Mat Mayer

One of the sites tells you how many of each clip or image has been sold: it is iStock. That is a good way to reserach what sells. I am a newbie to stock but would assume subtle grading is best. The images above look really good to me, not sure if they would be too flat or not.

They can do similar bitrates and codecs. My phone is way behind in dynamic range because of the tiny sensor, even after raising the bitrate to very high levels. I have a feeling that the Samsung S6 Edge is a big step up just from playing with it in the store. This app is incompatible with my Oppo Find 7a; would of been nice to see what the flat profile could have squeezed out if it.

I think the original RX100 would do. It is really cheap compared to the third one and the improvements are mostly features rather than IQ. No idea about AF as I never used it with my mk2 because it hunts which is useless for my still videos. The mk2 is the minimum if you want 24/25/30fps (might not do all those) 1080p. With the first one you had to de-interlace the 50i or something? Actually the NX500 is pretty unbeatable for the prices it is going for as grey imports on eBay in the UK and US. Much much bigger sensor readout for stills and heavily cropped 4K video if you don't mind the transcoding required. In conclusion, the LX100 is your best bet. Nice big sensor, compact size, 15 minutes of 4K. Or maybe look into the Samsung S6 Edge for a cool option which wouldn't require you to wear a fanny/bum/waist pack/bag.

GH4 has been £100 off all summer in the UK with cash-back. I assume £900 is way below the original price (£950 in most places after the cash-back).

I thought the V Log talk on Facebook and other places was annoying before. Jesus H Christ; it is now ridonkulous. I have had to unfollow all the GH4 Facebook groups because of people non stop complaining and asking stupid questions about it. What a giddy bunch of camera geeks Just wait until it is released where you live. $99 is fair. If they don't sell it in Thailand for my UK model tough luck on them, I will just pop over to that free place garrrr (that's gaarrrr like a pirate would say).

I have been joining a few recently. Started with Shutterstock and made $130 from two 1080p wildlife clips so far (got $105 from one as it led to a subscription). Uploaded maybe 50 clips a few weeks ago. Also been uploading to Pond5, Videoblocks and Dissolve- been too busy to fill in the meta details and tax info so far. Should be a nice little couple of hundreds bucks a month once all 80+ suitable clips I have are online. One of them, beginning with R I think, only allowed clips max. 480 x 680 (or something equally weird) so didn't bother with that. iStock was a pain in the ass, they had ridiculous requirements like certain format and size, but I got an automated error when I created clips that way. After bollocking them I think they accepted us but I will leave them to the end, they wanted different versions and photos and shit. Might be able to get into them via Getty Images; I am not clear how they work together yet. Anyway seems to be worth a try, they only want short clips so it doesn't take much time to do.

Deleted

Looks like the Lenovo P50 is the one for me, unless my Macbook Air 2013 4GB i5 can be used with the proxy trick in Premiere Pro for 4k. The Lenovos look like little beasts.

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-HC-WX970-Camcorder-Built--Camera/ 4k = future proof camcorder = no time limit price = $850 20x optical zoom, easy to use, HDR movie so no exposure expertise needed, interesting sounding twin camera function for close ups of the pastor from phone. No reviews below 4 stars. "Real-Time Broadcasting* — You can live-stream events on USTREAM as they are being recorded in Full-HD resolution." Sounds like it should be ideal to me, plus Panasonic is a great video brand.

Nice to hear the 5 minute thing was a typo mistake. Shame about the battery not being great but it is good that it can be charged in-camera. Just get a good usb charger and that should keep it topped up. They should work on the fast charging you can get on some phones now for the next one. I also agree that the 240 fps is too short at 2 seconds. Sounds like 100/120 is the way to go for regular slow mo.

