fuzzynormal

I like the extra shallow dof with wide open lenses for interview shots, but yeah, if you're not a shooter that wants that particular thing, using the f2 lenses is a good bet.

Well, I guess I can literally say that Olympus has been so far up my ass, that they left an impression. I do remember laying in the colonoscopy room and thinking, "hmmm, I wonder what resolution that camera has? Hopefully the DR is good." BTW, John, in all seriousness, I'm trying to get an Olympus rep her in SoCal to visit a film festival I'm part of and do a demo of the EM5II and EM1MII during the event in January. If you got any idea who I can contact, much appreciated.

Gear is so cheap you're gonna have the majority of users making technical mistakes. They're hobbyist, not pros.

You're not wrong about Oly. And I shoot Fuji as well, so all these things are part of the mixed bag. The thing is, when we're talking price, when we're looking at cameras within similar classes, the difference is typically a few hundred bucks. At a certain point, determining my camera purchase can turn into a "penny wise and pound foolish," decision. A few hundred, or even a grand, is a small price to pay to own and use a camera that I'm comfortable with and does the things I need it to do. You know how it is. You balance liabilities of the gear with the needs of your work and one's own biases. For instance, I just did 6 30-min documentaries in 6 months. I did it with the GX85 and EM5II. I'm not lying when I say that I'm glad I did the job on these consumer cameras rather than something like an Arri. One would look INCREDIBLY better than the other, and I would love to use that camera for many many many things, but I wouldn't have been able to do half the work load (nor the radically informal work that yielded a lot of good results) without the flexibility of these goofy, small, hybrid, IBIS, 8-bit, cams. I know it's hard to fathom among a forum like this, but having the best IQ is not always a priority. My favorite industry idioms comes from the National Geographic guys. It's simply, "f8 and be there." And I think you can understand the sentiment of that saying. That's why I can't get caught up to much in the IQ debate. My factors for my particular work rely on a lot more than just IQ. You'll have other needs. Someone else will have other requirements as well. For instance, I'm doing a cinematic doc/narrative in 2017, and I plan on using a Sony F5 and 100% static shots, so it's always always an "it depends" sort of answer with tools one decides to use for a project.

Eh, many just want affirmation that they're correct in their decisions. We're all guilty of it. Being able to step away from that insecurity is part of what separates the the accomplished from the enthusiast.

When I can finally buy the perfect ink pen, I'll compose my masterpiece. It's going to be awesome. Just you wait and see.

"I don't like movies because of the plot line."

Yeah, let's not let a half year thread that lists for over 70 pages go off on a tangent. ;-)

"I no longer want to pander to the times."

I only have experience with the Oly lens, not the Panasonic, but I certainly like the Olympus glass. It's so useable as a manual lens for motion picture shooting that it's been the workhorse on the b-cam for a doc series I've been shooting over the past half year. BTW, that doc was shot (mostly) on the GX85.

FWIW, I'm undertaking an effort to transition out of doing "work-for-hire" and going into producing and underwriting my own commercial projects. The risk is greater, the pay is less, but the creative reward and personal ownership aspect of that possibility are too intriguing. My wife and I have spent the last decade setting up our finances with modest passive income so we can pursue this ambition. I'm also of the mind that the current democratization of imaging equipment is going to make technical accomplishments very very moot in the immediate future. And the people that rely only on their expertise in using that technology might become moot as well (outside of the upper echelon of production). So, I want to position myself for that assumption. What I offer creatively HAS to be more valuable than the gear I bring to the table. If I don't believe that, then I'm in the wrong biz'ness completely.

Platform and NLE info please?

Not a fan, myself. The GX85 does not have a good EVF for continuous use when compared to the competition...and apparently the G80. Next to my EM5II and the peaking on that camera, it's a disappointment. Kind of the only bad thing about that camera though. If you're going to do a lot of EVF filming, I'd recommend against the GX85.

Looks like another great value from Panasonic. Ridiculous how practical their cameras are. Still interested in Oly though, ain't gonna lie.

Thanks. Always good to hear as these folks are personal friends of ours and it's not easy to tell sometimes if the things we find charming and interesting about them exactly translate effectively for an uninvolved viewer.

The last doc I made was a passion project. My wife and I didn't pay anything to do it, 'cept our own travel costs. Since documentary production is so simple, I can't really imagine 'em needing to be too expensive these days. If you're capable of being your own crew, you can certainly do it for "free."

Just as a point of physics from a goofy layman (me) that can kind of only half remember high-school science classes: molecules that get colder move slower. After all, absence of vibration is actually absolute zero, right? That's not exactly relevant, however. Computer components being exceptionally cold won't change the laws of electromagnetism and the speed of light. Waves of electricity are unaffected. Of course, your components could get so hot that the molecules in the components would start to fly away and irradiate so violently that certain components fail. That's always impressive. Humans tend to like to see things burn and get blowed up real good. It's a fun primal thing we all share. All that said, if you computer is hot, cool it.

I can testify to this. You get what you ask for.

"If it was easy, everyone would do it" FWIW, I've found that the hybrid camera setup I currently use make my job easier rather than harder. But I have a very specific job I do in a very particular way. It wouldn't be the correct thing for a different gig.

I currently own 2 gx85's, a gx7, and a gm1 --and have been shooting video with them for quite awhile. I posted a doc I did with them in the screening room. my avatar icon for this website is a GM1 with a little manual Pentax lens on it. LUMIX are nice cameras. Kind of great, really. I still like using my EM5II more. Better stabilization, audio input, EVF that's useful, flippy LCD, headphones, easier to hold and shoot with... the sum of the whole is better than the parts. The IQ is better with the LUMIX cameras, no question. For my needs, the IQ is not so much better that I've stopped using the Oly. I just enjoy using Oly that much. Its nothing that shows up on a spec sheet. LUMIX cameras are better IQ machines. They are a huge value for that! But when I'm out in the field everyday shooting for hours, I like to feel comfortable with the camera I'm using. Oly does this for me more so than the LUMIX. It's that simple.

Fair enough, but all these sorts of cameras need a little tweaking out of the box and in post to get to a better place. Olympus is no different. They require a little more work, actually. But once it's dialed in, it's dialed in.

Nice. Shot with good well considered light. Would look fine with just about any camera to be honest... Which, honestly, is why I'm considering using Oly cameras from here on out. They're "good enough" for video and my deciding factor ends up being more about the ergonomics of the gear when all else across brands is close to equal at this price point. I just like using Olympus cameras. Can't say I have a hard time with any other brand. I like them all, really, it's just that Olympus feels "right" to me. That said, it's not going to stop me from using a full frame camera with a 50mm on it for my interviews. That's just a look I can't get from M43, so I gotta have an extra camera just for those set-ups.

I ignored the flags, just looked at the bottom line. Big bad mistake.

Well, FWIW, this particular person has an industry career with more substantial credentials than I have. This fact says more about the state of the industry than her ability. Yes. I'd say that's on target. My reality of the craft is most definitely not in sync with hers --and now the compromises of the work are staggering. It's not quite "Alan Smithee" levels, but I've considered it.

I admit I failed at this part. There's a contract. It is too ambiguous. I should have known better. Funny thing is, we've had a working relationship in the past; very small modest stuff, however. My expectations were based on that experience. I completely got caught up her inability to handle this level of storytelling. I'm really not mad at her, more disappointed in myself, honestly. Although, it is amazing how she's been completely obtuse through months of this production. One would figure she'd connect some dots along the way... normally I would attempt to educate the client, and I still kind of try as I can, but she's the "director" on the project so she's not been too keen on too many suggestions.