Leaderboard

Panasonic was going to release the GH5s yesterday but after reading this thread they realised it would never live up to expectations and cancelled the whole project.

The announcement is that the GH5S has not been annnouced. It’s looking like it will be better in lowlight, possibly have better DR and a couple of new frame rate options. It’s unconfirmed as to whether there will be an “Auto Hollywood Mode”, where any video you record will instantly look like Hollywood.

The missing Canon label...

No, the press needs more time to make that "Hitler is not happy about the GH5S" video.

LOL.. this thread sure got derailed.. see this is what happens when you claim personal opinions as facts! Hopefully, we can all agree now gear choices are subjective.. and there is no perfect camera for everyone. Getting back on topic: the new Eterna simulation coming to H1/XT2 should be of particular interest to filmmakers as it's based on motion picture film stock:

The House of Pie in LA is heaven (and it's where Tarantino did some writing in his early days). And if the numbers do convince you to go for cake, Broadway Pizza in Memphis. That's right, a pizza joint has the best cakes you will find anywhere.

I own both Veydras and many of the SLR Magic lenses. They're quite different. They Veydras are more consistent in terms of their performance and across the board are more uniform to work with if you're trying to work with remote focus units etc.. The SLR Magic have more individual personality and aren't as consistent in terms of their mechanics. Owning both of them I tend to reach for the SLR Magic first, usually because they're more unique in look. The 25mm 0.95 has a great look for certain jobs, and I really use the 10mm a great deal. JB

Here's something done with NX500 + Rokinon 12mm + something which has: "made in USSR" 44mm, written on it + small LED panel footage was shot at DC / 90Mbps / no audio Happy holidays to all

This is not about IQ & I'm not "hung up" on sensor size, it's a question of aesthetic preference, and I'm currently infatuated in the Super35 zone. I prefer it over FF and obviously M4/3. . FWIW i love Digital Bolex and was sad to see them go and have shot many commercial projects with Blackmagic gear and continue to do so.. So yes, depending on the project I absolutely would and do use other cameras "over my XT2".. never claimed it was the end all be all of cameras.. unlike your statements with the GH5! Sadly this is starting to sound like fanboy defense talk...

Pretty sure I'm the first person outside of China who has the new Kinefinity TERRA 4k. I've been a bit of a ghost on this forum since going all-in on the Kine pre-order, but here's an unboxing video by way of saying hello again:

BMPCC + Carl Zeiss 25mm lens. Stylised color grade based on my BozBMDFilm to Rec709 LUT. Download Page: https://goo.gl/B9Ns51

Luckily this wasn´t my card, so i feel very sorry to say no

Jealous!

They're almost ready to ship out your set?

So, what was the announcement then?

Well Said jonpais !!

I know I should be hawking the 1DC right now. But, if I were you... Because you are coming from the NX1... I’m sure you haven’t invested in many Canon lenses.... Go with the Gh5... and later the Eva1... You know that Panasonic won’t disappoint in the long run.... and because your a bonafide film student... you of all people should appreciate the 6K opengate anamorphic mode....

There are two issues which confuse the matter. The first is a franchise you need from the government to install cable, or set up microwave towers, etc., on public property. The reason most ISPs can charge what they want is they got in first (with telephone or cable and can reuse it for Internet) and, like you say, matching what they do is very expensive. It's probably not as hard as you think to start a high-speed ISP where you live/ What makes it practically unfeasible is the expense you need in legal fees, engineering reports, environmental assessments, etc., in getting the government to give you the right to string cable. However, the rules are public and there's no real reason you can't do it. Those phone companies and cable companies did it. We can elect a government tomorrow that says anyone can string up cable anywhere. If they did that, you'd have a lot of choices in ISPs. You'd also have wires all over the place and with each one a bit cash strapped whose to say the service would be good? There is something to be said about economies of scale in large companies As I said elsewhere, States should build "neutral" network through higher taxes or bond issuance. But NOOOO. No one wants to pay for it The second issue is one of pricing regulation. I'm against fixed pricing because economic studies have shown, over the centuries, that any kind of pricing control eventually backfires. People are just too good at getting around them and the energy they spend doing that ends up in the price of the things you're buying. That why ending Net Neutrality isn't some crazy idea. If the companies really do want to raise rates, what's to stop them now? They do want to raise rates, yes, but on services they can't offer now because of price controls. They will also LOWER prices on things where there is too much competition or supply. It's the fear of change that really drives the politics of net neutrality. If there are problem at least NOW people can say, it's a complete free market, so why don't have have 2 ISPs in Southern California. Then maybe we can have tax incentives to change that.

