kye

It's a "no excuses" filmmaking world now.  Obviously the new tools basically mean that creative folks can make studio level cinema.  
For instance, there are super-talented colleagues in my town that have made feature films on their own with pretty much zero crew.  Their latest is a wild and lovely silly movie, but it's better than most things out there and looks just as good.  
Literally made on 1% of a studio budget.
https://www.heavenofhorror.com/reviews/the-island-of-lost-girls-2022-fantasia/

I'm reminded of the comments from @John Brawley talking about how he used a super-minimal setup based on the BMMCC when shooting The Resident.



Obviously these are all completely controlled sets with lighting etc all dialled in, so external shots out in the world would need a bit more rig perhaps.
John spoke about how the size of the rig allowed him to get much closer to the actors like you see with him holding it out in front literally between the actors, which would have been a different equation had it been bigger / heavier.
 

Let look at their minimum setup
I see fx3 with atomos ninja v and npf battery, this setup will be around 1.25kg 
 
Vs 
Fx6 with battery will be 1.34kg already, add the same ninja v setup will be 1.9kg
So that is 50% more weight already.

Yeah when the first rumours of this project being shot on an FX3 came out that was my initial reaction, that this was more of a marketing promo angle. But after reading that article it seems like the directors ethos for this was to see how far down he could go "leaning on a new wave of affordable, lightweight filmmaking technology — Edwards stripped everything down to its essentials to inject more spontaneity and creative freedom into a process that felt needlessly rigid."
Doesn't seem like it was so much a budget choice but more likely compact lightweight oriented. and while the FX6/FX9 aren't huge, once they get rigged up with V-mount, follow-focus, monitor, cine lens, matte box, wireless transmitters etc.. they aren't really super handheld anymore. I mean here is the FX3 fully rigged up and its not exactly compact at that point:

It's not just about the extra buttons for speedier usage, it is also about the tonnes of extra features that makes life easier:
TC
Built in ND filters 
Multiple (independent!) outputs 
SDI output(s)
etc etc etc etc 
Eh, I've been working since last week on a fairly "uncontrolled set" (man, I wish I had more control over the racket being made! Too much noise) and this camera is "rigged up" that we're using (if anything, this is a more minimalistic setup for itself currently, as it is stripped down for the ever suffering Steadicam Op):
 

 
It's only 250gm difference between a FX6 and FX3 body, so the difference would often be not even close to as much as 25% between the two rigs.

Also a no for me. Micro pancake lenses on a 1 inch sensor simply can't rival with S35/FF + nice glass. 
The DoF on an iPhone makes it look like everything was shot at f11. Don't even get me started on "cinematic mode".
Then you have the handling/ergonomics. Dials, buttons, aperture rings etc are essential to me.
I don't even know how you'd go about putting things like ND's on an iPhone or quality audio.
Now for social media or vertical B-roll sure it sounds nice. 
My biggest gripe I guess is that you have to buy an iPhone 15 Pro to have log. You know they could give you log in other models including older models. If anything pros would prefer to disable all the image processing. 
 

Yes, but it's been the most popular camera for quite some years!
Just look back at the Flickr camera stats from previous years...  

Well, I actually have to take it as a game changer or am I only being ecstatic over here, hey folks?
Take a look on this second 249... let's also be smartphone camera fellows this time to match the same iPhone 15 Pro Max model too, hey @kye ? ;- )

There is no good way to judge colour online - lets review all the possibilities:
log images are shown
this is the purest experience of the camera, but you can't judge anything with this
  log images + manufacturers LUT is shown
this is the best way to judge images, but its random chance how good this will look and doesn't really show the potential of the footage
  graded images are shown, but they look crap
this tells you nothing as you can't tell if the camera is bad, the LUT is bad, the colourist is bad, or all of them
  graded images are shown, and they look good
this tells you what is possible but not what is possible for you.  great images could be because the camera is great and colourist is ok, camera is good but colourist is very good, camera is mediocre but colourist is world class BTW, if camera forums and camera YT had the same level of knowledge about cameras as they do about colour grading then every video would be trying to work out the exposure triangle and failing.  Even rudimentary colour grading and colour science knowledge online is rare outside professional colourist circles - I know more about these things that most and I am at the very very very shallow end of the pool so if I know more than you do then you're basically no-where...

There is no good way to judge colour online - lets review all the possibilities:
log images are shown
this is the purest experience of the camera, but you can't judge anything with this
  log images + manufacturers LUT is shown
this is the best way to judge images, but its random chance how good this will look and doesn't really show the potential of the footage
  graded images are shown, but they look crap
this tells you nothing as you can't tell if the camera is bad, the LUT is bad, the colourist is bad, or all of them
  graded images are shown, and they look good
this tells you what is possible but not what is possible for you.  great images could be because the camera is great and colourist is ok, camera is good but colourist is very good, camera is mediocre but colourist is world class BTW, if camera forums and camera YT had the same level of knowledge about cameras as they do about colour grading then every video would be trying to work out the exposure triangle and failing.  Even rudimentary colour grading and colour science knowledge online is rare outside professional colourist circles - I know more about these things that most and I am at the very very very shallow end of the pool so if I know more than you do then you're basically no-where...

