Cinegain

Agreed. Beh-bye GH5, hello G9 and GH5S (one dedicated to stills & travel video, one dedicated for studio style shooting). - btw, I was one to mention 'no IBIS' recently and a bit of a while ago already as well, if it's aiming at doing what I think it will (a proper all-in-one handheld compact pretty hardcore cinema camera (DR/Codec/etc), which traditionally means no IBIS; traditionally also means: no lowlight (ISO409600 type, not even anything over ISO6400) monster & C-AF you won't be relying on), also, helps to keep people (additionally?) going for the regular GH5 with the advanced video features that does have IBIS. Still though. You can shoot like a proper cinema camera and get that thick gradable footage out of it (nothing a vlogger would be looking forward to). Amazing for well set up and thought through shots/scenes. Of course, they're expecting you to work with rigs, gimbals, dollys and sticks. Not so much indeed for your casual inconspicuous aim & grab. 2... or should I say 3 different beasts. If you can live without the GH5's advanced options though, indeed the G9 seems to hit the right spot there.

Well, if you'd have read what it said 'w/ tiffen pearlescent filter', you'd know. https://tiffen.com/diffusion/ I think filters like these (and e.g. Smoque 1 or Ultra Contrast (low) 1 & 3) are underrated, more people should give that kinda thing a go.

Wasn't digging. I just put in 'Fashion film GH5', lol. But I get what you mean. - Best stuff might've come from folks that happen to be on EOSHD as well. Luke Neumann and Albert Fast too. Guess that's something we can be proud of as a community.

Should check out some fashion films on Vimeo... e.g. Thing is... at the time of the GH2, normal folks weren't really looking for an 'in' to cinematography, just us enthusiasts and perhaps professionals that would love to either get into it affordably... or just because of the compact factor. And that was pretty close to the 5DmkII and T2i/550D boom that made us focus on these kind of cameras. These days, especially with vloggers using DSLRs and mirrorless cams, we've been seeing everyone doing test videos and that's the thing that get searched for most as well, because people are still looking for their 'in' right now, now that this method of shooting has evolved. Andrew, Caleb, Dave didn't have a GH5 guide out that quick, so then every n3wb had their chance to play important and release reviews and recommendations about stuff they actually hardly know a thing about. And it has become way more accessible as well, so there's just more people getting into it... but nobody really knows what they want to do with it... so you have people with 0 knowledge and 0 experience, but this camera and all they can come up with is shooting test videos, figuring things out. That's not a very good measurement to base anything on however. The GH5 is undoubtedly more capable than the GH2 was and WILL in the right hands, be a much better tool with better results. Though yeah, when there was this 'pick one camera for the rest of your shooting' or something, the GH2 was the one I picked. Just because you only had the basics to worry about and because it really was my first interchangeable lens camera, which I bonded with and learned from so so much. But nostalgia has little to do with how a camera actually performs or what it is capable of. That's still down to the person operating it.

Still going to say it's only about one thing: pulling sensor data, processing and storing. (Yes, those are technically 3 things xD) I'm going to go ahead and say they're pulling a BMPCC, but done right! So a handheld all-in-one fairly compact, yet capable, cinema camera body with a complete disregard for stills and prioritising and optimizing everything for shooting video. So, I'd say yes to new sensor, with heaps of DR and really good highlight roll-off. Full V-Log, no more lite. 4K60p 10-bit internally? Heck yes! Some clever trickery with dual cardslots and UHS-II to store footage as RAW DNG, ProRes or a new proprietary format (like Sony has XAVC-L for example), based on h.265? Or atleast something clever externally like that? Global shutter? Bit wishful thinking, but sure, why not? You can have it all! Feeling like ISO409600? Well too flippin' bad! You can't actually have it all. Expect it to be just as much better as the GH5 is compared to the GH4, though perhaps even worse, because of prioritising DR and not lowlight sensitivity (remember BMD, RED, ARRI ain't much better either)... don't get your hopes up and be thinking anything above ISO6400 is going to look any good. Expecting C-AF to blow Canon's DualPixel AF out of the water? Sorry to break it to you, not even close, expect the same ol' performance we've always been getting out of these puppies. I even think... that they might possibly even leave out sensor stabilization for better performance (it might be hard to effectively pull data from a free floating sensor, also: try to cool down a free floating sensor... especially with the intensity you're pulling from it). So... I think it's going to be a mixed bag. Great news for the cinematographer, some real pushable filmic looking footage. The photographer now has the Lumix G9 and Panasonic can still sell the GH5 as that more allround camera for both stills and video, that gives videographers that freedom with sensor stabilization and all (and them not feeling cheated for not having waited a bit longer for this GH5s to arrive).

