canonlyme

I did a little search as well and from what I found out there is no IBIS 2, but dual I.S two, that is only supported with certain lenses. I am looking at the official panasonic support site, so you will have a hard time proving me wrong with other sources. https://panasonic.jp/dc/lens/dual_is.html By logic, this would mean dual i.s. 2 is a question about the lens and firmware of the body , but not the I.S of the body itself. So this has zero relevance when not using pana lenses and with the same weight, I.S should be the same on the gx80 and g85.

Of course this is black and white, throwing around arguments, mister, you did not further your opinion or talk about the content of my message at all. If you think that weight does not affect IBIS, 400g to 700g in terms of microshakes, fair enough. I have a rig including handles so I am sure my stabilization works perfect with IBIS because I am giving enough weight to eliminate microshakes. I have never heard about the "IBIS II" you talk about and I do not think that Panasonic marketed this until you prove it different.

Your comment summed up: Talking about the way you discuss, not about the video, or what I did not like about the way you act here. Do you have your own opinion or do you just hang on someone elses blank statement? I do not ask you to show off your skills (in fact the original post), but there is a way to communicate that makes it seem like your are not actually confident, but the opposite. When you are on the table talking about things you like about a movie (let this be our table), the person starting to say, I fking hate this video, is usually not just having an opinion but often in need to reeveluate their own position, in this case by you giving credit to a blank disrespectful statement rather than detailled critique and description of taste.

Guys, I do not know if you know the rules about open discussion, but it is said that you express your opinion without respect. Having an opinion is not about winning, this is a forum not a fight. Your opinion is not more credible because you have had more commens or likes in this forum, I am having my discussions not just in this forum, but in real life, family, cafe's and student classes. saying: your comment wins, I find this a very ungrown way to lead discussions- and i am young. The video is of a craft that has at that time won a video arthouse price in vimeo, we are not judging things here by the means of a filmmaker, but most people here are videomakers. This is a video that is so good, that just because it is hectic, does not ask to be hated. I get the feeling your strong espression of "fking hate" does not only come from dislike, but maybe also fear. Is this something you can easily recreate, making so many different shots, or is this also something that is overwhelming you through the quality of images that you can achieve? youtube allows you to play everything at speed 0,25, an easy fix not to cause any seizures. Have you watched lord of the rings, do you fking hate one of the most iconic movie scenes by hitchcock in psycho, cut way under 1 second in average? The sounddesign of this video is also very high, is sound something that you do not care about? About the grading, what you say makes it seem that you hate coen brothers movies and most movies since the 2000's except arthouse, as this is a standard complementary grade of colors, which has been used by painters. Feel free to clear me up about your opinion, I am interested in discussing this with you. But I have seen ignorance in many parts of this forum, so it would not surpise me if not. The ratio here is : talking about your favourite lens < creating something yourself. I am making a thesis that you are not a better filmmaker than allesandri, and you would not be able to create such movie with a gh3 - prove me wrong. Thanks Is there any difference in the new version because of witch I should rehack my gx80?

hate is a strong word, at least you can respect the craftsmanship if it is not your style. IMO the best is cinelike D for gradability in post, using something like noam kroll settings. http://noamkroll.com/the-best-gh4-settings-for-video-why-you-shouldnt-be-tweaking-things-too-much/ If you want something straight out of camera and little projects I would recommend natural.

I do not think that IBIS is better, this comes most likely from the additional weight and better grip with the g85. Right now, I have a cage around my gx85 so if I would do a test video of "my"/the gx85 ibis it would appear to be better. The good thing is if I rig the camera up, at the end of the day I am happy about less weight, and the ergonomics do not matter anymore. You are right that there are better cameras, I did not follow the very last trends in terms of pricing In terms of value for money, I think the gx85 is up top, but of course, this is always subjective depending on what you need in the camera. It is also worth to remind yourself what nice things have been shot with what cameras. I always remind myself of the fact that watchtower of turkey has been shot with the gh3, making me want to have that camera for slow-motion, even though I am happy with the gx85

I agree with you, the micro is very appealing at a lower budget.

