kye

That makes sense. In that case, I don't know why people are saying the S5 is a FF GH5. 100Mbps Long-GOP < 400Mbps ALL-I, regardless of how big the sensor is. In fact, I shoot 200Mbps 1080p because I value the 10-bit 422 ALL-I more than I value 4K.

My impression was that the GH5 started off without the cool codecs and they were added later on, so I would have thought the S5 would also get updates in a similar manner. Maybe not, who knows. Certainly the GH5 was partially famous because of the ALL-I modes, so it does matter I think, although there's the whole 'undercutting your other models' thing. I've idly entertained the idea of upgrading one day from the GH5 to FF, especially if there is no GH6, but there's no way I would re-buy a camera body and all my lenses for 100Mbps Long-GOP after having 200Mbps/400Mbps 10-bit 422 ALL-I. I guess if you graph how much a 150Mbps+ 10-bit 422 ALL-I capable camera with IBIS and MILC form-factor costs then maybe that graph goes up after the GH5 goes EOL? I thought the S5 would have been that natural replacement.

Very cheap 50/1.2 APSC lens that seems to not be rubbish.. CA is its weakness, but for under $100 you can't have everything!

ALL-I gives a HUGE performance boost when editing! If I ask an NLE to go to a specific frame in a file, Long-GOP requires to find the previous keyframe and render each frame between the keyframe and the target frame. ALL-I just goes to the frame and decodes just that one frame. ALL-I footage plays backwards with the same CGP/GPU performance as playing forwards. For the same bitrates ALL-I does take a slight quality hit, but it's not that much. The bitrates aren't that different either - the GH5 has 200Mbps and 400Mbps ALL-I modes, but there is nothing stopping Panasonic from adding other bitrates as well. ALL-I is one of the reasons that BM can get a modestly spec'd computer to play 12K BRAW footage, when almost no computer on earth can play the 8K h265 files from the Canon R5.

I agree.. also, S1H buyers are more likely to have higher skill levels to get the most from the footage out of the camera - post processing shouldn't be underestimated - the more I learn about colour grading the more I view camera footage (even rec709 h264 files) as an unprocessed image for input to an entire image processing pipeline. Does the S5 have all the 10-bit 422 ALL-I codecs yet? I haven't kept up with it, but when it launched it was like the GH5 at launch, limited to unremarkable 72Mbps type codecs.

The XC10 can undercrank. I shot some pretty amazing night footage once at about 1fps, which I didn't use in the edit but was quite useful at the time because the camera could see the boat passing nearby, how far away it was, how many people were on it, and many other things, when to the naked eye the boat was completely in darkness apart from its headlights. I was talking about filming 24fps and then playing it back slower, ie 12fps / 50% speed, or lower. Most recent usage was the dramatic scene where a woman is crying and chasing a train which is pulling out of the station and has her lover on it. I felt it matched the aesthetic very well. My understanding of cinematic language is that 50p conformed to 24 is typically used in Hollywood to make something seem a bit surreal, the way we experience reality during peaks of emotion. Shooting 50p and playing it back at 24p slows time but still gives a continuity of medium, ie, it doesn't break the illusion of continuous motion. It is also a subtle speed reduction that the footage doesn't feel overly artificial, whereas 120p at 20% feels completely artificial and calls attention to itself. Having less than 24fps displayed to the audience will break the continuity of motion. This can be used to great effect for sequences where the perception of a character is highly impaired, such as due to heavy drug use, injury, or severe trauma. In situations like this the use will likely be seen as fitting into the context, but if it had no alignment to the story then it would pull the audience out of the experience and call attention to the medium, so it can't be used without careful consideration. Slowing down 24fps footage will do both of the above things - it will slow down the events to slower than real-time and it will show an altered perception of reality. This may be appropriate in situations like the point of view of a car accident victim coming in and out of consciousness, or the above mentioned woman chasing the train, but the level of emotional engagement has to be right - it would work for the woman if her lover leaving would mean that her life would be basically over but it likely wouldn't work if her lover was going away for a week and forgot his spare socks. I think frame rate effects are something that you can only use effectively when you understand the aesthetic associations involved and are using these to support the dramatic content of the story. Failure to do so is one of the things that I see with vloggers who have copied the Casey Neistat vlog formula but don't understand it, so they use slow-motion in ways that say "I just discovered this function of my camera" rather than "here's something that looks awesome in slow-motion, and the thing and the slow-motion effect are both relevant to the story". One thing that is interesting is the use of slow-motion pedestrians walking in a city. It's a stereotypical image that I find works quite well occasionally, typically when the music is on the higher-intensity end of things, but also where the context is also high-intensity. If someone always wanted to go to NY and this was their trip of a lifetime then that context might warrant it, but a NY vlogger going out to buy milk would have to try a lot harder to 'justify' the altered-state high-emotional context of that shot. The wedding film-maker shooting a wedding couple in the middle of Times Square that I saw when I was there might get away with using it in the wedding reel, as the wedding is likely a high-emotion situation too. I see film-making as a three-level thing: 1) understand the technical aspects, 2) understand the aesthetic of each technical aspect, and 3) apply the right technical choices in order to support the story at each given moment.

