John Matthews

I think that shows that Lumix has several bargains on the second hand market and you can pick and choose according to your needs.

They're everywhere, and are often just normal TVs rotated 90 degrees
In shopping malls


Some are pretty big

Some are pretty tall too, presumably for narrower spaces

Outdoors

Bus stops

In shop windows


etc.

It's a bit of a vanilla option when you can get a used S1 for same price which is same spec but a much more premium body, or pay a bit more and get an S9 with PDAF

I'm a little surprised that the S5 or S5D didn't make a mention. Pick it up for about 550 euros new and get one of those nice Konica lenses- you're ready to go for under 600. Get BlackMagic recorder and you'll even get B-RAW.

Do you agree with my choices...
And did I miss anything?
https://www.eoshd.com/news/the-2025-hybrid-mirrorless-camera-rankings/
The 2025 camera rankings for video quality and value for money are in!

Well I just ordered an EM1X, sigma 18-35 and speedbooster off of MPB. Trading in my Nikon Z6 setup so I am almost breaking even. Will update the group on my thoughts on the camera. Seems like a beast. 

I may do a comparison on the blog about the E-M1X and OM1.
The E-M1X is... different.

The original Olympus OM3 was one of the finest cameras I ever owned. Didn’t need a battery except for the meter (if I recall correctly). Even seeing “OM” brings back memories of long gone days… ironically given the debates about MFT, FF s16 etc, I sold it to get a Bronica MF. 
Anyway, sorry, totally irrelevant to the post.

Finally someone has done it
https://www.benro.com/en/prelaunch/NE1-nd-filter.html
It has a nifty bluetooth controller with auto-AE as well.
Curious to see how nice it is to use, but no word on pricing yet.

The new entry-rule is doubleplusgood. Giving five-year socmedia record to Borderforce is only goodthink. Right citizens with nothing to hide welcome full truthcheck, for it keeps out crimethink, facecrime, and all ungood elements. Freedom is Strength, and more watch means more freedom.
The Party merely sees what all goodthinkers already show. Only unpersons fear oversight.

I think people see politics these days as a form of show-biz entertainment soap opera drama, what a surprise they are going to get when the frogmen smash their door in next.

Especially with so much competition, and smaller cameras.

Here's the video if anyone wants to learn about hawks and the local people here to track 'em.  Also, you can play guess the camera:
 

Same.  On this particular project I found myself reaching for it more than the GH5.  Not for the bird shots as that really required good slow-mo, but for the people shots?  Looked awesome.
It pancakes the highlights though; just loses details that LUMIX cameras hold onto. Other than that, pretty great for a $300 camera.

Oh god.  That thing.  When online people complain about lousy footage with the cliche "was that shot on a potato"?  They're probably talking about the D90's codec.

GH5
GH4
EM10iii
OM-1
5Dii
XPRO2
XT-5
P1100
DSC-RX10
iPhone15
iPhone12
Xiaomi12 Ultra
DJI Mavic Pro
GoPro Hero
All those different cameras were used to make our latest indy documentary on-and-off over the last 3 years.  We finally finished post-production (for real this time) last month.  Not to mention all the different ridiculous vintage lenses and modern lenses employed along the way. 
So that happened.  
My advice?  Yeah, don't use so many cameras...and then try to make all that cohere somehow with no legitimate color grading skills...
Surprisingly, I found the EM10iii footage the most pleasant looking color-wise when exposed correctly.

I'd argue it is the MOST important because without the camera, you don't have a picture.
It is the small differences between the latest sensors and codecs that's the unimportant thing.
In cinematography, our job isn't to worry about the costumes or set pieces, that's the job of someone else.
So lighting and camera are the most important for a DP.
What has happened is the gap between the top-end i.e. ARRI and the cheap stuff has closed up.
This has been going on ever since the start of the DSLR revolution so it's not a new thing but there's never been a smaller gap that exists now, for example between something like the Alexa 35 and a $1000 used Panasonic S1H.
By the way although Magellan has beautiful content and really nice camera-work, the sharpness of it and the deep DOF isn't everybody's cup of tea. It does look a bit too soap opera in parts of that trailer, I think.
It looks very different to an IMAX shot film.
So there's big differences between formats and lenses still...
The same cinema focal length for example on 16mm has always looked vastly different to same on IMAX or large format.
Also there are big differences in grading style, camera movement style, and so on.
I think most relevant for us is that you don't need to make a massive rig any more to get good results.
It's horrible having the weight as a one-man DP.
Probably why they used such a small camera on this.

