Leaderboard

Hello, I hope everyone is well! Even though I’m not really active on camera forums anymore, I frequently read the EOSHD blog and every now and then the forum, so I saw the thread and thought I would respond. Because it wasn’t ”poof gone”, it was announced on the channel over a year ago and mentioned in the last three videos. Before going into why, super flattered that this thread exist. I mean that. So here are some thoughts on the matter and why I took it down. Hobby vs Work YouTube was never my job, just a hobby. So was video making and photography, in the beginning. When starting the channel I was working as a producer after a couple of years as a radio/TV reporter. So I started the channel to keep my practical skills fresh. And to keep up with the development, which was huge at the time. The DSLR revolution, Blackmagic, cheaper editors etc. Fast forward a couple of years and I started making more videos at work again. At the same time I pretty much lost all interest in doing it as a hobby. And actually canceled the channel. Winston Churchill was definitely right in saying that work and hobbies should not be too similar. But what I had discovered was a passion for still photography, which I had pretty much no experience with. So I started making videos again. That’s why my videos became very repetitive and short. I didn’t care about that part, I just wanted to display my stills work and get feedback, talk to the community, experiment with cameras and develop. After a few years I became a good enough photographer that my new employer noticed and just like that I was shooting stills professionally all the time. And I still do (I work in marketing and PR). It’s a huge bonus in my field and if you are good at it you will never be out of work. So photography also became less and less of a hobby. Instead I found other hobbies. They where things that for example got me out into nature, so photography tagged a long a while, as a secondary activity. But eventually it faded. It was also nice to do things and not share it with people. I know I probably could have a very successful channel by making videos about my current hobbies, and even make some money. But I never really wanted a channel for the sake of a channel. And always had a full time job. The fact is that at no point would I had been able to live of my channel, not even at the peak. Even with sponsors it was never more that a regular salary (in my field and country). But as long as it was a hobby and I was glad to do it, it was a welcome addition to finance camera gear. Time At the same time as my channel started to feel less fun and other hobbies started taking my time, I started a family. So.. you get the idea: full time job + family + 2-3 hobbies = no YouTube. Upkeep So why take it down, why not leave it for the community? I did.. at first. Like some of you pointed out, the YouTube crowd in the photography/video space is generally nice and positive. That is my experience as well. Early on I learned that a good way of keeping the trolls away was to be present. Respond and engage. Trolls are usually idiots or cowards, so they don’t like getting push back. But once I stopped making videos, views and comments obviously went down. But the trolls started coming back. Not so much after me, and I don’t care about that. But agains the community. The people commenting started being nasty towards each other. I felt a responsibility to moderate, which was annoying. That’s when the thought about simply removing it started to grow. It wasn’t an impuls. It was an internal debate that went on for months. And the issue grew much much larger than a couple of trolls. I started thinking about five years ahead, 10 years, 30 years.. This post is already way too long so I won’t go into all of it. But I think you get the idea when I say: Privacy or when the content no longer reflects the creator. Digital minimalism, control over one’s narrative, inactive or outdated content. Risk of misuse of content due to me not checking the terms updates. Closure. So there is a looong ramble :) To keep in spirit of the forum I can charge my current gear for pro work :) For the longest time I used the EOS-R for 75% of all my work and the R5 (rental) for the rest. It wasn’t mine but my employer told me to buy whatever I wanted. Paired it with a 28, 35 and 70-200. 70/30 stills/video. The R5 is peak camera imo. Today is a little different. I started working for a new company about a year ago and again was told to buy what I needed. I would have bought the R5 without hesitation if it wasn’t for the Sigma 35-150/2-2.8.. I just had to have it. So I ordered the Nikon Z6iii. It’s not as good overall as the R5 for me and what I like in a tool camera. But it’s 90% there. And coupled with that lens it’s becomes on par. //MB

Yep that's the kind of intermediary codec that the ZR needs. But only if Nikon doesn't cook it with that aggressive noise reduction. You know the drill, Fuji had similar issues I seem to remember you pointing out. Thing is, I don't buy cameras based on promised or wishful features anymore. Been burned too many times waiting for "coming soon" updates that arrive late, incomplete, or not at all. So as of right now, the ZR is off the table for me. It's not just the codec situation though tbh, the unreliable view assist/exposure tools and first gen quirks also give me cold feet. Good to know LT is officially on the roadmap, though.. great for early adopters but I think I'm done gambling on "maybe later".

