Cinegain

You can go and count the number of question marks in my post. I'm a mirrorless crop guy myself (no experience with 35mm full frame here (my history with interchangeable lens cameras is a little something like this: GH2, E-M1 (soon to be gone), GH4, BMPCC and E-M5II (soon to be added)... do have something DX, the D5300 and the image is great, thing is... when used to mirrorless cameras (especially liveview (features) and EVF) working with the D5300 feels like a bit of a step back)). Was wondering a bunch of stuff and playing a bit of devil's advocate in the process. Just the other day someone told me that 45mm on M43 for portraits is not a great idea (he's been into cameras and lenses for decades), so that got me thinking... why is that? Is it the rendering? As we're discussing the same here, I threw it in the mix. That said. Depth of field aside, to me there's just something about full frame results I've seen that I like and think is pretty magical. Maybe it's the 5D's softness that has something familiar and yesteryears about it, reminding of old school film, with 4K and rich detail crispness being the future perhaps we are still adjusting to (kinda the same reason people are split on HFR?). Would've jumped aboard the S.S. 5DmkIII if it wasn't for the same reasons I'm not really loving the D5300 (which has nothing to do with the image quality/results you can get with it)... so basicly just that mirrorless is much nicer to work with from the perspective of having more user-friendly features and what is super important to me: you can go crazy compact... no lugging around huge and somewhat heavy gear (although it's not so much the weight as the size that restricts me)... less obtrusive... but at the same time being able to meet the requirements in more demanding situations, easily adapt into whatever set-up you need it to be, allowing for mounting just about any lens you can think of as well. Not really that on board with the whole 'full frame is cheaper' either. Go start out with a bit of money. Maybe you could just manage to get the 5DmkIII with 24-105mm f/4 and then that's it. Go ahead and buy some more (native mount) full frame glass. That don't come cheap, yo. It's another reason I started out with a cheaper GH2 and mostly added cheap but great vintage lenses from eBay to my collection (or just cheap native electronic ones). Not really seeing how going full frame is the cheaper route here. But I'm drifting off...

Ok, listen, I know you can get a similar depth of field for the same equivalent focal lenghts although different sensor sizes. I'm not arguing that. But how about actual rendering of subjects? People love their full frame 85-135mm range for portraits... the interesting thing is... this choice is not a matter of depth of field, it's a matter of actually rendering shapes and giving off a flatering look. It's the projected lens image circle on that white piece of theoretical paper that was talked about earlier that's particularly being liked. If you take a 50mm lens you get different rendering on that piece of paper and using a smaller piece of paper isn't going to make your 50mm lens render like that one lens that has the focal length equivalent to the 50mm used on the crop sensored camera. So even if you match the depth of field, won't the rendering still be different, meaning you can't exactly replicate the full frame look all the time (which probably would become more noticeable the wider you then compare, being able to get real close otherwise)? So then it becomes a game of 'would you rather?'... would you rather... shoot a portrait (well, let's take a 1080p video with both cameras) with a M43 camera (2x crop) and a 45mm lens at f/2.8 or would you go with a full frame camera shooting at 90mm f/4 or would you claim it doesn't matter? Would you argue that the larger sensor surface doesn't give you richer results? How about lens performance? Don't you get a better optical performance out of your lens if you close it down a bit to f/4 instead of using it fairly open at f/2.8? I mean... you can throw in theoretical examples and mathematical equations... but real life deals with more parameters. Now... you can narrow down the error by having your subject far away and using a longer equivalent focal length to base your tests on... but get something a little bit closer and shoot a little wider... would you still say the same. To get back to the posted 'proof'. I also have a little trouble with understanding how you used a monopod and four cameras to create these four images at the same time... I mean, you could've just been taking a video with one camera only (with monopod, sure) and extracting 4 stills, each 1 frame apart (so much for the 'difference blend mode'). Because they're scarily similar in shooting position, detail rendering and everything. I mean. If you can match four cameras (or three cameras and a smartphone, is that what you were hinting at?) like that with same kind of dynamic range... contrast, colors, saturation and everything... then I tip my soft protective helmet to you, sir.

And I can tell you... there will be a successor to the GH4! There will be a lot of obvious things happening in the future, GH4 firmware is a very probable one. Rumored features though aren't neccessarily things that will obviously happen. Remember, we've seen images where people were supposedly running 4K-enabled firmware on an E-M1 and that was coming to us as well (oh, and 24p remember?)... I don't believe anything until I see it with my own eyes.

Huh? You take pleasure in shooting with your camera? You ditched the A7S because of ergonomics? You're simply happy with the results? What is this!? Glad to hear. Go enjoy it some more, you seem to work nicely together and get some great results (and surprisingly 'un-Samsungy looking'). Keep it up!

