kye

I think the GH5 is a sleeper camera, along with many others like the UMP, C100, etc. These cameras are good enough quality so the images easily meet a professional standard, aren't fancy or odd enough to be bragged about, and aren't used on large productions that have interviews with the cinematographer. People talk when someone shoots a feature film on an iPhone because the perception is it's not good enough. People talk when someone shoots a project with a camera that is fancy or odd, or when the camera doesn't traditionally suit the project. and if a film has a huge budget and wins awards then everyone gets interviewed and there are four paragraphs about the lens choices and the phrase 'colour science' gets mentioned. But when someone shoots a documentary / ad / training course / low-budget series / short / or indy feature with a sensible and capable camera, there's no press about it. That's the GH5, XT-3, UMP, C100, etc etc. I would be very curious to see what percentage of all edited content consumed is shot on these types of cameras. I think it might be a quarter. But that's the point - we'd never know, because it's not remarkable. Therefore no remarks are made, and we don't hear about it. These are the cameras of the people quietly working outside the limelight and delivering good quality content.

Yeah, it certainly looks chunky! I suspect that there are limitations to how small a body can be if it's got a larger sensor in it like the S1H does, but the MFT form factor works pretty well with the combination of a body that's got nice ergonomics but isn't too heavy.

There will always be fascination / confusion / derision of new things that people don't understand. An older work colleague of mine was "having trouble" with her youngest son in his later years of school because as graduation came steadily closer he didn't seem to be motivated to do anything, didn't seem to have a career path worked out, and did ok at school but wasn't getting great marks. All he wanted to do was to play computer games. He started university in something he was only mildly interested in and was still just focused on computer games. My colleague loved him dearly but thought that basically he was going to have a directionless life that he would basically just fritter away. One day he entered a competition to review a computer game run by a very large gaming site, and out of many thousands of entries he took first place, won several thousand dollars, and was offered the opportunity to write another review. They liked his review, published it, and he wrote another, and is now a computer game reviewer and gets paid a wage that is pretty good compared to other entry-level jobs straight out of school. The interesting thing about it is that what set him apart from the rest of the competition is that his review included comparisons to loads of other computer games, making it a really interesting and rich review that would be entertaining to new players and seasoned gamers alike, and there is no way that he would have been able to write like that without having played computer games for hours every day for the better part of a decade. My colleague was incredibly relieved that he'd found a career, but more importantly had completely changed their opinion of him. They used to think of "my poor son, he might not amount to much" but now they were hugely proud as "he beat thousands of other applicants and is now getting decent income in a highly competitive field and doing what he loves".

EOSHD blog got a mention from Kai....

Is this the point in the conversation where a futurist mentions a dozen occupations that no one has heard of, everyone laughs and rolls their eyes at how the consultant has made up BS, and then the consultant produces a report showing they're the fastest growing occupations according to some reputable survey company, and then everyone is reminded that "truth is stranger than fiction"... And just in case anyone thinks I'm just making up things, that happened to me and I was one of the people in the audience looking at the job titles and thinking WTF?!?!? I guess if life wasn't so strange then there would be less awesome stuff to point our cameras at.. 😆😂🤣

Basic business Return On Investment rationale would suggest that they stop production of lenses that are no longer profitable, or they think are making less money than if they forced people to buy the newer mount. I'd imagine some lenses would be stopped immediately and might only have been in production for completeness of the lineup or other strategic reasons, and others would gradually dwindle until it was in their interests to just stop the whole EF lineup altogether, but they might be continuing to make the classic EF lenses for some time. For example I'd imagine that the 24-70 f2.8 and equivalents might be pretty popular and even if no new customers were getting into the system, there might be enough pros dropping them or wearing them out that there would be a steady demand. One thing that amazes me is that productions can have a movie budget of millions of dollars for a film and not think much of it, and then they talk about crash cameras or various other equipment getting destroyed and my brain kind of twinges with the thought that someone would buy something like a Sigma FP or other equally capable camera and deliberately destroy it, but that's the economics of the situation. and that means that even if camera ownership doesn't go up, for every time that happens, a new one much be manufactured and sold.

Great spotting... but how did they film Dr Who before the P4K was released??????

