fuzzynormal

Ha!  Great thread.  
Over the course of this on line conversation I considered the GX85, mulled it over, bought one, tested it, enjoyed the results, bought another one, began to shoot 6 short documentaries with 'em, learned to resent my producer along the way, clashed creatively like I've never done before, shot a ton of misc corporate stuff, did some time-lapse that one time, finished the documentaries, sold the first one to a woman so she could take pictures of her newborn grand-daughter, sold the second one on ebay, and generally enjoyed using the camera during it all.
Didn't fall in love with the GX85, but liked it plenty.  Still seems like the best value for money on the market if you like smaller-sized cameras.  I'll continue to recommend it.

Well, what were you eating yesterday, though?

I like this 100 times... Not sure, but I think they hired the same guy(s) for their website GUI that got fired from the Sony menu design team.  Seriously, for something as visually aesthetic as the medium of photography, it's like they're deliberately trying to rape my eyeballs with their layout.

I like this 100 times... Not sure, but I think they hired the same guy(s) for their website GUI that got fired from the Sony menu design team.  Seriously, for something as visually aesthetic as the medium of photography, it's like they're deliberately trying to rape my eyeballs with their layout.

I thought that too, but then I'd be on DPReview.. not worth it

Yeah, I sold mine and kind of regret it.

Earnestness is awesome. It's such a blessing. Wish I had more of it. 

It's visceral, literal, metaphorical, technical, and plenty of stuff in between. 

It's visceral, literal, metaphorical, technical, and plenty of stuff in between. 

I miss Zach - maybe because, at times, he made some of us look a little less sane than we thought we were. Absolute star! I bet he turns up having made some crazy ass doc, in the style of Nick Broomfield, which everybody raves about as being pure genius - all filmed on his T2i!
Don't miss the 60yr old filmmaker from Egypt - he used to piss me off no end with his constant BS & chest puffing. Funny that it took a scam to rumble him, not the fact that no one here could name an Egyptian filmmaker if they tried & would trust his word on everything!
Miss maxotics too!!!!!

Not my work, but certainly one of the most "American" movies I've seen in years.  If you live overseas and your vision of USA culture is what you distill from Hollywood, well, here's something a little more accurate to the world many of us grew up with:  https://vimeo.com/96897402
 

Well I don't have a GH5, but I can tell you from all the Olympus, Panasonic cameras I have owned and it probably total close to 10 of them, AF-C sucked on all of them. Now AF-S was pretty good on all of them. That has been my experience. YMMV. My Olympus EM1 was hands down the best focusing m4/3 camera I ever owned. It was damn good. But not great at AF-C.

So this is sort of an informal poll as well as a question.  First, which film here do you find more entertaining and/or interesting?
https://vimeo.com/212758265
https://vimeo.com/108018156
There's not a right or wrong answer, just curious about which y'all find more engaging.
Now, regardless of which vid you chose, why did you choose it?  And a final follow up, how do you think this sort of thing affects the future of the "industry," if at all.
Cheers!

Cool answers.  As mentioned, no right or wrong answers.  I suppose it's a loaded question, sure.  Technical accomplishment vs. an artistic one.  
I find it compelling because of my personal experiences.  I mean, my main gig throughout most of my career (and still if I'm being honest) was mid-budget corporate stuff.  So I did a bunch of things with decent gear, looked clean and slick, but was boring as heck.
Myself, I find the goofy kid in Sundance more interesting as, to me, it has a sort of ramshackle Andy Kaufman satirization vibe to it.  Also he has a unique "voice."  he can take poorly shot video and manipulate the context of it to tell a curious story.  Thus, it's not "bad" footage at that point.  No small feat.  

