So I read that RX10 ii review, and... help!

[kaylee]

ctrt, i agree with the folks who think youd love a gh4. its a great camera

[CTRT]

ctrt, i agree with the folks who think youd love a gh4. its a great camera

Thank a lot! I think I will do that... I was looking at this package here:

http://www.bpm-media.de/en/Sales/ENG-Live-Production/Cameras/HDSLR-Cameras/Panasonic-DMC-GH4A::368198.html

The reviews of he lens seem like it would be good for video... but I'm sure once I start buying lenses I won't stop...

Thanks again!

[Flynn]

Adorama has the NX30 listed as a closeout. Might mean the replacement is around the corner. It should be a lot like the NX1 in terms of video, except cheaper, and might even be able to do a few things the NX1 can't do.

[fuzzynormal]

Whatever works!  There's no right or wrong answers.  

You'll read mostly technical stuff on this particular blog, but as you've noticed, making money at this sort of thing on the lower end has almost bupkis to do with that --and more to do with relationships. 

Ive been using an EM5ii for half a year. Many people don't like the camera because it's not the ultimate in image quality. But, it does the job for me in a way that streamlines a good chunk of my production. That sort of thing is valuable to me, so I've been recommending that camera for consideration to folks on a similar level.

[CTRT]

Adorama has the NX30 listed as a closeout. Might mean the replacement is around the corner. It should be a lot like the NX1 in terms of video, except cheaper, and might even be able to do a few things the NX1 can't do.

Whatever works!  There's no right or wrong answers.  

You'll read mostly technical stuff on this particular blog, but as you've noticed, making money at this sort of thing on the lower end has almost bupkis to do with that --and more to do with relationships. 

Ive been using an EM5ii for half a year. Many people don't like the camera because it's not the ultimate in image quality. But, it does the job for me in a way that streamlines a good chunk of my production. That sort of thing is valuable to me, so I've been recommending that camera for consideration to folks on a similar level.

How do these compare to the HG4, quality-wise?

I say this, because I basically am buying a few things, and so have the money for the HG4, at the moment, as part of a business loan yada. So if it's worth the extra I'll just get it and be happy with it for the next year or so... however, if I can get 99% of the same thing for 400-500 or 700 less, then I'd be stupid not to... owning no lenses and having no brand loyalty, I am a clean slate. 

Sorry for asking you guys so many questions!

[Damphousse]

Thanks for this!! That's some great information... 
I hadn't ACTUALLY checked how much Resolve cost until about an hour ago... holy cow! I mean, a grand isn't that much, but on top of all the other costs it adds up quickly!

I am thinking in a year I may just add something like this to my business, but the total cost is too much for me now...
 

Sorry I wasn't clear.  Resolve Lite is free.  It does everything I need except noise reduction.  Resolve 12 is still a beta product.  Resolve Lite 11 is available on the same page.  You just have to search around a little for it.  Honestly if you aren't into grading at all I would steer clear of any Blackmagic camera for now.  Going back and reading the thread it sounds like you are receiving jobs as we speak.  You don't want to be learning too much at once on paid gigs!

I would follow other people's advice and go for something like a GH4.  Maybe research the differences between a GH4 and a G7.  Grey market G7s with no lens are going for $650 on everyone's favorite auction site.  The G7 will probably never have a log option, but if you aren't into grading that doesn't matter.  Frankly on a lot of these cameras other than Blackmagic cameras log seems to be getting people into a lot of trouble unless they really know what they are doing.

Someone is selling a used G7 with no lens for $580.  It's up to you whether you think that is a good deal or not.

It really sounds to me like you need a very user friendly and affordable camera that can get you decent results straight out of the camera.

[CTRT]

Sorry I wasn't clear.  Resolve Lite is free.  It does everything I need except noise reduction.  Resolve 12 is still a beta product.  Resolve Lite 11 is available on the same page.  You just have to search around a little for it.  Honestly if you aren't into grading at all I would steer clear of any Blackmagic camera for now.  Going back and reading the thread it sounds like you are receiving jobs as we speak.  You don't want to be learning too much at once on paid gigs!

