newfoundmass

I've never noticed this but I've also never actually shot anything without an external mic! Like others have said I'd go with an external mic. It should eliminate this problem and you'll get better audio even when using some of the more affordable mics out there. I suggest the Movo or Boya (I believe they're the same mic) knockoff of the Rode Video Micro. It's $40 on Amazon and from what I've heard it is as good, and maybe even better, than the Micro, which is an excellent mic.

This feels out of left field. Surprising to see, I honestly didn't even know Sharp was still around!

I don't think the 1080p is bad though on the G7, at least not from what I've seen on videos I've watched on YouTube (granted that's not the best way to judge given their compression.) I admittedly skipped that generation of Panasonic cameras, only having used the GH4 on my friends projects. A few years back I was really considering the upgrade from my GH3 and did a lot of research into both the G7 and GH4 and overall remember being really impressed with the G7's output even though I ultimately decided to stick with the GH3 for longer. I've really only heard positive things since. I debated getting a G7 for my GH5 b-cam but ultimately spent the extra on the G85 because it matches the GH5 with less tweaking and because of the ibis. I think the OP will be very pleased with his choice overall!

This is surprising! I live in Vermont, so I know a lot of Canadians (eh?) and the only negative interactions I have really ever had are with French Canadians. They drive too fast, pretend they don't speak/understand English (most of them do!) and can be pretty sour. And before anyone accuses me of being prejudice my Mom's family is French Canadian! So some French Canadian runs through these veins! ? Really though I think part of it boils down to the importance of art and creativity in Canadian culture. Culturally they focus on the arts more than the US does these days. As someone that grew up in the late 80s and the 90s, art and music programs began to disappear during my time in school. I think that began even earlier, unfortunately, starting in the 70s. Those programs are what stimulate creativity in children and send them on the path to creative outlets like photography and film. Degrees in the "liberal arts", theater, and even stuff like journalism, etc. have become kind of punchlines and are viewed by many as useless degrees in the United States these days. Without going on a political rant, the TL;DR version is simply the United States has really focused itself culturally on money, economics and... That's about it. Even our film and television industry has become more about money and economics than artistic expression and creativity. Films make more money than ever but those films are void of much substance. They're incredible from a technical standpoint, but Transformers 8 and Fast and the Furious XXI aren't exactly leaving a positive impact on the culture of the United States. They're made for economic reasons, not artistic. When you watch films or television made in other countries you'll often see that they've been made with government grant money, whereas most films and television is made here using private money with tax incentives. Heck here in the US people are trying to defund what little is made with tax payer money! PBS is one of the few American outlets that still produces things with substance but is constantly targeted by people trying to defund it. I think you can also trace the decline of American influence globally in part to the decline of the arts here. Obviously there are a ton of other factors, but American entertainment was a huge part of spreading American culture and ideas (for better or worse) to the world. Anyway. Ha ha ha ha. As others have said, I think it's a cultural thing.

The G7, if I recall, has an image that rivals (and maybe even surpasses?) the GH4, if the videos I watched a few years ago were accurate. It's a very good option and is probably the best bang for your buck even today. The biggest thing the GH3 has over it is battery life and overall build quality. As Shaun wrote, the GH3 is really well built. But the G7 will serve you well, I think. I know people that swear by it and use it even though they could afford to get something newer. It's hard to go wrong really with a camera that's so cheap but also so capable. You can't really argue with people that have made thousands of dollars using a camera they bought for under $500! Look into the Viltrox or Commlite speedbooster too so you can use your Canon glass. While I don't recommend shooting just exclusively with adapted glass, it's a great option when you're up to shooting things manually. I use the Sigma 18-35 on my GH5 and G85 and the image is beautiful! I'm sure you can get excellent results with some of your Canon glass! Just don't expect great results with auto focus when adapting glass, or really even with native glass! ?

You had a bum camera if your 1080p looked like upscaled 720p. The GH3 has lovely 1080p. Moving from the 6D to the GH3 would be like night and day; the GH3 is miles ahead of most Canon cameras, even some of the newer ones (minus the obvious exceptions) in terms of image quality. I was still using my GH3 as recently as last year as a b-cam before retiring it and giving it to my nephew, who has shown interest in shooting video. With that said I wouldn't recommend the GH3 in 2019 unless you absolutely can't afford something a bit newer. It's a great camera, and it is a work horse for sure, but it's hard to recommend a camera that is over 7 years old. A G7 is a very good option on a budget. I don't recommend shooting in 4K and downscaling to 1080p though unless your system can handle 4K editing or you don't mind very long render times. In most instances it just makes sense to shoot in the resolution you'll be delivering in.

I don't understand why it has had to be repeated so often, re: 10 bit. ? TV networks and stations literally require it, even smaller local stations. If I was @Oliver DanielI'd be annoyed about the price cut happening right after buying it! I'm looking forward to seeing what he's able to do with it!

