anonim

Not so much expensive for once-to-a-life unforgettable pleasure-grief dating, I dare to state... Of course, just R (i. e. fire-ones, censured-ones version are accounted: I got 35mm and 50mm Summicron for 250e and 200e respectively, even 28mm 2.8 could be find for about 400e. Even 28-70 zooms are just of the same silksexy touch for about 300e.

Oh, no - not so pricey Zeiss Contax Distagon 35mm 2.8 (and its Voigtlander Scoparex clone), Zeiss Contax Distagon 25mm 2.8 and Leica Summicron 35mm f2.
Actually, I like small and precise constructed manual lenses on m43 body. For me it is so lovely to rotate smooth focus ring and be more envolved in shooting process. IMO, autofocusing is so boring and cocacola styled (Being VIP-importantly in hurry and get some fast sugar emulsion for keep condition for our choef-d-oeuvre's shots!)

Oh, no - not so pricey Zeiss Contax Distagon 35mm 2.8 (and its Voigtlander Scoparex clone), Zeiss Contax Distagon 25mm 2.8 and Leica Summicron 35mm f2.
Actually, I like small and precise constructed manual lenses on m43 body. For me it is so lovely to rotate smooth focus ring and be more envolved in shooting process. IMO, autofocusing is so boring and cocacola styled (Being VIP-importantly in hurry and get some fast sugar emulsion for keep condition for our choef-d-oeuvre's shots!)

One of the the most beautiful rendition of Voigt's that I found - in spite of being upload just in 720p. Actually, what me personally impressed with Nokton Voigt's, is the fact that any of other lenses (IMO) don't render so wonderful even at 720p. As they don't need bite-me sharpness to made an impression. Proof for their high-end microcontrast, roll-of and intrinsic color-science in general?
 

I think Jon looks for different things in a lens than some of us, which is perfectly fine of course. Seems he likes a perfect lens, he has a track record of owning and shooting with some of the best lenses for the system, incl. the Panasonic 12mm f/1.4, 42.5mm f/1.2, Olympus 75mm f/1.8, 25mm f/1.2, Sigma DC DN 30mm f/1.4, Veydra Mini Primes etc, where it's all about resolving power and sharpness, where they are absolutely smashing it, you can't really argue that.
It just doesn't seem he 'gets' people that put character first however (which is funny itself because he didn't feel Phil A's footage had any, but okay)... like shooting a 17.5mm f/0.95 wide open or using anything vintage. Takes offence himself when people find a lens to render 'boring', meaning not that he himself has shot something boring, but that the lens has a reliable and clinical look of perfection to it (maybe that is the sort of 'character' he wishes to see, to me that's prefering a vodka over a whiskey, where as well, nothing is wrong to put one over the other, personal preference and all). To that person. Yet you know, it's okay if people aren't on the same page, an opinion is something subjective, there's no one true way... and one should really be accepting of that and letting others do their thing. To me it matters more that someone is having fun shooting and makes great content in terms of mood, composition, 'story telling' however limited applicability perhaps. If you have blinders on and can only tell if someone's work is good by pixelpeeping, then you might be missing the point (but atleast you'd have every pixel). So I personally was able to appreciate said video and post, because it isn't always the main goal to capture something pixel perfect, but to capture something that elicits something beyond that. And Jon's said it before himself... he might've shot and uploaded a video with the white balance, framerate or audiosync off... and never finds anyone in the comments complaining and pointing it out. That's all because they look through the pixel peeping and rather just focus on the essence. If your content is good, it's probably good because of the bigger picture, not just the individual pixel. And even if you don't see it that back with someone else's work the least you could do is give them some constructive feedback... the lowest thing you could do is dismiss what they've done altogether and regard it as someone clowning around (discouraging them to ever post something again). A bit of mutual respect goes a long way.

Firmware 2.0 for the Panasonic GH5 has been officially announced, and will be available for download at the end of September 2017.
I've been testing a pre-production version of this on my camera thanks to Panasonic, to bring you my first impressions of the new features which include:
Professional 400Mbit ALL-I intraframe codec for 10bit 4K 4:2:2
"Open Gate" High Resolution Anamorphic Mode (4992 x 3744)
Hybrid Log Gamma with view assist feature for HDR shooting
New and improved autofocus engine for video
Performance optimisations and bug fixes
Read on to find out what it's like to shoot with...