I would follow other people's advice and go for something like a GH4.  Maybe research the differences between a GH4 and a G7.  Grey market G7s with no lens are going for $650 on everyone's favorite auction site.  The G7 will probably never have a log option, but if you aren't into grading that doesn't matter.  Frankly on a lot of these cameras other than Blackmagic cameras log seems to be getting people into a lot of trouble unless they really know what they are doing.

Someone is selling a used G7 with no lens for $580.  It's up to you whether you think that is a good deal or not.

It really sounds to me like you need a very user friendly and affordable camera that can get you decent results straight out of the camera.

Thanks for this! I'll check out resolve Lite!

I wouldn't mind getting into grading, really... I just don't want to not be able to work for 2 months while I figure it out And yes, I get a variable amount of work... I did 14 videos in the last 2 months, but 2 the month before that... next month I have 5 booked, including a high profile national event... but it's all mostly video for the web, etc. 
 

I know I probably am - to some extent - sending mixed messages, but that's because I am frankly pretty confused, not just about which camera, but about where exactly to invest in my business to help it grow. The whole videography thing taking off was a surprise, but I don't want to end up making wedding videos, etc. So I am basically biding my time trying to sort out where I can fit in and be happy. I am good (so clients tell me) at editing, and have a family member who is a very well known working RV editor in the UK. He is suggesting I try and develop that, and maybe find a way to transition out of the corporate work and into something more rewarding.

Because of my connection to lots of creative people I hope to gradually get some better - as in more rewarding - work, but know I probably can't do that with my rinky corporate setup... so I plan to just do the corporate stuff, reinvest into better gear, find a niche I enjoy and see where that goes... but that makes it kinda confusing for me at the moment.

I am also buy a new 27" iMac, and some better lights, and I have a nice audio setup, so hopefully, when I do get a nicer camera, I'll be in a better position to use it for good, instead of banks, and accountants and rugby teams... all very nice people, and easy to work with, but after years of just doing original music it's a bit... hard to be passionate about.



 

[fuzzynormal]

How does the EM5II compare to the GH4, quality-wise?

For IQ, it's not competitive.  The GH4 shoots a very clean video that is 4x the resolution of the EM5II.  The Gh4 does look really good.

But here's the thing about that:  I've edited together projects that were shot with both cameras simultaneously and the client never noticed or cared.  So, you have to decide why you want a particular camera.  Are you aiming for the best IQ?  Then go for it.  Consider 4K.

For me, I required something that I could use with quick ease and have it look really smooth and elegant handheld.  Resolution wasn't the biggest thing I was concerned about.  With the EM5II, easy smooth handheld shooting was possible more so than the GH4.  If you're interested why, just look at some of my past postings on the subject.

Here's my take on all of this:  If you buy a camera for around 1-1.5K you're gonna have something pretty great to work with.  If you buy a 4K camera for $600, it's gonna be great to work with.  If you buy a 1080 camera for $700 with 5-axis stabilization, it's gonna be great to work with.  If you buy a 1080 Lumix camera from 2013 that's been discontinued and only costs $350, it's gonna be great to work with.

There are not too many wrong answers anymore when it comes to mirrorless camera bodies.  Except for Fuji.  The video from their cameras is pretty bad.

Now, when you want to talk about lenses...then it get's pretty interesting...

[CTRT]

For IQ, it's not competitive.  The GH4 shoots a very clean video that is 4x the resolution of the EM5II.  The Gh4 does look really good.

But here's the thing about that:  I've edited together projects that were shot with both cameras simultaneously and the client never noticed or cared.  So, you have to decide why you want a particular camera.  Are you aiming for the best IQ?  Then go for it.  Consider 4K.

