newfoundmass

The rolling shutter on all of those Sony cameras are awful, ha ha. It didn't really improve until the A7iii. Sony mirrorless cameras were / are pretty much useless for the bulk of my work because of the rolling shutter, so I wouldn't say you're a hater since that's a valid criticism. But I also wouldn't say their sensors are terrible. They just aren't good for my kind of work (fast moving objects and people.) I'm sure in more controlled situations they're great!

I don't think that's the case at all. $2000 for the GH5 two years ago was a steal. And frankly it still is able to do stuff all in one package that no other camera can do on the market in its price range. It's really not fair to compare the A7iii to the GH5 because it can't compete with all of the GH5's features. The A7iii is a great camera but it lacks so many features of the GH5 and isn't a true alternative. If you're only going by sensor size you're missing the bigger point. The A7iii was/is a great value, but it doesn't have all of the film making features that the GH5 and no matter how big of a sensor you have, that's not gonna make up for missing them.

The A6300 sensor was very good, though the overall package I thought wasn't great. It had the same flaws most of those Sony cams had / have. But it had very good 4K from what I recall after using it once or twice when it came out. It'd have done better if the A6500 hadn't come right out almost immediately. It was kinda comical how many used A6300s hit the used market so quickly.

The GH5's AF has really, really improved since the last firmware. Even Sony / Canon users have taken note: A big part of working with the G85's auto focus is learning how it acts, since it's not perfect. Once you kinda figure it out you get better results. You really though don't even need to do that for most vlogging work. Set it up, connect your phone, touch your face to focus and you're really good to go. I don't know if vloggers just don't understand how easy it is with the phone app, given how crappy the Sony phone apps are, but I'm able to do this during shoots with the Panasonic app while across the room working on something else.

I think for most blogging use the G85's auto focus is more than adequate, though I don't use it for that purpose. I've used it in far more difficult situations than almost any vlogger would and I've been satisfied.

I think Fuji, out of everyone, might be the next leader of innovation given how quickly they've caught up. They're so close to hitting a home run with their video offerings. I'm also encouraged that it's Nikon, of all the companies, that has worked with Atomos to unlock RAW. That's a huge development.

I think they're going to get a lot of flack for positioning their first full frame cameras as being directed towards photographers. Though I think this will change with time, I do wonder if there are tech limitations preventing them from focusing more on video. I'm quite happy with the GH5 and think Panasonic will continue to innovate as they have for the last couple of years. I think the sensor size is what has made that possible. The problem Panasonic will have is if / when the competitors can close the gap with their full frame capabilities. Take away Panasonic's advantage there and they're in a very bad position. Those 2 year old GH5 specs would've looked a lot less incredible if Sony or someone had been able to match them within a year. Instead though what we have is an inedible camera that's 2 years old and is still able to do a lot their competitors haven't been able to do and is arguably still the best camera on the market for its price range.

These cameras baffle me because cameras like the G85, which is going to be 3 years old, is by far a better "bang for your buck" camera for vlogging and an excellent b-cam for the GH5. Granted I suppose if you're already in the Sony ecosystem you're less likely to pick up a Panasonic MFT camera, but still, it's amazing how uninspired Sony has been when it comes to their APSC line compared to Panasonic and their MFT lines that have really pushed boundaries. Heck the G85 will be 3 years old this year and still does a lot of things better than new cameras. As time passes, and more offerings are made, my fondness for the little G85 grows because of how much it can do.

While I generally agree, there are many circumstances where doing this is inconvenient.

I've never noticed this but I've also never actually shot anything without an external mic! Like others have said I'd go with an external mic. It should eliminate this problem and you'll get better audio even when using some of the more affordable mics out there. I suggest the Movo or Boya (I believe they're the same mic) knockoff of the Rode Video Micro. It's $40 on Amazon and from what I've heard it is as good, and maybe even better, than the Micro, which is an excellent mic.

This feels out of left field. Surprising to see, I honestly didn't even know Sharp was still around!

I don't think the 1080p is bad though on the G7, at least not from what I've seen on videos I've watched on YouTube (granted that's not the best way to judge given their compression.) I admittedly skipped that generation of Panasonic cameras, only having used the GH4 on my friends projects. A few years back I was really considering the upgrade from my GH3 and did a lot of research into both the G7 and GH4 and overall remember being really impressed with the G7's output even though I ultimately decided to stick with the GH3 for longer. I've really only heard positive things since. I debated getting a G7 for my GH5 b-cam but ultimately spent the extra on the G85 because it matches the GH5 with less tweaking and because of the ibis. I think the OP will be very pleased with his choice overall!

