John Matthews

The GX85 continues to be a great. I had it for over 2 years and I took videos and photos that I'll cherish forever. I only sold it because I mistakenly thought something Sony and FF would do better and they were from a technical point of view, but it was much bulkier and not as fun to shoot with. I've taken a tonne of shots with the 14mm f/2.5 too- loved that combo for over a year and a half. In 2019, when I decided I'd never leave M43 again, I've been looking for that lens. Sometimes, you can find it for about 100 Euros. Can't wait to see the results you get with the combo!

I mistakenly wrote "color creator" mode when I should have written "color profile" mode. Saturation can essentially be individually adjusted for 12 colors of the rainbow. This could allow for film simulations or creating looks that emphasize certain colors (and not others). I'm not aware of any other camera that can do that in-camera. Maybe I'm mistaken?

I got the Olympus E-P7 a little over a month ago (a fantastic bundle with the venerable 75mm f/1.8). The camera is a little bit of a mixed bag, not have any PDAF. However, it does have some things going for it: only 330g (that's the main feature) with two dials, otherwise roughly the same as the E-M10 iv minus the viewfinder. Decent for one-handed operation. 4k in all modes (world camera), 8-bit 420 (I think, but don't really care), something the PEN-F lacked PEN-F style color creator mode, meaning one can control the saturation of 12 different colors for interesting out-of-camera results. In fact, due to the PEN-F coming out in 2016?, there are many settings out there to mimic film stuff or just creating interesting looks. Downside of the color creator mode is that you need to work from P mode. Yes, you can use the AEL button to lock things down. Using a manual lens, it's essentially manual mode. Does anyone have any questions about it or interesting in seeing some footage with various color-creator settings?

This looks like exciting stuff. I got the latest iMac and I have to say that for a 4k fcpx WITHOUT transcoding anything (and mine only has 8gb of RAM), it works great. Screen is great too. Apple's going to clean up with these as they hit the market with chip shortages that Apple seems to control more than the competition, bitcoin graphic card madness, and lack of intelligence from Intel (or at least a competing product with the same ballpark of performance per watt ratio). It's a perfect storm.

The way I look at this is: If you have enough detail and no banding in 1080p, 8-bit 1080p is just fine (for me). If you see banding (i.e. in the sky), shoot 4k 8 bit. If something is still "off" (with colours), try 4k 10 bit and I doubt you'll see anymore problems. I've never been at step 3 for my purposes, nor do I have any cameras that shoot 4k 10 bit.

A lot of good points... especially about the virtues of a locked-down shot. In handheld no-ibis shooting, that's the best option if not shooting really wide. I currently have many M43 lenses, but the best fits for this body right now are my SLR Magic 8mm f/4, Olympus 17 f/1.8, Panasonic 20 f/1.7, and a Olympus 45 f/1.8. I've also for the kit lens Panasonic 14-42 PZ version that seems super-sharp at the wide end and it has IS. I think I can use the SLR Magic and the Panasonic 14-42 PZ for hand-held stuff and the rest locked down. The Panasonic 20mm works great for a low-profile/low-light setup but lacks IS. I'm really debating on getting the 14 f/2.5 (which I had 2 years ago) because it's so stealthy on this body. At 259g on a M43 sensor, it's quite amazing. I also have some Pentax lenses: 50mm f/1.7, 50mm f/2.0, and a 135 f/3.5, all of which are great. Finally, I just got some Lomography Toy lenses which will fun to try out... why not? I've never really cared about Slow-mo... it rarely helps me to tell the story better. Again, a really interesting documentary. I'll be interested in seeing some of your newer stuff.

@fuzzynormal I really appreciated watching this documentary. Just got a GM1 the other day for super cheap (thank goodness the deals are coming back). After all these years and experience, what would you recommend in terms of lenses for this small camera? (Double post because I think you might not see it unless I tag you.)

I really appreciated watching this documentary. Just got a GM1 the other day for super cheap (thank goodness the deals are coming back). After all these years and experience, what would you recommend in terms of lenses for this small camera?

I got an M1 iMac. I'm pretty happy with it. I got an external NVME and it's been running great- quiet, super-efficient, nice screen, and very sleek. A good value product without breaking the bank on video cards.

I have to say I like your approach. The last 10% is exponentially harder and harder to get, bit it would seem that computers and software are changing this with faster, more efficient computers with more and more fast storage. I'd compare it to jpeg vs raw. Nowadays, raw files can go into your workflow rather seamlessly and the benefits of jpeg are withering away. I'm still good with jpeg, but I've gone to raw because I don't see much downside to it anymore other than taking up a little more of my time in editing. In this same way, I think raw workflows will become the norm. Personally, I'm fine with 8 bit, but if I don't "feel" the difference anymore, why not? We're still a few years off from this though.

Dito. I found a GH2 a few months back for dirt cheap and ran across this comparison: I find it absolutely amazing that the hacked GH2 still holds up in some areas against the GX80, which is a great value proposition in itself. I'd go as far as saying the hacked GH2 still holds up in many ways to current offering by Panasonic (G100). This not a knock on Panasonic but rather congratulating the people who've hacked the GH2. Now, actually prefer working with a GH2 to working with a GX80.

My PL9 never seems to get to 4gb with my biggest original file being 3.6gb. Yes, in 1080p, it still makes a difference. Thank you for the correction. Same. For longer stuff, I plan on using my hacked GH2. It just has something special about the footage out of camera.

