canonlyme

As you say, it depends on your usage and what you want out of a camera. I don't feel the need for a GH5s, however if I did have the GH5s I might pine for internal ProRes and RAW. 
It's also not about RAW for me. I wanted to shoot ProRes because the files off both my GX80 and LS300 were driving me nuts. In my experience no edit suite can play JVC's 422 files at all, and I was also having some issues with h264 realtime playback, even if the files are untouched. I'd imagine the GH5s would give me similar results. On the same machine, I can grade the ProRes files and playback in full quality as if it's nothing.
Sure you can convert the files to ProRes, but that adds a lot of time to the workflow. Yes you can also record externally, which I did on the JVC but that's more gear to carry around.
For me this camera is fantastic in the field, the only thing I need to carry that the other cameras don't need is extra batteries... in fact, the same batteries I'd have used in the recorders I mentioned. Then when I get home to edit, it's like I'm dreaming. 
Having used it almost daily since October, I'm fairly convinced I have the best camera available for my requirements, for everyone else, that may vary.
 

We're now fancy at www.lens-yclopedia.com . Still the same thing until a good soul shows up with some web skills to adapt the information into an even prettier shape of a website.

It does squeezes 2x as well, but GH5's HDMI will output 4:3 image in 16:9, so it will appear as a picture in picture. Keep that in mind.
I use Feelworld F7 which has custom zoom and custom anamorphic stretch options, works like a charm with GH5.

Hold your horses there! I'm calling full and utter BS on that last statement ? I use my 2X all the time with my NX1. It's 16:9. I get paid actual monies (several monies sometimes) specifically BECAUSE I shoot 2X! There are monitors that can desqueeze it and crop to 2.35:1. I have one. There are adaptors to make it single focus. I have one. Shooting with it? Easy as shooting with any standard prime lens.
 
In terms of "easier to deal with"? As in the post-production? Don't fool yourself, unless you're a fool (which I'm sure you're not). It's just math. Desqueeze ratios and aspect ratios. Vertical and horizontal resolution. All can be sorted with simple division, multiplication, subtraction or addition. 
 
If you feel the need to defend the 1.5X, that's fine, there are great 1.5X lenses and crappy 1.5X lenses, just like there are great and crappy 2X lenses. 
 
As as far as calling 2X users "purists"? I take offense. I'll put my "cheap" 2X up against what I can only assume is an Iscorama that you spent too much money on. But I'll tell you right now mine is sharper, the bokeh is more distorted, and the flares aren't yellow, they're blue. Oh, and it has a wider FOV (even when cropped to 2.35:1). 
 
Im all for everyone finding their own solution in anamorphic, but do the math, don't just make blanket statements.

Thanks @BTM_Pix!  I now have CineLike D on my GX85!  Would it be possible to unlock or add the ability to shoot in the 4:3 aspect ratio in 24p 4K?  The camera only allows 16:9.  I can shoot video in 4:3 using the 4K Burst (S/S) mode, but that's 30p.  I'd like to use my 2X anamorphic attachment using the 4:3 aspect ratio.  

Even with sharpening set to minimum it's still too sharp for some - each to their own I guess. I nealy ruined a couple of shots a couple of months ago when I accidentally left the sharpening at 0 and not -5 and had to do some softening in resolve to get it to look natural. and not over sharpened.

Thought this might be interesting for you guys: 
I was at the Berllin Museum for photography this week and had the chance to see "Helmut Newtons private property" that gathered all his belongings shortly before he died in a car crash. 
(one of the most famous photographers of all time). 
At one point we could see the lenses he owned. Apart from some full format camera stuff he must have often shot with small handy cameras like the eos100d, pentax and nikon. 
Sadly the museum staff didn't put all the lenses the way that you could see focal lenghts and apertures (like nobody would be interested in that ? ), but I think I could make out he used the same range of lenses for all of his cameras. 
This is what I think I could see: 35mm (don't know the aperture), 50mm 1.4 85mm 1.4  as well as 135mm 3.5, all nikkor f`s. 
 

I get the feeling that fewer and fewer people are using ML. For me the flexibility of the raw files is the main reason to use ML, this paired with the 'fullframe look' makes it such a versatile cam that looks different than most with their 'video' look. 
My guess is that most people can't be bothered with the workflow but any RAW format will require a lot of time, thats what you choose for when you shoot RAW. Using ML on paid shoots is something I'm entirely comfortable with. 
To keep it going, some projects of mine:
 
 
 
 
 
 

I always hear comments like this, but I’ve never heard an actual story of anyone having a “it was all blank sorry” moment.  This seems like the modern equivalent of forgetting to load a card into a digital camera. You’d have to either have very serious mechanical error, severe under exposure, or be uneducated in the process, all of which are preventable... especially since the room for error with negative film is extremly high.
I recently shot a short piece on a Bolex Rex 4. The scanning prices have dropped recently and the 4k scans available now are really nice and affordable. 
ProRes LT to Vimeo has worked pretty good for me in the past. Film grain holds up really nice in my experience.
 

