I took a cinema camera on holiday, and it changed everything

[MrSMW]

Just about to say the same, ie, XM5 + used Sigma 18-50 (27-75) f2.8 

[ac6000cw]

If you need the superzoom lens, the combo of A6700 + Sony 18-135mm is actually a bit lighter (and is a slimmer lens) than X-M5 + Fuji 13-135mm, plus it has an EVF. (Assuming https://camerasize.com/ sizes and weights are accurate).

But the Pana 14-140mm is much lighter and smaller than either the Sony or Fuji lens, and has wider zoom range... it's really hard to beat as a 'do almost anything' travel lens.

I've been doing these kind of comparisons myself recently, with a view to possibly buying a *small* MILC with better video support than the GX85 I already own (and one that has a mic input).

Comparison - https://camerasize.com/compact/#910.702,935.426,673.931,ha,t

[kye]

16 hours ago, bjohn said:

That all makes sense. I bought my BMPCC and BMMCCs for a documentary project (and future doc projects) and they'll work for that; most of my doc work is music-related and I don't need a "run and gun" setup. But I do a lot of concert and dance photography and am occasionally being asked to do video as well, and that's where something faster and easier to use would be helpful. My big requirement there is low-light performance, and it seems that despite its smaller sensor the GH7 might be better in that department than the FX30 (the FX3 is out of my price range, although the Nikon Z6iii could be a contender), plus I'd get the advantages of more depth of field (and thus more forgiving manual focus) when shooting MFT. I'm in no rush to make a decision as I can get by with my current cameras for now, but I definitely want a simpler, hand-holdable and faster option available when I need it.

You'd have to find a direct comparison to compare the two..  I recently saw an FX30 latitude test and the way the person exposed it for the 'normal' exposure it had almost no stops under but heaps of stops over, so it might be that the different sensors and log profiles are skewing things rather differently.

I say this because I've noticed that in high-DR scenes you might want to expose things in a non-normal way, ETTR or ETTL.  Everyone knows about ETTR, but I discovered that with the GX85 you want to ETTL because what's clipped is clipped but you can bring up the image 1-2 stops in post, so if there are higher-DR scenes then you'd ETTL in order to avoid clipping things too hard.

[kye]

12 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

I'm wondering whether the new FujiFilm X-M5 might be an option if you looked for something outside the MFT format.

Its a proper little powerhouse for video with IBIS, PDAF, 10 bit 4:2:2 and 6.2K open gate etc

It is also just plain little as well, even against the GX80/85

Interesting little camera..  the lens options seem to be quite good too (unlike the FF systems right now).

The reviews say it doesn't have IBIS?

How is the DR and low-light on it?  I couldn't find any DR tests except people parroting the claims from Fuji, and we all now that DR specs are amongst the least trustworthy pieces of information available across all of human history.

12 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

Works out around $200 more than the GH7 body only and of course, aside from the camera itself, are all readily available used to keep the price down further.

Its a sobering look at how far MFT prices have crept up.

Yes, MFT prices seem to have risen, I assume it's because they only release large flagship cameras now.  Yet another one of the [everyone says X online] -> [manufacturers respond] -> [everyone complains about cameras on offer] pattern of behaviour.

I've been thinking about this more since posting and I think I'd actually prefer an MFT solution.  I watched some video of the S9 and new 18-40mm f4.5-6.3 kit lens, and even at 18mm F4.5 it still has enough background blur to make me nervous about focusing.
[we want crazy-shallow DoF] -> [manufacturers go all-in on larger sensors] -> [now everything is out of focus.. waaaaah]

On MFT focusing is still an issue of course, but the issue is typically acquiring focus, not selecting which thing in the frame to focus on.  Of all the focusing failures I've seen over the last ~5 years, 90% of them are it successfully focusing on the wrong thing.  With MFT I don't have this issue.

13 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

Oddly enough, my recent experiences of travelling have shown a shift in the negative perception of people with "real" cameras as my observation is that people are now getting far more irritated by the pouting photoshoots using smartphones happening everywhere.

I was walking through St James Park in London a few nights ago and the amount of people draped over the bridge doing the "take a picture of the back of me as I gaze thoughtfully at Buckingham Palace" was ridiculous.

Particularly considering it was virtually pitch black !

Encouraging news!

I did wonder if it would swing in this direction.  When out shooting / touristing I've actually heartily embraced the dorky-dad aesthetic because it encourages locals to give you a bit of leeway if I'm accidentally rude or film them when they'd prefer not to be, and it also separates me from the vacuous volumes of professional narcissists.  

Before I switched to WFH I shot a number of times in the CBD before work to test a camera, and when you're wearing office attire and shooting with a camera people seem to get very paranoid.  I was shooting a composition of people walking through my shot (away from the camera) and one guy stopped right in the middle of the frame and then stood there for ages.  At the time I was just annoyed because it ruined my shot.  When I looked at the footage later it turned out that he clocked me with a sideways glance, then stopped, pulled out his phone and using the selfie camera to see behind him without turning around he super-zoomed in on me and took lots of photos of me.  I'd assume he was a conspiracy nut.  

