Axel

Apart from the technical aspects that let you MIMIC film (24p, DR, Filmconvert) and make your video a travesty of an extinct medium, I think it's mostly the quality of the recording that helps, the film arts if you will, a.k.a. production value. Don't record the banal reality, make an image bursting with emotion and sensation. rec_2020 describes HFR and true HDR as the new standards. Though considered uncinematic now, these will actually help to enhance a truly great film. Be ahead of time.

I am interested if the MB SB XL 0,64 fits on the GH5 physically. I am told that it almost touches the sensor of the GH4. This would be an awesome combo. Does anybody know of a tester who used this (can't see the video above, cause I'm abroad with a smartphone and have used up my flatrate limit ...)

You mean this? https://www.proaim.com/proaim-camera-hand-grip-with-wrist-strap.html But I saw the same thing from various manufacturers. https://www.proaim.com/proaim-camera-hand-grip-with-wrist-strap.html

Yep, match doesn't match. Would be too easy.

Hm, the Nikon version is dumb, wonder whether this would work with the GH5 then. Or should I buy EF-lenses? Without manual focus ring? A makeshift manual solution was to record the same, er, colored chart with both lenses and then match one visually to the better looking one. You could save this correction for future use as a base (just off-the-cuff, don't know if this works). I would have bought such a chart long ago, I just know I'm too lazy to carry it around and place it everywhere as soon as the light changes.

Thanks gain. To be honest, I couldn't tell which one was better. As for slight differences in colors I know I will have the same problem with normal adapter and speedbooster, even if I use the same lens. Perhaps I will buy one of those color charts. With this, I could batch-match all shots with ease as well in FCP X (with CFP) as in Resolve. I really can't believe you when you say you can't color correct. Compared to grading, CC is science, and simple, no rocket science. Use the scopes, you don't have to trust your eyes. If you tell me what software you use, I can perhaps link to good tutorials. Was this a simple adapter, not speedboosted?

Okay. So if I'd use a passive adapter or a not-stabilzed lens or both, this 5-axis-stabilizer won't work?

Somewhat off-topic. I grew up with film, shot in Super 8 since I was 8, a pun I was aware of at my birthday, life-determing, my Rosebud. I shot 16mm B&W and developed the footage myself. I was a projectionist for many years, it's like my pulse is tuned to 24p ... - but I never understood what is meant by motion cadence (not a language issue, in german it's Kadenz). But I see that there is something special about jonpais' shots. I think you partly nailed it down by "chilled" and "slow motion". ;-))) Or that asians generally radiate more patience than Europeans or Americans. And that jonpais reacted to that in his static tripod shots. He observes patiently. Too cryptic. I quote my favorite director, who put it more simply: If I know WHAT I'm shooting, I know HOW to shoot it. jonpais portraits people, they are his subject. If I shoot action, the natural impulse is to follow it, "track" it. On-topic again: what is all this stuff about in-camera-stabilization, Dual-IS and so forth? Yes, I understand that with the FoV of a 50mm on MFT it's more difficult to shoot handheld. But then, these techniques didn't exist before and people managed to hold their cameras steadily nonetheless. It's a matter of an ergonomic rig and training. No?

With A7Rii I can do better with minimally tweaked CINE4 than with s-log. Don't care if colors are more "baked in" as long as they are not too much off. My request was not meant to let you do my homework, but I appreciate your input.

Yep! Did you see this? Imo it suggests that (for GH4 at least) Cine-D has some advantages over V-log (particularly since I am a dilettante if it comes to grading - but apparently I'm not exactly an exception). Imagine we could find some settings (sharpness, saturation, maybe a color shift, NR, that kind of thing) to find the perfect profile for us. And leave the butchering to the rest.

Color vandalism - I am guilty of it! jonpais, excuse me if I missed this somewhere else, can you link me to the threads where you elaborate on this "tweaking"?

