newfoundmass

You're acting like he's planning to buy an XL1 or something! That's an antique. You don't call a perfectly capable camera that meets most professional's requirements an antique because it doesn't shoot 4k or have insane HFR. He'll get superior image quality, vastly better audio, better ergonomics, and the ability to record longer than 30 minutes (a necessity for the content he wants to produce). The C100 is still used by tons of professionals even today. I know at least a dozen personally that shoot on it still, from studio work to going into war zones in Iraq to shoot news/documentary footage. I'm sure if he had the money he'd buy the C200 or C300, even if he still only shot in 1080p. But for under $2,000 and for his specific requirements (wanting to stay in the Canon family), he's not going to do any better than the C100 and it'll still be a relevant and capable camera for years to come. For his uses and budget it's a good investment. Hell, in a couple years he'll still be able to get something for it, probably at least half of what he'll pay for it, if he decides to sell or upgrade.

I've come to appreciate the smaller camera. I used to dislike it and scoffed at the idea of shooting video with a DSLR style camera, but I've come to embrace it and now prefer it. I think it makes more sense for Sony to make their design, hardware and software more efficient instead of beefing it up significantly. I can't imagine they don't have the capabilities to do it. It also makes no sense to cannibalize their higher end line to that extent. The A7 line is confusing, particularly the A7iii given how great it is for video. It kinda took some of the A7Siii's thunder; that camera is gonna really need to be a home run.

There's no comparison between the C100 and Canon DSLRs; the IQ is far superior. It provides some of the best 1080p video I've ever seen, which is remarkable considering the codec. The ergonomics, the pro features, no recording limit, etc. all fit what he's looking for. It's still a great camera and, in my opinion, a good deal. Crazy to see people arguing against it.

The c100 should do fine with stage lighting. I never get asked about 4k. I really only shoot it when I know I'll need the extra resolution. He doesn't seem like he needs / wants 4k in the immediate future, so I wouldn't worry about it. He can always rent a camera if necessary.

I don't see why you should wait. It's unlikely that a comparable Canon camera will be released that fits your budget any time soon. If you don't need 4k then it's a great option. Even if you find you need a better codec you can buy a cheap Atomos recorder to get ProRes out of it. I say go for it. I think I'd try to get the mk2 if I could find a good deal on it, but the mk1 would still be a great option.

Auto focus is a necessity, not so much for me but for those that have become obsessed with it. The GH5S showed that good low light is possible, and even the GH5 showed that low light capabilities are improving over previous cameras, so that's not a major issue these days, but narrowing the gap in low light performance is obviously something they need to continue with. I think exploring a APS-C sized sensor might be something they should look more into. With adapters it can get you very close to full frame, which is another thing people seem to becoming more and more obsessed with. Overall though I think Panasonic has done a good job developing the system. Nearly 2 years after release I think the GH5 is still worth every penny and is still the only camera in its class capable of doing so many things.

All your bases will be covered!

Still strongly think the Panasonic route is the best option, as your b and c cameras could easy be used as an A cam and do almost everything that your A cam can do. Having that versatility cannot be underestimated. And the crop during HFR can be worked through, I think you'd eventually stop noticing it and just be used to it. Auto focus on the gimbal really isn't an issue. I've never had problems with my GH5 and the Moza Air, both using Rokinon lenses w/o auto focus and Panny lenses with auto focus. I think AF is a weak reason to pass on 10 bit and 4k 60p on your b and c cams, but I'm not the one using the cameras If I did go the Sony route I'd probably avoid getting the a6500 because the HD is pretty awful and get two A7 III.

This latest news is disappointing. It doesn't seem like they listened to anyone's wants. Bummer.

Depends what he wants to do with the photos. For online publishing and small prints 12MP is adequate, I think.

I dunno, I am pretty happy with the 10 bit I get internally... You're welcome for my deep analysis!

4/3 Rumors is reporting that the LX100 mk II will be announced on August 23. https://www.43rumors.com/ft5-panasonic-lx100ii-announcement-on-august-23/ No specs yet, but fingers crossed!