[kye]

5 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

If you need the superzoom lens, the combo of A6700 + Sony 18-135mm is actually a bit lighter (and is a slimmer lens) than X-M5 + Fuji 13-135mm, plus it has an EVF. (Assuming https://camerasize.com/ sizes and weights are accurate).

I'd assume the sizes they list are likely accurate, but the images aren't 100% reliable as I stumbled upon a combination where two cameras had the same lens on the front (it was the front-on view) and they were slightly different sizes.  Not so much as to stop using the tool, but maybe 10% out.

5 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

If you need the superzoom lens, the combo of A6700 + Sony 18-135mm is actually a bit lighter (and is a slimmer lens) than X-M5 + Fuji 13-135mm, plus it has an EVF. (Assuming https://camerasize.com/ sizes and weights are accurate).

But the Pana 14-140mm is much lighter and smaller than either the Sony or Fuji lens, and has wider zoom range... it's really hard to beat as a 'do almost anything' travel lens.

I've been doing these kind of comparisons myself recently, with a view to possibly buying a *small* MILC with better video support than the GX85 I already own (and one that has a mic input).

Comparison - https://camerasize.com/compact/#910.702,935.426,673.931,ha,t

Your post actually brings up a point I hadn't explicitly made, but I actually want two cameras (one with an incredible image and one that's very small) and I want them to share the same lens system.

I did only mention the combinations of BMMCC with 12-35mm F2.8, GX85 with 14-140mm, and GX85 with 14/2.5, but actually I have more scenarios:

• Big camera for day and night stuff: BMMCC with 12-35mm F2.8
• Small tourist camera during day: GX85 with 14-140mm
• Small tourist camera at night: GX85 with 12-35mm F2.8
• Tiny stealth camera: GX85 with 14/2.5
• Extreme low light: GX85 with 7.5/2 + 17/1.4 + 50/1.2
• Wide-to-extreme tele scenes from the hotel window during the day: BMMCC with 14-140mm on tripod
• Wide-to-extreme tele scenes from the hotel window at night: GX85 with 14-140mm on tripod
• Wide-to-moderate tele scenes from the hotel window at night: GX85 or BMMCC with fast primes

As you see, apart from the 14mm F2.5 pancake lens, every lens is used on each camera.  This is one of the reasons I tend to keep all my equipment, so many times I've hit a new situation and then reached into the "I'm definitely not ever using this again" box and pulled out just the right tool for the job.  

I bought the 14mm F2.5 lens in about 2012, and am still using it and it's still one of the best options available.

5 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

I've been doing these kind of comparisons myself recently, with a view to possibly buying a *small* MILC with better video support than the GX85 I already own (and one that has a mic input).

There is very little to replace the GX85 if that's your main camera.  There's a reason I'm still using it, despite it being a long-superseded camera with quite aging tech.  In my setup it's the "when size is more important than image quality" option.  I've mentioned I can get the GX85 to look like the BMMCC, and that's true, but only with a decent amount of work and only when it's operating within its quite narrow sweet spot, and even then the images are only 'passable'.  The BMMCC is truly a cinema camera - the fact it's so small is just a coincidence - apart from size it shares nothing with "small cameras", which is just a synonym for horrifically and unnecessarily compromised images.

 

[BTM_Pix]

5 hours ago, kye said:

The reviews say it doesn't have IBIS?

And they would be right !

I don’t know where I got that notion from.

In my defence I am not far off qualifying for a bus pass, not really a fan of the destructive nature of IBIS and prefer OIS which a lot more of the X mount lenses have.

5 hours ago, kye said:

How is the DR and low-light on it?

Well in my new role as Minister of Disinformation, I could only speculate but as it’s is the X-S20 internally then I’d go by that.

 

[ac6000cw]

8 hours ago, kye said:

There is very little to replace the GX85 if that's your main camera.  There's a reason I'm still using it, despite it being a long-superseded camera with quite aging tech.  In my setup it's the "when size is more important than image quality" option.

It's not my main camera - that's currently an OM-1.

I've kept the GX85 for use as a travel-cam, fitted with the 14-140mm lens - that combo is smaller and lighter than some smaller sensor 'superzoom' cameras. Its main downside (for me) is the poor quality audio (and no mic jack to work around that). The cropped 4k video isn't ideal either, but at least it's less cropped than the later 20MP sensor GX9 or G100. So (like you) it's my "when size & weight is more important than image and sound quality" M43 camera.

AFAIK the only *reasonably small* hybrid M43 20MP cameras with uncropped 4K are the Oly E-M10 iv & E-M5 iii and the OMDS OM-5 (and they are all taller than the GX85/GX9, and only the E-M5 iii and OM-5 have mic inputs).

I've thought about replacing the GX85 with an E-M5 iii or OM-5, but I already also own an E-M1 iii (the OM-5 is based on it internally) which is a bit larger and 170g heavier but is 'free' to me.

I think what both of us would really, really like the G9 ii/GH7 sensor and processing in a smaller body...

[MrSMW]

4 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

And they would be right !

