Arikhan

@Orangenz ??? @Emanuel Emanuel, I don't do any review or howto videos...I just share here my personal non scientific experience, absolutely depending on my purposes and shooting style (in many cases "capture the moment"). Just try the BBF and AF lock method within a restricted AF area, it's really simple...

@Emanuel That's a good way to go, yes...The second aspect is trying to keep your focus area as small as possible (without including parts of the background, if possible)...This way, you should get rid of most disturbing pulsing of background - and your Pana could concentrate on focusing in a small, defined area only, without trying to adjust focus on a large surface and depth of field (pulsing and pumping are simply tries to microadjust focus within predefined focusing area - so keep this as small as possible and drag it to your subject)... EDIT: There is though a practical problem out there --> When shooting out of the hand and using BBF and AF-lock, you will use your thumb to keep focusing, usually with your right hand...So now, there are two flaws: A. Your right hand + right thumb are busy with keeping/releasing BBF --> you can not move focus areas with the joystick any more... B. When you want to tap focus, you have to do this with a finger from your left hand, and this way your camera could get shaky (because you will hold it for this moment with your right hand only)... Try to track your subject within the focus area by moving the camera...for sure, this only works when the subject doesn't move toward or back to you...

@Kisaha Full ACK! Though, when talking Canon vs Sony, please consider the service factor...Canon is known for a (mostly) perfect service - Sony is far away from this. And a reliable service is crucial for pros...It will be very hard for any camera manufacturer to reach the service quality (repair, etc.) and area coverage of Canon... And from consumer POV, Canon is PHOTOGRAPHY & IMAGING. Their brand is very, very strong. It will be very hard for Sony to get their brand associated with photography and general imaging in buyers mind (film)...Never underestimate the power of an established and powerful brand like Canon, even if ultraconservative and hostile to innovation in their product releases. Technology and innovation are only 2 aspects of the story...We should always also consider built quality, ergonomics, usabilty, etc. And from this point of view, Sony should learn very fast for getting a serious competitior for Canon products. On the other side, Sony is from technology point of view a fantastic catalyst for the digital imaging market, so Canon should feel forced to more and faster innovation within their product lines...I hope, great times for digital imaging enthusiasts....

@Ken Ross Ken I work on Pana cameras with back button focus AND AF lock. And here you are completely right, THIS working style alleviates the issue. Shooting situation: You lock on focus with back button and release the BBF...Now your camera will stay focused on your subject till end of time and the background will NOT pulse at all...IF...Yeah, IF the subject doesn't move toward or back from shooter...So it's ideal for all not much moving subjects...But this workaround breaks down as soon as the subject moves toward or back *...Even more when you work with a wide aperture or some tele... So, in these situations you just need an reliable continuous AF...Why? There is no even pro puller pulling as fast & precise as a reliable AF as seen on Canons DPAF devices, or Sony a6x00, RX100 m5, or Fuji X-T2x, etc. For sure, you can try to shoot with aperture F5.6 and smaller, to get much DOF. But therefore you don't simply need a bigger sensor camera, you can do this with a 1/2.3" cheap camera and all will stay in focus...Or you can try to shoot as wide as possible...But, in these cases you will always be artistically restricted because of a miserable continuous AF. Please consider, that this pulsing is pretty visible and for most clients/audience simply not acceptable...In forums we are peeping around on 400% crops and almost non visible color nuances...But we refuse to see the terrible pulsing? Nope...Pana has to work on this - or to resign interested buyers... If one doesn't shoot impredictable or fast moving subjects, you can work around these flaws for sure...But this kind of shooting doesn't meet the requirements of nowadays "capturing the moment"...Just my 2 cents... EDIT: * When using BBF during a shot with a towards/back moving subject WITHIN a restricted focusing area, the pulsing outside the non focused area is almost invisible...Therefore you have to hold on BBF during shooting, "track" you subject with the camera body and try to keep your subject framed within the restricted AF area...

