PannySVHS

Hey John!
Thank you for your answer! So that means with A3G3 one gets closer to the yellows and greens and further way from the reds and blues? 5% IRE in FCPX would be
values 64 and 960 in Davinci?
I think colorwise the GX80 should be really nice when graded well and of course shot well with A3G3:) Also, on G6 I shoot Natural with color 0 and anything else in -2.
It´s not a look I adore out of cam but grades nicely to my eyes. Filmig with not too much saturation to avoid color clipping. Not too low contrast and saturation either to avoid "plactic" and false colors, as far as I would understand.
By the way, do you know if the GX80 can record internally when having a HDMI out to a small monitor solution?
best regards, Marty

Loaded up A3G3 on the white balance and Neutral -2. Looked good. Then I pulled out My A7s to refresh my memory what Brandon Li's Autumn Leaves -3,0,-3 looked like. Had to do some major grading to emulate the Sony. May have de-saturated the lemons a bit and the over-exposure of the auto ISO on the Panny didn't help but I thought the handheld stabilized sensor held up pretty well against the gimbal. All purely unscientific. Don't try this at home kids!

Gritty 

Hallo John!
loving your findings. Went for the A3G3 and A3M9, but on my G6, outside in the late afternoon sun with WB at 7200 Kelvin, shot at Natural all -2.
The image out of cam looked so lala. I don´t know if the Canon FDs "attract" IR polution. The 28mm definately has not its strengths in strong sunlight compared
to the 20mm 1.7 Pana Lumix lens. Paired the FD with a China Booster.
But what amazed me was what kind of color I got from grading the footage, as always with my G6 I am amazed by the "hidden" color in that 24Mbit codec.
Curiosity enough, I shot 50fps for slomo, so only 28Mbits for twice the frames per second. Still, codec holds up amazingly well.
So can you explain your reasoning behind the A3G3 a little bit more. I don´t think I completely understood the technical aspects you were explaining.
 
By the way, grade is from the 28Mbits for 50p, so almost half of the 24p bitrate per frame!
 
Thanks a lot for your awesome contributions!
 

Hallo John!
loving your findings. Went for the A3G3 and A3M9, but on my G6, outside in the late afternoon sun with WB at 7200 Kelvin, shot at Natural all -2.
The image out of cam looked so lala. I don´t know if the Canon FDs "attract" IR polution. The 28mm definately has not its strengths in strong sunlight compared
to the 20mm 1.7 Pana Lumix lens. Paired the FD with a China Booster.
But what amazed me was what kind of color I got from grading the footage, as always with my G6 I am amazed by the "hidden" color in that 24Mbit codec.
Curiosity enough, I shot 50fps for slomo, so only 28Mbits for twice the frames per second. Still, codec holds up amazingly well.
So can you explain your reasoning behind the A3G3 a little bit more. I don´t think I completely understood the technical aspects you were explaining.
 
By the way, grade is from the 28Mbits for 50p, so almost half of the 24p bitrate per frame!
 
Thanks a lot for your awesome contributions!
 

Hallo John!
loving your findings. Went for the A3G3 and A3M9, but on my G6, outside in the late afternoon sun with WB at 7200 Kelvin, shot at Natural all -2.
The image out of cam looked so lala. I don´t know if the Canon FDs "attract" IR polution. The 28mm definately has not its strengths in strong sunlight compared
to the 20mm 1.7 Pana Lumix lens. Paired the FD with a China Booster.
But what amazed me was what kind of color I got from grading the footage, as always with my G6 I am amazed by the "hidden" color in that 24Mbit codec.
Curiosity enough, I shot 50fps for slomo, so only 28Mbits for twice the frames per second. Still, codec holds up amazingly well.
So can you explain your reasoning behind the A3G3 a little bit more. I don´t think I completely understood the technical aspects you were explaining.
 
By the way, grade is from the 28Mbits for 50p, so almost half of the 24p bitrate per frame!
 
Thanks a lot for your awesome contributions!
 

Hallo John!
loving your findings. Went for the A3G3 and A3M9, but on my G6, outside in the late afternoon sun with WB at 7200 Kelvin, shot at Natural all -2.
The image out of cam looked so lala. I don´t know if the Canon FDs "attract" IR polution. The 28mm definately has not its strengths in strong sunlight compared
to the 20mm 1.7 Pana Lumix lens. Paired the FD with a China Booster.
But what amazed me was what kind of color I got from grading the footage, as always with my G6 I am amazed by the "hidden" color in that 24Mbit codec.
Curiosity enough, I shot 50fps for slomo, so only 28Mbits for twice the frames per second. Still, codec holds up amazingly well.
So can you explain your reasoning behind the A3G3 a little bit more. I don´t think I completely understood the technical aspects you were explaining.
 