For me, I required something that I could use with quick ease and have it look really smooth and elegant handheld.  Resolution wasn't the biggest thing I was concerned about.  With the EM5II, easy smooth handheld shooting was possible more so than the GH4.  If you're interested why, just look at some of my past postings on the subject.

Here's my take on all of this:  If you buy a camera for around 1-1.5K you're gonna have something pretty great to work with.  If you buy a 4K camera for $600, it's gonna be great to work with.  If you buy a 1080 camera for $700 with 5-axis stabilization, it's gonna be great to work with.  If you buy a 1080 Lumix camera from 2013 that's been discontinued and only costs $350, it's gonna be great to work with.

There are not too many wrong answers anymore when it comes to mirrorless camera bodies.  Except for Fuji.  The video from their cameras is pretty bad.

Now, when you want to talk about lenses...then it get's pretty interesting...

That is actually a huge relief if I'm honest... trying to make sense of the minutia and decide between two or three cameras based on proprietary technology and bit rate and sensor size, resolution, codec, etc., etc., is pretty mind numbing.

I'd love to just get something that is pretty simple, but that can give me a bit of scope to grow. 

I may just get an HG4, but I am going to look at all the other suggestions as well... if I could save a bit of money and maybe get a second lens, or a handheld gimbal like that nebula 4000 lite... though that thing seems to be dodgy... anyway, if I could get something else by saving some money on a camera body, well.. that's a good option too!

Did you see that lens that comes with the HG4, the: LUMIX G X VARIO 12-35mm / F2.8 ASPH. / POWER O.I.S...? The reviews look good, but.. is it way overpriced? Is there something similar for a lot less? I saw those new Tamron lenses, and the sample images looked amazing, but were also probably taken by someone with 100 years of experience and a 20K camera.

I also saw, looking at a Blackmagic video, those cool c-mount lenses... I'd love to experiment with things like that for video, but I don't know if any of the cameras we're discussing can be made work with them... 

[Cinegain]

C-mount just takes a small and cheap adapter. There's nothing to it really. Works with any M43 camera, just a little better with the BMPCC, because it has a larger crop factor: it crops in more on the image circle, making it less sensitive to the outer edge vignetting. Then again, you can cut 1080p out of a 4K image that the GH4 shoots and cut around the vignetting as well. They might give some fun effects and character, but overall, I haven't been in love with my cheapo copies (I have a 25mm f/1.4, 35mm f/1.7 and 50mm f/1.4). Wouldn't base a purchase on it unless you'd have some vintage C-mounts lying around or something. If you're thinking about cheap vintage glass, rather look at some M42's, Pentax, Minolta's and FD's for example. Work great with the M43 sensor, have great character, usually built like a tank and optics are solid. Check out the sticky lens thread.

About the 12-35mm f/2.8, it's a lot of people's go-to lens. Since M43 is a 2x crop sensor and shooting 4K gives a 2.3x crop compared to the 35mm reference, the 12-35mm gives a practical range for normal shooting scenarios. The lens has a f/2.8 sensitivity throughout which is pretty great. You could consider a Sigma ART series 18-35mm f/1.8 lens and use an adapter with optics inside to compensate for the crop a little and win a bit of light in the process, which is a great combination, with great optical performance and character, but the Sigma faces the same problem as a Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO lens would have on a Panasonic body... these lenses have no image stabilization built-in an Panasonic cameras don't do video sensor stabilization (as Olympus cameras do, see fuzzy's point). As the Panasonic 12-35mm has built-in optical image stabilization, it will do a decent job of filtering out some of the shakiness. Also, a third party lens with simple adapter (not electronic, with or without optics) does not allow for in-camera settings to take effect. You'll be left with full manual operation. The native mount 12-35mm doesn't have this issue (should it be one to you;personally I don't mind fully manual operation). I figure lots of people just have one, because it's just so darn convenient.

