Stab

Are you serious? A GH3 + Speedbooster + Sigma 18-35 f1.8 (f1.2 with SB) is not bad in low light at all. Sure, there might be better low light camera's, but this isn't bad at all. Also, I need the 50p 1080p for slow mo and I simply like the current look I'm getting. At the time I invested in these camera's, C100's couldn't even do 50p/60p at 1080... Many people don't take these Panasonic 'toys' seriously but I guess that's actually a good thing. By the way I forgot to mention that I need this wide angle mainly for the 2nd camera, in this case the G6, to record a wide view of the ceremony. ​

I can't seem to decide between those 2 lenses... I shoot a lot of weddings and I'm searching for an ultra wide to accompany my Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 and Rokinon / Samyang 85mm f1.4 on my Panasonic GH3 + G6. I've went through 5 different copies of the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8, but it doesn't work well with my setup. Decentering, extreme soft sides, etc. Even though I use expensive adapters (Novoflex / Metabones / Speed Boosters), I couldn't get good results. So now I want to get it over with and buy a native MFT lens. These are the 2 options I narrowed it down to. The Samyang / Rokinon 10mm f2.8 vs the 12mm f2.0. Light gathering is important as often ceremonies take place in dark churches. I guess f2.8 is just fine though, but cutting it. 10mm is of course more wide but also have more of a 'wow' factor. 12mm is just plain wide, nothing special but gets the job done. I can't really decide what's better so I'm asking your opinion. The price difference is no problem here so, what would you prefer? Which one is better?

Hi guys, One of my clients asked me if I can arrange live projection for them on a beamer + screen during their wedding party. It sounds doable but I don't want to make it too hard on myself and for sure don't want to use the mini-HDMI output of my GH3. Normally we use GH3's and GH4's for filming, but I might need to rent another camera for this. I don't think running a 20m HDMI cable into my GH3 is the solution but otherwise I wouldn't know where to start So, what would be the best option here? I don't know yet which type of beamer it is but let's assume it has HDMI / VGA inputs. Also, is there a wireless solution for this? And which camera would be suitable for this? Last question. I know almost every camera can output a liveview on an external monitor / Television but can it also do that to a beamer? Does it work the same? Thanks!!

Great stuff!

One thing is not really clear to me. It has a S35 sensor but a MFT mount. So when you mount a native MFT lens on it, the field of view will be like MFT, or 2x crop. Right? And what happens when you mount S35 lenses on it with MFT Speedbooster? You will get a s35 FOV right? And when you mount a Full Frame lens? So do I understand it correctly that the only way to get a s35 FOV one needs to use a Speedbooster to achieve that? Or will a simple MFT -> S35 adapter also do the trick? Which one?

Thanks Chris and Jimbo. I'm still doubting between a Zoom H1/H2n and a Shure VP83F. I realized that I will hardly ever use the camera actually mounted on the camera itself. I will use them to speaking subjects from as close as I can get with a microphone stand. I guess a shotgun is better for that, so the VP83F sounds like a good contender. And, if the situation permits, I would like to record the audio directly into the camera as well. So that's why I want something with a high output (+20 DB) setting so I don't have to sync up in post when possible. My buddy has a Zoom H4n and when you hold it close to your mouth you get really nice, clean direct audio. Almost like a shotgun. But I wonder what happens when the distance increases to like 2-3-4 feet. Will it still sound so direct?

Thanks Jimbo. If you keep the GH3 at 1 stripe of gain and put the mic at +20, could that be too loud sometimes that it starts distorting? I've read that the VP83 sends out a hotter signal than the Videomic Pro. Wondering if its not too much maybe?

Thanks Chris. I believe the Zoom H1 or H2n could be used as a recorder in the field, no worries there. But 2 things: - How would it work out if you connect the Zoom to the camera, in this case a GH3. Would that signal be strong enough to not having to use the GH3's preamps? - How does it sound when you want to record someone giving a speech and you put the Zoom H1 or H2n at close distance to the subject? (like 2-3 feet)

Thanks Jimbo. Which camera do you use the VP83 with?

