Digitaliant

I am either misinterpreting people's comments or everyone has lost their minds.
If it was their material up on a paid service with no compensation or approval, they would be all up in arms.
I've not read the safe harbor law, but common sense says it would not give companies the right knowingly leave copyrighted content up on their site, and, even worse, try to make money off of it.  If it doesn't say that, then the people in the EU are on drugs.

I've had LX100, GM1/5, X100T, RX100 over the years and decided I wanted a truly pocketable stills camera so went with the GRII. Incredible stills, malleable RAW files, top notch fixed 28mm equivalent lens, APS-C sensor so decent low light and dynamic range is excellent, out of camera black and white JPEGs are some of the best I've seen.
Ergonomically it is incredible - you can operate with one hand, which makes more of a difference than I expected for the kind of casual or experimental off the cuff shooting you'd do with a smartphone. The level of customization and your "workflow" with the camera is great, it just gets out of the way - other camera manufacturers could learn a lot from this camera. It was clearly designed by photographers and has been refined over the years.
The LX100 is a great hybrid camera, but I was never happy with the stills quality. But really great camera. The RX100 packs a lot in, but was ergonomically a mess - got used to it, but no enjoyment, always fighting the camera. GM1/5 are great, excellent stills image quality (I thought much better than LX100 when paired with good glass like the 20/1.7 or 15/1.7 or 45/1.8). X100T is great, but that's getting kind of big, and I'd rather shoot with my A7s/FE 35 2.8.

Matthew, on GH5 vs. A7RIII image...
For stills: the A7RIII is vastly superior to me. But A7RIII does weird white balance stuff (same problem with A7/A7II/A7RII) - inconsistent and often wrong. GH5 stills quality is vastly improved over the GH4 and the ghastly GH3/2. The jpeg engine on the GH5 is really good and I often don't bother messing with RAW. And I found DR is much better on GH5 over GH4, files are much more malleable, especially on highlight retention. But shadows are cleaner too. But A7RIII stills just have a lot more latitude and I actually prefer Sony color (feels more natural, accurate) when white balance is right. I shot with Fuji X-Pro 2 and X-T2 and X100T for a while and those cameras are awesome at auto white balance. Colors are really pleasing, if not accurate.
For video:  I haven't shot the A7RIII much, just got it and I've had a bunch of opportunities to shoot stills but not video, so far. So nothing meaningful to add on video image quality. But clearly IBIS is not in the same league, that is immediately clear. 
The main reason I bailed on the A7RII was usability as a hybrid cam rather than stills or video image quality. The A7RIII is much, much better as a hybrid camera. Not as seamless as the GH5 in switching between roles as stills and video camera, but much closer to the GH5 than the A7RII. The other reason I prefer Sony is the access to a wonderful range of glass, especially the ability to use wider angle legacy and manual focus glass without crop factor. I recently picked up the Voigtlander 40/1.2 and am really enjoying that lens. I think the Oly 25/1.2 Pro is one of the best 50mm equiv lenses I've ever used, for any platform (it really is all about the glass), but that is still like a 50/2.4 from DoF perspective, so somewhat limited in what you can do.

It's very expensive, yes. Sony's GM pricing is a laugh.
The Sigma 20mm F1.4 would be my choice for wide.
The Sigma 24-35mm F2.0 is a stop faster than the 16-35mm.
But if you really need that ultra wide end, 16mm... The Tamron 15-35mm F2.8 for Canon mount is actually a very good lens... But it won't have video AF like the Sigmas and Sony GM.

A test of several Sigma lenses on the Sigma MC-11 adapter. For comparison I included some Sony E-mount lenses as well. With the MC-11 adapter, the Sigma Canon EF mount lenses (and their own SA mount lenses) use continuous PDAF (phase detect AF) in video mode, just like Dual Pixel AF on a Canon body. This isn't possible with Canon's own lenses or with the Metabones Smart EF adapter.
In the test:
Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 ART (super 35) Sigma 24-35mm F2.0 ART (full frame) Sigma 20mm F1.4 ART (full frame) Sigma 24-105mm F4 (full frame) Sigma 30mm F1.4 (super 35, e-mount) Also: Zeiss Batis 25mm and 85mm for comparison. Video mode: 4K XAVC-S at 25p, in Hybrid LOG Gamma. Graded to Rec.709 in post.
Read the full article

I saw it with a LG 55B6V. No idea if the tv is HLG/HDR when i watch the youtube videos but it looks great.
I will try to download the file and upload it on a USB stick and watch if something changes.

