newfoundmass

I'm guessing we won't know fully until shooters get to spend more time with it. The consensus seems to be though that it's pretty good, significantly better than what Nikon is advertising.

Except you literally have done exactly that. Go back and re-read what you wrote when he said he liked the 10 bit 4:2:2 better. You're awful, man. Thank you @Shirozinafor alerting me to the ignore feature!

I'm not convinced the A7Siii will have 4k 60p internally but just because one camera company isn't able to implement it for those reasons (overheating) doesn't mean that another can't. I imagine a lot of R&D has gone into trying to make 60p possible in 4k on Sony cameras. One of them will be able to do it eventually, some sooner than others.

Having had the chance to watch a bunch of videos and read a bunch of stuff, overall I'm encouraged by these two cameras. There really does seem to be a lot to like here. Still I don't think it's quite there for those of us that are primarily video shooters. While I feel like the lack of dual card slots has been blown out of proportion, it is disappointing and a strike right out the gate. Not a deal killer for me, but something I've come to expect since shooting with the LS300 and the GH5. I'm also not big on the choice to use fly by wire for the lenses. I'd at least like to see something similar to what Olympus does with their f/1.2 primes and the MF clutch. I also agree with Jordan Drake that since it's fly by wire they should at least allow you to change focusing direction. While no other FF camera has 4k 60p it's still disappointing that it's not possible, even externally (like I can with the LS300.) Prior to getting the GH5 it was never that big of a deal, but after having and using it, it'd be hard to go back to a camera without it. The ergonomics look good. Big buttons, spaced out nicely, a beefy grip. But that was to be expected. The lack of flip out screen though is a real bummer. I'm really not sure why every camera manufacturer hasn't gone that way yet. Overall the video looks pretty pleasing. I look forward to seeing it more out in the wild in capable hands. AF in video looks good too, comparable to Sony and maybe even a little better. The important thing overall is that they're in the game now and really seem to be taking mirrorless seriously. While right now it's not a viable option for me, and I think the A7Siii will inevitably blow these two cameras away for video (it has to right?), I think we're really going to see Nikon really step their game up and by the 2nd or 3rd generation they'll be competitive with video shooters. If by some chance the A7Siii doesn't blow it out of the water, then they might be there already. It's an exciting time for sure!

The point you're missing is, you can post all the lab tests that you want, when it comes to what camera is "better" it all boils down to preference and what each person believes. There are facts and there are opinions, you often confuse the two and denigrate and insult those that don't agree with your facts because, to put it bluntly, you're a dick to virtually everyone. I'm not invested enough to look up the post because frankly arguing with you is pointless, but it was just the other day that you were telling @Shirozinathey were factually wrong because they liked the Panasonic 10 bit 4:2:2 codec more than the Sony's 8 bit 4:2:0. Who the fuck cares about your tests if he prefers the Panasonic? Those aren't facts, those are your own conclusions that you pass on as facts while he came to his own conclusions. What's even more telling is when @Andrew Reidcalls you out you have nothing to say, but when anyone else does you call them fanboys, accuse them of smoking crack, etc. I don't understand why your attitude and behavior are tolerated, regardless of how much useful stuff you share, especially when you have caused at least one knowledgeable professional to post less here. You look to be in your 60s, act like it.

Jon's jump from GH5 fanboy to Sony fanboy is wild. I wish he wasn't such an intolerant dick and was able to process the notion that we all have different opinions, preferences, and wants. If you don't agree with him and his "facts" you're delusional, an idiot or both.

I mean, none of us will actually know until we hold it, but from pictures: The button layout looks preferable, particularly for those of us with big hands. The A7iii's buttons, for example, felt crowded when I used it. The location of the dials look to be unobtrusive while still easily accessible. Overall it looks like a more thoughtfully designed camera.

The GH5 has an ETC mode which will allow you to use your c-mount lenses without vignetting. Lemme use one of the c-mount lenses I have left over from my BMPCC days tomorrow to check. I think mine is 12.5mm too! A Computar one! I use the Viltrox focal reducer with the Sigma 18-35. What a wonderful combo! The Metabones was just too pricey for me, I've been very happy with the Viltrox. Pixco has released a dummy focal reducer too that's $99, if you're not concerned but your lenses communicating with the camera. I got the G85 for $600, which included two cheap Olympus lenses that I sold for about $275 total, so the G85 ended up being $325. So if you can find a deal on it you probably won't regret it. Still though, I love my GH5!

Most people don't like Sony's ergonomics and prefer the traditional DSLR form factor. It really shouldn't be hard to understand.

Really, really disappointing. I kinda wish they'd not released it at all, ha ha, because it's so disappointing. I was really looking forward to a powerful pocket cam that I could carry around with me. I would've had a lot of uses for this camera.

The G85 is very good, I have one as a b-cam for my GH5. I don't think you'd regret getting it, especially if you find a good used deal like I did, though I think the GH5 is worth the extra money. It has fewer MP but it's more than adequate for Instagram, social media, web publishing and even smaller prints (I imagine; I've never printed any images from my G85.) The GH5's 6k photo mode is so great, especially if you're shooting a fast moving subject. I was using it for my nephew's birthday party last weekend and I never had to worry about whether or not I'd miss the shot as he and his friends played. As someone else said it really is an under appreciated feature.

The GH5 is more than capable for stills, especially for online publishing. The 6k photo mode is great for social media use. If I was mostly focused on photos I'd probably look at Fuji or Sony, but if you're going to use it for a lot of video work the GH5 is definitely one of the best options out there in my opinion.