@Orangenz Yep! That's exactly Panasonic's "illness", not only on the GH5...Even when you tap focus, and the Pana camera will keep focusing on the tapped area, you will (almost) always register a pulsating and pumping background (AF microadjustments). But again, this is nothing new when working with Panasonic AF on consumer / prosumer cameras... Personally I have a problem with this issue, because Pana proved to do it better: When using the current HC-X1, not only that AF works very accurately (even in challenging situation, when subject X crosses subject Y) and there is no pumping or pulsating in background or foreground - NEVER...So why can this be done with a 2.800 Euro camcorder and not with a 2.000 Euro GH5? That's my point... In my eyes, Pana completely underestimated the necessitty of a reliable AF these days...There is a bunch of people out there NOT buying this great camera because of the desastruous AF failure. It's sad, that many really extraordinary features and a exeptional usability and built quality are overshadowed by a failure with AF. When a manufacturer wants to make money with a product, they have to go with A. very expensive and exclusiuve (eg RED) or B. moderate/cheap pricing for masses. "Enthusiasts" manual only advocates aren't by far a large enough market to survive...Pana could have learned "mass market behaviour" from Canon's AF success in moderately priced cams...A moderate/cheap priced camera has to be extremely easy to use nowadays to get a large audience - and a reliable AF is crucial therefore...

@Marco Tecno + @MountneerMan Guys...I KNOW about ISO invariance and use it excessively...I believe, you don't get the point: In challenging situations with fast moving subjects ("sports" aka needed 1/1000s shutter and not ideal lighting//illumination), you CAN'T shoot with ISO 100...In many cases I have to shoot even with ISO 6.400 and more, even with a FF camera. Eg.: Horse sports in indoor arenas, basketball, etc. These are challenging scenarios with NO chance for shooting with ISO 100...When you shoot in such situations, ISO invariance is quite useless. And these are the situations, where the NX1 completely fails...Completely... @Marco Tecno Talking about AF aquisition of the NX1 for fast subjects moving: I owned the 1DX till end 2016 and shoot also with the 7D and 7D m2. Overall, the NX1 might be better in keepers as the 7D (and that in good light only) - but no chance to get the keeper rate of the 1DX and 7D m2 (even in good light)...And the Nikon D500 (I don't own it, but shot with it a few times) wishes the floor with it... That's only about speaking of the NX1 as a "baby 1DX"...Nope...Never ever...The NX1 is a wonderful camera and has many strengths...but it is NOT what I call a sports camera...Shooting twice a year a biker coming toward you in ideal lighting conditions doesn't qualify a device as sports camera... A sport camera is not "spray and pray" but you need a 100% reliable AF in every condition...And here is the weak point of EVERY mirrorless camera...By far not as much keepers as when using top sport DSLRs...When shooting sports with high requirements , the NX1 isn't as good as in some owners phantasy...Excepting the case you consider chess as demanding sports...

@Marco Tecno You shoot only 100 ISO (+x EV in post)? Wow...I thought that was a DPReview only skill...When shooting sports, I have to shoot sometimes ISO 10.000 with FF...I didn't know, that this is possible with the NX1 - with "nearly" 100% keepers... There are some possibilities to explain this: You have a NX1-"Special edition" I don't own any NX1-talent, I have to learn to "properly operate my camera" Only untalented, dumb photogs/filmers shoot with higher ISO than 100 BBF / Tracking AF and sports shooting were invented by S A M S U N G - the mass of lemmings shooting sports with CanoNikon / Sony is simply ignorant The focussing capabilities for fast moving subjects of mirrorless devices is by far better than DSLRs (sic) Thank you for sharing your knowledge, it was very educative for me. BTW: Blind fanboyism and exagerated "enthusiasm" destroy every basic principle of a serious discussion and misleads interested users...But hey, that's internet...

