TheRenaissanceMan

yes, it's compatible.

It's r709. The sRGB item in the menu refers to jpegs.

The GX8 is a 20 MP sensor...so still no. Not the same as any other Panasonic camera. The GX85 and G7 have identical low light performance, as they have the same sensor and same processing.

D810 has a native ISO of 64.

Look like toys in the frame? No idea what that means. Recently did a test with all kinds of different lenses--native, speed boosted, vintage, modern--on both the G7 and BMPCC. All gave very different looks in regards to skintone, detail, contrast, 3D seperation, bokeh, and color. Where does this "toy" thing come into play, and what makes it a result of sensor size and not lens choice or camera processing or color grading? To your actual question, I have no problem dealing with crop factor as the price of great image quality. Micro Four Thirds lenses are good, cheap, and plentiful, and you can easily get an APS-C field of view of your full frame lenses with a simple $150 focal reducer. In terms of 4K? Like any tool, it depends on the project. Kind of a moot point if the studio/client asks for it; you need to have it. And I think we'd all rather have a badass high-DR awesome color RAW 1080p image than crummy compressed 4K. That's a silly argument because there's no possible way anyone could disagree. For broadcast and documentary, 1080p makes a lot of sense for file size reasons and delivery. But for high-end TV and narrative work, all else being equal, would I personally want 4K or 2K? Probably 2K for most things, as it's kinder to faces and I don't shoot a lot of wides. But it really depends on the project and your style. The biggest problem with 4K right now is delivery. We have the cameras, we have the displays, we have the content, but the pipes to get it there aren't up to snuff. 4K streaming is far too compressed at average American bitrates to beat a good 1080p Blu-Ray for quality. That Sony box that lets you download 4K digital copies works well and doesn't compromise quality, but you have to have all your movies downloaded far in advance and the library is very limited. They make 4K Blu-Rays now, but the library is small, they're expensive, and the players cost about $300. TLDR: There are more important IQ factors to consider first. It makes sense for certain projects, styles, and shots, but isn't quite there in terms of delivery yet.

G7 and GX85 use the same 16MP sensor. The GX85 doesn't have an AA filter, but for video the quality is identical. The GX8 is a completely different 20MP sensor.

But they have. The G7 was a huge step forward in low light performance. Not as good as the Sony, but a damn good performance nonetheless.

I think that's why complaints about Panasonic DR seem overblown to me. Yes, it's less than some LOG/RAW cameras, but the shadows are so recoverable, the highlight roll off so smooth, and the midtone noise so filmic that I rarely have a problem making it look good.

Depends what's more important to you. Do you want a mic jack, larger grip, fully articulating screen, longer battery life, slightly larger viewfinder, cine profiles, and $200 cheaper RRP? G7. Do you want smaller size, a denser-feeling camera, a tilting screen, and the all-important in-body stabilization? GX85. From what I've seen, CineD provides no DR benefit over Natural. The only reason to shoot CineD (imo) is if you like the Leeming LUT workflow. Actual image quality is identical between the two, so choose based on ergonomics, features, and price.

It's really meant to be used with an external battery. That's mainly how I use mine, and have had zero issues. I wouldn't rely on internal power for a long interview. Battery life is poor without an external solution, but no reliability problems. Are you using cheap Chinese batteries? Not sure how the metadata screen hurts reliability. Just don't use it if you don't like it. And my clock time has never shifted. Not sure what it'd hurt if it did.

It's a video camera...it'll never be a non-video image.

Indeed. No idea why people think it's the same one.

No need to get personal by implying that others aren't. I think if you're buying new, the 1DX2 makes way, way more sense. 4k/60p, 1080/120p, dpaf, etc. But if you're buying used, the ability to pick up a 1DC for ~$3500 skews the value proposition strongly in that direction.

RAW being the only alternative? Yes, I think we need ProRes. Plus, still optimizing hardware board for production? I'd rather they finish that before they start handing out cameras.

There's absolutely zero evidence to indicate it's the same sensor.

I like the 28 1.8. It's got some character.

They've never put out products with bugs like that before, and bungling such a widely anticipated release could haunt them forever. I'm guessing they'll put out a problem-free product at any cost.

If you don't need it for critical color rendering, the VS-2 Fine HD is an excellent choice. Picked one up a couple months ago and can't imagine life without it.

The AF100 with an external recorder was the a-camera on The Raid: Redemption, an absolutely kick ass movie I don't recall a single person critiquing for its visuals. Learn your way around it and you'll be fine.

But it's not. It's a 1.4. The exposure will be exactly the same as a 24mm 1.4, just with more depth of field.

It's supposed to be announced at Photokina.

The whole idea of ISO being multiplied by crop factor as well is the main thing I've heard rejected by people who understand sensor physics better than me. I'm told by the people I trust that for the purposes of exposure, ISO is ISO and aperture is aperture. While a shorter actual focal length/narrower field of view provides functionally less bokeh/more DoF, it will not affect your ISO/aperture.

Those results are highly contested. But let's not devolve into yet another equivalence argument. The internet has quite enough of those already.

Eh...BMVAs are cheap. And the GH4 offers very different strengths and a lot more versatility. I'd take a BMPC personally, but both are great options.

Fair enough. Just thought I'd float that out there for anyone who forgot/didn't know.