Panasonic just released a new on-camera mic. Looks like an excellent option for events etc where you want something small or something really flexible. I've watched a few YT showcases and for me, the best features are: It gives you 32-bit without having to have the external mic preamp box (and then adding microphones to that, making it larger again) It's small, much smaller than an on-camera shotgun mic You can quickly swap between modes (I assume?) it's powered by the camera It unlocks the ability to record >2 channels of audio into the files (one person said you can record left/right/mono/mono-20dB as a combo, and left/right/left-20dB/right-20dB as a different combo) It's definitely not magic and the laws of physics still apply. There don't seem to be any really good on-location stress tests posted yet, but there's a few examples. Media Division did an in-kitchen test to compare it to in-camera mics and lav and a DJI clip-on, and also applied a bit of AI voice isolation too to see how far you can push it: Dustin did some good tests including walking a 360 around the camera in each mode, which showed how directional it is, which seems pretty impressive. He also compared it to the Sennheiser MKE440. This shows the different modes out in nature: This is probably a complete revolution for a number of niche uses. Content creators would be one, where they're recording in noisy environments but still staying relatively close to the camera where physics will be helping them. Another is where the flexibility really helps, like shooting events where getting pristine audio isn't an absolute must but working super-quickly is more important and perhaps the 32-bit would really come into its own. This reminds me of how people used to talk about Panasonic when the GH4 and GH5 were around and people were saying that Panasonic just listened to people and then implemented the features that people would use rather than trying to be flashy and grab headlines. This will be an invisible workhorse for lots and lots of people.

Getting prepped for my next trip and have further refined my setup. This trip is a quick trip to China, but it's also a test case for a trip I'm taking later in the year to Europe where the packing approach will be minimalism. Unlike the way I like to travel in Asia, the Europe trip will involve changing accommodation every few days, so packing and unpacking and hauling bags around will be much more of a pain, so I'll try and travel really minimally. As such, my approach for this trip is "when in doubt, don't take it" and see what I actually use. So the setup for this trip is: GH7 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 zoom, which I use during the day at F5.6 which means my 1-5 stop vND is enough 12-35mm F2.8 zoom, which is a great walk-around lens after dark Takumar 50mm F1.4 with M42-MFT Speedbooster (with bokeh insert) for "night cinema" iPhone 17 Pro setup (Neewer phone filter mount, K&F 1-9 stop vND, MagSafe Popsocket) The GH7 and zooms are self-explanatory, so here's the 50mm F1.4 setup. I have played around with "inserts" and ended up with a pretty extreme design, so this is a test to see if the vertical edges are too strong a look for me. It's made from the sticky part of the post-it note, and a layer of sticky tape over the top to keep it a bit more together. It sits between the speed booster and the lens, and I won't use the speed booster for any other lenses while travelling so this will stay in there and protected, so doesn't need to be that robust. It's a strong look in some situations and quite "painterly" in others, so I'll be curious how it goes. For my iPhone 17 Pro, it's a phone most of the time and a camera only as a backup, so I searched for a setup that would: Protect my phone from drops (I dropped it on the last trip and the screen shattered, despite it being in an Apple case - the only one available at the time... sigh) Still be right-sized for getting in and out of pockets etc Have a vND solution for when I want to shoot and use 180 shutter I'll spare everyone from the rant about the options out there (everyone wants you to buy into their "ecosystem" now) so I ended up with the Otterbox Defender Series Pro case, which makes the iPhone feel even larger than it did in the Apple case (which doesn't seem possible but is true), but seems very robust. The vND is the Neewer phone filter mount, which sort-of clips onto the phone (It's designed to screw onto and clamp the phone but you're clamping against the screen, so I wouldn't tighten it that much). It's designed for a naked iPhone, so I had to modify it (and the Otterbox case) slightly where it interfered with the Otterbox case to get it to sit a bit flatter. It still doesn't sit flush, but it goes on and seems to be fine. I haven't got around to actually taking it out to shoot with it, so that remains to be seen. I paired it with the K&F 1-9 stop vND, which boasts 18 layers etc, but doesn't claim to be a "True Colour" one like the 1-5 stop ones do. It doesn't have hard stops and I think it still gives the X at the max amount, but I'll see how I go. Not having an aperture sure sucks considering you're not really losing having shallow DOF. That is all combined with the MagSafe Popsocket as a safeguard. I've used the adhesive popsockets before and they're great for giving a much better grip on the phone, but I wasn't sure how strongly the MagSafe would be. The Otterbox claims to have magnets in it that strengthen the MagSafe connection, and this might be true. It feels quite sturdy actually, and I tested it to require 1.75kg of force to pull off, compared to the 1.45kg of force it took to pull it off my naked iPhone 12 mini. No idea what strength a naked iPhone 17 Pro MagSafe connection would have, but it's not terrible. Lots of compromises involved, but it's really my backup camera, and the Otterbox case is very grippy, so I'll see how I go.

Regarding voice AI. Hoo boy. As a documentarian, this one can affect me a lot. A lot of ills can be smoothed over with AI audio. But ... at the end of the day it's an ethical choice how it's employed. I've decided to ONLY use it to salvage VERBATIM lines from interviews and field audio that is distorted beyond comfort. Like, wind noise, clothes rustling. And then it's a last ditch option after audio EQ/Rx tweaking. Best thing to do is just not 'f up the field production to begin with. Beyond that, if AI is used as a production short cut to solve a storytelling/crafting failure as a filmmaker -- I now consider AI use untenable for me. It's simply on the wrong side of things morally when it comes to making honest doc films. Sadly, I fear that's now a contrarian opinion; an "old-fart" opinion. No one probably really gives a shit anymore about these sorts of "cheats" 'cept me.

