fuzzynormal

One's really got to be shortsighted to not appreciate the performance you're getting from such a camera at such a price point. 
Honestly, it's kind of ridiculous how good and cheap this is.
In my mind Its a value on par with the BMPCC that was sold @$500 awhile back. 
 

One's really got to be shortsighted to not appreciate the performance you're getting from such a camera at such a price point. 
Honestly, it's kind of ridiculous how good and cheap this is.
In my mind Its a value on par with the BMPCC that was sold @$500 awhile back. 
 

One's really got to be shortsighted to not appreciate the performance you're getting from such a camera at such a price point. 
Honestly, it's kind of ridiculous how good and cheap this is.
In my mind Its a value on par with the BMPCC that was sold @$500 awhile back. 
 

If you want to make it easy, put whatever you got on f8, shoot wide, manual focus, and have fun.
Technical considerations are all well and good, but if you're having a blast just grabbing cool shots and the vibe on set (or when documenting stuff) is loose and fun, that's a heck of a lot more important than anything else.
Don't get in your own way when filming! 

If you want to make it easy, put whatever you got on f8, shoot wide, manual focus, and have fun.
Technical considerations are all well and good, but if you're having a blast just grabbing cool shots and the vibe on set (or when documenting stuff) is loose and fun, that's a heck of a lot more important than anything else.
Don't get in your own way when filming! 

After using 5axis stabilization for a year and a half now, I gotta say I'm somewhat reliant on it. The ability to shoot clean stable shots without a tripod is wonderful. Also, drifting and creating small dolly shots is easy and fun. 
I'd love to get a GX7markII, but really need the audio input for a documentary series I'm doing.  (Not enough time in post production to record then sync hours upon hours of outboard broll audio) so I'm sticking with my EM5II for now.
If you don't require that sort of audio, Pany's new cam with 5axis would be my ideal; also, manual lenses with a speedbooster. 
Got my hands on the camera yesterday. The stabilizer is on par, if not a touch better, than Oly's

Wait, Are you implying artistic imaging skill matters more than what particular sensor is used?  Because that sort of rationale isn't going to get much traction here on the 'ol interwebs.

I'm an older guy and grew up in the age of publishing. Magazines were an enthusiasts connection to new developments. 
As such, I'm perfectly happy with the pace of content on EOSHD. It ebbs and flows with gear development.  And doesn't that make the most sense? 

I've traveled around the world and back.  As long as you have a competent camera, you'll be fine.  
I'm not ashamed of any of the footage I captured via SD, neophyte HD, mature HD, or UHD.  Although I will say, on some shots it would have been nice to have more DR, since controlling the lighting was never an option.
From my experience, I'd say a good long lens can be a cool tool to have every once in awhile.  Otherwise, shorter and standard focal lengths are fine.  The smaller and assuming the camera, I've found, is the best bet as it lets you move around people without being too ostentatious.  Also, who's to say it's "once in a lifetime?"
 

I've used 5d2RGB a lot. It does create an image in encoding that's slightly better than what QuickTime can do. 
It is a slow transcoding process, however.  
If proresHQ offers a better IQ than regular prores, I've not been able to see it.
I'll also use proresLT at times to save hard drive space --depending on how much footage I'm trying to convert. 

Cool.  If it's on par, or even close, with the Oly then it'll be a fun production tool. I've had nothing but good times with the EM5II for the past year.  If only it had that Pany level of 4K IQ... well.... 

Stopped in the local camera shop today. Not on display yet. Will try in the future though. What I'm seeing from the online clips looks promising. 

I'm on a film festival committee.  Trust me when I say almost all indy movies look really good these days.  IQ looks on par with just about anything.  Even work that has limited dynamic range still looks pretty impressive.
As for all the other stuff that's actually more important in making a narrative film... well, not so much.
So, if you think what camera you're shooting with is what's holding you back.  IMHO, you're wrong.  So, you pick up and use what you're going to pick up and use.  That's it.  Stop thinking about the limitations of it.  You made the choice, move on.  Now, make smart lighting decisions.  Get a good audio guy (for god's sake please do this), concentrate on telling a good story, and find some actors that can actually do so.
Trust me, no one's going to give two shit(es) if you're dynamic range in 10 stops or 13.  Your skin tone looks a little goofy?  Oh well, I forgive you if you're showing me some interesting characters on screen.

