fuzzynormal

If anyone is interested: I'd like to preview the 1080 60p footage. Specifically, I want to see how the GX85 handles motion when shot with a 125shutter speed vs. a 60shutter speed. Often I shoot to conform to slow-mo with my GX7, and I've noticed that I cannot conform 60p/60ss to 30p slow-mo. For some reason the shutter needs to be on 125ss. Not a big deal, but one loses a bit of exposure ability. So...same with the GX85? A quick test with something like car traffic moving across the shot frame would suffice for review. Any help is appreciated.

If anyone is interested: I'd like to preview the 1080 60p footage. Specifically, I want to see how the GX80 handles motion when shot with a 125shutter speed vs. a 60shutter speed. Often I shoot to conform to slow-mo with my GX7, and I've noticed that I cannot conform 60p/60ss to 30p slow-mo. For some reason the shutter needs to be on 125ss. Not a big deal, but one loses a bit of exposure ability. So...same with the GX80? A quick test with something like car traffic moving across the shot frame would suffice for review. Any help is appreciated.

Because organic flaws such as imperfect focus pulls have character. Seriously. At least in my head. I don't know if you've ever composed and arranged music on a computer, but if you rely on precision and algorithms to lock in rhythm, it ends up sounding rather soul less. Imaging can be similar: too clean and clinical. But, I understand CAF is a useful tool. it has been refined for dedicated motion picture cameras. I've seen it in action and was impressed, but I personally wouldn't use it for my stuff. Also, expecting smooth motion-picture-efficient CAF in a $700 photography camera (this year) is overly optimistic.

A fair chunk of this new LUMIX video footage I've seen online seems to be shot by photography enthusiasts that might be, umm... let's just say technically challenged when it comes to finessing motion pictures. The old power plant footage is good to my eye, however. At any rate, I've certainly seen user error, bad shutter speeds -- and even lousy vimeo playback, which could be an issue. I suppose this should be expected. Not too many film pros are clamoring to get their hand on a new $700 camera like the GX85 and create videos that they would then screen online. You often get the dudes that like playing with new toys, not necessarily the ones that'll take their time to understand how to creatively maximize the motion picture aesthetic. That said, many people do seem to have a more discerning eye than me in regards to motion cadence. Maybe there is something about it that you don't like. Perhaps even a 24fps rate makes you uncomfortable? The best bet is to get ahold of actual camera files and see what you think using them in your NLE. Myself? I like using a 0° shutter with 24p. A good dose of motion blur and the traditional film frame rate is a "flaw" I actually sorta like. Not typical, but I prefer certain imperfections in my image. Anything to take the edge off the clinical quality of digital and lean it towards an analog feel.

FWIW, I can't make heads or tails of this test. Different lenses, cameras, and stabilization that doesn't seem to be activated properly? What's what? Not sure what I'm looking at.

I find this curious as well. Shooting video, in my mind, needs manual focusing. And most of what I shoot is documentary style, not narrative, so if pulling focus in a run n gun situation is doable, then it's even easier when things are under control. I can't imagine letting any auto system control focus for me. I'm open to being convinced otherwise, but I certainly don't trust it. Yet, in online comments such as these, auto focus seems to be one of the items at the top of spec sheets people like to acquire and/or brag about. Of course, if you need the speed for action photography, different story For video though, I'll stick with my collection of cheap old manual glass and the less inclined can buy the fancy stuff.

One's really got to be shortsighted to not appreciate the performance you're getting from such a camera at such a price point. Honestly, it's kind of ridiculous how good and cheap this is. In my mind Its a value on par with the BMPCC that was sold @$500 awhile back.

If you want to make it easy, put whatever you got on f8, shoot wide, manual focus, and have fun. Technical considerations are all well and good, but if you're having a blast just grabbing cool shots and the vibe on set (or when documenting stuff) is loose and fun, that's a heck of a lot more important than anything else. Don't get in your own way when filming!

How do I buy tickets to the next Citybois performance?

If your main objective is shooting video, I still say a good old manual prime lens is the way to go. And honestly, the more "flawed" the better. I like an image with character. Thats my bias anyway. I desire my stuff to have a different look about it and funky old glass helps. Plus, it's cheap.

