j_one

I had a chance to test this, it does look like the extra green shadow noise introduced by the new autofocus is somewhat reduced by shooting at the higher base ISO 4000 if the situation allows for it. So shooting with an ND could work.

B&H and Adorama are my most trusted vendors for used stuff. Fun thing about Adorama is that almost all their used stuff on their site is also listed in their eBay store with a “Make offer” option so you’re able to buy things under list price. They’re pretty good about actually accepting offers, too. 

I’ve had very good luck buying and selling with MPB in the past, but you need to reallyyyy stress test stuff from them IMO. I’ve returned a couple items that I didn’t feel were listed correctly. Like, things I bought at “Excellent” that I would characterize as “Poor” or “Acceptable”. Still, there are some great deals there.

We all know that cameras produce (sometimes dramatically) different images and image quality, and yet we also know that within a given price range those same cameras typically use the same sensors from Sony and are recording to the same codecs in basically the same bitrates.  It's maddening!
So, WTF is going on?  
Well, I just came upon this talk below, which goes through and demonstrates some of the inner workings in greater detail than I had previously seen:
It's long, but here's my notes...
Firstly, how you de-mosaic / de-bayer the image really matters, with some algorithms being higher quality and require higher processing power:
(Click on the images to zoom in - quality isn't the best but the effects are visible)


If you're not shooting RAW then this will be done in-camera, and if your manufacturer skimped on the processor they put in there, this will be happening to your footage.
If the camera is scaling the image, then the quality of this matters too:

and if the scaling even gets done in the wrong colour space then it can really screw things up:

There's more discussions in there, especially around colour science which has been discussed to death, but I thought these might be illuminating as it's not something we get to see that much because it's buried in the camera and typically it's not something we can easily play with in the NLE.
All these add up to a fundamental principle that I have been gradually gravitating towards.
If you're shooting non-RAW then shoot in the highest resolution you can shoot in, and just un-sharpen (blur) the image in post.
Shooting in the highest resolution means that your camera will be doing the least downscaling (or none), and most glitches and bad processing will be at the pixel-level, which means that the higher the resolution the smaller those glitches and errors compared to the size of the image, and un-sharpening de-emphasises these in the footage.  
You might notice that all of these shortcomings make the footage sharper, not duller, so the errors have made your footage sharp but in a way that it never was - it's fictional sharpness.
Also, the more modern displays are also themselves becoming sharper, so it's no wonder that footage all now looks like those glitch websites from the late 90s that were trying to be cool but looked like a graphic designer threw up into them...

FilmLight (who make BaseLight which is the Resolve competitor that costs as much as a house) seem to be on a mission to get deeper into the image and bring along the industry on that journey, and I'm really appreciative of their efforts as they're providing more insight into things we can do to get better images and get more value from our limited budgets.

You asked about two specific cinema cameras - neither of which has stills capability - so what worthwhile opinion was there to influence when you weren't revealing 70% of the requirement ?
You have absolutely wasted the time of every well meaning person in this thread that was giving you very considered opinions not only on the two cameras that you originally requested a comparison of but also on many different similar alternatives that you might like to consider.
You then compounded this by encouraging more input on different types of camera that you knew would only meet 30% of your needs and would therefore not be suitable.
There were two points at which you should have mentioned that 70% of what you wanted this camera for wouldn't be covered by a cinema camera - the first time was in the original post and the second time was when anyone mentioned any other cinema camera that doesn't do stills.
If you had mentioned the stills requirement then you would have got responses for at least these three high end hybrids.
Sony a1
Nikon Z8/9
Fujifilm GFX100/II
The first two of these you did get recommendations for (the a1 was the very first reply) and interestingly didn't respond to at all when they are the only two cameras that have been mentioned in the thread that fulfil what you knew that you needed.
And, lo and behold, the last one is the one you've now bought.
I even said in my recommendation of the Z8/Z9 that "Naturally, if you do decide to shoot the odd still with it then it rinses every cinema camera out there at that particular task".
Did you not think that might have been an opportune moment to say "actually, I have to admit that I do need a still capability" instead of letting the debate go on a few more pages with people blissfully unaware they were wasting their time on the finer points of cinema cameras that would in no way be able to meet your requirements ?
If you had come to realise that it was a hybrid that you needed throughout the course of the discussion in the thread then thats one thing but to know that from the get go and not state it then or at any point subsequently is another thing entirely.
I hope you enjoy your GFX100II and it will certainly service the real needs that you have now revealed that you actually have pretty well but you owe an apology to everyone on this thread that you have clearly abused the goodwill of.

