Leaderboard

Cue all those who recently made, ‘Why I moved to Lumix’ pieces on YouRube gushing over the S1II, scrabbling for a piece of the Canon pie. Or Nikon pie. There’s 24 hours between the two so plenty of time to choose which ship to jump to next.

Had a fun time trying out my X-M5 micro cinema rig on a low budget, 3 day music video shoot last week. No overheating or issues of any kind shooting 6.2k prores raw in open gate mode to an Ninja V+. Insane what this little guy can do for an $800 purchase (body).

That is all. Thanks for coming to my TED talk.

Although it's not exactly what you're looking for, I'd have to second the Nikon Series E lenses. They truly are remarkable little lenses. I haven't been able to find a good copy of the 35mm 2.5 but the 36-72, 50mm and 100mm are nice little lenses, especially the size of the 100mm. Also the older non-ai lenses are pretty spectacular as well. One lens I hate to mention because it does get such bad reviews is the 35-70 3.3-4.5 ai-s lens. It's tiny and a lot better than the bad reviews give it. I mean, it isn't great, but there's something very Nikon in its not greatness. Another zoom lens I love, which I assume you're familiar with is the Canon FD 35-105mm 3.5. This lens is ALMOST parfocal. Obviously constant aperture. Internal zoom. Fairly compact. I've had a few copies over the years, then end up selling it because I didn't use it too often, regret it and seek another one. My most recent copy I put on the Sigma FP and here's a sample of it at 105mm wide open... No mind-blowing image by any means, but fairly sharp wide open and I like the way it handles the highlights. Of course it's a mess in direct light... as I found out last week during a shoot. However, there are rumors that Canon considered putting the L badge onto it because they were so happy with the lens. As far as primes, other than the Nikons, the Takumar lenses are a personal favorite of mine. I've heard people argue that the 28mm 3.5 is one of the best 28mm lenses they've used. I haven't used that one but the 35mm 3.5 is excellent. I've used a couple of the wide angle Tokina lenses from the late 70s, early 80s and they were decent, but I think they were f/2.8 lenses. Obviously you could get a cheap Neewer fixed ND to pop on the lens and leave there to give you that slower stop and to protect the front of the lens. Also check out the old Vivitar lenses, I have a set of mostly Tokina made ones in the m42 mount and I have always been very fond of them. The image instantly feels like an old 70s made for TV movie. I'm probably going to sell them though, not because I don't like them, I just have too much stuff and really need to scale back. I guess you could also look at some of the older Zeiss Jena lenses... even the MF ones would give you the slower apertures you were looking for wide open. Great thread! Wish there were more threads like this on here like it.

OK, decision made, flipping the S9 and an S5ii plus a lens, for a second S1RII, - it's worth it to me. 4 bodies down to 3 from what was 5 at the start of the year. 9 lenses down to 6, down to 5. I'm hoping to get that down to 3 at some point in the near future... 3 camera brands down to 1 (already happened)...but need more batteries because this S1RII is a power hog. I'm one of those that normally scoffs at folks reporting crap battery life and can normally exceed the official numbers by a factor of around 3, but with the S1RII, only by about 1.5. I now have 12 batteries and have 2 on charge at all times and as soon as Llano have the Lumix battery charger with built in power bank available, will have one of those in my bag. But the power issue aside, I think it's a bit of a no-brainer to me and really it comes down to one single factor more than anything, - e:shutter, - I hate it (for stills) and am going back to mech shutter only. The Sigma 28-45mm f1.8 is great by the way. Not quite as big or heavy as I expected, or at least no larger or heavier than expected, fast, very well built and no frikkin' extending zoom!! I'm just hoping they make a longer focal length version and then I really would be set for the remainder of my career.

@Tulpa If you are buying from scratch and don't have a lot of lenses etc in a particular format that you want/need to use then I'd be looking at this camera too. It is smaller and lighter than even the very compact GX-80/85. Compared to the bigger MFT offerings in the G and GH series then it is even more of a stark difference in form factor but it is also dramatically cheaper. Video specs, it shoots 4:2:2 10-Bit and has the open gate mode which for this sort of expedition might well be beneficial to you as you can more easily reformat the footage in different aspect ratios for social media etc. It has the colour profiles for ease of use but it also shoots in both flavours of F-Log so you can roll your own look. Lens wise, it has not only got a huge back catalogue of native lenses (a lot of which have stabilisation) and are plentiful on the used market but it also has a lot of fast compact 3rd party lenses like Viltrox which are available at the sort of prices we all remember MFT lenses being back in the day ! Obviously, it has the larger sensor too.... The "downsides" would be considered to be the lack of IBIS and having what appears to be a vague degree of weather resistance - I couldn't find any definitive answers on that one. The lack of IBIS may well actually prove to be a blessing in disguise if the camera is going to spend any amount of time on the handlebars while you traverse over what for large chunks of the journey will be less than smooth surfaces. Wear and tear over three years will be bad enough without throwing the fragile mechanisms into the mix. There is a reason why shows such as Top Gear went with the IBIS-less GH5s (although I'm not sure if the story of show wanting to use the GH5 minus it was actually the trigger for Panasonic to make that version is apocryphal or not). Whatever way you go, I'd spend some research time on the best shock mounting options as it will be a point of failure for any camera that you go with over that period of time. As for the weather sealing... Back in the dark distant past when I was a professional sports photographer using battleships like the D3/D4/D5 etc they could take a hammering but as soon as the rain/sleet/snow became a bit too much none of us were taking that chance that they were immune to it so out would come the covers for both the bodies and the lenses. Think Tank make good ones but they are all designed for bigger cameras rather than the X-M5 so on a more prosaic level, these are cheap and cheerful at less than £11 for a pack of four and won't take up much space. On a trip like this when you are likely going to encounter very real weather, I wouldn't take any chances with the weather sealing rating vague or otherwise of smaller cameras.