I'm just editing a little highlight reel from the Berlin Fashion Week last year, and I deeply regret selling my Canon FD 24mm 2.8 lens now. Some of the rendering is really nice, to my eyes at least. I replaced it with the Sony 28mm lens, and that's great, but it is just lacking something. Also used a Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/4, GFILM settings and Deluts Downtown Alt as a base LUT if you were curious.

 

Final update here: I've purchased a used "Excellent Condition" Sony A6500 from Adorama. Saved a couple hundred bucks from new price. Funnily enough, I bought my current camera, a d5300 refurb from Adorama. With a 30 day return policy I'm going to give it a go. Settling on the 35mm 1.8 OSS Sony and a Lens Adapter for my two Nikon Primes. Should be a fun next couple of weeks!

Here are my first screengrabs shooting on event with gx80+ vintage minolta set up. 
Lenses I used were 24mm 2.8 Tokina RMC and the 50mm 1.4 Minolta with lens turbo. Happy to say that they blended in quite well with each other, only for some shots I still remember which was which. 

The picture of the glasses was shot with the minolta, the other two were shot with the tokina which I got for 24 bucks ? 

Here are my first screengrabs shooting on event with gx80+ vintage minolta set up. 
Lenses I used were 24mm 2.8 Tokina RMC and the 50mm 1.4 Minolta with lens turbo. Happy to say that they blended in quite well with each other, only for some shots I still remember which was which. 

The picture of the glasses was shot with the minolta, the other two were shot with the tokina which I got for 24 bucks ? 

Here are my first screengrabs shooting on event with gx80+ vintage minolta set up. 
Lenses I used were 24mm 2.8 Tokina RMC and the 50mm 1.4 Minolta with lens turbo. Happy to say that they blended in quite well with each other, only for some shots I still remember which was which. 

The picture of the glasses was shot with the minolta, the other two were shot with the tokina which I got for 24 bucks ? 

You're like 90% of the way there.
 
See if this doesn't help:
The following examples would provide the exact same image, and therefore are "equivalent" assuming the camera is always in the same spot.
On a M34 sensor: A 25mm 1.4 lens  (and it doesn't matter if the lens was made for FF, APSC, or M43 - this is important) On a M43 sensor: A 50mm 2.8 lens, speedboosted (pretend it's a 0.5X speedbooster).  (This is because you're now actually putting a 25mm 1.4 lens on the M43 once you've added the speedbooster, just like #1) On a FF sensor: A 50mm 2.8 lens  - - - For #3 the ISO will have to be multiplied by the crop factor squared to get the same exposure. - - - 
 
 
 
I ran out of likes for today but this is very important for new filmmakers to know
I used to think this but focal length has nothing to do with perspective, only the location of the camera and the relation to the objects in frame. The easiest way to test this is to shoot a camera at a chosen focal length, say 50mm, and then shoot from the exact same place with a lens with 2X the focal length (a 100mm lens in this example). Go into an editor and compare the full shot at 100mm to a 2X crop of the shot at 50mm. They will be the exact same image. This is no different from shooting a FF camera at 100mm and a M43 camera at 50mm. This shows how the perspective never changes if you don't move the camera, no matter what lens you're using. Seriously, try it out.

Has anyone mentioned the tamron 17-50 2.8?  That one could be nice and good for your budget. 
I think 2.8 is enough to shoot indoor events that are not well lit. 

Even though the lx100 is cheap, I don't see why you would consider that one over a used gx80 or not just keep your gh4 with a stabilized lense, for example 17-55 stabilized kit lense to begin with?

I think you will be able to still sell the gx80 in two years from now by the way, and while you might have reasons to do that, you don't wanna loose the lenses you have, rather your camera. 
With both the gx80 and lx100 you run into codec and therefore color restrictions, apart from IBIS your gh4 still is a far better camera in that context and has a mic jack too. Instead of getting IBIS and downgrade everything else you could even consider getting a small rig. 
Do you want to shoot b-roll slow motion or 24fps? If 24fps, you can get the gx80 with 4k 100mbs, if not, the 60p 25mbit/s 1080p will not hold up well to any grading or even nice luts you already use.  

Apart from that I think the mentioned nikkor zoom lense should give you everything you want, if you shoot manual like me. 
For B-Roll, I would consider getting a rather close lens. 40-50mm with a simple adapter should serve you fine. 