Sorry to hear about your medical issues and great to hear you are on the road to recovery.
I echo your thoughts about this place.
My last few weeks have been spent at my Mother’s bedside as she drifted away to her passing.
In times like that of huge change and trauma we look for constants to keep us connected to “normal” life.
In that respect, checking into here every now and again to find everyone having the same circular arguments was oddly comforting.
And I honestly mean that with love.

Global shutter is cool and all, but not having it really hasn't impacted my work given how good RS has gotten. 
I see this as being a much bigger deal for photography than video. 

Sports is the main target for the A9 III for Sony and the reason they went global shutter. Lots of pesky LED advertising signs which can cause banding, lots of fast action at the end of long lenses, fast pans, and also sometimes the need for complete discreetness and silence, no mechanical shutter or flash.
So for sports photography, they are getting ahead of the Canon EOS R3.
Also the very fast burst rates, small size of the body, smaller lenses (sort of) put it ahead of any mechanical shutter camera or 1D X Mark III.
They want to challenge Canon's dominance in football, F1, olympics and so on. Big money riding on it.
I think in this regard it is really well targeted and innovative, it's just a bonus that they eliminate rolling shutter for filmmakers as well, but not as big a deal for us as it is for sports shooters.

The lens itself. The compact body was just a bonus.

With the success of the x100v, I wonder why there hasn't been a large sensor compact refresh from Panny. The LX100 ii was barely an update too, I just don't understand...its one of my favorite cameras.

With the success of the x100v, I wonder why there hasn't been a large sensor compact refresh from Panny. The LX100 ii was barely an update too, I just don't understand...its one of my favorite cameras.

I'd love to see an update to the LX100. Add IBIS and PDAF, maybe ruggedize the body a bit, more modern video specs, tilt screen, bam.
Maybe offer a vlog variant where the screen tilts but can also flip up over the top of the cam (like some of the RX100 versions do), with a 16-35 or 20-50 equiv lens.

The camera integration tips the balance for me towards the ATEM family, particularly with the release of the new Micro Studio 4K G2 camera.
For under $4000 you can have four of them that are timecode locked and they can be fully controlled from the ATEM not just for colour and exposure but focus and zoom (with the inexpensive powered zooms from Olympus and Panasonic).
With the integration with Resolve, the ATEM ISOs and these cameras give you three products to sell to a client from one job.
The 1080p live stream The 1080p master recording of the live stream. A re-cut version of the live stream in either 1080p or 4K. The last one is interesting because with any manufacturers camera you can just bring in the ISO recordings and re-cut them in Resolve (as the ATEM generates a Resolve project with the cuts in it) but with the BMD cameras gives you the option to bring in the 4K BRAW recordings from the cameras own recordings.
When used with the ATEM, the BMD cameras can provide a 'video mode' output through the HDMI for the live switching whilst simultaneously recording their own 'cinema mode' versions to SSD.
This is a great option for doing live videos for bands as they get the 'video' version for the live stream and the possibility of a more cinematic looking version from the recut BRAW files.
The ATEM Mini Pro ISO is a bit limited so I would definitely recommend going for the ATEM Mini Extreme ISO not just for the extra four channels but also the additional media player and the SuperSource function which offers a lot of creative and practical possibilities.
The drawbacks with the ATEM are in the animated CG and video player aspects.
The former you can get around fairly easily with software such as Uno Overlays etc and the latter can be addressed using BMD's HyperDeck record/playback devices.
The cheapest of these, the newish HyperDeck Shuttle HD, is interesting in the role of producing live sports as with some inexpensive additional hardware splitters you can coax it into being a very decent instant replay system complete with tactile jog/shuttle control.
For around $6500 then, you can have an eight channel switcher with ISO recording and streaming, four timecode synced RAW shooting 4K cameras with full remote control and three channels of instant replay.
Unlike the Tricaster TC40 that I used to own (which was nowhere near being even half the functionality of this system let alone how much more its modern equivalent will cost) it will also all fit comfortably in a Peli 1510 case rather than an 8u flight case and is a fraction of the weight ! 
Another thing that people tend to overlook about the ATEM Mini series is that it has an excellent fully fledged Fairlight mixer in it with EQ and Dynamics on every channel including the Master channel.  Its mind boggling really how much of a value that is as they didn't really need to make it that comprehensive !
Don't get me wrong, the ATEM system isn't perfect but it is a very good eco system to start a business around.
And you never know, maybe one of these days someone might release a product that integrates a few more things to make it even more useful......