Sony rumors claim from a "rock-solid" source it's the C50, a full frame FX3 killer with R5ii sensor. If true that would basically be the R5C mk2 in an FX type body. Also Nikon is supposed to drop Nikon ZR the following day. What a time to be alive!

Totally get the frustration, mixed feelings here too. But honestly, I’ve been directing AI content for agency work and even for music videos where the budget wouldn’t cover full CGI. It’s not about losing work, it’s about adapting. Most clients are abroad and on tight budgets, so outsourcing is just reality. Learning to guide AI creatively is how you stay ahead, not get replaced!

It will be fine but needs either a baseplate & grip for even basic handling but better a cage from someone like Smallrig. I have the Smallrig baseplate/grip myself for my needs but if I was going anywhere rough and for more than a couple of days, the cage for sure as it’s not the most robust camera ever built. S9 + grip + Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 (42-105mm in APSC mode), Sennheiser MKE 200, mount for monopod. If I had the cage instead of the baseplate/grip, I could mount 2 accessories instead of one such as a mini LED. As it is, I just have to swap out the mic for the LED if I need it. Extremely compact and lightweight package for it’s capability but neither the body nor the lens have any proper weather sealing so IMO, this is not something to take around the world when you are inevitably going to have some inclement conditions!

100% agree about the size, and when compared to the GH5 the difference in the hand is a lot more than what it looks like in pictures, so it's sort-of deceptively chunky. By the time you're looking at a GH7 "small camera" territory is so far off you can't even see it in the rear-view mirror! Perhaps the compromise is that the GH7 has an integrated cooling fan whereas neither the R5 nor Z6 III have it, and will be a larger again by the time you add on additional accessories etc.

I can vouch for the GH7 as a workhorse. In terms of low light, I'd say it's fine. Here are a couple of stills from the GH7 with the Voigt 17.5mm F0.95 lens. I can't remember if the lens was fully wide-open or not, but I think the GH7 was at ISO 1600? These have a film grain applied, so the grain is deliberate. GH7 ISO tests are available online if you want to see the grain at various settings. Also remember that NR exists in post, and compression does a pretty good job of NR as well. The first shot is lit from the candle and the light of the fridge: and this is just the candle: Here's are some shots from the OG BMMCC from 2014 at its base ISO of 800, the 12-35mm F2.8 lens and shot at a 360 shutter to cheat an extra stop. These locations looked about this bright with the naked eye, and I have excellent night vision. You actually need far less low-light performance than most people think. Thanks! The issue is that you're either showing a very wide FOV, which will have significant distortions, or you're cropped in to the point where the quality is low because you're cropping out most of the data. IIRC, If you have a 100Mbps 360 image then by the time you crop to the FOV of a 24mm lens you're down to something like only a few Mbps. This is why I said the bitrates are what matters most.

Just pointing out that "weather sealing" is useful for more than just filming in the rain. It's also protection against dust (which is a very common problem in arid areas). It's protection against something in your bag breaking open and leaking on the camera. Or your tent leaks in the rain at night and you had your camera sitting out. Or you just drop it in a puddle/fountain/shallow water for a second. And yes, it is good to understand how weatherproof something really is, but simply having gaskets around a lot of the buttons and on the lens mount is a big deal. And sealing on a zoom lens can be even more important in a dusty area so that zooming the lens doesn't suck in a ton of dust.

I wouldn’t and I think it’s a great bit of kit. But no weather sealing to speak of and it’s build I’d say is OK, but it’s not built like an OM-1. Or even close, that thing is built like a tank. Despite being a full-frame guy for photo and video, bike packing around the world, M4/3 for sure. I can’t see past Olympus/OM Systems for this kind of thing.