Their PR vid seems to show it working on a competitive level with Oly's.  Of course, that's in tandem with a Panasonic OIS lens, but still very encouraging.
Obviously, all manufacturers are gonna get this kind of stuff in their cameras, but I'm eager for it to happen sooner rather than later, no doubt.
 
 

I'm on a film festival committee.  Trust me when I say almost all indy movies look really good these days.  IQ looks on par with just about anything.  Even work that has limited dynamic range still looks pretty impressive.
As for all the other stuff that's actually more important in making a narrative film... well, not so much.
So, if you think what camera you're shooting with is what's holding you back.  IMHO, you're wrong.  So, you pick up and use what you're going to pick up and use.  That's it.  Stop thinking about the limitations of it.  You made the choice, move on.  Now, make smart lighting decisions.  Get a good audio guy (for god's sake please do this), concentrate on telling a good story, and find some actors that can actually do so.
Trust me, no one's going to give two shit(es) if you're dynamic range in 10 stops or 13.  Your skin tone looks a little goofy?  Oh well, I forgive you if you're showing me some interesting characters on screen.

I'm on a film festival committee.  Trust me when I say almost all indy movies look really good these days.  IQ looks on par with just about anything.  Even work that has limited dynamic range still looks pretty impressive.
As for all the other stuff that's actually more important in making a narrative film... well, not so much.
So, if you think what camera you're shooting with is what's holding you back.  IMHO, you're wrong.  So, you pick up and use what you're going to pick up and use.  That's it.  Stop thinking about the limitations of it.  You made the choice, move on.  Now, make smart lighting decisions.  Get a good audio guy (for god's sake please do this), concentrate on telling a good story, and find some actors that can actually do so.
Trust me, no one's going to give two shit(es) if you're dynamic range in 10 stops or 13.  Your skin tone looks a little goofy?  Oh well, I forgive you if you're showing me some interesting characters on screen.

Fair enough.  I think, for me, my attitude is also a product of my age.  Whereas I see all this gear as being incredible compared to the stuff I had to pay for in the past, new folks coming up focus more on the minute differences between cameras/brands; simply because those small'ish differences are the only things that separate one product from another.
So, it becomes not whether or not the camera can do good skin tones, but rather: is it easier to do it on one over the other?  On top of that, resolution capabilities are stunning, regardless.
I mean, here's a Panasonic cam that does 4k for $700.  Here's a Sony cam that does it for less than $1K.  It's all a candy store to me.  I'll pig-out on taffy or chocolate, doesn't matter.

All this going on and on about color --as if content creators could never make a good video without someone's skin tone looking like a Vermeer painting right off of the sensor.  C'mon, someone's skin tone should probably be the least of your worries with modern gear.  All of it is more than good enough. 
Sorry, I really shouldn't gripe and be an old fart about this.  
It's just that you're making interview videos for freaking YouTube.  If you have half a clue what you're doing... Sony is fine.  Panasonic is fine.  Canon is Fine.  Nikon is fine.  I mean, look what you're getting for less than 1K.  It's practically magic these days and it only costs a handful of beans.  Use it, make fun stuff, and be happy.
(Jeez, I'm seriously getting curmudgeonly about things these days.  Don't get old kids, it makes you cranky!) 
So anyway...I'd buy a G7... and why would you need a speed booster for talking head studio stuff? 

I'm on a film festival committee.  Trust me when I say almost all indy movies look really good these days.  IQ looks on par with just about anything.  Even work that has limited dynamic range still looks pretty impressive.
As for all the other stuff that's actually more important in making a narrative film... well, not so much.
So, if you think what camera you're shooting with is what's holding you back.  IMHO, you're wrong.  So, you pick up and use what you're going to pick up and use.  That's it.  Stop thinking about the limitations of it.  You made the choice, move on.  Now, make smart lighting decisions.  Get a good audio guy (for god's sake please do this), concentrate on telling a good story, and find some actors that can actually do so.
Trust me, no one's going to give two shit(es) if you're dynamic range in 10 stops or 13.  Your skin tone looks a little goofy?  Oh well, I forgive you if you're showing me some interesting characters on screen.