This is really making me curious... will this camera be really hot, flippin' cool or just chill?

Well, atleast you've got something else to look at than Casey's face.

Dang. You're going strong, then! :D And hey, less a day? Think about all the time you're saving, right? :P I must say, it's actually the first thing I've come across that actually sounds like it makes sense and isn't just the latest 'health'/weightloss hype like juicing detox, counting calories, going paleo, mediterranean diet or what have you, which usually isn't a lifestyle but a shortterm attempt to fix a longterm problem (focus should be health, not weight, then weight should follow naturally). This thing really *clicks* with me for some reason. Hope now it sticks too... thanks for the words of encouragement!

Actually, my phone is the only thing with a higher than FHD display in this house.

Dunno, it's pretty much been day one. In my youth I've always been super skinny, yet being able to eat and snack whatever I wanted. Then again, I also was pretty active (although not athletically, aside from self-defence sports like Judo). Things kinda changed when I had hit my 20s and I moved abroad for work and started living on my own (you know without mom's balanced diet of carbs/proteine and veggies as well). Activity slowed down to a minimum. When you're a kid, you meet your friends on the playground and pretty much blast through all your energy. When you're an adult you pretty much meet your friends in a bar and have a couple of beers. Or you go to see the latest Star Wars and have popcorn with a huge soda. You're no student, so you don't need to ride your bike to school and for getting around public transport around here is such that trains, undergrounds, trams and busses are practically all just around my corner and can take me anywhere, so I hardly consider going somewhere by foot or bike. My job isn't necessarily physically demanding and by the time I get home from 10:30 hours of work or something, I don't feel like hitting up a gym either. And after 5 or 6 days of work you've gotta catch up on household chores, groceries, administration 'n all that schtuff, so it's not like you haven't got other stuff to do. So that's one side of the story. So when after a couple of months I manage to go home again everyone always has to mention that my face has gotten a little rounder (which is getting pretty old now, but most people just have this image from me in my childhood; the ironic thing is, some of these people are fairly overweight whereas I'm actually at a pretty healthy weight, just optimally would lose just a few more pounds to be at the optimum, though mainly health benefits make me want to ditch this nasty lifestyle). Then there's food. Like I mentioned, you used to pretty much eat whatever your mom served that evening, which usually was potatoes, meat and veggies (and you'd actually be able to burn 'em off again). But these days, who has the time or energy to make a homecooked meal anymore? Usually you only find 15 or 30 mins to grab something quickly, so naturally you're just grabbing something 'quick & dirty', aka fastfood (although not necessarily McDonalds or Burger King, there's a lot of other stuff, incl. pastas or something, that's quick but not necessarily very nutricional). Or whatabout microwave 'foods' that appear healthy (like rice dishes). What do you have with that? A coffee with coffeine and sugar to keep you going. Or an energydrink. Though, that might not even be the biggest problem. I believe it's snacking. It's the large quantity of poison in 'em, namely: sugar. Highly addictive, 8 times more in fact than cocaine and we all crave for it. Soda, chocolate bars, candy, but as well salty foods like potato crisps and corn nachos. Sugar is in just about everything nowadays and it's causing a boatload of health problems. And there's sugar that gets converted from the carbs we take in. And each time we have something like that we spike insulin, the