newfoundmass

Have you used or looked into the JVC LS300? I'm actually surprised you never reviewed it, as it is a mighty camera for its price. The form factor, internal NDs, SDI out, professional XLR inputs, VSM (a feature I figured you'd love with all the vintage lens benefits), prime zoom, the zoom rocker, the streaming capabilities, and the like make such a wonderful package. And the combination of Super 35 and M43 mounts really worked out nicely together! Whether it's JVC or Panasonic, I'd love, love, love another camera in the spirit (and price!) of the LS300!

Focus assist features, better 1080p codec, V-log, much better battery life, etc. I love the G85 and would personally choose it over a GH4 (in fact I did!), but it is missing some of these cinema camera features first found in the GH4 and expanded on in the GH5.

I use the GH5 for most projects it's the easiest camera for me to set up about shoot with. Just take it out, put in a battery, and slap on a lens and you're good to go. The LS300 meanwhile is more like a cinema camera, so I tend to use it in corporate, studio or interview settings. You could just throw a lens on it and go shoot, and it's not terribly heavy or anything, but for running and gunning the GH5 is just a better option. Overall though I decide which is the best tool for the job and go with that Like when shooting with the LS300, for best results you should attach an external monitor since the flip out one is not good at all and the evf is awful. You'll wanna add the handle/audio interface for better ergonomics and controls. Getting some kind of shoulder rig or monopod is a good idea if you're don't hand held. Etc

I don't recommend the Pocket4K mostly because of the battery life and the need to rig it up with better battery sources / external SSD, etc. Not ideal for documentary shooting other than interviews.

The GH4, even in 2019, is a great camera and honestly, for how little you can get them for now, is one of the best "bang for your buck" cameras when you factor in all the cine features. The auto focus though is substantially worse than the GH5, the low light is also much worse than the GH5. And no IBIS stinks.

What are the chances of Panasonic going the JVC route and using a combination of a Super 35 sensor and M43 mount? When I really think about it this feels like, to me, the near perfect compromise. Virtually every person that uses or owns the JVC LS300 loves it. If JVC has marketed it correctly, I truly think it'd have been one of the major cameras releases to have come out. Instead it just fell under the radar. I get excited just thinking of what the Panasonic engineers could do in building something like a LS300. Would/have they consider it?

GH5 files should work pretty well, even on a little older computers. My editing rig is from 2015 and handles the 4K files well, though when doing multicam or lots of grading / FX using proxies isn't the worst idea.

The LS300 is such a wonderful camera. I truly hope that JVC releases a successor, or that Panasonic takes the formula themselves if JVC doesn't. The VSM feature alone makes this camera absolutely incredible. Are there any other cameras that have it? I can't think of any off the top of my head. My biggest complaint, outside of build quality (which I understand, it's how they made it so affordable), is the low light and the auto focus. The auto focus isn't a deal breaker because I mostly use manual lenses with my LS300 but the low light isn't really much better than the M43 censors that are out. I was expecting better low light from a Super 35 sensor.

Yes, that can be a problem for sure. It's usually pretty easy to deal with in post or by tweaking picture profile settings.

I'd heard that it exists but I've never watched it or heard what it's about. The entire Jussie Smollet case is extremely frustrating. Hate crimes against African Americans and the LGBT communities are on the rise, and yet this greedy person tried to use that to get fame and a raise? All he did was hurt those communities, given people ammunition to pretend that hate crimes aren't happening, and distracted the media from more important stories, like the Coast Guard official arrested planning terrorist attacks and assassinations against liberal people and candidates.

That's really why Fuji has my attention. I think in the next couple of years we'll see a Fuji that's on the same level as the Panasonic GH series, and maybe even better overall in all the features. It really depends how much they're looking to cater to video shooters; indicators look promising! When you say sharpness, do you mean too sharp or not sharp enough? Because I too have found times when the GH5 is almost too sharp for me and I'll dial down the sharpness in camera or fix it in post.

I understand. I think the colors out of the GH5 have improved greatly since the GH3. That was one of the major things we saw first with the GH4 and later with the GH5, where it got even better, and GH5s which is the best color I've seen out of these Panasonic cameras. I usually do little, if any, tweaking with the footage I get unless I'm going for a specific look or absolutely need to. Even though it's a 2 year old camera it's not completely fair to hold that against it. It still does stuff that other cameras don't, and there's still no camera in its price range that matches all of its features. The Panasonic GH5 was so ahead that it took 2 years for everyone else to catch up, and even so they haven't completely. Plus they're still releasing firmware updates to improve performance

Okay so then Fuji is an option! I still lean towards the GH5 personally because it has all the pro features you could want outside of the weaker AF. Fuji I'm looking at very closely though to see what the future holds. The advances they've made in video in such a short period is fantastic! They really could entice me to switch soon with the right camera!

One question I have, and it might have been asked already, but do you need a camera that doesn't have recording limits? Are you okay with 29:59 recording limits?

The GH5 is a great option. Using tap to focus works really well unless you're in terrible conditions. The auto focus performance really depends on which settings you use. I find it quite usable in one area and pinpoint AF. Also coming from the GH3 you'll have the focus assist features with the GH5 that make manual focus very easy. You can rent one for fairly cheap these days, maybe try it out? You might be surprised!

