newfoundmass

This would make more sense if they weren't facing more competition than ever in the mirrorless full frame market. I'm not sure I'd choose now as the time to coast, but that's just me. The landscape has changed over the last year. Others are innovating and moving forward while Sony seems stagnant.

It should be able to handle h264 without any problems. Worse case you can use proxies. As a rule though it's not ideal to transcode for editing unless you absolutely need to. Back in the day h264 and Final Cut Pro 7 didn't play well together at all, making it a real pain in the ass to edit, especially for large/multicam projects. I would transcode out of necessity back then. Now everything handles it well.

Those are all welcome improvements but they wouldn't be enough for me to upgrade if I had the A7 III. It's more interesting to me that they're again reusing sensors. That isn't necessarily bad, if they're able to get more out of them, but it's still a bit curious.

I never felt that way about sliders, as they're great for establishing shots. Using one just for the sake of using one though is obnoxious. Everything in moderation!

Gimbals are great, don't get me wrong, but I've largely eliminated my usage of them in favor of a shoulder rig. I prefer the natural handheld look more and more, especially now that everyone over uses gimbals. I really like how my GH5 footage looks with IBIS and a cheap $60 shoulder rig. I have been looking for an affordable motorized slider to use for interviews. I think at this point I'd get more use out of it than my gimbal

Another recommendation; https://www.youtube.com/user/element1108 Mark Holtze does a lot of videos on vintage lenses. His reviews and comments are very thoughtful; I really enjoy listening to him, he's very well spoken. His videos on the Takumar lenses are especially worth checking out, since they're not the most common vintage lenses you'll see people talking about.

Yeah, you're not going to get anymore out of the original file by transcoding. If anything you'll lose quality.

It might be modestly discounted, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Older models might, but they're not ideal for vlogging.

Nigel is great. I love how he still uses a GH3! FilmLook is also great!

Sports and other events.

Yeah, the time limit is really disappointing.

Have they released if there are recording limits? For my kind of work that's important.

I just got the Sennheiser XSW and it's really good. Just wish I could adjust the volume/output. I think I'd recommend them over the Rode based on some of the posts here.

You mean they intentionally left these features out?!? I don't believe it!

Our very out @Mattias Burling just released a similar video to this thread

The GH5 is not able to compete with Sony and Canon, especially when it comes to adapted lenses. But the narrative that it's awful or unusable just isn't true. Most of the tests you'll see are static shots on a tripod and don't play to the GH5's auto focus strengths. For instance, the GH5's strongest auto focus setting for handheld video is single area. As you see in the beginning of the video, when I move to get the shot of the wrestlers on the outside, it focuses pretty quickly and nails focus. That's the result you can expect going with single area. For the G85, when on a tripod for non static shots, the ideal setting for wrestling is 49 area. Single area doesn't work as well because there is much more going on in the frame, so you don't want just that single area to be in focus. It's all about learning how the AF works and working with it's strong points. Unfortunately it's strong points isn't when it's on a tripod with people popping up in and out of frame. I will look for footage I shot on the 14-140mm zoomed in and see if it's something I can share. I do know though that the results are comparable.

Mokara has been searching for every reason EXCEPT the most obvious one to try and explain why 24p was left out. Must have been licensing and cost cutting! Now it must be a processing issue! No. Canon left it out because they want to push the customers that want those features towards their higher priced offerings. It's really that simple.

Wide or not, I zoomed in multiple times, focused on six different individuals at different points in the clip, in poor lighting and it handled it perfectly. I've gotten virtually the same performance when using the 25mm f1.7 and the 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6.

Over there? Not directly, though my good friends have started up wrestling organizations in Italy and Portugal! They are building professional wrestling in those countries from the ground up!

If you're ever interested I know of places in Southern Europe where you can see this! Might be an interesting documentary subject!

I was talking to a friend yesterday as I went through footage and he was so surprised that I shot with the GH5 using AF. "The auto focus is terrible though!" People at this point just repeat it because they've seen videos where people play peekaboo to show how "bad" it is. Would it be cool if Panasonic could match Canon or Sony? Of course! Is it awful though? Far from it! I just hope that maybe this post went a little ways in dispelling this myth, especially as the GH5 can be had both new and used for such little money. What a truly magnificent camera!

Hear me out: It's not GREAT. But I'm tired of hearing the same claims that Panasonic's auto focus (specifically the GH5) is "awful." Here is a two minute clip from a pro wrestling event I shot last night. I used the Panasonic 12-35mm with one area auto focus. Lighting is terrible in that venue, so please forgive that. I chose this to share because there's a lot of movement and action going on, and as you can see the auto focus does a pretty good job. I just figured I would share this to show what the GH5 is capable of in a real world, practical situation.

Probably a dumb question, but do Minolta Rokkor MD lenses cover the entire full frame sensor? I've only ever tried on M43 cameras.

Autogain is when the volume is adjusted automatically up or down based on the volume of the input. For instance, if a speaker lowers their voice it will add gain to boost the audio. Automix handles the mixing of the audio automatically, fading in and out in the mix based on whether there's any audio or not. Think of it as what you do after you've set your audio gain / levels. Autogain and Automix aren't ideal. I'd only recommend using either as a last resort. When I'm a one man crew and am absolutely unable to monitor multiple audio recorders I'll use autogain unless I know the person knows to speak at a consistent level. They're not a substitute for having someone handling all of that.

If you have the money get a nicer ND, but it's really not necessary. With a custom white balance and that $7.99 gray card I posted you'll be good to go. I'd just save the money!