And has anyone experience with the Rode Videomic GO maybe? And what about connecting a portable recorder directly into the camera, like a Zoom H2N? Would that feed a strong enough signal to the GH3?

Thanks Fuzzy. The reason for not wanting a wireless lav solution is simply the price. Also, because we've had great results in the past with a Sennheiser ME66 (Shotgun mic), I'm wanting to go a similar road.

And what about an external recorder, for instance the Zoom H2N plugged in directly into the GH3. Would that give me a hot enough signal? That mic seems to sound great from a small distance as well.

​ It will probably be the Rode, but I'm hoping to hear some alternatives as well. Maybe even better quality, cheaper, etc. What I don't like about the Rode is the clumsy shockmount, the use of a 9v battery and the lack of any battery life indication. Anyone having experience with the Shure VP83? Is it a better mic? Or even the Rode videomic GO? Which is much cheaper and doesn't need a battery?

​At the moment we use my friend's Sennheiser ME66 with a wireless sender / receiver and then use that directly into the GH3 or G6. So no preamp there. That sounds really great. We position it on the table of the speaker, so never more than 50 cm / 2 feet from the subject. We've always been really happy with the result. I want to buy something similar, but I don't have the budget at the moment for the ME66, power module and wireless solution. But it has been proven that this setup works. So a shotgun mic with 80% of the quality (like a Rode Videmic Pro for instance), directly into the camera or a nearby recorder (I have a Zoom R8) will probably sound very very decent. I just want to be able to plug it in directly into the camera as well when the situation permits, for obvious reasons. Saves time in editing.

​Yes usually we use a small mic stand on the table of the speaker. Very 'minimal' setup IMO.

Thanks Fuzzy. I know, that's why I'm not planning to use the mic on the camera, but close to the speaking person!

So I'm in the market for a (cheap) shotgun microphone that I will mainly use to record the priest / speaker during wedding ceremonies and for voices of people up close. Actually, I won't use it so much on the camera itself. The reason why the Rode Videomic Pro comes to mind as a possible canditate, is because of it's +20 DB setting. This gives much better and especially 'cleaner' audio when recording directly to the camera, in this case a GH3 or a G6. So actually, it doesn't need to be a on-camera-mic but it should be a good sounding shotgun, like the Videomic Pro, with a hot noiseless signal. The +20 DB and the price are the only reasons I'm after the videomic, so maybe you guys know any similary prices alternatives? There is the Shure VP83(F) lenshopper which is around the same price. Again an on-camera-mic, with a +20 db setting. There is also the 'F' version which has it's own flash recorder built-in, which is very nice but a bit more pricey. See here: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/966010-REG/shure_vp83f_condenser_shotgun_mic.html Any other mics I should consider? I don't want to use lavs and if possible no other mics which require senders / receivers. I would like to use it directly plugged in to the camera so again, a 'hot' signal is required. If you know anything, let me know. Thanks!

I think you are right Quirky. Maybe I've spent too much time thinking about this and everyone else here has already accepted the fact that the market is flooded with newbies. I'm just looking for things to have 'the (cinematic) edge' over everyone else. Actually I think that we 'seasoned, talented entrepreneurs' on this forum might already have that, but somehow it seems foolish to me to spread all our hard gained experience and knowledge around like free candies. Every company has their 'secret ingredients' as you wish. Nobody knows still what all ingredients of Coca Cola are. And for a good reason. Other brands might come close, but nothing tastes like Coke. The difference is that we as creative film makers like to help each other. And I still do. I don't see fellow film makers, directors and DOP's as competitors. However, I see wedding film and corporate film producers as competitors. And I hope the latter category sticks to their 7D :)