G85 has unlimited recording, while the G7 has a work around (I've never used one though so I don't know for sure.) I'd recommend the G85 over the GH4 because of the better low light performance and IBIS, unless you need the advanced features of the GH4. For event shooting the IBIS is a life saver. You can get really stable shots even hand held. Use a monopod or some other stabilizer and it can almost feel gimbal like. Biggest downside to the G85 is the 4K crop and the comparatively weak 1080p codec, but the 1080p is still fine, I feel, especially for web delivery. The GH4 though, if you want a compact mirrorless camera with cinema camera features, is one of the best deals out there these days. Some of the eBay prices I've seen are straight up bargains. One of my friends works for a production company that still uses GH4's and plans to continue to do so for a while. They're work horses and only feel "old" because of how incredible the GH5 is. They very much were cutting edge and game changers 5 years ago.

Hmm. Can you give us an idea on shooting conditions? The Sony AX53 and AX33 are both decent camcorder options. If going the camcorder route I'd probably stick with Sony as it's been my experience that they get better low light and battery life than Canon. It might be different with 4K but my old Sony 1080p handy cams would go about 4 hours on the largest aftermarket battery available. As far as mirrorless goes, the G85 with kit lens might be a good option but the auto focus might be a weakness that you don't want to deal with, depending on what you're shooting / situation is. The benefit of a camcorder is that you can pretty much hand one off to anyone and they're able to get pretty good results regardless of their experience. You can do that with mirrorless cameras, too, but they're better for more manual control.

I'm guessing most of the major companies don't want to pay the Apple licensing fee. I imagine Sony or Panasonic would have to pay substantially more than Blackmagic, Atomos, and the others that have adopted it so far. I can also see them not wanting to give Apple that kind of leverage.

The thing about trying to appeal to shooters on a budget is that there are a lot of affordable options to compete with. Are they as good as an Atomos monitor? No, but there are quite a few sub-$200 that are "good enough" when you factor in price. So much competition out there that I don't really see the point in this. As others have said, I'd just throw down the extra $200 or whatever to get the recorder if I'm spending more than $200-250 on a monitor. This will be true if more cameras begin to shoot in ProRes and/or RAW, but I think there will always be a market for external recorders until that happens.

GH5= Higher bit rates/more bit rate options, no tax to enable 10 bit, no recording limit in 4K 60p (big deal for me), flip out screen, near perfect size, (probably) better IBIS, etc. I get the that right now, technologically, there may be limitations that prevent the S1 from doing all that. But it's still what I want out of a full frame camera. Things like better low light and DR don't really woo me when that's to be expected from full frame cameras in general. Add the price of the body and lenses, too, and it it just kinda turns me off. With the GH5 it honestly felt like a bargain when I factored in everything that the camera was giving me for my $2,000 and I guess the S1 just isn't giving me that feeling, especially with the paid upgrades factored in.

I can't get anything in Fusion to look nearly as good as what I'm able to do in After Effects, which really annoys me. Meanwhile I've been able to get over the Resolve learning curve and edit pretty efficiently. I don't find I'm missing Premiere much at all, outside of some video codec compatability (Resolve for instance doesn't support QuickTime PNG videos, which is what exported a lot of After Effects work I've done over the years in.)

There was a bit that I disagreed with Tony's video about and a few things I do agree with. To me, the lens pricing is inexcusable regardless of Sigma's plans to release all their art lenses in the L mount and the ability to adapt. They're asking people to join a completely new ecosystem and aren't making it easy to do. Road maps are great, but you're asking me to pay $2500 for the body alone and then just as much for lenses. This is exactly the same thing most, if not all, of us faulted Sony for doing. It's insane not to think that will scare off a significant number of users. All the video features are nice, but the codec, the recording limits in some modes, the paid upgrades (if it's $100 like the V-log upgrade that's fine), etc. are negatives, even if they aren't deal breakers for a lot of people. There is very little about this camera, outside of it being full frame, that makes me want to "upgrade" from my GH5. Even if I was enticed enough by this camera I'd still hold out to see what they have in store with the GH6. What they needed to do, to get me and a lot of others, is to have come out with a full frame GH5 and this just isn't it. I'm sure they're working on a video focused full frame camera, so we'll see how that goes.

This is getting old. I don't know who to be more annoyed with, Canon or myself for expecting them to come to their senses. We should all know better by now.

I love the BMPCC. I still have mine, though I don't really use it anymore. Once I got the GH5 it just became too much of a hassle to rig it up with an external battery and monitor. But the image and colors, they are wonderful. And it also looks very good upscaled to 2K, maybe even 4K. We used mine as a b-cam for a friend's BMCC and he was able to mix them together perfectly. I dunno about using it on weddings though! It's not great for low light and while there are no recording limits it gets warm real quick.

Tom Antos did a video comparing cheaper to more expensive gear. Hopefully this helps at least a little. It's unlikely you'll find anything cheap with zero latency. Even more expensive wired HDMI monitors have a little latency.