Youtube must pay more than I imagined for ads

Thanks for letting me know. Looks good. I saw a comparison of the Sigma 18-35 (on Metabones) with the Panasonic 12-35 and it was very noticeable, so the Sigma or something like yours (might be better range for me) should be next. For now hopefully I'll be happy with the kit lens and I want to get into sound more, which doesn't sound cheap. I want to have nice surround sound for the landscapes. Research has not brought up the solution yet: there is a dedicated dolby 7.1 mic for $6k, or I could spread several mics around the area but would have to watch out for phrasing apparently, or maybe just go with two mics for a stereo sound for now. That could be a whole new research plan, so will probably pop that on the back burner for now and just get out there instead. There is always stock audio and half of the time there is traffic noise with landscapes in the UK and Southeast Asia anyway.

Thanks for the affirmation Ebrahim. I can tell I have made the right decision before I even have the gear in my hands. It just feels right, like when I first held my 600D. Looking forward to becoming a lens nerd browsing used gear shops in Thailand and ordering off eBay when in UK. Going to check out the G1 on Youtube now to see what it can do, if nothing fun/useful will see if anyone wants to trade it for an interesting lens.

Thanks Aaron, but I just had a thought (like in Batman when he used to say "Robin that plan might just work"): I could get the weather sealed, longer battery, more video controls and future V Log in the behemoth GH4 and get it with the cheap kit lens: 14-42 F3.5-5.6 MKII for a very similar price to the G7 with the 12-35. I know you are supposed to favor glass but it doesn't sound like a terrible lens, for now. At least I will have the proper camera and can upgrade to the 12-35 when I can? GH4 with cheap kit lens (14-42) or G7 with better lens (12-35)? edit: Case closed. I went for the 14-45 which was better reviewed than the 14-42 and the GH f-king 4. Got a G1 in the mix too, no idea if that is any good but it was free with the lens. What a relief, the search is over

Who needs a Gh4 now I assume this works with a G7 too.

No. Sounds like a rather cheap feeling plasticky thing.

I think I might play it safe and go with the Panasonic Lumix G X VARIO 12-35mm, unless there are any other choices that pop up in the next 16 hours. After a bit of reading it seems a better fit: The Sigma is the better lens but that is before an adaptor/booster is added. It is also heavier- I use cheap $15 tripods so they are lightweight for off road and can be thrown away after using in saltwater or mud. I know what you mean about a good tripod head- I had to stick paper in to try and keep it steady at first which was no good; but then figured out how to keep it steady with a better version. The Sigma might not balance on these tripods properly, they are really lightweight and unstable unless you dig them into the ground, which isn't always possible (then it is fill a sandbag time). The panasonic is going to fit, better for travel and seems to be the right price at £460. Will check out more opinions on it later. Anymore more thoughts most welcome

Thanks again, but... Just looked up the Fotga and it gets bad reviews. People on Amazon say it can damage your lens. Quotes from 3 reviews out of a total of 7 (all 3 got 1 star): "Terrible - buy anthing else", "Warning - May damage your lens", "Poor design... got jammed". Someone says the aperture ring is not smooth and there is no autofocus (so it is taking features away from the camera and lens as well as being less than ideal). Sorry but I haven't made it clear in my post- I am not looking for a quick fix or temporary solution. I don't want to cut corners with cheap equipment that could break the lens. I want stuff that works, not stuff that might work or might break while I'm in the middle of nowhere in a third world country with no way of fixing it. Sorry if I sound ungrateful, I do appreciate the advice, I am sure the Fotga works for most people but I need stuff that gets 4-5 stars and works for everyone.

Thanks Cinegain. I am pretty sure that lens has cropped up many times in my searches. With the focal reducer it is over budget but certainly doable as I want to do this right. I read mixed opinions about the focal reducers e.g. someone said one causes flair or something, so gave up looking at them as I imagined that would be an issue outdoors when it is best to shoot late afternoon (I am kind of guessing though). These videos need to be immaculate on massive UHD screens, so no imperfections allowed. If people are forking out the big money on Metabones it makes me think the cheaper alternatives must be poor quality in some way. Would it be better to get a cheaper adaptor which doesn't affect focal length and save up for a Metabones if and when I need it? I would rather have to walk back a bit than half ass the focal reducer. edit: started reading up on focal reducers and a UK one called Camdiox won't allow infinity focusing- sheeeeeet, I use that all the time. Also maybe no aperture control and poor edges. Others are proving elusive on eBay UK. As I suspected it appears like it might be false economy to get a nice Sigma lens and then ruin it with one of these.