I can, especially as a one man band photographer filmmaker/videographer who always works solo. I currently use 2x photo dedicated cameras, 2x video, 1x monopod, 2x tripods, 2x lightstands, 2x lights, up to 6 pieces of audio gear, 1x drone, multiple camera angles at the same time, photo and video at the same time... There are parts of every job where I use every single one of the above at the same time except 2x photo cameras. I can have 3 video units rolling, with an audio feed to each, shooting stills with the drone up shooting video straight down statically. OK, with the drone, it's a frikkin nightmare doing that and last time out I crashed it into a tree landing it 200 metres away...but it can be done. And that's with single attempt no second chance scenarios. Now carry all that on a bike plus all the other gear? Obviously not, but a single robust dedicated camera and either 1 or 2 max lenses, carbon travel tripod, super-lightweight collapsible lightstand and small LED plus audio gear takes up near zero space and battery life is excellent. Tiny compliant drone. Yes, I can see one person handling this just fine, especially if you are taking your time. I think all of us to a degree can overthink these things and volume of kit creeps up. I'm on a reduction mission myself right now in this regard having allowed my own volume of gear to creep up. I had a kit rationale recently and asked myself, "do you really need 6 lights and when have you ever used 6?" Err, never. Do I really need that 3rd camera angle for video or is it just overkill and one more thing that actually risks screwing the entire scenario up because you are now juggling too many pieces of kit that all need to be focused, or not focused and rely on AF and is the transmitter for the audio switched on and is the receiver also and... Sometimes, often even, less can end up being more.

Olympus/OM System OM-1 + 12-35mm f2.8

@Tulpa Maybe John is best placed to talk about camera bodies, but here's a few thoughts: you absolutely want weather proofing, and should read the manual to see what this can cope with (and what it cannot) IBIS is great but the mechanisms are fragile and I'd imagine that if there are any constant vibrations from cycling you could easily break them (e.g. will there be hours and hours of off-road or riding on rough roads?) consider what you'll be doing for audio - if you want an audio input then you'll need the G or GH line of cameras, not the GX line which lacks audio inputs docos are about getting the shot, not having a setup that looks incredible but isn't flexible or fast enough to use in the field. for this I recommend simple setups and zoom lenses. if you go MFT the 12-35mm F2.8 is a great lens because it's got some flexibility and also enough low-light for most situations. You need to think about the whole ecosystem involved. You will have the camera, lenses, filters, batteries and chargers, media, potentially separate microphones (and therefore all their battery and charging needs), etc. You might want a cage and maybe external monitors. You'll need camera mounts, definitely for mounting things to the bikes, but also a tripod is probably a must-have too. If you're shooting interviews you might want some small lights, which come with their own battery and charging requirements too. Then there's media management. How will you offload cards, and where will you store the data? Will you be able to backup to the cloud as you go? Can you buy drives along the way and mail them home as you go? Having three copies of something is great but if they're all in your bag when it gets stolen then the footage is still lost. This ecosystem is something you need to assemble and then use a few times to work out the kinks and get everything optimised. The reason I say all that is that by the end of that process you might decide that you don't have space or the weight capacity for the camera after you pack a wireless mic and a laptop and some hard drives.

Here at a camera store in Berlin we have the 3 musketeers. 2012 vintage RX1R OG, the one without the AA filter. It's very nice and I can't understand why it only goes for $900 used. Because it's got a much better lens than the Leica Q. No red dot though. RX1R II, the one with the tilt screen, phase-detect AF and pop-up EVF. It also shoots 120p, albeit no 4K. It also has a further innovation - the AA filter can be switched on and off. This was Sony when they felt they needed to catch up with Canon and Nikon by really pushing the boat out. 2014-2015 vintage Sony. The $2000 mint condition used RX1R II is reasonably rare but when you do find one, it's still cheaper than the Leica Q OG and closer to the Leica Q2 in terms of image quality. The pop-up EVF is mechanically a thing of beauty and offers a big field of view. Although without a rubberised eye cup, it isn't the most ergonomic or comfortable. So to the new one, the one with the 10 year gap. Sony have made sure to price it so that nobody buys one, which is good because they want you all to buy E mount lenses. Just to summarise the street prices: RX1R: $800-900 used RX1R II: $2k used RX1R III: $5100 / 4900 euro The lens is identical to the previous cameras. Which is fine to be honest, but I had more issues with the AF in macro mode on the RX1R III vs II. Weird. I also dislike the finish and build quality, doesn't feel as premium. It feels a bit like the A7CR. Not great and nowhere near a Leica and the RX1R II also feels more premium. I do prefer the buttons though on the new camera, they are raised for a more tactile feel. Gone is the pop-up EVF, in place of it a smaller standard one. The resolution of the live-view feed is better, but the overall optic is worse and more pokey. Gone is the articulated screen. Which is a really weird one. In comes a fatter battery - very welcome. 4K is there with no crop in 24p/25p... However, there's no IBIS or even OIS, which is a downer. The AEL button has changed to an AF-ON... Again a welcome change, because the first two models had no back-button AF at all. Well done Sony. So if you're looking for a full frame compact, the first two models are a steal. I got the RX1R II again. I regretted selling it the first time out!

I love this thread. Keep em coming. If only the Canon FD 35 105 was not prone to gnarly focussing after several years of use due to ball bearings covered with desolving rubber. There is a very compact 38 to 100mm F3.5 under the Hanimex label, which I really like using for personal filming. Mine has a FD mount. I used to have a video uploaded showing this lens in action, which I shared here before. Vimeo deleted it along with 60 other videos when I canceled my plus account, because they deleted all groups and destroyed the whole community. I really need to read into Nikon glass. All these different versions leave me puzzled.:) @mercer

Absolute scumbag behaviour from these American corporate fascists. The law and YouTube needs to stand up and say... enough. You should not be able to abuse so many innocent people via the legal system. It's all fair use.