Didn't read every posting in this thread, so maybe this was already covered. I mean the part about EditReady. There is a much more powerful tool that does a lot more. It's called Kyno. A beta version for Windows (free) is announced. Didn't look too spectacular to me initially, but now I've bought it, and I think it's fantastic. Plays all* media (you can filter by video, audio and stills), dives trough folder structures (called drilldown-mode), allows to import, trim (> subclip), batch-rename, tag (Premiere: mark), transcode, wrap and copy directly from card. Allows to send data bases to FCP (shift cmd f) and Premiere (shift cmd p). 
*well, no raw video for now, they're working on it.

GH5, no troubles with heat, rolling shutter is kept in check, tons of cool features, sweet battery life, cardslot is on the side and dual slot type, proper audio interface... ISO is now supposedly pretty solid up to ISO3200. Nice 'n grippy for handheld shooting; especially with the 5-axis B.I.S. and optional Dual I.S. (2.0). Vari-angle display with well-implemented touchscreen. Tons of compact native lenses as well, as you know. Keep it light and throw it on a gimbal. And... people seem to be enjoying it for stills as well, for which it also has numerous interesting features.
 
Like, don't get me wrong, the pixel level results from the A6500 sensor are pretty great, like, the amount of dynamic range, level of detail, high ISO noise performance, really great stuff and all. But once you look beyond that, it really falls apart. The body is just rubbish. Like, Sony... c'mon, take notice, all other crop sensor mirrorless camera flagships are pretty nice bodies. GH5, E-M1 Mark II, X-T2, NX1, even the Canon EOS M5 for Pete's sake. But no, they went for a super cute small footprint camera, because that's what Sony envisions the people want. Btw, there's not other choice, there's just one model of this generation APS-C Sony mirrorless camera, atleast the other manufacturers are giving you the smaller ones as an option, not forcing you to go along with it.
With flagship cameras you expect great things, but that's hard to realize when you've got only so little space to make it happen... so, chip infrastructure is baaaaddd. That's why you get massive rolling shitter. Heat dissipation is more or less non existent, leading to recording interruptions and camera shutdowns. They've come up with a 'solution': tripod mode! So basically you raise the threshold for overheat protection to kick in, that however renders your camera sooo friggin' hot, that you are no longer supposed to shoot handheld with it. I mean: c'mon son! Anyways, some people are willing to make that work or claim it's not that bad, all I know is: I can't just rely on it at any given time. But ok, we'll shut our eyes and pretend we didn't see anything. Still, the body is terrible.
The cardslot is co-located at the battery compartment, you can't imagine how happy I was when the G80 had gotten a dedicated cardslot on the side, rather than the G7's one that's at the battery compartment as well. The battery itself is tiny and doesn't last very long, don't you just love changing batteries all the time? Yeah, well, me neither. There's no dedicated headphone jack for monitoring. It lacks a sizeable grip for comfortable holding. The screen flips, but not all the way up, nor is it of the vari-angle type that flips up from the side so you can still mount a mic on top and still see the screen. It's a touchscreen now, but the implementation is rather limited, you'd expect more from a manufacturer who's in the smartphone game (although, I'm not suprised they're not killing it, the new XZ1 for example looks amazing on paper... just like their cameras, in reallife... they just don't win you over). Like honestly, what were they thinking here. Back to the image, atleast that's alright, right? Well, like I said, tons of rolling shutter and especially color at its default settings is appaling... even generates color channel clipping. You can make it work, but it takes you a lot of tweaking... don't know about you, but I rather get stuff done than dicking around.
That's why people love Canon so much, they're like the opposite of Sony. Don't care about innovation, about specs, how it looks on paper. They just want you to pick it up, shoot with it and find the results pleasing with the minimum effort that went into it. Their AF is on point, colors are pleasing right of the bat, light codec 1080p only on many of their cameras so NLE's slices through the footage like a hot knife through butter. But you know, for how long can you really ignore con-/prosumer need for 4K? Slowmo? Sensor stabilization? Vari-angle screens & mic-in port? Etc. So, you're kinda in between these two extremes.
And with the Sony btw, lenses. Argh, their lens philosophy. For a good 3 years now their mirrorless lens line-up has been dead (if not taken into account big bulky expensive ENG/Cinestyle zooms), no development no releases whatsoever. At this point the APS-C E-mount cameras are entry level fullframe cameras for poor souls unable to afford the A7 line-up. Atleast with the A6x00 they can start building their fullframe lens collection and wait until they have enough money to upgrade. Don't know man, not cool! For me one of the main benefits of a crop sensor mirrorless body is the fact that the lenses are small, the body itself doesn't even matter all that much, but if you can keep lenses compact, you've found the secret to a compact system! Sony fails to embrace this. Another big no-no for me!
It just all adds up... to something that's disappointing, but like, I was looking forward to the A6300 when rumors of it were leaked and it got closer and closer to launch, because I do like the APS-C performance, I think it's a sweetspot. You get a bit more dynamic range and are able to squeeze a little bit more juice out of the colors. High ISO lowlight noise performance is really respectable. Obviously the crop is less, so your options to go wide angle are better. It's easier to establish a shallow depth of field. All true. Like the occasional fullframe look? Throw on a focal reducer! Still, you have the option to keep lenses small... atleast, with those manufacturers that are willing to embrace that path. Like honestly, I'd probably pick the APS-C Fujifilm X-T2 instead (there were rumors of a videocentric X-T2s, but it has been pretty quiet for a couple of weeks now I believe) or the good ol' Samsung NX1, though, that one really doesn't cope very well at high ISO either. Both the Fuji and Samsung have a bit similar issues that make 'em less appealing. First is the less flexible lens mount option, with no electronic adapters either. No sensor stabilization is a biggie for me. And no vari-angle screen, plus the X-T2 isn't touch sensitive either. To me both Panasonic GH5 and Olympus E-M1 Mark II are what mirrorless crop sensor bodies should be all about. Like, there's hardly anything bad to say for them. You might only be able to 'blame' them for not having APS-C/FF sensor performance. But if that otherwise gives you everything you could ever dream of wanting and be compact at that as well... it's easy to find ways to make it work out just fine. So until someone comes up with something like the GH5 in terms of body and features and throws in an APS-C sensor, for me: Micro Four Thirds it is.

