aldolega

I would most definitely go for the a7RII. And probably sell off your a6300 as it won't give you anything the SII or RII don't have. FYI, at lowish ISOs the RII's video quality is overall just as good as the SII's, better in some ways (s35 mode is suuuper sharp, better than the SII's 4K, 1080p is a bit sharper and has less rolling shutter) and worse in others (FF 4K mode is binned so a little softer and can moire).

Remember that you don't have to shoot in V-Log, or Cine-D, or whatever and then laboriously grade it to perfection. There are plenty of other profiles and controls to use to get a good SOOC look. The catch there will be that you're usually sacrificing a bit of DR with those profiles (and DR is one of the a6500's strengths), but people seem to be getting good DR with the Like709 profile. Or use the Leeming LUT workflow, which couldn't really be simpler (set camera to recommended settings, shoot, drop LUT on the files in your NLE). He has LUTs for V-Log so this might be a simple way to get the max DR of the camera with no added effort in post. If you typically have to do a lot of WB corrections I would definitely want to have 10bit just for that. The only wins I see for the Sony would be a small edge in DR, lowlight performance, and photo quality. But if the GH5 is good enough for you in those categories, I think all of its other benefits make it the clear choice really.

The big flashy MB/a number that's plastered on cards and their packaging isn't what need to pay attention to. That number is just the peak transfer rate, what the card is capable of hitting for a few seconds under the right conditions. It's relevant to shooting bursts of photos, but not video. For video you need to look for the minimum sustained write speed. This is the speed that the card can write at continuously, without stopping or slowing down. This number needs to be at least a smidge higher than your camera's bitrates. Unfortunately, this spec isn't as sexy as the peak write speed, so nobody uses it for marketing, and it's usually not easy to find. This is where the various speed class ratings come in. Class 2 would do 2MB/s continuously, Class 6 would do 6MB/s, etc. That topped out at Class 10 I believe, then they switched to the U rating... U1 is supposed to be able to write at least 10MB/s continuously, and U3 30MB/s. Then the next system is the new V rating (for video). V60 does 60MB/s, V90 does 90MB/s.

I would use the Leeming LUT workflow on both cams, should match up nearly perfectly once you drop the LUT on.

http://www.newsshooter.com/2017/08/17/newsshooter-gets-a-sneak-peek-at-a-working-panasonic-eva1/ No LUTs. Not sure how they can keep a straight face calling the EVA a cinema camera without LUT capability.... especially when the GH5 has them.

Yes that will work fine for the current bitrates, as it is U3 rated, which means it can record 30MB/s continuously (150mbps is only about 19MB/s). 400mbps is 50MB/s, so for that you will need one of the new "V60" or "V90" rated cards, which do 60MB/s or 90MB/s continuously.

Vitality says Panasonic's engineers are having a tough time getting the 400mbps to be stable... if true it might be a while before we see it.

GH5 will be much sharper (higher resolution). The G85 1080p is ok when there isn't much movement in the frame and you don't need to grade/adjust much in post. The GH5 will withstand motion better, and you can shoot in 10-bit 4:2:2 in 1080p.

I can't see how the delay on the GH5 itself could vary depending on the monitor/recorder used. I think it's just that cheap monitors add some additonal delay of their own.

Don't forget about the Video Devices PIX-E5. It only does 4k up to 30fps, so it's not the best choice for a GH5, but it is smaller than the huge 7" recorders. Built like a tank too, which is good but also kinda bad (weight).

A simple flash bracket will let you relocate the mic. For a more compact cage, look up the camera's dimensions and see if another Smallrig option will work. Maybe a GX85 or A7 cage would work.

True, assigning dollar amounts to features is a crude way of evaluating a camera. But I think my overall point stands: at this point, with what we know or can reasonably assume about the camera (GH5 LSI, AF performance), the camera is overpriced- even when disregarding the GH5 and strictly comparing to it's intended competitors (FS5/7/7II, C300II, UMP, C200). I also think assuming the EVA will be a Varicam at half the price is a bit foolhardy- at least when recording internally. Processing and codec are very important parts of the image pipeline, and if it's the GH5 LSI in the EVA, I doubt it will be packing Varicam magic into 150Mbps. Surely the image will be a bit nicer than the GH5's, just because of the better sensor: but quadruple-the-cost better? I'm betting the EVA will be a lot like the FS5- nice form factor, nice sensor, really nice image when outputting raw to a (bulky, fiddly, expensive) external recorder.... weak-ish internal codec that's a lot closer to what's in their consumer photo cams (GH5 or A-series, respectively) than their pro cams (Varicam or FS7/7II/F5).