After using 5axis stabilization for a year and a half now, I gotta say I'm somewhat reliant on it. The ability to shoot clean stable shots without a tripod is wonderful. Also, drifting and creating small dolly shots is easy and fun. I'd love to get a GX7markII, but really need the audio input for a documentary series I'm doing. (Not enough time in post production to record then sync hours upon hours of outboard broll audio) so I'm sticking with my EM5II for now. If you don't require that sort of audio, Pany's new cam with 5axis would be my ideal; also, manual lenses with a speedbooster. Got my hands on the camera yesterday. The stabilizer is on par, if not a touch better, than Oly's

Not to put too fine a point on it, but but problem with that video is that it's poorly shot, not that the 5axis is introducing some jitter into the motion image. (Which it does) Long fast handheld pans? Sorry, but 5axis isn't going to help in that scenario. So, the solution? Don't do ridiculous long and fast handheld panning shots. Easy enough Look, good shots need a good shooter. I don't care if you're filming with an Alexa and the worlds most expensive gimbal. If you don't know what you're doing within the limits of the gear, you're going to create garbage. The thing that footage is good for is recognizing the patameters of the stabilizing tech. If you suffer from the delusion that 5axis is going to make bad footage good...well, this should disavow you of that notion.

It'll be adopted as a viable form of entertainment or art, of that I have no doubt. I'm not particularly interested, but there are plenty of creatives out there with the skill to make it viable. As all nascent tech, when it's in the hands of the engineers to create content, or, worse yet, when non-creative "creatives" are making things, it's gonna kinda suck. Early motion pictures were kinda crap for more than a few decades, for example. Heck, most commercial entertainment in motion pictures still is kinda lame, we just have a vocabulary for the craft now. Ideas as presented in this thread will help define the potential for VR.

Just curious, but aside from what can or cannot be accomplished with RAW, why weren't the scenes lit and exposed properly to begin with?

I'm an older guy and grew up in the age of publishing. Magazines were an enthusiasts connection to new developments. As such, I'm perfectly happy with the pace of content on EOSHD. It ebbs and flows with gear development. And doesn't that make the most sense?

Mmmm, gotta disagree on that one. If someone envisions that "pan&scan" can emulate dolly shots, then they're not comprehending how or why a dolly shot is visually worthwhile. Stabilization in a camera is a fun, great tool that offers new potential, (I rely on the Em5II for this purpose) but that (and/or 4K) is not a substitute for effective shooting. If you need a dolly shot, to get a good one, you have to move the lens through 3D space. Haven't used the new Pany cam...but I can say I've seen a lot of lousy examples of EM5II footage, and it looks bad most often because of user error.

That's a bad cable and/or connection. And yes, as the other poster replied, get a handle on the concept of mic placement. The world's best microphones are pretty much worthless if you don't utilize them correctly. Btw, as you found out the hard way, (and I'll say it here so other's might avoid the mistake) never record an interview while not monitoring the audio on your recording device.

For doc work, I would think that just shooting without a monitor would be easier; one less thing to worry about. plus, it keeps your public profile low is often better for doc work, depending on circumstances And, yes, I'd think no need for LOG. Just dial in flat settings with the basic color profile.

I've used 5d2RGB a lot. It does create an image in encoding that's slightly better than what QuickTime can do. It is a slow transcoding process, however. If proresHQ offers a better IQ than regular prores, I've not been able to see it. I'll also use proresLT at times to save hard drive space --depending on how much footage I'm trying to convert.

If you're using manual lenses then no. I've used a dumb eos adapter with the camera and the 10-20 Sigma without a problem.

My wife has been shooting random video shots while we're here in Japan. Stuff to test the limits of the camera in between grabbing still shots. 3200iso, moire prone scenes, etc. If we hit up a biz hotel with good internet and a card reader, I'll see if I can get some more video examples of the xP2 uploaded. Im with you on the xt2. It's tempting.

It works as well as any other non-flip-screen-photo-that-also-shoots-video-camera that I've ever used. Maybe a bit better since the exposure controls can be manipulated by old-school hardware instead of user menus. The EVF previews 16:9, so I'm not sure why you're assuming otherwise.

Stopped in the local camera shop today. Not on display yet. Will try in the future though. What I'm seeing from the online clips looks promising.

Based on my experience with the EM5II, I plan on continually shooting exclusively with 5axis cams. I've developed a style with them that I really like. To shoot documentary productions, I mount a wireless receiver to my EM5II and record audio straight to the camera. I'd have a hard time giving that up and then dealing with hours of b-roll sync in post. Still, with 4k, it's probably worth the compromise. Also, this is a $800 camera! Gol'Dang this stuff is so cheap now. Anyway, I'm in Japan at the moment, maybe I'll pop into a Bic and see if they got one on display. Give it a try and see how it measures up to what I'm used to with the EM5II.

Their PR vid seems to show it working on a competitive level with Oly's. Of course, that's in tandem with a Panasonic OIS lens, but still very encouraging. Obviously, all manufacturers are gonna get this kind of stuff in their cameras, but I'm eager for it to happen sooner rather than later, no doubt.