tomsemiterrific

I don't think the issue is in settings. I think the issue is with the AF method---it is seriously limited in capability. So, why not use dual pixel AF? It's clearly better. My C300 is rock solid.

Actually, you can play back footage by pushing up (12:00) on the wheel that surrounds the menu button. Pushing up on the new toggle thingamajig does the same thing. I shoot with a viewfinder so the screen is completely enclosed, and I always review footage while never removing the viewfinder. In playback mode you can also use the shutter wheel to shift from on information screen to another concerning clips. So, I have a question about the in-camera V-log view assist. Using it makes footage look normal. But how to I get the better exposure for V-log. By going how the view assist looks? Or do I keep referring to the wave form? Enquiring minds want to know.

Sigma has a 24-105 that is an EF mount and newer. It might work a treat as they say across the pond.

I'm having trouble with that lens as well. The video is unstable and jerky. I tried it with the lens only stability, both internal and lens stability--it's quite unstable either way.

I shot some footage in the GH5 422 10 bit----in .mov. I thought since the clips were in the native Apple codec that grading would be a breeze. But man does it run slow. FCPX can't seem to handle it. Preemptively, let me say I have a 5k iMac that usually runs quite well. So, my question is how do you think I can make this 10 bit footage run smoothly on the iMac? I shoot 10 bit 422 and even 444 on the Canon C300 mk ii and I can't ever recall a problem. Weird. This has me a bit bamboozled? But I'm sure there's a simple solution to this.

Nice and simple fix--just make sure your DOF is wide enough and/or don't bob and weave too much and you're golden. And yes, finding your way can take a lot of time and a lot of work. I'm still searching for what I want to do with video--but with music I found it long ago.

I like them. And the a6500 has the best color of any Sony i've used. Still, the color of the GH5 really knocks me out--standard and natural are both great and so easy to make them look beautiful in post. I love my Canon cams, but if the AF of the GH5 were solid I think I'd use it on talking head presentations. I think it rivals Canon color out of the cam--different but beautiful.

There is a cure for the iffy AF--if Panasonic would only take the medicine and incorporate dual pixel AF. Sensor size has nothing to do with it. I have a Canon XC15 I use for presentations and some field shooting. It has a 1 inch sensor--like a Super 16---and the AF on it is FANTASTIC--rock solid, never hunt, not even for a New York Nanosecond. Great for interviews.

I've had the a6500 shut down after only a few minutes run time on a very mild day. Still, when it's not overheating and shutting down you can get some beautiful stuff out of it.

Light the scene properly for your equipment. It's a crazy idea, but it might just work.

Glad this was of help to you. Once I got it straight I thought I'd provide something other than what has been rudely thrown at me here and on FB: "Did you read the manual?" "Just shoot green?"--no explanation beyond that; "Do you have google on your computer? If so, use it." I ask myself, "Why the Hell do we have sites like EOSHD?" I always thought it was to share information and save time and to provide clearer, less convoluted information than we get from these TERRIBLE web sites and user's manuals. But apparently I was wrong. Go figure! Apparently, by the words and actions of some I get the sense they believe it is for them to be rude and snooty and to try to make people feel inferior and inept---that is, as long it is not they who are trying to get good and pertinent information. Anyway, I thought I'd take advantage of my 35 years of communicating and teaching to actually lay out the needed information in a clear, orderly fashion. Because that's what I thought EOSHD was about--for all of us to courteously help each other.