Same…one of my most used lenses for my Z6, an old Nikon 17-35 2.8, is not weather sealed lol, but there’s the 5% of times where it’d be nice for the body to be weather sealed.

Just discovered that Minolta MD 35-70mm f3.5 is parfocal. 🙂

Decided I am selling my S9...I know. It's a killer camera. I realized I want something more durable as my a-cam. I got it for a killer deal, but that also just makes it all the more easy to sell as I am pricing it low at around $900 WITH the Smallrig cage. After further thought, I want a camera that is weather sealed, and reports about the rear dial going out (it feels soooo cheap) do not give me the most ocnfidence.)

The cupboard in question

Turns out I had the Makinon in a cupboard all along and will also give it a go. Some of these old zooms have terrible 1.5m+ minimum focus distances or rely on an awkward to engage separate macro mode, but some have the macro mode on the main focus ring and some are even par-focal. The Exakta 28-70mm F4 MC Macro (made in Japan with 62mm filter thread, and mine is an M42 mount version) in particular stands out for me, nice vintage look, nice size and weight, ergonomic to use, decent optics and distortion, covers GFX 100 well, especially in square 1:1 aspect for stills or 16:9 for video, and focuses down to 1:3.2 macro with one turn of the main focus ring (no funny separate mechanism to contend with). The best for flare is the absolutely pre-historic Voigtlander Zoomar 36-82mm F2.8, think it was the first ever zoom lens for SLRs, the distortion is absolutely insane at 82mm but if you stay between 36-70mm it has a lot of cinematic goodness.

Inspired by this post, I tried to make some flares with the Makinon. Some were shot at f/16 and others f/3.5 with an ND filter. I shot in v-log and corrected for exposure and add the official Panasonic LUT.

Sorry if it was already mentioned but the Canon R50V ($699USD) seems like a no brainer. But also depending on when you need to squeeze the trigger, Canon is rumored to be announcing a new Cinema cam with the R50V compact form-factor next month: https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-to-announce-new-compact-cinema-eos-camera/

More back-pedaling, it’s going back. Tried it for 2 jobs and actually, real world, I don’t actually like the size & weight. With the ability to take either 2 steps back or 3 steps forward, the less than 1/3rd the weight and 1/2 the size plus 1/2 the cost, 35mm f1.8 makes more sense. I ‘liked’ the 28-45 and really did think it would be perfect for me, but nah, going back to my roots and 100% primes for stills and hybrid but sticking with zooms for video. And sorry @Thpriest but that means keeping the S9! Shooting these last 2 jobs just reconfirmed what a joy it is to shoot free hand or on the freestanding monopod for all my run & gun clip work. Ridiculously light, quick and easy and probably the only thing I’d replace it with now is either a next gen S9, or possibly (but not this year!) third S1Rii. You can probably tell I am a bit of an S1Rii fanboy, but it just works for me…and I have barely touched the video side yet. Yes I would still rather it was an FX3/30 style body, but I’ll take what it can do what those cannot, every single day. If I change anything else this year, Mrs SMW will walk, so it’s; S1Rii x2 paired with any combo of; 18, 35, 50, 85mm f1.8’s (could do with something longer but not a ‘need’ as such) plus S9 with the Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 glued on plus, S5ii with battery grip and 70-200 f4 for all static longer capture duty. 4 bodies, 6 lenses, 1 system vs what was at the start of the year, 5 bodies, 9 lenses, 3 systems, so a BIG improvement in logistics. I do have a single mint S5ii for sale, EU only, €1000 inc postage for anyone that is interested or quick enough as Monday it’s off to MPB…

I think this is the first time the S5ii can do raw and it was X model only previously? Considering the prices of used S5ii’s now, that makes it some piece of kit! I have a minty S5ii for sale if anyone (EU only) wants one, for €1000 inc postage, or it’s off to MPB within 48 hours…

