kye

After the wife saw how much effort I was putting into looking at various options she just told me to buy the Voigtlander and be done with it, so I now have a 17.5mm 0.95 on order!! I wonder if I've managed to escape without having been bitten by the vintage lens bug? Probably not! ??? So, my lineup will now be: SLR Magic 8mm (for "wow" landscapes and cityscapes / tight interiors) Voigtlander 17.5mm (for the 80% of shots) Helios 58mm + 0.71 SB (for quirky portraits or without SB for tele detailed shots from lookouts or what-not) No excuses now (not that I ever had any before anyway....)

Great to hear your thoughts, and I agree about post-processing being critical. I specifically went with Resolve because it had the more advanced colour and image processing, which I believe is more important to the feel of the footage than people realise. After more than 18 months of trying to learn colour grading I can do a lot of stuff, but putting magic into the footage still eludes me and is a deep art indeed! The best footage is yet to come. I know from playing with my GH5 and some vintage lenses that an image can be detailed and yet still soft and film-like, and this is the kind of thing that can be done in post if the colourist has the skillset. You'd think that they'd know better than to let @webrunner5 in there in the first place!!

Yeah. I keep tossing up between calling this fictional camera an XC20 or a C50 or a C100mk3. If I asked Canon for an XC20 they would probably keep the fixed lens, if I asked for a C100mk3 then they'd probably not include decent 4K, but the C50 might be the winner because it might get the best of both worlds.. The "mini C100" concept is great. Imagine if Canon changed their stripes completely and made a C50 with M-mount, APS-C sensor with IBIS, DIGIC processor giving 4K from 6K downsample, HFR and 10-bit modes, H265 to the SD-card and RAW to the CFast card, with the existing XLR audio module for the XC15. Would anyone on here buy a different camera ever again? Of course, Sony probably wouldn't deliver anything like this either - partly because its in the grey area between their hybrid team and their cine team, and partly because no other company is forcing them to do so. If Canon released the C50 as described above then it would almost instantly cause all the other camera companies to restructure to either merge their hybrid and cine divisions or create a third one with people from the other teams. Ah, we can dream....

Excellent start, and +1 for more videos!! Everybody on YT has had a go at making a how-to for travel film-making and somehow basically none of them get past having an ND filter and buying their LUT. ??? I'd love to hear about getting close to people, as well as all the artistic elements that also never get spoken about. Why you chose one shot instead of another shot in the final edit, how you colour graded to match the location instead of the latest trend, how you choose which places to go, when to use drone footage moving forwards vs backwards, how all that contributes to the story-telling, etc etc.

It depends on how many NDs you want to put in it. It might be bigger than a single ND (I'm just guessing tho) but by the time you're saying two or three NDs plus a clear setting, that's got to eat up space surely. If they put the A7Sii into the XC10 form-factor then that's basically what it would be! Of course, the C100 does all that except 4K60. If they released a C100 mkIII it would be interesting to see what that would look like.

I wasn't talking specifically about either. When you said "The pocket 4k has different tone curves at different iso's (shown drastically by the dual native iso) so the discerning user will choose the ISO with a tone curve that matches the look they are going for at that particular moment (narrative/documentary)" it made me think that for people shooting in less controlled situations they could use whatever settings was appropriate (full sun or low light etc) and still benefit from being able to choose which tone curve they want. If you're on set then you can just dial in whatever lighting hits your favourite ISO, but that doesn't always work for everyone. Does that make sense? Maybe I'm the one missing something