I'm kinda on the fence... a GoPro Hero4 Black or this... hum.

Actually, DJI is just another Chinese Shenzhen company, so the thing is, you're not even really paying so much because of the 'brand'. They've just looked at the pro choices out there and made something that's just as much of a tool and brought it somewhat more of a consumer level. It's not popular because it's the cheapest choice out there, but because it works so well and has a very solid line-up of pro level multirotors. They know their stuff. Whilst all these cheap choices basicly just remain toys. The same way I would say 'don't go amature, gopro', I would say 'why? Just get the DJI!'. I'm the last one to convince you not to buy cheap stuff from China, coming from years and years of buying audio gear, radio controlled stuff, flashlights, tablets, smartphones and all sorts of gadgetry from there. I even was in Hong Kong a few months ago to be close to the action, visiting the Hong Kong Electronics Fair and getting across the border at Lo Wu to visit Shenzhen. Just this very morning the postman dropped off a WLToys V931 helicopter. But as much fun as these things are to play around with, I wouldn't get something from these guys if I were to shoot aerial video... I would go with DJI, even if that meant saving up to it. I think they give you the best value for a fair price. If you want something to rely on, with a proven track record, is nice to work with, tilting capabilities, that gets you the results... I'd say they're the best bet. But of course, if you have no other option than to go with something like the CX20... it's gonna be closer than nothing and New Zealand has to be one of the finer places you'd want to fly an aerial platform above for sure. I get that. Maybe over at RCGroups they've got some nice tips 'n tricks for you. Gd luck!

I always say 'Don't go amature, Go Pro', because to be honest, there's nothing really like a 'GoPro'. I mean, not that GoPro is the most perfect thing out there, but it does work brilliantly, the mountsystem and options are great and there's a reason for it being the number one choice out there. Now... you could go and get the SJCAM SJ4000, M10 or SJ5000-series camera for example, which include an LCD from the go and come rather cheap, but the GoPro is just in a different class altogether (albeit I'm pretty sure they could sell them at half price, so that part is kind of paying for a name). That being said, wasn't much of a fan of the DJI Visions, but the new Inspire really kicks ass image wise as well. And they've joined the M43 format, so that's very exciting. Sony, Contour, Panasonic, etc might have some stuff going for them that's not at all bad and although some have image stabilization and stuff, I don't really like any of their looks and the pricing gets comparable with that of a GoPro and then 'surprise', I'd rather get the GoPro. Anyways, to get back to quadcopters. I'm very familliar with WLToys and the likes. My first quadcopter was the V929 which I got back in 2012. Tried mounting an 808 spycam for some aerial footage, but you know... it's not a tool... it's a toy. It's not stable, it's wonky. Vibrations everywhere. Same for the spycams. Jittery footage, kind of sharp, but lacking detail, dynamic range, weird colors, etc. Nothing cinematic or useful about it... the only thing you can say is 'here's a video I took from up above'. Well. Congrats. I've tried built-in cameras, like on the UdiRC U818A, maybe that works better since they can design it with an optimum center of gravity? Not great either. I mean... these DJI-like somewhat cheapo quadcopters must be fairly decent in comparison to some of the brands really cheap toy models (although those are great for training your flying skills, like the ultra cheap but fun CX10) and for instance Walkera is a very reputable brand, so they're probably solid, but it's kinda like picking a SJCAM over a GoPro. If you want to rely on something to work awesome, get yourself something that just works awesome and nail the results time and time again. And the DJI Phantoms are really awesome. It's just hard to touch that. The Inspire 1 takes it a step further, but I get you might not want to go there. So I would listen to Xavier. DJI. A used one perhaps. You'll need a gimbal. It's a must. FPV is not actually mandatory (people used to shoot aerial footage with blind recordings all the time!), but sure, it does help tons and it's 2015 now. Also... think about hiring someone that has aerial experience and all the gear. Might be the best idea yet. Maybe in a year there's stuff that gets it done for 300 bucks. But we're not quite there just yet. Think about how far we have come in so little time though. Who would've thought years ago that you could just go and buy a setup yourself and get amazing results being an amature without an endless wallet and skill. I mean, if you want to up your game these days, you can get a complete quadcopter kit with multi axis stabilization, GPS, telemetry, FPV and easy interfaces at the price of what? A GH4? NX1? A7S? So how about instead of a new camera, you get a new angle? That's insane. Although you do have to think about your local regulations flying these things and general safety issues. That's the sole reason I haven't trusted me with getting one. I want to play by the book, but it would totally not be fun/useful to have one anymore, applying all the restrictions, so I'm kinda left with: what's the point? Anyways. I wanted to end this little rant with a few videos I think are pretty awesome and makes you excited for aerial footage: CineStar 3 Axis Gimbal | Vimeo (freefly) PB's Backyard | Vimeo (copterkids) Aerial video over Norge | YouTube (ddhuans) DJI Inspire 1 - "The Southern Roads" (4K UHD) | YouTube (neumannfilms) The GSS C520 Review | YouTube (neumannfilms) Definitly check out more of Neumannfilms stuff: http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHC7WKecm42ptBmWM-FWv6g DJI Inspire 1 Hands-on with Trey Ratcliff | YouTube (digitalrevtv) Koh Yao Noi | YouTube (philipbloom)

