KnightsFan

It's more depressing than embarrassing being American. Helplessly watching government institutions crumble one by one. Republicans have become the doublespeak party, talking about rule of law while favoring criminals, talking about freedom while banning parades, talking about balanced budgets while having the largest deficits, complaining about "mainstream media" from the largest broadcast company, and so on. And as much as Trump was the worst possible outcome, Biden being the actual candidate for so long shows that we have no one competent to turn to.

Agree with what everyone has said regarding there being many poor looking film movies that we forgot about, many great looking digital movies, and everything in between.
I believe a better thesis would be, "movies looked better before smartphones were invented"
A big reason that mainstream movies look bland is because they are no longer designed for a giant screen in a dark theater, nor even on a big flatscreen in your living room. They are increasingly consumed on 6" screens in broad daylight (as well as theaters and living rooms).
 
Now to go on a sight tangent, the same can be said of writing. Often when I talk to friends, they'll say, "oh yeah, I saw that movie. It was on netflix in the background while I cleaned my house" To some degree, it's not that writers are worse, it's that modern writing is designed to be consumed at 50% attention with chunks missing. The percent of audience that watches every second at full attention is simply getting smaller.
I don't believe that shift has anything to do with filmmaking technology.

Agree with what everyone has said regarding there being many poor looking film movies that we forgot about, many great looking digital movies, and everything in between.
I believe a better thesis would be, "movies looked better before smartphones were invented"
A big reason that mainstream movies look bland is because they are no longer designed for a giant screen in a dark theater, nor even on a big flatscreen in your living room. They are increasingly consumed on 6" screens in broad daylight (as well as theaters and living rooms).
 
Now to go on a sight tangent, the same can be said of writing. Often when I talk to friends, they'll say, "oh yeah, I saw that movie. It was on netflix in the background while I cleaned my house" To some degree, it's not that writers are worse, it's that modern writing is designed to be consumed at 50% attention with chunks missing. The percent of audience that watches every second at full attention is simply getting smaller.
I don't believe that shift has anything to do with filmmaking technology.

Agree with what everyone has said regarding there being many poor looking film movies that we forgot about, many great looking digital movies, and everything in between.
I believe a better thesis would be, "movies looked better before smartphones were invented"
A big reason that mainstream movies look bland is because they are no longer designed for a giant screen in a dark theater, nor even on a big flatscreen in your living room. They are increasingly consumed on 6" screens in broad daylight (as well as theaters and living rooms).
 
Now to go on a sight tangent, the same can be said of writing. Often when I talk to friends, they'll say, "oh yeah, I saw that movie. It was on netflix in the background while I cleaned my house" To some degree, it's not that writers are worse, it's that modern writing is designed to be consumed at 50% attention with chunks missing. The percent of audience that watches every second at full attention is simply getting smaller.
I don't believe that shift has anything to do with filmmaking technology.

It's more depressing than embarrassing being American. Helplessly watching government institutions crumble one by one. Republicans have become the doublespeak party, talking about rule of law while favoring criminals, talking about freedom while banning parades, talking about balanced budgets while having the largest deficits, complaining about "mainstream media" from the largest broadcast company, and so on. And as much as Trump was the worst possible outcome, Biden being the actual candidate for so long shows that we have no one competent to turn to.

I don't know which settings CVP used for that shot, but if they weren't using DR extended mode, the 25 ms 16:9 FF mode is not far off from the S5II's 22ms. Now I've said many times in the past that rolling shutter is the only part of the S5's image that I dislike, so I'm totally with you in absolute terms, and I personally am willing to pay more to get faster readout. So yeah I think for me personally, I'd be willing to pay more for a stacked sensor competitor, but many people are happy with the S5II or even A7IV, so all in all it's not terrible, if you view the extended DR as a specialty tool rather than the default. That's my opinion anyway.

