newfoundmass

I know everyone wasn't a fan, but one less camera media outlet is not good. Such are the risks when you sell your site to a larger company that only cares about the bottom line, I guess. Not good news for the community as a whole, and really unfortunate for all those who are losing their jobs.

Indeed, though as more time passes they'll become cheaper and cheaper! That's when you find the bargains!

Internal ND is nice, but is it worth paying 2 or 3 times as much? Audio is less of a problem these days, since you can buy the hot shoe audio adapters that are available and can grow with you. If you are going the Sony route I think the FX30 is an excellent option and competitively priced. I think if you wanted full frame the A7IV would be a better deal than the FX3. For me, it's better to spend less on the camera body because that's what loses value quickest. The second you open that box for the first time your camera is worth less than it was when it was closed. And with every day the value goes down more and more. That's part of the reason I have trouble recommending people drop serious coin on a camera, because unless they are going to be generating a lot of income because of it, it's just not a great long term investment. Like I could afford to buy the Lumix S5ii right now but I'm not going to because in a year or two it will be significantly cheaper on the used market, meaning I keep more money in my pocket even when using it to generate income. 🙂

What does the C70 or FX6 give you that a mirrorless camera half the price doesn't? If you have the money to spend then I guess I'd say go for it, but honestly there's not a ton of good reasons to purchase a cine camera unless you're a full time DP who can benefit from being an owner/operator, and thus get more work and charge more since it eliminates the need of renting a camera. For most of us it just isn't a good investment.

The main reason I suggest a weighted shoulder rig is that it will help stabilize the Pocket 6K better while keeping the handheld look they're going for.

You can find this for a fraction of the price on Ebay. It's also not very good IMO. A weighted shoulder rig is probably your best bet, unless you can afford an easyrig.

I've found Panasonic's colors SOOC to be very good since the S5. I used to really love Canon's color science, but I've come to dislike how unnatural they can be. These days I prefer accurate colors more than anything. I'll be labeled a fanboy, but I prefer Panny colors to Canon at this point because I know that when I take a picture (or video) the colors are going to look closer to what I saw with my eyes than what Canon will give me. Everyone is really catching up to Canon, and in some ways surpassing them. Even Sony, which is still my least favorite, has improved dramatically.

Yeah, if it was because of phase detect you'd think it would impact every picture profile. I can't imagine it won't be fixed in a firmware so that the standard profiles at least get the same performance as V-Log. If it isn't something they can fix then shame on Panasonic.

Because it's Panasonic I'm confident they'll fix it with a firmware update. Any other camera company I'd be less certain but Panasonic has always been good about these things.

That's insane!

I don't care about lab tests at all, I care about real world performance. The noise reduction is a much bigger issue than any lab test. Hopefully Panasonic fixes that in a firmware update, because I should be able to control the level of NR that's going on.

Are the studio cameras essentially just the pocket cameras but with added broadcast features? I've always kinda been confused about the two. Why wouldn't you purchase the broadcast camera over a pocket camera then?

This is my thought as well, as a S5 user. The mini HDMI is one of the reasons I don't use external monitors very often on my S5 bodies and will use my GH5 instead when I need to.

You really didn't differentiate, you heavily implied that Panasonic and Sony are in the "video" category while the others are in the "cinema" category. You then mentioned things related to the image they produce, such as color science, to explain why. Honestly the entire statement didn't make sense, and you seemed to be lumping the criticism people level at Sony in with Panasonic. What about Pannyboy's philosophy of adding advanced cinema/video features to even their entry level cameras makes them inferior, our soulless, to those other companies? And what DCI options is Pannyboy missing compared to them? Didn't Pannyboy literally introduce DCI to the mirrorless world? What does Sony and Panasonic being diversified businesses have to do with being "soulless?" The diversity, and the extra income streams, is what has made their imaging divisions possible. Re: Panasonic's image. As I said, "I think Panasonic has had the most filmic image out of the major camera manufacturers since the S series was released." The issues with the S5ii, which will eventually get fixed with a firmware update, don't detract from the near universal praise the S series cameras have gotten for the images they produce. You mention the GH5, which is a six-year-old camera: what relevance is that to what I said? And what were any of those companies producing six years ago that came anywhere close to offering the value and image of the GH5 when it came to video? Almost every other company has caught up to Canon when it comes to colors, and most produce overall a better or just as good image (and have for years.) The days of Canon eating everyone's lunch when it comes to color are over.