Yeah, what would be interesting to see is how it would compare wide open against a pinched 75mm f/1.8 or Nocti 42.5mm f/1.2 set to f/2.8. Or price wise how it could keep up or beat say the Olympus 60mm f/2.8 or Panaleica 45mm f/2.8. Concerning the footprint... a Panasonic 42.5mm f/1.7 or Olympus 45mm f/1.8 should be around that same mark I believe. Not sure about that smooth finish, but that might well be a thing that looks more iffy than it really is.

Granted they do not look like vintage lenses in the rendering - quite uniform bokeh and very sharp.
However my Cooke S4 PL lenses are even sharper, so I guess film people DO need resolution
What sort of correction would you do to videos shot with Sigma ART glass?
I don't do any. The distortion on the 35mm F1.4 for example is practically non-extistant.
Yes I can see why you'd not want to chop and change too much when the GH5 is working well and it's good to focus on something that works.
But full frame, good video PDAF even with Sigma EF lenses, 42MP stills, very good ISO 12,800 and two 4K field-of-views per prime lens thanks to S35 mode with instant switch-a-doo button, is quite a lot the GH5 lacks.
May want to wait to see what the A7S3 brings though if you need to replace the GH5 outright, with another 10bit beauty.

The Sigma lenses are all superb. As you point out the only thing I'd change is the size & weight.
The FE mount ART range should be fantastic.
But will they still be bang for buck?

It works superbly for stills if you engage AF-C, which uses phase-detect AF.
In AF-S it seems to struggle. But single-point AF-C on a back button or half-press is like having AF-S anyway.
I found a similar thing with official Sony lenses and even the RX1R II, where AF-C was far superior to AF-S mode.
The Metabones adapter doesn't work at all with some Sigma lenses (was out of luck entirely with 35mm F1.4 ART!) but you should keep it for Canon stuff. I am not having much luck with Canon EF lenses on the MC-11. How about you Oliver?
Not tested Eye-AF yet but no greyed out options that I've noticed with a fully compatible Sigma lens on the MC-11.
I now prefer the A7R III to the GH5 and D850 purely for the amazing AF in video mode with Sigma lenses and Sony E-mount stuff. I have a lot of these lenses and it means I can sell a few Canon lenses when I get rid of my 1D X II.
Video AF on the GH5 is very much mediocre and had expected bigger leap with GH5S but not to be!

The Sony FE lenses tend mostly to have the more quiet AF motors, but some of the high-end GM lenses do make a clicking sound.
The Batis 25 and 85 are great... and silent.
Very impressed with the Sigma 24-35mm...As well as world's fastest full frame zoom lens, the quality is as per Zeiss Batis 25mm F2 prime... Which is more expensive by the way, and only fits one mount... But with the Sigma, you are getting a 24, 28 and 35mm prime in one lens...that goes on A7R3, 1DX, 1DC, GH5, you name it... and a handy 50mm field of view when you switch to Super 35mm mode to boot. All at F2.0 and pin sharp, with Dual Pixel AF quality autofocus in 4K on the A7R3.
Most of the Sigma lenses I've tried so far do all make a noise when focussing though, so you won't want to use the onboard audio with video AF... Same situation as on a 1D X Mark II, just for the record  The 18-35mm seemed a lot quieter though, almost silent?!
It's just very very positive to finally have Video Autofocus with Canon mount lenses... Albiet just the Sigma ones. The Canon lenses DO NOT autofocus in video mode, and neither do Tamron or the older Sigma non-ART lenses. Throw them on the scrap.
When did they introduce this BTW? MC-11 has been out for ages but I haven't seen a word out of the other bloggers and sites about C-AF in video mode + Sigma lenses. Dickheads lol
Metabones still works better in stills mode with Canon lenses... but reliability is shit with Sigma ART. So you may end up having to get both adapters. At least the Sigma is competitive priced. Mine was 250 euros brand new.

