mercer

I had the BMMCC and hated rigging it up... so I don't think I could handle rigging the BMCC. I also briefly had a Pocket a few months back, but I had a lemon and the thing overheated so much I could barely hold it. So I returned it. A few weeks back I looked at some of the footage and it looked better than anything I have ever shot. I also used it without any monitor with the Panny 12-35mm with OIS... I basically treated it like a point and shoot. This time I picked up a Nikon-BMPCC Speedbooster.

You would pick the 50mm, but the speedbooster will change the "true" focal length, so you change the focal length to the Metabones adapted focal length... from my understanding.

Sorry, I mean lens' focal length, but then with a speedbooster, the focal length changes.

True focal length, but I think it's different with a speedbooster.

Which lenses did you go with?

I have the D5500 and I've been testing almost every brand of camera since I bought it because I thought... these other cams have such better specs, they must have better 1080p... but other than the BMPCC, I haven't found a 1080p image I like better than the humble 24mbps from my D5500. You are not kidding... constant compromises.

I I had the XC10 and recently sold it... great camera with great features and awesome color. The C-Log is really nice with the 4:22. My major issue with it was the tremendous price drop they were taking on the used market. I understand taking a hit and that cameras depreciate but for it to lose 35-40% of its value in a couple months is a little too much for me, especially since I am mostly a hobbyist. I also never owned such an expensive camera, so I sometimes didn't want to take it certain places out of fear it would get damaged or stolen. With that being said, if I had them side by side and could only keep one... I would probably keep the FZ2500 for the reasons stated above. But YMMV. No Auto ISO or exposure compensation if manual mode. I did another short test today with Shutter Priority and AF and also some shots with all manual. With Shutter Priority, I had the ND Filter set to Auto but it showed no nd on the screen... I have to read the manual about that. But again the Touch AF worked pretty damn good in normal light... it was actually spot on. The files seem to handle some decent amount of color work... if only I were better at color work... I will be heading out again on Friday, if there is anything specific you would like to see, let me know, and I should be able to test a few things... I will be testing the 4K which I haven't really messed with yet.

Since you're used to the GH2 with its limited functions (peaking, etc) and want to move to aps-c or full frame, then I would say in that price range, either the Nikon D500 for aps-c or the D750 for full frame. With the D500 you are getting excellent 1080p with the flat profile, plus a cropped 4K if you ever need it. Also the 1080p has an electronic 3-axis stabilization that is very interesting and gets decent reviews. The D750 is just an all around excellent full frame camera. There has been some great work shot with it and a lot of people will argue it may be the best full frame stills camera for... I don't know I don't really shoot stills but that's what I've read.

Well, it was pretty dark and Panasonic hasn't perfected their touch af yet... but it actually handled it better than I thought it would. The stabilization is the hybrid 5-axis so it relies on the lens' OIS mixed with e-stabilizer... of course their manual on stabilization really needs to be rewritten because there is also the option of shooting with "Level Shot" instead of e-stabilizer and the 5-axis symbol shows up with either of those options. It is a clunky camera though, but all in all I am pretty pleased with it. I am heading out again tomorrow to test the Shutter Priority mode with auto nd in better light... so far I am pleasantly surprised with it... but I've never shot anything other than manual... so... To add... Last spring I briefly owned the FZ300, and although it was a blast to shoot with, the iq was lacking shooting 4K with that small of a sensor. Since I've been looking for a "compact" camera ever since, I was really lured in by the specs of the FZ2500... and so far I am glad I took the plunge. When shooting I usually spend so much time trying to keep my focus on the tech, that the creative element of composition and utilizing the light properly sometimes suffers. With the FZ2500, even when shooting hybrid manual, the camera just gets out of your way. Loads of fun. Obviously, these are just tests, so they are a bunch of nothing, but I figured it may be useful to someone. Also, I can only imagine the footage you guys could get with the camera.

I had a few minutes this evening to run a handheld test of the FZ2500 in Shutter Priority mode, with +1 stop exposure compensation, auto ND filter, with Single Point Touch AF. This was shot in true 24p with the All-I 200mbps 1080p...

All advertising is deceptive, it's the nature of the business. Remember when Canon used ML to film one of their 5D ads? And I don't think that cinema lens made that much of a difference in this particular ad.

