Leaderboard

When I watch tests like this, it reminds me how much I dislike gratuitous slow motion. I think every filmmaker should be given a lifetime allocation of 10 minutes of slow motion that they can use judiciously throughout their career. It's like exclamation points: I remember reading a diatribe against them in which the author said that every writer should be given a lifetime supply of exactly one exclamation point.

Leave us wedding people alone!!!!! 😘

Now I have to trust this thumbnail.:) @Emanuel The fellows mouth is forming a strong vowel with an important message on his wettened lips.😅

There are some crazy deals right now for Black Friday, at least in France. I found the GH6 for 1579 Euros (tax included) with a 400 Euros cash-back scheme, an extra year of waranty and a SanDisk Extreme 1tb drive SSD thrown in (to be confirmed). Well, it looks like I'll be able to purchase on after all... along with the promised GH6 guide from @Andrew Reid. I was not expecting that, but now that I have a gazillion M43 lenses, it makes sense. The main problem now is that I have too many M43 cameras!

I don't know of a Sony 20mm F2. are you sure you don't mean the 20mm F1.8? I'm not really a fan of Sony lenses. Too clinical. Much prefer the Sony Zeiss in E-mount, but that's personal. I meant FF with a Speedbooster using cine or vintage lenses. Center sharpness isn't everything, most of the FF lens mojo comes from vignetting, diffraction, aberrations etc. Again totally personal. As for 60p capturing motion well. Ughhh. No. It gives it the dreaded soap opera look. Use 30p if your panning a lot but never ever export on a 60p timeline. Just no. Since you like dancing, here is a great example of a filmed dance sequence as far as motion with a global shutter S16 sensor in 24p: hopefully it will make you change your mind 😉

Well John, dear Gx85 fellow friend:), congratulations! @John Matthews Afaik the Gh6 is resolving more detail and is holding onto colour much better in super lowlight than a GH5S, meaning it could be a next level colour wonder. Two things keeping me away from it, no true zero sharpening as the Gh5II actually provides. That's big, making the Gh5ii a compelling choice. Secondly, it does not provide the additional 1.4x Super16 crop mode as the Gh5 does. I think the Gh6 should excel regarding crop modes, since it allows open gate up to 60p. It should be the prime machine of crop modes all up to 60p, full height 1to1, kinda like S16 fullwidth x full width, 5to4, Super16 4to3. Prores LT! Third point actually, is the price, though you get a whole lotta image, convinience and overall quality for the money. So how much did you pay, 1579 minus 400 cashback, making it 1179 EUR? Where did you get that deal???😄

A step higher... :- )

At this point cinematic = is not a still picture 😂😂

For me, cinematic has a straight forward meaning: a quality of cinematography that I never notice the cameraman. What these people do is exactly opposite of that, the only actor I notice during the video, is the cameraman.

The stuff that bothers me about current online content, I could write a 10,000 page book about it... Camera tests (the ones that grab the most views that is) have become completely meaningless. They're just about undisclosed variables. Everything looks more or less the same and if there's a difference then you can be 99% sure it's due to a random undisclosed variable like somebody grading two LOG formats a bit differently, trying to match but not quite. Tells me nothing about the camera. Any subtly even big differences in texture between uncompressed Cinema DNG and silky smooth H265 just gets completely obliterated on YouTube and most people probably even watching it on a phone! It is like evaluating MP3 vs FLAC through a $10 bluetooth speaker. Completely pointless. The format is all so similar now as well. American YouTube clickweasels who chuck a cheap bit of eye candy in front of the lens and think the results are the definitive verdict on image quality! Manny has a model walking stiffly up to the lens and that is supposed to be definitive verdict on an AF system. Toneh has a pool table in Rec.709 colour profiles and that is supposed to say everything about high ISO performance. Not that simple now there is dual native gain circuits is it? This is where Gerald at least goes further than skin-deep, but it always ends up being a box specs reading or box ticking exercise that doesn't merge the technical data he collects with the creative appropriation of it through the eye of an artist or story-teller. So what REALLY looks best out of the Z9 and A1? All I get out of these videos is... slight colour differences? From different colour profiles? And different grades? Don't even mention what codec and modes they're comparing. Pointless shit. If you fall for this shit, you're enabling those high viewing figures. Wonder if what you're doing is just consumerism, entertainment. Nothing wrong with that. Just don't pretend anything otherwise or pretend it says anything useful about the current differences in camera technology and performance. We need a standard benchmark look for cinema as well to judge the mirrorless cameras by too. Perhaps in a useful camera test there should be an appreciation of the grain and texture of film, the imperfections of it, because everything looking technically perfect and clean is not really doing it for me.