Lately I’ve been thinking about how fast new cameras and lenses come out, and it made me wonder, do these companies actually realize a large portion of the world (especially here in the U.S.) is feeling some real financial strain right now? Between rising living costs, inflation still lingering in daily budgets, and shoppers saying they plan to cut spending because things are less affordable, people in many income brackets are tightening their belts rather than splurging. At the same time, camera gear prices keep going up, with manufacturers leaning heavily into higher end products and even having to increase prices due to tariffs and costs and used gear demand is surging, which suggests many photographers are turning away from new purchases and toward more affordable options. Meanwhile the constant cycle of marketing, hype, and new products can get overwhelming. It starts to feel less like “new tech we need” and more like noise pushing us to buy things even if budgets are tight. I’m curious, do you think camera companies are aware of this, or does it not matter to them because their target audience is high end buyers? And has the constant churn of new gear given you a kind of “second hand fatigue” not necessarily because you want nothing new, but because it feels relentless and disconnected from what most people can realistically afford?

This reminds me of using my old Sony camcorder with the 5.1 surround sound microphone. I would shoot with it, then in post be able to isolate each channel and choose which one to use and ignore the ones that were just location noise. Pretty handy without much effort when shooting. This might be similar in that sense.

Fair enough. I just wish they'd spent time and resources elsewhere. I want a small, up-to-date, Panasonic M43 camera, not an overly complex version of a on-camera mic. This seems like a great product for 2010. But what do I know, maybe this THE MIC, the one that everyone was waiting for. What I can tell you with 100% certainty, people are ready and willing to pay vast sums of money for old gear, only because it's small. What happened Panasonic? The whole miniaturization of components thing has been apparently disregarded.

Come on John... everyone knows that anyone who wants better footage than a smartphone can provide is 100% totally fine with a camera the size of a microwave oven that looks like a Borg prototype! Being slightly serious though, it's easy to criticise, but as someone who wants flexibility and better sound options, this is FAR better than the previous options, so it's a welcome addition in my eyes. The worst enemy of progress is criticising everything that isn't perfect in every conceivable way.

It's great they came out with something new, but I wish they'd spent their time elsewhere. This product just doesn't seem like a priority. If audio is the priority, I'd rather a set of 2+ wireless lav microphones that connect and record to the camera via bluetooth or wifi. Why hasn't anyone done that?

Hey everyone, You know me. I’ve been agonizing over my next camera the entire year of 2025. Countless threads, rental tests, ecosystem debates… I've got a shortlist but I’m still somewhat undecided in February 2026. Now a proper ongoing gig has landed: high-end lifestyle / product / mini-doc content for a well-known outlet. All solo run&gun: fast stories, Reels, interviews, close-up product detail, lifestyle vignettes, multi-platform deliverables (horizontal main cuts + vertical social + still assets). No crew, just me moving fast in boutiques, ateliers and interiors. Current shortlist : Canon EOS C50 (€3,500 ) Pros that keep winning me over after testing: 7K open-gate 3:2 + simultaneous 16:9 / 9:16 dual record to different cards = massive time-saver for vertical/horizontal from one take. Dual zoom rockers (body + XLR handle) smooth variable-speed creeps and fast punch-ins on primes felt magical. Built-in fan = no thermal anxiety on longer takes. Cine OS: frame guides for every ratio, false color/waveforms/zebras, shutter angle, base ISO switches. Gyro data + Gyroflow covers stabilization so well that lack of IBIS isn’t a big issue. C-Log2 grading is easy and beautiful, plus Wide DR mode (I’ve missed that since my C100/C200 days). Pro mini cine cam body look perception is important in my field; you can charge more with something that screams serious filmmaker. Cons: Body+lens investment hurts minimum RF 24/1.8 Macro IS STM (~€500) + RF 45/1.2 STM (€500) = €4500 total. Closed RF glass. EIS only (electronic), so very dynamic handheld shots rely on technique or light post-stab. Canon EOS R6 Mark III (€2,899) Pros: IBIS for aggressive handheld run-and-gun. Built-in EVF (huge for bright interiors/outdoors). Mechanical shutter + flash sync for occasional stills. 7K open-gate 3:2 for post-cropping multi-ratio. Same C-Log2 grading ease and fast hybrid menu/dial switching. Cons: No simultaneous multi-format dual recording all multi-ratio work is post-crop only. No 7K downsampled digital zoom (FHD only). No built-in fan thermal limits in demanding long takes (30–60 min in 4K/7K high-bitrate). No XLR handle or mounting points out of box. Consumer-looking body doesn't have the pro mini cine cam vibe. Sony FX3 (€3,500 ) I already have Zeiss Batis primes, so zero lens spend. IBIS, low-light is proven, and it’s the safe solo workhorse everyone knows. But in 2026 it feels dated: Still capped at 4K internal (no 6K/7K future-proofing). No open-gate all multi-ratio work is post-crop from 4K (quality hit). No RAW for high-end stuff. No EVF. 12MP stills. Spending serious money on a 5-year-old body feels like questionable investment math, especially considering an FX3 mk2 will drop later this year. Sony FX2 (€2,500) Despite its controversial usage of the old A7IV sensor, it's a real nice body thanks to its unique tilt EVF that I absolutely love. Also a proper hybrid. Its already gone down in price a little bit but like the above FX3 it feels silly investing in a cam with outdated tech and specs. Nikon ZR €2,200. Cheapest option. I could adapt my Sony glass. Internal R3D RAW is appealing for high-end grading. Big, beautiful display is the main draw. Main cons: R3D RAW means huge files. H.265 codec applies quite heavy noise reduction that turns into “mush”. No open-gate. Basic controls. No EVF, no mech shutter. Ecosystem still feels young for run-and-gun reliability on a high-profile gig I’m leaning hard toward the C50 right now. The open-gate + simultaneous dual-ratio recording + rocker zoom control feel tailor made for the exact multi-platform content I’ll be shooting. C-Log2 grading is easy and beautiful, Wide DR mode brings back what I loved on my old C100/C200 days, and Gyroflow + EIS covers stabilization perfectly for my style. Cine menu and exposure tools also feel like a step up for product polish. RAW and anamorphic support for potential high-end stuff. The handling with the excellent top handle makes it feel like an evolved FX3. It's a hefty investment although I should recoup fast once I start getting paid. Yes I'm purposely omitting Lumix, a forum favourite I know but I just don't gel with either bodies or lens choice. Appreciate any real-world takes from people who may have used above gear and/or deliver this kind of content. Thanks in advance.

