Leaderboard

I'll be sure to post my cack handed results on iBrokeit shortly then.

He'll either sell it for a huge loss or kill it.

Yes, its universal for all Panasonic cameras. FZ1000 already has Cinelike D though so its of less use. Funnily enough, the HDMI port on my FZ1000 is also fucked.

As recently discussed with you in a parallel thread, increasing MPix will inevitably decrease RS and overall read out among other things. That is why R3 has much better RS in video than Z9 or A1. Or can do 195fps max burst rate at full resolution in FF vs 120fps in 11MP crop mode for Z9. It's always a give & take. And depending on the user that will tilt balance in either direction. Again I think Fuji did the smart thing with XH2/XH2S giving the user the option of super fast readout or high resolution 45MP/8K. Finally I think the R3 sits just fine against the A1/Z9 and given the choice I'd pick it over the other two. But that's because I value read-out speed in both photo/video over super high resolution. In the end I'm not a sports/action shooter though so no real need to invest in such cameras. I just wished there was a fast stacked sensor in a non flagship action/sports oriented body. XH2S fits the bill but I'm not sure I wanna head back to Fuji system for other reasons.

You always note the difference - I tought than moving from the 20mp m4/3 to 26mp X-mount will not bring too much of a difference, but I was wrong. Both in quality and storage requirements... For some instances, 40mp would be very useful. For concert shooting, the ability to crop from 40mp to 20mp would be very welcome. But for "no crop" work, not so much. One thing that was never explained (or tested): if you drop the resolution from 40mp to 20mp in stills, it is oversampled or line-skipped? If you don't need the 40mp for some work, a oversampled 20mp image could both bring less storage requirements AND (maybe) more color accuracy. This would be a very interesting alternative to me - albeit, if oversampled, probably would not diminish rolling shutter (could even increase it). And for video, the 40mp sensor needing to crop to be oversampled in 4k was a HUGE bummer.

I am excited to hear your guys thoughts. The white balance and tint was quite different on the two cameras. The Alexa has a bit more texture I would say, the sigma a little cleaner.

Well yeah you'd assume sensor & processing go hand in hand, but if you look at XH2/XH2S, here are two cameras with identical processing but different sensors, one stacked the other not. XH2S's stacked sensor allows fast read out that enables super low RS but also 14-bit processing. It does give up 8K in favour of 6.2K and is a bit more noisy. Stacked sensors are also more expensive to produce so that does add a bit to the cost. To me that's an acceptable trade-off. But I think that most manufacturers feel that a cheaper camera with 8K/45MP will be much more of a sell factor than more expensive faster read out 6.2K/26MP camera. Fuji were smart enough to give us both options but at Sony/Canon/Nikon, they seem to reserve the speedy stacked sensors for their expensive flagship sports/action cams. That probably won't change any time soon, so just wishful thinking on my part but I'd like to see a fast "XH2S" type hybrid from the other big players that isn't a high megapixel sports camera. like an FX30S, R6S, Z6S..

It's very popular with wedding videographers in part because it can record a safety track you can use in the event the person mic'd up gets too loud. If that's your budget ($180) then that's a very good option. You'll get "good enough" audio straight out of it, and even better if you do a little post processing. If you do have the budget the Tentacle Track E is a great option, due to the timecode feature and the option to record in 32-bit float, which can be a life saver in the event someone gets too loud.

The audio guys (IronFilm) are going to scoff at me for this suggestion but I've had good experiences with the Rode Wireless Go II on small little projects I've done in the past that have not allowed for more expensive setups. The Transmitter records so that if the signal to the receiver drops out (and it doesn't take much to get it to drop out) you still have a 24bit audio recording. It has quite a few shortcomings, mainly being the non removable recording media so you need to make sure you transfer the files before they get overwritten (7hrs in High Quality 24bit mode), no Timecode support and the requirement of using Rodes rather clunky software to transfer the recordings but if you treat it like a small recorder that can transmit just for monitoring then I think you will be pretty happy with it. Use a slate to mark your takes for easy syncing in post. I've also used it paired with a Sennheiser HS2 headset microphone to record an exercise instructor and it sounded great. The small, lightweight form factor was a cinch to hide in the instructors active wear....where I don't think I would have been able to use a heavy sennheiser G4 or Sony UWP. It's also pretty cheap. What I don't like about recorders that don't transmit like the Tascam, is that you can't monitor the sound so you will not know if the lav capsule is rubbing on clothing or pick up on any other issues you may get. Learn the Wireless Go II's limitations and work within them .....used with a good lav I think you'll be surprised with how it can sound.

I love this forum in no small part because randomly you'll have someone share a video filmed with an old ass bridge camera that makes you think "damn, that looks pretty dang good!" Looks good! Thank you for sharing!

I had the Tascam and whilst it worked it was good. But… it stopped recording sound one day and since then I’ve never trusted it. I found other people online who have had the same problem. For critical sound you should get something you can monitor.