Axel

Thanks again. Then I won't buy the 30mm, because gimbal bumble is the only time to switch to AF for me. I already know. I will (again) make the camera "ENG-style":
> put a big soft eyepiece on the excellent EVF, like I did with my GH2 (Zacuto replacement part, € 16):

> instead of a rig-diculous rig, I'll buy a grip like this:

> I'll re-buy only one lens for the start: the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 for Nikon G. For Nikon, because then I get a MB speedboosted manual aperture ring, which I find more intuitive. And I am used to the direction of the focus ring.
> I'll buy two adapters: Novoflex MFT<Nikon. This makes the Sigma a 36-70 @f1.8 (FF equivalent). Then a Metabones speedbooster (don't know which one works yet, don't know how much stops it will boost), with, say, crop-reducing by 0,7 I would have the Sigma be ~ 25-50mm and faster than f1.4.
> for a small AF lens, I am not sure. They all seem to shout 'sterile video'! Might then be the cheap and very light 14mm pancake, or should I really spend $1500 for Leica Summi-something?
 

@Dimitris Stasinos
You are right of course. As I see it, Philip Bloom didn't do us a favour by shooting "night for day" in his Now I See or later in the weird lake-shot that was only lit by the moon. Lowlight capabilities allow you to scale down the amount of light necessary to light a scene (but they shouldn't save you from lighting!), but to shoot in practically no light is a misconception. I also know the GH5 will never come close to the cleanness of the A7Rii/A7Sii (I use both sometimes). The DR also is very good with the Sony's. Be it as it may, they are terrible in terms of video usability. It starts with tiny, dim and not fully articulated displays. I like the images, I absolutely dislike to shoot with it. On a check list with a comparison of Sony vs. Pana the GH5 would probably get a "con" for lowlight.

I've used the Zhiyun Crane on 2 shoots now with the A6500 - and it's the first time ever that I've been really pleased with a camera / gimbal combo. 
The Zhiyun is a beast and operates brilliantly. Works very well with the A6500 autofocus. 
The only real downside is that the A6500 doesn't have 4k60p, the 1080 60p is just ok, so I'd say it really depends on the GH5's autofocusing capability. 
I'm covered for cameras, the GH5 would be a treat if anything. How long until we see 4K  60p in Sony cameras? (But it likely won't be 10 bit in a firmware upgrade!) 
 

Hey guys, I put together a behind the scenes video about how I film my travel videos for clients. I have been posting a few of them lately and I plan to post one every week or so. Let me know if you have any questions or comments and please subscribe if you like it!
 
 

This would become (FF equivalence) a 34-100mm f2,8 with the speed (but not the DoF-characteristic) of an f2.0 (one stop brighter). You will know better how good the focus ring is. Metabones list of tested and officially supported lenses for working AF with the Ultra:
However, I suspect "working" means, it will focus if you are patiently aiming the camera at your motif for stills. Don't think that it's usable for video.
Your lens seems to be top-notch. Probably a very good (parfocal?) glass for the GH5 with a very desirable focal range and very fast too. 700 bucks for the SB - if you don't like it, send the Speedbooster back and sell the Canon, that's what I'd do if I were you. The XL (~same price) - if it fits on the GH5! - would make it a 31-88 with the speed of an f1.8 - everything one needs, and IBIS would work with it.

This would become (FF equivalence) a 34-100mm f2,8 with the speed (but not the DoF-characteristic) of an f2.0 (one stop brighter). You will know better how good the focus ring is. Metabones list of tested and officially supported lenses for working AF with the Ultra:
However, I suspect "working" means, it will focus if you are patiently aiming the camera at your motif for stills. Don't think that it's usable for video.
Your lens seems to be top-notch. Probably a very good (parfocal?) glass for the GH5 with a very desirable focal range and very fast too. 700 bucks for the SB - if you don't like it, send the Speedbooster back and sell the Canon, that's what I'd do if I were you. The XL (~same price) - if it fits on the GH5! - would make it a 31-88 with the speed of an f1.8 - everything one needs, and IBIS would work with it.

