Leaderboard

Random clips shot with GH5 and Olympus 25/1.2 in standard profile.

I actually was expecting to buy a gh5 (been using a7ii,gx80,bmmcc) but a em1 mark ii was available at £1200 open box so i thought id give it a go, i was expecting to sell it on after a couple of weeks and get the gh5. However I am really happy with the image for stills and video, the colour is really nice for me and thats the main reason im going to keep it over a gh5. Ill miss the slo-mo (which i hardly use) In fact im so happy with this camera that not only am i not getting a gh5, I have sold my a7ii, gx80 and bmmcc !! ... Ill have some spare cash for a couple of nice lenses too. I havnt got footage to show just yet as im editing a short shot on the bmmcc. For the record i love the image from the bmmcc but rigged up on a shoulder rig with screen i got stopped a couple of times by kazakh (yes was filming in -25c Kazakhstan) police, and had to convince them i was just a crazy tourist. So the dslr form factor with stabalisation would be a big advantage to me too. Thats also the reason i am not too interested in Panasonics or canons new cinema cameras

Some House of Cards crew, and star Robin Wright, made a six minute short film, set in one location, shot in two days. I guess the crew volunteered their time and resources. And they still ended up crowdfunding $50,000 to make it happen. So just a bunch of millionaires not willing to put a cent of their own into a film they call a "passion project". From the stills I've seen, I have no idea where $50,000 would have gone. And it sounded like they got accepted to CANNES before they were even finished. For Wright's directorial debut. Just because it looked pretty and had a big name. (My source was an interview on Colbert, if you want to look it up, sorry for not posting it here) How is that okay? And how far back in time to you have to go to see Sundance and Cannes as the home of brilliant films that don't fit Hollywood's bill? (Sundance appeared to be a mess this year too. Apparently Nick Offerman and Kristen Stewart are the great talents of our generation) Let me know if I'm just being a dick, but wow

There's capital and then there's cultural capital. People will leverage their names to get cheap labor. It might not be right, but it's their right to do so. I also strongly doubt everyone worked free. No one is being forced to donate or forced to work. It's all voluntary, even if it's frustrating. I hear you, though. I have worked on high profile festival projects for cheap mostly because I wanted the credit, thinking I could exchange cultural capital for actual money down the line. We'll see how it works out. It definitely really sucks but I only have myself to blame if it doesn't. If anything, it should inspire you. If you can get better results for free than the House of Cards crew can get with $50k and tons of favors, you'll be doing so well soon enough that you needn't be jealous of them. Let it inspire you! Whenever you see something made by high end pros and think "I can do better," the only injustice is that you're not giving yourself the chance to prove you can. It's not like anyone involved in this had upsetting you in mind, they don't know who any of us are and don't care. So maybe it's not that their work is sub-par for the money, maybe it's that your work is better than you realize and you already have the skill to be in that upper echelon. If you do, then you owe it to yourself to prove it. Or admit to yourself it's not your priority. If you have the talent and want to do something with it but don't, that's the only injustice, you being unfair to you. (The Cannes shorts program isn't very competitive, either, but yes, nepotism plays a major major factor in the festival scene. Think of it like a social club trying to maintain an image and a guest list, with the films as the entertainment for the club. The social and branding components are more important than the quality of the content. But it makes sense, each festival represents a brand, and a brand is cultural capital.)

Yeah that is really lame. But that's how rich people stay rich... they use other people's money. If you want to feel better, go over to the shooting section to see a feature film shot on a t2i.

I looked at the Kinefinity cameras...though I have to say I preferred the form factor of the Kinemax...ultimately any questions I had were either only partially responded to or not at all...and I was inquiring as a potential buyer....after a while I decided that buying the cam would be too risky to me and let it go....perhaps with a US distributor I could have gone that way...I found the image lovely though...truth for me is there's probably a large number of cameras I could use...with a professional colorist, good DP and gaffer, any number of cams....even inexpensive ones could yield a lovely image...when you're shooting a wedding or a feature or television series...and have to get the shot, the Kine camera would made me nervous....especially after the communication in my earlier enquiries.