I understand why a lot of people may be upset about websites and sponsored content... I don't really care because it is listed as such. The next argument seems to be about a filmmaker's ethics for using the 80D and overly selling the camera. Maybe he just really likes it? And the truth of the matter is this... if you can't make a good movie with the 80D, then you really can't make a good movie. People have made features with iPhones. With that being said, obviously this short promo movie is geared towards young filmmakers and the parents who will buy them their first camera. It is geared towards vloggers who need an acceptable image with good in camera features. I mean, Casey Neistat still, proudly, uses a 70D. But... if Canon really wanted to show the world what can be done with a Canon camera, they should have hired Kendy Ty. In fact, if Canon gave Kendy Ty an 80D and a 35mm f2 lens, I bet this thread would have evolved differently.

I've been testing a few cameras over the past month, with my last test being with the FZ2500... which I am definitely keeping... I love the 200mbps 1080p... even though most people don't recommend shooting with it. I never owned a GH4, but it seems like a mini GH4. Overall, I think the XC10 image was thicker with that 4:22 codec, but for the price I paid for the FZ2500, I like it better. In about a month I am going to get a BMPCC. Anyway, I look forward to seeing what you do with the G85... if the IBIS is anything like the GX85, you should be a happy guy.

I sold mine last week... the resale value was just dropping way too fast. What camera are you moving to?

No, thank you!

The camera was just released this week so I doubt it is in a 60i wrapper. It's basically a one inch sensor GH4 with a fixed zoom lens.

Okay, thanks. By 60hz, I am referring to the NTSC frequency that the video is being recorded at. With the FZ2500, you must set your frequency to 24.00 hertz to record true 24p. You can only record Cinema 4K at true 24p. If you want 23.976, you set it to 60hz or 59.95 hertz to be exact. Thanks again for your help.

Sorry, thought you were referring to a benefit of shooting at 23.976 vs. 24p... meaning it is easier to switch between frame rates 23.976 and 60p. So, you think even if shooting 24p, it should be converted to 23.976? If that's the case, then the only real benefit of shooting in true 24p would be the ability to shoot Cinema 4K? But you also have to shoot in 24.00 hz as well which can cause strobing... so I might as well just shoot in 23.976 at 60hz.

Thanks Cary, do you mean VFR and slow/quick function? Or do you mean by having it at 60hz it is easier to go in and out of 23.976 and 60p?

Recently picked up the FZ2500 and so far I like it. It seems like it is a mini GH4... except not so mini. As I am going through the settings and testing a few things I became curious if there are any feature, focus, or exposure differences with shooting in 24p as opposed to 23.976? I know you can only shoot DCI in 24p and I know for broadcast reasons it is easier to shoot in 23.976, but as far as other camera features, auto focus benefits, or exposure latitude... does it make a difference? I figured a long search of the vast topics on the GH4 could yield the answers but I figured I'd ask first to see if someone has a quick answer... thanks.

I believe Jase shoots his videos in 1080p... or at least his earlier GX80 stuff was.

Thanks Mike! I am pretty pleased with this camera. - This video was shot with manual focus and it works great. I did test continuous af today and it is pretty good. I am not really an af guy, but I was pleasantly surprised. It went soft a couple times but it didn't hunt. It would go soft when the actor did a sudden, swift movement with his head. But I am so new to AF that I may not have had the settings correct. - I haven't shot much with 4K. It obviously isn't as steady as the 1080p with the hybrid IBIS, but I can't say I noticed that it was excessively jittery. It reminded me of the OIS with 12-35mm. I will post the AF examples and the 4K clips within the next few days... probably after Christmas... so you can be the judge on the focus.

Ok, thanks. Derr... makes sense... brain fart moment. Lol.

Speaking of motion cadence and shutter speed/angle, I have a quick question... I recently picked up the FZ2500 and I have been testing the VFR options. When you use the VFR with the GH4, if you are using a shutter angle of 180 degrees for 24p, what do you use if you have the VFR set to 72fps, 96fps, 120fps? It seems like it's encoded in a 24p wrapper, so do you stick with 180 degree shutter?

Idk, I will probably get slammed for saying this, but I totally get the phrase "cinematic motion cadence" and "filmic." The problem is that those terms are rarely quantifiable, so some people hate the phrases. But when you look at footage from BM cameras or Mark iii with ML, etc... there is a certain rhythm to the movement or weight to the image that feels more cinematic and less video.