Conurus,et al, here's my experience. 1. Update the adapter, connecting the adapter to the computer using a USB connector. There's a place for the connector under the tiny rubber insert on the side of the base of the adapter. 2. Update by downloading the Metabones app found on the Metabones support page. Once the app is downloaded, click on it and it will immediately locate your adapter, analyze it, and tell you what to do next. If you're up to date it will tell you. At that point you can disconnect your adapter from the computer and go on living as normally as you are capable of. No matter how normal you may be you will still have to know how to use the adapter so your Canon/EF mount lenses work----that's next and the point of this whole thing. 3. Once that's done mount the adapter and lens on the camera. Depress the jog wheel on the side of the adapter, and remain holding it down while you turn the camera on. 4. Once the camera is on you should see the image with the LCD screen display. Yea!! But you're not home just yet--at least in my experience. 5. At this point your mileage may vary, but I find everything works except the camera's aperture control wheel. To make it functional I have to depress the jog wheel on the adapter yet again, holding it down while adjusting the aperture wheel. Once the aperture wheel kicks in and the lens' aperture is being controlled in camera you can release the jog wheel. After that the wheel will work fine without having to depress the jog wheel. 6. If you shut the camera down and restart in order for everything to function you have to repeat the steps above as follows; a) hold the jog wheel down while turning the camera on, only releasing it after the cam is fully booted up. b) in order to make the camera's aperture control operative you will have to re-depress the jog wheel and then turn the GH5 aperture control wheel. Once that's done you no longer need the jog wheel until you stop and restart. This has worked fine for me with all Canon lenses and the Sigma 18-35 1.8 as well. Hope it works for you as well as it does for me. And yes, I didn't mention AF, because I don't use AF in shooting video--but basic AF does work pretty well--I tested it to make sure. Hope they actually fix this issue, because doing this every time you stop and re-start is a kind of pain. But, at least it works and you can use your EF lenses.

I'm sorry. I have no idea what you mean by "green mode." Not sure about the latest firmware? What is it?

As many of you know the Metabones T Speed Booster XL 0.64x Adapter for EF lenses to MFT that worked find for the Panasonic GH4 does not work well at all on the new Panasonic GH5. Does anyone know if Metabones is addressing this problem? And if they are when they might have a firmware update to solve the issue make make EF mount lenses functional on the GH5?

Does anyone have any information about the Metabones T Speed Booster XL 0.64x Adapter? Are they working to make it functional for the GH5. It works great on the G85. But the only thing you can put on it on the GH5 are non-electronic lenses.

I knew it. You're just the kind of guy who has to have the last word...compulsive.

I'd probably use the a6500 for that. Have fun bearing the load.

You wrote: "Again, the speed boosters are not changing the camera, they are changing the lens. I have two focal reducers and they are just giving you a faster lens as well as wider lens." I'm perfectly aware of that. I didn't say the speed booster changed the camera, it affects the light that passes through the lens and provides a wider angle of view---the EFFECT is similar, if not identical in many cases, to a larger sensor camera----the EFFECT--that is, what viewers of the footage will actually see. In the end both cams and methods have their virtues and vices. I've owned an a7sii--and it is an amazing camera, but color has always been an issue for me with Sony--until I bought the a6500. Low light was amazing on the a7sii, but I'm not a spelunker and do little to no shooting in caves or places where I don't have adequate lighting, so the ultra low light and high ISO--for me--ended up being little more than a parlor trick--nice, amazing, but in the end, regarding real world usefulness, it was a feature that provided little practical benefit. If I ever shoot caving expeditions or do a documentary on a second story guy I may have to reconsider. There's a lot of choices out there and progress has been amazing. But just because it exists it doesn't mean you have to have it. You only need what you need, and the a7sii is definitely over kill for what I do. Despite all you say, which would take me more time than I have to respond to in detail, I believe the a6500 and GH5 are cams that will provide the lighter, less expensive, and more ergonomic option. I know I sound like a broken record, but I really do wish the 6500 had a better shell, didn't overheat, and was rid of those absolutely HORRIBLE batteries--gawd awful! Make a professional camera--provide a professional battery dammit--and don't put it out until you can run it without shutting down at unexpected times. But what I really wish is Canon would get off their asses and make what they are capable of making in and aps-c cam and in a mirrorless--in 4k!!! and stop their horrible policies that demand the highest prices for the most niggardly amount of features. They're capable--but I don't think those tight asses will ever do it.