Using the ruse of wanting to "compare its wifi control to my FZ1000" , I spent a few minutes packet capturing an FZ2000 app session in a camera store earlier to get some examples of it sending the 100 and 200mbps 1080p setting to the camera. The commands were formed exactly as I was expecting them to be so confirms my findings that although the camera will accept them it won't properly action them but it will change to 4K24p instead. This is a different behaviour to when you send an outright "illegal" setting (i.e. a PAL rate when its in NTSC region and vice versa) where it returns an error. Whether it simply reverts to its uppermost setting when given a request that it doesn't reject but can't find an actual match for I don't know but the end result is the same in that it doesn't get us anywhere. With regard to the LX100, the Cinelike D and V are acting almost completely the reverse to how you would expect them to in that it massively saturates the colour! However, it also completely and I mean completely canes the black level. I've got a hunch that with the LX100 being such a close relative of the GH4 that there might be something involving an interaction with the master pedestal level and/or the luma level which are changeable on the GH4 but not on the LX100. If someone who has an LX100 could try this and see what you think. It might be correctable with changing a combination of the saturation/contrast/shadow/highlight controls to bring it into line and if it is then it shouldn't be an issue for the Deploy function to combine the string of changes into one click. I stress might though ! And I can't look at anything to do with this for the next four or five days at least now while I'm away doing the day job assignment so don't hold your breath.

I second this. Considering the price ($499) for a focusing, super lightweight adapter this ain't bad. Century Optics and Optex adapters sell for as much...and they're like 20 years old. Now just wait for a nice discount and you got a real steal here.

Whatever you did... it worked.

Thank you. I may have shot it a bit warm due to very strong summer feelings that evening, but most is done in post

"AMD is planning to release its own high-end enthusiast Ryzen line — dubbed the “Threadripper” — later this year with up to 16-cores and 32-threads, something that the newly announced 18-core i9 Extreme will compete head-to-head against." - at last an Intel vs AMD speed war.

That's a good point. I also think Fritz was hinting at this, but who is this camera geared towards? Canon gets blasted for their lack of tech but their cameras are geared toward very specific shooters. The C100 i & ii are geared towards the low to mid budget event videographer and documentary filmmaker. The FS5 is geared to the mid level videographer and filmmaker, so of course they would have better specs. Who exactly is this cineX camera designed for? I would assume it's for mid level professionals. If it is touted as a Varicam Mini, then it has a narrative lineage, so the specs need to be at a certain level. And IMO 10bit 4K 60p isn't enough to justify a $6500 price tag. Now if it has 5-axis IBIS with either internal or external Raw... even at 10bit 2K up to 72fps and this camera is a winner. Otherwise you may as well just buy a GH5 or an LS300.

Intel released the x9i - 18 cores FTW??? https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/5/30/15710476/intel-core-x-processors-i9-chips-i5-i9-skylake-kaby-lake-computex

I have yet try it in 1080. I will have a little play and let you know. Im hoping the 1080 50/60 fps is good for a little slomo. I have found the image to look really good with only minor tweeks. I use the flat profile and mostly canon fd lenses on a speed booster. I also am a fan of black pro mist and ultra contrast filters, rather than reducing any more contrast in camera. Then with just a little contrast and saturation in post it is already looking good. Im not the most experienced colour grader and rely on good luts for my bmmcc footage so this is a bonus for we while i improve my skills

Speaking of competition what about AJA Cion and Kinefinity Terra?? They have RAW and at a good price too.

I used a D750 before switching to Canon. It's a great camera, especially on the stills side. The 1080p is definitely soft but it didn't stop me from making great videos. I did pick up a second hand A7S (original) few weeks ago, mostly for it's low light abilities but also to use all my Nikon glass I kept. 1080p on that is definitely sharper then D750 and grading S-Log is pretty easy I find. Ergonomics are poor but having an EVF is a bonus. I'll be getting a BM Video Assist soon so 4K will be available on it too. I feel no particular attachment to the Sony like I have with my Fuji or DSLRs though FWIW.

In an amateur/hobbyist context I think the balance between the fun/convenience of using a camera and the quality of the "product" is an oft neglected debate. Arguably, for some, the "hobby" is at its best when it is fun to do it - in that sense the result isn't even that important. I don't enjoy the process with either the A7S or the rx1004 irrespective of the decent output. BM on the other hand is something I find great fun in its sheer simplicity. Of course, if the bread on the table depends on the output this perspective is irrelevant.

