zetty

Anyone got Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM? I just bought one second hand and the focus ring has an awful uneven plastic friction feel, notably worse than a couple of other similar lenses I got, such as 85mm F1.8 USM (best out of the three) and 28mm F1.8 USM (quite bad but still better). And while we're it, any good third party lens hoods for Canon lenses?

Can anybody advise please if Canon's 70-200mm F4 (first version, no IS) has hard stops with focusing?

Now, wait a little. Is that how S1 is recording audio?!

Interesting.. I wonder if there is any basis in need of phantom power for a decent shotgun? Ambient TinyMike is pretty damn good without it, still sounding notably better when recorded with external recorder than in-camera (GH4/5). It annoys me when people say "XLR" as if that was a hallmark of good sound. It's just a connector, the sound quality is mic and ADC dependent. Certainly, there's no need for balanced inputs for such short cable runs as having the mic on camera, and even with all this, we should have long since switched to mini XLR.

I am planning to get SLR Magic VND but I am a bit worried about two rings on such a thin body, doesn't polarization get turned accidentally when you just want to adjust the ND? I have been using Hoya NDs for years and managed just fine, even though sometimes have had to compensate with a bit of aperture or shutter speed adjustment. However, with a longer run and gun project coming up with potentially frequent moving between indoor and outdoor locations, thought I should get a VND as an option. Would the IR pollution be an issue for GH5?

Wouldn't it work even better to have the collapsible hood at the end of the variable ND? That way you only need a single hood and ND is always visible/accessible..

Yeah, I have noticed that too, whitebalancing on grey card often gives a clearly inaccurate result. I found out the translucent lens cap is working better for this but most often I'll just dial it in. Haven't played around with the new AWBc yet, which is supposedly suppressing the prevalent reddish tones under certain conditions.

Something for @mercer EDIT: apparently has its own topic here: http://eoshd.com/comments/topic/24803-improving-gh5-colour-comparison-with-5d3-raw/

I tend to think it will up the quality a notch where it matters but it's all just guessing, cause the compression is such a complicated thing and there are so many variables in play.. Let's hope Panny's engineers know what they're doing. Meanwhile, there's also a petition making rounds: https://www.change.org/p/panasonic-introduce-4k-4-2-2-ipb-400mbps-and-fhd-4-2-2-ipb-200mbps-modes-for-panasonic-gh5

I don't use auto but can confirm you can set the ISO range even while recording -- when you press the ISO button, one of the dials sets the upper ISO limit while the other the ISO itself, including switch to AUTO if so desired. I wish I could assign the dial by the LCD for the ISO adjustment, much like how it works on 5D, without need to press any button first at all. Right now, the dial does nothing in video mode and isn't assignable either.

So it's not getting this information electronically from the lens even with an active adapter? I thought it would have considering it provides full EXIF data..

Well, it's the same when adjusting ISO manually. Pretty annoying indeed, as you have to go in and out of the menu to check for zebras.

I don't think Panasonic anticipated all this fuss about AF, so the settings and the manual aren't that well thought out. Frankly, neither did I. Can't believe the % of attention this camera is getting that's going into this. Personally, I don't give a rat's ass about AF even if it could be a nice extra. I rarely use gimbal and can live with deep DOF or keeping appropriate distance and just tapping on my phone attached to my arm when I need to refocus. Now, with IBIS (which is truly amazing) I'll use gimbal even less as I don't mind slight handheld look most of the time. FWIW, I think the Panasonic's excuse for not implementing PD focus because it degrades IQ is bullshit though. I reckon it was a commercial decision they had to make as clearly there is a limit of R&D that can go into a camera at this price.

Of course it does. What I am saying is that the metering isn't as precise or consistent but then just slightly so. I have had shit batteries like DSTE where the metering goes from 2/3rds to flashing red like in 10 minutes. I have another Patona double charger for GX85 and use a single power adapter from Ravpower to feed both of these as well as AA/18350 battery charger (it has three outputs, each rated at 2.4A). Pretty handy and compact setup.

I bought Patona charger that takes 2 batteries at the same time. It's USB powered and requires 2.1A input minimum, which I can provide with a dedicated adapter (mine is 2.4A and it seems to charge quickly enough, although I haven't compared the time with Panasonic's original charger directly). Also, I have found out Patona and in particular Dot.Foto batteries to be of better quality than the rest of generic ones -- in fact, they last almost the same time as the original, just somewhat less precise with determining of how much juice there's left. I think both of these brands are available in Europe only.

In my post I said: your first comment indeed appeared to imply "yes, it's filmic but it's because the lighting, depth of field etc" I don't see how one can misinterpret that as a direct quote -- even if I did use the quotation marks incorrectly, I also clearly stated "appeared to imply", denoting the following as my take on your words. I used quotation marks to separate the phrase from the rest of the sentence and somewhat in this sense: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes BTW, English is my third language and it would appear perfectly normal in my native one to use quotes to summarize, so apologies if I made a mistake here.

I got Beyerdynamic DT 880 Premium headphones and Focal CMS 50 monitors, two good bangs for the buck. Coupled with a decent audio interface/headphone preamp, both are adequate for editing mixdowns and even some music production, however with the monitors the room acoustics matter too. The DT 880's have a few "sub-models" but all are decent -- a bit bright but so detailed that if you make your transitions smooth, you can be sure they won't be noted anywhere else. The CMS 50 monitors I use for both mixing and listening as I absolutely love Focal sound, previously owning a pair of Solo 6 Be (which for the editing purposes are a bit of an overkill). Regardless, budget permitting, I always give my audio to a dedicated sound engineer for the final mixdown/mastering.