Also, F3 got a mention in one of the 2020 Best Tech videos... Fun stuff!

I think @mercer mentioned using a belt clip for a tape measure at one point.. ?

Recently I've seen a few instances where a TV show or movie slowed down 24p footage, effectively creating a <12fps shot. The interesting thing is that often these productions are modern, shot on Alexas, and could just as easily shot 50p or 120p+, but didn't. The moments that were slowed down were obvious shots for slow motion, so it's not like the editor went in an unexpected direction that the director or script couldn't have anticipated. The thing that strikes me is that it's a different effect to shooting 50p and slowing it down. A different aesthetic. TBH it seems more timeless and more emotional than the typical 50p, high-emotion, queue the big music, pivotal story moment that is commonly done. It feels more like classic cinema. Have you noticed this? How does it feel to you? Would you do it deliberately?

TV manufacturers are in the business of selling TVs. If you want to talk about the mis-alignment between what film-makers want, what consumers can see, and what is getting used to sell TVs, then you're wasting your time talking about anything other than resolution, and specifically 4K. Most people can't tell the difference between 1080p and 4K at normal / sensible viewing distances, and most video content even shot in 4K looks awful when viewed close enough to see the horrific compression that gets applied to it by streaming services. HDR is something that I think is worthwhile, and an argument can be made for why that should be something that is worth re-buying your TV for, but 4K in the consumer market is just a gimmick to sell things. I find that the world makes zero sense when you don't look at it from the right angle - the design of a TV isn't to give the best cinematic experience, it's to put dollars into the pockets of electronic company CEOs! Lots of discussions here on the forums are around how depressing the world has become, for a variety of reasons, and I think that a major contributor is the idea that the world should be a certain way, and that that way is different to how it is. This is simply a recipe for frustration and depression. I think Fuzzynormal said it best....

If you care about it that much then I'd say get more discerning friends! My experience is that people see / hear / smell / taste things differently and uniquely, not worse or better. They are likely not sensitive to the things that you are attune to, and vice versa. When I ask my wife about colour grading she has all kinds of opinions, however she doesn't know the words to use and so it's not an easy subject to communicate about, but my overall impression is that she's sensitive to different things than I am, rather than not caring. This was my experience when I was into high-end audio equipment too, it's very common for the wives of audiophiles to be able to tell that you did a minor upgrade, but without being told and by noticing it from the other room. The other thing to consider is that much of film-making is the deliberate crafting of things that other people find sub-conscious or completely un-conscious. The difference between good and bad editing for example results in the viewer being able to follow the plot vs being confused by certain elements, and this is often accomplished (especially by the great directors / editors who show and don't tell) by the careful arranging of lines, shots, and edits which the viewer will correctly interpret but likely won't be aware of. I suggest that rather than rant on the internet because the world doesn't align to your particular preferences, you take this as an opportunity to learn what they do care about and focus on that. After all, you're making content for other people, and not yourself, right?

I definitely agree with the sentiment "the least moves wins", although I would refine that considerably. I used to find myself basically fighting the footage, unable to get the footage to look even half-way decent. This was because my skill level was basically zero at that point. As I gradually learned, I started being able to make a few good adjustments before the 'tweaking' started doing more harm than good. Now, I think of it as a skill-level thing - the more skill you have the more adjustments you can make before you're making it worse and not better. My new workflow is now to apply a look (Kodak 2393 LUT with some blurring/texture as shown above is my current favourite but I'm adjusting and optimising over time) and then to WB, adjust levels, and do any localised corrections required, but all underneath the look. The secondaries are normally Hue-v-Hue / Hue-v-Lum / Hue-v-Sat but I will also do local adjustments if required. These are often to match shots rather than significantly push things around. I'm often doing things like darkening / desaturating distracting objects in the background or doing a large and soft power-window to brighten the subject. I regard this as being quite minimal, considering that the 2393 is by far the largest adjustment in the grade and it was created by people far above my skill level, so I'm still responsible for the minority of the grade. With my control surface I'm able to rip through an edit only spending a short amount of time per shot, by only making a few relatively repeatable adjustments.

Every camera has great rolloff if the DR is there, just apply a curve. If I can get a compliment on the highlight rolloff from a budget P&S camera from 2009 then there are no excuses! It's also possible to get a nice rolloff on areas that are clipped, although you don't get any detail back from them obviously. The more I learn about colour grading, the more that I realise that grading is in the same category as production design or lighting, you can't expect your footage to look great if you don't do any set dressing, hair or makeup, or just shoot with whatever light happens to be there when you happen to show up, so why would it look great if you didn't do any colour grading either?

