mercer

The headline feature of XV10 is that it's 4K. Yet, footage after footage that's been posted to date has been soft, like it's a HD DSLR. Still, we have have ardent supporters ignoring both the specs and the results and vigorously defending it. It's either an overpowering brand loyalty or a contrarian attitude that simply wants to go against the majority view. Reminds me of an evolution debate where the creationist hears a five minute listing of facts supporting evolution and responds with "I don't believe it." Touche. Seems pointless to engage in XC10 discussions till we have much more footage/results/experiences.

​In my opinion these are the main reasons against the a5100:-to small for my hands
-body is getting pretty hot after using it in video mode after only 3 minutes
-no function buttons, you have to configure everything over the menu
-no external mic jack
-no view finder
 

I'm still a beginner and do not have a lot of experience, but these features are pretty important and the a5100 dont have it.

You can select individual clips and transcode them. I'll look again to see if there's an option to transcode the clips in the timeline automatically. You could be right though that it transcodes the entire original file, (not just the section in the timeline).

I'm not sure though that transcoding is even necessary. The only time I've ever seen it remove codec issues was with the mark 1 omd em-5 footage, which would become really macro-blocky sometimes if you edited it natively. With other cams I've occasionally tested this, transcoding one clip in the timeline but not the others, and I've never been able to see a difference. I guess if your media is fast enough to handle the increased amount of data, then editing transcoded footage should be lighter on the processor. But I'm always amazed at how well fcpx performs, even on lowend laptops. I was playing with someone else's 100 Mbit GH4 footage, and even that worked ok on the Air.

About transcoding, if your NLE takes XAVC-S natively (which it probably does, it's a pretty supported codec by now)  Nothing beats editing and grading the native file, only transcode when your computer is not powerful enough to edit the native footage so ProRes/DNxHD is much lighter for the machine. Transcoding is a cumbersome process that takes time and effort and is best avoided if you can edit the native files. 

I've just checked my settings, I have transcoding turned off for import in FCPX. I think it's just the clips that I drop into the timeline that get transcoded (although.... when I look at video info for a clip in the timeline it says that only the original is available)

Fcpx transcodes everything to prores on import anyway. I'm curious, why do you want to transcode before import? XAVCS in fcpx is seamless, even on the lowest spec MacBook Air.

​Bigger sensor but also bigger megapixel count.. so the noise and DR is about the same in both cameras. 

The evf on the GX7 is pretty crap imo but because its tiltable you can actually use it in a unique way by getting a Manfrotto Pixi http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81M38qFcN-L._SL1500_.jpg you can rest the legs against your chest and rotate the camera's EVF up so you can look into it comfortably and get stable shots.

That's how this was made

 

It isn't a second camera for a C300/500 since the image quality is dramatically inferior. That pretty much destroys it's supposed main advantage.

Shooting in HD limits you to 50 mbps at 60p, and 35 mbps at 30p. Something like the NX1 can shoot HD at 80mbps at 60p, and 60 mbps at 30p, using a more efficient codec. Some of the bandwidth of the XC10 will be sacrificed to support 10 bits and 4:2:2 as well, so relatively speaking even more resolution information is lost. The Canon codec isn't "broadcast approved" either, it is simply a format that can be readily transcoded, that is all. But so can all of the other codecs out there.

The Ministry of Aerial Muggle Affairs

Can I use xavcs for 60p on the a5100?

There are many ''algorithms'' for downsampling, and the best ones (cubic & Lanczos) are used in your NLE when you put 4K footage on a 1080p timelime or when you render 4K timeline to 1080p. Don't worry there isn't a better way. 

​Fair enough! 
If you're invested in FD stuff already, an FD 50mm is your best bet. It's a beautiful lens and will match what you already have. However, it is not usable at f/1.4. At all. I tried it at a concert once, and the footage was lousy with purple halos. Completely unusable. The Rokkor 1.4/50 is much better wide open if that's how you're looking to shoot. 

​Wow, nice test! Parfocal (or close enough as makes no difference), very little breathing, and that great low-con FD look. 
I went with the 35-105, but now I'm considering replacing it with the 35-70. The 35-105's a nice lens and focuses relatively close but at the cost of being a fat as **** chunk of glass. Nice and fast on a speedbooster though, and that range can't be beat for run and gun. 

​If you're looking for a shorter focal length with shallower DoF on M4/3, you might consider the 25mm f/0.95 from SLR Magic. It can be had for less than $500 used, it's incredibly well-built, and it has the nicest bokeh I've ever seen. A little low contrast and "glowy" at f/0.95, but better than the Voigtlander. It sharpens up nicely at f/1.4--and that's for stills. I happily use it wide open for 1080p video. If you'd like me to shoot some portrait tests for you, I can probably find some time later today if I can find a willing subject who isn't too hungover from 4th of July. In the meantime, here's a stills comparison against some vintage stuff and the Voigtlander. http://3d-kraft.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=137:adorable-25s-25mm-f095-speed-lens-comparison-on-lumix-gh3&catid=40:camerasandlenses&Itemid=2

If you want a longer focal length, SLR Magic offers a 35mm f/0.95 as well, and the 35mm f/1.4 has amazing bokeh too. Take a look at Flickr and see what you think. I'm a huge fan of these lenses for video, and recommend them to everyone shooting M4/3. Amazing bokeh, good sharpness, fast apertures, decent prices, and they have this inexplicable 3D look that's incredibly cinematic. It must have something to do with its sharpness characteristics combined with low global contrast, but it produces the closest rendering to actual PL cinema glass of anything in its market. 

Thanks.  I'm more of primes guy myself, but that lens on a speed booster could be a nice option for fast production during a narrative film shoot.  Lots of decent options with the FD's for sure.  

​Yeah, strictly m43 vids; a set-up for interview shots.  Usually I carry around a FF Canon and a 50mm specifically for the talking head stuff, but was thinking about alternatives that might satisfy me --so I can stick with one cam throughout a shoot; interview and b-roll... and I like the longer portrait focal length, 70-90'ish-mm, so a 50 lens on a speedbooster seems intriguing.

Of course, the extreme shallow DOF of Full-Frame allows some ease when making interview shots looks really nice, so anything that gets me into a similar aesthetic would be the goal.

The lens turbo is cheap as are FD lenses, so I might experiment and see.  It's not a hefty investment.  If I don't like it I can always re-sell I suppose.

​I was just looking at video samples from the LX100 and am pretty amazed!! For the price it seems almost too good to be true! 
I was planning, if the work keeps up for another year - I get a job every month or so and they pay well enough - to upgrade properly, and I was hoping the loaner camera I had would stay in my possession that long  Now that it's going away and I have to have a quick solution I am still considering that upgrade, but may have to wait say 18 months. But then if it was still going like this I could afford to drop 4-5k on a camera/lens and get something proper for the long run. So to speak.

The LX100 seems pretty perfect though! Thanks so much for that suggestion!