It's really interesting to me that he and others have mentioned that they think it's the same sensor as the Ronin 4D 8K, but that camera has only 16ms readout in 8K with DRE off and 32ms with it on...  so maybe it's a variant of that sensor?  
Otherwise, the video modes are bit bewildering and confusing.  Good on Panasonic for making so many of them, but I think the average buyer is going to go crazy with all of the asterisks.  "So the camera can record in 8K?"  "Yes."  "So I'll plug in my external drive and start recording?"  "Well, sort of.  You'll need to use external power for that."  "So I need external power to record in 8K?"  "No, just to an external drive.  With CF Express, you can do it in-camera."  "OK, great.  So I put in my CFE card and I'll just go start shooting 8K ProRes RAW."  "Well, no.  If you want raw, that needs to be 5.8K and with an APS-C crop." "Uhhh, how much was that Z8 again?"
Meanwhile, the EOS R5, released almost 5 years ago, is over here happily recording 8K raw internally to CFE without a crop.  And yes, overheating and without open gate and about 18 other things that the S1R II can do... but c'mon, Panasonic, a camera released in 2025 should have a battery that's powerful enough to allow recording to an external drive in full quality and if you're advertising internal raw, it should be at full resolution, just like what the competition are shipping, and have been shipping for several years.
Is it cheaper than the competition?  I suppose that depends.  Compared to the Z8 and R5 II?  Sure.  Compared to a used R5?  Well, no.
Anyway, as for the RS and the overheating, they both seem to be a molehill that people are making into a mountain.  Is 24ms great?  No.  Is it fine for most people?  Yeah, pretty much.  Is it bad for a camera to overheat after more than an hour in its most taxing internal recording mode?  If you need to routinely run 2-hour interviews with a single take, yes, then it is not the camera for you.  If you are pausing even for a minute or two between takes, will you overheat?  I guess that remains to be seen, but I'm guessing no.

Ditto. In a moment of incredible self control, I have decided to pass.
I think it's an upgrade over the OG S1R, probably...
For video, yes, for stills, probably not much if anything in it.
I was looking for and hoping for a 1/2 price Leica SL-3. 
This is close, but not close enough and the benchmark is my A7RV and the new LUMIX does not beat it.
I'm not sure for stills it even equals it, but real world, there would not be so much in that.
I've run the financials and it would cost me approx €1200 to go sideways with less focal range, albeit with less kit and be within one system, but there just isn't enough for me to make it happen.
At least not at this time, but I will look at it again after this next season and before the new one at the same time next year.
In fact, other than flipping my 3rd S5ii for an S9 and possibly getting a few primes for that within the next few months, I'm sticking with what I have and focusing on the craft this year as the tools are already good enough for my needs.
I really hoped between LUMIX and Sigma, they would produce something for me to give up my A7RV, but nope, nothing yet. And I am far from being a Sony fanboi !!
I am however going to do this 😜

I think that pretty much agree.
I also agree with Gerald Undone's comment that it should have a general no-oversampling/low rolling shutter option in addition to the normal/extended DR switch. The (line-skipped) 4k120p is around 8ms RS, so we know it's possible, albeit with less DR and less sharpness etc.
But at the price (which will fall to sub-$3000 probably fairly quickly), it seems like a lot of camera for the money. If you want 8k video with much lower RS, go buy a more expensive camera...

This is one of those instances where it feels like Lumix is damned if they do, damned if they don't. They gave their high resolution stills oriented line a huge video upgrade, holding back very little, and it's still not enough to satisfy a lot of folks. This is a very capable video camera for a camera that is meant for still/hybrid shooters.
The only thing that is unacceptable to me, and it's a very big thing, is the overheating. 
 

Maybe evidence Panasonic is saving that for a more video-centric camera?
From the specs so far it's not a particularly video centric camera, but if they've gone through the trouble of making a video-first iPhone app, then probably there's another camera on the way. Certainly the rumor sites seem to think so.
And while we're on the subject, a proper video monitoring app is huge! That is one of my absolute favorite features of Z Cam. We'll see if Panasonic deliver. If I can have wireless, full HD monitoring with reasonable latency on 2-3 devices simultaneously, that's an immediate, massive plus. I'm really hoping for a BS1H successor now!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveon_X3_sensor
Tl;dr it captures RGB data at every photosite, instead of using a color filter array to capture RG or B at each photosite. Thus it does not require color interpolation, aka demosaicing, to reconstruct its color image. It's not as good as it sounds, however, because interpolating colors from the vertically stacked photosites is very complicated.
The upside is less color moire, higher resolution per nominal pixel count, and arguably "better" color accuracy.
The downside is that (with current technology), it has significantly lower SNR, sensitivity, and readout speeds.