I had followed that thread before, but I've never really had the need to go with that firmware for my e-m1 ii. Also, I'm scared to do it as I love that camera too much. I might look into it again though. For the PL9, it's still limited to 13 parts of video, which just means a little more than the 29 minute cap that it currently has. There's a way to bypass those preamps in the settings. And here's a good explanation (9 minutes in): Let me know if it helps and if you still find the pre-amps loud (of course, this works only with an external recorder like the Olympus LS-P4, but it is a workaround). I have the LS-P4 and it works fairly well for me. This guy has a lot of interesting stuff too on his channel.

I used one of my either a iBook G4 or one of my two Intel MacBooks, all of which have Firewire ports. The supplied cable was a firewire to MiniDV connected straight into the camera.

My initial research suggests that miniDV captured through Firewire 400 with iMovie was as good as it gets. The resulting files are a ".dv" files which are simply a stream of digital video. Since it's all digital and nothing was edited in a destructive format, I think that might be the best I can do. If anyone knows differently, please tell me.

I looked again at the footage last night. It seems that I can change aspect ratios and do some blur gradients to hide quite a lot. It will need to be done on a shot-by-shot basis rather than just a one-size-fits all approach. I'll confirm this after some research today. I remember capturing it though. I used iMovie with firewire. That generation of miniDV was interlaced (captured on a Canon ZR930). I still have the option of recapturing the video in that I still have many old Macs and my ZR930... everything still works fine. Again, more research is needed.

All of my stuff was captured via firewire 400. I believe that was the highest quality I could go for. In QuickTime it says the resolution is 720 × 480 (640 × 480), fps is 29.97 (interlaced), at roughly 3.6mbps. I've got moiré and aliasing all over the place. Colors are wash-out. I'm not really into the AI thing... it always looks weird and unnatural to my brain. Is it empirically better? Probably, but my brain just doesn't associate emotions with it yet- only "wow, that's cool". Yes. This is going to take time, for sure. Most of the footage is stupid stuff like me shaking a friend's had or other banalities. Of my 43 minutes, I might use 4 if I'm lucky. I need to make a story of it first. Putting subtle grades will probably be my best guess too. It could take me a couple of weeks to get more familiar with it. Yes. I'm aware of the contrast trick. I might also go black and white... not sure, but since it was over ten years ago, it might make sense. I'm clearly going to try more of this. It might make it etherial but still look like something I lived. I watched and liked your edit. It almost looked like you shot it that way, making more "believable". I tried that, but I was getting some horrible flickering action. It might be a technical thing, but I'll into more. I think the flickering was due to the footage being interlaced. I'll look into this too. Maybe it's better than the in-your-face AI that I've seen before. Thanks.

Here's the deal: I have 43 minutes of consumer-standard miniDV footage of my wedding. My wife's asking for a nice video, similar to the ones I've offered to others in the family but with much better cameras. Does anyone know of some good examples of decent grades for this? Or, even some examples of interesting looks from low-quality stuff.

I'd believe it. I have the PL9 and an E-M1 ii. Both are great. In terms of bang-for-your-buck, I'm not sure which one is better. The PDAF in the E-M1 ii trumps even the GH5 ii if you're into auto AF. The PL9 is slightly smaller than the E-M10 iii, but lacks 5 axis stab (only 3) and a EVF. The E-M10 iii is getting difficult to find under 300 Euros, but he PL9 is around 200, probably because not many take it seriously. On another note, I got my GH2 for under 100 Euros... when hacked, it looks great at Base ISO... just no 4k, but it gets nice colors and enough detail in camera.

In which case, a Canon R5 would be the better choice.

I'm all for opinions from all different likes, as long as they're genuine; otherwise, it's just propaganda. Sadly, Youtube is seemingly full of that and it's becoming increasingly difficult to discern honest opinions from promotional content. Would you disagree?

All the people you mention seem to be after one thing: our time, which on YouTube means money. Here's my experience: I see a clickbait thumbnail. I click it. I sit through 5 seconds of Adobe slowware, thinking "not that sh*t again" I start watching the video (now they're getting paid by my view), admittedly some nice footage sometimes I watch some BS ad right in the middle of what they're trying to get to in their BS thumbnail. They're selling some BS service that no one needs (yes, they get a cut if you're dumb enough to sign up). I watch to the end. Now, they ask me to like and make a comment (more of my time) about their self-promoting BS video to enrich themselves. "Don't forget to click subscribe and click on the alert bell" so can also get spammed by YouTube. Let's not forget the Amazon affiliate links they so generously added in the description section. Finally, they pinned the the first comment (oh, what a surprise, it's they saying some more BS). Is anyone else tired of this over-produced, time-sucking, self-promoting crap? Is this what google meant when they said "Don't be evil"? At this point, I'm asking myself if I have anything better to do with my limited time on this planet.

It's so easy to fall into the trap of believing what popular figures define as what is "meaningful or beautiful" in art.

I don't watch most of those Canadians anymore. On Youtube, you really need to look for authenticity because you won't find it in almost any of the bigger channels. I've been watching for a long time now to see it go from authentic (and often normal) to shameless self/product promotion. 99% are simply infomercials, nothing more. You can still learn and laugh from them, but that is still the core of what they do. "Still Life - Art and the photographic image" by Justin Jones. He's a British guy who's into all forms of art and has 2.72K followers. He will never be known most likely, but his content is great. He's the type of YouTube I like. Here's a video:

In Britain, why is it possible to make jokes about babies on spikes, yet animals are off-limits? I don't get it.