JazzBox

I love Canon FD lenses. I had a complete kit (20, 24, 28, 35, 50, 85, 135, 35-70, 200 etc...) and I regret a lot I sold it... they give you a great image quality, an organic feel and they are cheap!

Ouch... I read somewhere that it should have internal ProRes 10bit... sorry! Anyway I tried to preview Luke Neumann's 24fps and 30 fps files and it is not possible. I don't understand why....

No: I can easily play (and preview from Mac's preview) the ProRes 10 bit files I shot from BM Pocket, BM Mico, GH4 trough Video Assist, so it has to be something different...

The very same mine late-2013 iMac, on which I easily edit ProRes from BMPCC, BMMCC, GH4 to Video Assist, 4K from GH4 and G7... We just have to hope that those files were converted in some strange format.... I'm going to buy the GH5 (I sold the GH4 for buying it) but I absolutely need to check the files from time to time while shooting during music videos etc... so I always use my little MackBook Air for preview during shooting... Please let me know if ProRes straight from the SD card is going to play easily on a normal Mac

That would be great! Did you have problems playing the ProRes files to preview them without transcoding? I tried with Mac's "Preview" and VLC and I was not able to play them smoothly, while I played normally ProRes 10 bit from BM pocket, micro and Video Assist. That would be my only concern. Other then that I want to buy it since I sold the GH4 in order to buy the GH5 and I'm using the G7 which I love

The stabilization while walking seems pretty good!

Pardon me: I just mash up requesting 12-35 stabilization vs 12-60 and 12-40 images quality vs 12-35/12-60! Of course the 12-40 has no stabilization What about 12-35 stabilization (I would prefer 2.8 in case) and overall quality?

Is the 12-60 going to work any better then the 12-35 (or Olympus 12-40) for handheld video/steadicam like shots? In that case I would consider it, otherwise I would prefer f/2.8. Thank you!

Both 12-40 and 40-150 are (optically) exceptional lenses. The only drawback is that the 40-150 has a focus ring not precise like the 12-40, especially when focusing from far to infinity. I sold it some days ago in order to buy some Zeiss... I miss it but I can live with a slower zoom...

I tried on my G7 with my VA, and after the bad experience I tried with the same units from a colleague, also changing HDMI cable. When recorded on the VA the G7 had a strong noise pattern. Not on the Atomos. But I cannot afford the Atomos, so I'm recording on SD and I'm very happy with the G7 (the only drawback is that you cannot use HDMI for monitoring, you can only record, while with GH4 you can do it). Anyway I'm a big fan of Lumix quality, even if I love the BlackMagic ProRes from Micro Cinema Camera, which I sold for the unpractical (for me) workflow. For the way I work, GH4 (which I sold in order to buy the GH5), G7 etc... are the best way and I love them. I think that shooting with @andy lee settings you have the freedom to do pretty much what you want in post. I tried to match G7 files with BlackMagic Micro (straight from the card) files in 5 minutes . I just can imagine what you can do with the new GH5 and a solid V-Log! p.s.: Andy, what about GH5's 24p ProRes files playback/preview without transcoding? I tried Luke Neumann's files and I cannot played them in preview. Thank you!

I sold my 5inch Video Assist after ecording both GH4 and G7 on it. The files from GH4 were not really better then internal, the G7's were a lot worst. I tried on a second unity, same results. Not the same thing on an Atomos... so I sold it... (just my personal experience, nothing scientific).

I can't wait to shoot with this amazing piece of gear! It would be great if Panasonic could add framing guides for 1.85:1, 2.39:1 etc... and a good 1080 wi-fi stream in order to have a nice monitoring on iPad / iPhone etc... I betat tested "Scopes", a nice app for full screen monitoring on iPad, but the signal is low quality, so it is not good for focus pulling. I tried Luke Neumann's files and I had some problem playing 24p and 30p footage without transcoding: do you know if it will be possible to play/preview them normally like with GH4? Thank you!

Thank you!

Wow, great price and awesome solution! Thank you Fritz!

That would be perfect! Thank you!

