newfoundmass

Back then though you went into it knowing that there was a business relationship between the press and companies, and also that most of those journalists went to journalism school and practiced standard journalism ethics. As things moved to the internet, there was an influx of blogs much like this one, where you could get honest opinions. YouTube/Vimeo/etc too. The people writing and creating content were just like us, and you went into it knowing that. Now we're where we are today, where the dynamic has changed. And once neutral parties that you trusted can overnight turn into shills. It's incredibly frustrating and damaging.

They could do a lot of things, I think, to help but I think companies in general have a problem thinking outside the box, especially if it means giving up control. I mean, even the current YouTube / influencer model was something that was literally thrown into their lap and was only embraced given how beneficial/one sided it was to them. "You mean we can send these people stuff and they'll make enthusiastic 'reviews' even if the product isn't great? That they'll do it almost exclusively for free stuff, access to us , and the revenue they can make from affiliate links?!" Long term it'd be for everyone's benefit to properly fund journalist and art programs that can help grow the video / photography community, but I can't see a scenario where they'd do it because it'd mean giving up a level of control that they're not comfortable with.

These days most reviews have to be taken with a grain of salt, unfortunately. It used to be easier to recognize the shilling, because companies would bring "influencers" on lavish trips and you could weigh that in when deciding on how much weight you put in their review. Companies would always send free stuff in hopes of getting reviewed, but it has pretty much infected every channel and reviewer at this point. Channels with barely 1k subscribers are now getting free stuff, sent from pretty large companies. All you need is a guest bedroom you can turn into a "studio." I don't completely blame the reviewers. In truth most are no different than us; I'd be over the moon if cool free stuff started arriving at my door. And that viewers have an endless appetite for new gear and reviews, it's easy to give them what they want, especially if it grows your numbers and gets you more free stuff and more affiliate sales. Unfortunately that's not very conducive to encouraging unbiased reviews. There should be some level of journalistic ethics when reviewing something because the information you're providing is meant to inform people on purchasing decisions. Second, that information should also be used to tell the manufacturer what they did right and what they did wrong, so that improvements can be made. It shouldn't be to gush about the product, gloss over the flaws, and then remind folks that affiliate links are down below.

I don't think it was a back handed comment, the United States IS a hyper capitalistic society. We can argue over whether that's a good thing or not, but it's an accurate statement. It's not a Japanese issue, re: marketing, given all of these companies are Japanese and they've successfully appealed to Americans for decades. Olympus had the same problem many companies have had which was they had their vision and what they wanted their cameras to do / be and stuck with it. That vision often was successful with their core customer base, but you can't be a major company that only appeals to a core base, you need to reach a larger audience. It's really disappointing because I was really rooting for them to follow Fuji and take giant leaps in video. They have all of the ingredients needed to create an incredible video capable camera.

To me that's what's so liberating about M43. If I want to rig up my GH5 so it's more of a cinema camera, I can. But alternatively I can fit the 12-35 and 35-100 in my pockets, and go completely stripped down. I really can't do that with a FF camera because of how large and heavy the lenses are. I get the appeal of FF, particularly as it pertains to low light, but in general there's very little I can't do with a little effort on M43 that I could do with FF. With FF though it's not really possible to overcome the size and weight benefits of M43. That's not to say shooting with FF is unpleasant, I really love the S1 and I lust after the S1H, but it's nowhere as convenient.

I don't even understand why they would send this camera out to people to preview / review. I haven't seen one positive video.

I can adapt pretty much every lens ever made onto my GH5; I've never felt like I had to settle in that regard, outside of budget or availability. I find it easy to get the color I want, with minimal tweaking unless I'm looking for something more stylized. Getting the kind of DOF that I want also has never been a problem for me. Ultimately it all comes down to personal preference. I've never been happier with a camera. I've never felt limited by it, at least not to the extent that there wasn't anything I could to get around it. I originally got it for event shooting, and have started to dabble in more narrative style stuff and I credit the GH5 for that.

I'm happy with it, as is everyone else I know that has used it. To each their own!

The truth is people that can't see beyond sensor size have been claiming M43 is a dying system pretty much from the start. This Olympus news certainly isn't a positive for the system as a whole, but I don't know how much Panasonic depended on Olympus, or how much they factored into the viability of the system in Panasonic's eyes. Panasonic really focused on hybrid and video, while Olympus largely focused on photography. There wasn't a ton of overlap between the two. I've largely stuck with Panasonic lenses, and most others I know did the same. The only Olympus lens I own is the lovely 7-14mm f2.8. I don't know how much cross over there was between the two user bases; I know some that used Olympus primes on Panasonic bodies, but hardly any of the Olympus users I've seen in the Micro Four Thirds groups I'm in use Panny lenses. M43 will always be the superior system for me and my uses. I think a lot of people feel the same way. And I think that as long as Panasonic is able to continue innovating at a faster pace than the others, there will be a market. They'll have to adjust, just like everyone else, to the overall market shrinking, but if they can regain the spirit they had in 2014-2017, I think they can make it. We'll see though. Regardless, I'm pretty sure I could go another 5 years with a GH5 and still get lovely images, worse case scenario. 🤣

