ntblowz

Atomos has released an interview with ‘The Creator’’s DP, Oren Soffer:
 

They should really do a GX9 II with the same pdaf sensor..
 https://fstoppers.com/reviews/panasonic-please-come-back-lumix-gx9-re-review-645313

There's skin in this one, just for you.
 

They should really do a GX9 II with the same pdaf sensor..
 https://fstoppers.com/reviews/panasonic-please-come-back-lumix-gx9-re-review-645313

Gratuitous very tenuous link to post, but just for ‘proof’, my daughters little story on IG…
 

I also need a day rest to fully recover from previous day, if I did back to back shoot I will be very tired on 3rd day.
The days of flying C70 with 18-35mm 1.8 on Ronin all day is definitely past my time.
So this year I downsize my setup to rs3 mini and ZV-E1 with <500g lens (or R8 with 600g lens) instead of the hefty 24-70 2.8 on R5 on Ronin rs2 pro, that is over 1/2 the weight saved, with this new setup I m not as over tiring as before which is good for me.

I also need a day rest to fully recover from previous day, if I did back to back shoot I will be very tired on 3rd day.
The days of flying C70 with 18-35mm 1.8 on Ronin all day is definitely past my time.
So this year I downsize my setup to rs3 mini and ZV-E1 with <500g lens (or R8 with 600g lens) instead of the hefty 24-70 2.8 on R5 on Ronin rs2 pro, that is over 1/2 the weight saved, with this new setup I m not as over tiring as before which is good for me.

I don't see your problem, just build strength by carrying around a brick all day when you're at home or running errands.
It's a standard industry strength training practice.
This photo shows a steadicam operator popping down to the shops on his day off:

 

It is.
Around a decade or so back, I was what is known as skinny fat, ie, very little muscle tone but a surplus of fat around my middle.
I never exercised, had developed asthma, smoked and drank (but not heavily) and it was a gradual erosion/accumulation more than anything.
I decided to do something about it around the time of my 40th birthday.
I’m 53 in a few weeks and never been in better condition and actually have a fitness competition (Hyrox) that I have traveled to Ireland for from France, in a couple of hours.
Why mention this?
Fatigue, or reduction of from being in shape.
And not just the physical, but the mental which is unseen but contributes.
But I still have trouble getting to sleep after an intense 15+ hour day because despite downing tools, I’m still buzzing.
The next day though…and I can never lie in and catch up no matter how late I went to bed or how tired I am, by lunchtime, wiped out and can easily grab another 1-2 hours early afternoon, but it’s not until the day after the day after I feel recovered, so never take back to back jobs anymore.
No way I could be working the way I have been for the last few years one to two decades ago and I guess another factor why when other photographers or videographers ask me how I do what I do, part of that answer is level of fitness.
But as with all these things, it is only a part of a greater whole.
2.8kg unsupported in and out of your hands all day though is a bit nuts which is why it has to go!

I just saw this video where Waqas demos the OFX version of the Motion Blur effect, and it does a seriously good job - I've linked to the final result:
He's also applied a blur to counteract the ridiculous sharpening (what a great idea!), corrected for the lens distortion, and added a subtle grade.
I have no idea if the OFX version of this has recently gotten better or if it's just been there all along, but it's waaaaaay better than the tool in the UI, which is what I tried previously.
I haven't played with it yet, so this might be a cherry-picked example where it worked ok, but it's interesting and worth playing with, especially on clips with more subtle movement.

Indeed. I work with 3-4 cameras, 2 of which can be static any time, 2 lights, 6 audio recording devices, shooting video and stills 100% (or as close to as makes no difference) all day long.
But only because of 3 essential ingredients.
1. Practice practice practice, starting simply and building up over time, adding and eliminating elements that work or do not.
2. Having a game plan in advance based on an understanding of what is going to happen and when etc. Advance knowledge is key.
3. Determination/hard work.
4. Bonus element, being organised and having a system.
My environment is weddings and at one level they are ‘all the same’ but at another, they are all different and people do random stuff. But it’s rare for there to be enough random stuff to make a difference.
It’s not rocket science and there are limits so it’s a case of knowing those limits and working up to what is possible but without it totally frying your brain.
It’s more weird for me if I am doing just video or just photo and the latter feels like I am doing just 20-25% compared with both and the kit level is tiny by comparison.
My brother by comparison gave up working in the video industry because he couldn’t work alone or make more than solo shooting viable. 
We must have different genes!