The GH2 will have a smaller sweet spot to get the best out of it for sure.  When I got my GH3 I found this to be very useful and it is using the GH2:
 

Just for the matter of proper quoting of "MrStupid":
"A lens with great micro-contrast can produce a photograph that appears to be life-like and threedimensional despite it being unsharp or out of focus. A lens that excels only at sharpness (like Sigma ART, Zeiss OTUS and Milvus, Sony G-Master or Canon non-L lenses) cannot achieve such a feat."
So, this is not opposite of mine experience with Sigmas: slightly exaggerating sharpness of detail vs providing more color nuances (and impression of depth) - at the end, image looks very flat-ish. That's the reason why for me it wasn't easy task to match radically sharp/flat choice of Sigma Art lenses with anything else.
Although, of course, his statement that "Unlike measurable resolution, micro-contrast is perceptible not measurable" has a mystical taste
As @jsc already note, Shane Hurblut test give some more elaborate facts about topic. http://www.thehurlblog.com/lens-tests-leica-summicron-c-vs-cooke-s4-film-education/
Hurblut: "I felt the Leica was sharper... Cooke definitely was creamier and more three dimensional... The 3D quality is how far the background feels away from the subject and how the subject pulls away from that BG."

@mercer I think its great you got a GH2, now you just have to go the next small step and take up the Back to the Future challenge™️ to improve your filming and cure you of GAS.  The main challenge is to use the GH2 for a entire year but if that too much to commit to up front then at least 2 months without any thoughts of a new camera purchase -you really don't need that E-M5ii or Canon M6 or D500  I will be your sponsor if do the challenge, and will join you with my GH3.
I missed the GH2 era and started filming with a GH3, I agree that some newer camera may have a better image with colours, tonality etc but in reality these are small improvements over the GH2/3 and can be overcome with creativity.  Now if your shooting for broadcast or theatre projection then it makes a difference, but for youtube or vimeo I don't think it really makes as much of a difference as we like to think. Some of the colour issues with say the GH3 are mainly due to everyone shooting with all settings at minus 5 and then expecting that slapping a few LUTs on the footage will make it look like an Alexa.   If I look at what I've done mainly as a hobbyist (I do the occasional paid wedding as well), I have been far too distracted by gear and the technical side -60p, then 120p now 240p, 4K (which I only use to get good 1080p, so why not just shoot good 1080p), shooting contrast at -5, then shooting log, so many LUTs I've lost count, big rigs, small rigs, I hate all rigs, monitors, evf's, external recorders, gimbals, sliders, ultra contrast filters, black satin filters, speed boosters and on it goes.  It some ways its refreshing to go back to basics, which was all there was for hobbyists really at the beginning of the DSLR revolution. I suspect that for a new filmmaker or someone who has been distracted by gear, the best advice is to get a decent camera such as a GH2 or GH3, a few good primes, and decent sticks and shoot the crap out of it for at least a year before contemplating any further gear.  Learn to compose, to light, to get good audio, to tell a story, learn to edit and grade. The GH5 looks great but in someways has more options than most of us need, and you can end up spending all of your time testing all of these options rather than being forced to shoot something creative.  If the Watchtower of Turkey was filmed on a GH3, with a 12-35mm and 42.5mm lumix lens, and a tripod, and it has 4.3 million views on Vimeo, then do I really need anything more?