It's hard to know where to start with your comments. I'll just say I try to read comments carefully before I respond, because I want to make sure my response is about what the person said, rather than somethings I assumed he or she said. I think that's always wise advise. Now, let me start with weight. Yes, the a7 cams are lighter than the G85 and the GH5. Lighter is better, but I think everyone will agree there is a point a cam can be too light. Some weight is needed to help stabilize the cam in the hand, and there is where the a7cams fall short. They do get weight--but from the FF lenses--while are often very heavy and make the camera feel terribly out of balance. I'm not against weight--just too much weight, and balance is also a factor I left out, but which is really important. The Panasonics are great cameras to hold. The A7 cams are not--and the heavy lenses often make them kind of miserable to hold and use. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Yes, the FD lenses can be used FF---but you have to lose the speed booster and that extra stop of light. I owned an A7sii--and could get some excellent results from it, but I didn't care for the color very much. Maybe I'm nuts, but I found the a6500 color to be much, much better. There the FD lenses shine, though the stabilization is not as good as the G85 and GH5. Honestly, I like the image of the a6500 best of all. I own one, but it's not a pleasure to shoot. If they only made a slightly heavier better balanced cam with a better grip AND BATTERY--using the FD+speed booster on them would make balance feel great. No way would I consider using FF Sony lenses. THEN YOU WROTE: "No, it just means you can use a fast lens and keep your ISO lower than with a slower lens but you can do that with an A7s series camera as well. Plus the A7s cameras have an APSC mode for double duty (not so great for stills with the lower pixel count but for video is useful). What are you going to match an A7s and FF 50 f0.95 lens with?" I think I'd far prefer shooting video on the 24 mega pixels of the a6500 than the cropped aps-c of a 12 mega pixel cam. And besides, why should I pay so much extra for features I don't need, don't want, and don't plan to use? I'm perfectly happy shooting with an aps-c sensor. The challenge with a smaller sensors is light, and the speed boosters go a long way to solving that. You wrote: " "The A7 cameras have greater lens choice actually as you can use all the lenses available for M4/3 and M4/3 lenses if you want but you can not use E mount lenses on M4/3." I have no interest in the E mount lenses--at all. The bizarre MF is unusable. I loathe it. And they are too frigging expensive. Sigma lenses are sharper, just as good--better actually, and with a MF that human beings can actually use. And if you put the cam in aps-c mode Sony has a shitty array of crop lenses--and nothing fast to speak of. You wrote: " Your G85 would be a much better general video camera to me than the A7s but low light? No, I don't think so." A large sensor cam will give you better low light and DOF all things being equal. But I find shooting the G85, with speed booster and the Sigma 1.8 zoom to be amazing in low light-it does what I need it to do well and produces beautiful shallow depth of field. The speed booster drops the 1.8 to 1.1 on the G85, and the 50-100 drops to 1.2 with amazing boca---creamy and gorgeous.(I just got an FD 100mm 2.0, mint, that drops to f 1.2, has a focus ring that is creamy smooth--and the image is sharp and beautiful--and it is super stable and cost me 1/3 the price of the Sigma 100). If I have all those satisfying features why the hell should I pay 4 times more for a different camera body and several thousands more for lenses I find unusable in MF.? But I'm not making an argument for the G85 over and against Sony. I'm not against Sony. I actually posted this because Panasonic, a video camera company that makes stills cameras, finally decided to take making a camera with in-camera stabilization seriously, and have now made a camera with world-class stabilization. Very good in the G85, even better by all reports in the GH5, and how this revolutionizes the use of these wonderful non-electronic lenses for hand held shooting. Let's face it. For video these FD lenses and rokinon lenses provide every thing you need and can easily control outside the camera--stabilization has been the missing link to make them full useful and free them from the tether of the tripod. IMO, at this point Panasonic's in-camera stabilization is better than Sony--though Sony is usable in the A7sii and a6500. And being able to use these less expensive, lighter FF lenses with speed boosters on the Panasonics and a6500 enables you to shoot in low-light and produce shallow DOF to the point the RESULT is often indistinguishable to that of FF cameras with their array of large heavy lenses--most of which are not very fast. And those that are are not stabilized. That was my point.

