newfoundmass

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.

I've tried using clip settings to make my 60p footage playback at 24 fps, which works, but is it really better than using the re time option? Is Resolve smart enough to know that my clip has more frames it can use instead of having to create new ones for slow motion when using the re time tool?

Sheesh, I was just kidding around. I'm not criticizing anyone for re-framing or cropping in, most of us do it. But if someone ever finds themselves in a situation where *8k* is necessary (or even "useful") to do it on a *1080p* time line then something probably went terribly wrong during shooting or the person was very lazy. That's way more resolution than you should ever need for that purpose.

No offense but if you need *8k* to crop and re-frame for 1080p editing you got bigger issues than resolution! ?

There really is no reason for 8k for 99% of us even if you're editing in 4k or 1080p. Most cameras already are downscaling down to 4k. I've never felt like I've needed more detail when working with 4k. If anything there have been times when I felt like there was too much detail that it looked too sharp.

I don't want or need 8k.

I'm finding Resolve to be frustrating. I feel overwhelmed. But I'm trying to finally rid myself of Premiere and Adobe's shitty subscription model once and for all. What are the best resources to learn Resolve?

Is rolling shutter really all that bad on M43? I've been fine with it on my GH3, G85 and GH5. Is a global shutter camera really even necessary at this level of hobbyist and indie filmmaking/videography?

Honestly the G85 at the current price that you can find it at is a great deal for all you get. I don't know that we'll see it go too much lower in price, at least not G7 low, for awhile. Probably not until they release a successor. Panasonic got a lot of praise for it but I actually don't think they got enough praise for how jam packed the G85 is. What a wonderful camera.

I got my G85, lightly used, for $650 with two Olympus lenses that I sold for $200, so I ended up getting mine for $450

Yeah, I've had the same experience with audio people. Granted I know that wireless will get used for these, but I can't think of a single audio person I've worked with that opted for wireless unless they needed it.

But why? Granted they're probably using high end systems but it seems unnecessary when you can simply use a wired connection to a recorder or the camera.

Why use a wireless system for a (presumably) sit down interview? That seems unnecessary.

Honestly shame on F Stoppers for contacting the company and offering not to review it because it'd be a negative review. If they're going to accept products to review they shouldn't give the companies that option and should just release an unbiased review, whether it's good or bad.