This was a good interview with him that covers a lot of his background
 

1. Be the voice of free America. Say and show that human beings of different ethnics can live together peacefully. 
2. Propagade the positive values, liberty, fraternity, equality, solidarity, inclusion, justice. Not the words alone, but what they mean in everyday life.
3. Reinstate facts over fearmongering, hysteria and conspiracy theories. All conspiracy theories ("Deep State") tend to be bizarr exaggerations of very banal truisms, i.e. that corruption exists (everywhere, by the way) and that there indeed is a swamp. A criminal detective would ask cui bono? In a capitalist system? Do we really need to speculate? Rich elites of course. Make their interests transparent! Obamacare (with all it's faults) was financed by progressive taxes, who will pay in the future?
4. And: reinstate facts over false political correctness. Lets add honesty to the positive values under point 2.
5. Don't attack Trump. Facts don't stick to him. Everybody already knows why he doesn't show his tax reports. That his crew is not qualified for the tasks assigned to them. And so forth. A bag full of shit can't be critizised. Better stop this kind of scandal-obsessed celebrity journalism which made him all too famous in the first place. Clinton was impeached for Lewinsky, but he stayed in office. These things are not what policy is about.
6. Trumps "reign" can be an opportunity. Become aware (and make others aware) what has been accomplished in the past decades. And what we risk losing by DJT. Ignore the ridiculous enemy. Unite to show the world how great America is. For us non-Americans, it always had it's sinister sides too. Would global capitalism - uncontrollabe for a single nation (and not to be stopped by any kind of protectionism) and a severe threat to our planet and our species - exist without the USA?
The good thing is, if you survive this regime, you will be stronger. I mean not militarily or economically ...
 

XAVC is such a good codec, it doesn't need 10-bit desperately. Do you really think that the 10-bit of the GH5 is automatically better? I don't see any evidence for this so far. What I expect is a camera that just has so many good features that it will be a joy to shoot video with it.
EDIT: ... and I really don't think Sony is going to cannibalize their FS7 by making their hybrids 10-bit. But who knows. The Alpha-series should actually be called the Beta-series. The minute you hold a brand new model in your hands, the successor is presented at a trade show, and it's successor is boxed in the factory (slightly exaggerated). 

On Dual-IS:
Seeing the list of lenses which support it, I know I wouldn't use it, except perhaps for the Leica 42,5 mm. The IBIS, working with all lenses, may or may not be very effective.
On AF:
I bet it will be disappointing in the first test, right after unboxing. Multiply face detection, pinpoint, seamless 1-area, multi-area, zone-AF, lowlight-AF asf. with the four custom sets and it's parameters. That's so many settings. I think one has to patiently test them, jonpais wrote something like this. It's not relying on automation anymore, it's programming. And one has to know this stuff by heart - or the AF won't do what you expect it to do.

Upon a closer look, you have to admit that there are very many corrections going on under the hood, let me cite a few:
Is all this intelligence a good thing? It may be. But the image IS processed on many levels, and it may very well LOOK processed in the end (with artifacts originating from suppressing artifacts in certain circumstances OR just by eliminating everything that makes an image look - excuse the term - *organic*), compared to the dumb, barely processed image of a BM camera.
Apparently - but the attached screenshots are somewhat puzzling - you can set a shutter angle instead of shutter duration in video mode. Good thing, if it meant you could make it 180°, and just forget about it. Shutter durations didn't use to be exact with certain framerates (i.e. 1/50 for 23,98 fps). People complained about poor motion cadence.
To be honest, I'm not sure what this means. It appears the Neumann footage was set to 64-940. Does anybody know how this could affect post?
???
On a A7Rii you can customize colors very accurately - at your own risk of course. But what does this mean?

Yep, same thing. 