@Marco Tecno After over 1 Million photos with Canon (and now Nikon) FF I know the techniques (BTW: the photo above is ISO200)...But for my photography (moving subjects in low light) I need minimum 1/250s shutter and high ISO. No chance for the NX1. I love it because it's versatile, reliable and has good ergonomics. But - in stills - it's far away from the best existent FF cameras. In good light it's comparable with the Nikon D7200... eg: Some people say, it's like "an APSC version" of the Canon 1DX...NO, it isn't - that's simply fanboy speach. People who claim this, have never shot with a 1DX or a comparable Nikon...In challenging situations without a chance for a second re-take and when you need AF accuracy even in lower light, the NX1 is FAR behind existing DSLRs. There is NO mirrorless cam at the moment touching the AF speed and accuracy of top DSLRs for moving subjects and low light, completely independent of the lens (F/x) used... I shot sports NX1 vs Nikon D500 --> in best daylight. NO chance for the NX1...The D500 has about 30 percent more keepers...and focusses even in a dark cave... BTW: Since 2010 I shoot (for serious work) RAW only or RAW+JPEG...

@Henry Silvestriz Well, it's a hard decision because discontinued...but still outstanding - not only as video device (in good light - and when using non-Samsung lenses - it outranges the 5d m3 mostly when talking photo IQ) When keeping it at low ISOs, you will get outstanding results and very beautiful (natural/realistic) colors...In daylight, it has a fantastic DR (photo only, please consider - film DR is worse than most current cameras)... It's a pity, that it can't do wireless TTL/HSS - I would have liked to work with more strobes for sophisticated "lighting concerts" with it... (Image is OOC-JPEG, without any correction - only cropped down to 1.000px horizontal)

@Inazuma Thank you for your work! Respectable results for the older cameras, keeping good up with the new X-T2... I love this camera and shot about 25.000 photos with it...But low light and low contrast (tungsten) are simply a desaster - not in stills only...

@Axel No, I haven't the lens yet but wanted to have first user impressions before buying. My mom uses the A6500 and the 35mm 1.8 OSS and till now it's the only lens she uses ("one woman, one lens") but now we like to buy a second "more universal" APSC lens. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experience!

@jonpais Full ACK...BUT: Photography should NOT try to immitate old painting style. Old paintings should (in some cases) only be (sometimes) an inspiration. Art means in my eyes creativity and not plagiarism helped by modern technology...Filming is in my eyes the creative coexistence of phantasy and reality - capturing the moment with all its emotions and backgrounds is driven by inspiration and phantasy. Realized with the help of todays technology... Many "enthusiastic filmmakers" haven't in my eyes much inspiration and phantasy...Just take a look at thousands of "test videos", completely contentless, useless - no story, no emotion, just techie junk - pure time lost for the audience and confession of failure for the creators...Modern gear sluts with latest technology in their hands, aiming to get the style of good old days - but clearly not capable to develop an own style... Nowadays we always say, we live in a very well developed, modern society...But it seems, we are not capable to manage modern technology to transform the technical progress into a slave (tool) of our inspiration and phantasy...Many times I think we care too much about technical specs and pixel peep around, wihout any sense for real content. So it seems, we became the slaves of technology and became useful idiots - our phantasy seems to fail and we completely suffer from poverty of innovation. So, lacking of one's own ideas, we try to copy the style and feeling of good old days... Just take a look at the "postindustrial" photography or "lost places" style - developed during the last decades...Take a look at the expressive, emotional photography portraiture style - developed during the last years, using wireless HSS as tool to lighten up and "unmask" faces and characters...These styles have nothing to do with the photo style of the 70s...Visionists (aka artists) inslaved modern technology to put their vision of subjects characters into digtal pictures... And then, don't forget that todays imagery is minimum 50% post production...But neither cameras, nor lighting or most modern image editiong software could drive up our phantasy or create a "shooting plan" in our brains...

Does someone know what happens, when recording 4K on the 5D m3 / 1DX m2 externally? When recording 4K, the output will be only 1080p...BUT: Is this "native 1080p" or downsampled 1080p from the 4K (generally top-notch quality when downsampling) running? If so, this could be a great solution to Bypass the poor Canon in camera 1080p One could get top notch 1080p and save disk space, because one does not have to store petabytes of Canon original 4K data Someone out there who knows or could test?