Well, they can actually be mundane as well.  Doesn't seem to matter.  
Personally, there's no way I would have ever had the foresight to be aggressively prolific in order to be essentially a modern day "motivational speaker" on social media, but it's working for him financially.  He deserves acknowledgement for that.  Ain't my bag, but whatever.  That motivational culture seems odd yet enduring throughout the generations.
I never willingly listened to dubstep either and a lot of young people made a lot of other young people famous and wealthy because of it.
It'll be curious if the financial reality of this sort of vlogging work actually makes him fulfilled emotionally a few years down the road.  That whole sort of career seems a bit 'ouroboros' to me...but, again, that's me.

I don't know about that, but I do know that there's no basement at the Alamo.
https://youtu.be/M8YApT-Eyn8
And then the guy that made these commercials then went on to run Apple computers.  It's, like, all the same reality distortion field, man.  It's full circle.

Well, like I said, I'm more of a luma guy, less a chroma dude.  I'd much rather look at lighting that's dramatic than look at a flat over-lit scene with perfect colors.

When I took the "Pepsi Challenge" in the 1983, I chose Coke.  Man, the college girl running the thing was ticked off.  What can I say?  I dislike cola in general, but the Pepsi was and just way too sweet.

So this is sort of an informal poll as well as a question.  First, which film here do you find more entertaining and/or interesting?
https://vimeo.com/212758265
https://vimeo.com/108018156
There's not a right or wrong answer, just curious about which y'all find more engaging.
Now, regardless of which vid you chose, why did you choose it?  And a final follow up, how do you think this sort of thing affects the future of the "industry," if at all.
Cheers!

Yup.  I have a few cameras that capably handle 90% of my work, but when I'm doing something more serious or particular, I'll rent what serves the need.

Well, as mentioned, Portuguese is Portuguese and Spanish is Spanish.

What would a lens at that's 45mm F2.8 on a medium format camera need to be on a M43 cam in order to hit the same DOF equivalency?  Or, how about a 80mm f1.9?  
Same question for those lenses to achieve similar DOF equiv. on a full-frame camera?
Having exceptionally shallow DOF with a wide FOV while shooting motion pictures does create a cool effect.  Kind of a 3D-separation-from-the-background-illusion...and then there's the subjective issue of bokeh --and also how big glass/focal plane light gets bent in that medium-format-way; as it needs to fall across a larger space.  I don't know how to exactly explain it...is it sort of a parallax thing, maybe?

My thought is that we all fall into the roles we decide for ourselves.  If you like playing with camera knobs, you focus on that.  If you'd rather tell a story, you focus on that... and lots of values in between. 
For instance, trying to break away from my established ( read: lazy ) career path is not easy.  Essentially, my time has been spent being a passable craftsperson, but not a terribly impressive creative.  So to switch priorities is difficult.  Having the confidence to actually tell a worthwhile story, develop an interesting cinematic voice, and shape the tone of stories with wise choices is so much more demanding than figuring out colors of skintone, you know? 
Because of that, falling back into thought processes that are a distraction from successful storytelling happens because dabbling with the tech is more comfortable.
( after all, look at my writing here )
So, to be fair, kids doing "content" are often just trying to figure stuff out -- while meanwhile so much of "content" is not exactly narratively creative.  Sort of a double whammy, that.  Those that truly have an itch for telling stories should eventually get there, but you're right, it's easy to go sideways with tech and lose sight of a more interesting career.  That's my anecdotal experience for sure.

Yeah, it's stupid, but, my goodness, these things are all moderately comparable, aren't they?  I'd willingly take any of those cameras and shoot stuff.   

Yup, I'm definitely with you on that as well.  I'm just not eager to stretch my ISO that much.  I mean 800, a fast lens, and slower shutter will easily expose a face lit by a small campfire.  That's pretty dim.  And any camera made in the last two years will more or less give you that ability.  Scenarios that are darker absolutely exist, but if you have a choice, best to try to avoid such settings.  
Running 6400 ISO simply because you want to stay at a relatively slow f4 seems silly and wholly counter-productive to me.  If you know you're consistently going into the dark, I'd certainly suggest making other gear decisions.
Such as just getting a low-light-high-performance camera like an A7s.