Just got the Sigma 24-35mm F2.0, it's an amazing looking image
The big surprise is this...
With the Sigma MC-11 adapter it tracks AF in video mode like a Sony FE mount lens.
The Metabones adapter does not do this.
Going to try a few more lenses on the MC-11... The adapter is just superb with Sigma's own stuff on the A7R3

I was so undecided whether to buy a GH5 or G9 or GH5s ... and I solved all my problems.
I bought the Panasonic Leica Summilux 12mm F/1.4 and the Panasonic Leica Nocticron 42.5/1.2 ... they will add more to my videos and pictures with the GX-80 than those new bodies.
There is always time to buy a new body :D
 

The 60mm f2.8 is one of the best value for money lenses out there. 

Thanks Jon.
I have been enjoying the 16 for casual photos but it is a bit big, so your vouch bodes well for saving it for video. It is certainly an improvement over my PL15mm, I just haven't been sure about the weight difference yet. I rock the Sigma 60mm f2.8 and am so happy with it that I dont think I need the better 75mm. Took a stupid amount of photos with the 60 today, as always. It gets great scores on DXO and has good DOF, plus it feels as good to me as the 1.4 Sigmas. At 3m away the f2.8 DOF is 20mm so it seems like the 75mm at f1.8 would usually be too thin DOF (for me).

I had the 35mm and the 50mm 1.4 art Sigma Nikon Mount and from what I see the only difference is the sensor not the quality of both lenses which is simply great.
If the 30mm 1.4 is bulky the 35 and 50mm for FF are huge.
The 16mm Sigma 1.4 at that price is a game changer for both M43 and for Sony A6xxx.
 
If Sigma could offer a 14-30mm F/1.4 zoom lens for m43 ... (the 18-35 1.8 and metabones speed booster is too bulky for my tastes) 
 
A 24mm and a 45mm (field of view equivalent) F/1.4 of that quality on a Sony it's simply great.
 
 
 
 

I am quite satisfied by the quality of the SIGMA 16MM F/1.4 MFT
 
 
 
GX-80 and Sigma 60mm F/2.8
 

@Greg Block Thanks for sharing the image of your rig! 
I'm thinking about getting a 5" or 7" monitor myself. I'm having a hard time deciding between VS-2 Fine HD, Ikan DH5e or DH7... I didn't think of the HDMI cable positioning as a problem as it's on the left side on my GH4. Here's how my rig could look when I decide which monitor to get. That's a 5" smartphone on top mounted with Shoulder Pod S1 and a ballhead screwed on to a SmallRig handle. I need the handle on the GX85 because of the HDMI is on the left but on the GH4 I won't need it so it can actually be an even smaller setup. 

Hi everyone,
I thought I share my first Project I shot with my new Canon C200.
I used Cinema Raw Light, mostly at 50fps. I used a lot of available light , I had only one LED Light Panel with me and relied completely on the cameras autofocus. I really wanted to try what I can do with minimal crew. Tell me what you think!
I am happy to answer all questions about the camera and my experiences with it.
Max
 
 

I knew that the iPod was going to make fun of a 1200 euros Leica and of a  450 euros Sigma in a 160x160 picture 
everything is relative 

@jonpais
just a couple of things
I like the 12mm field of view but the 16mm looks more natural without the obvious "distortions" of that focal length. 
Any lens from 12 to 75mm can be used for blogging but I think 16mm is a very good compromise not to get the camera too far with a natural look.
F/1.4 looks perfectly usable with very good out of focus zones, color rendering is great.
Was your profile picture made with the 12mm or the 7.5mm ?
 

Thanks, that's a precious info.

Thanks John,
I watched your video on a LG 55 screen (LG 55B6V) and I could say that the Sigma looks quite good for color and contrast.
Yes I noticed too that there is a quite sensible difference btw the Sigma and the Leica with ETC which has less contrast (without it is the usual splendid performer, no doubts about it).
If i had the GH5 I'd most probably use the ETC when I need to be closer to the subject with a tele lens so to get an extra reach. I am not fully convinced of the ETC with wide or normal lenses.
I don't remember if you did a video testing of the Sigma 30 with ETC in comparison with the 42.5 Leica. I will check now.
Thanks again, very kind of you.
 
 

Hi to All,
I wrote a script to fast enable/disable Cinelike for gx80-85 in IOS (iphone or Ipad)
Link for script https://workflow.is/workflows/ee3e045edbea4a79bec648e31e7d2a07 (Download Workflow App before)
In attachment a Video Tutorial to use it
I hope can be useful
AD84C80E-8445-4169-BB78-633CB561CE69.MP4
or link https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6F1iXrslVvha0dXMXdPU0hhLW8