Hitfabryk

also inspiring... "Hands of Bresson" depicts the way robert bresson films peoples hands...pure poetry in motion.
 
 
 

​I just thought your initial post was "challenging", which is fine. Everybody needs to be challenged. Your input into these topics are very useful (sometimes beyond my brain receptors) so thank you. I thought lafilm's reply was inappropriate and could of potentially fuelled a few emotions of the more opinionated members. Everyone makes mistakes when they get angry eh?
Ebrahim is a top guy, he is spot on. Topics like this are important to follow for the technical check-list - I'm trying to make a buying decision and this post involves those very cameras. 
These camera are very very close in DR. What matters is the price difference as per performance. Great sign for the future! 

What JCS said was challenging, but lafilm has made it much worse with his comments, there is no need for such confrontational attitudes from anyone. Especially in that tone. It's fair for people to judge from their own conclusions, different eyes see different things. At least be civil about it. 
 

​Make's a lot of sense, I like the natural as well as the filmic look. Thanks for posting.

​I'm thinking exactly the same thing. I love the C100 with recorder. Always wanted the 1dc(too much $). Thinkin now of settling for A7s but if I can get a similar price on a c100......hmmm

If only one lens for the A7S, the Sony SEL18200 (18-200mm F3.5-6.3) is excellent. Autofocus, IS, complete zoom range for just about every shot. If zooming while shooting, auto ISO works well. F3.5-6.3 isn't an issue as the camera works well at higher ISOs. Here's what the A7S+SEL18200 looks like in low light, with many different light colors, at 1080p60 (slowed to 24p in post). This is an APS-C lens, so not full frame, however this works well for handheld as rolling shutter is reduced.
For full frame and shallower DOF, the Canon 24-105 F4L looks great. Lots of folks report the Commlite adapter at ~$99 works well (or at least as good as MB). Getting a nice prime in the F1.2-2.0 range is also worth it for super shallow DOF. Used Nikon fast prime lens are pretty popular for the price (Nikon to NEX adapters are also low cost). If you want to do much still photography, consider Sony FE primes so you'll get autofocus (e.g. Sony-Zeiss 55mm F1.8).

The 24-105 on the Sony is going to auto focus slower than it would on a native Canon.  You already sold the NX1 for workflow issues, which should tell you something   It looks like you RUN a recording studio, so will you have time to manually set focus, exposure, etc.  I can tell you that using two system, I have Sonys and Panasonics ruins many shots for me because my 53-year-old brain doesn't move between menu systems as well as it used to.  What I've learned in the last couple of weeks is these cameras, as nice as Cine-D and s-log might be, are NOT RAW cameras. You have to have the experience and skill to set exposure EXACTLY RIGHT.  There is little you can do in post.  In short, getting the right exposure on your GM1 or EM1 will do more than having an A7S improperly exposed.   The Sony's have fantastic auto-focus in good light, but I find they struggle indoors.  The Panasonics too.  Again, if you're going to manually do everything IGNORE all this.  But if you have to be realistic, pick one camera platform and get lenses that are made to autofocus with the camera and you have image stabilization.

Maybe the winner, is in the centre of the picture..The GH4 ..easy to use..great 1080p, 4K inside, APS-C option (speed booster), light weight, weather sealed , battery life, al lot of users..new firmware updates will come and also very very nice..it's only 1500,-  I have seen so much good footage coming from a GH4.. that we do not have to call it or lets say that it doesn't have to be 'video like'! 

​Thanks again JCS,
I will give it a good thought..
Already wish you a happy new year .

i think this is going to be the year of the dragon. 
Happy 2015!

Hello Hitfabryk
maybe you are paying too much attention on the camera? I recently discovered my GH3 can shine when paired with the right lenses. And I never really liked the image of the GH3 so much compared to the GH2. Therefore I will upgrade to GH4 as this can serve as a reliable camera for usual hopefully. I just think that the lense has a significant influence on the image and not only the sensor?! 

 

You always use post, but the material you take into post affects where you can go, and how far.
Canon starts off very over warm, but there's a lot of wiggle room to remove that, so I like it. With others I find it hard to convincingly add that warmth if I want it, so I like Canon quite a lot.
Arri just nailed it for natural "do anything go anywhere" skin, amazing. So really the Alexa and Amira are the winners, at a price. That's one reason why so much film, TV, advertising, drama, so much everything are shot on them.
Red is good too, though there's sometimes a funny green/magenta tint that I find hard to knock out in a consistent way in post. I find it less forgiving.
Sony is very cool feeling but quite Kodak'y so not at all bad I don't think, just different. The rest I don't really have the experience to call.
That's my two pence from my experience, but YMMV of course!

No, not my work, just examples of color grading that make "ideal skin tone" seem somewhat irrelevant.  
My point is this:  I'm not looking for a camera that offers the best skin tone.  I'm saying all modern cameras are pretty good and with color grading you can pull it into your preference anyway.
If you agree with that assertion, then why worry so much about skin tone to begin with?
If you disagree with that premise I'm genuinely interested why.  I accept that I may be off the mark here.  
As for my videos, there's nothing in there where I'm upset with skin tone color. 
 

The 24-105 has a lot of distortion on full frame. The Sigma 24-105 (new version) is better anyway. Much sharper.
Consider the 24-70mm F2.8 or older 28-70mm F2.8 intsead.