You kinda did... 😉 I've been labeled a Panasonic fanboy on here recently, so this will probably come as no shock, but I think Panasonic has had the most filmic image out of the major camera manufacturers since the S series was released. Even in the color department, where I always preferred Canon, I think they've surpassed them in a lot of ways. Everyone else has moved toward more pleasing colors while retaining color accuracy, while Canon still have nice colors that aren't very accurate. That was okay when everyone lagged behind overall, but not so much anymore.

They really were smart to open up e-mount to anyone that was willing to make lenses for it. I think it had a huge impact on the growth of the system. That the third party options were also excellent quality didn't hurt either!

I definitely see a difference. The image isn't completely unpleasing. I think the issue isn't so much that it's there if you want that level of denoising, but that you can't turn it off. I'm personally opposed to having less control over how the image looks, so it'd be very much appreciated if Lumix could give people the option to adjust how much denoising is going on.

To me, it just makes sense to release power zooms as video has become such an important part of the mirrorless market. I miss the ergonomics of camcorders in general, but I especially miss the ability to do smooth and repeatable zooms. For event work it'd be a huge deal for folks, I think.

You've been dismissive and combative with everyone that has been remotely critical of this camera. Give it a rest. If you want to disagree with people, fine, but do it without accusing them of just parroting Andrew or being "fanboys" of another camera company. It lacks customizable function buttons of other cameras in its price range. It lacks dual card slots, which is also available in other cameras in its price range. Likewise, it lacks IBIS, which is also available in cameras in its price range. That it's so lightweight also doesn't do it any favors when it comes to stabilization. It has a worse EVF than many cameras in its price range. It has micro HDMI. These are all ergonomic issues that make the camera less efficient in a working environment. They might not matter to you, but they matter to a lot of people and are enough to make some of us say that this camera has poor ergonomics/design.

Hopefully it's something they can fix in a firmware update.

GX85 maybe?

Calm down and stop being so defensive. I've said nothing that others, including a Canon user in @herein2020, haven't said. That it annoys you so much that people aren't impressed with this camera says more about you than any of us. I've been as hard on Panasonic these past couple of years as anyone. It's such a lame excuse to accuse people of fan boyism.

I'm filming on two S5 bodies and a GH5. I don't care about using the latest and greatest. I'm merely pointing out, in response to people insisting on comparing the R8 to 3 year old cameras to point out how great it is, that someone before long will inevitably come along and release a FF 4k60p camera but without all the compromises for under $2000. I've had a GH5 for 6 years, so yes, I've had IBIS for the last 3-4 years. I've also had no recording limits/overheating, two card slots, good battery life, a body capable of tons of customization, etc. To me these are just as important as the image quality, because they make my job easier. How is this camera built for speed?

That 20-60mm kit lens is the best kit lens I've ever used, and is a genuinely good lens. When I bought my first S5 used I planned to sell the kit lens but then when I got it I decided not to. When I bought my second S5 body I ended up buying a second 20-60mm because of how good it is and in the event I needed two wider shots. Usually I use the 24-105mm on one body and the 20-60mm on another, but it's worth having that extra 20-60mm in my case for when I need it. My next lens will be the 35mm f1.8, I think. The Panny XLR adapter is great, but if you're feeding it a line in there's not much of a reason to use it over the mic jack. You'll get good audio either way, since Panasonic pre-amps have been pretty good since the GH5. Thank you for sharing your thoughts!

When I said cut down on the price I meant by not needing it to be parfocal. I wouldn't expect a power zoom version of the 24-105mm to be cheaper than the current lens. I'd pay more (within reason) to have a version of that lens with power zoom capabilities. Video has come such a huge part of the industry that everyone should be making power zoom lenses.