While AI can be employed for positive or negative things, there's a bigger outlook at play for me. Robert Persig's famous musings are where I want to stand philosophically. His theories, and my limited understanding of them, are pretty much the reason why I ultimately view AI unfavorably.

https://www.indiewire.com/news/obituary/robert-duvall-dead-1235141818/ The world will be much emptier without him. He was one of my favourites—and, for sure, one of many others here too. RIP, you’ll be truly missed, not just on screen.

Agreed. I felt the same about the G9II. Lowlight is good. Full frame cameras seem to just be INSANELY good. And seems like the crop of full frame cameras for the most part has been this way for the last few years. I owned the Nikon Z6 OG from 2020-2025. It has the same IMX410 sensor found in the Sony a7iii, Panasonic S5/S1/S5II/S5IIX. That sensor despite being used in 7 yr old bodies like the z6 or a7iii is great in lowlight, 12,800 ISO and 25,600 ISO never looked bad to me I used to push the z6 so hard with wedding films even dipping into 51,200 ISO and noise was always usable. I dabbled a bit with the G9II in January and lowlight seemed noticeably worse, but at the same time it wasn’t BAD per se and cleaned up well in post. Again I think it’s just that full frame cameras are insanely good. But then again so are crop sensors lol…I was just running some lowlight tests with my friends $649 Canon R50V. With some Denoise in Davinci resolve, 12,800 ISO looked great to my eye. Nuts! 12,800! $649 used to get me a Panasonic G7 and decent lens…how far all these cameras have come. I couldn’t dream of getting that type of result on the G7. But this $649 R50V was extremely impressive lol. We are so dang spoiled. I ended up getting a used canon r6 OG for a very good price ($929), overheating aside its a wonderful cam for $1k average. And looks great at ISO 25,600… I think my biggest isssue with the g9II was PDAF seemed to shut off or be used a lot less when above ISO 2500 or 3200 in a lot of cases. Meaning if you want to rely on autofocus it’s hard to really push things. Because I did find that with some Denoise ISO 6400 and 12,800 were honestly not bad. Maybe I also didn’t have the most optimal lens choices…but when I was recently filming at a summer camp where they had a canon r5 (so I could use the r5 when I wanted and my G9II when I wanted), the r5 seemed to wipe the floor with the g9II at 3200ISO and above especially when pushing things. And unfortunately I just seem to have times where I need to shoot in very very lowlight settings. So full frame is a big help.

My take on the situation is that I'm super-happy with the GH7. It basically does everything I want, and apart from having ultra-sharp ultra-shallow DOF, pretty much does most things that FF does. It does low-light very well, and is only behind the low-light from FF cameras because they have gotten crazy good.

Just scored this Petit Cinevision 1.5x baby anamorphic

R3D NE data rate is about 2x of that of N-RAW Normal, which in turn is 2x that roughly expected of Prores 422 LT 4K which is coming to the ZR in a firmware update according to Nikon. So you can get a 75% reduction in data rate compared to R3D NE in a 4K 422 format in the future. Would this be enough to make the camera practical for you? Another possible help is if video editors will be able to make shortened R3D NE files (after cutting) in the future, to save storage space. I imagine this is just a matter of time, if the camera is popular, it will probably be implemented.