I'm on a film festival committee.  Trust me when I say almost all indy movies look really good these days.  IQ looks on par with just about anything.  Even work that has limited dynamic range still looks pretty impressive.
As for all the other stuff that's actually more important in making a narrative film... well, not so much.
So, if you think what camera you're shooting with is what's holding you back.  IMHO, you're wrong.  So, you pick up and use what you're going to pick up and use.  That's it.  Stop thinking about the limitations of it.  You made the choice, move on.  Now, make smart lighting decisions.  Get a good audio guy (for god's sake please do this), concentrate on telling a good story, and find some actors that can actually do so.
Trust me, no one's going to give two shit(es) if you're dynamic range in 10 stops or 13.  Your skin tone looks a little goofy?  Oh well, I forgive you if you're showing me some interesting characters on screen.

I'm on a film festival committee.  Trust me when I say almost all indy movies look really good these days.  IQ looks on par with just about anything.  Even work that has limited dynamic range still looks pretty impressive.
As for all the other stuff that's actually more important in making a narrative film... well, not so much.
So, if you think what camera you're shooting with is what's holding you back.  IMHO, you're wrong.  So, you pick up and use what you're going to pick up and use.  That's it.  Stop thinking about the limitations of it.  You made the choice, move on.  Now, make smart lighting decisions.  Get a good audio guy (for god's sake please do this), concentrate on telling a good story, and find some actors that can actually do so.
Trust me, no one's going to give two shit(es) if you're dynamic range in 10 stops or 13.  Your skin tone looks a little goofy?  Oh well, I forgive you if you're showing me some interesting characters on screen.

There's a lot of options because everyone's needs are different.  For instance, having something that delivers on set editing with relative ease makes the decision a bit more narrow.  I love camera gear and I love using the latest and greatest, but if you only have a small budget you make the decision and then move on.  Whatever you choose will have limitations.
The cool thing is, those limitations push your other skills.  And those other skills are the things that actually matter the most.  I look at using low-end gear as a kind of win-win situation.  Cheap, good IQ these days, and forces one to be much more considerate when shooting to eek out better shots.

I'm on a film festival committee.  Trust me when I say almost all indy movies look really good these days.  IQ looks on par with just about anything.  Even work that has limited dynamic range still looks pretty impressive.
As for all the other stuff that's actually more important in making a narrative film... well, not so much.
So, if you think what camera you're shooting with is what's holding you back.  IMHO, you're wrong.  So, you pick up and use what you're going to pick up and use.  That's it.  Stop thinking about the limitations of it.  You made the choice, move on.  Now, make smart lighting decisions.  Get a good audio guy (for god's sake please do this), concentrate on telling a good story, and find some actors that can actually do so.
Trust me, no one's going to give two shit(es) if you're dynamic range in 10 stops or 13.  Your skin tone looks a little goofy?  Oh well, I forgive you if you're showing me some interesting characters on screen.

I'm on a film festival committee.  Trust me when I say almost all indy movies look really good these days.  IQ looks on par with just about anything.  Even work that has limited dynamic range still looks pretty impressive.
As for all the other stuff that's actually more important in making a narrative film... well, not so much.
So, if you think what camera you're shooting with is what's holding you back.  IMHO, you're wrong.  So, you pick up and use what you're going to pick up and use.  That's it.  Stop thinking about the limitations of it.  You made the choice, move on.  Now, make smart lighting decisions.  Get a good audio guy (for god's sake please do this), concentrate on telling a good story, and find some actors that can actually do so.
Trust me, no one's going to give two shit(es) if you're dynamic range in 10 stops or 13.  Your skin tone looks a little goofy?  Oh well, I forgive you if you're showing me some interesting characters on screen.

I'm on a film festival committee.  Trust me when I say almost all indy movies look really good these days.  IQ looks on par with just about anything.  Even work that has limited dynamic range still looks pretty impressive.
As for all the other stuff that's actually more important in making a narrative film... well, not so much.
So, if you think what camera you're shooting with is what's holding you back.  IMHO, you're wrong.  So, you pick up and use what you're going to pick up and use.  That's it.  Stop thinking about the limitations of it.  You made the choice, move on.  Now, make smart lighting decisions.  Get a good audio guy (for god's sake please do this), concentrate on telling a good story, and find some actors that can actually do so.
Trust me, no one's going to give two shit(es) if you're dynamic range in 10 stops or 13.  Your skin tone looks a little goofy?  Oh well, I forgive you if you're showing me some interesting characters on screen.