hormone that regulates blood sugar. When there's too much sugar coming in your blood it will try to put it in cells as glucose for quick energy access... or as a reserve: fat. What happens over time of consuming so much sugar is, we build a resistance towards insulin and it becomes ineffective regarding storing glucose in our cells. The body then gets triggered to make more insulin, which still isn't doing much, ending you up with high blood sugar and depleted cells that still crave sugar and the actual sugar itself ending up as fat. So... it really is about getting your insulin levels in check. And even better, to access that stored fat to run on as fuel: the state of ketosis (also most of your fat gets burned during quality sleep, so make sure you get enough rest at night). So we gotta avoid sugars altogether, including fruits such as apples or juices and also cutting out the things we consume and the body breaks down to sugar (like bread, pasta, alcohol etc). We should focus on real 'food', stuff with nutricional value, stuff that provides us with a bunch of minerals and vitamins. That's more or less what keto is all about. It's not so much about counting calories or not hurting those poor animals. It's: how do we provide our body with the best possible nutricion? And that's a lot of greens, like honestly a ton... especially bitter greens like kale, a medium amount of protein and a quite high fat intake. We also should give it time to digest, get broken down, absorbed and put to use by the body. That's why it's been so effective in combination with intermittent fasting, which sounds scarier than it probably is (atleast I at first was like 'whaaat? Not eating? Are you crazy!? That's not healthy at all!'). It's about the pattern of eating within one 24hr period. If you can, you bring 3 meals a day down to 2 or even 1 meal a day and the consumed meals in a certain time window with no snacking in between and certainly not after. What you drink is mineral water, preferably 'spiked' with apple cider vinegar and lemon. Don't push yourself to drink 'x amount' of water a day as you might flush out your body of the good stuff, just drink when you're thirsty. It's not a hippidy hipster ah those poor animals I live in LA fad (which I mostly had/sorta have still with the whole vegetarian/vegan scene)... it has nothing to do with anything but you and your health alone. Unfortunately we all grew up with certain foods and treats, or our environment and circumstances shaped us into adapting a certain unhealthy lifestyle and having bad habits. If only it were so easy to flip a switch and undo all the programming that led you here and replace it with different code... it's just not. So we've gotta do some bugfixing and keep improving. In meanwhile starting to code a new operating system for ourselves to run on. For the sake of our health, feeling fresh and sharp and looking that way too. I'm in my very early 30s and I already figured I needed to be more health concious last year. So I have already for the last year stopped eating the real fast food, mostly eating like chicken salads 'n soups and I have never been much of a morning bird downing on some food that early, so I already only do 2 meals a day. But the thing that really gets to me is the sugar thing, which I actually never really fully understood or acknowledged I guess. But all the soda pop, candy and chips... especially late night snacking before going to bed has been hurting all of the progress I've been meaning to make. So I'm going to make an honest effort this year to educate myself more and make healthy choices. Today I only had one meal, a chicken salad (actually way too little food, but try to find something open 1st of january in this very traditional country) and only drank water (already started doing that last week, with apple cider vinegar and lime). Had zero sugary stuff and didn't really have any problems with that so far. So... I guess so far so good? Sorry for the long read.

