Leaderboard

Filmmaking is an art form. In the realm of creativity, people often crave the authenticity that only real humans can provide. This is why blockbusters often enlist well-known actors to generate interest and why, despite our daily reliance on them, our personal computers don't make headlines in gossip columns. https://www.eoshd.com/news/dont-panic-about-ai-its-just-a-tool/

At least… I think they should have either launched the GH6 sooner than they did, or waited even longer and gave it PDAF. For me, it was a moment like when Fuji released the XH1 only to pop out the XT3 6 months later. GH6 and S5ii… I know we can’t always have everything we want, when we want it and the GH6 ticks a lot of boxes for many but the lack of phase and the need to shoot what is it, 2000 iso to get the most DR requiring a lot of ND? I went off it at that point and tried an OM-1 which I loved…except not so much video. M4/3 died for me then. Not because there is anything inherently wrong with it, just that APSC and FF offers me more of what I personally want. I would like to see the format developed and who knows. I never say never, just what works.

At that time we will have A6800 and FX40...

The wait for the GH6 was years. I suspect any GH7 might not be perhaps as long but I wouldn’t imagine anything sooner than 2025? Just speculating…

I'm sorry for the small (wo)man getting crushed by this, but when you are working on a freelance basis, that's part of the deal and a foreseeable risk. You are essentially an entrepreneur with the risks that comes with it. If you find you can't strike and have effectively no leverage on your employer, you know that you are in a vulnerable position. I'm not saying I'm fine with companies exploiting people by "outsourcing" all work from contracted employees to freelancers but it is a trend that is happening over the years and it is up to governments to re-balance the risk and reward between employers and employees through legislations. Because if we leave free market forces reign supreme, we either end up with an industry that is exploiting people, or an industry that can't get the people it needs because everyone becomes aware of it's practices and decides to pursuit their ambitions elsewhere, where less risk is involved. Sometimes something of a crisis is needed to make people aware and improve things.

With creative ideas like this so abundant, it completely fails me why the studios only want to make endless movies about a guy with a flying mammal fetish and the tin man from The Wizard of Oz..... 🙂

You, Ironfilm and me, three time travellers stuck in the timeless Lumix G7 thread by Andy Lee, reading his comparison with an Arri Alexa, then buying all G7 cameras we can get for our money, reading it again and buying even more G7 cameras and reading again... Time management and travelling, and cyclic GAS impulses, what a weird world of photo-video-sound nerds we are living in 🙂 @kye

No, I am a time traveler, and am talking about what is coming in the future: the Panasonic GH7.

It’s pretty obvious from that side to side that the first pic was taken in sunshine and with the second, a cloud had passed over so if this is the only evidence for any color difference, the clown show is in town. But I haven’t watched the videos and I’d expect some with them having different sensors and one being FF and the other APSC. Same or different lens?

Even clouds are not in the same place.

Not really, and it's sort-of complicated. The short version is I choose the mode with the bit-rate and codec I want, then look at what resolution options the camera gives for those settings. The long version is that it's more complicated, and you should really do tests to see what works best for you as it might vary between situations, for example if it involves more or less movement in the frame, more or less noise in the image, etc. At a high-level, there are a few advantages to shooting at the delivery resolution: The downsampling happens in-camera, rather than in your NLE, so it should be faster in post Rolling shutter might be less Bit depth on the sensor read-out might be higher But, there are also some advantages to shooting a higher resolution and downsampling in post: Downsampling in post is likely to be higher quality than in-camera, because in-camera it has to be done real-time and things like battery life and heat dissipation are considerations Any non-native resolutions might involve line-skipping, pixel binning and other non-optimal downsampling, which this may avoid Compression artefacts tend to scale with the resolution, so downsampling to timeline resolution in post lessens how visible these are You can punch-in in post more if the need arises, which also occurs when stabilising For a given bitrate the image quality is normally higher at a higher resolution, so you're starting with a better position For my setup, I shoot the GH5 in the 200Mbps ALL-I mode because it's ALL-I and therefore is nicer in post. I decided this over the 150Mbps 4K mode because that is IPB, making it much more intensive to edit with, and also over the 400Mbps 4K ALL-I mode because that would require me to buy a UHS-II card which was hugely expensive. However, I shoot the GX85 in the 4K 100Mbps IPB mode rather than the 1080p 20Mbps IPB mode. The 4K mode is IPB, but having 100Mbps is more important than the editing performance. I'd rather have a 100Mbps ALL-I mode, but if we're wishing for things then we'd be changing topics, so I choose the best from what I have. In terms of the GH6 and Prores, they're all 10-bit ALL-I modes (as they should be!) so the performance in post is mostly a moot point compared to IPB codecs, so it's probably more a case of making the trade-off between disk space and if you need the extra resolution for anything in-particular. I think with projects that are more straight-forwards then shooting at 200Mbps 1080p is perfectly sufficient. Remember that many low-budget feature films were shot with 1080p Prores HQ around 170-180Mbps and they were screened in theatres on screens larger than the walls of most private home-theatres, so the image quality should be sufficient for anything we could be doing. If you're shooting in uncontrolled situations where post is difficult, or if you're unsure what the footage will be used for in future, or if you're doing VFX, essentially if there are any special circumstances around the project, then having more resolution and MUCH higher bitrates might be worthwhile. There's an argument to be made for shooting slightly higher than the delivery resolution, at maybe 2.5K for a 1080p master, so that's something to think about as a sort-of middle ground, if that is available in the GH6 - I'm not that aware of what modes it offers and I know the GH5 has some intermediate sizes, like 3.3K 4:3 in the anamorphic modes.

It's WAY more than what I need! I would have probably purchased a G9 hadn't it been for the ridiculously low price, new, with 3 year warranty for a flagship product. I have absolutely no need for it other than creativity. I'm going to watch the Lumix live stream tomorrow as I think they'll say something. Still, the bigger feature for me is the high frame rates on an external SSD.

Not a user, but having RAW 5.7K60 and C4K120 and 4.4K anamorphic seems a lot like it's now in cinema camera territory. Things like the ability of RED cameras to have RAW at high frame rates was one of the things that I thought separated them from the usual prosumer cameras that mere mortals like I could afford. Maybe I'm just behind the times, but if you were shooting something serious like high-end music videos / high-end docs / low-budget features and had the ability for 5.7K up to 60p (for those emotional/surreal moments) and also C4K 120p for any special effects shots (like if shooting an emotional sports doco) then it makes it a serious camera for those tasks.