Great idea. Ken Rockwell has done a similar thing with this reviews, and it's really useful because he doesn't forget anything, so if you want to know if a lens has focus breathing or how much it weighs etc then you know that if he's reviewed it then it'll be listed. For that reason I will often see if he's reviewed something before I google for other reviews which may or may not specify something, so I think it would help the site

Thanks @IronFilm that’s really helpful. Definitely G6 over G5, despite the price difference. I’ll have another look over the other options mentioned when I get home, but this has all been very helpful. Thanks all!

Yeah, ok, that's a pain. My shooting ratios are pretty high, but my standby vs record time is absolutely huge, so that's a big deal. I guess power management and low-power circuitry has come a long way in the interim. The G6 is looking pretty good, but I'm still curious about the G5 and where it sits. It's something like half the cost, and cheaper is definitely better, so that's appealing!

I think my primary interest in it is the legendary cinematic reputation it has, and the challenge / learning curve of replicating that look with my GH5. I never managed to get anyone to shoot similar footage with a P2K, P4K and GH5, so it might be that I just need to buy one and then I can film whatever tests I want and do it that way. In terms of it as a backup / time-lapse camera, does it chew batteries as fast when doing a time-lapse as it does when recording? I would imagine that not having to process as many frames, not write the same data speeds, etc would save some battery life.. The other issues with it don't phase me as much, but I understand it's a very different shooting experience, and one that's valuable to wrap my head around. I suspect for this I'd be happy with a G5 (or lower) as they'll do auto-everything (which is great for day-to-night situations) and the likelihood of me having to use the 1080p mode is pretty low as that means I need a second non-wide-angle camera.

Just looking at prices for the G6 vs G7, and had the most wonderful epiphany.... numbers are bi-directional!!! So, why shouldn't I get the G5? (or G4.. or G3...) My baseline is that it has to do time lapses internally, has to have focus peaking, and has to have better 1080p than my GF3. and @mercer moves into first place for most ridiculous suggestion! hoorah! My shortlist right now is the P2K, the GH2, and G-series of 6 or under. And i'll just quietly do a bit of googling about the classic just to rule it out completely...

A couple more in todays feed.... First up is Blondihacks making a tripod-screw-adapter from scratch on the lathe. Takeaways from this is a magic arm on a magnetic mount and metal plates mounted above the work areas. Its interesting to see the quality of the video and that it's shot entirely on a smartphone. Especially when you juxtapose her track record of high-quality videos which are at least partly monetised through Patreon, with her obvious naivety around the world of the DSLR. and next up is a BTS on a cooking video from Peaceful Cuisine (Ryoya Takashima). Here's the finished video: and the BTS vlog: No idea what level of monetisation is going on here, but considering it's shot on GFX100 with a Sony appearing in the video too I'm expecting that he's got a job and this is a passion / side-hustle. If you're thinking you want to get into YT then this is your competition.

It's another whole lens system unfortunately, and I don't think mft native glass can be adapted so I'd rule it out based on that. Anyone who has played with spectacular lenses on a lower resolution lesser codec knows that the image gains much more from the nice glass than it loses due to the lower resolution and codec. In that sense I'd get better footage with 1080 h264 + Voigtlander primes setup than a >2k / raw output combined with lenses that serve no purpose other than backup and I selected primarily based on size, weight and cost. You mentioning the eos-m + ML setup and @BTM_Pix mentioning the P2K aren't the first time I've thought about those in the last week though, and my recent discovery that the P2K has a very flexible time lapse mode has significantly raised my level of interest in it. That is, if I can work out how much of a PITA it is to shoot with, thus my questions in the OG Pocket thread.

Are you able to share some of the footage you took? Be sure and export / upload in 4k so YT compression doesn't remove all the magic It would be great to see what it's capable of.

Don't need a mic input, and GX85 is much more expensive than I would want. The idea is simple. Only having a GH5 and X3000 means that if the GH5 has an issue the only camera for the rest of the trip is the X3000. A G6 gives a second angle for time-lapse, and means that I can film the remainder of the trip in a normal looking manner. From that perspective a GX85 doesn't give me much better bang for the money.

Thanks for replies so far, very useful. The plan is that if something happens to the GH5 then I'll use the backup camera and then replace the GH5 when I get home, so the G85 and G9 cost way too much for a camera I will hardly ever use. The G6 is sounding like the winner so far. What about the GH2? It's in a similar price range.

I swear i've seen some how-to videos talking about this type of setup, but can't think of how I'd find them again. YT might reveal some wisdom? I've also seen OSMO Action cameras used.