The Nebula 4000 I would forget... Some topics around here (like: http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/3293-3-axis-camera-stabilizing-systems-–-overview/?do=findComment&comment=99388 ) that kinda go into that... the recent developments seem to kinda make a bit more sense already, but personally don't think it's there/mature enough yet still. Anyways, I'd say: worry about that kinda of stuff later.

Yeah, I'm thinking the GH4 with the V-LOG option would be a good match for your needs. The BMPCC is pretty great if you need to just about torture your footage in grading, but the GH4 is more flexible and friendlier to work with. If only for ergonomics, vari-angle touchscreen and great battery life.

[Liam]

if budget and lenses are still a slight concern with the gh4, the g7, or lx100 even, have been proven to have really great images. might feel restricted slightly on the telephoto end with the lx100, but the focal lengths you have, it would appear (and according to Andrew Reid), are like having a set of primes.

you definitely don't have to get obsessed with videography, but having a camera of your own to fiddle with and googling/asking when you're confused, you'll be fine. especially if you're already getting a lot of good feedback and people wanting you.

also, if you ever want to make films, liking films really is good enough to go on.

[Cinegain]

I love the LX100, it's a little gem, but I wouldn't really dare show up with it to a paid gig. They'd probably get the idea that instead of hiring you, they should've bought the camera you're shooting with and do it themselves. Or you really gotta know how to sell and present yourself on a shoot. I agree, they should get you for your vision, creativity, knowledge and skills, but those values might not matter if you show up with a premium compact... guess it's along the lines of stripping down in front of a woman and then telling her 'erm, you know it's not about size, but what you do with it, right?'.

[CTRT]

C-mount just takes a small and cheap adapter. There's nothing to it really. Works with any M43 camera, just a little better with the BMPCC, because it has a larger crop factor: it crops in more on the image circle, making it less sensitive to the outer edge vignetting. Then again, you can cut 1080p out of a 4K image that the GH4 shoots and cut around the vignetting as well. They might give some fun effects and character, but overall, I haven't been in love with my cheapo copies (I have a 25mm f/1.4, 35mm f/1.7 and 50mm f/1.4). Wouldn't base a purchase on it unless you'd have some vintage C-mounts lying around or something. If you're thinking about cheap vintage glass, rather look at some M42's, Pentax, Minolta's and FD's for example. Work great with the M43 sensor, have great character, usually built like a tank and optics are solid. Check out the sticky lens thread.

About the 12-35mm f/2.8, it's a lot of people's go-to lens. Since M43 is a 2x crop sensor and shooting 4K gives a 2.3x crop compared to the 35mm reference, the 12-35mm gives a practical range for normal shooting scenarios. The lens has a f/2.8 sensitivity throughout which is pretty great. You could consider a Sigma ART series 18-35mm f/1.8 lens and use an adapter with optics inside to compensate for the crop a little and win a bit of light in the process, which is a great combination, with great optical performance and character, but the Sigma faces the same problem as a Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO lens would have on a Panasonic body... these lenses have no image stabilization built-in an Panasonic cameras don't do video sensor stabilization (as Olympus cameras do, see fuzzy's point). As the Panasonic 12-35mm has built-in optical image stabilization, it will do a decent job of filtering out some of the shakiness. Also, a third party lens with simple adapter (not electronic, with or without optics) does not allow for in-camera settings to take effect. You'll be left with full manual operation. The native mount 12-35mm doesn't have this issue (should it be one to you;personally I don't mind fully manual operation). I figure lots of people just have one, because it's just so darn convenient.

The Nebula 4000 I would forget... Some topics around here (like: http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/3293-3-axis-camera-stabilizing-systems-–-overview/?do=findComment&comment=99388 ) that kinda go into that... the recent developments seem to kinda make a bit more sense already, but personally don't think it's there/mature enough yet still. Anyways, I'd say: worry about that kinda of stuff later.

