fuzzynormal

​Same here. Such potential wasted, but that's the MO with Olympus and video. Panasonic have been exceeding expectations, but poor Oly (I'm rooting for the underdog!) just never seems to make it happen. Like a few other camera companies, video is an afterthought. Anyway, shortcomings are what they are. Using the kit in real life for my needs might justify keeping it. Haven't decided yet, but I'll put it through paces and see how I feel down the road.

​Eye-ball estimation, that? So, that turns a 12mm lens into about a ff-equivilant 32mm. A 50 becomes a 135, etc. Bummer. Not to mention it ruins all my easy 2x math calculations when putting lenses onto a M43 camera. 12 to 24 -- I can add that up. Slap a decimal into the mix and I get stupider than I already am.

With everything being pretty dang equal IQ wise these days, I don't really agree with that. But that's me. I think I'd rather work on story, style, directing, etc. I believe those are the things that really matter and impress viewers if one is trying to establish a creative film career. However, if you're trying to impress colleagues that specialize as camera technicians I suppose it's a different story. I just don't think that the path to being an accomplished filmmaker follows the technical side of things as much as many assume it does. You got to walk down that road, sure, but it's not where you should do the most of your traveling. So say I. (aka: not an accomplished filmmaker)

Some of the best low budget indy films I've seen in the past few years have been shot on a T2i. And that camera has inferior IQ. So, you know, it really is what you do with the story and your cinematography. All elements of a production matter, and I love a nice new camera a much as anyone, but camera gear making or breaking one's success? No, I don't abide by that notion. andrgl is being facetious with that iPhone rhetoric, but the reality is such that any modern imaging device in the hands of a competent user is a viable tool. If you're a film making student of any accomplishment I'm sure you've noticed that some off your classmates are more capable than others. Why is that? Because of the camera they use or because of their ability, their curiosity, their ambition. All that said, those Panasonic GX7's, GM1's and G6's are really cheap right now.

I think I'm just going to have to come to terms with Olympus being far behind the video curve. And I am. Again, just wish I didn't have to. It is a little crazy to me that I can buy cameras for half as much with very superior 1080 video, but that's the reality. Ultimately it's a concession I can tolerate, but...man, they are missing out on a great niche market with video. And it's a market that I believe is undervalued. maybe not in numbers, but in prestige. Its like an automobile manufacturer that makes a performance model that increases their brand value. For Oly could that be the em1 mark II? Who knows. Probably not And, really, it's not like they have to be better than the competition IQ wise, just comparable. More than anything, that's the frustration with Oly. They have such great potential. So close, but so far kinda thing. All that said I do know it'll be a very useable tool for MY needs, (I'm knowledgeable enough to compensate for the shortcoming) but my needs fit a small subset of people that are video centric; most video people are going to dismiss it.

No. I have a gx7. (And a gm1) I can buy those for less than $500. The video is awesome on that camera On on your other points I agree. Yes, the em5ii can shoot good enough video, just not sure why it's not as good as it should be.

I'm not striving for the best resolution, I'm striving for the best shot as fast as friggin' possible. That means handheld, mobile, and steady. Yes, I want Olympus to compete in the video sharpness arena and, just like Andrew, I'm kind of upset they are not. But, when I'm honest, I know the low-end-corporate shoots do not require the latest and greatest 1080 image. It was hard to pull the trigger on getting something IQ inferior, but for me the 5axis feature does make up for that shortcoming.

To be fair, my neighbor's dog is really cute.

Where can I sign up for the free-flowing world of online camera nerdery?

I do think Ed's post reflects a time that's been a long time coming, has arrived, but some may not have adapted to it yet. And ics is right on target too. Basically, the gear is beyond good enough and it's so cheap that anyone from almost any economic class can acquire one. Let's be honest. If you have the chops you could make a smartphone movie as artistic as anything out there. Maybe not likely, but possible. In the past with video equipment, having a new gear really could make significant difference. Investing in that gear was cost prohibitive for beginners. These days, since just about anyone can afford the stuff, the only thing that's really going to make significantly noticeable improvement to a video production is one's skill and artistic level. Yes, the pros will always have better cameras and lenses and many will covet that rare exclusivity. However, the divide between low and high is now, practically speaking, indistinguishable. If I had a time machine I'd love to go back and drop a GM1, lens mounting adapters, and a laptop on Kubrick or Leone's production facility's front door and let them have at it. Something tells me they and their crew would do alright.

​I'm part of the choir, preacher; lost my strong desire for gear ownership years ago. Couldn't see the point of it at the level I'm at. To keep your metaphor going: I just need to practice my fade away jump shot because too many of my videos have been clanging off the rim lately.

​Well, if a junior technician says it's possible, then "hooray!" good enough for the internet.

If that camera is a corolla, I'm driving a Ford Pinto.

Hey, that guy stole my haircut. ;-) Nice work. Love the color and slow-mo with the music. I really like that there's no lighting aside from the practical. Just have the talent stop plagiarizing my hirsute expressions.