I don't really use the audio for dialogue so can't really comment on it specifically. To zoom out and think more holistically about sound, and also a bit about getting in front of the camera, there are a few approaches. High-quality sound on location. This is great but you pay for it in terms of paying for extra equipment, extra faff of charging it, setting it up, using it, cleaning and maintaining it, etc. High-quality in-camera audio is the most convenient and the most expensive to get. External audio makes it easier / cheaper but creates extra work to keep the audio files managed and to sync them in post. Acceptable sound on location. This could be through a combination of average in-camera audio and average external audio. The in-camera audio could potentially using on-camera mics like the Rode VideoMicro or a plugin Lav mic that don't require any power and are plug-and-forget but are dependent on the quality of preamps in the camera. The external audio could be as simple as using a smartphone right next to your mouth, or using the integrated mic in the headphones as a short lav mic. I've seen lots of vloggers do this in very noisy environments and it works fine. First example, second example. Record in post. ADR (Automated Dialogue Replacement) is where actors re-record their dialogue in post production to match their lips in the footage. It is so common that many films simply didn't bother to get good sound and created the audio (dialogue, sound effects, sound design, the lot) in post after the fact. I've done this before on short films and if you take a bit or time to do it then you can get results indistinguishable from doing it on-location. Recording in post also comes into the idea of appearing on screen, or not. By taking lots of notes and recording your thoughts during the trip (potentially just using voice memos on your phone at the end of each day) you can then narrate the finished film and have a significant presence in the finished edit, have high quality audio, and also take away the burden of getting great audio for everything that happens throughout the whole trip. Narrating the film will also enable you to communicate ideas and feelings and information in a concise way with carefully chosen words, rather than trying to piece together a coherent summary from fragmented snippets of footage. Narrating the final piece also takes a huge burden off the footage too, because anything you didn't capture can be explained in V/O so the film doesn't rest solely on the footage to be self-explanatory, which is a high-bar to achieve. There's a hidden mindset that you're at the cutting edge of (and being cut by), which is that the entire film-making industry assumes that anyone wanting high-quality equipment doesn't mind it being large, and that if you care about size then you don't care about quality. I've gone round and round with people online and it's like "small and good" is a combination that somehow doesn't exist in their world-view. This has lessened over recent years, but is still the elephant in the room. Speaking of the elephant in the room, be careful not to lose sight of the final prize, which is an engaging final product. I don't know how much editing experience you have, but making a doc is like making a bunch of lego pieces without knowing what you're eventually going to want to make, then designing the building, and then trying to assemble the building out of the lego blocks you have made. Obviously those with a lot of skill will be able to anticipate the final result better, and will make better pieces, but to a certain extent the more pieces you make and the more variety you include, the easier it will be to assemble the finished product you want. This is why I advocate for setups that: 1) you will use (giving you more footage) 2) is fast to use (giving you more footage of things that happen quickly) 3) is flexible (giving you more variety of footage) 4) is enjoyable to use (making you more likely to use it and also making the whole thing more enjoyable and more likely to be successful overall). Remember, this person is ready for anything, but misses almost everything switching equipment, and has a hernia by the end... You should start with the idea of just using your phone and only add equipment that will make the end result better, not worse.

The reason that I've been avoiding (and maybe others have to) mentioning the GH7 has nothing to do with low light and everything to do with it being as large and heavy as a lot of FF bodies. If you're willing to go that big, you could also get an EOS R5 or a Z6 III.

I would check out Martijn Doolaard on Youtube, he filmed this on his own with drone and mirrorless camera and phone camera and it is seriously beautiful and high quality visually, and he has a very engaging way. He obviously has a good eye but it's amazing what can be done as a single person. He used a GH5 for this, it was a few years ago, the last 3 years he has been filming himself doing up a cabin in the Italian Alps, I think using a version of Sony A7 and drone. He releases a film each week and again it is beautiful to watch, is both mesmerising, educational, inspiring and medative, good for the soul.Highly recommend

I agree. The ability to reframe in post is incredible. It even goes beyond that because you are essentially recording every camera angle at all times, so if there was something that happened around you, you could cut between multiple angles of the same event. Even if you were psychic and were always pointing your normal camera in the best direction at all times, you couldn't record multiple angles at the same time with one camera, so it goes even beyond the mythical psychic camera person. I saw a great example of this many years ago.. it was a guy recording his family walking through a fairground with mum and the kids walking behind him. The sequence was something like: his kids calmly looking around someone in a scary costume approaching from ahead his kids not seeing them scary monster seeing the kids and having the idea to scare them and starting to approach mum seeing him and smiling, knowing what is about to happen the kids suddenly seeing him and reacting very suddenly / loudly the monster reacting to their reaction the kids laughing the monster laughing mum laughing monster walking away It was essentially a three-camera shoot, and like all good reality TV I'm pretty sure he overlapped the shots to extend the event, which probably only took about 5 seconds. The killer thing is that just by having a 360 camera you're recording all the camera angles all the time, so when the thing happens you've probably got all/most of the angles to show it happening. Just get the one with the highest resolution and highest bitrates. When you crop in you're drastically reducing the quality of the footage.

I also doubt that "weather resistant" is sufficient for the random deluges that are likely to happen over that duration of trip, although it's absolutely worth reading the manufacturers description of what "weather resistant" means, just so you know what they are thinking of when they use the phrase. It might be a lot more (or less) than what you might be thinking. This is something I have pondered for some time but haven't gotten around to. Better to just get something completely waterproof and be done with it. Then you can record in monsoon rains and get good footage of waist-deep water, which would be a highlight of the doco in itself. I would also suggest that the "bad weather low-light" situation isn't really that important. Realistically, if it's bad weather due to rain or due to dust at night then you can't see that much anyway. Just turn on your bike lights or headlamps and film the chaos. My setup doesn't cover the "long-zoom low-light" combination because it's not a thing that you need to shoot normally, and while it would be great to have, I have only ever wanted this combination for taking shots out of the hotel window at night in Seoul, and that's hardly a situation to design my whole setup around. I'm also surprised at how compact the 28-200mm lens is on the S9, it seems quite manageable.