Interesting replies everyone! Nice that everyone has a different view on this. I admit that I slightly exaggerated what I wrote in the OP, to get the discussion going. I do believe in sharing knowledge and being helpful to people. I am not the twat that I seem to be if you only read my OP. :P I have shared all my knowledge and gear in the past with everyone who was interested after watching my work. Why? Because I have also learned so much from 'the internet', aka people who shared their knowledge. But, to get back on topic, I do (still) believe that it is not a good idea to put everything 'out in the open'. Let me elobarate that my concern of sharing all the tips & tricks especially applies to 'easy entry markets' like Wedding Films, Event shooters and basic corporate stuff. Of course a well seasoned DOP doesn't use a GH3 + Filmconvert and became the man he is today because of his years or even decades of learning and experience. Of course sharing some tricks doesn't hurt someone who is a professional color grader with years of experience. These jobs are hard to get into and it takes not only years of experience, but also the knowledge of complicated software, dealing with many people and 'networking'. I understand your critics on my views, especially when regarding these professions. Maybe I should have made it more clear that I am aiming at easy entry businesses. However, it is a fact that more and more average Joe's who study 'communication' end up buying a DSLR, download Premiere and start a website called 'Joe's Wedding Films'. And AndrewS you are right, I am / was one of them. I did the same 4 years ago. Invested a couple of thousand bucks with a friend, called ourselves a business and we even got some jobs! Now, years later and more specialised and more experienced, I know that I have an advantage over the new starters. But I also see 'how fast it can go' in these markets... And of course, 90% of the guys who started like me will stop after a year or 2. They accept that they don't have enough talent or that they simply underestimated they 'business part' of it. But 10% will do fine. That means there are more and more competitors in the Google search results. If some of these guys spend time and money on SEO, they might even surpass me in the results, without even having touched a camera yet. Then, if they read some tutorials and tips of what other people use, they are not far away from producing a decent result. As good as my films? Maybe not. But 'good enough' is already what gets you going in this world. Especially when dealing with non-professional clients like couples who want a wedding film. So if Joe's Wedding Films show up in Google, their image looks fine and they manage to produce 1 or 2 decent films, they are in for a lot of business. Especially if they offer cheap prices. This is what I see all the time around me. I know that I'm producing good films, but I also see couples 'settle for less' because aparently it is 'good enough'. They receive an uninspired, boring wedding film with shaky 25p shots with no story telling, but hey IT LOOKS GOOD. At least 2-3 years ago these films wouldn't even look good. But now, within a week of reading online you know exactly what to buy and use to get some great looking footage. Because everything is out in the open to find. I'm just saying that we are making it easier and easier for Joe's to 'steal our work'. And of course you could say, 'focus on high end clients and deliver stellar results'. That's what I'm trying to do. But to make a living, I wouldn't mind getting some of the 'good enough' clients as well as they make up a much larger share of the market. TLDR: We just make it too easy for an average university student to start a video production business and produce decent results in a short period of time. Therefore the market is getting flooded with new startups, from which maybe only 10% 'succeeds' but that is still a lot of competitors gaining territory every year. As this will only get worse with upcoming technologies, self shooting, stabilizing, 8k camera's with 1.4 lenses and easy drag and click editing software. We are in for a storm of competition in easy entry markets. 10 years ago making a wedding film looked 'complicated' to 99,9% of the people and they would never burn their hands on it. Now I assume that if you ask 100 hipsters on the street if they could produce a nice wedding film, that 80% would say 'yea I probably could'. I know that they can't. But within a short period of time, they would. Will it be as good as mine? Of course not. Will it be good enough to get some clients who think it is 'good enough'? Yes.