Even with extremely good technology, there is still an artistry and subjectivity in image creation. No cinema camera aims for "color accuracy above all else." Arri wants their images to look Cinematic--and at this point in time, many cinematographers' taste has been developed specifically by Arri's colors. Sony might have a choice between spending millions on user testing, expert opinions, and fine tuning, OR they could save all that money and probably not take much of a sales hit.
Fwiw, I have never liked Sony cameras in blind tests, however, I love Panasonic's S1 and S5 even compared to Arri. So I actually don't even believe that "expensive" cameras always look better. I also don't believe Sony is incapable of making more or less identical colors to the S5. Maybe they decided keeping the same pipeline is a better business investment, or their product managers prefer the Sony look out of pride, or different taste--or maybe I'm simply not their target audience.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveon_X3_sensor
Tl;dr it captures RGB data at every photosite, instead of using a color filter array to capture RG or B at each photosite. Thus it does not require color interpolation, aka demosaicing, to reconstruct its color image. It's not as good as it sounds, however, because interpolating colors from the vertically stacked photosites is very complicated.
The upside is less color moire, higher resolution per nominal pixel count, and arguably "better" color accuracy.
The downside is that (with current technology), it has significantly lower SNR, sensitivity, and readout speeds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveon_X3_sensor
Tl;dr it captures RGB data at every photosite, instead of using a color filter array to capture RG or B at each photosite. Thus it does not require color interpolation, aka demosaicing, to reconstruct its color image. It's not as good as it sounds, however, because interpolating colors from the vertically stacked photosites is very complicated.
The upside is less color moire, higher resolution per nominal pixel count, and arguably "better" color accuracy.
The downside is that (with current technology), it has significantly lower SNR, sensitivity, and readout speeds.

Or a box camera with 1st party accessories to make it camcorder-like. Take a BS1H body, add a new side handle with full control, a single cable USB C monitor (or compatibility with Blackmagic's!), Panasonic's existing XLR module, and you've got a similar setup to a C400, ergonomically. All that's missing are ND's, which require a bigger body--not that I mind!--or some kind of eND adapter for EF/PL lenses. Of those, ND's are probably the only one that's particularly difficult to develop, if Panasonic thought they had the market for it.

I'll put my conspiracy hat on for a moment. Maybe BM knows about imminent competition, and want to get a few more sales out before that happens?

1) With the caveat that I don't use AF, the Panasonic S5 is a wildly good value at $800 used (what I paid for mine). Imo, the improvement in noise and dynamic range over the GH5 is worth it, but if you're always in well-lit areas maybe you won't notice much benefit. If you aren't tied to existing lenses, camcorders can be more convenient than hybrids. I'm not familiar with available models since I don't shoot events, but I'd research camcorders for event videography with no photos.
2) C400 or FX6. The C300 Mk III is also fine--I choose full frame because of the lenses I own. It also depends on how much weight matters, as the FX6 is extremely light. If I need photos as well, then add a photo body in addition, and honestly everything is so good these days that I'd take anything modern.
3) Assuming 1-3 person camera crew, it depends on the script. My general pick right now for myself is a C500 Mk II (cheaper than a C400). I used to have Z Cam, which has unbeatable wireless monitoring and control, but I don't like the lack of color management support in Resolve. I would pick a Z Cam F6 if I need to fit the camera into tight spaces. If it's a lot of fast action like a car chase, a Komodo's global shutter would be great. The Ronin 4D is also very interesting for extensive handheld--never used one myself, though. If I can step up in budget, I'd love to try the Blackmagic 12k LF.

I'll put my conspiracy hat on for a moment. Maybe BM knows about imminent competition, and want to get a few more sales out before that happens?

