dbp

Honestly there's this weird myth that you need to be a grading expert to bother with raw. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's quite easy to get a standard realistic look with raw files. The only difference is now you have tons of room to adjust the exposure/highlights/shadows. It *is* wonderful if you want to get into to heavy grading, but you certainly don't have to. raw, at least with the blackmagic pocket and micro, is a really easy workflow. I think you'd grow quite fond of working with those files.

I think Panasonic just had a nice sensor with the GH1 and especially GH2. Great 1080p cameras. Even the 720p was more detailed than the canon 1080p offerings at the time. They also had noticably less crop compared to a GH4 in 4K. Enough to make a difference with DOF. Lots of factors, really.

They have the capabilities. I remember this being a topic of discussion with the 14-140 mkII as well. Apparently their (newer) power OIS is junk. The older ones with Mega OIS were actually pretty solid. I had the original 14-42 and the OIS was great. I also used the original 14-140. Even on the 140 end, stability was great. It's the newer ones that have the microjittering for some reason.

Definitely will watch later. Steve Yedlin has fantastic info and breakdowns on the film look, digital vs film etc etc.

Whoa, that looks like a really great option. Surprised I don't hear about people using this more, considering how reasonably priced that lens is.

The Rokinon 12mm f2 is a good prime for the pocket. Minimal distortion and not too bad for going handheld, even though it lacks IS.

This a good point. The 12-35 definitely distorts on the wide end, which bugs me.

Panasonic 12-35 has always been the walk around IS go-to. More like 36-105 equivalent though.

I have the pocket and the GH4. Both are great for walk around shooting. Which one I take depends on how much I also want to take stills. For video, I prefer the pocket. Shooting raw is so nice for run and gun outdoor stuff. Rokinon 12 f2 is my goto lens. I'd opt for the 12-35 panasonic if I had it. SLR magic Vari ND. I have 5 batteries, but even with that many, it's annoying to have to swap batteries all the time. I recently started bringing the juicebox magic power with me. It's a bit unsightly, but it does mount on (or below) the camera. The added weight helps with handheld shooting, and I can just leave the camera on all day. It's so much nicer to just pick up and shoot at a moment's notice without turning it on and off to conserve the tiny batteries.

It would be extremely cool. As it stands, the only thing I see phones having the advantage on is size and weight. I never want to use mine cause it's still cumbersome compared to my dedicated camera. You are either stick with the whims of the phone's auto setting, or fiddling with an awkward touch screen to change anything, where as a camera has multiple buttons to change settings in an instant. It becomes second nature after a while. For that reason alone, even if phone quality was identical, I'd still bring my camera and deal with the size disadvantage for the ergonomic advantage. My wife has the new iphone that shoots raw. That definitely changes the picture a bit. But it's still a bit awkward to use. For video, it's even worse.

It's funny, I was just on a few small hikes today with friends, and I was thinking about how nice it was to see a plethora of DSLRs out and about. But now I realized that it was all middle aged and up folks. It's a shame. I have nothing against Ipads/notebooks/phones, but I was afraid that the lower sales would drive up the cost and slow the development of the higher end stuff. I still drag a GH4 and/or bmpcc on any treks, whereas all my friends just take phones. I don't see either of those as particularly bulky or annoying, but I know I'm in the minority amongst regular non tech nerd folks. It is what it is, I suppose.

Hah, yeah I've noticed the same. So much of it is overcranked to various degrees, with crystal clear sound obtain magically from packs of dangerous animals as if a boom op was right in the mix! The trickery of film.

I feel like I'm pretty good about being honest and not getting attached to my own stuff. I still feel very average as an editor. Interesting subject, though. I remember this coming up on r/editors and people saying they'd have directors/actors/DOPs coming into their bay and losing it because they cut things. Having that mental resolve to ignore that stuff and know what's best for the movie from an *unbiased* standpoint is key, I think.

I think it depends. The thought started when people said a full frame sensor is larger and can take in more light, which is true. But light gathering is just part of the equation. How it's processed down the chain matters a lot, too. The A7S is head and shoulders above a 5D in low light performance, despite the similar sensor size.

Was there any post stabilization? Because that's amazing if that's all straight out of camera, holy moly.

Ohhhh nice, I'm gonna check that out. Thanks for the link. Yeah, aputure really is a game changer. The 300d just seems like this monumental leap in lighting power with minimal hassle. I use their 672s and while it's not the most powerful light ever, it really is a delight to use. Using and mastering this type of gear will go way further in improving image quality than 8 bits vs 10 bits or whatever.

As much as they have been ragged on, I think we officially crossed a threshhold with the old school Canon DSLRs (5D, 7D etc..). Many cameras have come and gone that provided better quality, but that was the point where it became good enough to be convincing. Where if you were talented with lighting and camera work, it could convincingly look like a movie. Following and discussing tech is still very fun to me, but I think it's been removed as the limiting factor for a while now. Seems like lighting, stabilizers etc are slowly following suit.

Honestly, this seems like an instance where it'd be really handy if you could rent/borrow each for a few days and test yourself. The GH5 is way better in about every way when it comes to versatility, ergonomics, shooting options etc.. like, way better. So the question is whether the pocket image is enticing enough to pull you away from those advantages. I have the pocket and GH4, and generally prefer the pocket image, but the GH4 is way more handy for a larger variety of work.

I'm surprised at how defensive some people are about the blacks. At first we were wondering if it was on purpose or a camera trait. Turns out it's the former, no biggie. Not like everyone's going to agree on creative factors. No different than music, art direction, editing style or anything else. I also don't understand why it's weird to analyze the image qualities of the GH5 in this instance, given the thread title. If it was, "hey what do you think of my movie", that's one thing. But the thread title specifically mentions the cinematic qualities of the GH5. Of course that's what we're gonna discuss! But we get the too cool for school crowd who scoff at paying attention to the very details the thread invites us to talk about. Forums are strange sometimes.

Might I say that this doesn't just apply to cameras, but lighting and rigging as well. For the love of god, please please give me more products like the apurture 300d. No more generators or 800lb lights that risk burning down the city. Small, portable, and powerful.

Really nicely shot, camera movement is beautiful. I agree with the comments above though, blacks seem crushed and grade is crunchy at times. Not sure if that's a camera issue though, could be a stylistic choice.

For on camera, maybe this? https://www.amazon.com/Olympus-ME-52W-Noise-Canceling-Microphone/dp/B000MYPPPE/ref=redir_mobile_desktop?_encoding=UTF8&pc_redir=1414421918&robot_redir=1

Just curious how most of the people here afford their gear? Who works full time in video production versus a day job with video as a side gig/hobby? I freelance full time but it's become apparent that I need to figure out a way to get my rates up, since I can never afford anything. I seem to have a very minimal gear list compared to most people on here. What are your secrets?

What were the lenses?

Check out the SLR-Magic Vari-ND Mk II. For some reason it seems to fly under the radar, but it's fantastic. No sharpness hits or color casts, and it has a locking ring so that you can rotate the filter around to adjust for polarization.