By the way, grade is from the 28Mbits for 50p, so almost half of the 24p bitrate per frame!
 
Thanks a lot for your awesome contributions!
 

The 20mm is a super high resolving lens, maybe 3rd place or better of the Panasonic Leica lenses, after the 25mm 1.4 and 42.5mm 1.2.
Some curiosity, it seems to be 1/3 EV brighter than it´s 1.7 Fstop. So it´s a super compact, high quality bright lens with slow autofocus for
photo and not useable AF for video. I myself think about the 15mm 1.7 Panny Leica. On the 4K crop it would give me a classic moderate/normal wideangle FOV for video with very fast AF.

Yeah, but I think maybe the fact that the gx85 doesn't moire as much as the EM5II makes it appear a bit "sharper" in whole. 
Anyway, 4K in the gx85 vs. no 4K in the em5II is a pretty big deal for me at the moment. 
As I've mentioned before, I truly love the ergos and features of the EM5II, and I'm not dismissing it as a great tool, but if 4K is needed, (or desired) well...

Beautiful. I liked this a lot!!! Such rich colors. What cameras did you use?

Shutter shock happens with the mechanical shutter within the range of 125-250 shutters. It is absent when using the electronic shutter.
 GX8 and GX85 seem to be the first Lumix cameras not to exhibit this unwanted feature when in mechanical shutter mode.

Well, talk about amateurish look and apect ratio. Film friends of mine and I did a 4 cams challenge, 2 DV camcorders and 2 HD hybrids in the mix, 4 to 3 ratio. Was fun to do without planning other than having four people going crazy on our actress and filming like little devils. Mixing SD and HD cams wasn´t exactely my idea, neither having four cameras, but I decided to agree on it and I´m happy we did it that way. So old school look is not only cool for the look but also for the way how to approach filming. Really loved the approch of our lowfi project. In the end I had 1hour of footage at my hands to sculpt what became 3min in the final result. Matching the cams and grading was fun too. The beautiful autumn day helped the colors quiet a bit.
 
 

Shooting in Super 8 and planning to project it in the 90s was about as useful as shooting with a Flip cam for a feature film today. But I do agree with you that these samples do not look exactly like Super 8 but they are reminiscent of it... Which is what I think was the point.
With that being said, your video samples look nice. I am amazed to see how clean Super 8 negative stocks are now. A few months back, a bunch of videos were posted that looked absolutely stunning. 
I also agree with this, but I will say the biggest culprit of the "looks" in this thread is the shallow depth of field, especially with the wide shots.
Super 8 had wide depth, so when the shallow depth of field reared it's head, it took me out of the small frame feel original Super 8 had. 
With that being said, I still think it's a very cool experiment. I wonder what an early HD cam could do... Maybe an HV20 windowboxed or using 4:3 guides... It may have a nice mix of definition and color that really could reproduce that Kodachrome feel.
Also, I think Frank Glencairn has a highly regarded Kodachrome LUT that may be neato to mess with. 

who cares what super 8 looks like now - it's mostly an image in our heads.  It's all psycosemantic. As long as you like the look, thats good, whether or not it confirms to "reality"

Now I got it and I agree! If I get you right you are trying to create an amateurish yesterdays lofi look. Which some people could remind on small gauge film. This approach is often used for documentaries or musicclips I think. And in 20 years you are maybe after that feeling of the beginning of the century with its iphone footage in funny aspect ratio... (Btw the problem is no one can fake the projection. I own two blurays and a shelf full of super 8 Feature films - I am really into cinema)

So, I finally decided to buy FilmConvert. I'm loving it so far.

I'm always trying to get the Super 8 look, and this thread motivated me to try again. This is my bmpcc treated to look like Super 8. I want to post footage, but for some reason, a lot of my gorilla grain files cause red flash frames when composited over the footage. Fine grain works, but anything heavier has this problem. I'm pretty satisfied with this look. It's the closest I've gotten I think.

MAN THAT LOOKS AWESOME - is there a way to get rid of the tape issues - maybe if you record the signal out if it has a video out?
 
also seeing the JVC HD100 has a really nice look - does anyone want to test this out?
 
 
man that is super useful!
I took the detail out of it on the latest test.