I'm thinking an Oly E-M5 II and my $35 Merlin-knock-off will work good (enough) for me. Will test this out next week. Figure if I'm going to spend $1.5K for stabilization, maybe having a camera that does 80% of the work might be a better bet. I was able to produce simple and short handheld dolly shots with the old M5 just by doing a little tai-chi body control, so I'm encouraged that the new and improved Oly 5-axis will offer capability to elegantly handle more assertive movements. I like the idea of being able to grab steady cam level shots with small and very portable rigging...or no rigging at all.

Excellent point. ​This is why there will always be noise on the internet with many people and their gear. Those that have "something to say" actually go out, spend their time doing it, and don't really worry too much about online forums. However, those of us, like me, that get by doing decent but somewhat unimaginative work (I'm a corporate video guy) like to chat about their stuff because we're invested into it as a way to inflate our capabilities. For example: If I win the lottery then go out and purchase an Alexa... Well, I can then be superior to my peers because I've suddenly acquired a bit of kit that allows me to be 1 or 2 steps of dynamic range better than you! Haha! I'm better! I have the best thing! Hooray! Of course, that viewpoint is mostly nonsense. But, I do have a device that potentially increases my ability. Will I, with my limited abilities, exploit that in an effective way? I'd like to think so, but I would not. Not really. But, man, I'd be emotionally invested into that potential. It would affect my perception of my capability --of my value to my profession. And that value defines my self-worth as a person. It's not just cameras, it's kind of anything materialistic, really. The thing that comes to my mind is car enthusiasts that build hot rods with all the materials they can afford, but couldn't drive around a race track to save their lives.

So many reasons. The ones we might be unaware of though are the most powerful. ​I tend to believe that this "smartphone-as-proxy-for-witnessing-life-behavior" is a kind of a psychological issue, a subliminal problem. For example, so many of us have a difficult time accepting their temporal existence. Capturing moments controls time; proves to oneself that they can govern the journey somewhat. knowhatimean? Life's nothing without death. Ying-Yang. And whatcha' gonna do about it? Answer: Instagram. Myself, when I'm actually not working I tend to leave my camera at home. I prefer flawed recollection. That said, the GM1 is one of the best stealth cams I've ever used. Nobody seriously thinks anything worthwhile is happening with that bit of gear.

Im guessing that anyone that hypes JVC probably doesn't have experience actually using their cameras.

Depending on price, maybe just get two used 5DII's and cheap old 85mm or 50mm --f1.4 or f1.8 prime lenses. I shoot 5D interviews all the time; often without any lighting. (still have to know how to get a good shot though and exploit natural light) Personal testimony: I also shoot with the GM1 and it's very capable. You could get those cheap used as well. Cheaper than the 5D. Put a speed-booster adapter on it and you'd be shooting roughly the same "sensor" size as the 7D...if you really want it. You could also just put a inexpensive 50mm on a GM1 and have a great portrait lens, good for interviews. I'd bet you'd be able to acquire 2 cheap SMC Pentax f1.4 50's, two GM1's and two dumb adapters for less than $1K. 3rd party battery life for the GM1 is around an hour and the thing'll record non-stop as long as there is power. Anyway, that's some bargain suggestions for ya.

​I do. 33% interest compounded monthly. No pay, you get a visit from my Moldavian friends. Interested? We can meet in my office. It's in the back of Lenny's bar on 5th and Market.

I've used the Red1. I don't want to use it anymore.

​f5.6 on s35 is a common preference for people (narrative fiction cinematographers) that actually do this stuff for realsies. So I find that the "FF" aesthetic argument is pretty indulgent for the most part. On the other hand, technically, you can get some great low-light capability...and that's something practical to actually consider depending on what you want to do. That said, I still carry around my 5D and an old 50mm Nikon f1.4 lens for making easy and great looking corporate interview type shots. If anything, using FF for talking head documentary type work is my idea of FF's strongest aesthetic "feature."

Yeah, I don't know why people get their panties knotted about certain digital cameras not looking cinematic enough. These are judgements based on what exactly? Vimeo or YouTube videos from amateur goofballs like me slapping a kit lens on a camera body, lazily applying some ill-conceived color grade, and uploading it? Jeeze, if it looks too "digital" to you, change the lens, change how you shoot, change the color grade. Okay, maybe a certain camera gets you closer to a subjective cinema-look to start, but it's still up to you to finish the job. If you can't find a recipe to make your shots cinematic, you're doing it wrong, not the camera. I'll guarantee you someone with talent and skill could grab my modest Panasonic GM1 and make visually stunning shots while I could run around all day with an Alexa and create a pile of worthlessness if I didn't know what I was doing. Too much worrying about the wrong stuff when it comes to cameras, I think.

That's John Tesh on the ivories, right?

​In the paradoxically zen words of a contemporary sage much more admired than I am, "Words can't bring me down, so don't you bring me down today."