Hitfabryk- the GH4 makes an excellent 4K studio camera! The Natural picture profile is a great place to start. Cine-D and -V also have their uses.
Max- I find it helpful when starting a new project to try out all the cameras to see how they perform for the conditions. It's not just the lighting, but also the color of light reflected from the environment- "the radiance map" (especially important for green/blue screen work). Try all the picture profiles with the A7S- the results may surprise you.
The A7S is a decent stills camera (Canon 50mm F1.4, Metabones NEX to EF IV, Sony RAW, processed with ACR):

And with a little extra work with profiles for video (based on the conditions- there isn't one profile for everything), the A7S looks pretty good. The 5D3 with Neutral/Faithful and GH4 with Natural profiles work pretty well in many conditions (PP6 comes closest with the A7S). If the 5D4 gets 4K and 60p (at least for full-res 1080p), we'll have a competitive, solid all-around still/video camera (not having autofocus for Canon lenses on the A7S is challenging).

Nice colors, good edit and a lot of great shots..but those shakes ..to much for me. Probably a wonderful trip. Peace.
 

Found this analysis of Cine-D on the GH4 which I think explains the problem very well.
http://blog.josephmoore.name/2014/11/05/why-cine-d-sucks/
 

​The 1D C was £12,000 in the UK inc VAT when it came out. You expect me to have the same opinion now it is £5k and sitting on my desk, isn't that just a BIT silly!?

Thanks, I already have the $10 photo version.  I can get Premiere for $20 a month (but doesn't include after effects, do I really need that?  I won't be doing special effects).  I might be able to get the $30 version because I own a copy of CS 6.  I don't want to create any more threads than I have to, so here's some video footage I shot recently.  Nothing great, but if you're like me, ANY footage from different cameras is interesting.
 
 

If you're shooting bands, definitely the A7S. Clean lowlight is very helpful, the 50Mbps 1080p files are small, high quality, and easy to edit. The A7S with the Sony SEL18200 lens makes a great run & gun / documentary camera using IS, AutoFocus, AutoISO, and if radically changing lighting colors, AutoWB. When used with full frame lenses and all manual settings, shots can look filmic, and if using a tweaked color profile, careful manual white balance, broad-spectrum lighting, and a little post work, skin tones can look decent.

For low light, try tweaking PP3 and PP4. For brighter light, try tweaking PP5 & PP6. For very bright, high dynamic range shots, tweak PP7 (start with changing Color Mode from S Gamut to Pro, Rec709, or Cinema). Gammas CINE1, CINE2, and SLOG2 are good for bright light, CINE3, CINE4, REC709 are better for normal or low light, Color Modes Cinema and Rec709 look nice for skin tones, Pro is a decent balance of skin tones and scene colors. 
I've been using the GH4 mostly for greenscreen and outdoor/nature/landscape in bright light shots only. For up close work, Canon 5D3 (H.264) looks very nice for skin tones, and the softness lends to a filmic look. When more detail and color is desired, 5D3 ML RAW is the best deal available right now. If you also need high quality stills, 5D3 hands down. Looking forward to seeing what Canon does with the 5D4!
More A7S skintones (stock PP6 with post work in Premiere Pro CC):

http://brightland.com/w/delta-bts/
 

Would be ideal if you'd happen to know someone with a GH4 and/or A7S willing to let you borrow it... but I guess that's not the case?
Well... then renting is always a thing of course. Or purchasing and sending back the one you don't like, if the store's policy allows that sorta thing.
The E-M1 isn't thát bad. But for video, even though the E-M1 has IBIS, I just find the GH4 to be a much nicer tool.
(Expat NL-er. )

Hi!

Some scenes shot at the famous Juhu chowpatty in Mumbai, India using my then recently acquired GH4 and 12-35 lumix lens. Would like some critical feedback. 

New to the world of movie making, so be critical but not harsh. 

Thanks! 
 
 

Seems like everybody is still a little hungover from all the eggnog. We get sidetracked and offended by these little things a little easily.
Actually Andrew is quite right. Color IS subjective and as long as you end up with something you like and that's what matters, then that's what matters. Atleast, creatively speaking. If you're gonna show it to the whole wide world and want to be as accurate as possible, whatever that means, then what you think 'looks nice' may indeed not be all that likeable to your general targeted audience. My feedback would be the same as the peepz above and prefer the GH4 in this particular 'test'. To my taste the A6000 footage is too bright/washed out, too desaturated/flat, too magenta/blue. In contrast, the GH4 seems a bit too saturated and tends to be rather yellow/orangy. This also isn't much of a test if you don't try to match the footage. Also you have some very mixed lighting going on which doesn't help the cause. Putting your test footage side by side is nice, but now try to make 'em the same. Shoot using comparable settings and profiles, then look at the vectorscope(w/ skintone indicator)/waveform and get 'em as close as you can. Some quick correcting like this youngster kid did in the video shown here will do (2:02+ just so happen that the base video was too yellow as well and the camera to be matched was a little too bright/washed out, much like your A6000 footage was imho). Now compare the two to see which has the slight edge. Because the GH4 and A6000 have to be much closer than I'm seeing back in your video.
Anyways, it's not an easy subject and I'm still in the process of figuring this all out myself too. Just keep playing around and try a bunch of stuff. And don't forget. Sometimes we look at our screens too long. Sometimes it helps bringing a loved one or friend in for a 2nd opinion. They might not know much about tech and parameters, but they know what they like! Also just having a good night sleep and look at it with fresh eyes in the morning helps a lot. I know it all too well that I look at something the next day and go 'dear lord, what was I thinking?'. xD

One more vote for the GH4.