I am currently doing my own ZR image testing with footage I shot in every codec and the R3D RAW is beautiful, super rich, super detailed. Probably the best image you can get from a mid priced mirrorless. But then the h265 log conundrum. I just messed around with some log files and they're terrible. Reminds me of 8bit FHD 5D3 footage. Actually the whole camera reminds me of my C200 which had either Canon RAW or 8bit. I hated not having an intermediary codec and its the same scenario with the ZR. Quite a shame as I love the design, form factor and huge display. But it's basically a massive RAW file camera which isn't going to be practical for a lot of people. I'm headed back to Canon as Sony is in limbo and I don't do L-mount.

I saw this one the other day and it didn't tell me anything I did not already believe which was/is: Nikon wins on body & screen (albeit, I wish it tilted!) but the LUMIX on real world use. For my specific needs anyway. Based on his footage, the LUMIX footage looked better than the Nikon which looked a bit yellow/green (like older Sony stuff from a few gens back!) and side by side, a magenta tint was (only) then noticeable with the LUMIX, but the Nikon turned horrendous. YouTube compression and all that... Nikon wins (easily) on lenses taking into consideration adapted E Mount glass, but there is just enough in L Mount for my needs in 2026...which was not the case in 2024. The Nikon is very competitively priced. Bottom line for me is I would not trade my S1RII/S5II/S9 combo for any other currently available option as things stand.

There is indeed a wealth of super high quality material, instantly accessible and either for free or with very reasonably priced subscriptions. And every subject whether it be something historical, classic cars, wood turning, whatever floats your boat, is available. But it is probably less than 5% of the material and channels out there which are just dross and soapboxes for talentless hustlers. And now, increasing AI slop. We just have to be more selective as consumers.

@Djangoif you go c50 + gyroflow route then invest in the RSMB motion blur plugin. It’s the most realistic and dependable motion blur plugin I’ve owned and does a nice job adding back in convincing motion blur when you need to crank your shutter for gyroflow.

Economics aside, GAS is real and it’s gotten out of hand. The constant hype from camera bros on YouTube and social drives it. Every few months there’s a new “GAME CHANGER” video, clickbait thumbnail, sponsored “first look”, and comment sections full of upgrade questions and system switches. It creates endless FOMO where current gear suddenly feels obsolete, while most “must-have” updates are marginal and don’t matter for real work. Manufacturers love this however this cycle has the opposite effect on me: I keep waiting. Something new is always around the corner, so I drag my feet and keep changing my mind .. That being said there are game changers from time to time, and for me open gate is that kind of benefit for my workflow I’ve been waiting for and it’s why I’m going back to Canon. I’ve seen a lot of Sony users claim it’s not important, and anamorphic shills overblow it’s relevance but truth is for me it makes sense when doing multi-platform content. Extracting high-res stills from video takes is another practical bonus that adds real value instead of just another spec bump. That’s what matters to me, not another 0.5-stop DR , marginal AF tweaks, extra IBIS stops, or RAW flavour of the month. Cameras have been more than good for a while now and all the feature creep and size reduction brings other issues like overheating when reliability should remain a priority..

Quick follow-up after spending more time with the R6 Mark III at the shop. The R6 Mark III is pulling ahead strongly. IBIS is very effective and reliable for handheld shooting, and the EVF proved extremely useful, especially in bright exterior conditions where the small 3" LCD on the C50 felt noticeably inadequate for precise framing and focus. Flash sync and mechanical shutter add useful flexibility for occasional stills. It delivers most of the key video features I liked on the C50 (7K open-gate, LUT support, S&Q) but with better overall hybrid handling and a lower entry price since I’m starting fresh on RF lenses either way. The R6 Mark III menu feels more comfortable to read overall (the C50's cine UI isn't well adapted to the small 3" display, text and icons can be hard to parse quickly). Switching between photo and video modes is instantaneous, and the mode dial with independent custom settings (C1/C2/C3) is much handier for fast-paced environments where I need to jump between setups without diving into sub-menus. Overall this makes the UI feel better suited to quick, dynamic shooting. Downsides: consumer body look (a cage + handle will address that), no XLR top handle, no dedicated digital zoom rockers like the C50. I’ll miss some of the C50’s cine-specific features and the built-in fan for absolute thermal reliability, but tests show the R6 Mark III has fairly good thermal performance in real-world use. I’m now leaning strongly toward the R6 Mark III. At roughly €1000 less than the C50, it packs a mean punch for the solo run&gun content I’ll be shooting. The open gate capability for multi-ratio work and stills extraction, combined with solid IBIS, the EVF, and overall usability, feels like the best balance. Price to feature ratio is hard to beat in the current hybrid market. I still need to do more comparative tests as this is too important an investment to wing it and I still low-key want the C50. Thanks again for all the input, it’s helped narrow things down a bit.