I got mine in march. I owned a GH4 before, so I wasn't new to pana stuff, still after the shitstorm on the forums I was pretty unconfident with my new camera and it's capabilies and was thinking about about switching to A6500. After 5 months of use, I am pretty confident not to switch. 
The DR is not really improoved, but still you get a solid slow mo (with a cheap mitakon speedbooster you only have 1.5x crop, while the A7SII crops even more in 120fps mode), the battery is awesome, the ergonomics feels okay, and you get a 4:3 full sensor readout. IMO this is really a big deal, i found myself using this even without anamorphic lenses, I can reframe any shot. 4K 60fps is awesome, but the 10bit codec sucks. IBIS saves my powers, no need for tripods or shoulder rigs while running around on the field. The Like709 will become your favourite, i swear this is the best picture profile i ever used (not counting the logs).
If you watch any review on the YT, they will tell you exactly the same. So if you don't need propper AF (like the A6500 have), get a gh5, get a cheap speedbooster, get some vintage lenses and unleash your creativity.

About clean image... Note that this one is in 720p
Second in 1080p
 

While I agree with you the information posted on that site is not based on science and the points made are not valid, when one focuses most of their energy on attacking the character of the person vs. what they say, it vastly diminishes one's credibility and projects lack of self esteem: perception is projection. With our planet on the verge of another world world (possibly nuclear), it is in our best interest at every level to figure out how to be kind to each other and work together, to help each other non-competitively. Tough times are ahead- the cat's out of the bag regarding global banking and its current state (crypto currency is a reaction to the problem and may not solve it). It's in our best interest to prevent more division, instead promote unity and helping each other, as that's the best chance of preventing the next big disaster or helping us to survive and heal if it cannot be prevented. While it's important to be aware of negative things such as war and global financial collapse, it's more important to be thinking about living in harmony, as our thoughts do indeed change reality in ways that are currently beyond our scientific understanding: http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/implications.html
Here's a challenge for everyone: don't put anyone down or project negativity for a week. Smile at everyone you see. Meditate at least 10 minutes every day (it's easy once you start doing it regularly). See how people treat you differently and how your life and outlook on life changes. I'm not perfect and this post is a reminder for myself to practice the same.
On the topic of contrast, micro contrast, and resolution, it's all the same thing, the ability to measure differences / deltas / changes at multiple frequencies, from low to high. MTF charts and shooting lens charts are useful tools for showing lens performance without pseudoscience. The lens effect you mention regarding parallel light is collimation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collimator, https://oceanoptics.com/product-category/collimating-lenses/.
For aesthetic and artistic appeal, these kinds of tests are helpful: http://www.thehurlblog.com/lens-tests-leica-summicron-c-vs-cooke-s4-film-education/, http://www.thehurlblog.com/cinematography-online-why-do-we-want-flat-glass/. We can see that defects and artifacts can be appealing, depending on the intended use of the lenses and projects.

https://***URL not allowed***/talent-feature-limiting-yourself-produces-some-of-the-best-creativity-in-you-with-janne-amunet/

As mentioned in interview for Cinema 5D, this clip is done using exclusively em1 II
 