I have decided to forget about the fancy new Rx10ii and get the G7. Bigger sensor, better video, on a par with the GH4. I want to spend less than £1,000 ($1600) if possible. Please can you help me choose which lens? Requirements and shooting style: outdoor video generally in decent light (I don't care about stills)mostly landscape videoszoom range isn't too important but I want a bit of scope so no primes please (plus I often walk through water to find my shot so I can't be changing lenses)everything will be shot on a tripod, no panning, no zooming (super cheap tripod as they go in the sea, so the battery on the bottom of the G7 will hopefully not be an issue), image stabilization is irrelevant to me.I am open to different mounts "if" a cheap £20/$30 adaptor won't harm the image. I did look at the Canon EF 17-40 mm f/4.0 L USM Lens, thinking maybe I would use it with Metabones or another camera in future. I believe Nikon might be better value?happy to have manual focus but of course it is nice to have auto for the very occasional time when I can't use the screen or evfthe camera is £500, I will also need a variable ND and extra battery, so £400 ($700) is the sweet spot for the lens, but I am willing to go a bit higher. I have looked at the Panasonic 14-140ii but the reports of jittery video put me offcurrently looking at the Panasonic H-HS12035E Lumix G X VARIO 12-35mm but really unsure if suitable (being a noob)Any help would be much appreciated (have been reading forums and specs for weeks now, feels like I am wasting my life). Please don't suggest alternative cameras, I have decided the RX10ii and FZ1000 have a sensor which is too small for an A cam. The LX100 and NX500 are not good enough, plus I need 20 mins record time which they don't all do.

It shouldn't say Filmmaker/DP under my name, I am a newbie. So take anything I say with a pinch of salt. My gut is telling me you are trying too hard, but for all the right reasons. I imagine this is meant to be a consumer only camera and you are (admirably) trying to get extra out of it. The greens look radioactive to me. I am in the UK and travel a lot.

Someone please help him out. All these videos are making this camera look bad, surely it isn't this bad? Everything just seems wrong. Not filmic, not realistic, not attractive. But you can tell the range and quality is there, the focus through the trees is cool. Green leaves aren't that color, nowhere near either color. I am really tempted despite this- wonder if the new NX1 product from Andrew is usable and/or relevant for this camera or whether my foggy memory serves me correct in saying there isn't enough control options? I think I read no gamma control somewhere? Are you over exposing and then adding a lut instead of actually manipulating the three colors yourself And underexposing? I may of read somewhere that killing the saturation for the nx500 more than five is bad. I am not sure if I am stating the obvious or you are doing something over my head, please excuse me if it is the latter.

Thanks for your opinion. I am so sick of looking at cameras that I might just pick up the FZ1000 if they have it for a good price foday at shopping center, where there is a Jessops (UK camera store). I am in the middle of a f-ing fraud case now with Amazon about their dodgy sellers. Anyway if it is crap I will know who to blame I know the RX10ii is better in every way, but it is basically the same sensor (as far as I can tell), which has been modified so it can do slow motion. I expect a slight improvement in quality. But I have seen mushy corners and other hints of the limits I had with my RX100ii. A cheap FZ1000 would probably be fine for a year or so. Then I can invest in a system like the A7sii (when my bank manager is fatter), which I assume with become the gold standard prosumer for video.

The guy from Egypt (Ebrahim?) said the FZ1000 is crap when I asked this (he said something like "never been able to get/see good video from it"). The RX10ii price fluctuates wildly so don't make any rash decisions and certainly do not buy through Amazon because there is a scammer there called ASK who seems to be the only seller at the moment. Waiting on whether DigitalRev are selling the proper camera for a nice price (maybe £900) as someone has ordered two from them in the UK.