About the 'etc'... not sure if it will fit your needs, but maybe it would be worth looking into the Pixapro Nitsan was raving about? Still need a proper light kit myself. I kinda make do with three small Aputure LED panels at the moment (AL-H160, AL-198 & AL-198C).

Is it a YouTube or Vimeo? From your facebook (cool behind the scenes peaks btw) I figure this YouTube video? Go to the YouTube page, than onto share and copy the youtu.be link. Paste the link in your comment. Click away from the link. The link will first turn into an active shortcut. Then the system will realize it's a YouTube video and instantly turns it into an embed. I figured that out along the way. I agree, it's not ideal.

Using my Panasonic lenses less and less I have to say. The 100-300mm is a kind of specialty lens which is nice to have on hand and the pancakes are just incredibly small. But what optic feel concerned I'd very much prefer the Olympus line-up as far as native e-lenses concerned. To me they're somewhat like the Sigma ART line-up. Clean, sharp, but not in a videolike sense, which with the Pana's is a little harder to shake... the Olympus lenses have some nice character, rendering and color reproduction. Love the 45mm f/1.8 and the 12-40mm f/2.8 (also have the 60mm f/2.8 macro). I'd love to get the 75mm f/1.8, but for that kind of money you can buy another Olympus body! The 12mm f/2 has come down in price a tad bit, but same story more or less (wouldn't mind having it for the BMPCC though). The 25mm and 17mm f/1.8's are pretty cool too from what I've read/seen, but I kind of already got that range covered in meanwhile. Panasonic's own lenses... unless they're not Lumix, but Leica branded, such as the 42.5mm f/1.2 (and I thought the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 was expensive, lol) they tend to be a little too modern looking. Pretty much tack sharp, but kind of emotionless... little cold, contrasty, not as creamy in rendering. Picking the right lens, will get you the right look. Lately I've been leaning more towards good old vintage glass and quality lenses meant for larger format cameras. They just render nicer, have a chiller vibe to 'em. Especially when you're not just using a regular dummy adapter, but a lens turbo with optical elements to widen the lens and boost performance. Surely part of getting the right look is applying a grade that fits the piece. Naturally I'm more attracted to the still somewhat flat look over the crushed blacks and heavily saturated stuff out there. All that said. There we absolutely some nice shots in there and overall was a really enjoyable watch. @ Rudolf: nothing wrong with the GH2. It's still an absolute charming camera to me. I love the look you can squeeze out of it. If you have one, definitly keep it. If you don't and can get one on the cheap, definitly worth considering to add to your inventory still.

Movement looks pretty organic flowing. From what I've seen of the Nebula 4000, that one has a more motorized feel to it. So this looks pretty promising!

​It's actually rather nifty. Pop it back towards you and you have manual mechanical control with marker ranging from 0.2 m with a few intermediate steps to infinity (90 degree rotation WITH HARD STOPS). Push it again forwards, the focusring becomes fly-by-wire and has typical behaviour such as infinite rotation. There's a bit of 'rattle' as well whilst MF with it in fly-by-wire mode.

Olympus does have that really nice 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO of course...

Wait. The Metabones Speedy doesn't have aperture control? Both my dummy Fotga adapter and R.J. Lens Turbo do... given that I have everything Nikon mounted for that reason. - Ah. You mean precise control? Being able to read which f-stop you're at, because the Sigma doesn't have markings? Honestly, I don't mind. It's stepless! I can take whatever I require!

​Yes, you can! That would be my exact suggestion. The Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 with a R.J. or Zhongyi lens turbo (or Metabones Speedbooster, or Fotodiox focal reducer, whatevs). Need something wider? Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8. Not that wide, like Nick said, the 28-70mm f/2.8 from Nikon is pretty awesome. So is the 80-200mm btw (but you'll need to lock it down). Btw. I applaud you for taking this step!