I'm going to revise my choice for this type of use. Camping and biking mean to me that one camera might not suffice if going Panasonic. I do not think that the OM-3 will give acceptable levels of noise inside a tent at night unless with a small light; nor do I believe the S9 by itself will give acceptable levels of weather resistance (by the way, I doubt the Panasonic 14-140 does either even though it's rated weather resistant). Therefore, I would still go for the S9 with a 18mm f/1.8 lens for dark, inside a tent scenes and the 28-200. For bad weather, I'd get an action cam. This will eliminate bad-weather low light; maybe pick up a camera cover for the S9. At MPB, that setup will set you back 2500 euros. The other option is the "do everything" set-up with the OM-3 with the Olympus 14-150 ii and the Panasonic 9mm for about the same amount of money, but you'll be spending more on the camera (double!) for less quality output (but still great). If you are a disciplined shooter that usually uses a tripod and manual focus, there are options that will cost way less. That OM-3 setup is about 950g and the S9 + action cam setup is 1300g. Note: Camera size doesn't have the Panasonic 18mm list, but it's the same size as the 24mm. Again, this is for 10-bit with great IBIS and AF being the priority. I'd go with a much cheaper setup if it were me. I wouldn't want to take that expensive of gear out into the unknown. It's a close call though. There are so many good choices. It almost makes you say "screw it" and just use whatever you have with its limitations. If you're a creative, this is usually better.

The S9 isn't weather sealed, though, is it? It's not the only consideration, but I'd definitely consider that a "would be nice" for a multi-year bike tour which will probably include a lot of camping.

Here's one of the issues with M43: Granted, the OM-3 is quite possibly a more functional setup with a better build, but the S9 could be all you need and will beat the OM-3 in price, low-light, and video output. Personally, I'd rather go with the S9 even though I've bad-mouthed it quite a bit.

An OM-3 with a 14-140mm and a small M43 prime barely takes up any space. An action camera barely takes up any space. A phone is probably coming anyway. That's a primary camera and two backup cameras. For lights, if they're needed at all for the style of documentary being done, a small pop-up reflector weighs almost nothing and can do a lot. Combine that with one or two Aputure MC's and maybe an ultra-portable light stand and you've got a workable lighting setup. Don't want the reflector? Include a white t-shirt or hoodie in the package and use it as a bounce. It'll look ridiculous on set, but I've made it work with worse. The MC's are also nice because they have a magnet built-in so with some creativity, you can find a place to put them without necessarily needing a light stand (if it were me, I'd bring at least one small one, though. For mics, a DJI mic 2 kit and one of the tiny Deity or R0de on-camera shotguns? The Mic will pair with an Action 4 and can also record internally. Total weight of that entire kit? <2kg Not bad for a setup that can record fantastic-looking video (in the right hands) and capture acceptable audio! Need a tripod? If it were me, I'd skip a traditional tripod and go with something like a Cobra 3 monopod with the little "tripod" that folds out at the bottom and a foot pedal to unlock the top. With such a small and light camera, it'd be stable enough (I'd set a bag on the feet on a windy day) and with a fluid head or ball head on top, you can also fake a slider, a dolly, and to some extent, a steadicam. That's another 1kg or so. Don't want to offload media using the phone (this is doable with a modern iPhone and a USB-C hub these days) or want to edit on the go? Add an M4 Macbook Air which adds just about 1kg more. It'll be plenty for just about any editing OM3/action camera/phone video. The rest of the stuff mentioned that's needed (sleeping bags, etc) is all a sunk cost in terms of weight for a long biking trip.

Totally get the love for the “celluloid look”: 24p, grain, soft image, widescreen bars. It hits a vibe. But these are aesthetic codes we’ve absorbed over time, not fixed rules. They signal “cinema” because of decades of conditioning, but it’s just one visual language. Some of the most “video” looking content was shot on film. Sitcoms like Friends or Seinfeld used 35mm, but lit and cut for TV brightness and fluidity. Meanwhile, filmmakers like Lynch or Soderbergh have used DV or even iPhones and still delivered pure cinema. It’s not about format alone, but how it’s used. Same with frame rates. 24p stuck around because of early sound sync limitations, and we grew to love its motion blur and softness. 60p feels more “real,” which works for news or sports, but often feels uncanny in narrative. The Hobbit in 48p was a bold move, but many rejected it because it broke the cinematic illusion we’ve grown used to. New generations are wired differently. They grow up on 30p iPhone clips, 60p YouTube, 120Hz TikToks. What feels “cinematic” is shifting. Same with aspect ratios: 4:3, widescreen, vertical. Even black bars have become a kind of shorthand that says, “this is a movie.” Resolution plays a role too. Some DPs shoot in 8K then soften or downscale to avoid the overly digital crispness. Others embrace every pixel. You’ve got people using 35mm, 65mm, anamorphic, spherical, vintage lenses, weird sensors. There’s no single “cinematic” look. Just choices.

Stay of execution for the S9… A. Trade value is trash and I refuse to take that kind of hit, providing… B. I can get some use out of it and soI am going to repurpose it as; spare/backup body/lens (with the Sigma 28-70 which I was keeping as a back up lens anyway) dedicated slow mo unit for such times I need such a thing which is every job, but less than 5% of any job. Ditto ‘gimbal-like’ duty. Potential 3rd angle that I recently decided was overkill to have a camera full-time dedicated to. So occasional roles I could have covered mostly, but may as well use the S9 for. So not quite down to 3 cameras from what was 5 just a few weeks back, but I’ll call it 3.5!

