newfoundmass

I think, when it comes to M43, Panasonic is stuck trying to win over a segment of the market that simply will never buy a M43 camera. YouTubers have moved on to full frame to film themselves on a tripod in their "studio" aka basement, garage, or spare bedroom. Even if M43 leaned into the strengths of the system those folks will never buy in. Obviously they have more data than all of us, so maybe focusing on niche users just isn't viable. But it's hard to imagine that trying to win over folks that have moved on to larger sensors because they're "better" is a recipe for success. I loved the GH5. It was a game changer for me. But it was released during a very different time. You could overlook the increase in size because it had best in class features that no other mirrorless camera had. Everyone caught up though. I don't think there will ever come a time when I'll be all in on M43 again. But I absolutely would be open to dipping my toe back into the system if they released a compelling camera that could be a good b or c cam, or even an a cam when I'm trying to not draw attention. But it needs to offer something that others don't. For me, that's a feature rich (within reason), stable, and small camera.

It's a necessary evil, as it's required to make the camera competitive in the specs race that people seem to care more about, but we really are continuing to get further and further away from the promise of M43. The lenses, or at least most of them, are still smaller but it's a real bummer that we can't get smaller cameras even if it's at the expense of higher resolutions than 4K. Perhaps it'd be too niche, but a GH5 with updated colors and PDAF in the body of a GX85 at a competitive price would make me consider getting a M43 body again. The GX85 with the 35-100 f2.8 is still one of my favorite combinations due to how low profile it is. I genuinely miss that set up and more than once have found myself regretting selling it.

My biggest issue with gyro stabilization right now is the increased processing time it adds in post. It's not ideal for fast turn around and long takes. BUT the potential is HUGE and could be a total game changer, especially as processing power in cameras increases. We're not that far away I bet from it all being done in camera, which would be huge.

Yes, a speedbooster will improve low light performance. I think the argument that the FX3 is better in low light is overblown. It's always nice to have, but 99% of the time you'll never need to film at those higher ISOs. And the FX30 is no lightweight when it comes to low light anyway, especially if you're using fast lenses, which you can buy with the money you save not buying the FX3.

I think it boils down to how much you really value the larger sensor. It's definitely one of those things that only you can answer if it's worth the extra money. I can see the argument for it, but me personally, it's hard to justify.

You're the one being defensive, man. I chose not to respond to you because there wasn't any reasoning with you, and you wouldn't concede anything so what's the point? Maybe when multiple people notice something about you there's something to it even if you can't see it? I don't know.

You see it a bit with Canon too, though I do agree that Sony has supplanted Canon when it comes to people defending them no matter what.

I can't imagine identifying so much with a billion dollar corporation that I have to defend them no matter what. It really is a weird part of this hobby/profession (and honestly, many others.) It's little wonder why these companies think they can get away with things, they'll have an endless number of people defending anything and everything without being on their payroll!

They were only a few dollars more than the ProGrade here in the US. My friend Tom highly recommended them, so I figured I'd take a chance! Fingers crossed!

And they all said the same thing about the 6700 😉

seems like it has most of the same overheating issues as the a6700.

Nothing I said was false and nothing you said proves otherwise. Sony is putting out features like breathing compensation that only work with Sony lenses. It requires specific communication between the lens and the camera to computate the correction needed. If they wanted to they could work with third party lens manufactures to make it work with them, but they won't because they want people to buy their lenses. It's not 2016 anymore. Sony now has a large lens lineup and has become a leader in the market. They really don't need to play nice with third party companies anymore, because they really don't need them to boost the system anymore. Bless your heart for giving any of these companies the benefit of the doubt, but my original statement strands: it would not shock me at all to see Sony clamping down on third party lenses in order to try and sell more of their own. And there is absolutely nothing stopping them from doing so, as a few lines of code can make third party AF lenses useless if they so choose.

I went with a couple of Angelbird cards. We'll see how they go! Fingers crossed!

None of that limits their ability to clamp down moving forward. Nothing can stop companies from making lenses for the mount, but it's absolutely possible for Sony to limit how well those lenses work on Sony bodies. We're already seeing it with Sony developing features like breathing correction that only work with Sony lenses.

I really wish they'd make these less tacky/cheap looking and relax on the branding, especially on something labeled "pro." It'd be nice if they were inconspicuous.

