DayRaven

Panasonic GX8. The stabilisation is good with Panny lenses, particularly in 1080.  The audio is very good and the continuous autofocus and face detection is excellent. This camera continues to surprise me with its versatilty and excellent image quality.

Hey guys, just joined here. The main reason being that there are many users here who seem to  see the magic in the 5DII and III when it comes to skin tones and people. I find lots Sony fans just love the specs and detail. Anyway, I did love the a6300 image and wanted to test it out. All handheld and bad editing. But it's just a test. I do like the ITU709 color mode because it doesn't have that drab look that I've seen in so many other videos. I still enjoy the skin tones of my 6D more! 
 

Yes the Sony lens I have adjusts the iris during movie capture automatically, as does the e mount sigma in shutter priority or program modes. Aside from the Minolta, I have no other automatic lenses.
Can confirm I have a PAL camera - UK stock so I get that message in NTSC mode and have to format the card.

I have the sony 50mm f1.8, the sigma e mount 19mm 2.8 and neither of these two things you have observed affect these lenses, however the first issue affects the Minolta 135mm STF T4.5 through a Sony LA-EA2 Adapter when the second A mode iris is engaged, even though the camera recognises that A mode has been engaged and adjusts the iris display to match. I cannot find a lens that replicates your second issue.

I think 4K 24p Super 35 -> to the ultimate 1080p in post for $1k is a pretty good deal to be honest.

This looks like a great camera to pick up B-Roll, cramped locations, run/gun, especially when you can't fit/get/get away with a focus puller.
Or even a Director's viewfinder; the sensor size is close enough to all the other close-enough cinema 35mm. Great for DP, scouting locations too. 
Some of you have ridiculous expectations. It's a $1K camera. Obviously it's going to involve compromises. Those drawbacks might not work for your project, but that's on you if you somehow expected a perfect camera for $1K. "How could it not have X, how could it not have Y" ... because these aren't professional cinema cameras. It's a consumer camera that has some pro features. Don't get it backwards. If it isn't your perfect camera out-of-box, and you're not willing to tinker with it or work around it's issues, then get one that does. 
But the 4K quality, low-light and usable video autofocus will give it a place in the market. I certainly am looking to add it to my bag. There are only three other cameras who have all those features: Canon C300 ii ($16K), the upcoming Canon 1DXII ($6K), and the Sony A7Rii ($3K). 
And those cameras have their own issues. It's valuable to talk about the limitations, no question. But the pissing and moaning? Lord. Nobody's forcing you to do anything. 
There will probably be some talented folks who will shoot a feature film with just this, and it'll look great, because they'll know how to work around its limitations. Ever since the Canon 5K Mark II came out, there's been a terrific growth of indie filmmaking, because people are willing to manipulate these non-pro video machines to effectively tell stories.
And big ups to people who actually shot with this...a lot of great, usable footage. Exciting. 
 

No, the G series use the Contax G mount, it's got a much smaller flange distance - similar to a Canon screw mount, and certainly a smaller diameter too. I would assume, but cannot say for sure, that they are completely different designs and unlikely to share the desirable characteristics of the C/Y Zeiss glass being discussed here. Not to say that they aren't lovely in of themselves, but not glass that would match.

Mines supposed to be arriving today, so as soon as I'm able, and if no-one else gets round to it first, I will

Don't worry, the 6K 18 stops with global shutter cam will be announced at NAB.

enny - show us the video (make it private/password protected), then at least we can advise you better. We won't hammer you, but it would be interesting - especially since you're doing it for free & i've got a feeling that in future you should be charging, even if it is a nominal fee.
If you post yours, i'll post my first free music video, which was a complete nightmare as well!
The problem with musicians is that they can be a pain, like a real pain. Nowadays everyone thinks that they can make a video/film (armchair directors), but in reality its a lot harder than that. The last live video that I made got a bit a criticism from the main guy, simply because he showed it to loads of people & a few of them had convinced him that the edits should be quicker. This was also coupled with the fact that he wasn't in it as much as the singer - starting to see the problem with working with bands?!
I met him face to face and explained to him very nicely that this was the best edit possible - the main reason being that I got some great footage during the sound check & then during the gig, the lighting guys went crazy with strobe lighting, which ruined everything and made my job 10 times harder. He obviously came around to my way of thinking - I am very persuasive, in a nice way.
Show us the video, as i'm almost 100% sure the singer wants to re-edit the footage so he's in it a lot more than the others!
Meet them all, face-to-face and I think that they will be your allies (you said the others liked it) in convincing the troublesome one that you've done them a great video for free! Remember, you've done them a video for free! If after meeting them, he's still a pain, then you just look him in the eyes and tell him that you don't need the hassle and are walking away from it all.

