webrunner5

I am not too fond of sharping in camera or in post at all. I think doing that with a great lens known for sharpness, Zeiss comes to mind, is the way to go. It is natural looking and predictable. And yes certain cameras are known for good sharpness also.

Yeah, but like I said above the cost alone for several really nice lenses is easily half the price of the camcorder. And are you even then going to have a 15x range on them? If you bought a Canon R5 and the kit lens you would be as much as this camcorder. Camcorders of this type now are the go to camera for all the newspaper, TV stations where I live. They only use the big ENG stuff for super special events, sports in a fixed position now. You could totally make a living with that camcorder.

That lens is working well for you. Looks good, amazing for what they are price wise used.

It looks like it is doing something good.

I have considered buying one but man they look dangerous as heck to me. A gust of wind or head up ass move on my part, well you know the rest.

I think it is a wonderful video. Just goes to show sometimes less is better in video.

Well, I made a total liar out of myself and went and bought another Panasonic GH5 with V Log in it. And to make it even more crazy I bought a Canon FD 300mm f2.8 lens, the big white one, with it, and the older 14-140mm Panny lens, the black and gray one. With the newer firmware updates the GH5 has gotten a lot better than when I had mine before. Pretty hard camera to beat used even today. The 300mm ought to be good for birding and well why not. I am going to use it with my EF to M4/3 Speedbooster so will be interesting. So now I will have even more stuff.

Heck those lenses are not going to work on e 35mm film camera, my bad.

Just buy the EF-S lenses, they are cheap and are really good for the price. The 10-18mm I had was really good and the 18-135mm is amazingly good for that big of a spread. None of them are a fast aperture but they for the money are hard to beat. And they are light weight so you would not have to worry about the mount. What kind of film you thinking about using?

The SC weighs a bunch less. The S is a handful. https://store.dji.com/guides/ronin-sc-vs-ronin-s-side-by-side-comparison/

Yeah, but you don't have to buy any lenses or ND's, no nothing. And you just pick it up and go. That is what is so nice about camcorders. 15x Optical Zoom lens, DPAF, 10bit 4.2.2, Clog 2 and 3, killer battery life, built in lens hood, XLR's, that is pretty dope.

It might kind of look like a BMMCC or BMPCC on roids, but it also looks like it has 8, 9 stops of DR. That is where it is going to fall on it's ass. That is the downfall with most cameras, crap DR. No free lunch.

I have the pancake zoom 12-32, for the money pretty hard to beat, and to top it off it has OIS in it. But it has no focus ring. It can be collapsed if you want it to.

Wow this thing can put out some pretty killer footage in the right hands. Might be the camera of the year.

The patent is about as dumb as one that says you are not allowed to sing in the key of C. Just crazy stuff.

Some camera comparisons to ponder.

Sort of a Long review of the Canon XF605. Looks like a beast of a camcorder. When you factor in you don't need any lenses for it, or NDs, on and on it is really a pretty good deal and a nice pick it up and go solution with a nice looking output. This thing is a top end machine. Now if I just had 5k laying around. It has everything but the kitchen sink.

The only negative I have about Canon EF lenses are that they are Huge and Heavy, even the 24-105 F4 is a moose. I will give Sony credit their FF FE lenses are pretty small and light. That 24-105 F4 on the R7 would probably be front heavy as heck I bet.

Really nice footage. Expensive little bugger.

Well you can bet the DOP is not going to just throw any lens on there he or she wants without the Director OKing it.

I can see why, that was pretty damn dope.

I don't think it is. This is the best I could find. https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3854876#forum-post-55927150

Another gripe was the lens not having a constant aperture. That was stupid on Canon's part.

Oh, I think the G7 was one of the best m4/3 cameras ever made, up there with the Olympus E-M1. Even though they are both older cameras now I think they still hold up in this day and age as way above cameras for what they cost, and output wise stellar. Overall, the G7 is better for both photos and video, but for photos the Oly E-M1 is amazing, I think it is even better than the MK II version output wise. More pure looking. The G7 probably would not be my top pick for a Filmic, Cine look but for a person that wants a pick a cheap camera up and shoot for not much money it Really gets the job done with little to no hassle. Throw a 14-140mm kit lens on it and you are ready for nearly anything. Killer combo. It has amazing color science.