Covert Affairs - Season 4 last few episodes. Definitely in english.. Please don't judge me! [edit: and, for absolutely no reason whatsoever, also let me recommend Master With Cracked Fingers as a rather different, but excellent, viewing experience!]

Stupid questions: Does the BMPCC have any kind of auto-controls, like auto WB, and auto SS for exposure? and what is the limit of its SS (do you NEED an ND or can it go down to a small enough exposure time)? I am having mischievous thoughts..

I'm looking for a second / backup camera body for travel. Main setup is GH5, 7.5mm 17.5mm and 42.5mm MFT primes, and the Rode VMP+. Second camera is a Sony X3000 action camera. I shoot live action as well as time lapses with both. My thoughts are that bringing a small MFT body would enable me to have a backup MFT camera should anything happen to the GH5 while travelling, and would also enable me to take time lapses while the X3000 and GH5 are busy. For example, on a cruise ship when you're pulling into port it's great to be able to record time lapses from a couple of angles whilst also using the GH5 to take normal video. A second MFT camera could then record time-lapses (RAW images at native resolution are great quality) and if the GH5 has a heart attack then i'm not in paradise without a camera. I'll also take my 14mm f2.5 lens in case the GH5 / 17.5mm lens (the main lens on the camera most of the time) end up falling out of a plane or whatever. I'd also take a Rode Video Micro as backup audio. Requirements are: Must be MFT as they're the lenses I have 1080 is fine, although I'd prefer higher quality rather than lower quality Built-in time-lapse functionality Still images in RAW would be great Slow-motion NOT required If it can take the same battery as the GH5 that would be spectacular (saves the hassle of extra batteries and chargers) I'm wondering if I should go an old GH1 or something. I know that the later G models have 4K but in all likelihood I won't be using the video functions, just the still images. I have a GF3 but it has no mic in, theres no time-lapse functionality (or way to trigger it remotely), and the 1080 isn't the best. .......and of course, smaller and cheaper is better....

Well, if that's the case, my footage is probably so marinated it'll be liquified! If only I liked editing as much as I like shooting!!

Interesting that the Alexa Mini is right up there. I would have thought that the Mini was a camera with more compromises than the larger bodied models and therefore was more of a specialist camera for lower budgets or more difficult shooting conditions (drones, highly mobile rigs, for mounting on vehicles, etc) but maybe I'm wrong? What limitations does the Mini have over the larger models? and although this is pretty academic as none of us here are really in the market for an Arri... be careful about causality - these films weren't successful because of the cameras that were used and we can't get the equipment and expect it to make us better. It's that the people who are killing it just happen to want to use these cameras. I remember once I was riding my mountain bike up a long and steep hill and I wanted to be going faster and changed down a gear without thinking about it, almost falling over because I could no longer keep up my pace. I realised afterwards that I changed gear because that's what you do when you're going faster, but of course, changing down a gear doesn't make you go faster!

I think there's some discussion of it here: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/03/just-mtf-charts-zeiss-slr-lenses/ Assuming that's the one, the curves remind me of many of the classic cine glass that they've also tested. Contrasty (the top curve shows this) but not too clinical (the other curves are lower - when all the curves are towards the top then that's when lenses look super sharp) and the lower resolution and astigmatism towards the edges (lower lines = softer and IIRC when the solid and dotted lines diverge that means that the radial blur no longer aligns with the other blur (at 90 degrees to it) so nothing can be completely in focus). Looks like a very promising lens... I look forward to some sample images

That's what I heard (although I'm the last person that would know such things, so apply salt here..) but with some of the quality I'm seeing, my current production standards for my family travel videos have exceeded (a small percentage) of the quality of some shows on there. Still, in the end none of that matters and it's about content. TBH I think that with a very modest setup and the right levels of skill content that looks professional can be created with almost no budget at all. An example might be @DaveAltizers video Porcelainia: Shot on a 7D, L-glass, and graded in FilmConvert it's a great example of how, when done well, content shines through. Think about how many people have access to equipment that meets this level of quality - at this point it would be half the people on earth who own an ILC. And this is exactly what I'm seeing - there is heaps of content on YT that people make for fun or as part of a side hustle, and heaps of content on Netflix where people with skill use the same level of equipment and skill but are more ambitious and take on larger projects and larger distribution goals and do distribution deals that way. The best content on Netflix is obviously better than the best content on YT, but the vast majority of Netflix content has less production value than the best examples on YT. The overlap is huge.