Just tell me what you think, I trust your judgment. For me, it's a matter of NOT buying many different lenses. Thought of a second lens that could cover 50-100mm (FF-equ.) with the said two adapters instead of having three or four lenses.

Beautiful, and beautifully graded. I wouldn't hesitate to spend 1000 bucks for a superior lens. For this focal range, do you think it would beat the Sigma Art 50mm? I think with such a small DoF it would have to be manual anyway.

Thanks again. Then I won't buy the 30mm, because gimbal bumble is the only time to switch to AF for me. I already know. I will (again) make the camera "ENG-style": > put a big soft eyepiece on the excellent EVF, like I did with my GH2 (Zacuto replacement part, € 16): > instead of a rig-diculous rig, I'll buy a grip like this: > I'll re-buy only one lens for the start: the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 for Nikon G. For Nikon, because then I get a MB speedboosted manual aperture ring, which I find more intuitive. And I am used to the direction of the focus ring. > I'll buy two adapters: Novoflex MFT<Nikon. This makes the Sigma a 36-70 @f1.8 (FF equivalent). Then a Metabones speedbooster (don't know which one works yet, don't know how much stops it will boost), with, say, crop-reducing by 0,7 I would have the Sigma be ~ 25-50mm and faster than f1.4. > for a small AF lens, I am not sure. They all seem to shout 'sterile video'! Might then be the cheap and very light 14mm pancake, or should I really spend $1500 for Leica Summi-something?

Thank you, jonpais. The 30 mm looks very sharp indeed (some tolerable moire, the guy with the red relax-cap). It appears to have the same nice focus ring as the 18-35. And it has a very good FoV. Used the 18-35 mm speedboosted on my Pocket almost exclusively @35mm, which equalled a 50mm FF. Imo the advantage of a gimbal over a steadicam is that you don't need to go very wide, making your shots look like GoPro. Now I could adapt the 18-35 mm with a normal adapter also (this is not so much about the weight, I have the Ronin M), particularly if you say that CAF won't work for this kind of shot, but I see that the 30mm was indeed a very good option.

Very good thinking, Ronnie. I never tested this myself, but you're right: trust your own eyes.

Or daylight. The right lens is half the battle. Owned three original MFT lenses with GH2. Two of them (Pana, Oly) were directly responsible for a 'videoish' look. The third, the Nokton 25mm, was beautiful for HD, but maybe not sharp enough for UHD. The Sigma would be my first thought. Because I have a gimbal, I'd need a good lightweight AF lens as well. This might turn out be a hard choice. I didn't follow discussions on MFT lenses for a long time. Need someone to bring me up to date.

"certain ..." Will my beloved Sigma 18-35 be among them? I've read somewhere that SB XL's rear element almost touches the GH4's sensor. If it's possible to use it on the GH5 physically remains to be confirmed.

Found it easily on german appstore. You have to read this and scroll down, then you will be relocated to your local appstore.

1. The files transcoded by MSC match the timeline settings. They are played back as they are. Playing back HD ProRes (no matter the flavour) is the easiest thing for any Mac. 2. No matter if you chose Better Quality over Better Performance in the viewer, FCP X will always scale the quality down to give you realtime experience. It says better quality, not absolute quality, it's literally a preference of one over the other, not an exclusion. 3. Therefore, it's normal that HD ProRes looks somewhat better than 4k mpeg4 *in preview*. Put the same clips side by side in your timeline, export them and then compare! 4. Mpeg Streamclip does not have it's own ProRes encoder. It's just an interface that let's you define the codec for export, but it uses QT, the same module that FCP X and Compressor use to transcode. No difference to triggering the process as background task from within FCP X. Only that this would have been more practical and smarter. If they also play back equally smoothly in 4k, there wasn't any need to use optimized media anymore. Anyway, everybody's experiences with ProRes are that it's visually indistinguishable from the original. Just believe it and try what I suggest under point 3.

