fuzzynormal

Grrrrrr...
Google serves up that ridiculous piece of software for just about any transcoding question. 
Brorosoft has vomitted this sort of manufactured content everywhere to exploit SEO. 
Heaven forbid one actually tries to locate legitimate advice about video transcoding through a search engine --as wading through the algorithmic garbage dump of information is barely useful. 
But then again, Monica660, you already knew that, didn't'cha?
That's why you're here. 

I got no problem with opinion.  I'm just weary of the YT culture that extolls about this camera or that camera.  Usually with click-bait titles like "Best Ever," "[insert brand here] Killer," "Camera of the Year!" etc.
And the cliche' of apologizing about 20 things wrong about their production at the top of the video?  That's always common and amusing. 
"Sorry for the noise.  My cat has explosive diarrhea, but I need to film this right next to the kitty litter box.  Also, I left my polarizer in my Mom's basement so please excuse the over-exposure."

The digital revolution is an incredible thing. The first globally cultural phenomenon.
Bigger businesses can try as hard as they can to monetize it, but that sort of process demands way too "lowest-common-denominator" sort of stuff to be truly compelling.  
Normally, it's dry and boring "content" not actual writing.  Lousy Corporate speak and intellectual junk food.
Those of us that are more curious than normal folks will always require niche corners, like eoshd, to keep it real. 
There's plenty of room inside the Internet. Writing created by people that really do care about what they're saying will always have a place. 
Whe I first came here I spouted off my typical egalitarian camera rants and was quickly chastised by the head-honcho because of it, which I really appreciated.  
Finally, I thought, a place where someone has an opinion they really care about!  Its not some unpaid intern just regurgitating a PR sheet from corporate marketing.
I don't know, maybe these sorts of corners will have a harder time existing as newer generations get more sophistically exploited by content-providers. Perhaps not.
After all, Humans have always tended to have alternatives to the mainstream. From philosophy to books to camera blogs. 

Ha!  Not quite as simple as all that, but then again...maybe it should be. ;-)
Funny thing is, I still use my 5D for a lot of interviews.  Full frame with a 50mm lens wide open.  Hard to beat that FOV and shallow DOF for a talking head shot.

Ha!  Not quite as simple as all that, but then again...maybe it should be. ;-)
Funny thing is, I still use my 5D for a lot of interviews.  Full frame with a 50mm lens wide open.  Hard to beat that FOV and shallow DOF for a talking head shot.

The outside looking in is always an interesting perspective.  The USA is typically a bit of a mess, and there's a blessing in that.
You might as well.  We all do over here too.
And I wouldn't worry too much about it.  Intellectual films will always be niche.  Dumb films just have broader appeal.  It's quite simple, really.   A genius, sitting amongst a crowd of morons, can appreciate stupid slapstick and a fart joke.  
However, those morons wouldn't feel comfortable at an art house while that same genius chuckles knowingly at the cutting cultural insight of a witty turn of a phrase or convoluted allegory.  
So what'cha gonna do?  Smart films have to stay small, dumb films go big.  Some try to have it both ways and succeed.  It's all part of the mix.

The digital revolution is an incredible thing. The first globally cultural phenomenon.
Bigger businesses can try as hard as they can to monetize it, but that sort of process demands way too "lowest-common-denominator" sort of stuff to be truly compelling.  
Normally, it's dry and boring "content" not actual writing.  Lousy Corporate speak and intellectual junk food.
Those of us that are more curious than normal folks will always require niche corners, like eoshd, to keep it real. 
There's plenty of room inside the Internet. Writing created by people that really do care about what they're saying will always have a place. 
Whe I first came here I spouted off my typical egalitarian camera rants and was quickly chastised by the head-honcho because of it, which I really appreciated.  
Finally, I thought, a place where someone has an opinion they really care about!  Its not some unpaid intern just regurgitating a PR sheet from corporate marketing.
I don't know, maybe these sorts of corners will have a harder time existing as newer generations get more sophistically exploited by content-providers. Perhaps not.
After all, Humans have always tended to have alternatives to the mainstream. From philosophy to books to camera blogs. 

OMG.  Thanks for this.  I don't know how this has flown under my radar!  
...oh...looks like this is why:
"I then saw that before they were even released they were discontinued in the US. I did quite a bit of research and it looks like Zaxcom sued Tascam for patent infringement and Tascam had to stop selling them in the US. Zaxcom has a similar device but it's over $1000."