I really do think the camera is the least important aspect these days though. Lighting, set pieces, costumes, locations, etc. are so much more important. Magellan could have been shot on pretty much any camera from the last 10 years and looked just as good, because everything else about it looks good and it's clearly made with skill and talent.
28 Years Later was a huge disappointment for me as a film (28 Days Later is one of my favorite films of all time) but it's still a gorgeous looking film that was shot on iPhones. If it was shot on a ARRI Alexa 35 it wouldn't have changed what I disliked about the film. And watching it, I didn't think to myself "jeez, this would've looked so much better if they'd film it on a better camera." A LOT of gear went into making it look as good as it does, but the camera itself was pretty low on the list, I think.
 

Well, if you talk about eras, I absolutely agree, but if we consider a single "historical period", the camera doesn't make a difference, except in extreme cases. We have seen many examples over the years. Your works with the mighty GH2, Independent films shot with the GH2. Blind tests where the GH2 was mistaken for a cinema camera. We have the shorts shot by Filippo Chiesa with a GH5S which has a better look than this film with the GH7. We have the blockbuster shot with the FX3.
The reality is that in common use cases, the camera doesn't make a difference. The difference is made by the lights, the set, the lenses, and the skill of the DOP. Certainly, with a more limited camera, the DOP is forced to work harder with the other tools. In this forum, everyone is still nostalgic for the 5D MKII with Magic Lantern, which scientific tests have shown does not have more than 9 stops of DR, and yet here, we are declaring the death of a camera over 13 or 14 stops of DR.
Run&gun is different of course. Other extreme cases that come to mind are wildlife documentaries where you don't have the possibility to set up cinematic sets (up to a certain point), and therefore the camera and lenses make the difference between having or not having the result. Here, in fact, RED cameras and their crazy mix of resolution and frame rate (and pre-recording) still reign almost supreme. Yet, as the article I posted wrote, action cameras are also used out of necessity simply because it is the only way to film certain situations, and then it is up to the colorist and editor to manage to prevent you from seeing the difference.
Returning to the film with the GH7, I personally don't like it at all. The look is banal, heavily color graded, and with heavy grain added in post. But I believe it was a personal taste of the authors and that it was not something done to cover the limitations of the camera. Perhaps more the limitations of the production budget. I repeat, this is a very personal opinion.

The gatekeeper is talent.

Thankfully, we're so far beyond the camera being the gatekeeper to accomplishing beautiful cinema.  There's no real technical limitation affecting the cinema we see here.  I've always been partial to portrait focal lengths because of what they take away from an image, but it's great to see more creative cinematographers shooting wide.  Lubezki pretty much hangs out there most of the time.

Thank you for sharing, Andrew. This is looking great. I will watch it as soon as they show it in the cinemas over here. I am still curious to test a GH5 MK II due to it been tested by slashcam for displaying great rendering of texture and offering one of the best 4K images of any dslms out there in that regard. Its optional 1.4 crop mode makes it a great digital 4K S16 cinema camera. GH7 in 4k pixel per pixel mode might be closer to 16mm crop though. I would love a M43 sensor sized lumix pocket cinema camera with flexible cropping, like S16 1:1.66, S16 4:3 with full Super16 width, 2/3" 1:1, you name it. And while you are at it, Panny please give it an internal ND and still keep the EVF and great battery life plus full size Hdmi.:)

Looks fantastic.
Any interviews with the cinematographer / crew out there?
They used Panasonic GH7 + Lumix 12mm F1.4 for most part
https://www.eoshd.com/news/in-ny-and-la-theatres-january-major-new-movie-magellan-is-shot-on-the-panasonic-gh7/

I have never understood why someone would shoot a 30 minute continuous take at 120fps.
It's absolutely fucking bonkers.
120fps is for slow mo.
If you slowed-down an hour long continuous take from 120fps to the cinema standard of 24p, it would last for 5 hours.
Who the fuck is sitting through that?

And while it's not nearly as ridiculous as the EOS R5's overheating problems that were almost entirely caused by the Canon 🔨, when you bring out an S1R on any number of shoots for a long time, someone's bound to start going on about how it overheats.  I still get that when I bring out my R5 for slider shots/suction cupping to windshields/etc.
"Aren't you worried that's gonna overheat?  I heard that camera overheats a lot."
"They corrected most of that a while ago and I'm pretty sure it'll make it through this 45 second take, regardless."