Yeah, it s called open gate. So you have more room at the top and bottom to play with. Should be okay for sports or action shots, but eleminates what s so special being a camera man- finding your framing and shooting unique footage.

Did not know that, very interesting since Im upgrading the equipment for my emplyers in house production (mostly stills).

Sony always seems to elicit the "great IQ, hate the shooting experience" posts, and I'm no different. But after tinkering with an A9, Sony finally got it right IMO - the stuff that needs dials is there, the record button is fixed, body egos are better, AF is next level amazing, IBIS is much improved over the A7mk2's and so on. When it trickles down to the A7s3/A7r3/A73, it will be very tough to choose m43 or Fuji over Sony. If the A9 were priced at the A7rII intro price of about $3200, I would have two right now and be back in the Sony camp.

wooden camera?

Yikes - I do not know who harry56 is or why he was quoting me. I looks like the post has been removed so hopefully that avoids any further confusion. But I just want to clarify for everyone, I was NOT referring to redimp when I made the original comment.

Yep and works like a charm. I am constantly recording 95 minute interviews to 256gb cards.

@Bold you're machinist is a lot faster than mine, excited for the pictures. I've made a huge (at least I think so) discovery in terms of getting wider with this lens... My Helder .45x wide angle adapter arrived and my camera came back from repair and I got right to testing it out. As it turns out (and so I feared) the Helder is not .45x like the Sony is .7x, but more relative to the Sony more like .8x––so the Sony is actually wider. Not too upset with my $20 let down, I took the adapter off and noticed it was two pieces, a macro element and a wide element. In a fit of curiosity, I removed the front focal element of the B&H from my helicoid and replaced it with the wide angle part of the Helder. What do you know, it worked! Not only did it work, it seems to allow better infinity and a serious added wideness to the taking lens, as well as bringing close focus down to around 5 inches. On top of the added wideness of the 2x anamorphic, there seems to be an around .7x wideness added by the Helder element. Even better, it appears to eradicate the infinity focus issue, as well as bring my close focus down to ~4 inches! Some test video with a Canon FD 50mm f/1.4 (Take note of how wide it appears) on BMMCC (s16):

I think I mentioned earlier in the thread but those are messages from the camera to the app to tell it what items to give the user access to. Its one piece of the puzzle in that you can still construct set commands based on them (or estimates of what they will be) but the camera will not necessarily action them and you will generally get an "err_parameter" message in your browser. An example of this would be to send : http://192.168.54.1/cam.cgi?mode=setsetting&type=videoquality&value=mp4ed_c24p_100mbps_c4K Sending this will be actioned by Panasonic cameras that have the functionality enabled but won't be by those that won't. In this respect, it is pure good fortune that although Cinelike D and V are not enabled in the app the camera will actually activate them if we send it the commands. There are other examples such as the ISO50000 mode and 23 point AF mode that aren't listed but I was able to get working. You will also see this selective rejection when you have the camera in PAL mode, you can send it NTSC based formats such as 1080p60 but it will reject them. If you then boot the camera using the multi button diagnostic mode into NTSC region you will be able to send them and it will action them. We can only presume that Panasonic had it in mind to have Cinelike D and V in the GX80 and left it in there. Something unusual happens when you tell it to go into one of the high bitrate 1080p modes in that it switches to 4K24p so its not entirely rejecting it but its also not doing it either. Again, I'll say that the LX100 is doing something odd with the Cinelike commands so there might be something worth tinkering with there. For now, I'm only concentrating on looking at command stuff for my hardware box (which is all I was originally intending to be tinkering with this stuff for anyway before I uncovered the Cinlike thing!) so hopefully now so many of you are using this you might all find some new stuff with your own experiments.

Works great on my Gx80..thanks BTM_PIX!

Nice work, John... I loved the second to last shot. I really enjoy the intimate stories you portray in your films. If not for you, I would never know of this couple in Hiroshima or the Harley subculture of Japan.

The main reason I would not buy it is that BM has abandoned that form factor it appears. It seems that they're moving all of their efforts into the Mini's. I would just pick up a used UM46K. There's a good amount of them for sale now that the UM Pro is out.