That's what is making me wonder if it's time to switch. Never, ever had a problem with them but with the issues with their SSDs and now this card crapping in under a year, I'm a little weary. Well, weary enough to be looking at ProGrade and Angelbird cards anyway, as I've heard good things about both. Yeah, I don't tend to buy from Amazon for that reason. Got these from B&H, so I assume they got them from SanDisk directly. I didn't lose any work, thankfully, because I record on both cards, but still a bit concerning!

For the first time ever today I had a memory card failure. One of my SanDisk Extreme PRO UHS-II cards that is less than a year old stopped working during a shoot. It'd only record for a couple seconds before stopping, almost as if it couldn't write fast enough. What SD cards do you use?

I think we'll start seeing more of this happening with Sony, especially as they start releasing features that require more communication between the lens and the body like needed for breathing compensation, etc. It also wouldn't surprise me to see them start to try clamping down on third party lenses now that their lens selection has matured. When they were just trying to get people into the system those third party lenses helped a lot, but now that they've fleshed out their own offerings I imagine they're wanting people to purchase those instead. They aren't making any money when someone buys a Viltrox lens, but they do when someone buys a Sony or Tamron lens.

I think whether or not it's the best camera depends on what kind of work you're doing and what your needs are. We're really fortunate to have so many options to choose from, and frankly you can't go wrong with most cameras these days as they're all quite excellent, but some cameras have better strengths than others and it also boils down to preference. At one point I was leaning towards going with Sony, but ultimately decided against it. For my work I do a lot of handheld shooting, so Panasonic's IBIS was a big selling point for me. I also prefer Panasonic's colors over Sony's, and find V-log to be better than S-log to grade. I did have to compromise though on things like autofocus (though I still insist its not nearly as bad as people say.) Ultimately that's what ya gotta ask yourself when choosing a camera: what compromises can you live with? I think though if you're just doing video, have decided that Sony is the best tool for you and don't need any photo features then the FX3 is the better option, especially given it has received more firmware updates as @ntblowz stated. The FX3 also pairs well with the FX30 in the event you ever need a reasonably priced b-cam. Heck the FX30 is an excellent option as an a-cam and is a bargain.

Keep us posted!

I think that's why the C100 is so good in log despite being only 8-bit 1080p; the 4K downsampled to 1080p gives you more flexibility in grading than if the sensor was 1080p. I helped a buddy film with three C100s a couple weeks back and the image still holds up. He upscales it and it looks really good. I wish the C70 had kept that form factor, because the C100 is possibly my favorite ever. It's such a pleasure to use. Heck, I wish more companies would copy it!

8 to 10 bit definitely is a more notable upgrade. For a lot of people 8 bit was/is enough, especially for personal use.

I'm sorry, but I don't have the time to set up a video comparison for you. And as I (and others) have stated, whether there is a noticeable difference depends on the person's preference, what the scene is, what you're doing with the footage, etc. If you are talking about simply using footage straight out of camera or even doing a light grade, then 4:2:0 will most likely be fine for most cases. If I am filming 10 bit I'd prefer that extra information, but again, that boils down to preference. If you don't notice the difference is it really that important? I just don't feel like I can give you the answer I feel like you want to hear.

Not at all. I'm sorry that you took it that way. I am simply saying that none of this matters if you don't just pick up a camera and film. Six months ago it was "is there really that much difference between 8-bit and 10-bit" and now it's "is there really that much difference between 10-bit 4:2:2 and 10-bit 4:2:0?" Being inquisitive is good! But from my perspective it really does look like you're worrying about things that, in the big picture, won't really impact what you'll be using the camera for, especially if you're just an enthusiast or hobbyist. Regardless, none of us can really answer some of your questions because it boils down to preference and what is acceptable to you. If you can't notice the difference between the two then does it really matter? Does it matter that I can? I don't think so.

I don't mean any disrespect here, truly, but I don't have a ready link to a YouTube video or anything because I've never needed one since I work with footage every day and part of my job is seeing/knowing the difference. I am sure there are YouTube videos out there that show a comparison (though I'm sure YouTube compression will be an issue) but you have access to the same available online information that I do with a simple Google or YouTube search. There really is only one person though that can answer your original question of whether or not you can see a noticeable difference and that's you. You've been looking at getting a new camera for what feels like a year, and I feel like you are far too concerned with this stuff vs. just getting something, getting out there, and shooting. You can pick up an old camera that films in 8-bit and get awesome images. It ain't the camera that is gonna limit you. Well, except maybe if it's a Sony, I hear they have trouble filming outdoors! 😉