Good job! If you need any more tips regarding the gx85 feel free to ask me, I own it for some time now.

This is some of the bullshit you only read in online forums. If you say something like that, is is only because you are justifying paying more for the g85 over the gx80. The gx80 has equivalent 4k to the g85. That is what matters. If you really think that they process the image differently in fhd, then give me an official enginnering source or make that judgment over your own footage, do not just reference another test because you are lazy to do your own. I think a couple of points have to be added here. The GX80 is by far the better professional budget option then the g85. Who cares if the fhd is worse then something else, you are not gonna buy a porsche and then only drive it at 100kms an hour, comparing the sound to a fiat. Why? In 4k, there is no visual difference to be seen to the gh5 4k, and equivalence to the g85 4k. We have recently shot a documentary and noone could tell much difference to the gh5, even at 200mbs, to the 100mbs 4k of the gx85. Feel free to post a screengrab with the gh5, I will give you one of my gx80 that will look as good. You get the gx80 for around 200 to 300 bucks less then the g85. The gx85 is missing external audio jack, but this does not matter, since if you shoot professionally, you will not allow bad pre amps or camera sounds to go on your audio and go dual audio. One other thing is weight, people say the gx80 is missing weight, but as a b-camera, this is a huge upside. We were shooting while hiking and carrying the gh5 on a gimbal/glidecam slash the gx80, we always ended up using the gx80 on the glideplus a 40mm voigtlander, and we got the most beutiful shots. The gx85 has professional features that if you go dual audio, you not really need and, if you have the same budget, it allows you to get a cage, grip and a zoom h1, which will take your gh5 audio apart. To summarize, the gx85 is in my opinion the best price/value under 1000 dollars, its a beast. So getting the gx85 over the g85 is a no brainer. Comparing it to the gh3, I think the gh3 is a beautiful camera, and if there would be image stabilization, I would recommend the gh3 over the gx80. But ibis is still what kills the gh3. On top, I am currently building up anamorphic, and the gx85 allows you to shoot 4:3 in 4k photo mode, which the gh3 does not. On the other hand, the gh3 has internal audio (bad preamps). The gh3 also gives you better slow motion then the gx80 at 50mbit/s vs 28mbit/s. The G7 is the gh3 with worse slow-motion and worse fhd, so I would go for the gh3 over the g7 and the gx80 beats the g7 as well because of ibis. I don't wanna be mean but there has been some junk written in this thread about high iso and soft footage of the gx80. If you are gonna use iso higher iso than 1000 with a m43 camera, you are already doing something wrong. Without loss of IQ, you are gonna use fast lenses or lighting to shoot at the right light. I do own the gx80 and I can recommend over the g7 and g85 as a first cam, b-roll cam or professional b-cam, for a gimbal/glidecam for stuff like weddings, or as the first camera to get at the current state of technology (which is 4k)

Do you know if there is a difference between feelworld f7 or t7? have the same zoom functions.

I think the anamorphic is only squeezin to 1.33 / 2.35 anamorphic, right or wrong?

thanks guys, I actually had the same issue with sharpening and it takes me so long to sharpen every clip with unsharp mask in post, next time I will film with more in camera sharpening!

Hey guys, I am going to shoot in a cave and have borrowed a gh5. Normally I have noise redution cranked down all the way, but I don't do post processing including neat video and am not looking to buy it. In camera noise reduction seems to be always mentioned in the same breath as "neat video", but I haven't really found anyone comparing combinations of in camera noise reduction to using post processing and other forms than neat video, as well as comparing a camera with and without noise reduction. Consequently, I am wondering if I should shoot the cave with noise reduction cranked all the way down, or if I should rather trust the in camera processing of noise if I will not target the noise in post anyway! I am going to keep the iso below 400 at all points. Looking forward to your answers and views, maybe even different ideas of handling noise apart from neat video in premiere or davinci light. Cheers

Thought this might be interesting for you guys: I was at the Berllin Museum for photography this week and had the chance to see "Helmut Newtons private property" that gathered all his belongings shortly before he died in a car crash. (one of the most famous photographers of all time). At one point we could see the lenses he owned. Apart from some full format camera stuff he must have often shot with small handy cameras like the eos100d, pentax and nikon. Sadly the museum staff didn't put all the lenses the way that you could see focal lenghts and apertures (like nobody would be interested in that ? ), but I think I could make out he used the same range of lenses for all of his cameras. This is what I think I could see: 35mm (don't know the aperture), 50mm 1.4 85mm 1.4 as well as 135mm 3.5, all nikkor f`s.

