newfoundmass

It depends how compact you're looking for. I'm guessing you're also looking for a point and shoot camera? Panasonic has a good number of options, from ones that can fit in your pocket (LX10) to ones that have a traditional camera style body (FZ300). Most, if not all, of the Panasonic 4k lineup has very good video quality.

Using the H1 as a pre-amp is a great option until you're in a position to get something nicer. For even better audio switch out the camera audio for the H1 recording, which should be very easy given they'll be nearly identical, minus the H1 being cleaner!

Sigma 18-35 art lens

RX100VI would definitely NOT be what I'd recommend anyone shoot a concert with. That aperture range is no good for most concerts I shoot.

I haven't updated it yet but I've heard that the new firmware has improved it to match the GH5s.

@John Brawley I just want to thank you for your patience and the information you've shared. It's truly appreciated.

If you can get the 25mm Voightlander for under $500 you should probably pick that up because that's a good price. It's great for low light and it is a 50mm equivalent, which is good. The old school mentality was "zooms suck, use primes." And there is something to that, because a lot of primes give you a much nicer image. But these days zooms have gotten better in quality and frankly the convenience makes them ideal for any beginner videographers, and more and more professionals are using them. So keeping one isn't a bad idea.

I'm not sure, but I feel like, if the mic itself doesn't have a battery and thus requires power from the camera, that it might require phantom power otherwise I don't know what will power the mic but you'll want to check that out, as using a mic incorrectly with phantom power can damage your mic.

Low light wise you're not going to get any better than Sony. But there are other considerations: you said that you're shooting live events? Do you have to record non stop for longer than 30 minutes? Sony cameras are limited to 30 minutes for each clip, their battery life is atrocious (minus the A7iii), and they all tend to overheat if used for too long. In addition the rolling shutter on them is brutal. Still that low light performance and better auto focus is very attractive. The GH4 is very good but the GH5 improves on it significantly when it comes to low light. The GH5 (not the GH5s, which is much better at low light) isn't great at low light, but it's not terrible. It's auto focus isn't good, not even in the same realm as Sony or Canon, either. The stills are decent, depending on what you're using them for: for your average use they're more than adequate. I like the color science Panasonic uses and it is overall a more fleshed out video camera compared to the Sony cameras, with better menus. The battery life is fantastic. The IBIS is great. No overheating, no recording limits. 10 bit color. Ultra high quality bit rate. Very little rolling shutter. Ultimately though it comes down to your priorities, what is more important?

I've not experienced too many problems with vimeo playback on my phone. Haven't tried on the laptop in awhile though. I use Wi-Fi on my phone 95% of the time.

Can you kind of explain the set up a little more? Is it all acoustic with no speakers at all? I think the H1, using it's stereo mics, alone could produce decent results as long as it's close to both. Or use the VideoMicro with the H1. Get it within 2 feet of the guitarist on a stand and I think it'd be decent enough. If it's windy put a dead cat on it. You obviously won't get studio sounding audio but it won't be awful. Otherwise I'd get a small diaphragm condenser mic if you're willing to spend a little extra, though unlike my suggestion for vocals I don't have a specific suggestion on what mic to get. For vocals I'd get a Shure SM58-LC. It's about $30 US above your $70 price range but it's a very good mic for the price. I'd put it on a mic stand and have the vocalist just sing it that way.

Yeah, these cameras COULD have very good 1080p even at 24 mbps but the way the video gets processed it never even stood a chance, it's poor whether it's 50 or 500 mbps. Someone that knows more than me might be able to say otherwise, but I think there is some difference just based on how fine tuned the camera has h264 encoding and the cameras processing power in being able to process it. Less processing power might mean lower quality encoding because it can only handle so much while encoding on the fly. I might be talking completely outta my ass though!

So the SmilePowo didn't overheat or it took 2 hours to overheat?

Yeah, the ergonomics and color science alone make this more appealing to me than the a6500. The Canon color really is leaps and bounds above Sony. The 1080p on both is nothing to write home about though.

I mean, in the second post of this thread you referred to it selling by the truck load and proceeded to be dismissive of my skepticism and all feature requests people have made in a thread about what features we, as potential customers, want. Then, when engaged in actual discussion you ignored comments, criticism, and concerns, defaulting back to talk of the specs, etc. All the while I've been cordial and appreciative of your enthusiasm for the camera (multiple times no less), only for you to resort to name calling and accusing ME of being a troll? OK.

At $249 on B&H the E1 in 2018 is actually a bit of a steal if you need a really small 4K camera, as like you said the firmware updates greatly improved the camera. When looking at it in that price range, the muddy image and not great color become less of an issue. I know at least one vlogger recently started using it as a webcam.

None of the VR cameras they've released have gotten the attention of the E1. To pretend otherwise is to be argumentative for the sake of being argumentative. I'm sure though that you're right and it'll be critically acclaimed and sell like hot cakes, just like the E1 and their VR cameras, which outside of the initial fluff pieces covering their launch and include virtually no critical analysis, reviews (despite being called reviews on the Z-Cam site) received very little media and user attention. How can it not? Look at those specs! .