Here's some interesting overview by one of the usual suspects -- directly to an useful tip to extract the better from:
 

It is fixed aperture so no aperture control

It is fixed aperture so no aperture control

R7 is the underappreciated camera of the year.
I sold my R7 earlier then bought it back again cause it is the only one in the price range that offer long 4k recording without worrying about overheating and offer 32MP stills which is perfect for hybrid setup, when paired with Sigma 18-35 1.8 the image is quite nice.
 

R7 is the underappreciated camera of the year.
I sold my R7 earlier then bought it back again cause it is the only one in the price range that offer long 4k recording without worrying about overheating and offer 32MP stills which is perfect for hybrid setup, when paired with Sigma 18-35 1.8 the image is quite nice.
 

FYI, went for a used Xiaomi 12S Ultra.  Will report back after using it a bit.
Thanks yet again for the advice.

That's one major reason I decided against an S5 ii - the others were the size & weight of long telephoto lenses and the APS-C crop in 4k50p/4k60p (I normally shoot everything in 50p, so it would effectively be an APS-C video camera for me).
So sixth months ago I looked seriously at more upmarket APS-C cameras for video instead, but having played with an R7 and an XH2s I decided they felt too large and/or awkward in my hands (the Sony A6700 wasn't announced then, and the FX30 has no viewfinder so ruled out). Then the XS20 was announced and I pre-ordered it... but before deliveries started a used OM-1 turned up at a really good price so I bought it and cancelled the XS20 order.
So in the end the fact that I already had micro4/3 lenses and the OM-1 just feels 'right' in my hands (and is weather sealed, with top-notch IBIS and a lovely 5.76M dot EVF) kept me in the micro4/3 world a while longer...

Yes, I typically have the C70 as my A camera locked down with XLR input from the mixer and the Canon EF 24-105mm on it with a speed booster and the R7 is my B camera with the RF 70-200mm F2.8 on it. I track the peak action with the R7 and discovered none of my current tripod heads are smooth enough when punched in at 300mm+ to smoothly track moving objects so I had to get a better fluid head. The Sachtler Ace XL Fluid Head did the trick after buying and sending back two other brands. I have shot everything from opera performances to music videos to dance recitals this year with that setup. 

I really have no plans for 2024, this year has been a steady stream of a wide variety of jobs, possibly one of my busiest yet as repeat customers keep repeating and new customers keep showing up. 
As far as gear goes, I never thought I would like a crop sensor so much but every camera that I own other than the R7 is gathering dust right now. I would say 80% of the jobs this year were hybrid photo video jobs and nothing in my kit is better at that than the R7. Social media is really prioritizing video these days and my setup is perfect for social media content as well as editorial and some light commercial work.
I still love the C70 but its useless for hybrid jobs and so is the R5. I did pick up two Tascam DR-10L Pros for 32 bit float audio recording and a new tripod with a Sachtler head because I shot a lot of dual camera projects and needed a better video head for tracking the talent but that's it.
So for next year I plan on no new kit whatsoever and really just keep focusing on keeping my current customers happy while occasionally taking on new work where it makes sense. 

Full circle achieved...

Starting 36 years ago, I spent 5 years shooting and in the dark room with the camera on the left and then after a 10 year break from the industry, returned to it shooting weddings with one camera loaded with colour and the other, B&W.
How far have we come now that it can do both, without ever having to load or change a roll of film and the cost of doing the equivalent, absolutely nothing. And at a flick of a switch, 4k video with up to 8 stops of IBIS.
Other than a quick set up and play, not had a chance to properly put it through it's paces yet but it's got some mojo...

Before I started to develop the Rec709 conversion for the SIGMA fp I did quite a bit of research on how different manufacturers are creating theirs as a starting point.

One of the main ingredients seems to be that after the tone mapping of the cameras dynamic range into Rec709 nearly all manufacturers LUTs have a baked in default contrast around a pivot point of middle grey.

This looks great in a controlled studio scene, because it will be quite punchy out of the box. Additionally, it is hiding shadow noise because it will push these down as well.

However, in reality this means you are always pushing highlight information much higher by default than you would need to. Same goes for the shadow details. So usually the first post step would be to counter this effect.
My conclusion out of this was to create Rec709 LUTs, which are only tone mapping correctly and possibly create a smooth rolloff. Contrast has/can be added in post around a custom pivot point, or by adjusting the curves.
Let me demonstrate that effect on some sample stills, guess that is easier to understand. 