I really like your shots, but I don't see any growth in dynamic range, at least I see a lot of shots were the mids are underexposed with proper exposure of the sky or the sourroundings overexposed with proper mids... Not like any mft or apsc can do better, but I would expect a bigger reward for using raw.

Alright then, I'll think of you guys next time I bring my spare dumb adapter :). However when travelling run-and-gun I think I can't afford to bring my b-cam and will take the risk...

Would not really count that for an argument. I don't see why a manual speedbooster should fail. By that argument, every run and gun-filmmaker would from no on bring 2 cameras, two microphones and two adapters. If it makes you feel more safe while shooting however, that would be another story.

Sure, it's just that if you know you are going for a speedbooster anyway, you can save the 7 bucks for a dumb one, or at least buy one that doesn't hurt the lens threat. But you are right I guess with something like the sigma 18-35, some people here have the opinion a dumb adapter on m43 gives it an even better zoom range. I'm looking into that at the moment too since I have the 18-35, gx80 and no adapter yet. Hey man, I think it is funny you take that as a downside, because lightweight could actually be nice for you. Have you thought about just swapping your zhiyun crane v1 with the zhiyun crane m, primarily intended for smartphones?? I read some people were using that one for gh5's and even sony's as it is much cheaper than the normal variant (i guess v2) and it can work fine until 800g or sth. like that. Just an idea and sth. I am looking into at the moment too. Cheers

@Dustin I would advise you to directly go for a lens turbo speedbooster, if you want to save the cost for a dumb adapter. Glad you found sth. you like

Agree with IronFilms points, but the gh4's 60p is much better than the g85 60 p. Unless you are investing in a recorder, the g85 25mbit 60p fhd won't be good enough for you if you want slow motion with high enough IQ for grading. (you will end up with something like 10mbit/s) vs the 4k 100mbit. Long story short, if you just need the crisp 24/30p 4k, the g85 will be fine, if you want to record sound externally the gx85 will even be a catch, but it also depends on your lenses. Sony 6300 is only 1,5 crop, whereas with the g85' 2 times crop you should add: 1. 120 euro for a lens turbo speedbooster with manual lenses, 2 200 euro/dollars for an electronic viltrox 2 that supports some lenses or 3. 600 for the metabones speedbooster, still loosing the sonys autofocus. On the other hand you have the sony colors which in my opinion are not nice enough out of camera and you don't want to grade color too much with an 8 bit codec. Also you should think about if all of these cameras deliver a picture that looks actually too sharp and digital, as a6300/6500 and g85 will deliver you crisp image, but it with modern lenses it will easily look "digital". Look into tiffen contrast filters for example. If you are a run and gun type of shooter, buying the gh4 you would have to heaviliy consider buying a gimbal or you will loose time in post stabilizing every clip with warp stabilizer. And finally, if you start turning in circles because every camera is missing one thing that the others don't (which I think is not a coincidence for panasonic with 2*crop, sony with overheating and color, canon with nice skin colors but heavy prices), I would advise you to not loose too much time. Fix your final budget (like 1400dollars), and write down the exact combinations you can get with different cameras including lenses and rigging.

@kidzrevil Thank you, I also used a low contrast 1 filter, (3 is not needed because vintage does the rest). I read that you enjoy tiffens too ;).

Here are my first screengrabs shooting on event with gx80+ vintage minolta set up. Lenses I used were 24mm 2.8 Tokina RMC and the 50mm 1.4 Minolta with lens turbo. Happy to say that they blended in quite well with each other, only for some shots I still remember which was which. The picture of the glasses was shot with the minolta, the other two were shot with the tokina which I got for 24 bucks ?

