webrunner5

It does look like a darn nice camera other than the AF. It is just too bad it is priced so high. With all it has in it I think it really is worth it, but there a lot of other cameras in that price range that a good also. But as a Cine camera it probably is the best thing out there for the masses.

Looks pretty nice.

It is Not a few thousand. You have to buy 3 to 4 lenses, ND filters, on and on. The RX10 is ready to go. And a RX10 uses the same sensor as a RX100 has. And not cheap ass kit lenses.

With the new 4x up rez software that is in Photoshop and Lightroom have now it is a game changer. Even my 12mp Sony a7s II is great now for wildlife stuff, birding, etc. So you don't need 50mp cameras anymore. There is a lot to be said in a all-in-one camera like the RX10 or the Panasonic FZ1000 to just grab and go and you have all you need. So you can now use them for all kinds of work photo wise. How good of stuff do you really need to use for YouTube, Facebook, home movie stuff? Sure everyone wants an Arri but.. I like Sony A7s cameras because it opens up the ability to shoot stuff at times of the day you would never think of. You can get shots, videos that are really unique. Nighttime stuff is so different from the norm. It is kind of scary to look at but you can't not look. You take advantage of blacks that you try to avoid in daylight. Sunsets and sunrises are just crazy beautiful. Foggy nights and mornings, wow great stuff. Justy easy to do with a Sony A7s.

For what you shoot a Sony RX10 MK II would be the ticket. Probably be the best camera for the majority of people on here not making a living doing video or photography. Heck a newer Smartphone gets the job done anymore.,

Color Science was the main reason I got rid of my GH5. And I think that is the weakest link to the average person is editing and color correction. So why have to color grade every damn inch of footage you shoot. Nah not me. Plus we can get into the DOF thing, no equivalent fast lenses, poor high ISO's, crap AF, sure a SB solves some of that, but the extra glass degrades the image on and on. I am not even into s35 anymore. FF or go home. Even my OG BMPCC is a pain in the ass with a 2.88 crop. All that crop stuff gets old. SB, Focal Reducers ehh enough. And the GH6 is pretty huge to boot. I don't see it sorry.

Well Sigma is already familiar with multi-layer sensors so if anyone can do it, they can.

Since I am not in the market for one, I have not really watched too many of the GH6 videos, but have they changed the Color Science, that would be my biggest knock if they didn't.

I think the GH6 is a camera too late. Most people have moved on from M4/3. I guess if you are big into Anamorphic I can see buying it but ProRes and Raw, all of that is already in a lot of FF stuff now. And hardly anyone uses big long lenses for video work. Mostly wide angle stuff. So that is off the table.

If you have fat fingers, then the RX10 is not a camera you want. There is Very little room between the lens and the grip. I had to sell mine because of it. But if it works for you, I highly recommend one. They have pretty much everything you need in a small very well-made package.

Double post ignore.

He is getting pretty good AF in Studio.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bB5gqqECB

For video use I think It is pretty hard to beat especially if you have m4/3 lens. Sounds really good with the proposed firmware debate. If you are a Photo shooter the OM1 is the way to go looks like.

Tough decision for the money.

Fuji is a pimple on a dog's ass when it comes to world wide sales. Canon is nearly the rest of the dog. Should not be with their cripple hammer track record, but they are. If Canon was a woman she would be one ugly bastard.

Well I have a Lot of experience of riding around Naples late at night in a Fiat 500 taxi, and you will notice the one in the picture has no mirror and that is for good reason, they would not have fit in the street going 65 kilometers or more at night with their lights off. Even drunk it was some damn scary stuff I tell you.

That amount of money would be too rich for my blood LOL. 😬

I don't understand it to be honest. The LX100 and the G7 I have had were really good, damn good CS wise. Even the GH3 was not bad, but man the GH4, GH5, well not worth a damn I think. They went backward.

Now that makes it a lot more desirable. Thanks for the info on it.

I have just been on my computer looking at my multiple hard drives and sifting through 20 different cameras I have had in the last several years and the GH5 stuff has to be the least favorite of all of them looks wise. It is just flat and lifeless compared to everything else I have owned. I have thousands of pictures and videos and it is far and away the least favorite. YMMV.

I think the GH line is just not worth doing anymore. Other than smaller lens sizes, which if your using MF doesn't even count, they make the nearly the same size lens for FF, why bother. Well maybe anamorphic but the FF Panny stuff has that also. Times have changed but the GH line hasn't evolved enough to stay relevant especially when they are charging the same money for it as an FF camera. Crazy ass strategy.

To my old eyes the top one is the one I would pick. The other 2 look more like log files than final output. Maybe I am missing something here. Not hard to believe I guess.