Exactly.  Is it worth the difference?  What do you want to do with your footage?  A lot of people will go down a rabbit hole chasing superior IQ, and for some things that certainly makes sense.  For other things...not so much. 
I've lost count of the number of videos I've seen that are unwatchable, but look great, knowhatimean?
There's so much more than just IQ when it comes to crafting a successful production.  Ohmygoodness, so so much more.

I read all of that with my inner-head Werner Herzog accent.  
Also Casablanca.  One of the "Hollywood-ist" films ever made, and all the better because of it.
RIP Ed. :-(

OMG.  Thanks for this.  I don't know how this has flown under my radar!  
...oh...looks like this is why:
"I then saw that before they were even released they were discontinued in the US. I did quite a bit of research and it looks like Zaxcom sued Tascam for patent infringement and Tascam had to stop selling them in the US. Zaxcom has a similar device but it's over $1000."

If the EM5II had slightly better video, I would have never bought two GX85's for my current project.  The EM5II with the battery grip feels and works like a "real" camera.  It just jibes with my old school sensibilities.  I swear to you, and it's almost embarrassing to admit this, but I have carried that EM5II camera around a few times simply because it felt good!  Not because I wanted to do anything with it, just simply because I liked the way it felt in my hands.  Crazy.
I really do like the GX85's.  I don't love them.  Aside from the IQ, the model comes up short for me in the ergonomics.  It's not bad per se, just not as reassuring as a EM5II. When you're using a camera 8-14 hours a day, that really makes a difference.  And son-of-a-bitch, I hate the GX85's EVF.  Gah!
Believe me, there's been times recently where I've thought to myself, "The heck with it, I should take the IQ hit and go back to the EM5II.  The video is 'good enough'."  Also, I can do (good 'nuff) on camera audio recording.  Man, that is such a god-send when dealing with hundreds of hours of b-roll.
But these are concerns that lean more to the pro-side of things.  If you want something for more personal use, getting the most video IQ out of a hybrid might not matter. 
So, if you're looking to get a stills camera FIRST, and then a video camera second.  I'd definitely recommend the EM5II.  Keep in mind this:  The video from the EM5II isn't bad, it's just not as good as the GX85's clean and crisp 4K.
I'm pretty sure, if I can rustle up the cash, when the next gen of OMD comes out with 4K, I'm hopping back onto that line.

I'm shooting a documentary wherein I'm trying to capture around 80% of the footage with a FD 1.2 55mm on a speedbooster.
I think it looks great in an imperfect way.  
Typically I'm getting most of my shots @f2.8, which is pretty darn sharp with that lens. But, I've done some low light stuff where I open it to f2 or f1.4-ish, and the chroma aberration really starts to be noticeable.  Which isn't all bad, depending.  It's a "look" anyway.  It's certainly nice being able to shoot low-light if needed.  f1.2 on a speedbooster with 1600ISO captures a lot of light.  I've even pushed to 3200ISO with useable results...depending on what you consider "useable."
Here's the thing some people fail to take into consideration when it comes to IBIS bodies and m43 cameras:  The cameras are very light.  The lack of mass makes them prone to hand held jitters.  But, once you adapt some hunking piece of glass and metal to the body, then the weight of the camera actually becomes beneficial for steadier handheld shots.
My take is that the ergos are actually better for shooting video when old vintage glass is on the body.

I'm shooting a documentary wherein I'm trying to capture around 80% of the footage with a FD 1.2 55mm on a speedbooster.
I think it looks great in an imperfect way.  
Typically I'm getting most of my shots @f2.8, which is pretty darn sharp with that lens. But, I've done some low light stuff where I open it to f2 or f1.4-ish, and the chroma aberration really starts to be noticeable.  Which isn't all bad, depending.  It's a "look" anyway.  It's certainly nice being able to shoot low-light if needed.  f1.2 on a speedbooster with 1600ISO captures a lot of light.  I've even pushed to 3200ISO with useable results...depending on what you consider "useable."
Here's the thing some people fail to take into consideration when it comes to IBIS bodies and m43 cameras:  The cameras are very light.  The lack of mass makes them prone to hand held jitters.  But, once you adapt some hunking piece of glass and metal to the body, then the weight of the camera actually becomes beneficial for steadier handheld shots.
My take is that the ergos are actually better for shooting video when old vintage glass is on the body.

I'm thinking that perhaps there's a better place for ALL CAPS political rants.  The interwebs is a big place.