Yeah, I'm thinking the GH4 with the V-LOG option would be a good match for your needs. The BMPCC is pretty great if you need to just about torture your footage in grading, but the GH4 is more flexible and friendlier to work with. If only for ergonomics, vari-angle touchscreen and great battery life.

Thanks for all of this... I honestly need to read it a few more times to properly understand everything you said, but it's all very useful... I wouldn't mind a manual lens at all.. I tend to use a tripod, even for most cutaways/b-roll, and so I can take a minute and set it up properly and then just sort of tweak it quickly as need be... I didn't even use any of the auto stuff on the nikon for months as I thought it would probably stink... it didn't in the end, well the continual focus was useless, but the auto focus worked pretty well.. 

the hardest thing I found was trying to learn how to judge what the final image was going to look like based on the screen.. I can't really imagine not being able to use a screen, just a viewfinder! Props to people who know it all well enough to do that, but that's not me yet! I actually need to buy a light meter and learn how to use it, and a color card, or whatever you call those... 

I liked the footage here of a c mount lens:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZXwzeSu-Hc 

at the end...

Thanks for your help, it's appreciated!

if budget and lenses are still a slight concern with the gh4, the g7, or lx100 even, have been proven to have really great images. might feel restricted slightly on the telephoto end with the lx100, but the focal lengths you have, it would appear (and according to Andrew Reid), are like having a set of primes.

you definitely don't have to get obsessed with videography, but having a camera of your own to fiddle with and googling/asking when you're confused, you'll be fine. especially if you're already getting a lot of good feedback and people wanting you.

also, if you ever want to make films, liking films really is good enough to go on.

thanks for saying the thing about films... I LOVE films, and especially things like old Seijun Suzuki, Wong-Kar Wai, Sidney Lumet and on and on... 50s American, 60s Japanese, 70s American, 80s French, 90s HK, etc., etc.

I just love movies...

And I appreciate your encouraging posts!

I love the LX100, it's a little gem, but I wouldn't really dare show up with it to a paid gig. They'd probably get the idea that instead of hiring you, they should've bought the camera you're shooting with and do it themselves. Or you really gotta know how to sell and present yourself on a shoot. I agree, they should get you for your vision, creativity, knowledge and skills, but those values might not matter if you show up with a premium compact... guess it's along the lines of stripping down in front of a woman and then telling her 'erm, you know it's not about size, but what you do with it, right?'.

I actually think this is probably true... I showed up to my first shoot with the nikon and a big (also borrowed) older digital camcorder... it sucked, but it LOOKED good and they keep saying how professional and prepared I was compared to the COMPANY they'd been using...  the "company" was using... you'll never believe this... the in camera mic to record interviews with banking professionals... 

I was shocked.. 

But to your point, yes, a bigger camera looks more convincing, as lame as that is...

[Liam]

yeah, I would've recommended the lx100 sooner if it didn't look like it does.. but still, if they're comfortable with someone on a dslr already...

besides, in that aspect, the bmpcc is almost worse

[CTRT]

yeah, I would've recommended the lx100 sooner if it didn't look like it does.. but still, if they're comfortable with someone on a dslr already...

besides, in that aspect, the bmpcc is almost worse

that is true! but if you had a normal lens on it... it might look real to them.

I was shocked about them being ok with a DSLR, then I started going to all these corporate events and meeting other videographers, and they're ALL using DSLRs! Shocking!

 

[Liam]

yeah, they can give a good image, and some people are coming around to it, but still kind of a bad stigma sometimes. and you're using external audio and lights and a tripod? if that stuff looks professional, it'll draw the eye

[CTRT]

yeah, they can give a good image, and some people are coming around to it, but still kind of a bad stigma sometimes. and you're using external audio and lights and a tripod? if that stuff looks professional, it'll draw the eye

The first few jobs I did I rented lights, LED panels, and I often think that created a sense that I was a pro, along with bringing two cameras... so I bought the lights. And I bought lapel mics and an H4N. The overall quality is pretty awesome really, and quick to use, but most importantly it seems to make the right impressions... 