Yesterday I played around with FLC and grading some clips from Korea and the GH7 and 14-140mm. I plan to do a range of tests around settings for softening / sharpening / adding grain / other texture treatments in post, but YT compression is pretty diabolical so I'll need to do quite a number of upload tests to see what settings in Resolve get you what result on YT. I also went much bolder with the colours too, thinking of Gawx. This was a first attempt just to work out the ballpark of where to start. Probably the immediate takeaway is how the grain is quite different per shot, despite it being applied evenly to all shots. Here is a comparison between the timeline in Resolve, the 42Mbps h264 4K export, and the 12.6Mbps h265 4K YT download. Shot 1 - Resolve: Shot 1 - Export: Shot 1 - YT stream: Shot 2 - Resolve: Shot 2 - Export: Shot 2 - YT stream: Shot 3 - Resolve: Shot 3 - Export: Shot 3 - YT stream: Impressions: I'm told that film grain is most noticeable in the mids and shadows, so the distribution is consistent with film, which partly explains why the first image has less noticeable grain as most of the image is quite bright or quite dark. The sky shot seems to have lots of grain as it's a flat surface in the right luma range, but it seems that more grain is retained on the YT stream because there is less movement in the frame for the compression to cover. Whereas on the street scene the grain is considerably reduced despite having similar darker flat surfaces. I didn't apply any softening to this video, so the sharpness is direct from the 14-140mm -> GH7 5.7K to C4K downsample -> C4K 500Mbps Prores 422 -> 1080p timeline image path. The 14-140mm isn't tack sharp but it's not too bad. I've noticed in the past that grain can make images look sharper than they really are, but in this example the grain combined with the compression probably softens detail as a net result. I will definitely be exploring this relationship more. Film is known to have a sharpness of >1 at its maxima, so having some sharpening applied seems appropriate. Overall it seems to do a pretty good job capturing the grain, here's the next frame from the YT download so you can compare what is grain and what is detail and texture in the scene.

Great info from John and definitely agree on the zoom + fast prime combo. I have the 14-140mm and love it. I was tossing up between it and the 12-60mm F2.8-4.0 because I wasn't sure how often I'd use the 60-140mm part of the lens, but since getting it I was really surprised at how often it really comes in handy. Essentially, it means you can shoot whatever you can see, which really helps when you're trying to give a sense of a place. It's slower than the 12-60mm but neither is a low-light lens and the DOF differences aren't relevant in a doco situation. Here's a video I did showing the stabilisation, but it should show you the versatility of the lens. I shoot travel videos and have found that AF zooms best allow you to document the places and experience you're in, as they support the approach I've developed to shooting: Shoot a good variety of shots so you have lots of options in the edit Shoot the wide so you have an establishing shot, shoot the people, shoot the buildings, shoot the motion, shoot the colour Shoot the space (especially if it's large), shoot the details, look down at the ground and look up at the buildings / trees and the sky Think about what makes this place special and shoot that Think about what makes this place feel the way it does and shoot that In general, the faster you can shoot the more you will capture and the more authentic it will be because it will be more spontaneous and more based around your initial impressions rather than shooting slowly and having too much time to think about it. Plus, sometimes things happen very quickly and often they're the most important things to capture. I'd also second @tbonnes idea of combining the action cam and mirrorless. The action cam can be mounted on the bike ready to grab footage at a moments notice and doesn't need to be put away even in torrential rain or a dust storm. Then, once you've stopped you can pull out the mirrorless and get some shots. If you're a masochist then you can even go ahead, setup the mirrorless and hit record, go back again and ride through the frame, then go back and retrieve the camera. It seems like a great way to shoot a film and a spectacular way to remove as much pleasure from the experience as possible. This raises the other option - a drone. It's the fastest way to get shots of you without having to ride the same section of road three times. The laws for flying drones seem to have stabilised in a lot of places allowing drones under a certain weight, but it's something that would require an incredible amount of research beforehand to make sure it wouldn't get confiscated or get you into hot water just for having it.

@Tulpa sound like a cool project. Haven't done anything like it but have brought a bunch of different cameras on training rides filming my wife (a mountainbike pro) for the last decade. I would strongly consider a combination of an action cam and a mirrorless. The Osmo Action paired with their mic mini is a brilliant combo. The camera alone can be used in a bunch of conditions without risk (rain etc.) I have no experience with M 4/3 but used to bring a Samsung NX500 in my back pocket. It was brilliant at that. Has now been replaced with a Fuji X-M5. Same size.