This one gets on my moobs also as does, “tell me what content you want me to make”. The latter reads to me as, “OK, I have been through everything I can think of and also copied everything everyone else has done in this genre and now I am stuck and desperate for more material. Please help”. I have been recently unsubscribing from so many YouTube channels as part of my on-going “I unsubscribe from this world of fuckwittery” lifestyle choice.

Every time I’m watching a YouTube video and they say “Let me know down below in the comments” I just think “Oh no you poor bastard”. The problem is of course that they have to appeal to people to do that to get the algorithm to work for them and give their content a chance to get noticed. YouTube actually make you open yourself up for trolling to even attempt to make yourself relevant in their “who gives a shit about quality?” mindset. It’s exactly the same with the other clown and his blue tick programme being a deliberate incitement to gain money by hateposting, rage baiting and outright lying to farm replies for cash and cause division. Absolute shithouse behaviour. Particularly as it also seems to be an effective template to become US President.

Two thoughts from me. If you close your eyes and imagine each scenario, how do each of them make you feel? What is never really talked about is that if you feel like you're having to argue or strong-arm your equipment then you'll be in a bad mood, which isn't conducive to a happy set, getting good creative outputs, or just enjoying your life. I think people dismiss this, but if you're directing the talent then this can really matter - people can tell if you're in a good mood or distracted or frustrated etc and people tend to take things personally so your frustrations with the rig can just as easily be interpreted by others that you're not happy with their efforts. The odd little image technical niggle here or there won't make nearly as much difference as enjoying what you do vs not. When it comes to IBIS vs Giroflow vs EIS etc, it's worth questioning if more stabilisation is better. For the "very dynamic handheld shots" having a bit more camera motion might even be a good thing if it is the right kind of motion. Big budget productions have chosen to run with shoulder-mounted large camera rigs and the camera shake was pleasing and added to the energy of the scene. Small amounts of camera shake can be aesthetically awful if they're the artefacts from inadequate OIS + IBIS + EIS stabilisation, whereas much more significant amounts of camera shake can be aesthetically benign if coming from a heavier rig without IBIS or OIS. If more stabilisation is better, maybe it would be better overall to have a physical solution that can be used for those shots? Even if there aren't good options for those things, maybe the results would be better if those shots were just avoided somehow? In todays age of social media and shorts etc, having large camera moves that are completely stable is basically a special effect, and maybe there are other special effects that can be done in post that are just as effective but are much easier to shoot?

Depending on which source, we're the third, fifth, or sixth highest. But that also comes with highest prices for a lot of things including health care. My after-insurance cost for a dental check-up, two cavities filled, and a crown was over $2,000. To have a skilled laborer (like a plumber or electrician) come to your house will usually cost $300+ for all but the most basic things. The trend started before the current president and is applicable to every country. In general, fewer cameras are being released in the $2,000 range than are released in the $3000+ range - and far fewer still under $1,000. Even if the median salary is $40,000 (according to the SSA), after state+federal taxes, that'll come to under $3,000/month - barely enough to cover rent, food, and insurance. https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/central.html

What are you using now? Do you already have lenses? Without having used it, the C50 seems like a great choice from what you have listed. If lack of IBIS is a big problem, you could also pair it with a used Canon body (now or in the future) which has decent IBIS for those handheld shots (or your current body if you have one, if it has IBIS). There's a reason that my R5 comes with me on every shoot. Need a quick handheld shot? Just grab it from the bag. Wanna have someone go pick up some b-roll? R5. Suction cupping it to the windshield? R5. Plus the second body with decent AF can be really useful for grabbing a second angle, if wanted. Just set it up, make sure to hit record, and let it do its thing.

Thank you for letting us know! I'm glad you're well! I do wish the content stayed up, as it was still useful, but I understand your reasoning. At the end of the day, it was YOUR content and you could do what you wanted with it! I hope that you check in from time to time and thank you for all your input over the years! And congrats on the family!

I usually tell people that in my opinion it's 1) Script / Plot / Story 2) Performance 4) Sound 5) Set Design 6) Lighting 7) Camera And other stuff can come after the camera, but if you have 1-6 right, you can shoot on a T2i and you'll have a great film.

