenses specifically anyway. Go for Panasonic G80/G85 (or a secondhand G7, if on a very tight budget).

Shot this promo back in August on a 5D3. Using a Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 and a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 It was professionally graded in Baselight Studio, the colorist was very surprised when he found out what it was shot on. Let me know what you think or shoot a question!

For those unfamiliar with the Ribcage Backbone Mod here’s a video from a modified Yi 4K and a 25mm C-Mount lens... I know the GoPro can shoot in ProTune for some slight grading, but does Yi have a similar Flat Profile? To be fair, here is a video from GoPro Air modified with the Ribcage...

Nobody around here said that. So, "No!". The opposite is the case. You got something wrong here: People find the EVA a very satisfying camera. It is a really awesome camera from what the article says, which you have been cititing. But you´ve been giving a complete wrong summuary: Newsshotters article says it is a great camera with better mixed light capabilities than sub 10.000 USD cameras from Canon and Black Magic. Good low light but no low light beast, pleasure to use, great colors- even Varicam like . To use an addtional EVF like a Zacuto Gratical Eye would also be necessary with a camera like the C300 MKII, by the way, or with Black magic cameras. So I think your post is totally wrong, completley and totally wrong on interpreting the newsshooters article to its complete opposite of what is was actually stating. Renting a GH5, on the other hand you´re right about that, is a fantastic idea in its own right of course!:) "If you are in the market for a sub $10k digital cinema camera then the EVA1 is definitely a camera you should be seriously considering." These are Matthew Allards words about the EVA in the article you´ve been referring to http://www.newsshooter.com/2017/11/01/panasonic-au-eva1-hands-on-review/

You'd be silly if you thought that the EVA1 isn't an upgrade over an RX10ii. For my money, it's the best looking image <$10k.

An extensive review of the EVA1 by Newsshooter... http://www.newsshooter.com/2017/11/01/panasonic-au-eva1-hands-on-review/ As color rendition is a top priority for me, I was happy to read Matt's assessment: "In my personal view (feel free to disagree with me in the comments!) the EVA1 has the most accurate colour rendition of any of the sub $10K cameras that are out there. The colours are very reminiscent of the Varicam LT and you would struggle to tell the two apart." Camera's not without its flaws but I expect I'll be pretty happy with it. Here's a short doc Matt shot with it.