I'm usually a huge Panasonic fanboy but I'm a bit pessimistic about the EVA. The price is just too high for what you're getting, which is the GH5 LSI hooked up to a new sensor. 8-bit 4:2:0 at anything over 30p? And under 30p, the bitrates are still no higher than the GH5's? C'mon, that's not $7.5K territory. That's like $5-6K territory.... GH5 is $2,000. Internal NDs and XLRs and form factor add about $1-1.5K of value. Maybe $2K if you really want to argue. Bigger sensor adds about the same. That brings it to maybe $6K- well shy of $7.5K. And that's before considering that the EVA won't have IBIS, its AF will certainly be worse than the GH5's (which isn't stellar in the first place), and it doesn't have a viewfinder. So subtract whatever you think those are all worth- to me it's a lot- and you're most likely back under $5K. Sure, there's RAW output, and slightly better HFR than the GH5... add what you will for those features. Maybe they make it worth it for you. The value will be easier to judge when the GH5's 400Mbit update is released. If it's as good as everyone hopes, both cameras become much better values. But I think it will be about the same situation as the GH4's 1080p: the 100Mbit Long-GOP is better for most situations over the 200Mbit All-I, unless you're really prioritizing motion over resolution. And then there's those pesky rumors that the Panasonic engineers can't even get the 400Mbit to work smoothly on the GH5 LSI....

If you go strictly by counting pixels, 4K60 is equivalent to 1080p240- both give you 497,664,000 pixels per second of output resolution. But processing that info is apparently not just a matter of sheer pixel count- at some point there's a time restriction independent of pixel count. Meaning 1/240th of a second is just not enough time to process the sensor's output into HD (2,073,600 pixels), while 1/60th of a second is enough time to process it into 8,294,400 pixels (four times the pixels but also four times longer to do it). So it seems binning or skipping or some other shortcut is introduced after a certain point, to reduce the amount of data being processed, and allowing the higher framerates. I wasn't assigning shame though, just giving my opinion on the answer to his question, which specified full pixel readout. I assumed this excluded other methods, which may very well be perfectly acceptable for most people's uses (like your A99II example). I don't think conflating scaling with binning is accurate, or helpful.

Not with full pixel readout, no way, not in a year. Unless it's a native 1080p (2MP) sensor. I think we'd be lucky to see continuous clean(full pixel readout) 120p in the next year. Aren't the RX cams doing some sort of binning in 120p mode?

It's not really fair to evaluate the GH5's AF with a non-native lens.

Sound/Video Devices (or whoever else) should really do an updated PIX-E5 that does 4K60 and Sony's raw. 7" and 8" monitors are great for big cameras sitting on big support gear, but I bet there aren't any more of those customers than wedding/event/one-man-band types shooting with photo cams or smallish large-sensor video cams (FS5, C100, LS300 etc), who need something light and compact because they're shooting quickly, with lightweight support gear, or even handheld. They want to add something the size of their cellphone, not the size of Stephen King's new hardcover.

Sure it can, you'd just have to enter the focal length manually in the camera menu. A pain in the ass if you change FL often, but it would work. I would do some googling to see if photos shot with the EF version of the lens have the focal length included in the EXIF data. If so, you should be golden, as that means the lens is communicating FL to the body in at least that manner.

I don't know one way or the other, about that lens specifically. But if it's EF and has contacts, and can autofocus and change aperture on Canon bodies, I see no reason why it wouldn't work on the A7rII and Metabones.

Is there enough space in the E-Mount for ND and a mechanical shutter? We haven't seen both in one cam yet, only one or the other. And I don't think we're close to electronic shutter truly replacing physical shutter yet. Would Sony even want to do eND anyways? There isn't enough space in the A7 (or even A9) body for an ND that flips out of the way, so you'd have to fix the ND in place. Even if they got the minimum setting down to one stop, that would still probably eat whatever gains they'll have made in ISO performance. Which is the whole selling point of the A7s series. Might not be something Sony marketing wants to risk as a potential selling point. Personally I'd be much more interested in A7sII performance but with no or reasonable rolling shutter, better batteries, no overheating, brighter flip-out screen with good touch performance, better ergonomics and menus, and better AF.