1) With the caveat that I don't use AF, the Panasonic S5 is a wildly good value at $800 used (what I paid for mine). Imo, the improvement in noise and dynamic range over the GH5 is worth it, but if you're always in well-lit areas maybe you won't notice much benefit. If you aren't tied to existing lenses, camcorders can be more convenient than hybrids. I'm not familiar with available models since I don't shoot events, but I'd research camcorders for event videography with no photos.
2) C400 or FX6. The C300 Mk III is also fine--I choose full frame because of the lenses I own. It also depends on how much weight matters, as the FX6 is extremely light. If I need photos as well, then add a photo body in addition, and honestly everything is so good these days that I'd take anything modern.
3) Assuming 1-3 person camera crew, it depends on the script. My general pick right now for myself is a C500 Mk II (cheaper than a C400). I used to have Z Cam, which has unbeatable wireless monitoring and control, but I don't like the lack of color management support in Resolve. I would pick a Z Cam F6 if I need to fit the camera into tight spaces. If it's a lot of fast action like a car chase, a Komodo's global shutter would be great. The Ronin 4D is also very interesting for extensive handheld--never used one myself, though. If I can step up in budget, I'd love to try the Blackmagic 12k LF.

I don't seem able to find a review video that compares the c500ii with the canon c80 and the c400. Did anybody came across one? I want to see the image difference between those camera's. I recently have used the C500ii and I love the image over lots of camera's (packs a lot of dr, and has good color, and looks smooth). The c500ii is quite bulky though. So I wonder if the C80 and C400 provide the same IQ.  

1) With the caveat that I don't use AF, the Panasonic S5 is a wildly good value at $800 used (what I paid for mine). Imo, the improvement in noise and dynamic range over the GH5 is worth it, but if you're always in well-lit areas maybe you won't notice much benefit. If you aren't tied to existing lenses, camcorders can be more convenient than hybrids. I'm not familiar with available models since I don't shoot events, but I'd research camcorders for event videography with no photos.
2) C400 or FX6. The C300 Mk III is also fine--I choose full frame because of the lenses I own. It also depends on how much weight matters, as the FX6 is extremely light. If I need photos as well, then add a photo body in addition, and honestly everything is so good these days that I'd take anything modern.
3) Assuming 1-3 person camera crew, it depends on the script. My general pick right now for myself is a C500 Mk II (cheaper than a C400). I used to have Z Cam, which has unbeatable wireless monitoring and control, but I don't like the lack of color management support in Resolve. I would pick a Z Cam F6 if I need to fit the camera into tight spaces. If it's a lot of fast action like a car chase, a Komodo's global shutter would be great. The Ronin 4D is also very interesting for extensive handheld--never used one myself, though. If I can step up in budget, I'd love to try the Blackmagic 12k LF.

With the recent price drop, the Pocket 4K is now under £1K new and that has pushed used prices below £700 so they are now far more affordable.
It shoots ProRes as well as BRAW so theres no need to get involved with Resolve and even if you did want to shoot BRAW there are now direct importers into FCPX.
As you are shooting multi-camera for live events etc then the BM range are absolutely hands down better options than any other range for work like that. 
With the ATEM Mini Pro series starting at under £300 you can do the live camera switching (or even just very efficient multi camera monitoring to a single monitor) and have full remote control of the cameras as well.
If you get three used P4K cameras and the ATEM Mini Pro, then its £2.5K for the whole integrated multi camera system and the cameras are obviously more than capable in the cinema role too.
Particularly as it is roughly the price of a single X-H2S.
Without the live aspect then options such as the X-H2S etc are a good choice of course but as an all round system for fulfilling the different roles that you've listed then the P4K x3 /ATEM Mini Pro is far more suitable in my opinion.
 

If budget is no option, FX6s all around. You're talking a sturdy body to handle the shake of long lens, good autofocus, good low light, good audio and timecode options, good dynamic range and color. If you are majorly constrained by budget, GH5s would be fine, FX30s would be better if you can afford them. As some have mentioned though, lens constraints are a major factor here. 

I definitely agree that more SDR luts would be great. It would be nice if cameras could share luts with the same ease as using a new snapchat filter. Or if you could connect your camera to an ipad wirelessly and build the lut in real time using color correction software. There are so many UI/UX barriers to cameras still.
However, for narrative projects, I would never shoot anything other than a standard log profile anymore. I shoot in log on large projects because it allows a color managed workflow. If I shoot a scene one day, and then have pickups a month later, with slightly different lighting because it's cloudier--or with a different camera system altogether--log is very useful. Partly because of added dynamic range, but, more importantly, the shots are standardized to reduce the guesswork for adequately matching. I also shoot a kelvin white balance rather than balancing to a card for the same reason. Standardization is key.