Leaderboard

I have gotten to where I shoot almost exclusively with the R7 for events and hybrid photo/video work. For talking heads, long form content, concerts, etc. where the camera can be locked down and audio is more important then I use the C70. For commercial shoots and things like music videos I typically combine the C70 with the R7 as the b-cam. For audio when running and gunning I typically use just a shotgun mic, the Canon EF 24-105mm F4.0 lens and get pretty close to the subject to try to reduce background noise. When I am working with an onscreen personality doing impromptu interviews at events then I use a Sennheiser handheld mic and G4 receiver. For talking head work I use a Sennheiser G4 transmitter and receiver combined with a mini-XLR shotgun mic into the C70. Some of it is depending on budget as well. If the budget is pretty low I will just use the R7 simply because I don't see the point in bringing the C70 to a lower budget shoot unless it will drastically improve my workflow. If the budget is high enough then I will use the C70 even for shots that I would typically shoot with the R7 (i.e. I will rig up the C70 on a gimbal if the budget is high enough, and forgo the R7's IBIS for the C70's improved DR/IQ when shooting handheld). At the end of the day I definitely make my camera selections based on the project type. If the project is 90% photography and 10% video then I will probably use the R5. If its 50/50 photography/video then I will use the R7, if I need two cameras then I will pair the R7 with the C70, if its 100% video then the budget and audio requirements will make me choose the C70 or R7, etc. etc. The great thing about the R7, R5, and C70 is that none of them need much rigging to work and all of them will produce great quality with or without rigging/lighting. I know BM cameras tend to need more rigging/lighting to get the best results which is why with my setup I can use any camera for anything from run and gun to studio work.

This is true. If you have the control anything made in the last 10 years can look great, especially if you only have online delivery. Throw away that control over lighting and all of the sudden things like dynamic range and highlight rolloff become immensely important

To me the camera is more important if you have no control of lighting. I'd take an Alexa everytime as it handles natural light really well, unless you are shooting in the dark where you need like 12,800 iso. Now is it worth the time effort considering what you'll likely be paid for run and gun shooting, probably not.

I’m bored of my A7S3. There’s nothing wrong with it. It exposes. It focusses. It churns out Prores raw (with the Atomos). It’s damn good. But it’s boring and there is no joy in using it. So I thought I’d get a second Pocket. (The one I have is used as a “studio” camera I use for work-related videos on sticks - set up with Nikon glass). But 4k or 6k? If I get the 4k I can also get the Olympus 12-100 f/4 and the 100-400 f/5-6.3 obviously in MFT. If I go for the 6k (probably pro) I’d get the Canon EF 24-105 f/4L. The Olympus lenses might be more fun to use (easier to manual focus?)… but there are some advantages to the 6k pro. The image from either would be absolutely fine (until I ruin it in Resolve…) I know the specification and technical differences - but which would be more fun? Thoughts?

I mean at the same time a lot of these new cameras do handle natural light pretty well, especially the full frame sensors. I think the big differentiator is still the lack of 14 bit readout on most cameras. Dynamic range is pretty respectable but we are still only getting a 10-12 bit readout. I'd love to play with 5D MK3 raw footage. I imagine its lacking in dynamic range but has a certain mojo due to the 14 bit readout. What I found with the S1 sensor is the dynamic range was good enough for most scenarios, even some pretty difficult ones. I find after using lower end cameras for many projects from production to post, and now using an Alexa from production to post, you can tell the difference. If you are just comparing single frames maybe not as much, but overall the Alexa sensor and color science is just easier to work with and looks better when pushed really hard. If I wanted to be smart I'd get a RED Raven or Komodo for quick projects. You still get that great IQ, albeit not an Alexa, but in a much smaller and less power hungry package. That would be run and gun enough for me.

The camera you have and nope, for YT output any finer nuances or differences will be crushed to death in the compression.

First off I want to caveat this with the fact that I am not an IQ purist, I am not constantly in search of that perfect camera to try to replicate Hollywood magic; instead my focus is on nearly everything but IQ. I focus on things like workflow optimization, ease of grading (the C70 wins this category hands down BTW when set to Cinema Raw LT), audio options, shooting features (IBIS, ND filters, etc), battery life, and of course above all DOES IT OVERHEAT (here the C70 wins again). IMO any modern camera above the PS bodies produces fantastic quality; the story you are trying to tell, the lenses used, and the lighting all affect quality far more than the camera body. With that said, no, I don't think the IQ is distinguishable between the R5, R7, and C70 on YT for 95% of what I shoot. I keep the C70 in CLOG3 to match the other two to make the color grade easier. Now there is the remaining 5%; when a scene is a high DR scene, has strong highlight rolloff, or is perfectly lit and when the C70 is in CLOG2 then and only then does the C70 display enough of a quality difference to possibly be noticeable even on YT. I think the same can be said for most camera ecosystems (BM, Sony, Panasonic, etc.). I also briefly mentioned lenses earlier; I do think all of the cameras listed above would produce noticeable IQ improvements with "cinema" lenses; but my typical project is nowhere near the budget required to use lenses like those. The vendor's camera campaign videos produce the quality you see using the same bodies you and I purchase; but with $60K - $100K worth of rigging and a full support team. Those videos are nice to see the art of the possible (and they are hosted on YT), but achieving that look is unrealistic for most of us. I still like watching them though because they prove my point that the story, lighting, and rigging affect the quality far more than the camera body.