10-bit and weather sealing. There's the rub. Panasonic: GH5, GH5 ii, GH5S, G9, G9ii, GH6, GH7 Olympus: OM-1, OM-1ii, OM-3 Anything smaller, you'll need to forgo 10-bit. For lenses, there are many options from flagship zooms (all are great, new and old) to small primes. However with the latter, there aren't necessarily that many that are weather-sealed. Panasonic: All the new versions of the Leica-branded primes, minus the Leica 15mm f/1.7 Olympus: All the Pro versions and the new versions of the 17mm and 25mm f/1.8. For run and gun in 2025 (AF in video), I'd choose the G9ii (lighter) or the GH7. For lenses, I'd go with two- one all-purpose, do everything lens like the 14-150 (Olympus), 14-140 (Panasonic), or 12-100 (Olympus, heavy!). After, I'd go for the Leica 25mm prime (new version) if weather-sealing is necessary; if not, the old version of the Leica 15mm f/1.7, Olympus 17mm f/1.8 or Panasonic 25mm f/1.7. If 10-bit isn't the issue, I'd go for the smallest camera with the best output. I'd go go a GX85 and an audio recorder, the E-M5 iii, OM5, OM5ii (all of these have decent audio and AF). It's sad that Panasonic cannot offer us anything under 500g with 10-bit, decent audio, and decent IBIS in MFT. For that, they can only offer the S9 in FF with NO pancake lenses- a CRAZY situation that is costing them dearly every single day!

This whole thing is a really silly take. I can absolutely afford the RX1R Mark III and I can also say it's too expensive and there's no way I'd buy it at that price. And being mentioned in the same sentence as the Q is not a win when the sentence is "this damn thing is nearly as expensive as the Q, but isn't even a Leica." Otherwise, Fuji could just kick up the price on the X Half to $6,500 and enjoy that sweet victory. Obviously some people are going to buy the RX1R III. That was never in doubt. There are always some people who will pay any price for something they want. That's not to say that it's priceworthy.

It certainly is, thanks for doing that. Much appreciated.

I just remembered that the 17mm F1.4 has a strange filter thread size I don't have an adapter for, so I went with the Voigtlander 17.5mm instead, plus I also did the Voigtlander 42.5mm as well. I took stills on the GX85 so you can see the full sensor readout, and the SOOC images below are the actual images from the SD card and 7.9MB each so pixel pee to your hearts content if desired. I even remembered to set the taking lens to infinity and focus with the adapter! Voigtlander 17.5mm at F2.8, no adapter, SOOC: Voigtlander 17.5mm at F2.8, with Sirui 1.25x adapter, SOOC: Voigtlander 17.5mm at F2.8, with Sirui 1.25x adapter, de-squeezed (0.8x vertical size adjustment): Voigtlander 42.5mm at F2.8, no adapter, SOOC: Voigtlander 42.5mm at F2.8, with Sirui 1.25x adapter, SOOC: Voigtlander 42.5mm at F2.8, with Sirui 1.25x adapter, de-squeezed (0.8x vertical size adjustment): Hopefully that's useful. I took a shot of something round last week and pulled it into Resolve and rotated it 90 degrees and lined it up at 50% opacity to test the squeeze factor, which turned out to be just under 1.25x, but I suspect this might change depending on the focus distance. I don't know if it might also change with the taking lens, but I'm probably not going to do extensive testing on all my lenses. Also, for my purposes, it's meant to be a controlled degradation so nailing the squeeze factor for all focus distances isn't a high priority. Let me know if you want any other tests, some of these are pretty quick to do.

Same as VW pricing a Golf the same as a Porsche and calling that a win. Err no, you have simply over-priced something massively that is not at the same level. This is not a pissing contest and I only used the Q3 as context, but IMO the Sony only beats the Leica in 3 areas which are; it is smaller and lighter, it has a higher res LCD and it’s AF will be better. Having said that, the Leica is over-priced IMO, but then you expect that with Leicas. It’s more a case of when you compare the RX1Riii against the A7CR and the A7RV it really shows how nuts the price is. Sony have a ton of small lenses and IMO the A7CR at half the price is a MUCH better option. The only thing about the A7CR that really bothered me wss they cheaped out on the LCD and tipped me towards the A7RV. And yes, the A7RV and anything with an interchangeable lens is a slightly different prospect, but still very realistic competitive options. I hope Lumix bring out something similar, - a rangefinderesque type body, either fixed lens or interchangeable because within L Mount we ‘only’ have manual focus M’s or e:shutter only FP/L’s and the massively expensive Q’s. S1Rii spec in an FP/Q3 body for around 3k? As long as they don’t do anything stupid like drop IBIS and preferably has the fully articulated LCD, done deal and dream camera for me.

Without being too flippant, tariffs etc aside, I wouldn't buy this new Sony at above 2.5k and even then, I'd rather have the older 'middle' one. Is anybody actually seriously interested in this camera? I know there are people out there, (about 3 of them), stating, "I don't want no stinking floppy screen or IBIS, just give me a photo camera", but surely even they, and dentists, will baulk at 5k for one of these? It's a tiny bit bigger and a little heavier, but a used Leica Q3 can be had for the same money. 8k, flip screen, IBIS, wider and faster lens, is a Leica not a Sony...

Yeah, I have a bunch of M42, but none wider than 28mm as it's all FF vintage. I'll grab some shots.

Lok Cheung's input (the other part by another usual suspect is here) on 360º acquisiton for traditional use -- my bet, actually: That London ride is exactly where I think the sensor size factor (the same for Osmo Pocket 3) makes all the difference (coupled to 10-bit realm, obviously, just not exactly all the way long like in that example but counts more than the usual reviewers tell)... No less. My shot too :- )