I am so happy that it was videography and not photography... those guys... ehh... talk about cultish! I guess it's a pretty small community here and tight-nit... I wouldn't want to have to try and get in with them!

[TheRenaissanceMan]

The first few jobs I did I rented lights, LED panels, and I often think that created a sense that I was a pro, along with bringing two cameras... so I bought the lights. And I bought lapel mics and an H4N. The overall quality is pretty awesome really, and quick to use, but most importantly it seems to make the right impressions... 

I am so happy that it was videography and not photography... those guys... ehh... talk about cultish! I guess it's a pretty small community here and tight-nit... I wouldn't want to have to try and get in with them!

 You can always build up small camera with a cheap eBay rig and matte box if you want it to look more "serious." 

Also, I'm typing on my phone right now, so I'll keep this brief: the BMPCC is a very, very easy to use and grade. DaVinci Resolve 12 is free, and can handle RAW and ProRes without a sweat. Worst case, if you want a usable starting point, all you have to do is right click each clip and apply the BMD Film to Rec709 LUT, and boom--usable footage. I actually have a much easier time lighting, exposing, and grading BM footage compared to other cameras because of their huge DR and super robust codecs.

The camera also requires a lot less accessories than people pretend. Realistically, you need a couple big SD cards ($100-200), a pile of batteries or external solution ($60-$120), and a lens. That's it. The other stuff can be nice, but it's by no means necessary.

I'm a beginner as well (film school), and I'm finding the Blackmagic to be a powerful and straightforward tool to work and learn with. If you want more information, I highly  recommend checking out Mattias Burling's and Drew Network's YouTube series. Both are extremely informative and do a lot to reduce the camera's intimidation factor. You can also feel free to message me. I'd be happy to answer any questions and even run tests, if I can find time.

[Damphousse]

 

I actually think this is probably true... I showed up to my first shoot with the nikon and a big (also borrowed) older digital camcorder... it sucked, but it LOOKED good and they keep saying how professional and prepared I was compared to the COMPANY they'd been using...  the "company" was using... you'll never believe this... the in camera mic to record interviews with banking professionals... 
I was shocked.. 
 

I can believe it... and more.  I am not a professional.  The only thing I've sold from my hobby are some stock video clips, but even I've seen some amazing things.  A friend of mine who apparently has no aesthetic sensibilities made some videos for their company in house.  From what I can tell the videos were shot with some kind of old STANDARD DEFINITION pocket video camera with internal mic for sound.  No lighting, no external sound, and most of the shots were framed terribly.  I can't fly out of state right now to help them with their videos so I haven't said anything.  I don't want to tell them it is all dog poop and not be able to help them fix the problem.

The strange thing is they could use an iphone and an external iphone compatible mic and that alone would make the videos a million times better.  Toss in 2-3 hundred dollars worth of lights and you are off to the races.  Sad but true.

If you are good with editing, lights, sound, and framing shots you can pay the bills with a G7.

My concern is what exactly was your workflow before?  If you shot a lot of handheld with autofocus and IS then that is what you should shoot for.  If you shot with manual lenses and a shoulder rig than you have more choices.  I use IS a lot.  Plenty of people that are better videographers than me use shoulder rigs and monopods and never touch IS.  You have to do what works for you.  I have a BMPCC and most of the time I use one Canon IS zoom lens with a speedbooster and no shoulder rig.  I haven't used any of my vintage lenses yet.  I inherited the lenses.  Honestly for people who owned the lenses already or got them before they shot up in price they can make sense.  But after doing tons of reading and looking at all the prices and pitfalls I decided a speedbooster and a top rated canon zoom would be more versatile and cheaper.  Minty copies of nice vintage lenses can cost hundreds of dollars per a focal length.

[CTRT]

 You can always build up small camera with a cheap eBay rig and matte box if you want it to look more "serious." 

