Davey

There is always going to be an improved camera further down the pike. If you ask me, Panasonic have come out with yet more wife material but that won't stop Sony unleashing a strumpet that will seduce many. It won't be as reliable as the GH5 but will definitely turn heads and get people salivating.

Brandon Li's latest Crane offering:

I really like that but forgot to look at the quality of the footage, so will have to watch it again with the sound down. I can see a precedent being set with this video - great stuff

Very dodgy in my eyes. Is there any cheap monitor out there that does accurate waveforms - don't currently care for any other functions, because if I did I would end up spending £1500 on something I will not use for years. Thanks

Looking on FB some bloke said he'd spent $200k on their gear. Lok had to borrow his M5, presumably because they didn't fully trust him not to drop it.

To be fair, that is the worst video in the world. I wouldn't invest any conclusions from it whatsoever.

Regarding the Cinemartin, check the comments section out here: http://nofilmschool.com/2017/01/cinemartin7-inch-hd-monitor-99-dollars

It certainly is for S-log if you shoot that. Cine for quick SOOTC with little to add in post, but this guy is making me want to try something different:

Using the a6500 EOSHD settings on my a7s but having seen Harv's video on YouTube I want to try Pro Color with S-log 2 on my A7sii. Been put off from ever trying S-log because it is supposed to be next to impossible to grade unless you are near expert level. Reckon it's time to make a fool of myself

Is that S-log2 and which camera?

Looks like the kind of thievery that is to order, and if so, those lenses will be out of the USA already and will not ever be sold online as first point of sale. No chance of security cameras identifying anybody, either - unless they are complete idiots doing it for a few bags of crack. Insurance will cover the company but will not cover them for the lenses that people buy as an alternative whilst they await new stock.

Love Roy Kinnear - the master of disdainful, cynical and exasperated expressions.

This, in the comments, comes across as equally disingenuous: Sebastian Wöber March 3, 2017 Hi Chris, Thank you for your appreciation of what we do. Being honest has big downsides in this industry and we work extremely hard to keep up what we’re doing. I’m very interested in what a camera “truly” does and I think people should know and that keeps us doing what we do even though the cost is usually high. So far we’re pulling through and comments like these truly keep us alive. If there’s anything to improve what we do we’re always listening as we feel part of a larger community that we serve.

I still have the Hague MMC and loved it so much (despite the cheap construction) that I chose another C-shape in getting the SmoothShot. I knew about the bottom weight screw problem so took the one off the Hague and was dancing around corners with the a7sii and 28mm f2 within two minutes. With IBIS switched on it is as smooth as silk.

No amount of shiny adverts will cause me to part with any money until such time the vast majority of users over a period of many months are delighted both with the product and with after sales care. The 4000 was incredibly tempting when Dave Dugdale first got his hands on it, as were the Beholders when Darren Miles reviewed the MS1 and DS1. The Crane seems to be the best of the bunch but there are a sizeable minority that are vocal about various issues. Having blown a lot of money on the DS1 - which is unusable - I have returned to using an old fashioned type stabiliser (cost £35) until such time the gimbal market is ruled by reliability and accountability.

The warp stabiliser destroyed every shot it was used in. Not sure if it was used incorrectly but definitely not a good advert for it. When I use optical flow in FCPX there are occasions when it just doesn't work, so I just ditch it. All he achieved in using warp stabiliser was to distract from the title of the video.

Cheers, just bookmarked his review.

Thanks for sharing this. That will save me a tonne of time when I finally get around to using lights for the first time (probably this summer when doing interviews). I've watched a few videos on the subject but it's far easier just to look at that one single page. Still pictures cannot waffle.

Trouble as in legal trouble, or trouble as in their reputation taking a nose dive? If it is the former then a precedent might be set (in court) that will make would be reviewers and testers think a thousand times before hitting the publish button.

Maybe because the masses who buy this camera will film everything - and I mean everything - at 4K60p for the first six months until the novelty wears off and the views die down. They will not care for bit rates or efficient codecs. Those who buy the GH5 as a production workhorse are in the tiniest of minorities and will likely only use its showcase feature very sparingly. Just as the YouTube viewing market was swamped with rats scurrying about at 4am in deserted cities when the a7s first came out, it will shortly be swamped with slow motion skateboard gimbal videos from the end of this month onwards. None of them will care for h.265, let alone Anna Morphic or whatever her name is. Panasonic need to make money and they do that via the masses and not the serious filmmakers, just as every company does that sells prosumer gear.

I nearly didn't buy the 55mm f1.8 by Sony because it wasn't £900 like the 90mm f2.8 and the 28mm f2 had to be rubbish at only £350. Everybody knows about the Sony lens premium but I went ahead and bought those two lenses with great suspicion that there must be something wrong with them - which there isn't. I shall do the same with the Sony 85mm f1.8 (£600), worrying that I should have got the Batis at £1000 or the f1.4 GM at £1600. Half price camera bodies and lenses - or half price anything for that matter - whispers to us there must be something crappy about it. The BMPCC is £70 cheaper than a GH4, so the end product (image) must be worse. The saying "You get what you pay for" can deceive us.

I know this is a predominately camera based site, but what an achingly good track that was.

You're not wrong there. Utterly bland.

And still moan.

No need to add to that. Saved me a heap of time.