Still fighting with GH5 colors and dynamic range..... Cinelike D is for me ,very yellow, slightly green and not real skin tone Today I found a pretty promising setting, You definitely try.. --- Highlight/Shadow -1/0 Master Pedestal +5 i.dynamic - standard i.resolution - OFF Luminance level 16-235 Photo style: NATURAL 0,-5,-5,-2,0 And important - AWB adjust. A:6 !!! ----

Which I think is actually a point that speaks against it I'd say... because, will you still be shooting micro four thirds in 10 years? That's especially where people with multiple systems have a hard time picking MFT over Canikon mount lenses. Within say the next three years there's a chance that atleast one of the following will have something compelling to offer... Be it Sony that might get their shit together... Canon might finally embrace enthusiast cameras with exciting features for consumers, Nikon might enter the mirrorless world and Fuji might continue the good thing they've got going on, they just need to loosen up a little (goes for any of them: less tradition, more forward thinking). We might even see BlackMagic do a handheld compact all-in-one shooter with S35 sensor? The real benefit of Panasonic then is the size of the lenses that ultimately makes it a compact system. I don't like the Sony system that priortizes fullframe lenses for their camera systems, Canon has a so-so compact mirrorless line-up, Nikon isn't in it and Fujifilm does alright, but a lot of lenses without stabilization and a body without sensor stabilization has become a hard sell. There are speedboosters and smart adapters for MFT, so it's very compatible... the real question is... is it very capable as well? Personally I can move within the boundaries of MFT cameras, but that does mean it takes a lot for you to consider when shooting, that ultimately makes you a better shooter, but it would be so so nice to have some of these restrictions lifted. Like I find dynamic range still a little on the challenging side... of course noise performance has been improved, but ISO6400 would really be nice to have clean. Set stuff is one thing, being out in a city at night or something, you might not have the means to go about it another way. Instead of looking for alternatives that do work, you're then just in the moment without 2nd guessing if it would turn out alright or not. That's a nice thing to have. Also, I do find a Canon, Nikon or Fujifilm a little richer/more organic. Partly color, partly crop, probably just different sensor interpretation making it less videoey. I'd say that it's likely that in the next few years I'll make the switch to S35. Also, speaking of stuff that lasts. Although a 1299 lens is epic to have, what if you don't buy the flagship lenses and spend a bit more of your budget on support gear, lighting and audio for example? Or renting a serious camera and some anamorphics. -- btw, I agree with you that a camera body is probably the least significant thing you can upgrade. Last year I figured that by now I would probably have already replaced the E-M1 and GH4 with their successors, but I find myself not really caring too much about the new ones right now. Guess in summer, when the updates have rolled out, I will upgrade to the GH5 though, but I'm quite liking both GX80 and G80 right now, might not be as productively laid out... but they're troopers when it comes to fun. Really loving sensor stabilization and adapting non-stabilized primes. That Leica 15mm f/1.7 is so neat too... it's super compact, nicely designed (though would've been cool to have had the Olympus manual focus clutch here), Leica mojo, affordable. You haven't checked that one out yet, now have you? And yeah, totally, when it comes to lenses everybody is always so enthusiastic about 'em. Guess it's like people, everybody has their own character, but we can all mutually accept and appreciate one another (well... sorta, the world is a messed up place, guess some people are more messed up than some vintage lenses). Lenses are the canvas, the paint and the brushes all at once. It's what paints the picture. Guess that's why it's gear that perhaps speaks to us the most on an emotional level and why we are so fond of them?

@ssrdd I am waiting for a 4K C100 type of camera 1 and a half year now! The LS300 @Alt Shoo mentioned is a great option in 3000euros, +1000 for a Atomos, you have 4K/60p, great (and too many) codec options, variable sensor (native m43 and whatever else through adapters) and a 7" monitor (the Atomos), and a great run and gun 4:2:2 camera on its own with Prime zoom function.

