newfoundmass

That's a very good point Kye, though I still think Shell should look into lighting and audio. Those are the things that you'll need regardless of the project, it's just a matter of figuring out which work best for the most work you do. I spent so much money on gear that I rarely use. It's nice that I have it when I need it, and it has often gotten me jobs, but gear is such a addictive thing. I'm glad to have finally moved on from being impulsive, though I'm still a sucker for a real bargain!

What kind of stuff are ya shooting? Lights and sound are definitely what I'd invest in, regardless, but getting the right lights and mics for what you'll be using them for is key. For a mic the RODE Video Micro is a good choice for $60ish dollars, though the Movo VXR 10 is I think $40 and there's not much difference between the two. They can both be used on camera or boomed with good results. YONGNUO has some pretty good LED light panels starting at around $25. Aputure has some better ones too for a little more money. You can also go the clamp light route, with either CFL or LED bulbs, you'll just want to get higher quality bulbs so you don't have to worry about flicker. I just picked up two Godox SL-60W lights for $200 total on eBay that are arriving tomorrow. You can get one of those for around $120, and it's comparable to the 120d from Aputure.

Panasonic certainly needs to sort those issues out. It seems Panasonic did themselves no favors with the scenes they set up for people to test the camera with. Most opinions I've seen have been very positive, but you always need to take those with a grain of salt until people have really been able to spend some time with the actual camera released. That's one of my biggest problems with these press events: you can't tell a lot from spending 90 minutes with a camera, good or bad. You get a partial picture, but some of these reported issues, for example, are things people might've not noticed until having used the camera for a considerable amount of time. I have more faith in Panasonic than I have in a lot of other companies, but they definitely need to make sure these issues are resolved, if not by the time it's released (preferred), but shortly afterwards.

It's frustrating to see Mokara make the same argument over and over again despite all logic and reason. Canon left out 24p in their lower end cameras because they wanted those users to spend more and/or invest in the new RF mount cameras. It really is that simple. It's a calculated move where they've decided that the rewards outweigh the negatives. Casual users are unlikely to care or notice, which is the only thing Mokara is correct about. Enthusiasts/low budget filmmakers will either pay up for more "premium" cameras, because of brand loyalty or the amount of money they have already invested in Canon gear, or they will move on to a different camera system. From a purely financial standpoint it makes sense, because unless their sales absolutely tank, they'll end up making more by forcing people to pay more for the features they've always had, even if a percentage of users abandon Canon. They've probably calculated those customers were at risk of buying different cameras anyway. But by removing 24 fps from their new sub $1,300 cameras they've given you two choices if you want to stay with Canon: pay up or buy up the remaining inventory of soon to be phased out cameras that are collecting dust in warehouses and store back rooms.

I put one on the groom and one on the officiant. Sometimes I'll also just put the H1 on the podium if there is one and only lav up the groom. I've thought about trying to lav up the bride but I think it's too invasive.

I'm still skeptical about the claim that the Z6 is getting internal RAW. I'll believe it when I see it.

I think there's a middle ground: I think that people should expect at least minimum level of quality from a $200 wireless system, especially from a company like RODE. That is to say, people should rightfully expect the thing to work as advertised. I'd also say though that a $200 wireless set may not be the best choice when shooting something like a wedding, where you've got one chance to nail everything. There's just too great a chance that something will happen. That's why I use a Zoom H1 and a lav. Definitely not fancy but I've never had it fail on me, which is more than I can say for most (all?) wireless systems I've worked with.

There's actual documentation citing the exact opposite! It's beating a dead horse at this point.

The a6400 still overheats in 4K after 30 minutes or so.

I don't blame you, Canon cameras produce such lovely images without having to do a lot of processing. It's hard to beat them when it comes to images straight out of the camera. I think the S1 though is still an excellent stills camera. I've found it to be more pleasing than Sony, for instance.

8K is just a way to sell TVs. As stated previously, the screen size needed to get the benefits of 8K is far larger than most people will ever have. The average TV size in the US is under 50 inches. You'll need a TV at least twice the size to begin to see the benefits of 8K. We haven't really even achieved the benefits of 4K yet! I don't even know how much of the country can even stream 4K yet. From a production standpoint, 8K has some uses. For most of the users on this forum, they don't really NEED 8K even if they WANT it.