I think Panasonic would be on to a real winner if it challenges the C line in low light and replaces the mechanical shutter with ND filters.

I did a lot of crazy things back them. I was the first person in Ohio to ever own a IBM XT computer around 1982. It had a 4mb, yeah mb hard drive in it and 64k, yeah k of memory. I paid over 7,000 bucks for it. I was maybe the first person in the world two have to video monitors hooked up at the same time to a PC computer, maybe any type of computer. I was trying to teach my daughter Digital Turtle Graphics and I wanted a Monochrome monitor for text, and a RGB color monitor for the graphics, running at the same time, to made it easier for her to learn. I had a degree in Computer Science at the time. I called Digital Computers and they thought I was crazy, not going to happen, not possible. And then I called IBM and they said We Never ever thought about doing that. About 3 months later they wrote me a one off machine language program to make it happen. I had my picture and computer setup in their corporate newsletter, they gave me 500 dollars and a 600 dollar "six pack" I/O board for coming up with the idea. A few months later anyone could do it if they wanted to. I also had a business called The Data Bank Company going at the same time. I was on the Web before there was a thing called the web. It was out of Phoenix, Arizona. Cost 250 dollars a month. It was mostly just for Colleges. I was one of the few in the world that was on it as a regular person. I can't remember the name any more. I did research for court cases for lawyers. I would download the data all night, I had a 300 baud modem with a 256k modem buffer on it. And it print out using 3 Epson printers going 10 hours a day, I would wear out all 3 of them nearly each month! used a 20# box of printer paper a day. Charged 60 bucks an hour back them. A ton of money in the early 80's. Worked out of my home part time. I was a BUSY bastard in those days. On the foreskin of technology as they say Lol.

"Well bigger pixels with same count would be bigger sensor". ahh, you can only put so many pixels on a sensor. If you have a "bigger sensor" those same sized pixels would not fill up a larger sensor. So you would have smaller "wells" to capture light with. Pixels Have to cover the entire sensor. The more you have the Smaller they have to be. Hell maybe we are saying the same thing, but there is no way in heck you can have unbelievable low light using a sensor with say 50mb on a FF sensor.. Unless it is a MF sensor with HUGE sensors. And that is why MF cameras are so good. Large pixels per sq inch to gather more light.. One of the best older low light Cine cameras is a Sony F3. It only had like a 3.4 mp sensor in it. It is so the pixels, pixel pitch, can be huge to gather more light. And 2mp is all you need for 1080p anyways. Hell when I got in Broadcast TV the top of the line Sony 3 Tube Cine 2/3 cameras had less than 1mp total because they were only 480i. And they weighed over 20 pounds. And before we could use them the techs had to turn them on at least an hour before we could even shoot them to "Warm" them up to be stable. And after that they had techs that checked them for correct color balance before we could go out and shoot them in the field. They only did like 550 lines of resolution. Just Sony Beta. They cost about $100,000.00 a camera with deck.. When the first 2/3 CCD Sony Cine Cameras we had came in they did 720p @24fps and they had 1mp total. Anything above 24p was interlaced video, not true intra p footage. They weighed around 18 pounds or a bit less. They would do like 750 lines of resolution. That was Sony Beta SP. They cost about 75 to $80,000.00 a camera with deck.. Man how things have changed specs wise, but I bet the cost are damn near as much in real dollars as then. It was CRAZY ASS money to have a TV station back them. Millions and Millions of dollars, and that was insane crazy money back in the late 70's. I remember the President of the company coming in once, , nearly pulling his hair out LoL, asking did we Really need another new switcher that cost nearly 1 million dollars to replace our old one!! I remember also the pedestal tripod for the main news camera on the floor cost 65,000 bucks alone. With the camera , box lens, and tripod it was close to $250,000.00. And we has 3 of those, 2 of them when I worked there were older though. Crazy stuff. I can't imagine what it cost TV stations to switch to Digital from Analog TV!!!! You just can't go into it a little at a time, it had to be all or nothing! Old memories from a old guy LoL. My one daughter in California still has 2 Sony 2/3 3 CCD cameras and recording decks, tripods, chargers, etc at her house I had in the 80"s I bought. She majored in Creative Writing at the time to help with the dialog. I was one of first people I knew in Ohio that was doing freelance broadcast video Ads for local people back them. Crazy times. I had more business than I could do part time at the time. I had very good credit at the time LoL. You know even now is a good time to do local business Ads for people to help pay off your gear and hone your skills. Same opportunity now as then. It will never go away. People have to advertise. And they think you are God until you hand them the bill Lol. I have seen grown men nearly faint, Heh. The more takes the more money is a good thing to stress LoL.