Russian media and the word "censorship."  Huh.  Interesting, that...  
Man, it's all so weird. Used to be most voters in the States would view anything Russian with heavy skepticism.  Now, if info serves to support one's ideological purpose, no problem.  The source is almost irrelevant.  Augh, political years in the USA.  Oh well.  I'm burnt out on it.

What the heck?  You live in Kansas or something?

I've often strategized that I should make a doc or two and pander to a specific ideological market.  It's not a bad way to make a living.  You can exploit people that are eager to hear the choir sing.  But, I guess I just can't be so cynical to do that.  It would feel too gross.  I'm always trying to see things from all sides.  For instance, my best friend is sort of a hard core right-wing religious socially ultraconservative dude, but he's still an awesome guy with a lot of love in his heart.  So I don't care for caricatures that refuse to see people as whole.  
FWIW, I consider myself to be in the middle of the ideological spectrum, leaning left. (by USA standards)  We're a wonderfully weird and messy nation.  Corrupt and noble simultaneously.  Prejudiced and fair.  Violent and compassionate.  Hey, we're human.  And we're not homogenized, so it's never going to be easy.  People are people after all.  Tribal.  There's comfort in in being tribal, so I get that desire even though I like to think I can avoid it.  
As things like this D'souza documentary continue to polarize opinion, I don't see it as a healthy shift in American culture.  But, we've always been a bit nuts in that regard.  Lot's of pundits tend to be incredulous about the current level of discourse, but it doesn't seem any more vexed than previous elections; it's just that those wildly contentious elections took place before any of our lifetimes.  We've even had weirdos like Trump on major party tickets before too.  Those guys tend to be forgotten as time passes. 
This year the GOP is in disarray. (has been for awhile)  It's pretty much like a retired guy that's upset kids are playing on his lawn; loud, cranky, attracts a lot of attention, but wildly outnumbered.
What's happening this year is just a fever.  It'll eventually break and then we'll be inoculated for awhile until the next virus hits. 
In the meantime, the only cure is more cowbell.
An economics movie that was so ideologically loaded it caused that sort of uproar?  Can't think of anything mainstream that came down the pipe recently which would cause such a reaction, unless you're in a really ideologically biased community.  Was it more of a fringe movie like "Hillary's America"?  And was it more of a righty film or a lefty film?

Nope.  I'm watching the trailer and I've read a few think pieces about the film's content.  Also I know the guy's MO.  He's a fabulist.  So what?  Look, it's kind of funny when the trailer features a shot of a proxy Clinton stomping down the hallway while an intern cowers in fear as she walks by.
Say what you will about seeing or not seeing the movie, but it's obvious it's a film catering to political ideologists and it's not objective.  And again, I can't fault the guy for trying to make a buck.  It's nothing that Michael Moore doesn't do, but let's not kid ourselves here.  We're better than that.

As a documentarian, I've totally let go of big rigging.  While I love to shoot on an Alexa, if I'm rolling through the day with a subject and need to keep a low profile, these stabilized M43 cams are just so incredibly practical.  No, the IQ isn't as perfect as other cameras.  But, as seen above, it doesn't really need to be.  Shoot wise and your footage will look great.

That guy is a hack. He's one of the biggest trolls in politics.

As a documentarian, I've totally let go of big rigging.  While I love to shoot on an Alexa, if I'm rolling through the day with a subject and need to keep a low profile, these stabilized M43 cams are just so incredibly practical.  No, the IQ isn't as perfect as other cameras.  But, as seen above, it doesn't really need to be.  Shoot wise and your footage will look great.

This looks great.  I'm a big Olympus fan -love my E-M1 for the colour, IBIS and ergonomics, it just make shooting fun.  

But just look at that dynamic range and skin tone!  Totes on point.  What more do you need?  That's what it's all about, right?

Personally, my main concern is EVF.  
I really like using a good EVF.  When they work well it makes manual focusing a breeze and fun.  And since I shoot manual glass, it makes sense to covet such a feature.  Besides, I actually enjoy utilizing manual lens focus hunting in my edits.  I don't really know how to articulate that bias.  Maybe because it makes things feel more organic and connected to a human shooter?
At any rate, Panasonic's GX series EVF's have been very frustrating.  And, yeah, having on board audio recording is a blessing.  I miss it now that I'm shooting with my GX85's.
Still, it's a kick-butt little cam.  One can't have every solution in a piece of kit that cost less than a good ND filter set!