I figured it was worth reminding you that if he prefers the image, and thinks it's far superior, it doesn't matter how much you claim "the facts" say otherwise because, ya know, it boils down personal preference. You're welcome though. I feel I should thank you for being a crotchety old man that has caused multiple people to cease posting here (I miss @Mattias Burling, it's a shame that a knowledgeable shooter and someone that has devoted an incredible amount of time to educating and helping people avoids this place because of you.) You're experience filming people in cafés has been invaluable here.

That's his opinion. There really aren't facts when it comes to preference.

The lack of mic input really is disappointing. I feel like this camera got enough of a following with some video shooters that they'd have listened to our wants more. Aside from the great lens there really isn't much of a reason to buy this vs their smaller ILC cameras.

The GH5 has no recording limits, so you can record until either your battery dies or your SD cards are full. Panasonic is the only company in the DSLR/DSLM market that doesn't have the recording limit. It produces beautiful video, both in 1080p and 4K. The stabilization is fantastic. It's weakness is auto focus in video (using adapters makes this worse) and low light performance (though it's not as bad as some say.) Canon lenses can be adapted (one of the most popular lenses for the GH5 is the Sigma 18-35 with focal reducer / speed booster) and work decently well manually or using push to focus, but the auto focus isn't the most reliable and is slower than if you used native lenses. I use a GH5 for similar work as you do. The GH5 and the Panasonic 12-35mm f/ 2.8 are a great combo. If you want faster glass and don't mind primes, there are some really great prime lenses between Panasonic and Olympus lenses. Speed boosters are fine on the GH5 too, as long as you know what to expect. They work no worse on the GH5 than they do for Sony cameras, etc. If you're not interested in 4K and aren't looking to sell your lenses then the C100 is probably the better option. Maybe someone that uses more adapted Canon/EF lenses on the GH5 can chime in, but the only EF lens I use is the Sigma 18-35. The rest are native MFT and adapted vintage lenses.

You're acting like he's planning to buy an XL1 or something! That's an antique. You don't call a perfectly capable camera that meets most professional's requirements an antique because it doesn't shoot 4k or have insane HFR. He'll get superior image quality, vastly better audio, better ergonomics, and the ability to record longer than 30 minutes (a necessity for the content he wants to produce). The C100 is still used by tons of professionals even today. I know at least a dozen personally that shoot on it still, from studio work to going into war zones in Iraq to shoot news/documentary footage. I'm sure if he had the money he'd buy the C200 or C300, even if he still only shot in 1080p. But for under $2,000 and for his specific requirements (wanting to stay in the Canon family), he's not going to do any better than the C100 and it'll still be a relevant and capable camera for years to come. For his uses and budget it's a good investment. Hell, in a couple years he'll still be able to get something for it, probably at least half of what he'll pay for it, if he decides to sell or upgrade.

I've come to appreciate the smaller camera. I used to dislike it and scoffed at the idea of shooting video with a DSLR style camera, but I've come to embrace it and now prefer it. I think it makes more sense for Sony to make their design, hardware and software more efficient instead of beefing it up significantly. I can't imagine they don't have the capabilities to do it. It also makes no sense to cannibalize their higher end line to that extent. The A7 line is confusing, particularly the A7iii given how great it is for video. It kinda took some of the A7Siii's thunder; that camera is gonna really need to be a home run.

There's no comparison between the C100 and Canon DSLRs; the IQ is far superior. It provides some of the best 1080p video I've ever seen, which is remarkable considering the codec. The ergonomics, the pro features, no recording limit, etc. all fit what he's looking for. It's still a great camera and, in my opinion, a good deal. Crazy to see people arguing against it.

The c100 should do fine with stage lighting. I never get asked about 4k. I really only shoot it when I know I'll need the extra resolution. He doesn't seem like he needs / wants 4k in the immediate future, so I wouldn't worry about it. He can always rent a camera if necessary.

I don't see why you should wait. It's unlikely that a comparable Canon camera will be released that fits your budget any time soon. If you don't need 4k then it's a great option. Even if you find you need a better codec you can buy a cheap Atomos recorder to get ProRes out of it. I say go for it. I think I'd try to get the mk2 if I could find a good deal on it, but the mk1 would still be a great option.

Auto focus is a necessity, not so much for me but for those that have become obsessed with it. The GH5S showed that good low light is possible, and even the GH5 showed that low light capabilities are improving over previous cameras, so that's not a major issue these days, but narrowing the gap in low light performance is obviously something they need to continue with. I think exploring a APS-C sized sensor might be something they should look more into. With adapters it can get you very close to full frame, which is another thing people seem to becoming more and more obsessed with. Overall though I think Panasonic has done a good job developing the system. Nearly 2 years after release I think the GH5 is still worth every penny and is still the only camera in its class capable of doing so many things.

All your bases will be covered!

Still strongly think the Panasonic route is the best option, as your b and c cameras could easy be used as an A cam and do almost everything that your A cam can do. Having that versatility cannot be underestimated. And the crop during HFR can be worked through, I think you'd eventually stop noticing it and just be used to it. Auto focus on the gimbal really isn't an issue. I've never had problems with my GH5 and the Moza Air, both using Rokinon lenses w/o auto focus and Panny lenses with auto focus. I think AF is a weak reason to pass on 10 bit and 4k 60p on your b and c cams, but I'm not the one using the cameras If I did go the Sony route I'd probably avoid getting the a6500 because the HD is pretty awful and get two A7 III.

This latest news is disappointing. It doesn't seem like they listened to anyone's wants. Bummer.