Haha, John, this is cool. Steve Huff, one of the first ambassadors of m43. Used to stop by his blog every day. Great guy! Also really dig his posts from the beginning of his place, beautifully written pieces!
 
Oh, shoot, seems like Steve has changed his site to smartphone ratio. Now it´s embedded within two columns, making it narrower to read.

Another review. This one by Steve Huff... I like his not-so-scientific views on cameras and handling.
He also did a write-up:
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2016/06/24/shooting-with-the-panasonic-gx85-small-with-a-huge-punch/

I bought an old Panasonic SDX900, it's the dvx100's big brother.  I thought maybe SD had something interesting about it - lacking resolution and dynamic range.
I tested it quickly against my Sony F65 going to 8mm or 16mm, and it seems to have its own weird unique feel that's kind of interesting.
Anyway let me know what you think - post workflow I can post as well how I kind of "destroyed" the image too.

the Nikon AIS 28MM f2.8 is one of the best 28mms ever made optically no distortion edge to edge - it is Nikons finest hour! not much comes even close to it - plus long throw for follow focus ,these Nikon AIS lenses (the glass out of them )were used as the base spherical elements in Panavision E series Anamorphics - they are that good!! 
ps - if you are shooting micro 4/3s just stick your 28mm  on a Metabones speedbooster that gives you x0.7 on the back of the lens - saves adding a front wide adaptor which are optically inferior
also consider the killer SIGMA 30MM F1.4 - its APSC only so wont work on a FF camera but is stellar on APSC and Micro 4/3 I use it on a Metabones XL alot
 

Hey Fritz,
I think, Andy Lee was talking about a 0.8 by century optics.  Question is, if it fits fullframe lenses and there are so my converters by century out there. So which one exactely? Maybe 0.7 is the limit anyway for a compromise of effect and quality. By the way, bidding on one Andys many and great lens recommendation very soon. Who hasn´t though?:)
Well, with the EVF of the G6 focussing on distances from 5m (15ft) on with wideangles can be tricky, since it´s hard to see. Doesn´t help that punch in focussing magnification doesn´t seem to work when filming.

Hey Jason, I think 4K is good for some of us who need a nice HD image with consumer equipment. For Pros great Arri 2K, for indies Digi Bolex 2K is nicer than
4K from Panny and Sony consumer cams. But that Panny and Sony and Samsung 4K ist just so nice for us to shoot it with that affordable tech.
Though the Big Screen shows every single digital flaw to the image, but digital projection on 20 feet wide screens looks nice with consumer 4k downscaled HD.

Hey Lenny!
Output would be 8bit. The 4K and 1080 24p codec is on the G7 is very good. One main advantage with external recording to an Atomos would be Prores- a codec which is easier on your editing system. Other than that you got a very, very nice camera in your hands.
 
Speedbooster is giving lenses about the same field of view of Super 35mm, the main film standard, so of cameras as FS7, C100/300/500, etc.
They make the field of view of a lens a little bit wider on your Panny G7 or any other M43 camera, such as GH4, GH3, GF1, E-PL1..:)
These Speedboosters exist for different lens mounts, so you can adapt lenses with Pentax K-mount, M42, Nikon F-mount, Canon EF mount, etc.
You can adapt these lenses with ordinary adapters as well. Speedboosters, additionally, just give you a slight boost in field of view and about 1 Fstop of light gathering/ effecitively sensitivity.
Your kit lens is sharp, but colors are rather on the video side, more broadcast look than Hollywood:), hard to fix in post but possible.
Manual focus is not so nice, because it´s not mechanical.
 
So my suggestion would be: get an ordinary adapter for Canon FD on m43 mount for about 15USD/EU, plus an 28mm F2.8 in Canon FD mount
from Canon (about 20 to 40 USD), Sigma or Tokina or Vivitar or Kiron (cheaper alternatives). Nice filmic combo to produce fantastic results!
Plus Canon FD 50mm 1.8 for 15 to 30 USD.
There are so many lens tips on this forum from Andy Lee and other guys. But for a start my suggestions would
be fine. Avoid the GAS, Gear acquistion syndrome and keep it simple for the beginning.:)
 
24mm option would be about 40 to 100 EUR:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/SIGMA-SUPER-WIDE-II-24mm-f-2-8-CANON-FD-MOUNT-LENS-W-HOOD-/322114601538?hash=item4aff86c242:g:-80AAOSwOVpXWDpq
cheers