Thanks all, just what I was hoping for This video was what made me eliminate the Olympus 17 f1.8 - it just looks so flat and 2D, like she's standing almost against the back wall. I've linked to the comparison shot in the video below. There's obviously a grading difference, but I don't think it accounts for the lack of depth. The Panasonic 15mm 1.7 looks much closer to the Voigtlander which is encouraging. The Olympus 17mm F1.2 looks like it has potential but is the same price range as the Voigt which has a stop or so more aperture (not that sharp mind-you, but it is there). Size isn't that much of a problem as long as the lens isn't larger than my Rode mic on top of the camera. I am also kind of intrigued about the vintage glass, and full manual controls don't fuss me. I'll build the muscle memory and the GH5s autofocus isn't reliable so I'd rather gear up for MF than have a hit-hit-miss-hit-hit type scenario when I can just do it myself. I looked up the Hollywood Contax and just about had a heart attack! Not cheap!! Still, it warrants further research. I found it difficult to find 28mm lenses that were fast enough, but maybe I'm not searching for the right things yet. I'm still learning. I did some tests today with a few lenses to compare and the results are interesting. Left = Panasonic 14mm F2.5 Centre = Yashikor 28mm F2.8 (no SB, so 56mm equiv. and lens has lost its front coating so flares the highlights a lot!) Right = Helios 44M 58mm F2 (no SB, so 116mm equiv) While the middle one has too much flare, the right one has a nice balance between detail and softness. The full images from it look just like film. I've played around copying the look by softening the left one and sharpening the middle one, and the left one can be softened but the middle one didn't give me much success. What other ~28mm vintage lenses are F2 or faster?

I agree it will be bigger, but it doesn't have to be huge. The XC10 has a small 1" sensor and no IBIS, but it does have one internal ND, a fan for cooling and a pretty powerful processor inside, and it's still very compact. If you compare the XC10 to the RX100 (both 1" sensors) then you can see there's a reasonable size difference: However, if you add that size difference to the A7SII then it still wouldn't result in a terribly large camera: TBH I think they could do a lot worse than to make it similarly to the XC10 because the ergonomics of that camera are absolutely fantastic (especially note the size of the grip which contains the battery), and it's still really quite small in the grand scheme of things. Here's the XC10 being dwarfed by the 1DX (which actually is a large camera). Even if you added the XC10 to the A7SII it would still be smaller! Of course, in the longer-term, these things will all get smaller too. Go back in this forum and I'm sure you'll find people talking about 720p cameras and claiming you'd need a tripod to carry the camera that could do 1080 at HFR, and now we have the iPhone and it's 1080p240 and 4K60 in it's sub-$40 camera module!

And the technically proficient and discerning user might also shoot a test scene with a bunch of ISOs (controlling exposure via SS) and then compare, select the nicest curve, and then build a set of curves that turn the lesser tone curves into the good one. If you're careful and organised such a thing would only take a few hours to do from start to finish.

Actually, I think this question will get easier to answer over time. It used to be that a cinema camera had lots of features (NDs, dedicated buttons), connections (SDI, XLRs), and high IQ (resolution, codecs, DR, colour science). So when hybrids got good, it was confusing because they also had much of the high IQ and some of the features. Once hybrids have all the IQ and features, then it will be down to the connections. This is as it should be, as no-one is going to run a 20-person crew with a hybrid and rely on the HDMI out - they will pay the extra and get a camera that can integrate into the wider architecture of a professional film-set with multiple monitors showing multiple grades to different people, audio mixing and wireless sends, etc etc. If your film set is $20,000/hr then the difference between hiring a $5K camera and a $50k camera is negligible. Unfortunately the product lines from most manufacturers seem to indicate they are clueless about this. I don't think they are clueless about it at all, I think it's the middle-managers playing corporate chess for survival coupled with organisational cultural inertia that's the real reason behind it.