Amen to this.
Exactly.
Bad things can happen when clarity and communication is not given across all concerned parties. Even if it's an unpaid project, there still needs to be clear deadlines agreed and understanding of what is to be delivered. Always keep control by retaining footage and submit viewing copies as low/SD resolution or with a fat 30% opacity watermark over the middle of the footage until you get paid. If you are to agree that you are to simply shoot and submit footage, get that in writing. Otherwise once you send the raw rushes, it is then up to trust that the person will pay you the agreed amount.
Any verbal agreement that is made should at the very least be put into an email or writing - so there is some kind of record of what has been agreed to (legally binding or not) This will quickly prove if someone has gone against their word, straight up lied or not clarified conditions clearly. Luckily my memory is getting worse as i get closer to 40 so after I talk to people in person or over the phone - I ask them to put it into an email, which allows me to refresh my memory and creates a paper trail If you like. It allows easy tracking of progress and what has been agreed.
Where applicable, get the relevant release forms/ permissions you need to cover your ass. As a photographer or videographer you simply need to ensure that you retain the rights to your raw images/ footage until you get paid or complete a submission to the terms of agreement to a contract.
I'd say it is even more important to have written contracts between friends (especially when money is involved) - as that way, everyone knows where they stand - even if the project falls apart for whatever reason, you are more likely to remain friends afterwards, draw a line under it and put it down to bad luck. I'd much rather remain friends with someone if a project goes to the wall, and especially if it was out of their control. 
Over the years I've been duped out of about 6 grand by taking on projects from friends or for pitches - only to be given endless deferment promises, or simply no response at all after handing in an invoice. Those times I took the projects 'on trust' and the footage and final edits were sent before payment was received. Never again.
 

I would probably be the bigger man here and just let them have the footage, with a written contract stating that you are allowed to release an edited version, for use in your portfolio/showreel.
It's a live and learn situation... You may as well come out of it with something to show for your hard work, even if the band release something you do not want your name associated with.

The definitive response needs to come from a lawyer well versed in Canadian law. But that notwithstanding I think the tale you tell is a reminder that things do go wrong with friendly arangements and it is always best to have something written down. I would be tempted to have a lawyer draw up a template contract/agreement for this type of work so that all parties know what is proposed. A little investment and thought in advance could save a lot of needless hassle.

It's funny, you guys represent The Camera Store, and have an in-built bias, let alone reason to maintain a good relationship with Sony...
 
... So the fact you are one of my most trusted reviewers speaks volumes to the hard work you put into your content, and by constantly being fair and consumer minded with your reviews, you have, despite those in-built percieved bias', always "been on my side" when it comes to making a purchase - the respect you get in the community is well earned, and long lasting because I have experienced enough products you have reviewed to know that you have always been absolutely upfront with a products shortcomings. Also, the fact you go through a products shortcomings without pouring vinegar on the product, which may work well for others who don't need that specific feature or can work around it makes you guys an absolute pleasure to watch!

They put two S-Log profiles in, if they were marketing it purely to casual users, this would be a terrible decision. In fact, if they didn't want to broaden the reach of the sucessor to the best selling mirrorless of all time, then they wouldn't have included a lot of the features they did and priced it at least £200 cheaper.

Damn... Im still torn if i want or NEED this camera...I have two canon dslr and 1 pro panasonic 4k video camera.. This camera appeals to me because of the great 4k image, form factor and ability to use some of my canon/sigma lenes... But do i NEED it... is my question.. dont mind me.. just talking to myself..lol

Imagine you were shooting a movie with a1st person perspective of a character who was drugged or poisoned, you could really use rolling shutter heavily as a style for that shot, but in general, you want to try to minimise it from the level some cameras display, because it is too much, but trying to avoid it on some cameras becomes more effort than it is worth - plenty of great movies have it, but people are too involved in the story to notice or care.

This would surely be illegal if they did so! It wouldn't matter how any previous employers had treated me, or how much on my side anyone they handed my details too, I would be furious at the breach of privacy if any company I had previously worked for did this, and, quite rightly, in the UK there are laws preventing this.

I suspect that those of us in the UK don't always appreciate how fortunate we are...
(different debate about the extent to which we should be grateful to the EU!!!)

Didnt quote you. Have nothing against your point.

Oh, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt to be honest. This is worse! Good luck telling people that their "bad" religious traits need to change!

I was joking, I agree, in perfect world we should be able to control any post processing which is automatically done by the camera. "It's not a bug it's a feature" is usually referred to an excuse made by software developers when they try to convince the user that a flaw in their program is actually what it's supposed to be doing.

Hi DayRaven and alexO,
I used the word "bug" because that is the term the reviewers in the videos I link to use to describe the issue. Apparently what "bugs" them is that you can't turn off the soft skin "feature" when using an external recorder in video mode - unless you also record in-camera. As I understand Mark Gilden that means for longer takes on the a5100 he pretty much gets to choose between the camera overheating or having waxy skin applied to his talents. And I'm pretty sure that would "bug" me too
It would also "bug" me if I can't use face detection auto focus without having a soft skin filter smearing facial details in video mode. According to Mark the face detection feature and soft skin filter are two separate functions that can be turned on and off individually in all other modes than video mode where they are somehow locked together. I can foresee quite a few situations where I would like to use face detection auto focus in video mode, but I can't imagine I would ever want to use the soft skin filter. So it would be great to know if the two features can be turned on and off individually in video mode on the a6300

Don't do that, please! You of all people are above judging people based on things like their religion, race, gender etc - that statement, while I understand was meant positively, was just as discrimitory as "Women can't reverse" or "Black people are lazy". There are Orthodox Jews who respect human/labour rights, there are Orthodox Jews who abuse them. That they are Orthodox Jews does not give you the ability to have any understanding of them at all beyond their religious beliefs.

it would not have better center to corner sharpness, it will just be more consistent in the frame with sharpness.