Totally! The ND adapter never leaves my R5C and the extra stop you get from the .071x adapter really comes in handy (you usually need to put the R5C in 35mm crop mode to use it tho). Also thanks to those adapters, lenses like the OG EF 24-105mm f/4 IS and the 17-55mm EF-S IS have become more popular than ever. Especially with the C70. Personally I just discovered the OG EF 70-200 f4 IS - god it is so f*ckin' light with great IQ. So I ended up selling my OG EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS. Point is, thanks to these adapters - alot of R5C and C70 users in the groups I'm in are rediscovering the EF-L line in a big way. 

I have to humbly Disagree with the idea that All M43 Cameras must be Tiny or Pocketable. That's Lucrous.
Apple has the distinction of making smartphones that make claims that they can shoot Arri Video Quality or Prosumer or Professional Photo Quality, at a fraction of the price, but there isn't really much truth to that. Regardless of what Hollywood director, whose film has been sponsored by Apple, tells that to you.
 
While almost everyone ALSO wants a GM5 sized Panasonic (especially since Fuji and Ricoh make some superb point and shoot cameras), all Panasonic need not be tiny. They would have issues with overheating, and other issues and look rather amatuer on a Professional shoot. 
 
I am comparing the GM5 to the Netflix Approved Sony FX3, the A7Siii, and the Fuji X100v.
 
Panasonic needs the GH, the G and the GM lineups (hopefully something with the GX85's IBIS, but much smaller, probably with 10 minutes recording times).
 

Hi everyone!
Another music Video coming along. Shot on the blackmagic 4K with Metabones and Sigma 16-35mm and Helios 55mm. On the outside shots i had ND filters with IR correction. Also there is a small DJI camera in the mix for all the shots from above ( Just put it in a stick) . On this shoot i really missed an autofocus feature.
Also i had some problems with the grading in the first half of the song as the lighting conditions were very different in each set up. Maybe i would have needed to have a closer look on the white balance. Maybe also a grading session in Resolve would have helped, i did the grading in premiere.
 

Let's assume you are product manager in a Japanese camera company. You want to add a new video oriented hybrid to your line up. By video oriented hybrid I mean a video camera that can be used for still photography, rather than a still camera that can shoot video very well.
Please be specific about the specs. And consider, as a product manager, you should have a clear plan for future updates releasing every 2 years, and at least one firmware update in between. Also be realistic to keep the price at $2k.
I don't want to know what you personally want. I want to know what you think the market wants.
 
Thanks.

Right, now I get it.
Throughout this thread I thought that people were saying "Look how huge it is.....   by giving it the body of the S5 they made it huge" when actually they were saying "Look at how the mk2 is the same size as the mk1 - that's outrageous - every camera update should be drastically smaller!"
TBH, if we're going to judge everyone that didn't give us what they could have given us, we'd all better be saving up for an Alexa, because the people who worked on every other camera released in the history of the world are going in front of a firing squad tomorrow at dawn.

I hear you, being one of the most "sizeist" users here, but I just don't see the strength of the reaction being proportional.
We could make a list of all the things wrong with the G9ii release, or the release of any other model from Panasonic, and we could easily find parallel examples from other manufacturers of things they do that are just as egregious, but when Sony releases yet another camera that overheats, or GoPro releases another doppelgänger camera with microscopic spec improvements, or whoever the hell else waits years and then releases an uninspiring black box, we don't then spontaneously question the future of the brand or the entire format.
If someone were to post in every Sony camera thread that FF was dead and Sony was going to exit the camera market because of the latest release then they'd be considered unhinged, but somehow with MFT every camera announcement is turned into a wake..
What will you use it for?

Funny enough, it's Canon's decision to offer the EF-RF adapters - specifically the ND filter and .071x ones - that has given the EF lens a massive leg up. Currently I have the RF 35mm f/1.8 and I see myself buying the RF 24-70 f/2.8 next - but aside from that I am a happy camper with my EF-L lenses on my R5C and R5. I've also sold my 1DC and 5D MKIII so it's not like I'm ever going back to the EF mount - it's just that Canon has given us a nice lane for RF-EF users, and I love it!