Now I've gone MFT, I plan to eventually get a nice lens around the 15-20mm mark as my walk-around lens for travel and home videos. In combination with the ETC mode on the GH5 that makes it a ~35mm lens and ~50mm equivalent lens - the two most flexible focal lengths. My criteria are: nice MF ring aperture control (manual aperture ring or electronic control from the camera are both fine) faster than 1.8 nice 3D rendering neutral or on the warmer / nicer / more flattering side I have other wider and longer lenses to compliment it, but as I think the ~35mm focal length is the most useful, I think I will do most of my shooting with this lens. As such, I'm saving up and will have a bit of budget. The options I've found are: SLR Magic 17mm T1.6 Olympus 17mm F1.2 Voigtlander 17.5mm F0.95 (winner in the Hurlblog comparison) Panasonic 15mm F1.7 (looked ok in the Hurlblog comparison) Rokinon 20mm T1.9 (borderline fast enough) Sigma 16mm F1.4 Panasonic 20mm F1.7 Speedbooster + Canon Nikon etc fast prime?? Adapter (not SB) + Canon mount ~16mm fast prime?? Adapter (SB) + nice ~28mm vintage lens (eg Minolta Rokkor 28mm F2.0) Eliminated options: Veydra 16mm T2.2 (not fast enough) Olympus 17mm F1.8 (in the Hurlblog comparison it looked flat and lacked contrast) Speedbooster + Sigma 18-35 F1.8 (too large / heavy) Adapter (non SB) + vintage wide angle (I couldn't find any wides fast enough or that weren't fisheyes...) Please help!! Ideally I'd love the Voigtlander 17.5 0.95 but if there's a better deal then I'd love to know. Otherwise its a case of saving up.....

Makes total sense Luckily the internet is awash with people that can't shoot or grade very well!

I agree about size and heat dissipation, but that contradicts the idea that all the cameras in a given lineup had the same body? It's a strange situation to be in because if they push their video line-up and make a new body (that would obviously be larger due to cooling fans) for it, then it would make sense to use the opportunity for adding things like NDs and other things that take up space and they couldn't before. If they did that and called it the A7SIII then it would confuse the A7 lineup completely but capture all the PR from the A7SII customers and reputation. If they decide to slot it into their cinema lineup and call it something like the FS3, then most A7SII customers wouldn't understand it. It's going to be a tough gig to make it better than the competition in performance, large enough to have cooling, and still fit the general form-factor of the A7Sii line and customers existing gimbals and other rigging that they'll want to keep using.

Of course.. that makes the list something like: G m43, perhaps with a hi/lo philosophy, as the basic hybrid line GH successor as a proper small-factor cinema camera, with emphasis on video operability while retaining most of GH5/5s stills capabilities S as FF contenders against Sony and Canonikon with 8K ---OR--- EVA as 4K with much larger form factor with dedicated buttons etc Varicam as pro cinema line, including FF sensor and no-compromise operability Even if we started to add their fixed lens cameras below the G series, their entire lineup would still make sense and be useful to almost all film-makers who need A-cam / B-cam / crash-cam options. This clean hierarchy really doesn't seem to be common amongst the other manufacturers, who completely ignore parts of the market, or have large gaps in IQ between their consumer cams and professional cinema lines.

Ironically, if I bought the BMPCC4K instead of GH5 then I'd already have the expensive media!! I don't think they're fast enough for 1:1 RAW at 60fps, but they're usable for every sensible mode. See below - they test about the same as a SSD HDD.

@Andrew Reid is right - badly graded images tell us nothing. If we see a bad grade, how can we tell the difference between it being a great camera and bad colourist, or a flawed camera that the colourist wasn't skilled enough to correct, or a broken camera that no-one could get a good image out of even if given years to do so? The answer is that we can't. Unfortunately, when you give a camera to a pro and get a great image back, you may be seeing the result of a camera that is really easy to work with and a very simple but effective grade, or you might be seeing a camera that takes skill to work with and the results of an experienced colourist, you can't tell. However, at least you can tell that the camera isn't fundamentally flawed. I find Philip Blooms camera tests very revealing both in what they show and what they don't show. He shows what works with the camera, and to be fair, he normally does stress test them a bit. But every now and then he'll release something like his iPhone 120fps video which makes the iPhone look like a wonderful camera until you realise that every shot (almost without exception) is pointing into the sun. What's the moral of that story? The 120fps mode needs a metric shitload of light, especially in 120p when exposure times are so short. Its an omission, but it's one that is noticeable if you pay attention. As Andrew said, only a skilled grader or the RAW files are of any use.

That makes sense @UncleBobsPhotography and would explain why I'm not getting 50MBps in the GH5 on a card that gives 80MBps in the computer I must say though, I went out again today and took some random test shots and the 150Mbps modes just floor me. Even the FHD 180fps mode looks great. The phrase "digital film" keeps coming into my head when I look at a clip, either fullscreen which looks soft and with wonderful colour subtlety or zoomed in hugely where it just looks like film grain. My vintage lenses will be helping with this, but even the 14mm F2.5 still gives that impression too. It's a mile away from the brittle and digital look most 4K mirrorless cameras shoot these days.