Doh - forgot to list the 9mm F1.7 lens. That's the ultra-wide I'll be taking too. So the total count is one body, 5 lenses, my phone with vND. I was slightly conflicted about the "wide-angle night cinema" slot. The SB+50/1.4 is equivalent to a 71mm F2.0 on FF, so having something wider seems an obvious thing but I'm just not sure if I would use it. I've mentioned the 12-35mm F2.8 as my night walk-around lens, and when combined with the GH7 low-light capability it's a fine combination, but it's not crazy fast/bright and isn't the best "cinema" option around. The things I considered were: my TTartsans 17mm F1.4, which is small and light and despite being soft wide-open is probably quite cinematic my 14mm F2.5 which is small and light but is bettered by the 12-35mm on flexibility grounds being a zoom my Voigtlander 17.5mm F0.95, which is a great performer but is quite heavy my c-mount 12.5mm F1.9, which is similar FOV when you crop in to its S16 image circle my 9mm F1.7 combined with the GH7 cropping, which is fast but sacrifices resolution and doesn't have the DOF advantages of other options (although I am already taking it) SB + 28mm F2.8 combos, but it's hard to get a reasonable quality 28mm F2.8 in M42 mount and it's not that fast anyway I opted to take the 12-35mm (which I sort-of take as a backup lens to the 14-140mm zoom) but if I do end up wanting a wider fast lens for night cinema, I think I might just bite the bullet and get the PanaLeica 15mm F1.7 as it'll be light and have AF and be sharper than I could ever want. I looked at the reviews of a bunch of budget F1.4 or faster lenses around the 14-20mm mark but I'd never be sure if it was as sharp as I'd like, and spending money to get something that isn't that much faster than my 17/1.4 or that much lighter than my 17.5/0.95 seems silly. MFT is the wrong format for ultra-fast wide lenses, and I already have lots of options for something I might not use, so the whole thing might end up being academic anyway.

Yes. This to me is just a somewhat expensive, limited use, vloggers device that has zero serious use case for my needs. I already have 2x Sennheisers that fill this role at €150 for the pair of them.

If it were half the price it'd be interesting but there if a lot of cheaper good gear out there. But it's good to see them innovating. I'm enjoying the S1mk2, I feel it's a big step up from the S5mk2. I hope it survives the summer! Panasonic now has quite comprehensive line up for all budgets.

Looked at and decided very quickly it isn’t for me, but good to see LUMIX making stuff they at least think folks want. What they really want however is an S1H mk II in an FX3 style body with the screen mech from the S1II and the screen from the ZR. Then they will truly win the crowd and strut like gods of low-mid film-making.

We should hold theft in disdain. Not doing the stealing thing, after all, is one of the commandments in the Bible. I have a friend/colleague that has gone into the AI rabbit hole. He wants to only deliver videos with 100% generative AI. His argument is the hackneyed "It's just a tool". Well, a tool delivering mimicry from unauthorized sources is theft. "But humans copy each other all the time" he's said. Sorry, bud, you're just rationalizing stealing. Putting aside that human plagiarism is also theft, the process of being creatively influenced as a human is not the same thing. Humans filter all creative context through their own impressions, wisdom, experiences, empathy, and feelings. That particular matrix is infinite, random, and organic. The talented know how to tap into this mystic calculus, to develop their expertise, bend their skill set as a means to an end, and to use all of it to create something profound. Hacks (of which I am one, mind. Maybe a self-aware one, but still one nevertheless) can only regurgitate superficially. This lazy superficiality has now been globally scaled and monetized for the 1%. It sucks. Specifically, it sucks for me because those mediocre jobs of regurgitation used to be $$ in my pocket, not theirs. I had a skill of the craft that was worth a certain value. That value is diminished significantly. Yes, I'm bitter about it. Should I be? I may lack art, but at least I had craft. Be that as it may, my colleague's use of AI is especially galling as he's eager to brag at how hard it is to get the various AI systems he uses to comply with his prompts. Here's the thing: he's putting out animation style videos. Do you know how difficult it is to be a crafts-person creating animation? Good god. And he says he's "working hard" doing prompts? The "it's a tool argument," to me, is like going into a museum to admire and marvel at the paintings and sculptures ... but then standing in front of a 10th grader's paint-by-numbers knock-off of "The Harvest" and insisting it also deserves as much admiration as the original Van Gogh -- Or looking at some technical feat, like a 3D print of Michelangelo's David and being, like, "Wow, the person that ran the 3D printer equipment to make a copy of that sculpture is so great!" Bull. Shit. Admiring the craft needs to also be part of admiring the art. If my colleague is so addled that he doesn't even see repercussions of that craft-art-divorce, he's probably hopeless. Worse, he keeps trotting out his latest video examples in a gee-whiz-isn't-this-great-way to everyone around him -- as if we're supposed to be impressed? He's literally said, "I can finally make everything that's been in my head exactly how I see it!" "Make?" No, that ain't what's happening, not really. And the fact that he can't even recognize that he's not a "maker" is the real problem. People that are too shallow to cop to any of that, to appreciate what's being lost ... again, it's the deeper major problem with [waves arms around] all of this. I'm tired hoss. Tired of shaking my fist at the clouds.

I am planning to use it on my custom phone with a Linos Mevis c mount 16mm lens. But it will work also with a bigger sensor. In the past I have used super 8 babies on full frame with great results.

Do you agree with my choices... And did I miss anything? https://www.eoshd.com/news/the-2025-hybrid-mirrorless-camera-rankings/ The 2025 camera rankings for video quality and value for money are in!

No, I have a GH5s, but I'd like to upgrade, as I need PDAF among other things.

I'm glad Mr Burling replied. I was always happy to watch his stuff, always felt hand made with a touch of love. Bit like Nona's home made tomato sauce... You always new you were in for a treat. The man had a talent for finding interesting lenses and using them in ways i wouldn't consider. I own a couple of lenses, thanks to him and i do try to emulate him as i can. So thank you for the artistry and the knowledge you shared, and good luck for the future.

