TwoScoops

Spread the love, not the hate! Take the victories as they come knowing you can't win all the fights (and some aren't worth stepping in the ring for).
The world is too big to make everyone happy, so whatever you do, do it for yourself and don't be bothered too much with what others think.
Seen you and Albert Fast do great things with the new Olympus Pro f/1.2 optics and I appreciate the willingness to share your findings with us!

The video was shot with a single GH5 (with a little A6500 in there) in 10 hours, edited, graded and effects done in 4 days (by me). 
The new album (last I heard) was at No.7 in the official UK chart. 
I'm a big fan of what Panasonic has done with this camera. 
That said, the shining star of this video is the band. 
 

Big camera on sticks, small camera on sticks. Doesn't make much difference in my experience. Same thing on a dolly. Handheld, sure, although I'll take a good FS7 shoulder setup to holding a properly rigged camera out in front of me all day. Gimbal...sure, a small camera is the ideal tool there. But gimbal shots are massively overused these days, and don't necessarily guarantee more interesting shots. In fact, I find many people I work with use camera movement much more effectively when stepping up to a larger camera, because it forces them to think harder about how and why they're moving the camera. And also because shoulder/handheld stuff has a nicer look due to the added inertia--a more professional handheld aesthetic, if you will. 
Also, big cameras just have more going for them. Comprehensive I/O, better image quality, more features, higher frame rates, beefier codecs, etc. More space means better cooling, more ports, bigger processors, etc.
I'm not saying a big camera is always the ideal tool, but the vast majority of the time it's not what's holding you back.

I love doc films like this most of all.  Exactly the tool for the job. 
When I watch narrative films, however, I want to escape reality. I don't want an overly sharpened, overly saturated, tiny sony sensor version of footage filmed with a camera whose image looks similar to the local broadcast news. 
Definetly going to watch this doc. Awesome trailer!

Which Lumix camera was used? And I want to save my judgement until I see the Devil’s skin tone. 

Gimbals and Drones are a bit faddish at the moment.
I mean once you've had a drone shot in your sequence then you still have to do the basic story telling.  It's a shot..or two maybe....or maybe it's the intersticial tone shots in between scenes at most.
Gimbals require more time and people to do well than a Steadicam does and offer very few advantages, and come at the cost of dramatic feel. Everytime I bring this up with a pro gimbal human, they say hey you can go low to high in-shot or go through a window and hand off.

And yes, you can.  But I rarely see this being designed in shots.  Now I just see shots that should be done hand held or on a steadicam being done to an inferior standard and for impinged dramatic feel using a gimbal because that's the tool of the moment.
Don't be seduced by the tool and use them to do what can do well.
JB
 
 

i think banning phones is going to make people hate you, so Id just ask for phones to be on silent, making the point that some boogeyman producer wants NO PHONES AT ALL, but i thought that was unreasonable. see im nice ?

I wouldn't switch now, especially from a 1DX2 + $6K Canon glass. All rumors are pointing towards a FF mirrorless from Canon probably announced around Photokina.
Also 1DX2 is a beast and imo destroys the A73 in terms of IQ. The file sizes might be huge but they produce super thick imagery with that cinematic intra-frame motion.
The A73 AF is good, but nowhere near Canon's dual pixel reliability & smoothness.
Let's not even get started on color science & WB..

So he's used it for a couple of hours max, recording in a low stress nature setting with perfect natural light.
He proceeds to make a review admittedly littered with exaggeration.
Definitely fits in at Eoshd.
 
 
 

Unpaid job for a feminist film. Did I wake up in purgatory this morning?

^ I figured that out my first week with the GH4, comparing how different the Pana 12-35 image looked to the Voigts. I think the auto-corrections done to native M43 lenses probably add to the sharpened/digital look, too, vs legacy/manual glass. 

I will use these lenses in the BlackMagic Pocket 4K ... 

You just need the right sized pocket...

My best guess is that he was smoking something while making assertions like this: 
"IMO, The Gh5 (even before the "s" model, SMOKES the C500." 
 

F35 is global shutter, isn't it? So would explain why it looks so nice. 

I wasn't a fan of the 12-35 either on the GH4. Though I better not call it crappy or Emanuel will have a stroke. 

Looks like the Micro is already going down in price on the second hand market. I got one for under $700. This is my first test, also my first time shooting Raw. Love this little camera. My Micro and Pocket should compliment each other well.

I posted a GH5 vs UM46K sample last year. I prefer the Ursa color, but GH5 and 5s are great.
password: test

If you happen to stupid enough, like me, to buy into kickstarter projects, you would realize that a company's ability to realize a project is inversely proportional to the attractiveness of the price, specs and timing of the product they promise.

No Chris, not my craft. I am not upset as I could tell you answering your friendly PM. As written, no worries. I also think I can disclose a bit the content of your message which clearly hints you've actually recommended that same lens, so not exactly a divergence unites us on that one : ) My point is to clear up the topic, no other : ) I am usually one of the jokers over here so why shouldn't I be second your mood there, isn't it? : D We come to these boards for making friends among the members not to fight on topics, no matter we may diverge or not (E :-)

On the lens debate - 'crappy', 'different strokes for different folks', 'opinion vs facts':
There are a lot of optically superb native M43 lenses. For example the Olympus 12mm f2.0 (Zuiko Digital or so). Had better reviews than SLRM 12mm f1.6 (less distortion, sharper at wide open, less lens flare). 
But was not a manual lens. And (my opinion) you should prefer a lens with a good and big focus ring. A 12mm was a 35mm equivalent on the old Pocket, the 'reporter wide'. Now a 16mm (Sigma 16mm f1.4) would be a 30mm. 420 €. Easy choice.
I own the 18-35mm Sigma (once for Nikon, now Canon, swore to never sell it again). Had it with the Pocket MB speedbooster then, made it a 30-58 @ f1.0 (!!!). Practically never changed the lens from then on.
Speed booster Viltrox is just 160 €, will make it effectively a 24-47 @ f1.3:
Easy choice.
Don't need to go wider, but obviously need a longer lens. Adapter without speedbooster? Didn't look into that, but why not? 
 
Opinion on adapted vintage lenses: good, but you need to become an expert. Don't expect good old lenses to be bargains anymore. People became smart.
Opinion on slow lenses: no. Anything below 2.8 should be considered 'crap' for this kind of camera. This is no Sony.

I see 'professional' and 'closed' system as an oxymoron. Who in their right mind uses a computer whose lifespan is determined by the shortest lifespan of any given component.
I gave up using Macs for desktops when Apple stopped making desktops (which is a while ago.)

Did you design this lens? You seem to be so upset by someone calling it crappy. Maybe go for a walk. 

This was the OG OIS Pocket lens some people recommended due to its power zoom through LANC. I never owned the lens but I’ve seen some videos of it on a BMPCC and it seemed pretty sharp. 

I had a it for a while when I had a GH4. It's definitely crappy.