My kit is a GH5, a G85 and the GX85 as my c-cam. I bought the GX85 because I saw one used for $250US and figured if I found I didn't use it I could easily sell it for that, or even maybe a little more. After my first multicam shoot using it I was blown away. The IQ is in the same league as its big brothers, though the GH5 is superior for obvious reasons. The three though match pretty much seamlessly. Now when I go to grab a camera for something minor or for personal use, I pretty much always grab the GX85. Where it really blows my mind is when I pair it with the 35-100mm f2.8. What a combo! And you can pretty much bring it anywhere without anyone paying any mind. Throw a flip up/out screen and mic jack, and you'd have had a much more competitive "vlog" camera using 4 year old technology. Bonus if they'd included GH5/G9 AF updates.

It really is asanine. They could literally have taken the GX85, just added a mic jack and a flip up screen, and they'd of had a more compelling "vlogging" camera. The 4K on the G100 looks so soft, not to mention the crop. It really is like Panasonic decided to do the exact opposite of everything that helped them become popular. Remember how insane it was when they released the G7? And how crazier it was when they released the G85, which is STILL an excellent camera almost 4 years later? Really can't imagine what they were thinking here.

What marketing research are they doing if they think this is what vloggers are looking for? Vloggers aren't going to buy this, so it's not even a successful money grab on Panasonic's behalf. Who is this for?

If I was Panasonic I'd have done everything in my power to purchase this. I imagine a lot of the tech could be used across their MFT and FF lines. If it's too late for that, then I'd make a hard play for the engineers and staff.

Videos are starting to drop and woof, a big swing and a miss. Really unfortunate.

These days, as long as the camera has a decent codec with good bit rate, you can pretty easily color match cameras when using a gray/white card or, even better, a color checker card. Using the color checker in Resolve gets you very, very close. You might just have to make a couple tweaks, but it's pretty quick and easy.

The auto focus on the GH5 and G9, after the updates, are both usable for vlogging. The perception though, and the fact that their competitors have better AF overall, is what kills them. It's really too bad, because pretty much everything else is prefect. While it's an overblown complaint, it's really crazy that they're sticking with DFD. Even Olympus has figured it out. The E-M1 mk II has PDAF after that update they released, right? I've been looking at it as an option for specialized uses, given the used prices are pretty good.

I wouldn't go that far, but I imagine it'll be harder to sell if they can't claim similar auto focus at the very least. That's the main selling point for a lot of people when it comes to vlogging.

43Rumors says: 20MP 4k30p 3.8 MP EVF in the middle of the camera Near gx9 size G100 with 12-32mm kit lens will cost $749 - Unless it has better auto focus I can't see why this is a better vlogging camera than any of the other lower end Panasonic cameras. Maybe if it removes the crop and has better stabilization? But even then, with how cheap you can get a G85 or even GH5 used... 🤷🏻‍♂️ No 4K60p is just dumb.

If it doesn't require phantom power, yes, though it's still a good idea to run it through a good preamp. Dynamic mics straight into camera don't provide the best sound, so boosting it (or better yet, recording it with a decent audio recorder) is better.

After the G95 was such a disappointment I don't have terribly high hopes, though depending on the features it may give us an idea about where a GH6 is heading. I also feel like most of these "vlogging" cameras end up not being very good for vlogging.

I haven't, but this guy did

Godox is rolling out the mk II of their SL series of lights that update the build quality, add features, and has an even quieter fan, though the fan on the SL60w, at least the ones I have, weren't as bad as people say. I'm glad they didn't abandon this line once they announced their higher end VL series. The SL lights are an incredible bargain.

This is dumb and pointless. Take it to DM or leave, dude.

Honestly I kinda have the opposite feeling these days about video. I started out on tape and doing linear editing with Videonics equipment, then moved to a NLE but still having to transfer footage from tape, to now being able to quickly edit things I've filmed. I remember being 14 years old and carrying around a heavy shoulder mounted camera. Now I have a tiny GH5. I can rig it up, or I can use it stripped down. It's liberating compared to what I started out with. Even the equipment I work with, it's lighter, easier to use, and most importantly, more affordable. My only complaint, when comparing it to photography, is that with photography I feel more in the moment. With video I have to think ahead to editing, what I want out of the finished project, etc. When taking stills I really only need to focus on what is going on right then and there. Sure you'll tweak the photos later, but mostly what you see is what you get. Still video is what fascinates and intrigues me. It's what I got into before doing any photography. I was just a 10 year old kid with a camcorder and a VCR, making his little masterpieces. I've loved it ever since.

A7sII