I don't know which business you are in and I understand there is a big difference between someone who is a DOP for feature films and someone like me who makes wedding films and shorts. The latter is much easier to get in to. But you have to understand that video production is a line of work many people would like to get in to, 'if only it wasn't so complicated / expensive'. And the thing is, with current technology and forums / websites like these, it isn't anymore! And the more people will realise 'hey I just need 2000 euro's and I can start a wedding video business?', the more people will do it. And of course, talent plays a big role, so 90% of those people will stop after a year or 2 because they either suck at it or they can't get their business running. But 10% will continue and have succes in some degree. And 10% of an ever rising population can add up to a lot of future competitors. And I'm not saying we should keep everything as a secret, I'm just saying that the more tips and tricks we share, the more we improve our competitors work. Being a good film makers is hard and requires had work, talent and dedication. I know that. But being a pretty good cameraman requires much less time and effort and with all these tutorials and easy plug-ins like filmconvert and simple tricks like 'use a 35mm 1.4 on a GH4 with Speed Booster' enhances someones work in a short period of time. And I prefer my competitors to shoot an 5DM2 with a kit lens at standard ISO 3200, who has never heard of a ND filter or plug-ins to make your footage look better in an instant. Why? Because my footage will look better anytime, even if the other guy has the same or more talent for composition than I do. Let me repeat again that this indeed only applies for 'easy entry businesses' like wedding films, corporate films and commercial stuff. But I guess that's where 80% of the enhusiasts aim for or are in at the moment anyway.

In another topic about Canon's succes but failing to innovate, I wrote this post. I think it deserves it's own discussion. And it was pretty off-topic anyway. -------------------------------- Most people don't spend days and days on the internet and websites like EosHD to compare specs and numbers. They go crazy even thinking about it. They go to the nearest camera shop, ask for advice and try something out. Of course the seller says 'here is the Canon 7D, a great camera which we sell all the time'. The customer holds it (feels great!), trusts the brand and the seller, and walks out with the camera. Maybe he looks online for the best possible deal and have it send to him, but he's buying a 7D nonetheless. And that is why Canon is still market leader, and will be for a while. Why do big film studios sometimes use a 5D or a 7D, but never a Panasonic? Because they feel like a toy, have no reputation, different color science, etc. Canon is still the brand to get for everone who is not a nerd like us and spends much of their time on comparing camera's and specs. And the same goes for computers, TV's, car's, etc. People just want to buy something which feels good in the hand, looks good, has a good reputation and is recommended by others / sellers. And that is why people still buy overpriced iMacs, 5D's, Samsung TV's with digital sharpening and 200 hz modes, etc. But I will say once more, THAT IS PERFECT FOR US. Stop spreading the word! I tell you this is important! Some, like me, make money from shooting video's... Most of us, like me, coulnd't have started this business 10 years ago because of the crappy quality of affordable camera's and computers. Now, everyone with 2000 dollars / euro's to spare can buy a GH4 + lens, download Premiere from torrents, make a simple wordpress website and call himself 'film producer'. Everyday more and more 'competitors' join our market. And we all know that in 5-10 years there will be self composing, 10 bit 8K camera's with 20 stops DR that will focus themselves for 800 euro's in Wallmart... You know what this means for us 'professionals'? It means that you will have 10x more competitors than you have now. Throw some 'self editing software' in the mix and there you go, almost everyone becomes a video maker. Of course I am exaggerating, but I really believe we should all shut up and keep our secrets. I have learned a lot from the online community and I have given lots of knowledge back in the past, but I am not doing it anymore. I want my clients to look at my footage and say 'wow that looks better than the rest' and book me. And of course composition and editing have to do with it, but the camera plays a big part in it as well. So if you want to still make money in the (near) future, stop spreading the word about Sony and Panasonic. Stop talking about Filmconvert and explaining everything to people. Stop making easy tutorials for everyone to see. Do you want a future where everyone makes video's which are as good (looking) as yours? We are making it too easy for beginners like this. We are literally raising competitors which will hunt us in the future. I have stopped and I ask you to do the same. Praise Canon 5D's! Praise pricey software. Never give any tips and tricks for free. That is how you get rich.