The author of that discussion certainly wants to be taken seriously. But, no, it's a joke and he's incompetent.
The main reason modern primes have more elements than older lenses is the switch from digital to film. He's too bloody ignorant to know this and too stupid to any research, but film accepts light from any angle whereas the thick filter - often 4mm deep - in front of a sensor means that it only sees light travelling parallel to the lens access - because the filter consists of long narrow tunnels like a lighting grid. This change in requirements adds a lot of extra elements, especially to fast lenses. If you don't have these elements then, with a digital sensor, contrast goes down, not up as Mr Stupid thinks. (This is why people who want to shoot vintage wide angles have the filters on A7's thinned, even though it reduces performance in other ways.)
It would be one thing the silly man actually addressed the above and disagreed - but he's too ignorant to even know the basics of subject he's ranting about. This is example of
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect
..Which, yes, was discovered by the character from Archer. (True story: I look enough like Trotsky that people can't tell us apart except from the nose. And he's dead. And the friend I sat next to during my masters degree turned out to look just like Hitler - only no one noticed until he put a piece of black tape on his upper lip. Which won't make seem relevant unless you watch Archer, but there you go.)
 

Already mentioned, just to add some info: cheap and (still) hidden gem - Voigtlander Color Ultron f1.8. (In fact, there is second "concave" version which is very pricey.)
It is full Zeiss Planar construction, different from CY f1.7. QBM mount is very easy to adapt or - I think even unikely - convert to EOS mount.
http://forum.mflenses.com/voigtlnder-color-ultron-50mm-f1-8-in-m42-singapore-t72279.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/rollei-voigtlander-color-ultron-1-8-50mm-on-canon-t3-t71100.html

Slightly (or a bit more) sarcastic and apodictic tone of Jon Jacobs - to quote: "looking for more “mojo” to add character and “filmic” to your hobby of playing with cameras and trying to make short Vimeo clips look like someone's idea of exaggerated 80s film stock" - doesn't mean anything more than also subjective prejudice. In comparison with high capable GH2 hacks, for me GX8 has some problems with roll-ofs, in-camera done saturation, noise reduction and exaggerate sharpening, which in result may looks "cleaner" in 4k to HD conversion. Some of GH2 hack matrices successfully in great amount take away sharpening and noise-reduction artefacts, leaving futages in some sort of prores or even pseudoraw stadium that could be lately more sharpen.
@Mercer My greatest problem with GH2 always was high noise in any low-light situation and vulnerable DR. So, for me Canis Majoris is hack with highest efficiency in clever reduction of shadow noise. One of the late, or maybe the latest hack by master with nickname Apefos make, imho, sublimation of all others efforts. He even provide appropriate grading luma curves and, if needs, NeatVideo presets. Look to personalview site.

Slightly (or a bit more) sarcastic and apodictic tone of Jon Jacobs - to quote: "looking for more “mojo” to add character and “filmic” to your hobby of playing with cameras and trying to make short Vimeo clips look like someone's idea of exaggerated 80s film stock" - doesn't mean anything more than also subjective prejudice. In comparison with high capable GH2 hacks, for me GX8 has some problems with roll-ofs, in-camera done saturation, noise reduction and exaggerate sharpening, which in result may looks "cleaner" in 4k to HD conversion. Some of GH2 hack matrices successfully in great amount take away sharpening and noise-reduction artefacts, leaving futages in some sort of prores or even pseudoraw stadium that could be lately more sharpen.
@Mercer My greatest problem with GH2 always was high noise in any low-light situation and vulnerable DR. So, for me Canis Majoris is hack with highest efficiency in clever reduction of shadow noise. One of the late, or maybe the latest hack by master with nickname Apefos make, imho, sublimation of all others efforts. He even provide appropriate grading luma curves and, if needs, NeatVideo presets. Look to personalview site.

Honestly, if my grading ever looks pastellic... it's a mess up... either due to my bad skills or lack of calibrated monitor. If it ever looks good, it is probably accidental and I will not be able to replicate it. If it looks bad, it was accidental and I can replicate it every time...

I haven't used a GH5, but from the samples that were out, at the time, I chose the 5D3 because of this video. I have yet to see anything from the GH5 that looks as cinematic as this...
Or this...
However, I have seen some fine videos since and I am sure good narratives could be made with a GH5.