Emanuel

Feel free to change the title as mod : ) In any case, the idea would actually be ironic, as matter of fact, as you exactly said: "Maybe they are the same thing"... ;-) The more they try beat Sony going on a post production trick in-camera rather than the acquisition side, the more they fail to succeed it in the professional camp.

Seems...? : ) They DO produce them: ...such a pity, if they don't fix this bogus. May happen to be acceptable in the consumer realm; crappy for serious usage. BTW @Kisaha, that grainy a6500 sample's outcome doesn't bother me at all. The more I see from that Sony device, the more I like.

GH5 vs a6500 @6400 ISO GH5 vs EM1II @6400 ISO Stills, but... :-( Source: http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2017/02/14/panasonic-gh5-beta-first-shots

Focus transition mode (in the end of the video) seems pretty useful! :-)

Sem stock? Encomendar, pagar, devolver em 15 dias. Torcer o nariz para o efeito a EstudioPT, embora nada a apontar a Paulo Silva. E coberto se pago via PayPal. Bazar do Video do Ribeiro Chaves é opção, porventura, mais receptiva a trocas para teste, pois já andam nisto há muito mais tempo. Assim como Media Markt se o fizerem online.

Hey Kisaha and me? ; ) In Portugal or abroad, but Portuguese forever! : ) Rodolfo, FNAC, Media Markt... (Funchal?) Worten, etc EstudioPT idem (Paulo Silva, OK; Pedro Silva *thumbs down*), in 15 dias/days -> PayPal ;-) a6500 = 2017 *thumbs up* (NX1 < 2017) Abraço luso (I'm sorry but seems odd to me to strictly address myself in a foreign language, to whom speaks my mother language) Emanuel :-)

Well, maybe tap to focus may be not so bad route, after all, I'd say...

ah OK, my bad then, I am used to watch the footage without sound at all -- daily rushes habit... Thanks for the heads up, mate! :-)

True. That last shot looks like made on a steadicam... But it's handheld, folks! WOW What a piece of technology! A consumer camera, WTH...

With such Vlog filmmaking vibe nowadays on lazy YT viewers, Griffith must be spinning most likely in the grave... Anyways, here is an interesting low light outcome from a lightweight device I am sure D. W. would love to have it in his days -- from 3:17, 6:23 and 8:53, respectively:

Nice to know, thanks mate :-) Some expectations over here on a new Osmo. It would be nice to listen about a release for soon.

https://www.google.pt/search?q=ourives&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjbofiMlszRAhUG0xQKHZqlCFoQ_AUICCgB&biw=1301&bih=671&dpr=1

Like cooking, need to bake the footage ; ) Like love, a plant needs lot of care. Like life, stomach won't fill up with water nor alcohol all the time. Neither love. Filmmaking is not love making but certain rules apply ;-) Sorry for so strikingly technical reply... :-))

Post production can help indeed.

You know Simo, as someone said, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts... ; ) Saluti e Buon Anno, E :-)

Right :-)

Sure, I concur. I just don't think the opposite is not possible to coexist as much as a few people want the proof of it à la Saint Thomas. But, if faith can be subjective, 'the big concept' cinematic goes beyond because can be quantifiable by numbers. The evaluation of them is its subjective part. “The opposite of a great truth is also true.” ~ Niels Bohr

Right, so how isn't the motion cadence quantifiable?! First off, frame rate is quantifiable. Even a certain-chosen-one such as 24 frames per second is -- there's no one 24fps, 'several 24fps' apply. That is, let it alone when other variables pop up. Cinematic outcome is a match of it.

As much as the Aristotle maxim 'the whole is greater than the sum of its parts', a non-quantifiable premise doesn't necessarily rule out the gateway to quantify it. See above-posted. 24 frames are not the same as HFR. E :-)

" To re-invent cinema " doesn't necessarily mean to ignore the past as a bygone aesthetic. Take Europa (Zentropa in US) by Lars von Trier for example. E :-)

Accurate motion at 24 frames versus a more fluid, quantifiable number of frames such as 30, 48, 60 or even higher per second (do not confound with overcranking, obviously). Follow the new TV displays to interpolate frames or fields and mimic the infamous soap opera effect, you can take a look on the practical meaning of that.

Latitude to begin with, for pixel peepers we all are. But, also resolution in the past old days, motion, progressive versus interlaced was determinant to arrive where digital has placed the motion pictures to pair with a cinematic feeling marked for over more than a century of 35mm format experience. When there is the absence of artifacts, of course. Even though, rolling shutter, as for instance, can be acceptable within certain limits. Color sampling for vivid imaging, DOF (not necessarily shallow DOF all the time), framing where perspective, composition and accurate movement of camera are mandatory for creating the idea of POV as primary aesthetic requirement of filmmaking. Last but not least, production design for sure. In two words, it means space and time. Reason why when we talk about motion, slow motion is much appreciated by the film audiences comprehending an effective way of going towards the suspension of disbelief. E :-)

what thread?

http://maxcamera.net/lenses/85mm-eqiv-comparison/