Mattias Burling

That looks very tasty. Perfect size for so many cameras that you don't want top heavy.

Panasonic does say it compensates for movement without an OIS lens but they never say straight out "5-Axis without OIS". So it does some stabilization using the in body 5-axis, but they are not bragging about it, some claim its better than Sony (not very hard to be). But if its as good with vintage glass as Olympus is unknown or at least no one that has held the camera says so and I would love to get some hard tests on it. I have no idea, but my guess based on current communication is that the in body stabilization without an OIS will not be as good as Olympus. This is what Panasonic says, "The LUMIX GX80/GX85 incorporates the new 5-axis Dual I.S.(Image Stabilizer) for more effective suppression of blur. Combining an O.I.S.(Optical Image Stabilizer, 2-axis) and a B.I.S.(Body Image Stabilizer, 5-axis), the 5-axis Dual I.S. compensates for a larger movement which was conventionally uncontrollable, making it possible to use 4-step slower shutter speed*1. By making the most of both O.I.S and B.I.S., it is highly beneficial not only in wide angle but also in telephoto and in the adverse situations such as at nighttime or in one-hand shooting. The 5-axis Dual I.S. works in both photo and motion picture recording including 4K video. Panasonic LUMIX G DSLM (Digital Single Lens Mirrorless) Cameras offer a wide variety of digital interchangeable lenses and most of them are going to comply with this 5-axis dual I.S. in LUMIX GX80/GX85** and the B.I.S. compensates for the camera movement even when a lens without O.I.S. is used."

Ok, doesnt sound good if no one has a clear source. Hope it does have it but it doesnt look good as of now.

If true it sounds great. My store advertises 5 axis with IS lenses and 3 with non IS lenses. Hope they are wrong. BTW, I cant find where in the article you linked where they confirm 5-axis without an IS lens. Could you point it out?

Not getting 5 axis with non IS Panasonic lenses pretty much breaks the deal for me. Hopefully Olympus keeps improving on the video so we can get a good video camera with 5-axis for vintage glass.

Your EVF is a screen afterwards, thats what an EVF does, its just a screen showing the video you are about to record. Its not an eye and its not meant to match what your eye sees. Its made to show what the camera sees.

But you said it didn't, you said, "During noon I go outdoor, I look trough the EVF and set my wb to 5900K and some quadrant settings so that the colors in the EVF and outside match. During the night, indoors, I take my camera again, still set to 5900K but the picture in the EVF doesn't match what I'm seeing anymore. To get the colors matching again I have to set the temperature to something around 3500K." When you set you're WB to the "correct" value of 3500K to match your lights it looks the same in the EVF and real life. When you kept the "wrong" WB of 5900K matching daylight it looked weird in the EVF. It sounds just as it should imo.

"During noon I go outdoor, I look trough the EVF and set my wb to 5900K and some quadrant settings so that the colors in the EVF and outside match. During the night, indoors, I take my camera again, still set to 5900K but the picture in the EVF doesn't match what I'm seeing anymore. To get the colors matching again I have to set the temperature to something around 3500K." Do you have lights on indoors when you shoot at night. Im going to guess "yes". And Im also gonna guess your lights at home are not 5900K

Old thread but its the first time Im using them. And I think it illustrates why I find these type of Drag-n-Drop LUTs useful from time to time. This was a pure random, just out of boredom type of point&shoot video. A memory for myself of the time I worked in Poland for a week. Didnt care about focus, exposure or stability. Nor do I want to spend any time on grading. Thats when a quick LUT-slap and some over the top grain is perfect to give it a little feel. No tweaking no curves, no Lift/Gamma/Gain, just dropped it on and left it at that. BTW, as always grain is preserved better on Vimeo.

Sounds about right.

My guess. Probably because its a niche camera in a niche segment. Ive had almost all the BMD cameras but have no intentions to buy it. Its probably not selling nearly as much as the pocket and most people buying it doesnt use it as an A-cam. Just my guess.

I wouldn't call getting a color that doesnt look like puke to be "anal". "Fix it post" is for amateurs. A camera that makes you struggle at a simple task as WB is a broken camera. If my 10 years of working, 3 years at university plus all the time as a hobby shooter isnt enough to get concistent WB. When all other cameras does it easily, blackmagic, canon, samsung, panasonic, nikon, bolex, jvc and old Sonys like the fs100. If all those do it but not the a7sii.... Sorry its not user error. No its not just me. No I havent done to little research. And I can get nice colors in S-log, nice skin as well. But the WB still sucks. The cameras is good at alot of things. But its color and WB is sh.t. IMO

Looks like I found a button On topic: I dont think Blackmagic needs to worry about Kine cameras just yet. Shooters are still very brand conservative. Blackmagic has just recently been acceptaded as an option. Still most would choose something else if they can on bigger productions. And the full frame DSLRs still have a strong grip on the smaller circut together with c100/fs700 type of cameras. Not long ago I did a freelance thing for company that shoots blackmagic on a regular basis. They also use GH4 and D810. I asked what they wanted, Blackmagic or D750. They choose the later. Full Frame was the reason. So I do think BMD will show a new camera. But not because of the KineX (EDIT: just as I wrote this I got a text that said a news paper network wants to buy a doc me and a friend shot on BM. So its DSLR 1 - 1 BMD so far this year on the Moonlight side of work.)