Oh yes. XS-20 then!

[kye]

5 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

And they would be right !

I don’t know where I got that notion from.

In my defence I am not far off qualifying for a bus pass, not really a fan of the destructive nature of IBIS and prefer OIS which a lot more of the X mount lenses have.

lol about the bus pass.. TBH there are so many models with so many combinations of features I'm surprised that anyone can even be familiar with the equipment they own personally, let alone be walking databases...  (this camera has 4K and PDAF, but you can't use PDAF in the 4K mode unless you're wearing a blue hat and the moon is in Pisces...)

It's a bummer about not having IBIS as that stabilises roll, where OIS doesn't.  

IBIS gets a bad rap because YouTubers put an ultra-wide on and then walk-and-talk without looking where they're going.  No technology can withstand that kind of abuse!  

In my situation I use the many-layers approach to stabilisation where:

1. I don't use an ultra-wide
2. I try and hold the camera as steady as I possibly can with three (or two good quality) contact points
3. apart from the occasional follow-shot I am standing stationary with feet planted firmly on the ground and shoulder-width apart
4. I breathe out and hold it out while taking the shot
5. Shot will be static - no pans or tilts or anything
6. OIS is enabled
7. IBIS is enabled

In a sense, I've done most of the stabilisation before the light even makes it into the lens.  In instances like this the IBIS is only making very small adjustments, but the real reason I want it is that it stabilises roll, which OIS doesn't, and the BMMCC is a long and very thin camera so roll is the movement it's most sensitive to.  I'd stabilise in post, but when shooting 180 shutter the roll of the camera is baked into the frames in movement blur, so you can stabilise in post but then you get random bursts of rotational blur, which is less that ideal.

For the next trip I'm looking into options for a compact handle that will hopefully reduce this.

5 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

Well in my new role as Minister of Disinformation, I could only speculate but as it’s is the X-S20 internally then I’d go by that.

CineD said they "managed to get 13 stops of DR when the camera is set to 4K/25p" which is quite respectable.  Assuming that's SNR=2 then it's more than both the BMMCC and the GH7, so very respectable indeed.  Even if it was SNR=1 it's still pretty good.

The GH7 had excellent latitude test images, which is really what you actually use DR for, so maybe it'd be closer to being equal.  Regardless, and excellent option.

[kye]

2 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

It's not my main camera - that's currently an OM-1.

I've kept the GX85 for use as a travel-cam, fitted with the 14-140mm lens - that combo is smaller and lighter than some smaller sensor 'superzoom' cameras. Its main downside (for me) is the poor quality audio (and no mic jack to work around that). The cropped 4k video isn't ideal either, but at least it's less cropped than the later 20MP sensor GX9 or G100. So (like you) it's my "when size & weight is more important than image and sound quality" M43 camera.

AFAIK the only *reasonably small* hybrid M43 20MP cameras with uncropped 4K are the Oly E-M10 iv & E-M5 iii and the OMDS OM-5 (and they are all taller than the GX85/GX9, and only the E-M5 iii and OM-5 have mic inputs).

I've thought about replacing the GX85 with an E-M5 iii or OM-5, but I already also own an E-M1 iii (the OM-5 is based on it internally) which is a bit larger and 170g heavier but is 'free' to me.

I think what both of us would really, really like the G9 ii/GH7 sensor and processing in a smaller body...

Makes sense, and yes, it seems we have similar approaches.  Great minds think alike...  or fools never differ?  If it was the latter then neither of us would ever know, so I'll assume the former 🙂 

The crop doesn't really bother me that much, and it's only 10%, but lately I've been focusing on busy cities and the density means that if you go wider than 30mm you've probably got too busy a frame, but in those moments I just grab the shot with my phone and then move on.  The 12-35mm on the BMMCC is equivalent to 34-101mm FOV, and while shooting in Seoul I only wanted to go wider on a handful of occasions over the two weeks we were there - it is a very densely packed city!

I became aware (and probably hypersensitive) to my clips looking amateurish and started trying to work out what might be the causes.  One thing I realised I didn't like the look of was wide-angled lenses, especially if there's any uncontrolled camera movement.  Obviously they are used by the pros, but the more I looked into it and did my own tests, the more I realised that wide angled lenses weren't that common.  If you look at the old c-mount zoom lenses that were the work-horses on 8mm and 16mm film cameras, the wide end of the zooms for the 8mm cameras was often around 8mm, and the wide end of the zooms for the 16mm cameras was around 17mm, which would make them upwards of 40mm equivalent FOV.   You don't see people shooting features on lenses much wider than 35mm, on crop-sensors!
This is one of the reasons I moved to zooms, it was so I could try and shoot with longer focal lengths, but not lose any shots that I needed to quickly zoom out for.

For me, I'd be an instant birthday present if Panasonic put the GH7 sensor in the GX85 body and gave it 4K V-Log, even if they killed almost all the other headline features of the G9ii/GH7.  I know it's crazy, but I want to record 24p with a decent DR, and have files that are a reasonable bitrate and aren't over-processed.  Maybe I'm old fashioned.