DBounce

I have to say, I never cross shopped an iPhone against a dedicated camera... I don’t actually think anyone that is ready to cough up $6k plus for body only and maybe $15k-$20k on lenses, and accessories thinks.., “or I could just buy an iPhone?” I have an iPhone X, Note8 and Pixel XL and other than when I am out casually, they never see use for video. Smartphones are great for convenience, but for serious productions I prefer to have external monitors, I run matte boxes, I manually focus... as a way to direct the story... which means I need reasonable dof. I like low-light capability as I can use less lights. I do have a set of Moment lenses for the iPhone X, but honestly seldom use them, as they defeat the purpose of the smartphone camera... convenience. The new Sony ZX2 sports a HDR camera. It is the first smartphone to be able to capture HDR video. So I will be curious to see how it looks. But I can tell you now, it won’t be replacing any of my dedicated cameras. If it’s about money... or purely a creative choice, then shooting on a smartphone might be justified. But other than that there are better options.

I have an iPhone X... and a Note8... and a GH5, and the GH5S and the 1DXMK2. And I can tell you first hand... No smartphone comes close to those cameras. Yes they can all take video. And yes they can all take stills. But comparing a modern smartphone to a modern high end camera is a fools errand. You might as well go snipe hunting Do it indoors with ambieant light and it will be a really short test. Don’t get me wrong, I’m certain the breakthroughs will come in Mobile first. But a smartphone will never be equal to a dedicated camera of the same era.

@mkabi You're seeing DOF and golden hour lighting (first image) and the BPM filter. That's it. Add those to the GH5S and you are pretty much there. But in post you have a 10 bit image to work with.

It feels more made for TV than cinematic to me. I have both of these cameras, and I can tell you the GH5S hits a lot closer to the mark for "cinematic". But that said, there are other things in how this is shot, that help to keep it more "TV" than "Cinema" feeling. I think you just made the case for getting the GH5S for anyone that was on the fence.

Indeed, I think sofening up the image and using some light can go a long way to make footage look more cinematic. Here is a quick grab from the GH5S using BPM 1/2 with a flashlight .

I just pick a picture profile and shoot with the baked in colors. I have tried the prolost flat, techicolor and more. But honestly, 8 bit and color grading is a bit limiting I much prefer the GH5/S for CGing. Some might tell you it makes no difference, but I really see a difference. For straight out of camera, I think the Canon is hard to beat.

That would depend on why you are using them. If a budget issue then it may well be skimping, however, if a creative choice, then not skimping at all. However, you are suggesting to always just use a smartphone. For me, a smartphone is not close to an ideal platform for filmmaking. YMMV. The matte box is a Genus. It's on 15mm rod rails, but has an option to connect directly to lenses for a more mobile setup. It takes two filters with one of the two rotatable. The opening is 105mm. Build quality is good. I like it for the size and weight.

Well, I use my smartphones (Samsung Note8, IPhone X, Google Pixel XL) when they are all if have to use. Of course a smartphone could be used to film anything that a dedicated camera could. But if you are shooting a major production, why would you skimp only on the camera? Because you are still going to need everything else (light, sound, sets, makeup, a cast and crew... etc) that the dedicated cameras would need to pull if off. Also, I think you will find that even the best smartphone cameras are far worst in low-light conditions than a 1DC/1DX or GH camera. And forget using focus as a means to direct the viewers attention, as smartphones cannot use "fake DOF" in video mode. Oh, and lets not forget... no real aperture, with the exception of the S9/9+. And even then, the aperture is fixed not variable. If the limitations of shooting this way are good with you... have at it. I am certain that the day will come that smartphones will push pass the capabilities of the best cameras available today... but this is not that day. @DaveAltizer I'm on the same page as you. The GH5S is a much different camera to the GH5. I prefer the GH5S images by a reasonable margin. But neither of these cameras is a match for the 1DXMk2 in the stills department. While you can get great pictures with Panasonics, using the Canon feels almost like cheating. It's an amazing stills camera. And really small when compared to my GH5S

You may be right about HLG, but I wanted to give it a play to learn what it was like. Granted working with it presents challenges.

So I shot this at 270° shutter angle. What are thoughts about this vs 180° on GH5S?

Idk, I would imagine so. After all, aren't all the new movies shot in HLG?

Recorded in HLG. Might try VLog-L later. Slapped a Tiffen . BPM on there to try to soften it a bit.

So I have been mucking about trying to see if I could get the GH5S to feels "Cinematic"... whatever that means. Have a looksie, and post if you feel any of it hit the mark.

The 1DXMk2 is an amazing camera, for both stills and video. Mojo is subjective, I would say the 1DXMk2 is a more modern looking 4k whereas the 1DC is more vintage. Both honestly look great. That said, 4k@60p plus DPAF are both killer features, and imo tip the scale I favour of the Mk2. YMMV.

It takes photos?

The Sony is a toy next to the Canon. I’ve owned both, but still have the Canon.

Maybe hard to pin down, as most get it woefully wrong. 90% of so called “cinematic” footage only looks “cinematic” in slow mo. There’s are reasons that people almost never show 24p examples of cinematic footage with most of these cameras.

Can you add motion cadence?

Pricey, but not when compared to other wireless follow focus systems. Build quality it great, QC is great. Reliable with strong motors with user adjustable torque settings. It should serve many years . I know I will be using this long after my GH5 and S are history.

After picking up a Tilta Nucleus M, I can tell you that I’m done with my reliance on AF. For me it is no longer important.

So I got the Schoeps MiniCMIT yesterday and had a quick play with the GH5S and the DMW-XLR1 XLR Microphone Adapter. This adapter is powered by the camera and can supply the 48 volt required by the MiniCMIT. This configuration is ideal for light weight travel. I plan to add the SD633 for those great preamps and low cut filters. Working in my home studio next to my MacBook Pro (which was running its fans at full speed) tested the noise rejection. It’s probably as good as one could hope, but the analog side filters on a pro mixer would no doubt be a better pairing with this mic. The video is a spoof video. Loving the GH5S so far btw. Comments welcomed. I’m reasonably clueless with sound for video, but I’m slowly learning and open to suggestions.

Unfortunately, nothing yet.

Really loved the sound. Perhaps one of cleanest I’ve heard. Low noise floor, well balanced. Small enough to carry easily. To my ears makes the Sennheiser MKH 416 sound thin. Also does not distort when the subject moves a little off the sweet spot. Great noise rejection also.

So as part of my plan to build a new indy filmmaking kit I recently picked up the Schoeps MiniCMIT. There are really not many review of this model. I thought it might pull dual duty use for both on camera and boom work. Are any of you using this mic? If so what are your thoughts? Also thinking about adding the Sound Devices 633 to round things out, but first I wanted to hear what the DMW-XLR1 pres sound like with this mic.