I feel like my post deserves it's own topic / discussion. Have opened it. Hope Andrew agrees.

You guys can discuss till you're 70 but you forget 1 vital point. Most people don't spend days and days on the internet and websites like EosHD to compare specs. They go crazy when even thinking about it. They go to the nearest camera shop, ask for advice and try something out. Of course the seller says 'here is the Canon 7D, a great camera which we sell all the time'. The customer holds it (feels great!), trusts the brand and the seller, and walks out with the camera. Maybe he looks online for the best possible deal and have it send to him, but he's buying a 7D nonetheless. And that is why Canon is still market leader, and will be for a while. Why do big film studios sometimes use a 5D or a 7D, but never a Panasonic? Because they feel like a toy, have no reputation, different color science, etc. Canon is still the brand to get for everone who is not a nerd like us and spends much of their time on comparing camera's and specs. And the same goes for computers, TV's, car's, etc. People just want to buy something which feels good in the hand, looks good, has a good reputation and is recommended by others / sellers. And that is why people still buy overpriced iMacs, 5D's, Samsung TV's with digital sharpening and 200 hz modes, etc. But I will say once more, THAT IS PERFECT FOR US. Stop spreading the word! I tell you, listen to me, this is important! We make money from shooting video's... Most of us, like me, coulnd't have started this business 10 years ago because of the crappy quality of affordable camera's and computers. Now, everyone with 2000 dollars / euro's to spare can buy a GH4 + lens, download Premiere from torrents, make a wordpress website and call himself 'film producer'. Everyday more and more 'competitors' join our market. And we all know that in 5-10 years there will be self composing, 10 bit 8K camera's with 20 stops DR that will focus themselves for 800 euro's in Wallmart... You know what this means for us 'professionals'? It means that you will have 10x more competitors than you have now. Throw some 'self editing software' in the mix and there you go, almost everyone becomes a video maker. Of course I am exaggerating, but I really believe we should all shut the fuck up and keep our secrets. I have learned a lot from the online community and I have given lots of knowledge back in the past, but I am not doing it anymore. I want my clients to look at my footage and say 'wow that looks better than the rest' and book me. And of course composition and editing have to do with it, but the camera plays a big part in it as well. So if you want to still make money in the (near) future, stop spreading the word about Sony and Panasonic. Stop talking about Filmconvert and explain everything to people. Stop making tutorials for everyone to see. Do you want a future where everyone makes as good video' as you do? We are making it too easy for beginners like this. We are literally raising competitors which will hunt us in the future. I have stopped and I ask you to do the same. Praise Canon! Praise pricey software. Never give any tips and tricks for free. That is how you get rich.

I think we should be happy that 'the masses' are still buying Canon because it is 'the brand to get'. We, as enthusiasts and some even professionals, earn their living with shooting video's. I'm so happy that 80% of video shooters still shoot 720p on their Canon 7D / 5D. Why? Because my GH3 looks amazing compared to it. And my clients go 'ooeh' and 'aah' when they see my footage. Of course it is composition, grading, talent, etc. But the camera is also important. So I say, stop spreading the word about Canon camera's being shitty. You gain nothing from it, but you take the edge, of us video makers who spent lots of time selecting the best gear carefully, away. Buy Canon folks! Great reliable gear! Never had any problems with them! Furthermore, even though your articule is spot on Andrew, it accomplishes nothing. It's like asking Sony why they don't release a Mac Pro competitor for less money. Clearly there is no interest from Canon in this market. But also, they will still sell the most camera's for years and years to come. And you should buy a Canon, because they are great!

The big question is, except for the obvious smaller filesizes, is there a big advantage for this camera to record in h.265? As there is an 100% need to transcode for all purposes at the moment, why record in h.265 in the 1st place? And why don't they update the software so it can record in h.264 as well? Shouldn't be that hard to do with that powerful hardware... Because then probably much more people, including me, would be all over this camera...