SIGMA fp Rec709 LUT (only colour and tone mapping into Rec709):

SIGMA fp Rec709 LUT + default contrast at a pivot of 45 IRE (intentionally a little bit too much to show the effect):

SIGMA fp Rec709 LUT + custom contrast at a pivot of 75 IRE

Guess this is one of the main reasons so many professional colourists are using CST/ACES workflows, to have a better starting point compared to manufacturer Rec709s. Maybe this information can provide useful for some of you. 🙂
 

I was thinking the other day about how almost all lenses look best wide open.
So if it's a full frame F1.4 lens you see most clearly the rendering it has wide open rather than say, F5.6.
The advantage of a 2x crop sensor is that you get to shoot wide open and see more detail in backgrounds.
You take, say a 10mm F2.0 micro four thirds lens, it has the look of F2 but the deeper DOF as well so the setting isn't completely creamed out. If you have a really beautiful setting, you don't want it to be invisible and just bokeh in every shot.
So you could stop your full frame lens down to F4 or even F8 but then the whole character of the lens is lost and they all look uniformly pretty much the same beyond F4.
I think it begs a comparison... I might do one soon.
Take a Super 16mm 26mm F1.1 lens on a GH6, and compare it to a 50mm F1.2 on full frame, and also the same 50mm but stopped down to F2.2 to match the equivalent aperture of the S16mm lens at F1.1 wide open.
On the otherhand, the advantage of full frame might reveal itself more clearly when the focus distance is further out, and the subject remains a little bit separated from the environment, whereas on the 2x crop camera they'd be on the same focus plane, 'infinity' might start from about 3m outwards.
I understand the appeal of medium format, 65mm, large format cinema cameras, full frame, and so on...
Just think that 2x crop is not without merit and can even serve the story better in many cases.

People seem to be obsessed with nit-picking the colour science of cameras, but indicate they don't colour grade for one reason or another.
To me, even a few simple adjustments can improve the image so much more than the differences in colour science between manufacturers.  In fact, the image out of camera is like a plain sponge cake straight out of the oven - it's nice and the quality matters but it's far from the final result.
Colour grading is also talked about as being super complicated, and it can be, but it doesn't have to be.  Simple grades can still be really powerful.
Here are some examples from online, to show how much of a nice image is camera colour science and how much is colour grading.
ARRI  LOG:

With ARRIs LUT:

Grade:

The above grade was done using only white balance, the lift / gamma / gain controls, a vignette, log wheels, in that order.
To look at skin tones, the holy grail of camera colour science - here's a before and after....   before:

Then on top of the previous look, here's additional treatments to give it more of a film look.

These additional adjustments were: Gain (to lower exposure), white balance, saturation (lowered), darken shadows, in that order.
Which was inspired by this frame from Sicario:

Here's the video showing the whole grade: https://youtu.be/8GkcqEA72QM
 
Next example - SOOC:

with 709 conversion:

Grade:

Video link: https://youtu.be/fRDjEB6ryyQ
 
Next one - with 709 conversion:

Grade:

Video: https://youtu.be/OmBBYHMi_ek
 
Next one - SOOC:

With 709 conversion: 

Grade:

Video: https://youtu.be/UNW_8jcGJqw
 
There are literally more examples online to count, but I just focused on the more neutral looking colour grades, as the people doing dirty film grades probably don't care about skin tone minutia when they're going to pummel the image with Dehancer etc.
So, what's the TLDR?
Even half-a-dozen simple steps applied in addition to the manufacturers LUT can make a huge difference It's about making small changes to make the image look slightly nicer, and they add up The reason that fancy cameras look incredible is because the colourist takes the great work done on set and expands on it How do I get started?
Look at the image and work out what tool might improve it (if you have no idea, just try the basic ones) Wiggle whatever tool back and forth, deliberately going too far one way and too far the other way, then find the best spot Compare the adjustment you just make to see if it makes the image better or worse, if it's better then keep it, otherwise undo
(sometimes a really good adjustment will look completely natural and the 'before' will look like something is being applied to the image and is damaging it) Go to 1. Repeat until you can't find anything that makes the image look better. If you're using another image to inspire your look, then for step 1, just look at both images and work out what looks different about yours, and try and fix it.  Is it brighter? Darker?  More contrasty?  A different colour?  More or less saturated?  Adding a vignette to lighten your subject or darken the other areas of the frame is a good trick.  Looking to find anything in the frame that's distracting and de-emphasising it is really useful too - even just lowering the brightness or saturation can really stop it from fighting for attention.
Even by the time you've adjusted these basic tools, you'll be well ahead.