I wonder what you are more likely to find in most homes, an Ikea Billy bookcase or a Canon EF24-105mm f4?
Its a close call, I reckon.
They shifted so many of them in bundles with the 5DMK2 amongst other cameras because it was absolute bargain as an additional price standalone let alone versus buying a 24-70mm f2.8.
Do they do the same with the RF version ?
Because that would be the way forward to chuck those in with the camera as a bundle with the lens being at 50% of what it would cost extra which is exactly what Panasonic are doing with the S1 with their 24-105mm
As it stands, its the fat part of £1300 for the RF24-105mm which is just not appealing at all.
The Z and L mount both have the same problem to some extent but the third party range is what gives the other two the advantage not to mention E mount which just keeps motoring along with options everywhere.
Of course, there is the massive back catalogue of EF to adapt onto RF but, unlike Nikon with the F mount adapter, this is nothing unique as all the other mounts can do that too.
If I bought an RF camera, I definitely think that it wouldn't see a native RF lens for a very long time and thats probably been enough to keep me away so far as I can do that with everything else but also have affordable native glass too.
As it stands, the most flexible mount is Z mount (primarily due to the unique ability to have F mount with full AF) closely followed by the E mount.
E and L mount currently have the best options in affordable fast native lenses and Nikon are catching up.
The key to that, of course, is the 3rd party support most notably from Sigma.

I have and use the g9mki a decent amount and don't mind the body size as the lenses are still all so small, especially compared to their FF equivalents.
The g9, like most m43 cameras, really got attractive after a few firmware updates and price drops. It's so nice. I still have and love some smaller m43 cameras (gx85, bmpc OG, Z Cam E1) but when I'm doing a video gig I typically will use the g9. It's been wonderful to own and I bought it for $1000 USD new a few years ago. 

I'm currently still pretty tempted by the gh6 at $1300, but will probably hold off for a bit to see what they do. 

I love what m43s offers and personally don't mind if the top of the line bodies are a a bit chunky. The platform is still wonderful with the lenses they already have out. 

I do agree that I hope we see some more compact bodies with the new sensor and now PDAF soon though, but I don't mind the g9ii using the s5ii body.

I know the Single Biggest thing that would make the G9ii sell in the truckloads.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
...
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
A Netflix Certification 😎

The size of the arsehole when said earwig has been created by Panasonic's MFT design team.

Anyway, I've pre-ordered one.

Right, now I get it.
Throughout this thread I thought that people were saying "Look how huge it is.....   by giving it the body of the S5 they made it huge" when actually they were saying "Look at how the mk2 is the same size as the mk1 - that's outrageous - every camera update should be drastically smaller!"
TBH, if we're going to judge everyone that didn't give us what they could have given us, we'd all better be saving up for an Alexa, because the people who worked on every other camera released in the history of the world are going in front of a firing squad tomorrow at dawn.

I think the G9 flew under a lot of people's radar on the video side as they didn't really care about it because it was all about the GH5 at that time.
The GH5 though did get the same "not keen on the direction of travel for MFT size wise" from many people but it got away with it because of the video specs so everyone was prepared to accept it.
The issue now though is not necessarily just that the G9Mkii has the video specs that have aroused interest so its under the microscope (or not actually considering the size of it) a lot more but that what has changed from 2017 when the original G9 was launched.
At that time, there was no FF camera from Panasonic.
Or indeed an APS-C one.
So if you wanted to get their flagship camera then it was what it was and you had no choice.
In that respect, the increased size was actually something that helped them as in "it is arguably the best MFT camera around, therefore its obvious that it is this big" etc.
However, two years later, they did have a FF camera and that was even bigger which actually preserved that "tope of the range must be bigger" conceit for both cameras and still made it appear the MFT compact system ethos was in play when looking at them in comparison.

That was all well and good until the S5 came along because then the whole compact system alternative fell apart because it was actually bigger than the full frame camera.

With the Mark2 versions of the G9 and S5, they are now identical of course so, for me, the fact that the G9Mk2 is fractionally smaller than the G9 is moot because as soon as the S5 came out then the G9 was too big anyway.
In my view, it got away with it because there was no FF camera from Panasonic at the time and then when one did show up two years later, it actually helped the perception of the G9 because it was also somewhat on the chunky side.
As demonstrated by the S5/S5ii.
Irrespective of the existence of their full frame cameras, I'd still say the G9 (as I said even from the GH3 onwards) was pulling MFT into the wrong direction for me compared to what they had been doing even in DSLR shapes.

(NB before the "ah but the top panel display" comments start its worth remembering that the G9MK2 doesn't have one now either)
An optimist would say that at least they've marginally cut the size of the G9MK2 from the MK1 and that is a sign of progress back towards the compact system ethos but its the things that have happened around it during those six years that effectively make it an increase in real terms.
So, I'll say it again that this is a fine camera but ultimately the problem with it is that the S5ii exists.
Panasonic really finding their way with their FF cameras has coincided almost in lock step with them losing their way with MFT cameras.
 

I think I understand where @IronFilm is coming from - the advantage of a larger body is that you get dedicated buttons and other things that are useful on set.  Think about it, if there was no use for something then they wouldn't add it to the camera, regardless of how large they were allowed to make it.
On a controlled set you'd imagine that they'd have a proper cinema lens with remote follow-focus etc attached, matte box, v-mount power, monitor, and the whole thing would be rigged appropriately.  By the time you add all that then the difference between an FX3 and FX6 is maybe only an extra 25% to the size of the whole rig.