fuzzynormal

Working on a doc and my wife and I use it every now and again to grab stuff off the cuff. Works good when doing car tracking shots, for instance. We're not trying to make studio level color grades with our work, and typically we just push and pull iPhone footage by eye to get it close to our Acam and call it good. But, yeah, our standards are a bit more loosey-goosey than most, probably. Still, we're plenty happy with the results. It's not hard to get them close. At the end of the day, in my world having the shot is more important than have the correct bit depth and all that pixel-peeking stuff. It needs to exist first, then we'll worry about it.

Indeed. I couldn't even push it to 3200 without worry. Had a fast lens with a speed booster to take it as wide open as possible, but then you suffer from the glass making things soft and mushy, so the struggle was real. Always a trade off. Regardless, having small cameras for docs is default mode for me. Not a fan of demanding attention with big gear when you're trying to get intimate; still a bit amazed when I see industry folks being okay with a lot of gak on location for a documentary.

Started by buying an EM5 cuz it was small. Then Bought a GX7 cuz it was small. Bought a GM1 cuz it was small. Bought two GH1's cuz they are small. Bought an EM5II cuz it was small. Bought two Gx8's cuz they were small. Bought an EM10iii cuz it was small. Bought GH4's and Gh5's along the way as well. They are not small. I like the smaller cameras better in my hand. Too bad the small cams didn't have the same features/specs. Andrew is onto something by saying there was a missed market there. At least in my world that market exists. Doesn't take too much to wonder if OM can make a run at that market with trying to niche their way through the wildlife photographers. M43 for super long lens stuff is a relatively small kit. (Not the body, however, but the lens) Is it enough to keep the format viable? Probably not, but here's hoping.

Oh, wow, I never thought about this. Kind of an obvious head-smacking solution. Thanks!

Let me know if you're able to break the laws of physics and come up with a compact solution that'll do what you want.

If you want to complain about bugs in Premiere, you'll be a busy boy. What Premiere is supposed to do and what it actually does are not always the same thing. FWIW, I've noticed this too. My workflow doesn't run into too much so when it does I just cope with it 'manually'.

I feel seen. For me, it's a double whammy. Lord knows I could do all the tech stuff necessary to create beautiful wedding videos and could have a stable lucrative career in that, but I did those gigs early on in my career, didn't like it, and vowed I'd never do it again. I'm literally avoiding making money in a readily available well rewarded market because of some very old "reasons". Nah. I'll make documentaries! That'll pay the bills!

Another great bit of advice I got in my early days was to go study paintings. Particularly Vermeer's and Caravaggio's. As an idiot that didn't understand what made a nice image work and a bad one fail, just analyzing and deconstructing the craft of painting helped a ton. Absolutely brand-dead simple ideas like having your subject brighter than the background (contrast) confounded me as a newbie, but once I started seeing the techniques like that in practice I couldn't unsee it, and I got better. Which is why I'm pretty camera agnostic these days. There's so many fundamental techniques that need to be in place and exercised to create awesome images. Grabbing the most expensive camera/lens doesn't accomplish that for you, it only assists.

I’d say even try up-rez’ing it to 4k and then upload. See how YouTube handles that one.

Pffffst, not watching Godel. They changed his costume too much.

"Pffffst, extreme lighting isn't art" -some person in 1941 after watching Citizen Kane.

Had it. Also had the MII version. Best ergos ever on the EM5II with the battery grip. The other thing you get with those cameras: moiré.

I do that with an Old Fashioned whenever filming with an Arri Alexa. Gotta stay posh.

I've chosen to believe that it's Olympus' attempt to outflank the Japanese regulations. --And that the off-spun OM business will eventually end up back under the "Olympus" umbrella one day when the political opportunity is viable. (They've been known to pull corporate shenanigans) Meanwhile OM are positioning themselves into a more niche market of outdoor photography enthusiasts, so maybe they'll be able to make a go of it there? Hard to say with consumer imaging technology. But, man, if they can make in-roads against Canon with all the 'birders' out there in the world, perhaps! I also like to think OM is a more nimble company that has a better chance of surviving because of this. Wishful thinking? Regardless, it's cool that their cameras are getting recognition from the folks here on this forum. Same. I hate large field packages. Done enough of that in my life and whenever the gear bag gets too big I start to get frustrated. There's a reason a GM1 with an Pentax Auto110 prime lens is my avatar!

I'll chime in with a contrary opinion and a dark horse suggestion: Weathered sealed OM (Olympus) cams/lenses shooting 4k 8-bit --probably considered sort of low-end these days, right? OM cams definitely fly under the radar with videographers, but they have some useful features. The color and images look dang nice straight out of the camera, the cams aren't big, you get really good IBIS, and the file data sizes are relatively small. OM's target demo is pretty much nature shooters, so they build their gear for outdoor use. Be careful though. The video image might not be as 'meaty' as you'd like it to be if you're used to other pro cameras or doing a bunch of drastic coloring in post. Still, the wife and I are currently doing a nature doc and we're happy with what we're getting. ND... Man, that is the shortcoming on all hybrid cams though.