There are many different ways of increasing the amount of collected light that is converted to signal GIVEN the sensor size. Few examples: 1. Pixel size. Yes the majority of sensor designs pixels cover less area than the total area of the sensor, so more pixel coverage the more light is gathered. 2. Color filters. Typical Bayern sensors have an RGB pattern that filters away most of the light for each pixel location. The less you filter the more light you collect but the lower the color sensitivity becomes. Other pixel designs offer better light absorption like RGBW or CYGM. 3. Quantum efficiency. That describes the ability of the sensor to respond to the incoming photon signal and the conversion of it to a measurable electron signal. For example BSI technology moves the readout circuitry from between each pixel’s microlens and photodiode to behind the photodiode layer allowing more light to reach the light-sensitive photodiode.

I'm pretty excited to see what this new GH5 model has to offer. I'm happy with the GH5 and see the prospective GH5 "S" very intriguing. My favourite modes are the 1080p 200m All-I in 25p and 50p. The quality is exceptional for "lowly" 1080p, haha. Been shooting a traditional Christmas video this week, all in V-Log 1080p 50p All-I....

Yes.. and David Lynch shot a 3 hour full feature on a 1/3" sensor consumer DV cam.. please let's not go there and compare ourselves to legends.. my point is simply to each their own.. and no camera kills another in the right hands..

For someone who has watched that test series several times, this statement is exaggerated and out of context at best. And yes, you did forget to add the "imo" to prevent your statement from becoming a fanboy rant. Because that's what it is now. You tried to push a personal preference and opinion as a fact. Thats never a good idea imo.

I don't know, but as much as any of those Canon bodies are you could buy a Canon C100 for the video part of it.. And you can take great pictures with just about any camera made in the last five years. My Favorite would be the Canon 1DC, but it is a data hog in 4k for a lot of what you want. The mkIV has just too much of a crop in 4k for me to swallow. The mkIII is great for the Magic Lateran hack, but a little soft in 1080p. Some might think the Canons are a "downgrade" to the NX1 LoL. Hmm interesting.. Killer video, 28mp stills, great body layout, great lenses..... Yeah, get a C100 with the DPAF and be done with it. Now if you want stealth well maybe not, but I would argue none of the above Canon DSLR's are very stealthy either. Buy a Sony RX100 mk V if you want stealth.

@mercer the wait was crazy! I actually ordered the 5k a year ago, full-price. Was considering asking for a refund but was really intrigued by the specs of the 4k. Will post again when I shoot something legit with exteriors.

Exactly, and you don't really want to use F-Log with 8bit 4:2:0, I have found it to be unreliable even in 8bit 4:2:2 Prores. Sometimes even a simple S curve and a gamut conversion is enough to break it, I think it really needs 10bit, or some tweaking. Let's wait and see if the X-H1 gets it externally. My hopes are pretty low though.

Try this one https://www.amazon.com/Delkin-Cinema-UHS-II-Memory-DDSDUHS264GB/dp/B01M4RCVBE My source at Panasonic mentioned it as working pretty well. And with Amazon it's easy to return it if it doesn't, so you've got nothing to lose trying.