His attitude towards @Kisaha has been terrible and completely unnecessary.

@MdB seems to just want to argue. He called me a sheep and I don't even shoot Canon or have any plan to! He seems unable to process that people actually hate the ergonomics of the a6xxx cameras and prefer a more traditional DSLR body. Weird guy and a bit of a jerk.

I know this isn't what you want to hear but it really is worth paying more now for something that will last longer than to get something cheaper that you'll need to upgrade from soon, especially when it comes to laptops that can't be upgraded. I love budget options, but my editing systems are usually the one thing I don't skimp on.

No, I haven't, I was simply giving my opinion that the ergonomics (as someone with larger hands) and the Canon color has me more interested in it than the a6500. I'm sorry for not "contributing" enough to your liking.

I dislike the Sony a6xxx ergonomics, so yes, the M50's ergonomics are better in my opinion.

I haven't noticed an issue with the Panasonic 7-14, wonder if it's because you're using an Olympus lens?

If you're going to stick to editing in Premiere then I'd go with the Dell. There's really no reason to use Premiere on a Mac, you'll have more power, etc. with a PC. Do you know anyone that has a Mac and FCP X that you could use to test to see if it's something you can get into? There is a bit of a learning curve, one I've never been patient enough to get beyond, but those that do swear by it. Overall I'd just figure out what you want to edit with and make your decision from there.

I've been extremely happy with the Moza Air and GH5, especially since the latest firmware update. It'll come down obviously to what you can live with/without obviously, me personally though I'd prefer having b and c cams that can do 60p 4k and 10 bit even if I have to deal with the crop. It's why I end up using a friends GH5 a lot as a b cam instead of my G85 and will probably end up buying one myself in the not so distant future. I love the G85 and its great for a lot of projects, but more than a couple of times I've been in a position where I wish my second shooter and I both had a GH5 because something came up and we both needed those key GH5 features. Wrestling events can be extremely hectic, so you're never really able to prepare no matter how much you try. Either way I'm jealous about whatever set up you go with

H.264 and H.265 are probably the direction you'll want to look in if ProRes isn't what you're looking for. Because they're highly compressed they're not as easy for some systems to edit, so you'll want to keep that in mind.

Ultimately I think Oliver should consider versatility; he'd cover pretty much every base with the EVA1, GH5S, and GH5, with auto focus being the only thing he can't really make up for. His options are pretty much limitless when his 'b' and 'c' cams would have features that aren't too far off from his 'a' cam and could easily be swapped in and used for a lot of the work he is going to be doing.

I CAN AND I WILL BLAME THEM ANDREW! ?

It feels as though you're more interested in attacking me, as opposed to what I'm saying. It's great that you don't need these features shooting your hobbyist videos in the cafe or bar you frequent, but they're incredibly useful for many of us. The bulk of my work is for independent wrestling organizations and wrestlers. Getting footage of the performers doing their signature moves, flying through the air, etc. in 4k 60p is a huge part of what I do. The Sony a series cannot do that. I don't need to intercut 1080 60p with 4K because I have a very capable camera that can give me the extra resolution AND frame rate I need. That's kind of the point. I do green screen work for those same organizations and wrestlers. 4k 10 bit 4:2:2 blows away anything the Sony cams can do for this kind of work. It's simply on a different level. They are, as I said, things that I simply could not do with the A7iii and a6500. I'm not sure what part of that is difficult for you to understand? These are similar things that Oliver talked about doing himself. My experience I felt was relevant, so I shared it.

Honestly, if you were just talking EVA1 vs FS5 mk II I'd probably agree with going with the Sony for most of the reasons you gave. But as an overall package, man, I just think you're going to be able to get the most out of the GH5 cameras in more situations than you will with the A7iii and a6500. As someone that has used the GH5 for lots of chroma keying, event coverage, sporting events, documentary, and commercial work, I've been able to do things with it that simply aren't possible with those two cameras. I'd cry if I didn't have my 4k 60p and 10 bit 4:2:2 for a lot of that stuff!