Can anyone one recommend a good "dumb" adapter for the sigma? Would be interested too Maybe it can be smart too...

Has anyone mentioned the tamron 17-50 2.8? That one could be nice and good for your budget. I think 2.8 is enough to shoot indoor events that are not well lit. Even though the lx100 is cheap, I don't see why you would consider that one over a used gx80 or not just keep your gh4 with a stabilized lense, for example 17-55 stabilized kit lense to begin with? I think you will be able to still sell the gx80 in two years from now by the way, and while you might have reasons to do that, you don't wanna loose the lenses you have, rather your camera. With both the gx80 and lx100 you run into codec and therefore color restrictions, apart from IBIS your gh4 still is a far better camera in that context and has a mic jack too. Instead of getting IBIS and downgrade everything else you could even consider getting a small rig. Do you want to shoot b-roll slow motion or 24fps? If 24fps, you can get the gx80 with 4k 100mbs, if not, the 60p 25mbit/s 1080p will not hold up well to any grading or even nice luts you already use. Apart from that I think the mentioned nikkor zoom lense should give you everything you want, if you shoot manual like me. For B-Roll, I would consider getting a rather close lens. 40-50mm with a simple adapter should serve you fine. Last but not least, two alternative ideas: Is the problem for you changing lenses, or changing all your filters (tiffen contrast, nd filters..) as well? A: Get some kickstarter lens flippers you can wear on your belt, will save lot's of time and you can use the lenses you alredy have! They have them from https://www.friidesigns.com/ or some simple ones for just two lenses: https://www.amazon.com/NEW-Gowing-Lens-Holder-Canon/dp/B00KYP0LK0. I met someone on event who changed his lenses lightning fast. Remember two lenses will always give you better quality than one with the same range. B: If you have problems changing filters, I use XUME Magnets for like 80dollars total who are a life saver too and always impress people who don't know them. My final advice would be: Always consider if you can get what you want cheaper too, instead buying a new big thingi. Go simple and future proof, and invest in lenses, not cameras. The lenses you already have are quite nice and so Is your gh4! What I use: Sharp vintage Lenses for the best look I can get. Once I get a client that want's a sharper/clinical look, I will use my 18-35 1.8 that I kept, paired with a simple 50-70mm range, like you. Cheers

I'm sry but I don't think you are right. The idea of the equation ignores how the lens is built in order to make equivalence of the final picture more simply understandable. A ff 50mm 2.8 lens simply adapted to m43 will still act like the same 50mm 2.8. By logic, putting a 50mm 2.8 m43 lens on a ff camera, the lens will still act like a 50mm 2.8ff, only that you will get black borders (a narrower field of view). Saying that a 50mm m43 lens really is a 100mm ff lens instead, just so that you understand the equation better, is wrong. The aperture describes the ratio of aperture (entrance pupil) diameter to focal length of your lense. The focal length is physically built into your lense and you can't simply call your 50mm m43 lense a 100mm ff lense, just to make sense of the equation. Following the equation there are 3 ways to get equivalence in depth of field. A. Take a 50mm 2.8 full frame lense and simply adapt it to m43 and it will still be a 50mm 2.8 lens, but the final image is not completely equivalent because of different/cropped field of view. B. Take a 50m 2.8 ff lense and use a 0,5* speedbooster (which I think does not exist) and put that onto the 2 times cropped m43 sensor and it will stay truly equivalent hence act like a m43 25mm 1.4 lense. C Take a 25mm 1.4 m43 lense and put it onto your cropped sensor to get the same equivalence to 50mm 2.8. . What I am still wondering is why people (as in my suggested video) are sure that a speedbooster will not change the equivalent aperture of the final picture. However I am sure that they do! A speedboosted 0,7* 50mm 2.8 ff lense must be equivalent to a 35mm 2,0 m43 lens, for example. Correct me if I am wrong. I'm not really interested in knowing all technical foundations of how lenses are built, since I rather like to focus on using them