It's crazy how they go for $4k used now. Or maybe it's not so crazy, I often forget how much time has passed (it's already 2024?) but it's a great value. I'd be tempted to switch too. By the way, eva1 secondhand prices are even more insane now.
I struggle with the idea of having kit that would get me hired more easily, or at least be "recognizable" by name vs someone asking "what's a varicam?". Hell at least they'll know what an ursa mini is despite its reputation as a lower end camera/brand. I think that's what pushed me to lean towards the ursa vs the eva1 when I started.
For corporate it seems FX line dominates, some Canon. Narrative, its any Alexa with some Venice here and there. Commercial, it's a toss up between any of the big players, including Komodo/Raptor/C300. So I came to the conclusion that if you don't have the trending models in your kit then your strategy to be hired as an owner op by camera model alone is almost a moot point, and you should just get a baseline camera package that YOU prefer and works for your lower-end jobs where renting isn't even in the conversation.

The ability to edit my message timed out, so adding my final sentence here:
 Those times I come across the FX6/FX9 are: very occasionally on ultra low budget shorts films I do (but it's unusual! It's more normal to see a non-Mini ARRI, or a Blackmagic camera), or low budget adverts, or corporates, or reality tv shoots. 
Which while I do those types of shoots as well now or then, I do however tend to do narrative more often. 
Edit: ohhhh... I forgot Sony VENICE! Worked on a small number of those, and of course that's LF format. 
Maybe if I exclusively worked on high end productions, then perhaps I might have seen a brief period of time of a year or two when the majority I worked on was either Sony VENICE or ARRI Mini LF. 
But because I work such a massively broad range of productions from low budget, to medium budget, to high budget then there was always a mix of original ARRI Mini / other ARRIs /  FS7 / URSA Mini / Komodo / Gemini / etc making sure that S35 was still frequently in the mix! 
 