Thanks for the honest take and rig photo. I can see how ZR probably isn’t ideal once you build it out like that. I’m also a bit skeptical about the cinema positioning. Nikon pushes R3D hard, which is great for high-end grading, but H.265 should be solid and dependable at this level, not an afterthought. Hopefully some of this improves via firmware. Better bitrates, cleaner encoding, more mature UI. The FX3 launched pretty bare and evolved a lot over time, so there’s precedent. For me, the appeal of the ZR is the ultra-compact body with that big screen. I wouldn’t want to over-rig it. On bigger sets with serious monitoring needs, I'd say something more modular like the C50 makes more sense. I've decided to rent the C50 to see if it really meets my needs in client situations. Wish I could do the same with ZR but it isn't available for rental around here. Really appreciate you sharing the unfiltered experience. It helps a lot.

NRaw is half the data rates of R3D NE and NRaw files can be saved after trimming, but R3D NE files save without trims, which makes R3D NE 20x more data heavy in worst case scenario. Started to convert R3D NE files to H.265 with RedLog10 and 500Mbps as a temporary solution. With NRaw there is no need for that. Z6iii has already good H.265, and IMHO is a better camera with more buttons and good EVF. ZR is just more fun to shoot, but getting WB, exposure and focus right takes a bit more time. The R3D NE footage does look more pleasing to the eye than NRaw when compared side by side. But without comparison NRaw looks good too. R3D NE is better in the shadows, but NRaw does not clip so easily in the highlights, so pick your poison based on the shooting scenario you are in. Neither is perfect at the moment, but both can give good results.

I’m not ‘waiting’ for it as such, but based on my S9 experience, it could be something pretty special. If they get it right. If they even make one… I have gone backwards and forwards over what to do with my S9 that has been at times both A cam and B cam but due to me picking up a pair of S1RII’s mid last year, plus certain limitations of the S9 (mainly build), I was going to let it go… But then too many times I have let stuff go and regretted it so I have repurposed it giving it an XLCS cage, super-lightweight tripod and the dedicated 2 lenses to it, the 18mm or 85mm f1.8. I am hoping they do an S9II with a bigger screen à la ZR but with the S1I/R/E tilt option. And make it a bit more robust but spec wise, it’s already peak camera for my needs. So @gethin maybe look at an S9 because straight out of the box, it’s very high spec and really it’s only the body that is a bit weak, but beef it up with a cage and it’s 💪 And used, pretty cheap!

That's really unfortunate. His Vimeo is still up, and his Instagram too, though they haven't been updated recently. His content output decreased a lot once Gunpowder passed, but he had already been less active as I think he became more and more disillusioned with the entire YouTube/Filmmaking/Photography scene. I hope he is well and creating the art that he loves.

This is something I don't see people mentioning enough. That era, right before the gen2 S series cameras, they were nailing color science in lumix bodies. I'm keeping my eye on used prices, sensor streaking issues n all.

It once was that the pros had 16mm an 35mm film and the "amateurs" had Super 8 and videotape. Now that's all changed. Yesterday I was capturing some old videotapes from a friend's project that we did in 2011 on a Canon HV20. It looked amazing. I was expecting it to look worse than cameras of today but it doesn't. Just shows that even a camera from then, with a CMOS chip from that era, MPEG 2 encoding, 4:2:0 chroma subsampling, 1440 x 1080 frame size recorded of the wide screen image, and 8 bit colour, it still can look amazing. It just shows that cameras have been very good for a long time now. The differences are mostly ergonomics and physical size. When deciding on a camera, you have to consider what you want to spend months living with.

Here’s a quick review.

I think people are mistaking pretty with good cinematography. There’s good cinematography and there’s bad cinematography, and then there’s cinematography that’s right for the movie. In this case it looks right for the movie.

I'd argue it is the MOST important because without the camera, you don't have a picture. It is the small differences between the latest sensors and codecs that's the unimportant thing. In cinematography, our job isn't to worry about the costumes or set pieces, that's the job of someone else. So lighting and camera are the most important for a DP. What has happened is the gap between the top-end i.e. ARRI and the cheap stuff has closed up. This has been going on ever since the start of the DSLR revolution so it's not a new thing but there's never been a smaller gap that exists now, for example between something like the Alexa 35 and a $1000 used Panasonic S1H. By the way although Magellan has beautiful content and really nice camera-work, the sharpness of it and the deep DOF isn't everybody's cup of tea. It does look a bit too soap opera in parts of that trailer, I think. It looks very different to an IMAX shot film. So there's big differences between formats and lenses still... The same cinema focal length for example on 16mm has always looked vastly different to same on IMAX or large format. Also there are big differences in grading style, camera movement style, and so on. I think most relevant for us is that you don't need to make a massive rig any more to get good results. It's horrible having the weight as a one-man DP. Probably why they used such a small camera on this.