Hanriverprod, I disagree about misquoting you, can you quote me doing that? All I was talking about is what your post seemed to imply, on both occasions, second time quoting word by word. That is my interpretation of your words, not a misquote. As about the rest, in broad strokes I do live the life I want but I am constantly fighting against being pushed into compromises I find distasteful. I accept that's how it is but why shouldn't I express my discontent? I don't expect it to change significantly, nor I'm saying my hands are tied to do things differently, just speaking out about something I feel strongly about. You are right about the blurred line between form and content, perhaps I did put it the wrong way. I also agree about building on tradition but come on, the "tradition" we are building on here has such a narrow scope, it's suffocating. There are the basics and there are gimmicks -- and right now I feel like we're riding on gimmicks. In other words, there is a very strong trend to focus on a certain set of values, which appear formulaic and superficial to me -- and in order to achieve these, filmmakers are happy to sacrifice everything else that would make a unique, rich story. In short, it's that the predefined form (aesthetic) largely dictates the content. And in many ways supply is also affecting the demand, making it more difficult to break the mould with something more unusual.

Here is what you said and the "but" clearly implies it looks good because of everything but the camera. If several people have seen it that way, maybe it's worth considering it's not a misquote but rather a misexpression from your side.

Well, your first comment indeed appeared to imply "yes, it's filmic but it's because the lighting, depth of field etc", so I think that was a fair target and frankly, I agree with a lot of what Andy says. However, I think you also have a point: even if you cannot express exactly what's wrong with the image, you don't have to, it's your perception why shouldn't you trust it. I respect that. Myself, I am long since annoyed with this hype about "filmic/cinematic" image, which is a term that should never had been defined but of course now it is. It seems like lots of people have no individual vision of how they want their films to look, instead striving to emulate this "filmic" standard as the end of it all. It's also being universally implemented everywhere, including documentary, event coverage etc.. And there's a lot of snobbish attitude towards those, who care about different qualities and have different approaches, being deemed as "non-professional". You are almost forced to adapt the style to be competitive. BTW, exactly the same thing goes for storytelling techniques and sound design == copy copy copy; copy is good; copy is professional; copy is cinematic. Form over content, level everything by overdramatizing and exaggerating at the cost of realism, logic, depth, subtlety and nuance.

Jeez, should I now list the number of countries I lived in and my experiences of life to prove a point? :D At the same time you are trying to imply that using a different OS is "moving out of your comfort zone".. Go figure. Your comfort zone must be pretty tight. Narrow-mindedness doesn't stem from the fact that you have had broad experiences, it's from your notion that you universally know what's better for everyone, failing to acknowledge the different needs and approaches of other people. Clearly you didn't learn anything from your exploration of all religions..

Why should I, if I am loving the experience and have absolutely no frustration with it? You are so blinded by your own experience, the view your are preaching is extremely narrow minded. If that's what MacOS does to people then no thanks, for that reason alone :D There is no one-size-fits-all solution when it comes to something as sophisticated as OS.

Those are some loud words. I generally find MacOS and many of its structural implementations retarded and counterintuitive. Especially when it comes to system configuration and file management (which are some of the primary OS functions) -- I find Windows so much more streamlined, efficient and nuanced. And coming from Amiga before this, I hated Microsoft and Windows and wanted to like Apple/Mac (mid-nineties, around System 7/Windows 95 time). Both were lousy at the time but I found Windows to be more flexible and everything changed with the release of XP, from then on I have never had a reason to look back. The whole stability thing is a myth -- in the older times, both systems were crashing like crazy (and MacOS even didn't have task manager long since Windows already had it), and nowadays, from Windows 7 on, it's been perfectly stable. My uptime is weeks at a time and the only thing that ever crashes is Firefox when they're on a lousy build. While I have no reason to not believe people when they say they have had more problems with PC and coming to Mac has been liberating, there is no such thing in my experience. Neither I have had virus for at least a decade -- and I don't even have an antivirus program installed other than the built in Windows Defender. So I tend to think it's those users who are the problem rather than the perceived OS inferiority. Of course, I am saying all this from a perspective of Windows user (although I am still forced to use MacOS now and then for work -- and asked to troubleshoot theirs by friends haha) and I respect everyone's choice of whatever works best for them. But the high-horse attitude of people like Wolf33d can really trip me off BTW, writing this on a 2012 Sony Vaio machine which has seen upgrade (not a clean install) from Windows 7 to Windows 8 to Windows 8.1 to Windows 10 with no stability issues whatsoever and all drivers and software functioning perfectly. I'd love to have a productivity battle including different tasks between myself and an expert MacOS user -- confident I'd win cause the Mac users only think it's so efficient and effective cause they don't know any better..

Anyone knows what's the best way to get in touch with Panasonic regarding this issue?

From what I understand Dual IS 2 is the next iteration of IBIS+OIS software, currently only compatible with these few new lenses. OIS lenses with pre-GH5 firmwares only support Dual IS 1 mode (like one in GX85). Haven't had time to test any of this properly but all of my OIS equipped lenses only work in Dual IS 1 mode.