I don't see the either/or thinking. Both AF and MF can be useful in the right situation. I shoot only video, and MF is the way to go for 99% of the shooting I do. But I do want to say something about waiting for the next A7siii: If it existed right now I would not care to have it in the vast number of instances. Perhaps it might be useful in studio. But the weight of the lenses and terrible stabilization (compared to Olympus/Panasonic) make it very problematic for field shooting. IMO little has been said about the incredible in-camera stabilization of the new Panasonics and what it does for on-location shooting hand held. I've been shooting hand held with the G85, using a .72 focal reducer and speed booster, and using FD lenses and it is a world better than trying to manage the weight and limited stabilized full-frame Canon lenses. And the sensitive light and focus control is much better shooting manual FD rather than full-frame Canon lenses. Here are what I see for all the pros shooting video with Panasonic in-camera stabilization with speed booster plus FD lenses. 1. more sensitive and subtle focus control. 2. more lens choices---all are stabilized. 3. incredible low-light capability. I have in one small camera bag (very light) 1 85mm 1.8 (1.2 w speed booster), 1 50mm 1.2 (.095?? w/ speed booster), 1 35mm 2.0 (1.4 speed booster), 1 28mm 2.8 (2.0 speed booster), 135mm 2.8 (2.0 w/ speed booster); all stabilized, all giving me about the same perspective as the 1DX mk II. The whole set up is very light--nothing like the torture of lugging full frame Canon lenses---but wait! These are full-frame Canon lenses! Plus, I can use Rokinon Ef to MFT speed booster with click less aperture--all stabilized. Why the Hell would I forsake that for a larger sensor when all the weight and focus problems--and the cost come with it!! I mean, it's video. Just how sharp does it have to be--just how necessary is it to pixel peep till your eyes are blood shot?!? 4. FD lenses are cheap compared to their full frame equivalent--and with the speed booster they provide near a full-frame angle of view and faster F-stops. There's nothing Canon or Sony make the FD + speed booster can't provide you with plus at least one full stop more light. So, why should I switch to a full-frame Sony and have to pay full frame prices? and deal with the weight and the AWFUL impossible to use manual focus??? Other than Panasonic, another option I see is using the in-camera stabilization and speed booster FD lenses with the Sony a6500. That yields even better image/light results than the Panasonic G85, but the shooting is more physically challenging, inconvenient, and not nearly as pleasurable as shooting with the Panasonic. Can't say about the GH5 because it hasn't arrived yet here in the States. I pre-ordered mine, and it should arrive early next week. IMO: IF Sony put the body of the a6500 in a slightly larger, DSLR style body (like the GH5) and improved the ergonomics to make the shooting experience a little more facile I would buy it in a New York minute! --Hell, half a New York minute. I love that camera, and the results with its combination of in-cam stabilization, speed booster, FD lenses, and, IMO, image quality is second to none. Plus, the aps-c sensor is really much the same as the Super 35 sensor more traditionally used for video. The Bottom Line: An inexpensive, light, easy to use set-up providing freedom from the tripod, a beautiful image, amazing focus control and low-light, excellently stabilized---you lose almost all of those when you go to the full-frame Sonys, Canons, etc. But you have them in the GH5, G85, and the a6500---they allow you to shoot all day and not to have to undergo physical therapy for a week. Alas, if only Sony would improve the camera body--making it slightly larger, just a bit heavier, and with a better grip. Put the a6500 in something like that and you've got my money!

Thanks! That's what i had forgotten--the friggin' photo menu..."M"

I have a G85, and the settings default settings for ISO are 200, 400,800,1600, 3200, etc. But there is a way to change the settings so you can get the incremental numbers--But I can't find the place in the menu this can be changed. Anyone have a suggestion?

"I am getting the feeling that this size is okay. We were able to fit in size of 12% increase, which led to the realization of more user-friendly size.” I like the idea of a slightly larger cam for all the obvious reasons. I only wish Sony would come out with a more DSLR body style for their A cams: 6300,6500, 7, etc. The Sony mirrorless body style is not only unappealing, it is no pleasure at all to hold and use--like the Panasonic G85, GH4, and now the GH5. Making the body larger should also help with the Sony heating issue---or at least, that would be my guess. Don't anyone know when Metabones will have their speed booster (.64) firmware fixed. For me that's a REAL inconvenience since I almost never shoot with Pani or Olympus lenses.

I really like using the Kinotehnik LCDVF magnetically mounted view finder shooting hand held. I use one on my G85 and it works great. I've also used them on a 1DX mK II. Super tool for focusing and added stabilization. Any idea if Kinotehnik has an LCDVF that properly fits the GH5 LCD?

Would never dream of using autofocus. I agree wholeheartedly with you. I also don't like the twist-lock mount system--sucks. All my FDs are bayonet mount, and they mount quickly and remove just as quickly.