I work on productions with ARRI cameras all the time. REDs etc less often. Because on the high end RED doesn't exist much. And in the mid range RED struggles against the massive popularity of Sony FX series (or  before that the Sony FS7. Or
to a lesser extent, Blackmagic). Peak popularity for RED was in the distant past, it isn't now in 2023. 
Have worked on only a handful using one of the ARRI LF cameras (usually the Mini LF), a small enough number I could count it on my fingers. 
The standard Alexa Mini was still by far the most massively popular option (or one of the other ARRIs if it was a lower budget production, & couldn't afford a Mini). 
At least that was my personal experience over the last few years. 
Rather oddly, Panasonic Varicam (full size or LT) would be in my top three cameras I most commonly work with. (first and second being the ARRI Mini & Sony FS7, although I don't see a FS7 around so often in the last couple of years) Fourth place might go to the Blackmagic URSA Mini. 
However, Panasonic Varicam is only so "popular" in my personal rankings because there is one particular production company (which is massive) that I've worked for quite a lot, and they seem to like it on their shows. I for instance just got home from booming on location for a tv series using 2x Panasonic Varicam S35. Next couple of days I'll be in the studio, and they'll be using three Panasonic Varicam S35 cameras!
I'm quite sure however my experience is fairly atypical, and for others the Panasonic Varicam won't even rate in their top twenty cameras they have worked with in recent years. 
And no point was LF ever a popular format I came across! Unless it was an absolutely no budget at all production using a Sony a7S or similar as their A Cam, or a micro budget production using the a7S (or similar) as their B / C Cam. 
There were not a tonne of Mini LFs around (although I'll admit the seemed to have brief flash moment of popularity). RED Monstros I've almost never worked with. REDs are just not that common. (I've worked with the RED Komodo though on a handful of productions). Sony FX6/FX9 have got a fair bit of popularity, but I'd say mainly because they're the natural successor to the FS7 and not because they're LF.  However I only seem to work with them occasionally. I guess because I'm more in the narrative world, and FX6/FX9 are super rare in that, unless it is ultra low budget. 

Sorry I meant Venice II
 
From: https://www.xdcam-user.com/2021/11/sony-launches-venice-ii/
 
 

The internals are all fantastic, but I don't understand why they've muddied the waters so much by using the Pocket 6K Pro body. The whole philosophy Grant talked about just screams for it to be a traditional video camera form factor.
 
...the app seems really cool though!
 

I’ll preface this by saying that that is some spec and it will likely be a very decent camera.
However….
A smaller sensor inside a smaller body with smaller lenses at a smaller price was the whole raison d’etre of the Micro Four Thirds system.
The clue was right there in the name.
Panasonic seems to have looked what BMW has done since it acquired the Mini and thought “yeah, that’s the path for us too”.
In a world where their own full frame S5ii exists, let alone the compact APS-C feature laden cameras from all the other manufacturers, I don’t get where they are coming from with their latter day MFT releases and, in my opinion, they have completely lost their way with the system, particularly in terms of attracting new adopters.
Even for the old guard, you’d have to be pretty attached to that native lens collection to go in again.
Panasonic seem to have a borderline kinky reluctance to refresh the two cameras that would actually cause a resurgence in the ideology of the system as well as sales.
Namely, the GX80 and the LX100.
Putting a mic jack on them and giving them 10 bit 4:2:2 internal and VLOG would be a piece of piss for Panasonic and they could sell them all day long at their equivalent launch prices.
They might have to push the boat out and put IBIS in the LX but I don’t even think that is a deal breaker.
I’m at loss to where they are getting their market research from that’s telling them there is. Bigger demand for small sensor cameras in large sensor bodies at large sensor prices.
 

4k60p record times seem decent for this kind of body considering past Sony track record. And to complain about overheating when recording 4k120p for long periods of time...I really cannot think of any common shooting scenario where one would need to be doing that reliably.
I also can understand the philosophy of urging manufacturers to sell cameras that just don't overheat at all. My older iPhone overheats and slows to a crawl in these record-breaking summer temps. I don't cut Apple slack for that so I guess its only fair to give my professional camera tools the same treatment.
Still though. Yeah, don't make excuses for engineers cutting corners in heat-dissipation (for whatever reasons they do it for), but also, SIR, really, why are you recording 4k120 for that long? 60p sure...