​Be careful in thinking it's 'just perfectly amazing' though. I mean... it can be. But there's some trickiness to it at the same time. Mathieu of Mirrorlessons did a good video on that:

Might want to get one of these Vanguard Alta Pro's for that kind of stuff?

Just another tool in the bag. Here's Caleb putting something together with both A7S and GH4: http://dslrvideoshooter.com/a7s-gh4-music-video-production-breakdown/ .

To add a bit more liveliness to your studio recordings, you could get the camera to move around a bit freely. So the E-M5II would be kinda nice for that sort of B-roll. Kinda depends if you have lenses with optical stabilization built-in or not if you could make that work with the GH4 as well. You could, alternatively, get the GH4 and lock it off on a tripod and cut down on the number of takes by punching in or adding smooth and subtle pans/tilts from the 4K footage. Eventually you can get both the A7S and GH4 to get you 4K footage for 4K projects as well... and worth noting is they can both shoot really flat. So... it depends. There's something to say for both. For added motion I'd go with the E-M5II. For the 4K flexibility and like you say a bit more videominded character, the GH4, that whilst keeping in mind that if you were to get an external recorder for the A7S, then you'd also have two 4K capable cameras on hand. Wild option: you could also ditch the A7S and get both the GH4 and E-M5II.

Jup. From: http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/7800-new-nikon-d5500/ ​Took a month. There seems to be a slight improvement in performance, but only ever so little. Still sticking with the: if you don't need the added features/care too much for the newer handling and it's about getting quality out of the camera, get yourself a D5300 and save a couple bucks. If you can live without 60p (although: come on, Canon! RLY?!)... the 750D/760D might actually turn out to be okay-ish as well.

TCSTV (probably my favorite camera review channel on YouTube) just did a video on it:

Lol, true that. 'Look ma, I'm a filmmaker!' But if you run a business and for some reason you need like to put together some kind of training course, taping a few presentations and interviews. Perhaps you do a monthly interoffice video newsletter. I don't know... that sorta stuff. These businesses can then acquire such a kit and are then pretty much set on the gear part without having to do tons of research. They're still gonna need someone that kinda knows his or her way around a camera and editting... which is the tricky part. So, I agree, 'filmmaker kit' is a bit poorly chosen I feel like. But... if you're coming from photography (maybe you have a D600), have a bunch of Nikon lenses lying around (although probably just zoom lenses) and do want to do more with video, was looking at the D750 (almost typed 750D), you can get yourself 800 USD savings by getting the kit. Which looks like a pretty practical kit. I mean, I would prefer to handpick everything myself. But I can see how for some it could be interesting.

Managed to get lucky and use a 10% discount back then when the E-M1 kit was priced 2199. Currently it's retailing around 1999. To undercut that for being 2nd hand I'll probably lose something like 500, having to sell it at around 1499 (no idea what it should/could do on the market, have to research if that's realistic). Then I'd buy the E-M5II as kit again at 1799. Swap would then set me back around 300 EUR as well. And the lens is what's really keeping the value of the kit up I feel like. So, 350 for the body only swap seems sensible to me? Are there more people in our situation? How do you guys see it? The E-M1 has a more rigid built to it... better AF (and burst). But I'm mainly init for the 5-axis IBIS w/ usable video mode, so... to me it's an upgrade and splash and freeze proof is more than I'll probably need, really. Can't see any too big losses here for what you gain by getting the more hybrid minded E-M5II. Pretty stoked.

Talked to a store owner today, inquired about details. Also, at the moment they have a special deal going on for the E-M1 (sidewalk sign with poster). Get one now and get a free battery grip (HLD-7). I always seem to miss out on these M43 freebies somehow. Anyways. Asked him if he expected any stock or if Olympus announced anything special for the launch? He said they didn't give him any specifics yet. In meanwhile over at Cyberport here, it's expected for the 26th. Would be nice to get one and a grip to go with it (not counting on getting a free one, probably will be after two months or so, like I said, I always miss out on those things). My question is more... do I sell the E-M1 as a kit with the 12-40mm f/2.8? Do I keep the 12-40mm f/2.8 and sell the E-M1 as body only? The lens retails for about 1000 EUR and the E-M5II 12-40mm kit is 700 EUR more expensive than body only. The 12-50mm comes in 500 cheaper than the 12-40mm, differencing 200 with body only, but then again isn't worth as much (so not really contemplating that option). So... initially I thought, well, I could get just the body and battery grip and sell the E-M1 body only. But now I'm thinking it is probably better as complete kit (E-M1 + 12-40mm) and then get a whole new kit with E-M5II + 12-40mm in order to lose the least amount of dough. If you know what I mean.

Didn't know that. Actually think it's a pretty cool idea.