TheRenaissanceMan

35 1.8, 45 2, 58 1.4. The 85 1.7, 21 2.8, 28 2.8, and 35-70 are next, and samples I've seen show relatively low breathing on those as well.

No, a 50mm f/2.8 will be two stops darker than a 25mm f/1.4. Same depth of field, but that's it. The lens size advantage is indisputable. And it's not just sensor size; it's aspect ratio. Designing a lens with good edges and corners becomes much easier with a squarer aspect ratio, and requires a much smaller image circle. The G7 has already improved 1-1.5 stops in noise performance from the GH4. If the GH5 sensor offers any noise improvement at all over the G7, we're looking at a usable ISO 3200, which is more than enough for me. I don't understand how you can argue that m4/3 isn't a standard. Of course it is. We have 6 different manufacturers making lenses for it. And with a simple speed booster, you increase your low light performance by 1 stop and gain a s35 sensor with Canon or Nikon mount. Sounds plenty standard to me. M4/3 offers lots of advantages. Smaller, better-corrected lenses, faster fps, lower rolling shutter, broader dof, less overheating, better battery life, a 4:3 aspect ratio for anamorphic shooting, easier to process higher bit depths, etc. And if its performance in stills isn't enough for you, nothing made before 2006 must've been either. It's only a half stop behind APS-C in every metric. And though their sensor tech has stalled a bit, m4/3 will perform as well in 3 years as APS-C does now; at that point, I'd target have the reduced size and weight than a fractional bump in IQ. Also, keep in mind that we have no idea what we want. I mean none at all. After the GH2, what did everyone ask for? Better low-light, DR, color science, build quality, bitrate/codec, and menus. What did the GH3 deliver? Every single one of those improvements...yet everyone panned it as a minor step forward because the spec sheet didn't wow them. Here's what I want. -1 stop increase in noise from the G7. - reduce the crop factor to the native 2x, or bring back the multi-aspect sensor for 1.86x (APS-H with the speed booster) -1 stop increase in DR -V-LOG, with view assist and the green/magenta blocking issue fixed - anamorphic de-squeeze -10-bit internal recording, and a 200mbps 8-bit option - dual card slots (It'd be cool if you could record to both slots simultaneously, or your big files to one slot and 1080p proxies to the other, but that's dreaming) -A full sized HDMI port. There's room, and it would make external recording much easier and more reliable. -a better implemented YAGH brick than can run on 2 GH4 batteries I feel like that's an attainable wish list and a compelling enough tool to keep people on board until the next big leap. I'd buy one.

The only line of lenses I've used that have consistently zero focus breathing are SLR Magic primes. The Minolta primes I have are all relatively good too, as are the slower CY Zeiss.

Hardware. No hack will improve RS. The 1080p mode is pretty good in that regard, though.

SLR Magic all the way.

Canon EF has become the de facto low- end mount for the industry. I wouldn't read more into it than that.

http://www.dvinfo.net/article/acquisition/panasonicp2hd/a-critical-look-at-varicams-latest-demo-reel.html Art Adams, one of the leading experts in camera color, on the Vatican 35 demo reel. His only problems with it were revealed by the director to be a problem with their syrupy grade-- there's a more conservative grade of some of the footage floating around out there that avoids those problems. Also, try watching Netflix's Master of None. That show looks so effortlessly good. Incorrect. The C300 does indeed use analog gain to produce higher ISOs, but it does affect DR. You ever see those DR charts from DXO where the line slopes down as ISO goes up? Canon's Cinema cameras work the same way. I'm sure it's a flatter graph due to the large pixels, but Varicam does something completely unique. It has the exact same DR at 5000 as it does at 800, including the noise floor (which is lower than the F55 and Dragon). This is huge, and cinematographers are raving (with good reason) about it. The LT has the same dual ISO feature as the 35, actually. The forums are full of people complaining that unlike the F55, the Varicam doesn't apply any compression to its RAW files. That alone will disqualify it for many productions that can't deal with tyre headache of uncompressed 4K 60p. The control panel on the side can actually be removed and used as a monitor. There's SDI out, but otherwise we're stuck with P2 Express. Same problem with RED though, and people seem to have accepted it there.

Lol!!! What the hell are you talking about?

My understanding is that RJ makes the best off-brand SB. I use a Roxsen and have no complaints. The others may be fine, but I don't know enough to say one way or the other.

The 21mm? Because it's unique. And very, very good.

Olympus 21mm f/2 is nice. Otherwise, most every manufacturer made a 24mm f/2. The Canon FD And Olympus OM are both excellent and affordable.

Gillian Anderson looks way, way better in Hannibal. No idea how they screwed up so badly.

I would love to get ahold of the files for TL 2.0 if you have them. Shoot me a PM.

Low rolling shutter, clean in low light, really pleasing color and contrast, detailed enough, and only mild moire and aliasing (Reminds me of the GH3). Couple that with incredible stills performance, and I'd strongly considering picking up an X-E3 or whatever lower-priced Fujis end up with this sensor. It's not top of the heap, but I'd put it in the same category as a D5500, just above the E-M5 II and just below the non-4K Panasonics. I can't fathom why Fuji doesn't take a crack at pro video. They have the expertise, the pedigree, and a "look" cinematographers and clients can love.

Any chance you could share some side by side screen grabs?

Oh, completely agreed. My film student friends laughed when I bought Blackmagic instead of Sony, but guess whose stuff looks better? Guess whose camera still gets talked about? Guess whose camera cost 1/3 the price of a used A7S? This guy. :D

It gets simpler if you divide them between "available" and "shipping in January." :P

I like the Nikon look, but I just can't get over the backwards focus rotation. It ruins so many takes. Maybe it wouldn't be such a big deal if I used a reversible follow focus, but I almost never use a FF at all.

Apologies. I've never used the CC or PC. Thank you for clarifying.

Blackmagic has literally never used fans for cooling. All their camera's have thermoelectric systems.

The A7R II solved it, but this is a denser sensor in a smaller body. We won't know for sure until the camera's in our hands. I actually really like Panasonic color in the Natural profile. It doesn't have Nikon-level DR but still very respectable, and the low light is actually 1-1.5 stops better than the GH4. Factor in the benefits of downsampling 4K and it becomes a very attractive image at a very attractive price. I'm excited to see what can be squeezed out of it with an external recorder.

Zooms: the 28-85, 35-70, and 80-200 are all excellent. 35-70 is the cheapest, parfocal, constant aperture, and takes smaller filters, so it's the most popular. Ultra Wide: There's an amazing 21mm 2.8-- the same design as the ZE/ZF2 version. It's expensive (in fact, more expensive than the newer versions) but has an aperture ring, focuses the right way, and features the older, more forgiving T* coatings. There's also an 18mm f/4. Not quite as sharp, but very low distortion and it won't break the bank. You'll need an adapter to put filters on it, and it's a big size. 82mm if I recall, but I'd have to double check.

That's the million dollar question. They've clearly pushed the hardware to the limit giving is S35 UHD. It's a lot of horsepower in a small, affordable package. Where's the catch?

Shit, that IS doable. Let's start contacting everyone we can and get the lay of the land, so if someone IS interested, we can get fundraising going ASAP.

Is it the same quality as internally recorded 4K? The GH3, for example, had different image quality in live view than it did during video recording, when it switched to a different readout scheme. Does the G7 do something similar? And can you confirm that the video stream is clean of icons and such?