Haha, that too. Started keto & intermittent fasting (& taking diluted apple cider vinegar).

Well, back to all seriousness, I gotta really make efforts to reverse GAS into some GUD (Gear Unloading Detox) and simplify things, think that's a healthy move. This year I'll be doing a lot of travelling and will be in e.g. North America, Asia and Africa quite a bit. I've been eager to get into analog photography for a while now and cameras like the Contax T2, Ricoh GR1v, Fujifilm Klasse W & S were on my radar, but in the end I settled for the convenience of digital (which has gotten cheaper over time, rather than these analogs that have skyrocketed), though I think the Ricoh GRII will get me about as close as it gets to that. APS-C single focal length photography basics goodness. Yummy. Regarding video, 2018 is more of a bridging year before I'm going to attempt to do it on the side commercially in 2019. So, last chance to experiment and try as much as possible. My favourite part is shooting itself, but I probably need to pay more attention to effective storytelling and editing. Also kinda want to figure out the applications for HLG. No.1 thing is to go and have some fun with it.

6K sorry, I had to make the pun

Wish it were! Happy new year and happy new baby! I bet 2018's gonna be quite the ride for you!

Tbh, I wouldn't get into the Sony APS-C system either. A bit russian roulette regarding overheating, because some people don't seem to run into it almost at all and others have it constantly. Of course, you now have the tripod mode, where you're raising the threshold where overheat protection kicks in, but rendering it so hot, that you can't comfortably hold it in your hands, hence: tripod mode. Of course it greatly has to do with them deciding to keep the body so damn small, which makes no sense as they've neglected a dedicated APS-C lens line-up for the last several years now, so it's more like an APS-C limited FF entry level to get you warmed up for an A7 or A9 body, already having the FF covering lenses. In the end, the lenses are what makes a system compact, so releasing new cameras that are very compact, but failing to embrace very compact lenses to me is the wrong strategy. Then there's just ergonomics 'n stuff. No frontfacing screen, touchscreen is a rather limited implementation, there's no dual cardslot, no dedicated headphone port, battery life is not that great. Then there's the footage... lots of potential on a purely sensor/pixel performance level, but that rolling shutter... and default profile colors you definitely need to mess about with because else you're getting zombie skintones and color channel clipping. All in all, I just can't be bothered with them unless they change up their approach in this APS-C segment (bigger body... better heat disspation, more features/better interface, new exciting compact lenses native to APS-C). Like, if Sony could give me a Panasonic GH5 or Olympus E-M1 Mark II with APS-C sensor... and a exciting compact lens line up to go with that, I'd be all about that. But... no joy. Maybe 2018? In the APS-C realm, I actually consider Fujifilm to make the most sense now... and they're still quite traditional, have still a bit to go. Atleast they're nice to use. Now they just need a body with sensor stabilization, a frontfacing touchscreen and a dedicated headphone port on the body. My money's still in the MFT basket. You just can't beat the compact factor and value you're getting. It just means you can't be relying on super smooth C-AF and you need to really think about your shots as lowlight and dynamic range challenges you. But, that's all stuff that you can actually make work. Except for the DR, this is as close as you'll get to shooting with an actual cinema camera. With a BMD, RED, ARRI etc, you're not relying on lowlight and C-AF either. So it also kind of depends what kind of shooter you are of course. Of course the GH5 packs a punch, but I'd consider the Lumix G9 as well if you're into a lot of viewfinder work and stills (I guess that's what the Nikon was used for partly as well). Shorter clips only, but still impressive. Supposedly the processing is quite nice and gets raving reviews. Both the GH5 and G9 are quite sizeable bodies though, mind you, so with going compact, it isn't so much about the bodies, but the lens advantage there. But I always say: a camera wouldn't get made, if they didn't think anyone would buy it. And everyone has different needs/wants/budgets, so really it's up to you to figure out. If you have friends or a rental place, see if you can get your hands on 'em. Or just at the camera store alone. That will probably tell you more than comparing specs on paper.

I didn't mention Casey changing system (again) because he's a YT-er or whatever (I already mentioned that the YT crowd has their reasons to stick to Canon). The bit that's interesting is rumor sites keep using that one screenshot of him supposedly using the new GH variation, but that apparently using the new camera swung him back to Canon rather than being more excited about what Panasonic is doing in this space. Can we use this to tell us something about the new camera? One of the more interesting things is the fact he mentions DR being one of the reasons (which I was under the impression was greatly improved now on that new camera). So either... the new GH variation is more hardcore than expected, like a true cinema camera, with a more demanding post-processing workflow, or he just found it underwhelming in general? It's all just a bit off. Maybe it's just a play. Maybe the DR and depth of field will be great and then he'll reveal he's been shooting on the GH5s all along. xD

Well, then you might be better off with a prime? With such a tele zoom you're really giving up quite a bit of quality (and sensitivity), because there needs to be so much optical correction in the lens for the sake of convenience of having a zoom. Especially when that zoom bridges 450mm worth. - Hum, just checked, they all run in the multi thousands... except for like silly cheapo reflex zooms or quality 300mm f/4s (but those still being well over a 1000 bucks). There are however on the 2nd market a lot of interesting little gems to be had for very little money, which are, well, a bit more vintage. Relatively on the modern side of that would e.g. be a Sigma AF 400mm f/5.6 APO Tele Macro (supposedly better than a Canon EF 400mm f/5.6 L), which you could even use with a 1.4x or 2.0x Sigma APO Teleconverter.