Just to share a little personal story - the S5 II really restored my fun in shooting little personal video's. I shoot almost daily for work and I always swore by large cinema camera's. I'm one of those crazy people that thinks an Ursa mini is the perfect body shape. (part of this is copied from a Reddit comment I made earlier but I thought it would be interesting to share here).
For the longest time I was really torn up between having a kit that is able to capture what I consider to be professional quality and something that I actually would WANT to bring with me on a walk or a day out. I carried a little Pocket 4k (GREAT camera) with me, but by the time you rig that out to shoot comfortably with a monitor/filter holder/NDs/mic, you’re still carrying something that takes up most of your bag and it just sucked the fun out of it for me. On a job, no problem, for home video’s it just wasn’t worth it for me. I was really looking for something I could just pull out of a bag pack and shoot.
So then I bought a Canon R6, and honestly that camera’s video quality was such a massive step back from even the Pocket 4k that it just wasn’t worth it for me (esp. dynamic range but also the out of camera colors). Also just awful awful video assist tools on that camera.
The S5 II kinda hits all the marks for me: very small, good enough dynamic range, good colors, good monitoring tools and good AF (better than the R6 in my opinion) on my EF lenses. That last thing (combined with it being newer, so longer firmware support) pushed me over the edge when compared to the S1H by the way. I don’t mind pulling manual focus at all, but if I’m shooting on a 3 inch screen, the AF is really nice to have. Never felt like I could really trust it with the R6 but the S5 II has really really good autofocus.

Here's somethign small I shot with it:
 

Drum roll please....
I've finally got around to creating and releasing a LUT that gives accurate colour on the S5II and S5IIx. Big thanks to @Andrew Reid for allowing me to post about this.
It's available here:
https://lumasweet.com/shop/p/lumasweetlifelikes5ii

I'll get around to doing a write up on it at some stage. In the meantime, here's a YT video (don't laugh!) that I made about it. This might also be of interest to anyone who's interested in camera colour science in general, even if you don't have this camera.
 
 

And final decision made…
The S1H is staying and the S5IIX going back without breaking the seals of the packaging never mind the box.
I went into this weekends 3 day shoot edging towards the 3 identical camera body approach, which I would prefer in principle, plus smaller, lighter, faster, newer has certain benefits, but…
The S1H is just too good a stills camera. Yes, stills.
It’s meant to be ‘The Video One’ but actually excels as a stills camera for shooting people and events because it’s that little bit less critically sharp than the others without The OLPF.
And then there is build, the ergos, the feel of the thing to use and the shutter sound is just sublime.
The S5ii by comparison feels and sounds tinny. 
So decision made. I can’t sell or not use the best camera I have ever used. At least not until a genuine replacement comes along. When or if that happens, but otherwise the S1H is being reconfigured in my line up as principal stills with occasional video and the S5ii’s becoming more video specific and less stills.
Same kit, just re-jiggled about a bit!
I think the gimbal is going though. Just not getting any real use out of it and the S5ii is pretty good in that department for my limited needs.

So after what can only be described as a Devon Loch moment (ask your Dad) in the absolutely nailed on not going to change my mind purchase of a Nikon Z8, I now find myself joining you as a fellow Panasonic S5ii owner.
I had been struggling with the sunk cost fallacy aspect of buying the Z8 as a way of stopping my collection of pro Nikon glass collecting dust in the Peli cases but eventually bit the bullet and accepted reality.
The Z8 would indeed have given them an extended life but I’m not going to be hauling big f2.8 teles and zooms around with me any more so would you have eventually have to have caved and built up a Z mount collection to go with it.
Financially, that would be out of the question anyway and I couldn’t ignore the value proposition of the S5ii route.
So, after a bit of judicious choice of a combination of used and new offers and bundles, I’ve managed to acquire all of the following for roughly the same price as the Z8 and one of its Cf cards.
Panasonic S5ii
Panasonic 20-60mm f3.5-5.6
Panasonic 35mm f1.8
Panasonic 50mm f1.8
Panasonic 85mm f1.8
Sigma MC-21 EF-L adapter
Sigma 16-28mm f2.8
Sigma EVF for my Fp
As I have other L mount cameras (Leica SL and Sigma Fp) this collection will benefit all of them.
As I say, the value of getting not just a camera but three fast-ish primes, a very interesting kit zoom, a fast ultra wide zoom, the EF adapter and the long awaited completing part of my Fp puzzle couldn’t be ignored.
And all of them are light and compact compared to what I would’ve been rocking on the Z8.
Essentially, I went in for what I thought at my age might be a forever camera and walked out with my forever lens mount instead.
First impressions are that I don’t know enough about it yet to have any. It’s not to say I haven’t used it but it’s on all default settings, I haven’t really read the manual and I’m here on holiday so I haven’t/won’t put in the work to have a better  feel for it.
I’ll also defer judgement until after the imminent firmware update.
On a surface level, I’ve found the IBIS to be fairly impressive but the AF, whilst a huge leap forward over other L mount cameras that I’ve got, can be a bit of a mixed bag in lower light, particularly the face detect.
Again, I’ve got everything on default so I’m sure it can be tuned to be better.
What I will say as well is that the Sigma 16-28mm f2.8 is worth a look for anyone contemplating it.
 