This is surprising! I live in Vermont, so I know a lot of Canadians (eh?) and the only negative interactions I have really ever had are with French Canadians. They drive too fast, pretend they don't speak/understand English (most of them do!) and can be pretty sour. And before anyone accuses me of being prejudice my Mom's family is French Canadian! So some French Canadian runs through these veins! ? Really though I think part of it boils down to the importance of art and creativity in Canadian culture. Culturally they focus on the arts more than the US does these days. As someone that grew up in the late 80s and the 90s, art and music programs began to disappear during my time in school. I think that began even earlier, unfortunately, starting in the 70s. Those programs are what stimulate creativity in children and send them on the path to creative outlets like photography and film. Degrees in the "liberal arts", theater, and even stuff like journalism, etc. have become kind of punchlines and are viewed by many as useless degrees in the United States these days. Without going on a political rant, the TL;DR version is simply the United States has really focused itself culturally on money, economics and... That's about it. Even our film and television industry has become more about money and economics than artistic expression and creativity. Films make more money than ever but those films are void of much substance. They're incredible from a technical standpoint, but Transformers 8 and Fast and the Furious XXI aren't exactly leaving a positive impact on the culture of the United States. They're made for economic reasons, not artistic. When you watch films or television made in other countries you'll often see that they've been made with government grant money, whereas most films and television is made here using private money with tax incentives. Heck here in the US people are trying to defund what little is made with tax payer money! PBS is one of the few American outlets that still produces things with substance but is constantly targeted by people trying to defund it. I think you can also trace the decline of American influence globally in part to the decline of the arts here. Obviously there are a ton of other factors, but American entertainment was a huge part of spreading American culture and ideas (for better or worse) to the world. Anyway. Ha ha ha ha. As others have said, I think it's a cultural thing.

The G7, if I recall, has an image that rivals (and maybe even surpasses?) the GH4, if the videos I watched a few years ago were accurate. It's a very good option and is probably the best bang for your buck even today. The biggest thing the GH3 has over it is battery life and overall build quality. As Shaun wrote, the GH3 is really well built. But the G7 will serve you well, I think. I know people that swear by it and use it even though they could afford to get something newer. It's hard to go wrong really with a camera that's so cheap but also so capable. You can't really argue with people that have made thousands of dollars using a camera they bought for under $500! Look into the Viltrox or Commlite speedbooster too so you can use your Canon glass. While I don't recommend shooting just exclusively with adapted glass, it's a great option when you're up to shooting things manually. I use the Sigma 18-35 on my GH5 and G85 and the image is beautiful! I'm sure you can get excellent results with some of your Canon glass! Just don't expect great results with auto focus when adapting glass, or really even with native glass! ?

You had a bum camera if your 1080p looked like upscaled 720p. The GH3 has lovely 1080p. Moving from the 6D to the GH3 would be like night and day; the GH3 is miles ahead of most Canon cameras, even some of the newer ones (minus the obvious exceptions) in terms of image quality. I was still using my GH3 as recently as last year as a b-cam before retiring it and giving it to my nephew, who has shown interest in shooting video. With that said I wouldn't recommend the GH3 in 2019 unless you absolutely can't afford something a bit newer. It's a great camera, and it is a work horse for sure, but it's hard to recommend a camera that is over 7 years old. A G7 is a very good option on a budget. I don't recommend shooting in 4K and downscaling to 1080p though unless your system can handle 4K editing or you don't mind very long render times. In most instances it just makes sense to shoot in the resolution you'll be delivering in.

I don't understand why it has had to be repeated so often, re: 10 bit. ? TV networks and stations literally require it, even smaller local stations. If I was @Oliver DanielI'd be annoyed about the price cut happening right after buying it! I'm looking forward to seeing what he's able to do with it!

In my experience the only people I know that shoot RAW are ones that only do a couple projects a year. When you're working on tight deadlines you don't really have time to make shooting RAW worth it. For a lot of shoots we don't even shoot in log. Most production work is weighing what you NEED with what you want. You may want to shoot in RAW or log but do you NEED to? Do you have time to really work with it? Put me in the EVA1 camp, if I have to choose. Versatility is the most important thing to me. It still has a gorgeous image even if it doesn't have those Canon colors.

I'd have definitely been interested if it could do 4K 40p. While I appreciate the offering, that, to me, is the kind of shake up they'd need to do to tempt someone like me. ProRes and RAW are cool and all but honestly, if I want ProRes, I'd just as soon use a recorder since I'd need a monitor anyway.

Very, very little. The extra crop in 4K can be a bit of a hassle, no headphone jack stinks, and there are a couple of minor features missing that the GH5 has, but I'd argue 85% of the time it'll do everything most people would use the GH5 for. Image quality wise there isn't a ton of difference. You can cut between the two and they'll match perfectly with minimal, if any, tweaking needed. Panasonic really doesn't get enough credit for the G85. It was incredibly brave to pack so much into that camera knowing a few months later they'd be announcing the GH5. It will follow the G7, I think, in having a long, healthy life cycle.

The G85 is still an excellent camera in 2018/2019. For a lot of smaller projects I'll grab it instead of the GH5. IBIS works with vintage lenses, you just have to manually set the focal range.

It'll be stable in 3-4 patches... ?

I was literally thinking the same thing. Used to rig up the OG Pocket and would get through most day shoots with 2 batteries. Because the Z Cam is a stripped down camera brain that uses external accessories instead of internal camera features. They also haven't needed to, as their offerings have exceeded expectations based on features and price.

It probably didn't help, but most people didn't give it serious consideration even after they heard about it. Simply looking at the specs should've caught people's interest. Still very few bothered to check it out. That it feels like it has gotten more attention from notable video folks on YouTube in 2018 than it did when it came out days quite a bit.

It's a wonderful camera. Still bums me out that it didn't get more attention.

For projects like that the ability to highlight subtle looks, movements, facial expressions, etc. is important, so you really need to edit things more tightly. Lots of going back and forth to fine tune it so it's perfect.