I haven't seen much of anything on its photo capabilities other than a Panasonic rep saying that it can do everything the S1 can do.

I trust Panasonic when it comes to the GH6, so I'll take a wait and see approach, but that's a lot of MPs.

If there's a reason to it's fine, but I'm not a big fan of it as a stylized choice, though there are always exceptions.

This is one of the sillier things ever said on here. That's a $5500 camera. The X-H1 is a $1300 camera. That you need to spend $5500 on a Canon camera to get the features you can from a camera that's 1/4 the price is an issue. They want all of that for under $5500 ?

I mean it's funny, because when you look at all the channels that have "DSLR" in their names almost all of them now shoot on Sony or Panasonic.

It's obviously not a scientific poll, or based on sales figures, but just looking at YouTube these days is pretty telling: Sony and Panasonic have really taken over the enthusiast video market, at least in North America. Part of it is how aggressive they were, particularly Sony, in targeting those users. The other part though is that they were far more competitive in not only features but price. The G7 is still popular with YouTubers and low budget shooters, even after 4 years. It's still hard to beat when it comes to features and price. For the advanced shooters you then had the G85 and GH5, which both are still excellent values. The A6300, A6500, and the A7iii were of course all big releases for the YouTube and enthusiast filmmakers, too. I think you can really trace Canon losing their dominance in that space to how slow they were to roll out 4K in their lower end cameras. They were so late to the party, and when they arrived they crippled the auto focus. By that point Panasonic and Sony had already unleashed affordable 4K cameras for people to buy. I think a lot of the people that bought the G7 and the A6300 would've gone with the latest Rebel or EOS M if they'd had 4K offerings, even with crippled auto focus. Why go the Canon route though when you could spend the same amount, or less, and get a 4K capable camera? Canon is Canon. The name will always carry weight with average consumers and top level professionals, but I think they've lost the enthusiast and lower budget market that they pretty much created. Each move to cripple things only make it worse. It's not what I'd be doing if I were them but what can ya do? I have the exact opposite experience. Outside of the bigger channels that can afford higher end Canon cameras, or who have a relationship with Canon, Sony is by and far more popular. It's not even remotely close.

I don't think Sony is capable of putting out an A7Siii that can meet people's expectations right now. At minimum people will expect 4K60p in 10 bit 4:2:2, right? Think about how massive of a technological jump that is from anything they've released in the A7 series so far. I think it's telling that not only did they not do 4K60p or 10 bit in the newest A7R but they didn't even increase the data rate for 4K at all, which is something Sony shooters have been asking for for years. Can they double the frame rate, do 10 bit, and have the data rates needed for those advancements? If the A7RIV and A6600 are any indication, I gotta say I'm pretty skeptical. Maybe it's the segmentation game, but I'm really not sure why you'd leave 4K60p, even in 8 bit, out of a $3,500 camera unless you're just not able to do it. I think I'd have to ask the same question for the $1400 flagship APSC camera too. Sony has been very smart. It's hard to imagine that they've decided to coast, especially given the rapid developments over the last year.

What do you mean more specific? These are all wide angle lenses that would do what you requested, most in the price range you gave.

What a hill to die on.

One of my favorite YouTubers. What I thought was really interesting, and encouraging, is that Panasonic themselves had a Sigma lens on the camera. It's one thing to be a part of an alliance, but to feature another company's lens on your camera during a launch event shows me that they really are working together well. I think that's great.

The Panasonic 14mm f2.5 can be bought pretty cheaply. 12mm f2 Rokinon / Samyang is another option if you don't mind manual lenses.

Canon should just shoot in 480i and really save everyone some money!

They're not trying to push people to buy the C200 instead of the 90D. They are clearly trying to push those users towards the EOS R entry model, which magically has these features. It's literally common sense. What changed in the last year? Couldn't be the debut of their FF mirrorless and RF mount, could it?!

Things move at such a rapid pace in the camera industry, the A7iii launch seems forever ago. I don't think it's completely fair to call them the new Canon since they're not really crippling the camera by removing features, at least not to the extent Canon has, but it's quite concerning that they're releasing new cameras without much improvement to rolling shutter (which has always been a huge issue), image stabilization, ergonomics, bit rate, etc. all while re-using old sensors. You don't need to revolutionize with every release but there should be far more improvements than just a better battery and a headphone jack.