Things used to be a lot more conventional. Films tended to carry the look of the film stock they were shot on. Nowadays it is easy to go crazy with exposure as you have a 100% accurate monitor to reference. On top of that everything is digitally color graded to the point where it can be hard to tell what camera they were shot on. Though I can still often tell as the sensor/color of the camera often seems to shine through the manipulation. That isn't always the case of course.

But regardless it's all just personal preference. Take Roger Deakins for instance. He prefers to do everything in camera, where as others will do a large amount in post.

But in terms of the Alexa having a clean image I agree to some extent. At least compared to film it is cleaner, higher dynamic range(maybe), and probably sharper. That is just taking into consideration the Alexa Classic sensor. These are all conclusions Deakins had after shooting with the Classic on his first digital film "In Time". His word isn't God but he certainly had his fair share of experience shooting 35mm film content. I have never shot on 35mm film only for photography.

That is a 12 year old camera, now we have higher resolutions from ARRI, 3.2k, 4.5k, or 6k rather than 2.8k, RAW recording, even higher dynamic range.

But what I will say is at base iso of 800 the Alexa Classic isn't particularly clean. I tend to shoot 200-400 when I want really clean footage. That said it has a nice clean texture, meaning the noise is pretty consistent, lacking in color noise unless you really under expose badly. I rate the Alexa at 1600 iso, which again isn't clean but it's pleasant. That gives you 7 stops of highlight latitude but not much in underexposure. Most other cameras fair worse.

Deakins commented on cameras looking too digital. He doesn't care much for emulating film but did admit the Alexa has a natural texture and if that were to go away you might be left with something too clinical and lifeless. I guess the Alexa 35 has in camera textures which I guess solves that issue.

Deakins was one of the first to embrace digital and pretty much immediately conclude that it is superior to film, at least for him. I still look at 35mm film as the golden standard. I was brought up on it and there is something magical about it for me. In someways I was brought up on Alexa ALEV3 as well. Most of my favorite modern films were shot with that sensor tech.

There are some cinematographers noticing that the Alexa 35 Alev4 sensor/pipeline feels more digital. The motion rendering, the color science. ARRI has always been known for giving true to life looking colors with nice skintones. But compared to the newer sensor the starting point on the ALEV3 cameras does have a look to it. I assume it is similar to what Blackmagic did between the older and newer cameras like you mentioned. Going from a kodak 2383 to a standard rec709 look.

I suppose the option to actually shoot on film for people like me will always be there, assuming the budget allows. I've heard some very experienced cinematographers comment on how they can't seem to get the same look from digital as they do film. That may be them showing their age. Tools like Dehancer have made it a lot easier to emulate that look. I will admit I have seen a few videos that were incredibly well done in terms of film emulation. Although I would say they are the minority. I just prefer to get it in camera especially considering I am often not involved in post. Again that is just me and I am in the minority.


 

NOT = Neither Nikon nor Sony
I made the decision to go with the S5ii for very dull and practical reasons that I’ll elaborate on in a new thread.