You say it has rear contacts so I would assume it's an EF mount. If so it should work exactly the same as a newer EF lens.

A speedbooster is basically a magnifying glass for your sensor, that bumps it up one size. So a m4/3 sensor becomes APS-C (aka s35), or APS-C becomes full-frame. This is only possible with a mirrorless body (short flange distance) and SLR glass (long flange distance). The speedbooster fits in the gap in between. The GH5 shoots 4K60 and has extremely good IBIS, better than the A9 you tried. And if you use it with a newer Panasonic OIS lens the two IS systems work in tandem and the stabilization becomes pretty incredible. Photo IQ wise, the GH5 will come fairly close to your 5DII, just without that FF look. But If you add a Metabones "XL" Speedbooster, your crop factor would be around 1.3X, which is halfway between your 5D and the crop Canon bodies (7D, 80D, Rebels etc). The cheap speedboosters don't allow you to control the aperture on Canon EF lenses, while with the Metabones, you could, although AF will be mostly unusable in video, and slow (but usable) for stills. The A9, 5D4, 1DXII all obviously have the FF look built-in, and are of course better photo cameras, as well they should be at 2-3X the cost of the GH5. None match the ergonomics and practicality of the GH5 for shooting video, though. Actually, the 5D4 crops to about 1.7x when shooting 4K, so that doesn't even get you FF for video. The Canon MJPEG codec is also a lot heavier than I'd want for traveling, too. Sony's lenses let you use their AF, obviously, but kinda suck for pulling focus manually, as they're fly-by-wire. They're also not much smaller/lighter than FF DSLR glass. If I was on vacation I wouldn't want to carry FF glass at all. I would want the GH5 with native glass.

God yes. These cams desperately need a higher 1080p bitrate, 25mbps is just too low. A bump for 4K would be nice too, but much less needed IMO.

No way you're realistically getting a Micro up and running for a grand. It needs a monitor at the verrrry least. More likely a speedbooster, cage, and lots of batteries/media too.

The Panasonics are probably your main choice on that budget. GX85- very good 4K30, good 1080p60. 4K has an additional crop compared to 1080p (2.3X instead of 2X, compared to fullframe. Your D5300 is 1.5x). Very small body. No mic or headphone jacks. Very good IBIS. Screen tilts but doesn't flip out. Doesn't come with Panasonic's flat profile, Cine-D, but user BTM_Pix just figured out how to add it. HDMI output stays on while recording. Good to very good rolling shutter performance. G85- Same as GX85, except in a more DSLR-ish shape. Half-metal build is nice and solid. Has a mic jack but still no headphone jack. Has a flip-out screen instead of tilt. Comes with Cine-D. G7- Same shape as G85 but plastic build. Otherwise pretty much the same except it doesn't have IBIS. HDMI shuts off if recording internally. GH4- Bigger metal body. No IBIS. Has Cine-D and can be upgraded to V-Log. Slightly worse ISO performance than the GX85 and G85. Color science is also a tiny bit "worse" than the newer cams. HDMI stays on when recording, unless in 10-bit mode, then it's HDMI only. Much better bitrates for 1080p modes and has a VFR mode for up to 96fps, but it's pretty soft. LCD screen is nicer than the G cams. Battery life is phenomenal. Rolling shutter is a step better than the G cams, especially in 1080p. With the Panasonics I would recommend going the Speedbooster route. You could keep your Tamron and then expand on it with some old AI or AI-S glass, for fairly cheap. Your Olympus 50mm won't adapt to a Nikon booster though, you'd have to use a plain adapter. Or just sell it and get a Nikon 50mm. Photos with the Panasonics will be on par or a bit weaker than the D5300. The Speedbooster will help close the gap but you won't have autofocus. You can also look at the A6300, but as said above, its 1080 modes are soft, no IBIS, battery life and rolling shutter sucks, dim screen, etc. But for some people the tradeoffs are worth it for the great DR and detail in 4K, and superb photos.