@jpfilmz I took a look on my 4K TV - about 4m far away from TV (my usual distance when watching TV). The footage looks generally very nice...BUT: That wasn't that important when watching "Unmasked", because I simply forgot to pay much attention to IQ...A very good and engaging story, top notch audio and (mostly) a very pleasant lighting (beginning in the darkness is really amazing) . WOW...really nice work: Don't dream your life, live your dream... After watching for the third time, pixelpeepers and "uber-perfectionists" could find for sure some points to criticize...But hey, artistic and good conceptual work (like in your film) is nothing for know-it-alls...It's simply a great story, letting me forget the technical aspects...Just my two cents... EDIT: ...and a top main actor perfectly matching the type of character/guy you wanted to portray in your story...

@Ken Ross Hehe...Oh yes, it will get 4K 60p soon with a free firmware upgrade - but only when recording externally. Hmm...JVC is simply meh - compared to Panasonics newly released ARRI-killer... BTW: Just waiting for the first enthusiastic lunatics claiming, now they will sell their REDs and ARRIs and go for the GH5...Like Canons DPReview/YouTube PR bullshit with the "revolutionary" 80D... It's always the same: PR guys on steroids and their incompetent paid henchmen, trying to fire up peoples expectations and wondering, that their promisses can't be kept. Honesty and serious claims don't count any more - at cost of credibility lost...Even the crude reality is not that painful as evident exagerations and lies...

@Kisaha Oh, I believe you misunderstood me: With saying "don't want to copy the 70's style" I didn't mean you personally (I know that you are also doing ENG work and so on)...I mean the "old film style" very many people try to copy, wihtout carrying about the preferences of the audience and state of the art of technology. People craving for old fiilm style/appearance just refuse to admit, that we live in the digital era - and don't try to use today's advantages (resolution, sharpness, detail, colour variety, etc.) in their work. They just try to "ride the old horse the old way"... I ask myself, WHY don't they shoot with 40 years old Soviet cameras? They are cheap, grainy, mushy & smooth (by resolution) and quite perfect for "filmic style" of the 70s...WHY do these people cry for sharp 4K, when mushing out the 4K footage to 720p-style in post? So, no offense, I respect you and your opinion...no matter how old you are...as I am for sure much younger than you, I will be glad for learning from experienced people...

@jpfilmz Thank you very much for sharing, I'll take a look tonight on a 4k TV...

@Kisaha Kisaha, as said in another thread, I need two identical cameras at a total budget (without lenses, rigs, addtional gear, etc.) of rpund about 13.000 EUR. If I would buy a C300 ii, I could afford only one camera... I'm done with Canon in stills. As said, I've sold the almost complete Canon camera and lens collection end of 2016. I shoot now Nikon FF and will buy the A7R ii for portraiture, landscape and architecture...So in stills, I will go for sure SoNykon...My remaining 11 Canon lenses will be used to adapt to the Sony stills camera(s) coming... The FS700 + 7Q+ is a big and affordable chance for me to get into RAW and high quality IQ. Meanwhile I can use it for "quick & dirty shots" (no high IQ requirements) by shooting internally. I worked now for some days with this camera (not mine) and like it, as I could work with it alone (perfect phase detection AF with LA-EA2 + A-mount lenses, very reliable contrast AF with E-lenses, touch screen, etc.) and it is not bad in low light. 4K RAW is mindblowing, just premier league, 200fps in 2k, etc...So it's a camera for dual use: A. Quick. nice shots that could be done on tripod (interviews, etc.) by a one man band) and B. High IQ shots (external recording) with a crew /in controlled environments and lighting... And still - as you mention - this camera is a nightmare in some aspects. But I simply don't have the budget to spend on TWO Canon C300 ii - as simple as that... Yes, I know...It's NOT a cinema camera at all, but it has its own characteristics and charme...And the versatility and live streaming capabilities are very good too...It's a special IQ, very close to the NX1 (picture structure, color science, etc.)...And as you know, I am NOT the only one guy who loves this kind of imaging...The LS300 and the FS700 are completely different cameras, but each one has characteristics I like.. To be honest, additonally I am tired of the "Canon color science", of the smooth and warmish "Candy look"...As nostalgic filmer, you can probably not understand this aspect, but many "non-filmers" (= normal audience) think like me...Neutral colors, sharpness, detail and crispness are factors I'm looking for nowadays...I've shot some weddings as second shooter (stills) to get some experience and there is no sign, that "normal Joe" loves Canon more than the color science of other manufacturers... Personally, I am not nostalgic at all and don't want to copy the 70's style. We live in the digital era and it's time to move on...Just my two cents... Thank you very much for your engagement and for sharing your thoughts and experience!