Thank you very much to you both for your patience! This is one of the solution I tried: I mounted the quick release plate in avery possible position, but did not work :/ I think I need a spacer, but I'm not able to find it on Amazon or similar. If you have a pic of yours or a link I'll be grateful (anyway thank you very much for your kind help!!!). The VCT-14 is great, but too expensive for me

Ciao! I'd like to mount my G7 with a lens which protrudes from the body on a FlyCam HD3000 (a Glidecam-like steadicam). I tried several methods with the plates I have, but no one worked. I saw a couple of guy (YouNuts) that use a GH4 in a similar situation (I have not the CP2 unfortunately) but I don't understand how the do it. Could you please help me with a similar (or different) solution? Thank you very much! Simo

At the end I went to try both Panasonic 14mm and 15mm and the 15mm was great. I sold my 12-40 and took 2 Pana-Leica 15mm and 25mm, the lengths I used most of the time on 12-40. In the next future I'll took a 42.5 (the cheap Panasonic one or the Pana-Leica), but for the moment I can go 40mm with the 40-150 f/2.8 from Olympus, that is very good. Ciao

In my opinion there are a lot of cinematic, organic lenses in the analog world: try a Zeiss, a Canon FD, an old Helios 44... and see if it is the same as a Panasonic 14-140... They all have their characteristics (or defects) that could be bad for still and nice for video. Of course someone search just a clean, sharp, perfect lens, so a new one could be better then an old one... and in some situations (i.e. documentary or shooting outdoor at lunch time) every lens could work and makes no real difference... Anyway I always try to use analog lenses for shooting (music videos and narrative) and only use the digital Olympus 12-40 f/2.8 PRO (and 40-150 f/2.8 PRO) for wide shots where an analog 25 or a 28 is too narrow (or for quick gigs where I can't switch lenses and the 2 zooms give me all the focal lengths I need). But I certainly see some substantial differences between the "modern", more or less "perfect", "videoish" digital lenses and the old CY Zeiss (or Canon FD) and I try to use old lenses as much as I can if I can choose. In my opinion 20mm is too narrow for 90% of steadicam-like shots, it is too similar to 24/25mm and for the Flycam (a Glidecam-like stabilizer) I need a light lens as wide as possible without becoming funny or noticeable. I'd like to have a lens that gives me a Birdman-like (or La La Land-like) field of view. My Olympus 12-40 is a really good lens, but at 12 is good for landscape, not for humans. Going from 12mm to 14mm makes a huge difference: it become usable for humans, but it is quite heavy and I plan to shoot some long takes, so I need a lighter lens. Today I'll try both 14 f/2.5 and 15 f/1.7...

Thank you the same I need a lightweight prime lens, I have the 12-40 form Olympus that is really good, but too big for my purpose.

Thank you!

Ciao, when I need a wide angle I normally use my Olympus 12-40 f/2.8 on GH4/G7, but I recently bought a simple Glidecam style stabilizer (a Flycam) and I need a smaller, lighter lens to move with. I don't like exaggerated angle (such as 12mm) when shooting talents, and I saw the Panasonic 14 f/2.5 and the Panasonic / Leica 15 f/1.7. Which one is more "cinematic" and organic? I mean... I don't mind if some barrel distortion happens, I do love Wes Anderson's wide shots Thank you very much!

At the end of the day filmmaking it is an Art, with rules etc... but like with the music, you can have the best Steinway piano, you can study rules, harmony, you can be a good piano player... and you are still far from Bach, Beethoven, Mozart etc... Of course, we all love that "magic" in this Art - and we try to catch it - but it is like chasing the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow Someone catch it, most of us try to catch it, but anyway it is an enjoyable journey, because you meet on your road lot of great people that share your same passion and you learn something new every day. Probably this is one of the biggest value of filmmaking.

I think that a lot of film look has to searched here (after shooting with proper light, framing, camera, lenses, actors, locations etc...). What do they do make video look filmic? What kind interventions are important for achieving that look? What kind of grading and encoding?

There is something in big production movies, especially in american comedies, that to me it is "cinema" at first sight, at least in my definition of "classic" cinema. I don't really know what it is: of course it is a sum of great actors, great directors, great DOP, amazing locations, set design and costumes, great audio, wonderful camera with great DR and colors... But there is something "magical" that to my eyes is not really understandable: sometime it seems like a subtle slow motion - I'm not talking about 24p/180° - I mean like the movements are different from my footage. I thought a lot about it: maybe it is something about reducing sharpening/resolution and the color grading? Maybe it is the choice of framing with longer lens and letting the subject floating on the scene? But movies like Birdman are super cinematic and they have not a shallow DOF... And I can see this difference in movies shot with the same "cheap" cameras or dslr that are videoish in smaller production such as music video... I mean "La Vie d'Adèle" (Blue Is the Warmest Colour) is shot with a Canon C300, not an ARRI. And it has this magic "motion". I don't really understand what it is... For sure I can shoot 24p 180° with Lumix, Canon, BlackMagic and my footage is nice, but I am not able to reproduce that magic motion I see in the movies. If you have any suggestion, please share it