But the funny thing is he specifically mentions dropping resolution 'n schtuff for better dynamic range and such. Which... I think the GH5s would be all about (and thusfar seems that way, going by the bits 'n pieces Luke shared (btw, Congrats!)). I thought the update was going to be all on the processing end, a complete disregard for the stills side, for better video performance in terms of detail, dynamic range, colors, nuances, etc. Not so much lowlight perhaps (perhaps what the GH5 has improved over the GH4, the GH5s would be able to improve over the GH5 itself). C-AF neither (they'd have to approach this differently... which I doubt they'll have done). So it's really all about 'thick' gradable footage with good dynamic range, making it more 'filmic' if you will. Which on the one hand would make sense for Casey to not care about. He's more about the convenience... so when he started looking into 4K, it was first Sony, but they just were terribly impractical... and so the GH5 made its way into his arsenal (and it still is with vloggers like Jon Olsson). Just apparently he's seen every other YT-er still rocking Canon gear... and again, dualpixel AF, straight out of camera colors that are done with perhaps a curve thrown on it alone... and breezy 1080p footage for quick cut, render and upload times, means faster turnarounds. And getting your content up quick and painless is what the YT game is all about. So I get it... I just find it interesting he would mention dynamic specifically with looking for something else.

Hum... well, if Casey did have the oppertunity to play with it... seems he wasn't much impressed (also, as a parttime conspiracy theorist... is the title giving away what is up?)... Peter McKinnon (Canon sponsored (& Matti/Travel Feels?)) has him back on the Canon train it seems (6D II I'm assuming).

I'd be up for a combo like this: https://www.rollei.de/produkte/stative/rock-solid-stative/ & https://www.rollei.de/produkte/stative/stativkoepfe/rollei-bowl-adapter-g-75-fuer-rock-solid-alpha-nivellierschale,p313140 . They've got a guy hanging from one! xD

The Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED is a fine tele zoom (obviously it's not 600mm, yet, crop factor and ex-tele...). It's one of the 'Bourne' lenses. Believe they run around 700 bucks in top notch 2nd hand condition. Should be an older one, that instead of a zoom ring has a 'pump' type mechanism, that runs quite a bit cheaper. Pretty big 'n heavy though, definitely want to use a tripod or shoulder rig. Tokina has the Cinema AT-X series. They have the 50-135mm T3 (yeah, 135 is not super Tele or anything, but still (same for the Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8)). This is actually their converted stills 50-135mm f/2.8 (APO) lens, which of course runs way cheaper than the cinema model (the latter being $3299 on B&H in EF mount). Yet it stopped production a long time ago and is a little rarer than most lenses to find. Otherwise... native MFT? The Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 with 1.4x teleconverter is still something on my own personal wishlist. It's pricey though. So is the Leica 100-400mm. Myself, I have the Lumix 100-300mm, which I have liked quite a bit for zoo type schtuff, e.g.: Bence Máté, a Panasonic ambassador uses a lot of tele. He has a special gallery on the Panasonic website, where I think the 100-300mm images really stand out as well: https://www.panasonic.com/my/consumer/cameras-camcorders/lumix-g-mirrorless-dslm-cameras-learn/photo-gallery-by-photographers/lumix-gh4-special-gallery-bence-mate-ice-cold-wings.html . Otherwise... don't really know. Most of the time I don't go beyond 85mm.

Maybe mention the camera(s)/mount you're intending using it on?

Actually meant the 'no swimming' one where you noted that you might've pushed it too far. I'd be inclined to say you didn't push it far enough. Of course I added the note that this is just a personal/taste thing, so by no means is that my opinion right (or wrong). But you can also see the other examples shown in this topic are more striking because of the 'B&W pop' (actual highlights (almost) clip, actual natural shadows are exaggerated to pitch black almost). VS Well, that general direction neways, should've probably added some specific curve adjustment to raise that sky to have more white tones popping in there. Yeah, the old one started to bother me for some reason, so I messed about in PS for a minute, not really a keeper either tho.

Aw yeah, I remember that. https://www.eoshd.com/2011/11/latest-gh2-hack-unlocks-stunning-iso-12800-with-film-like-grain/

Of course there's different styles of B&W, but be careful not too make it 'grey tones' instead of B&W. I really liked the B&W on the GH2 (mostly because you didn't have to deal with orange-ish skintones and actually the noise looked much nicer, more like a gritty grain), but have been shooting color only for the longest while now. Definitely will get back into that for stills with the Ricoh GRII, maybe that will translate in a comeback to video as well. The Olympus E-M1 used to have a B&W mode where you could make the B&W dependent on certain colors. Always found that a pretty neat trick.