Been online singe 1994 - the strength of my filters should be a testament to that!

Could be, they're very easy to drink! Speaking of Korean TV series, they're surprisingly well produced and image quality is often remarkably high. My wife says the storytelling is also very good, so if you're inclined to a bit of soap then they might be worth a watch. Netflix is full of them if you can navigate their algorithm in the right direction 🙂

Everyone wants to talk about 4K and 6K and 8K and 12K, and to talk about 8-bit vs 10-bit vs 12-bit vs 14-bit, but when it actually comes to the quality of the image, people don't want to know. I was interested in it but found so little online that I ended up having to do my own study on the SNR of various codecs myself. It's here: You're talking about the quality / performance of the same flavours of codec but with differing encoding methods (software/hardware). I'd bet you won't find anything and you'll have to do your own testing to find answers. I found it almost impossible to get information on the T2 chip that even specified if it was supported, and if so, what codecs / bit-depths / subsampling it supported. Good luck, but my advice is to give up asking.

We bought one of each and tried them all at a dinner party, with my wife (who is heavily into watching Korean TV series) explaining the customs around drinking it, with the eldest person serving first, how to hold the bottle as you pour, who has the glass highest when toasting, etc etc. The only challenge was the 'original' flavour, which reminded me of grappa / methylated spirits! Urrgh.

Yeah, that's what I thought you were getting at. Wow... you mean that hiring a photographer (or videographer) isn't just hiring their camera, and that the operator is more than just a technician????? HOLD THE FRONT PAGE!! But seriously... yeah. All this equipment stuff is BS if you're putting it ahead of the creative side. No-one does their best work when fighting with the tech, even if the tech is nice tech. "The acting was uninspired, the lighting was awful, and the story was un-engaging, but overall it was a great film because it was shot on a great camera with high resolution and great colour science" - said no-one ever.

This conversation gets better and better.... The simple choice of wanting 8K output not only completely dominates the hardware that the OP has to use, necessitates a proxy workflow which the OP seems to be against, but now it dominates the choice of NLE! Never mind if I hate the computer, workflow, or software.... I have 8K! I think the OP should really be asking themselves how much 8K is worth in comparison to the other things it looks like they have to trade-off. I used to be very 4K-centric and was wanting to future-proof my videos as much as possible (which is a genuine thing considering I am basically the family historian so videos will get more interesting over time rather than less) but as I gradually discovered what I liked in an image and what made the most difference to getting those results I have gone down to 1080p. My interest in 4K was naive and it was only through learning more about the craft that I realised how little it actually matters. Everyone is different in their priorities, but when priority #1 means having to compromise on #2, #3, #4, and #5... it's a good time to question how that stacks up.

I was advocating for 1080p Prores / DNxHD proies, so that only requires a 1080p ALL-I capable computer, which these days is almost all of them. If he wants to shoot 8K and master in 8K then good luck to him, it's the editing experience that is the question. Plus who knows what kind of hype around 8K is present in the marketplace these days - until clients work out that 8K is pretty well useless and doesn't improve IQ even if it can be broadcast then there might still be money in offering 8K as a service, and considering the state of film-making and 2020 I understand anything to give a competitive edge..

Soju! I had my first soju experience only the other day, and it was quite delicious 🙂 I also like that the grapefruit one was featured - it was one of the ones that everyone liked the most!

The other challenge that @herein2020 was avoiding was that of incompatibility. My dad used to work for a large educational institution and ordered a custom built PC to replace their main file server, so naturally ordered the latest motherboard, CPU, RAM, RAID controller and drives. Long story short, two months after getting it he still hadn't managed to get an OS to install correctly, and neither had the other people on the hundred-page thread talking about the incompatibility, in which multiple people verified that the manufacturers of various components were all blaming each other for the problem and no-one was working on a solution, so my dad did what everyone else in the thread did and gave up. He was lucky enough to be able to lean on their wholesaler to take the equipment back with a full refund, but others weren't so lucky, and the thread continued for another year as various people swapped out parts for other models/brands to see what the best fully-functional system was. Or you just buy something that someone else has already checked for you. There's a reason that many serious software packages are only supported on certain OS versions and certain hardware configurations. It's because their clients value reliability and full-featured service and support rather than getting a 12% improvement on performance.

XMAS DOGGIES!! My only question is - what alcohol did you put in those little barrels? Brandy perhaps, for the holiday season? Whisky for a more straight-up drink? ...Tequila perhaps? 🙂 🙂 🙂

While the C70 has many advantages and attractive features, I think the above is probably the most important factor of any camera because it impacts the level of creativity and inspiration of the video, not just what colour or clarity the pixels are in the output files. I consistently find that creativity evaporates when I feel like i'm fighting the equipment rather than it having my back and supporting the work. In the creative pursuits, this is a night-and-day difference, but of course, is also different for all people, so it's about the synergy between the camera and the user rather than one camera suiting everyone. Great stuff!