@Kisaha Full ACK. The 18-105 is probably a "vacation lens", to carry with you, when you want to walk around with light gear. Carrying around the 70-200 (as complement to the 16-70) is for sure not a pleasure, as in Europe Sherpas are quite expensive at the moment... Nothing new here: For a maximum of flexibility AND quality requirements, you just need a bunch of lenses - and deep pockets to pay them... I use the A6500 at the moment and mostly like it. Ingenious technology in the body of an idiot, as @Andrew Reid commented in one of his Sony reviews. I have to make a serious decision till end of this summer: Which manufacturers line to go for video...As I like the A6500 and the A7R ii (portraiture and architecture) as devices for stills (in addition to my "serious" Nikon bodies), it would be better to put my money in 2 FS700 + 2 Odyssey 7Q+, so then my investment would be in Sony lenses. But I also keep my eyes on the LS300, so then I would need completely different lenses and adapters. It's a hard decision. I owned about 34 Canon lenses and some FF and APSC devices till end 2016, now mostly sold ( I just kept 11 Canon lenses). Now I take photos with Nikon FF, NX1 and A6500...and probably with a A7R ii, my next buy. Shooting stills and video with ONE manufacturer would be nice, as it would decrease a six figure lens + gear investment a little bit. Secondly, it's much easier to get good results when beeing perfectly familiar with color science, menus, etc., of ONE manufacturer, instead of owning x cameras of many different manufacturers with completely different concepts and product lines... It takes time to get familiar with camera and lens characteristics, if you want to get best possible results...

@BTM_Pix My friend shooting with the LS300 told me, that the smart adapter doesn't work with some Canon lenses (AF), but he didn't try them all, for sure...He confirmed, that the LS300 AF works very well with another Panasonic lens, the 12-35 F2.8 OIS. These are the only Pana lenses he tested with AF. He uses Canon and other lenses (many primes) with adapters and manual focus, as the focus support is great on this camera. Haven't tested face detection...

@Emanuel Oh, as seen some weeks ago, it worked perfectly with the Panasonic 35-100 F2.8 on it (stabilization worked quite well too)...Very reliable with this lens when keeping subject in the center of frame...No pulsing, no microadjustmenst, no pumping forth and back of background or subject...No such issues like in a currently released, hyped "enthusiast camera"... Neither did I...

@Geoff CB That's what most users say, yes...So, at the end of the day, it would be better to buy a lens like the 16-70 because of the quality over all focal lengths...And buy an additional 70-200 F/4 as complement...

@Geoff CB I saw the 16-70 F4 Zeiss three days ago on a FS700 and it did an amazing job. In my eyes it's nearly parfocal - the shooter told me, the 18-105 behaves there a little bit strange (it wasn't on the camera as we did the shots, so I couldn't compare for myself...To make a long story short, my buddy told me the same. Thank you for sharing your experience! OK, the 18-105 has much more focal length to offer, so at the end of the day it could be a great "universal lens" to carry, but IQ is the most important aspect at the end of the day... BTW:The 16-70 F4 Zeisst focussed great with the FS700 in the daylight scenes shots...It was hard for me to believe what I see: A 4,5 years old camera focusing a lot more reliable with contrast AF than latest modern Pana cameras...But shooting on the shoulder (with the LCD on top of the cam) with the FS700 is a pain...Oh boy...

Someone out there owning both lenses and experienced in video shooting? Which of these two would you buy? Are there substantial differences in IQ between the two lenses? Lens will be used at this time on a Sony A6500 (for video). Thank you!

@Kubrickian No...Now I'll take a look at the different solutions and make a decision...The shoot35 cinebox looks solid and affordable - the wooden camera device you proposed could fit my demands too and buying both would fit my budget...Thank you!