And to be a bit racist

http://gadgetflux.net/canon-xc10-firmware-update-v1010/

Never seen it, but if its fixed no prob.

Please feel free to point out the part in my post where I was unclear about messing with you. You said for Youtube its fine but "High End" needed NR. I then said that I didnt use NR for TV either. Meaning, no its not only on youtube that NR isnt used. You then quickly pointed out that it wasnt High End. It just sounded funny to me thats all. We all know that there are many shows, commercials, events and movies on TV that are way way more "High End" than many Hollywood films. And we all know that there is also simple things like news. So that you felth the need to point that out was funny And the whole NR for "High End" still sounds weird to me. Can you give a few examples of what is "High End". I took GT as an example. No I havent worked there. Dont even watch it, think it sucks. But I have worked on productions with more money involved and way way more viewers. But it wasnt high end and we didnt use Noise Reduction Why you feel the need to tell me about lights being taken out is also wierd. Thats photography 1:1. I think, you wrote a post that made you sound a bit elitist and instead of writing "that came out wrong" you kept going. But thats just my theory

I stopped at a store yesterday to play around with the compact cameras. I have a rx100iv, but Im getting rid of it again. So I was more interested in the competition. We have the Canon GX1 at work for field documentation. Mainly because its rugged with an almost APS-C sized sensor. The Mark ii doesnt have the range finder so I never payed much atention to it. But yesterday I played with it and I was very impressed. The RF is a trade worth doing for the new lens, which felth very complete, and the two rings. The image is though to judge on the lcd but it looked nice. And the peaking was awesome. Tilting screen is always handy. Last thing I checked before hitting the impuls buy button was if its 24p only like the Mark1. Nope, worse, 30p. So its now filed with some of the Olympus and Nikon cameras under "Could have been great but they decided to give it the 100% bullet proof dealbreaker for non US/Canada/Japan shooters." What a shame.

I was packing up the loaner thats shipping back to JVC when I thought I would do one last thing. Some experimenting with the Cine Gamma. The J-Log is really great. It has a nice roll of and I love using it specially on bright days with a high dynamic range. But in dim light, specially low contrast, it doesn’t withstand grading very well. The noise can turn very ugly and FPN if not careful. So far my fix for it has been to expose down. If its dark, let it be dark. This isn’t a night for day camera. Today I tested something else. Anybody that uses Sony and S-Log knows that in many low contrast situations its better to switch to "Cine Gamma”. Specially to preserve skin tones. And it seems JVC is no different. I shot some clips of myself in a mirror. There is no direct light hitting me, its pretty dim. If you look at my sweater, on the right arm, you can see how the J-Log has a nicer roll of, while the Cine Gamma has a harsher clip. But you can probably also see how much nicer the skin gets, specially on the shadow side. There where less banding on the wall as well. And the J-Log is just about to fall apart after the grade and a WB correction. The Cine Gamma had correct WB in camera but still feels like there is some more leverage there. J-Log Ungraded J-Log Graded Cine Gamma Ungraded Cine Gamma Light grade Cine Gamma Graded to my liking So a quick unscientific conclusion is, J-Log in bright and HDR light. Cine Gamma when uncertain. Now I can’t wait until my own LS300 gets here, because I need to give the Gamma settings and Picture Profiles a thorough run through. There is for example a WDR setting that I want to fool around with. Cine Gamma WDR Ungraded Cine Gamma WDR Light Grade

They have had similar issues with delivery every year, an have introduced new cameras every year. So my money is on new announcements.

Nor did I claim you did. But its good to know that something as simple as TV never can be concidered "high end". I guess something like Game of Thrones = Cat Video in the league you play in But your right, they probably dont use noise reduction either. I guess Neat Video is more something for Spielberg (better ad another just in case, people have been grougy lately and seem to misinterpret criticism as anger.)

I made some luts for the way that I expose s-log that makes skin look perfect with just a drag n drop. I made a couple different once with a kodak and fuji look. But if the WB is of by just a hair, it turns to garbage.

I still dont use it Ive never used it on TV either accept for one time. This is my ecperience as well. Thats why I started the thread. Never knew people used it on everything. For me its an emergency tool, like stabilization, never use that either unless I absolutely have to. Guess Im becoming old school

4K is not needed just yet. The ursa mini 4.6k is great in lowlight. All the cameras listed have flaws. So imo, get the one that suites your style of shooting the most. Do you need speed, audio, handheld? Those are the questions I would ask myself.

Just dont push it like the c100. The noise is not as nice as Canons. Otherwise they probably complement eachother well.