BMPCC, BMPC and UM4,6k ProRes in log. Apply the official rec_709 LUT, some minor adjustments (CC, not grading) - e voilá! : really, really great skintones, many nuances. This isn't raw, it's ProRes (pre-production footage):
Is it the codec? I don't think so. It's the color science of the camera. I dare say with the 400mbps Intra update the codec will be on par with ProRes. Did you know? ProRes422 is 400mbps @ 2160 25p - and it's a less efficient codec!

BMPCC, BMPC and UM4,6k ProRes in log. Apply the official rec_709 LUT, some minor adjustments (CC, not grading) - e voilá! : really, really great skintones, many nuances. This isn't raw, it's ProRes (pre-production footage):
Is it the codec? I don't think so. It's the color science of the camera. I dare say with the 400mbps Intra update the codec will be on par with ProRes. Did you know? ProRes422 is 400mbps @ 2160 25p - and it's a less efficient codec!

Of course and I am sure they will do this. i consider Sony slog2/3 as "Extreme". Sony has an exaggerated perception of what "flat" means. Slog3 is inarguably an overkill and I don't know if even 10bits are enough. What other companies call flat, Sony calls it standard. It took me over a month to built a "Canon like" ,or "Non zombie" profile on my FS700 and this with extreme settings...Of course 8 bit is not enough for this. I am only playing with cine gammas and have found the sweet spot between DR and codec efficiency.

You know the truism it's not the camera. I add another: it's not the codec. The colors of my old 7D were gorgeous, and they could be color corrected (in the happy days when I just color corrected and not dabbled at grading) without falling apart with a very primitive H.264 codec.
And you are right, it's easy to make the Sony colors look acceptable. It's impossible (in 8-bit) to make them really good. Will GH5's 10-bit allow this? I hope so. What I suspect is that they can be corrected to look as acceptable as A7x. Unfortunately the 10-bit footage available so far doesn't focus on skintones.

I think the reason people are asking for 10 bit in the next A7 series is just because Pana gave it In GH5. It is the "take that" factor of the prosumer market. That doesn't necessarily means that A7S need absolutely 10 bit to be a fine all around camera. No one asked for it before gh5's announcement. But people asked for other thinks, like better economics, usable screen and better autofocus for gimbal work. As Axel said XAVC codec is badass and the only reason for a prosumer camera to have 10 bit codec is to have room in post for correcting color issues. You can easily correct the "zombie" effect on the skin tones that a7 series give in post, but good luck with orange flat skin tones of a g7 ( this is exactly where a 10 bit codec shines). Overall I think that in this specific market it is wiser to provide a nice 8bit codec with pleasing skin tones than a 10 bit codec to save your camera's bad rendition of color. How many of the Pana fanboys out there have actually tried to work on a 10bit file really? I wouldn't be so excited, especially after trying to work with Luke's files on an IMac.....(dude THANKS for these...). Don't get me wrong, I am really considering gh5, but dear Pana...fix those colors please, cause everything else is perfect....

@Dimitris Stasinos
You are right of course. As I see it, Philip Bloom didn't do us a favour by shooting "night for day" in his Now I See or later in the weird lake-shot that was only lit by the moon. Lowlight capabilities allow you to scale down the amount of light necessary to light a scene (but they shouldn't save you from lighting!), but to shoot in practically no light is a misconception. I also know the GH5 will never come close to the cleanness of the A7Rii/A7Sii (I use both sometimes). The DR also is very good with the Sony's. Be it as it may, they are terrible in terms of video usability. It starts with tiny, dim and not fully articulated displays. I like the images, I absolutely dislike to shoot with it. On a check list with a comparison of Sony vs. Pana the GH5 would probably get a "con" for lowlight.

I'd rather have a camera be fully manual like my old Bolex 16mm or the Ursa Mini (insofar as you have two parameters to worry about: exposure and focus, even WB isn't important). I'd try to "customize" the GH5 to do that. Waveform would be an assistant for better exposure, peaking for better focus. AF - perhaps -for certain challenges, IBIS -perhaps - for others, both assisting me to achieve exactly what I have in mind. If the camera has automatic features, I'd trust them only so far as I could fully control them, delegate a thoroughly tested routine to them. I predict we are going to see hundreds of terribly degraded v-log clips this year, slomos of paint drying, terminator-vision autofocus and far away sparrows in 7,5 x slomo, terribly graded with focus transitions to a wind wheel in the foreground. That's when they fell in love with the GH5's virtues but never thought of controlling them.
You can turn that off in the menu, was the same with GH2, there it was the default.