Also, I'm typing on my phone right now, so I'll keep this brief: the BMPCC is a very, very easy to use and grade. DaVinci Resolve 12 is free, and can handle RAW and ProRes without a sweat. Worst case, if you want a usable starting point, all you have to do is right click each clip and apply the BMD Film to Rec709 LUT, and boom--usable footage. I actually have a much easier time lighting, exposing, and grading BM footage compared to other cameras because of their huge DR and super robust codecs.

The camera also requires a lot less accessories than people pretend. Realistically, you need a couple big SD cards ($100-200), a pile of batteries or external solution ($60-$120), and a lens. That's it. The other stuff can be nice, but it's by no means necessary.

I'm a beginner as well (film school), and I'm finding the Blackmagic to be a powerful and straightforward tool to work and learn with. If you want more information, I highly  recommend checking out Mattias Burling's and Drew Network's YouTube series. Both are extremely informative and do a lot to reduce the camera's intimidation factor. You can also feel free to message me. I'd be happy to answer any questions and even run tests, if I can find time.

Wow! thanks so much for that information! Do you use a speedbooster or some other solution to deal with cropping? Or am I totally misunderstanding that as well? 

How about viewing the screen in the daylight?

Oh and do you just grade in Resolve? Or edit in it? I'm used to FCP and wonder if it's worth investigating as an editor. 

I can believe it... and more.  I am not a professional.  The only thing I've sold from my hobby are some stock video clips, but even I've seen some amazing things.  A friend of mine who apparently has no aesthetic sensibilities made some videos for their company in house.  From what I can tell the videos were shot with some kind of old STANDARD DEFINITION pocket video camera with internal mic for sound.  No lighting, no external sound, and most of the shots were framed terribly.  I can't fly out of state right now to help them with their videos so I haven't said anything.  I don't want to tell them it is all dog poop and not be able to help them fix the problem.

The strange thing is they could use an iphone and an external iphone compatible mic and that alone would make the videos a million times better.  Toss in 2-3 hundred dollars worth of lights and you are off to the races.  Sad but true.

If you are good with editing, lights, sound, and framing shots you can pay the bills with a G7.

My concern is what exactly was your workflow before?  If you shot a lot of handheld with autofocus and IS then that is what you should shoot for.  If you shot with manual lenses and a shoulder rig than you have more choices.  I use IS a lot.  Plenty of people that are better videographers than me use shoulder rigs and monopods and never touch IS.  You have to do what works for you.  I have a BMPCC and most of the time I use one Canon IS zoom lens with a speedbooster and no shoulder rig.  I haven't used any of my vintage lenses yet.  I inherited the lenses.  Honestly for people who owned the lenses already or got them before they shot up in price they can make sense.  But after doing tons of reading and looking at all the prices and pitfalls I decided a speedbooster and a top rated canon zoom would be more versatile and cheaper.  Minty copies of nice vintage lenses can cost hundreds of dollars per a focal length.

I use a tripod, manual focus (or a autofocus before I shoot, but no continuous AF). I find the need to stabilise clips with the Nikon and handheld to make it pretty useless... I mean, you CAN use it, but things do get cropped so framing can end up being annoying during edit.

I am really hoping that IS works meaningfully on the HG4, or whatever I end up with  Probably the HG4 and that "LUMIX G X VARIO 12-35mm / F2.8 ASPH. / POWER O.I.S." lens.
I am sceptical, as a rule, or automated stuff... autofocus, auto white balance, etc., but maybe that's just a hangover from the way I feel about audio gear, where anything "auto" is probably not hugely great... 

As for what people do... a lot of the clips I've seen since I started are so uninspiring... I don't know how these people get jobs, and it's kind of inspiring to me, because I know I can easily do better and I'm just some jerk.

I look at the soccer clip posted by Fuzzy on the last page though and think... why am I even pretending... Then again, I never made a music video until I made one!