You must have missed the bit about it needing to be 8K for 8K TVs. 😉 I have had a better camera than the G9 for 4K, the XT3. I have an OK one at the moment with the A6400 (which has far worse video options, like 100Mbps bitrate), it's more for travel and street photography. Those prices sound amazing for the Panasonics. Used Fuji prices have been going up a lot, maybe M43 is seen as dying now? Are M43 lenses cheaper now too? I do sometimes miss my G7 and one or two lenses I can't use on APSC, like the C mount Pentax Cosmicar 25mm f1.4.

If the former happens, then surely the local fire department will need to be on standby? 🔥🚒🧯 Regarding the latter, not necessarily… I would not put it past any company to encourage sales of any item and then pop out an upgraded direct replacement shortly after…

For me, the actual camera bodies remain consistent regardless of any shooting situation. The only physical variables that I change are focal length choices and lighting with the latter very much depending on the specific scenario such as: Church ceremony, although it’s a reasonable length thing to shoot, setting up any form of lighting would be a step too far. For me. But a low light entrance or exit, or any other low light ‘run and gun’ situation, I might use an onboard video light. Other more static situations in lower light such as say bridal prep, I might use a bounced constant light source, or a spot for something like speeches. Otherwise as above, the actual camera ‘choice’ remains constant regardless, so my only choices are focal length and lighting, plus some in camera choices such as shooting log or a profile.

Not better at 25fps in any significant way and that includes ISO performance IMO. However, the GH6 torches the GH5 in high frame rates.

I think "fun" is probably better defined as "less annoying" when it comes to these cameras. In that respect, I'd say the 6KPro with the EVF as you then have two ways to address the major annoyance of the monitor screen. The internal ND is obviously a massive boon anyway but particularly as you might be using a mixture of EF and EF-S lenses that have wildly different filter thread sizes.

I took this path more than a year ago for several reasons. 1. BRAW. Using BMPCC 4K realized how good BRAW is - various degree of compression and file size - ability to adjust white balance - great support in Davinci Resolve, - smooth playback, scrubbing and editing One of the main reason I've choose Panasonic, instead of Sony or Canon was support of external BRAW recording. Only Panasonic and Nikon cameras had it. But Panasonic support is better as it gives you 6K and no line skipping, auto focus was not a problem for me because can use manual focus for 100% of what I shoot The other reason was price. Even then Panasonic S5 almost new from the box but second hand costed me 1100 Euro. Cheaper than BMPCC 4K which new came at 1400 Euro. If we add speedbooster and monitor price is also pretty much comparable to Panasonic S5 + Video Assist 2. BMPCC 4K is great but it's difficult to shoot without external monitor. Maybe it's just me but without a good 1500+ nits monitor which sits at 45 to 90 degree to the top of the camera or camera + cage + top handle it was really difficult and painful to shoot. In general I find that the most convenient, practical and useful setup for professional or serious shoots is camera + cage + top handle + monitor. It adds weight which is good for stability and it makes shooting so much easier. If we add the monitor to BMPCC 4K, then in terms and weight and size Panasonic S5 + BM Video Assist, suddenly became almost identical to BMPCC + monitor and even more compact in terms of length. Panasonic S5 can be used on most gimbals, BMPCC 4K on just a few. If I stayed only with BMPCC 4K had to buy a new gimbal. Sometimes it is great to be able to shoot with one small camera and lens, similar to the reporter style of Henri Cartier-Bresson. But BMPCC 4K is not good at this. It lacks EVF and is too big in length. Panasonic S5 on the other hand is. For those shoots I can skip the recorder and use 10bit 4:2:2 internal codec which is also very good or simply put the recorder in a bag and have a small and tiny HDMI cable hanging on the side. 3. BMPCC 4K sensor size. I used Metabones speedbooster x0.64 and in term of DOF and bokeh this camera and setup were great. However crop factor is kind of weird - 1.21, can't use my primes lens sets on their specific focal length. No big deal but still kind of problematic. With Panasonic S5 any vintage lens has exactly the same focal length / angle degree it was designed for. Panasonic S5 + BM Video Assist 5'' 12G solves most of BMPCC 4K shortcomings like poor battery life, lack of EVF, IBIS and smaller sensor size. Plus it is a great photo camera on it's own. Plus it could be used without BM Video Assist 5'' and will still give great image quality. Shortcomings of Panasonic S5 + Video Assist: Micro HDMI, always kind of problematic, needs special attention and mini cage with a clamp to hold it on place or micro HDMI to HDMI adapter clamped to a cage as well. You need a bigger bag in order to be able to put camera and recorder together as one piece but same is true for BMPCC 4K + monitor. You have to start / stop two different devices. In general I find S5 + BM Video Assist to be more convenient and enjoyable camera setup than BMPCC 4K + monitor + speedbooster. New S5 II solves the micro HDMI port problem and adds tracking auto focus. Can we call it cinema camera ? Yes, with BRAW it certainly is capable to deliver high picture quality.