Last but not least,  two alternative ideas:
Is the problem for you changing lenses, or changing all your filters (tiffen contrast, nd filters..) as well? 

A:
Get some kickstarter lens flippers you can wear on your belt, will save lot's of time and you can use the lenses you alredy have! 
They have them from https://www.friidesigns.com/ or some simple ones for just two lenses: https://www.amazon.com/NEW-Gowing-Lens-Holder-Canon/dp/B00KYP0LK0. I met someone on event who changed his lenses lightning fast. Remember two lenses will always give you better quality than one with the same range. 

B:
If you have problems changing filters, I use XUME Magnets for like 80dollars total who are a life saver too and always impress people who don't know them.

My final advice would be: Always consider if you can get what you want cheaper too, instead buying a new big thingi. Go simple and future proof, and invest in lenses, not cameras. The lenses you already have are quite nice and so Is your gh4! 

What I use: Sharp vintage Lenses for the best look I can get. 
Once I get a client that want's a sharper/clinical look, I will use my 18-35 1.8 that I kept, paired with a simple 50-70mm range, like you. 

Cheers 

 

Well here is a trick question to you guys, because I think not everything that has been stated here from the beginning is true. 
When talking about final aperture on a lense, you have to include the fact of which format the lens was originally made for.

Does a full frame lense of 35mm 2.8 change its aperture when you adapt it with a simple adapter (no speedbooster) to m43? No it doesn't, it will still act like a like  35mm 2.8 lens. 
And there is proof for that! If you adapt manual lenses the IBIS of the Panasonic m43 lenses only works smoothly when you set it to 35mm. 

Applying the crop factor is not as simple as stated in this article and by most of people. Watch this video as proof. 

 

Took the lenses for a walk... and I must say so far I am not really happy with the 24-35, at least not wide open. Maybe it is lacking sharpness? The 35-70macro delivers much better in my opinion. Here I have some footage:
1. 24-35 Picture 
2. 35-70 Macro Function
Here are some AVCHD Full HD Framegrabs: 
1. 24-35
2. 35-70 macro
3. 50mm 1.4



  .4 
  

Took the lenses for a walk... and I must say so far I am not really happy with the 24-35, at least not wide open. Maybe it is lacking sharpness? The 35-70macro delivers much better in my opinion. Here I have some footage:
1. 24-35 Picture 
2. 35-70 Macro Function
Here are some AVCHD Full HD Framegrabs: 
1. 24-35
2. 35-70 macro
3. 50mm 1.4



  .4 
  

@@mercer The lens turbo as well as all lenses arrived. No problems of interference with 24-35, 35-70 macro and md 50mm 1.4. 
 

@mercer. I got the 24-35! Yes I have installed the hack, however I am not sure if I will really use it. I used something similar on the sony6000 and didn't get all the color back. To be honest I don't trust a small codec to capture all the informations when they are compressed. Still it is a nice hack! But natural seems pretty nice too. 

My picture was shot with the sigma 17-35 1.8 and an old canon 500d. 

@mercer you mean 35 1.8 over the zoom? I like the zoom because 24mm speedboosted is the least wide that I am okay with and also the 24mm is much more expensive than the 24-35 zoom. I'll give my feedback about which lenses fit with the zhongyi speedbooster once it is there

It’s on eBay but I only sell in the US. For the amount that eBay and PayPal take from a sale, and for the price of the lens, it’s not worth the paperwork to sell it overseas.
If you’re looking for a great Minolta prime, look out for the MD 28mm f/2.
I shot this with it on the NX500.
I was going for a muted, vintage look, so it isn’t tradition Minolta colors and contrast but it will give you an idea of the lens’ characteristics.
There’s also a shot or two from the 24-35mm... the ones of the boardwalk binoculars.
 

Interesting... goes to show you that almost any lens can look good under the right circumstances.
I believe the “Beercan” refers to a Minolta A mount zoom.
And finally yes, the 24-35mm is awesome. That’s one of the lenses I have up for sale that I regret selling before it’s even sold. I may end up keeping it for Canon Mirrorless though. It’s such a nice little lens on aps-c... basically a 35-50mm... my favorite range. With a Speedbooster on m43 it would be about the same.
Actually it probably makes more sense on m43 with a Speedbooster because it turns the kinda slow f/3.5 into a modest f/2.5.

Not quite correct, but pretty good guessing ! Will explain if nobody else is giving his guess anymore. 
By the way, I am already quite happy with the way the minolta 35mm 2.8 and 50mm 1.4 render colors. I just did a quick edit. First pic is 50mm second pic 35mm. The 35mm made the already nice scenery 20 mins ago when the sun was going down even more beautiful. Incredible sharpness too.