Cheaper than the cards for my XC10. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1067863-REG/transcend_ts256gcfx650_cfast_2_0_cfx650_flash.html and that was just to get 305Mbps 4K!

From what I understand it took a number of firmware updates to get the BMPCC to where it is now. I'd imagine the newer one will be the same? If so, just think about it like you're buying a software subscription with free upgrades

One of the ways that I like to think about it is in terms of "tiers". For the average Joe, a G85 might take pride of place in their setup as an A camera. Their GoPro that used to be their A-cam might then be the tiny / crash cam in their setup. For some, a GH camera might be your A-cam with a G camera being your B-camera, perhaps if you're shooting weddings for instance and need backup angles for coverage and don't need GH quality across the whole kit. For others still, the EVA (or 8K S1?) might be their A-camera and the G or even GH camera lines might only be crash cameras. What I like about this is that is provides a range of cameras with increasing features and IQ that many people can use for whatever scale, budget and IQ is appropriate for their project. In terms of the new lens mount and 8K, do they go together? I'm not sure of the resolution of existing Panny lenses, but the new mount would be a sensible time to mandate a minimum level of sharpness. 8K video has more pixels than most still cameras, so I'd imagine the vast majority of lenses will be at risk of falling short. If that's true, then MFT lens only have to be 4K and 8K lenses are the new mount. That keeps it simple for consumers and would help explain why the new lenses might cost a lot. Agreed. Having the GH line firmly in the "small sensor but large body with many buttons" camp, there's room for things like internal NDs and other circuitry required for RAW recording and associated cooling etc. Panasonic seem to pride themselves at offering lots of new things into the market with the GH line and there's no reason why they can't continue that trend. 8K might be coming, but the excitement around the BMPCC4K proved that interest in high quality 4K is anything but dead. Tell me about it. I bought an XC10 and just upgraded to a GH5! This is the nature of technology conversion. The reason they're all touchy about overlapping product lines is that in the end there will only be one or two product lines and the process to get there will involve almost everyone losing their job. We all talk about convergence like it's the GH5 vs the BMPCC4K, but if you think longer term it's about the death of entire product categories.

Could you perhaps put something on one of the tripod feet that you can stand on and it would secure that leg of the tripod to the ground and prevent it from moving or tipping up? I'm not sure what that would be called, but its the same principle as putting sand-bags on the legs of big lighting stands to make sure they don't fall over. Then you'd be free to use the slider with both hands.

@Jimmy that setup looks quite neat and compact, nice work!

Damn.. I spoke to the guy in the shop and the critical part is UHS-II, the SanDisk card I have is only UHS-I. I think that it's probably a case of the card being able to sustain that speed on average but the video probably doesn't get generated at a constant speed and if the camera buffer fills up then it will cause the error. I've recorded a bunch of test clips at 400Mbps and 150Mbps and the 150 looks pretty amazing actually. I haven't compared them directly but I've heard that they're very similar, so I might just use that mode with the cards I have. Apparently UHS-II cards are really expensive.

Yeah, it's the V30 one, with the 95MB/s speed. I just finished copying 190Gb of images onto it and then looked at a bunch of images to compare the card copy to the HDD and they all check out. I'm satisfied it's not a fake. I'm going into town today so will call past the camera place I bought it from and see if they have another high-speed card to try out. Unfortunately that's the only fast card I have so I can't narrow down if it's the camera or that card, although the computer says it tests fine so that points to the camera.

It would make sense if Panasonic kept pushing the GH line as high quality 4K cameras (10-bit, or maybe RAW) and pushed the new FF line to 8K. It would be quite a nice neat lineup, giving pros four video lineups: the G as the disposable / C-cam line, the GH as the budget / small / 4K / IBIS line, the S as the pricier / larger / 8K line, and the EVA as the cinema line with all the SDI and pro ergonomics.