In my experience the only people I know that shoot RAW are ones that only do a couple projects a year. When you're working on tight deadlines you don't really have time to make shooting RAW worth it. For a lot of shoots we don't even shoot in log. Most production work is weighing what you NEED with what you want. You may want to shoot in RAW or log but do you NEED to? Do you have time to really work with it? Put me in the EVA1 camp, if I have to choose. Versatility is the most important thing to me. It still has a gorgeous image even if it doesn't have those Canon colors.

I'd have definitely been interested if it could do 4K 40p. While I appreciate the offering, that, to me, is the kind of shake up they'd need to do to tempt someone like me. ProRes and RAW are cool and all but honestly, if I want ProRes, I'd just as soon use a recorder since I'd need a monitor anyway.

Very, very little. The extra crop in 4K can be a bit of a hassle, no headphone jack stinks, and there are a couple of minor features missing that the GH5 has, but I'd argue 85% of the time it'll do everything most people would use the GH5 for. Image quality wise there isn't a ton of difference. You can cut between the two and they'll match perfectly with minimal, if any, tweaking needed. Panasonic really doesn't get enough credit for the G85. It was incredibly brave to pack so much into that camera knowing a few months later they'd be announcing the GH5. It will follow the G7, I think, in having a long, healthy life cycle.

The G85 is still an excellent camera in 2018/2019. For a lot of smaller projects I'll grab it instead of the GH5. IBIS works with vintage lenses, you just have to manually set the focal range.

It'll be stable in 3-4 patches... ?

I was literally thinking the same thing. Used to rig up the OG Pocket and would get through most day shoots with 2 batteries. Because the Z Cam is a stripped down camera brain that uses external accessories instead of internal camera features. They also haven't needed to, as their offerings have exceeded expectations based on features and price.

It probably didn't help, but most people didn't give it serious consideration even after they heard about it. Simply looking at the specs should've caught people's interest. Still very few bothered to check it out. That it feels like it has gotten more attention from notable video folks on YouTube in 2018 than it did when it came out days quite a bit.

It's a wonderful camera. Still bums me out that it didn't get more attention.

For projects like that the ability to highlight subtle looks, movements, facial expressions, etc. is important, so you really need to edit things more tightly. Lots of going back and forth to fine tune it so it's perfect.

It really depends. For sports I usually treat it like I'm doing a live switch since that's how I started out 20 years ago. Then I'll go back and fine tune things. Pro wrestling for instance I can switch and edit in my sleep at this point. If I'm doing a speech, interview, or really anything else I usually go through it a little bit slower, much more similar to how I'd edit something normally. Precision, pacing, etc. is more important. Sports gives you leeway that other work doesn't always give you.

Rolling shutter went from being one of my biggest concerns to something I don't even think about these days. The only cameras I notice having bad rolling shutter these days are the Sony a6xxx cameras. Every other camera has made huge leaps, to the point that global shutter doesn't interest me at all. I can only see rolling shutter being an issue on blockbuster films, like the Top Gun sequel where they're going to be shooting fighter jets at insane speeds.

I'm progressing slowly but surely. My biggest issue that would prevent me from switching is multicam seems to be broken. Saw posts about it on the official black magic forum, so hopefully that gets fixed in a future patch soon! I'm working on a short right now and it's coming along pretty well. I just wish 4K played smoother without needing proxies. But I'm not ready to commit to the upgrade yet until I see multicam in action.

The problems may be the same, but the causes might be different. It might be difficult to get an answer from the op given the post was made 2 years ago, but are you all using the same version of the lens (version I or II?) I'd probably reach out to Panasonic directly.

You can't really go wrong either way. The Voigtlanders are great lenses. Vintage full frame lenses are also great and have the added bonus of being adaptable to pretty much anything. I personally would probably go the vintage route. While I'm invested in MFT and have no intentions of leaving it any time soon, nice vintage lenses are going to retain their value more and be usable no matter what happens to MFT. And like you said you can get some really great and unique footage with them. Ultimately though it's up to you and your preference. I've looked into buying used Voigtlanders glass and they seemed to be holding their value pretty well when I looked over the summer.

Most of them aren't going to be shooting on mirrorless ILCs though!

4K 60p 150 mbps doesn't play back smoothly at all in Resolve (free version) for me. I have a decent gaming laptop that I got in February of 2017. I've heard that the paid version handles h.264 better though? Intel Core i7 7700HQ @ 2.80GHz, 16 GB of ram, and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 graphics card. Haven't tried it on my main editing rig yet, I still haven't unpacked it after moving.

No, I always wait for a couple of patches before installing a major update and plan to switch to Resolve or getting a Mac and using the Final Cut X license I bought when it first came out and learning that. Just can't justify spending $600 a year on a subscription when there are other options out there. I only switched to Premiere after Final Cut Pro 7 no longer was efficient.

It'd be weird if the trial version didn't support the same codecs. Aren't they fully functioning trials? But I've never had a problem with Premiere not supporting the codecs I've used.