I am not a native speaker, I can't feel those niceties. I use many terms because others use them and so they seem appropriate. Should I have written natural instead? I don't think so. Focus isn't anything you are away of when seeing the world around you. Sure, you can hold your index finger in front of your nose and simultaneously look at the television tower on the horizon, but you wouldn't usually do that. DoF only exists in images, it has to do with aesthetics and sometimes with film language. She was so absorbed in thoughts, the world around her blurred. What we do though (but not by visually blurring the background and thereby isolating the object of interest) is that we perceive selectively. Test this: watch one individual in a crowd for a few minutes. You'll notice that you drift into some kind of trance. You know that there are other people around, cars, trees, traffic signs, you actually see them peripherally, but they become marginal. Your FoV is vignetted - it really physically is, like right now. I know there stands a bookshelf on my right side while I'm looking at the monitor, I know the books have different colors, but it's just as if they were blurred. 
Focussing has to feel right. How can you teach a software to make an adjustment feel right? Only if it allows you to program it.

@jonpais
@Axel
I will make a video with these facts within the next two weeks. There are some more facts to consider, I've written them down.
Example: During a concert in late August 2016, I made an interview with a band menber. It was a very bright, sunny day, the man stood (not sitting), the background was green (grass) and water. With standard AF it was impossible to get the artist in a constant focus with AF. The camera simply focused on background...Why? No clue...
What I did: Though it was very bright (full sun and about 36 degrees Celsius, I remember very well), I put a LED light on his face. The hunting was gone...
BTW: Distance to the subject (artist face and some of his chest) was about 65cm.
During another run&gun interview, i put the FZ1000 very close to the face of my interview partner (hand held with Sennheiser mic on hot shoe). The interview was outdoor...The camera hunted like crazy on background...I got a miserable picture quality, it was pure garbage...
The last "dramatic" situation was for me during an interview with a German bishop, I have loosed because I was alone and had to use AF...The camera hunted on background instead of focusing on bishops face (the guy simply didn't stand still - but this is the reality)...This was a desaster...
After that I was tired of mediocre "AF footage", I begun to "study" the different scenarios and modes. I just wanted to get as reliable results as possible, not depending on luck when using AF. After some time of shooting and study, I got some good results: Quite perfect in focus footage of persons using AF in different modes (persons moving forth and back from camera, interview situations when subjects move a little bit forth and back). So far I am very happy with the results of my FZ1000. As you know, being perfectly on focus is one of the most important factors of my filming / photography. When possible I always use MF with additional control monitor (even when using a big shoulder camera), but when it isn't possible (unespectable run&gun situations, one man band, etc.) I need a reliable AF.
@jonpais
You shoot very much portraiture (faces). For this the two described methods (1. Face detection and 2. Specified area focusing) are quite reliable, in my eyes in more than 90% of situations).
I will try to write down my experience and settings with the FZ1000 (but these settings are similar on all Pana consumer cameras) and will post some footage with excellent face tracking in low light. I will try being very precise in describing the situations, I used the different modes....
BTW: In cases with more than one face, it begins to get hard - because the camera can NOT know which of the faces you want to keep in focus (assuming you have Face1 about 1,5m, Face2 about 2,5m and Face3 about 4m far away from camera - subjects spread all over your field of view)...
Please consider that I am not a experienced reviewer at all. I can only debate on practical facts I have experienced a lot of times.