Yep, every ISO setting that deviates from the native sensor sensitivity is the native sensor sensitivity with a gamma correction curve applied and baked into the file. BTW: what is the native ISO of the GH5? The best way to improve colors would be to a- use a good profile b- set an appropriate WB -c record a color chard like the one in your screenshot so that Resolve or Color Finale can use it as a reference to optimize the colors automatically.

Thanks jonpais. Really impressive. Cine-V and Cine-D might be enough. Why V-log if I can't grade anyway? Like the waveform, like the FN buttons, the battery life, the stabilization, Now the whole lenses questions come up again. Which speedboosters work? Will some vignette on the non-crop sensor (or little crop compared to GH4)? Will 400Mbit be H.265? Too much information buried in too many postings. Sigh.

I'll start with this, because it's the most important aspect of your request. Your late 2013 iMac is not considered vintage. Until July I had a 2009 MP (vintage) and it did exactly the same things my late 2015 (no newer model exists) 5k iMac does. Was just laggy with non-optimized 4k. There are two things you shouldn't confuse: performance and the general ability to playback files. The latter may have to do with being up-to-date software-wise. That your Mac accepts ProRes 10-bit means nothing. Every Mac since 2006 plays them, my old office iMac does it. OSX (now called MacOS) monitors 10-bit as such since only recently (before, it was rendered in 10-bit, but monitored in 8-bit, you had to use 3d-party-hardware to feed a 10-bit monitor). You'd need at least El Capitan. Better update to Sierra and 10.3.1. Make a clean install, don't install Perian or old plugins. You are right, you need to preview footage before import! FCP X uses every trick one can think of to better your performance. You can edit 4k on an entry level MB with weak CPU and GPU by allowing those tricks. One of these tricks is optimized media. It is space-consuming (your iMac has Thunderbolt? Get external TB drives! If you only have TB1, you could by a used Pegasus raid with 8 or more TB for below 500 bucks) but not time-consuming at all. I know because I've been doing it for years. As long as you have a preview of the original codec, the transcoding runs in the background, you just notice that an hour or so later the skimmer speed improves. You can also use proxy. They have a quarter resolution (UHD becomes FHD) - a no-brainer if you don't monitor in 4k or if your export goal was FHD. And the 'workflow' is just a toggle between show proxy and show original. There is no catch. No problems have ever been reported (aside from having forgotten to switch to original/optimized prior to export, but that's not FCP X's fault). As I've written a few pages earlier, my i7 4GHz 4GB iMac plays all files. But they are short and just a few. And frame skipping occurs (one of the said tricks to not stop playback, but no realtime in the strict sense). If I had to edit a project with hundreds of GH5 clips, I would immediately check the optimized media box or proxy. If I had limited space (I haven't: buy more!), I'd preview the clips and only copy those I needed. So don't be stubborn.

You are absolutely right, and I don't defend my grade. Regarding the clipping, I already wrote that I did this on purpose. I wrote "This belongs under subjective opinion, individual taste ...". I found the 'legal' values to look too romantic and boring, still do. I didn't use Resolve but just the very limited CC of FCP X, where you can't adjust RGB per channel with lift, gamma, gain. Should perhaps follow wolf33d's advise and use CFP in the future. I can read all scopes, and I use them for CC. If it comes to tasting the dish they don't help as little or as much as kitchen scales. Grading is not about good scrambled eggs, it's more about indian cuisine - something unexpected that explodes in your mouth and lets you forget about all traditional menus with known ingredients. But again, I don't disagree with your judgment of my results. Saw your Imagine Cuba, and you are talented. And you have been arrogant with your remarks. Fair. And mostly constructive. Like, come on, do a better job!

The i5 processor doesn't use Quicksync (mpeg4 hardware de- and encoding). You should use optimized media (also for Resolve, if you plan to use that). That's why I asked for some standard profile comparisons some pages ago. Very subtle.