jonpais

IBIS makes a very noticeable difference when working with a single-handed gimbal.

Feeding your crew good food is a good idea too. Now that I've finally assembled a tiny crew myself, the thing that irks me most is sometimes having to wait days before they're available for another shoot. And even on days we're shooting - right now I'm strictly filming in the evening - not only is it painful having to wait the entire day to begin, but they've got to leave by 8PM. Another thing that worries me is that I'm enjoying shooting at night so much, I'm afraid I'll never want to go back to filming during the day!

Part I

@IronFilm I like your conclusion best.

@mercer But not every single person here does agree.... Anyhow, if you’ve got time, take any of the GH2 videos that’ve been posted here - could you cite a few of the limitations that were imposed on the filmmaker by the camera, how they overcame them, and how their solution resulted in a great video?

Test tube meat. ?

I've been thinking of getting into in vitro meat. Crazy opportunities there!

All of this is just misplaced nostalgia. I could argue that there were more legendary conductors in the recording studio in the heyday of the gramophone than nowadays, but I wouldn't prefer Edison's cylinders to today's CD or MP3 players. And using recording methods in vogue in the early 1900s isn't going to yield superior results to those obtained employing modern technology. In other words, you can go ahead and purchase a GH2, but your films won't be any better - any more than your films will suddenly be Oscar-worthy by switching over to a GH5 from a GH4. Whether we're talking image quality or convenience, there is little to no reason to prefer the GH2 over the GH5 or, if cost is a factor, even the G85 or GX85 for that matter. The GH3 was already a marked improvement in just about every category when compared to the GH2 except for physical size. No reason to stop there either - practically any other camera released last year by Sony, Fuji, Olympus, or whomever would be a better investment than the GH2. In fact, it was Andrew Reid's review that convinced me to purchase a GH3 over the GH2 when I moved on from a camcorder to mirrorless. A very incomplete list of the advantages of the GH5 over the GH2 (and this does not even include dramatically improved color science, higher bit rates and on and on): the GH5 has focus peaking (oh, how I regretted the lack of focus peaking on my GH3!) a tilt-swivel screen, IBIS (impossible to shoot my GH3 handheld without some sort of rig; I can only imagine the same goes for the GH2), 4K, touchscreen (much easier to navigate menus, tap to focus), built-in wifi, better color depth, higher effective ISO, greater dynamic range, build quality, longer battery life, external mic jack, higher res screen, no AA filter, dual SD card slots, full sized HDMI, and on and on. If people aren't creating YT masterpieces with the GH5, shame on them! Perhaps @PannySVHS is right - maybe there were more cool short films being made in 2011, 2012 than today - I've got no way of verifying that - but as has already been stated, if it is true, then there very well may have been historical reasons for it. To desire a GH2 today because rad films were made with it nearly a decade ago is like wanting a word processor instead of a computer (apologies for the poor analogy!) I'm not sure where all this blind hatred for the GH5 is coming from (to be clear, I'm not accusing PannySVHS of being a hater), especially from those who've never even handled one - I usually refrain from meddling in Blackmagic, Canon, Sony or Olympus forums - for the simple reason that I've never shot with them! For sure, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but not all opinions are equally valid. And when I say valid, I mean having the facts to back up those opinions. One type of opinion I dismiss outright is the one that goes Panasonic will never be any good unless they employ a full frame sensor (fwiw, the 4/3" sensor is supposed to be ideal for anamorphic afaik). As for the rest, no body of work to show, little credibility, as far as I'm concerned.

We’re going way off course here, but this makes me think of the thousands of Canon users who descend on Book Street in Saigon every afternoon with massive tele zooms dangling down to their ankles. I’ll ask a buddy why they’re shooting in direct sunshine at high noon or why they’re having their subjects stand in front of such distracting backgrounds, and I always get the same response - they’ll just photoshop it!

My bad. hehe

It isn’t fair to compare a m4/3 sensor to a medium format a7riii. ?

Robin Wong shares some beautiful looking sample images in his review of the Olympus 17.5mm f/1.2. Looks like he’s fallen hard for this one, and for good reason - and if Sigma hadn’t released the 16mm f/1.4, this would be my first lens purchase of 2018. I also shared practically the same feelings about 35mm-ish focal length equivalent lenses as Robin did before shooting extensively with the Sigma, preferring either the Leica 12mm f/1.4 for environmental portraiture or the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 for head-and-shoulders work. As far as feathered bokeh goes, I can’t say I prefer it over ‘normal’ bokeh but since it only manifests itself at the widest apertures, you can decide how you want the final image to look. Sometimes I prefer clearly defined coin-shaped bokeh, sometimes I like softer edges.

All this talk about Panasonic copying Sony is amusing no end. This new camera is going to have not only Sony, but all manufacturers, playing catch-up all over again!

hahah. I wish I was busier shooting. So you're saying that since the GH2, Panasonic users in particular are less creative than they were back in the day? And only Panasonic users, not other filmmakers? This whole thread is lost on me... I know you'd like to see some creative short films made with the GH5.... or any short films whatsoever... The takeaway for me is that people keep demanding more image quality, but that's not what's preventing people from going out and shooting the next Days of Being Wild. But again, that can't be your point, since it's so painfully obvious. Images have to be viewed full size in this forum in order to be seen correctly, no different from my blog I'm afraid. Anyhow, I hope nobody's just viewing the thumbnails... I don't think my great model would be caught dead without makeup. hehe

GH3

Not sure I'm understanding correctly.... filmmakers use cameras. Colorists use LUTs. Some people rely on auto exposure. And? To suggest anyone thinks there are shortcuts to creating the next 8-1/2 seems overly simplistic. I'm sure that's not what you're getting at...

@sanveer Got it already. Is there a way to view in full res?

Thanks, @Mmmbeats. First time using Instagram. Is there also a way to view the image in full res?

What makes you guys think this is ISO 12,800? I looked at the Instagram page, I don't see the ISO mentioned anywhere. And the image is too small to make any judgements about the quality. Am I missing something? I'm not trying to dismiss the camera, just the assumptions kinda puzzle me. I don't even think it's a 12 megapixel camera.

I'm not seeing this superiority of GH2 image quality over the GH5. Just give it time, @PannySVHS. To my eyes, the GH5 is magic.

@FoxAdriano Could you please share a link?

@JordanWright Works flawlessly as in you shot ALL-Intra 400Mbps to two Sandisk cards simultaneously for half-an-hour then played them back on your computer?

It’ll get warmer with each passing year.

“thin ice” can only be a thinly veiled reference to climate change, a global phenomenon that is impacting every nation around the world. So whatever this new camera does, it is going to shake up the entire industry. Some researchers even claim that agriculture was already changing the climate as far back as 8,000 years ago. One solution to global warming would be carbon capture and storage, so it is pretty certain this newfangled thingamajig will require lots of storage. ?