@Axel
I tested the Pana AF modes intensively (last time two weeks ago) with the FZ1000. The more you test different modes and scenarios, the more usable it will be for shooters needing a reliable AF in combination with MF. I compared it with the very good AF of the NX1. (Personally I consider Canons DPAF to be number one, some Sony cameras numjber two, NX1 and X-T2 number 3)
The test: FZ1000 + NX1 both set on face recognition, subject walking forth camera, cameraman walking back in round about 1,2m distance to subject. Both cameras with F2.8. Results were absolutely comparable, Pana with no wobbling or hunting. The subject did a moderate walk (not slow, not fast)...I wouldn't have expected this...
With "multi area" (eg subject turns face away from camera), the Pana is hunting, oftenly searching for more contrasty structures (background). In these cases (intensively tested too), it is very useful to determine a flexible AF area - the extent of the AF area can be extended - which can be moved in every direction and place you want. Using this method, focus never hunts (in static situations), even if background is much more contrasty than the subject: You just have to keep your subject within the predetermined focusing area.
There are many complaints on the pana AF hunting (hunting for more contrast, "wobbling" etc. in AF) but I think, users should test more the different modes and adapt this to their preferences...
I don't know  (I never hold the GH5 in my hands) but to be honest, I don't expect an AF similar to the big "AF-Gorillas" (Canon, Sony, Samsung and Fuji as descripted above), but I find the Pana AF usable. I used it in quite "impossible" situations and in the dark (a night concert on a stage in Romania) and - despite the 1" sensor and crop - it did very well at long zoom (about F4). It tracked faces like hell, I was very happy - i never would expect it but this showed me how important it is to extensively test for knowing how to handle camera strengths and limitations...

Hi guys,
I have my GH5 on pre-order. I will also be ordering a Metabones Speed Booster Ultra 0.71x to use on the GH5 with my Sigma 18-35mm F1.8.
However, given that this turns the GH5's crop-factor into x1.4, I started to worry that this will cause vignetting with the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8.
Having conducted my own tests with the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 in the past on a full-frame sensor (http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/8444-sigma-18-35mm-f18-on-ff-sensor/?do=findComment&comment=92144), I feel as though the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 is actually designed, and can work with, sensors larger than APS-C.

This is something I also noticed with my Sigma 30mm EX F1.4 - which worked perfectly back when I used to use it on the 1D Mark IV (an APS-H sensor).

What I wish to request from GH4 owners, that both own the Speed Booster Ultra 0.71x and Sigma 18-35mm F1.8, is that if they could please test the GH4, with this combination, in 1080P mode (which does not suffer from a 2.4 crop-factor like 4K) and verify that there is no vignetting...

Whats more, given the results I found when using the Sigma 18-35mm with my A7S, I am starting to wonder if the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 will work fine with the Metabones Speed Booster XL 0.64x - which turns the crop-factor into APS-H (x1.3)...
 

Thanks again. Then I won't buy the 30mm, because gimbal bumble is the only time to switch to AF for me. I already know. I will (again) make the camera "ENG-style":
> put a big soft eyepiece on the excellent EVF, like I did with my GH2 (Zacuto replacement part, € 16):

> instead of a rig-diculous rig, I'll buy a grip like this:

> I'll re-buy only one lens for the start: the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 for Nikon G. For Nikon, because then I get a MB speedboosted manual aperture ring, which I find more intuitive. And I am used to the direction of the focus ring.
> I'll buy two adapters: Novoflex MFT<Nikon. This makes the Sigma a 36-70 @f1.8 (FF equivalent). Then a Metabones speedbooster (don't know which one works yet, don't know how much stops it will boost), with, say, crop-reducing by 0,7 I would have the Sigma be ~ 25-50mm and faster than f1.4.
> for a small AF lens, I am not sure. They all seem to shout 'sterile video'! Might then be the cheap and very light 14mm pancake, or should I really spend $1500 for Leica Summi-something?
 

I am interested if the MB SB XL 0,64 fits on the GH5 physically. I am told that it almost touches the sensor of the GH4. This would be an awesome combo. Does anybody know of a tester who used this (can't see the video above, cause I'm abroad with a smartphone and have used up my flatrate limit ...)