I modded a set of Conax Zeiss lenses myself. Wasn't without its challenges as this was my first time tackling something like this, but 100% worth it. The set includes 28/2, 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4, 135/2. Mods include: 1. seamless focus gears from Helicopter Sean 2. bolt on Canon mounts from Leitax 3. knurled step-up rings to 82mm from Breakthrough 4. 82mm push-on lens caps from Kaiser, Canon brand rear caps 5. and most importantly, I custom-made 2x fixed aperture cut from a .4mm thin sheet of stainless steel After sourcing all the lenses from ebay (all are mint or near-mint condition AEG or AEJ), I opened up each one and took measurements for the aperture discs. designed them in adobe illustrator (making alternates that were smaller, and smaller still). When I received the aperture discs I auditioned the different sizes, selected the one i was happiest with, and finally mounted them inside with a semi-permanent adhesive so i can remove them later if i want to re-sell the lenses. Haven't been able to shoot with them too much yet (busy at work). But I did take the 50mm pictured above for a spin. See below. Surprisingly, I've taken some flack when i mentioned this project in various facebook groups because these lenses are highly regarded (and pricey). I don't know, maybe they see me as either incredibly stupid, or reckless... maybe I'm both. But I can definitely say I'm also completely happy with the results.

Here are a few iscorama pre-36 shots thrown together for those interested - I took my camera and Rama to a local car meetup with this thread in mind. My injured back prevented me getting the low angle dynamic shots and closeups I wanted, but you get the idea. A sunny day with lots of chrome is always a good test to see if a lens has any CA or highlight/contrast edge bloom issues. There is some fine alias/ line buzzing artefacts due to warp stabiliser being used on almost all shots (no tripod and was high on painkillers). I'm sure the Bolex can match the iscorama (perhaps beat it) on sharpness, but as I've always noticed with the Rama - it tends to simply be as sharp/clean as the taking lens that you use with it. My other kowa lenses with Core DNA attached could have achieved similar results, but not at such wide aperture on 58mm on FF - and definitely not in such a compact and light form factor as the Iscorama.

Competition? The FS5 has it. The Ursa Pro has it. Without it, what benefit is there to get the Panasonic? And unless the camera is going to shoot 12 bit 4K at high frame rates, what would be the benefit of paying $4500 more for this camera when you can get a GH5?

Our conversation got slightly side tracked, but even if most amateurs can't afford to shoot Raw, it doesn't negate the fact that Panasonic should include it in a $6500 camera. Either way this is all conjecture at this point and we will know more in a few weeks.

@mercer Most amateurs do not own 12-17000$ budget equipment (6500$ camera + everything necessary for raw, +basic monitoring, + basic lightning, sound equipment, a few good lenses, capable editing suites), and you shouldn't either (except being financially well put), so I guess in this price range there isn't really a target group for companies. You can't shot raw on cards, usually need more equipment to make that happen (e.g external video recorders) even in cameras cost north of 10.000$. A short film can be easily achieved in 4-5 days of relaxed shooting, and everything rented can be just a small portion of that kind of equipment, and even you can hire a - low to medium - experienced sound man to do the sound with his equipment, and you should, there is no clear shortcut for good sound in small productions.

I know I am in the minority here, but AC or DIT duties do not exist in any kind of production I am currently working on and to be honest, the idea that people like me, with all of the available equipment to make a professional looking movie, at our fingerprints, are treating their productions as if they were filmed on a Hollywood lot is completely nonsensical to me. But whatever, not really my place to judge other people's scenarios. But again I'm a hobbyist that works with friends and first time actors. The goal is to get in, get the shot and move on... a 3:1 shot ratio at most. I have enough cards to get an hours worth of footage and it's highly unlikely I will ever need anymore than that on a day's shoot. I get why Raw would not be possible on low budget films when you have a Line Producer breathing down your neck, and every minute is scrutinized before lunch is called... but I don't have those limitations. But I also see your point for my scenario where a simple production workflow could be more beneficial... it all depends on the project and schedule. So to get back on topic, I still believe with the rumored cost of $6500 for this cineX Panny camera, it should output Raw, especially when every other camera, at that price range, shoots external or internal Raw. Just my opinion of course.

No dumb questions. You can attach via a custom coupler made from a lens hood if you have a front threaded adapter filter ring from Redstan or Rapidio. Otherwise you will need to get the HCDNA machined to slip the Kowa C35 in the back. Not machined, a 35mm was the widest I could go. Machined, a 28mm is the widest I could go.

1.33x, shoot under f4 likely to get square bokeh, average flares... remind me what the drawcard for this thing is at 500 dollars again?