But that's the thing: they can do all of that while maintaining a small form factor. Really, how much larger would the camera have to be if instead of 3.5mm it had mini XLR, etc.? Again, to arbitrarily handicap it to offer lower quality connections / features because it absolutely has to be this tiny brain just seems silly even if they offer modules, etc. But their most significant release was, in fact, the E1. I get being excited, and I appreciate they're even trying, but again, you seem to be giving them the benefit of the doubt and are dismissive of virtually all criticisms of the camera, criticisms that I think are pretty valid. That, by your own words, people have the wrong idea about what the camera is / is trying to be again shows how hard of a sell this all is, because Z-Cam has done a pretty poor job at explaining that. Going to their website, none of this is explained. It just has specs and a price. And the specs are great, but they mean very little if they don't deliver in other ways. Again, I appreciate your excitement, but going into a thread titled "What we want in the ZCam E2" and explaining away valid thoughts and wants if kinda silly. What then are we supposed to talk about in this thread?

I mean, the E1 retails for around $250 new these days. It shows that they didn't exactly set the world on fire and it had, if I recall, pretty major firmware issues on release. The video was also muddy looking with not very good color science. That's cool and all, but again I'd prefer recording to SSD without having to use the USB port. Whether we buy cages, external monitors, etc for our cameras we're still able to forgo all of that and shoot beautiful cinematic footage without it. I can take my GH5 out of a bag, put in an affordable SD card, add a mic and lens and be off to the races. Meanwhile you can't even use it as it was intended without costly CFast media ($200 for SanDisk 64 GB) and a monitor ($150+). The specs can be better than the Pocket 4K but ultimately things like ease of use, color science, etc. are all major factors in why people are far more interested in that, in addition to the low retail price. It already is a tough sell, though. People are interested and are watching to see how things develop, but it's not like we're seeing a lot of people clamoring for this camera outside of the Facebook group. I haven't heard much chatter about it outside of the initial discussion the week of NAB, even though I think it's supposed to begin shipping in the next two or so months. And this is why the form factor itself is silly. They want to position it as a cinema camera but they have arbitrarily decided that it NEEDS to be so small that it can't include tech that would add minimal size that would be worth it for added features / functionality.

That's a big if, though. I really appreciate their ambition and these kind of companies are honestly what push innovation faster. I suppose my biggest issue is CFast being the chosen media. I'd honestly prefer a slightly larger body and SSD over CFast, if they're going to completely forgo SD (which I understand.) CFast just raises the cost of entry, given I've never owned any CFast cameras and don't have any of that media. I do have quite a few SSDs though. I feel like that's the issue in general with this camera: you're going to need to invest quite a bit into realizing the full potential of this camera, assuming it can live up to the promises. While that's no different really than what happens when getting into higher end cinema cameras, it's a hard sell given the options out there that provide more of an all in one system even if they don't match the specs and are a bit more pricey, or in the case of the Pocket 4k, cost even less. Of course, all of this could be far less of an issue if they really hit a home run with this camera. But it's a tough sell, I think.

See, I feel like the LX100 did pretty well because there was a lot of talk about it for the first year or two of its release, with all the usual suspects releasing glowing reviews of it. There was also pretty frequent videos shot on it all over YouTube. Not saying that it set the world on fire, but it certainly didn't seem like it was released and then immediately lost in the abyss like some cameras were. That we still see videos on it from within the last year is pretty impressive, honestly. If they released a new model with some key updates, especially a mic input, I'd snatch one up in a heartbeat even though I really don't need another camera. I think a lot of people would. It'd serve so many uses for a lot of my stuff.

Caleb Pike made something like this. I feel like you could, pretty easily and much more affordably, make your own set up that does pretty much the same thing.

If you're an independent artist of any type you gotta hustle. If you can make even $100 bucks selling DVDs that's $100 more bucks than you had before. Doesn't mean though that you don't explore more modern methods of distribution in conjunction. I feel like people are too quick to move on to the latest technology, eager to leave behind old technology before its even dead yet. Physical media still accounts for 15 or so billion dollars in sales last year. Streaming only recently, as in 2016, made more revenue than physical media did. That's pretty remarkable given Apple hasn't updated/supported DVD Studio Pro since 2009 and Adobe hasn't updated/supported Encore since 2012, showing how early they'd given up on physical media. Indeed there are still areas in the country that don't have fast enough internet suitable for high quality video streaming. Other countries are even further behind. I live in a very rural state, Vermont, that has areas where they don't have high speed internet or even high speed wireless. For those areas streaming/downloading isn't feasible. I personally still get Blu-ray copies of movies I really love. Classic horror movies that have limited edition cases mostly. I'll then rip a digital copy for myself that I can watch while traveling, etc.

I'm actually surprised that they haven't released a successor yet, given I feel like this little camera was really successful and popular. In fact a lot of people I know still have and use it to this day, even on paid shoots. The ability to have a pocket b-cam is quite underrated, especially when you're running and gunning / don't want to attract a lot of attention. I debated getting one not that long ago for that reason.

While those people buying DVDs are declining there's still enough of a market, at least in independent professional wrestling where I work in, for them and Blu-ray to still warrant releasing them in my line of work. I think there will always be people that want physical media. Vinyl, cassette tapes, even VHS, have all maintained a consumer base, and in the case of vinyl, have seen that base grow. If my company can still make $400 or more (profit) selling DVDs or Blu-rays at wrestling events then, for me, yeah, it's still worth it and will remain so until it becomes too much work for not enough reward.