newfoundmass

The problem with going with the EF mount is that it'd be positive short term but a negative long term. Canon will continue with DSLRs for as long as possible, and there will be a ton of old lenses to use, but the time will come when the EF mount will become obsolete as mirrorless takes over for Canon. Do you really want your entrance into the full frame game to be based on a mount that will likely decline greatly over the next 10 years? It kind of has to be a new mount. One thing that they could possibly do, which could be interesting, it's bring VSM as seen on the LS300 to the camera, allowing the use of m43, APS-C and pretty much every other type of lense to be used with an adapter without vignetting. This is an option, honestly, that I'm surprised more camera makers haven't done. Being able to punch in exactly what sensor size your lens covers is such a powerful feature imo.

I'm curious, what kind of work do you do that you refuse to use a camera that doesn't have "good" auto focus? I'm not even using the argument that "real pros use manual focus" either, because that's silly too, but to put such weight behind auto focus is so weird to me. It does need to be improved, without a doubt, but to completely discount a camera because it's AF is not as good as Sony or Canon is wild. For me IQ is the most important, especially given how much vintage glass I use. I've even been fine with using the GH5 for multicam sporting events. I don't mean to pick on you or single you out, I just see you constantly talking about AF, is all.

The stupid thing about cannibalizing their pro video line is that, even if they put almost every feature into a smaller mirrorless camera, a large segment of that pro line market will still buy the cinema cameras anyway. I can't tell you how many people I know that own C200's or whatever that don't really do anything with it that they couldn't also do with the 1D X or the 5D mk IV (assuming they insist on staying in the Canon family.) They own them as much for the "prestige" or credibility as much as the functionality. It's about ego and image, not practicality and quality for a lot of people. It's like projects I've helped on where they insisted on renting a RED camera and lenses, spending as much on that as they would've spent on buying a GH5, Sony A7Sii or comparable camera that they could've used on their next project. Tons of indie films that never make money and hardly get seen do this, and for no reason. I'm guilty of it myself, on a smaller scale. I love my LS300 but I don't really need it anymore since I've got a GH5 and G85. However on certain projects I bring it when I have a feeling that the client will look poorly on me using what looks like normal cameras instead of a more professional looking one. And while the LS300 doesn't have the greatest build quality, once you rig it up with monitors and stuff it looks a lot more professional than my GH5 set up.

The idea that m43's death is imminent or that it doesn't have a place is silly. For video shooters it will only happen once these full frame cameras can match the features and capabilities of them. The GH5 was released a year and a half ago and yet there is no camera in the same league, full frame or otherwise, that matches its features. It's likely that within the next year or so information on the GH6 will begin to trickle out and the capabilities and specs will again be ahead of the competition. People will be blown away, but within a year or so, after Sony releases something that comes close but doesn't quite achieve the same capabilities, people will again start saying that m43 is dying. It'll happen eventually, but quit rushing to predict its demise. Panasonic getting into the FF game is great, but I don't see it putting an end to the GH line.

I've honestly used more budget friendly lavs for my own work, but for other higher end gigs I've had a lot of experience with the Sony ECM-55B and have been really impressed with it. My only complaint is the larger than normal capsule, but it has really good sound and has a good price to quality ratio.

I'd definitely exchange it or send it in for repair. You should be getting much better stabilization than what you're describing right out the box without even having to fine tune the settings (though that's a good idea to do once you get used to it.) The only time I've gotten jitters, or seen footage like that, was while running too fast / seeing reviewers run too fast and experiencing it.

That's simply not true. I'm specifically referring to people that have switched in the last couple of years; Sony's full frame mirrorless cameras were available at the time and they still went with m43. It's not simply how much the bodies weigh but how much the lenses weigh. Take the Sony 70-200mm. It weighs over 1480 grams! The Panasonic equivalent is 357 grams. The closest Olympus equivalent is 760 grams. You can carry an entire set of Panasonic lenses and it'd weigh less than that one Sony lens. That's not an insignificant difference.

Search YouTube. There are quite a few photographers that have released videos explaining why they left Canon/Nikon for m43 cameras. While the GH5 has appealed more to video shooters, it is used by photographers.

The GH5 really is a fantastic camera. It's wild that we're nearing the 2 year anniversary of it and it still has so many features that others do not.

Haven't seen anything about 4k frame rates so who knows, you might be getting ahead of yourself.

This. I'd be shocked if they did all that in anything other than a cinema camera.

I'm very skeptical of a lot of those specs unless it's a cinema camera.

I own a Moza Air and I love it. Pretty much every review I've seen has also praised it. Amazon reviews are becoming less and less helpful overall as paid / fake reviews have started to become an issue. 8 out of 10 times that I leave anything under 5 stars I get an email from the manufacturer offering a refund and offering to let me keep the product if I either delete my review or change it to 5 stars. It's gotten really bad and has made me very skeptical of most reviews on there.

What are the chances they use the EF mount like on the EVA1? I suppose they could use the Leica mount but those lenses are so expensive. Or create a new mount? Interesting times. If I'm Sony I'm sweating, cause in the span of 6 or so weeks everyone looks to be coming out guns blazing, with them in the cross hairs.

It feels like they have to have 60p internally but at the same time I am skeptical as to how successfully it will be implemented. I do think though that the A7iii, with most if not all of the video centric features that you'd have expected from the A7Siii, was probably priced at $2000 for a reason. Makes me think that they'll price the A7Siii at an even higher premium given how much they gave people for less in the A7iii.

I think it's unlikely that the A7Siii will be $3000 unless it's a modest upgrade. I'm guessing it'll be $3500 or so, given these cameras seem to increase in price every generation. I also think that might've been why the A7iii was priced so low.

Looks like it might've been an accident or it might be a future deal that they advertised too early.

Glad to see you active again. Hoping you do a full in depth series again on this camera like you did the BMPCC. You single handedly convinced me to buy one

I don't see it on the site but B&H is advertising the LS300 for $1995 which is a steal.

Yeah, I don't think Canon is all that concerned with being beat on the video front in their DSLR or Mirrorless cameras. They willingly let Sony and Panasonic take over there. That could always change and they certainly have the ability to catch up to everyone else, but until they announce something you can't really assume they're concerned about being overshadowed in the DSLR or Mirrorless video race because they really haven't shown much concern to date and seem to be dragged along kicking and screaming. Maybe Nikon will be what gets them to take it seriously? Who knows. I'd have thought Sony over the last 5 years would've been enough to get them to go on the offensive but it didn't seem to.

That has been my experience too, though I only use the Sigma 18-35 art lens (I'm looking into getting the Tokina 11-16mm.) But yeah, it reports the correct focal length and aperture.

The A7Siii isn't going to have ProRes let alone ProRes RAW, where did that even come up? Lol

PhotoJoseph on YouTube might be a good person to check out and talk to, as he also does pro work in both video and photography with the GH5.

The Sony camcorders generally have better low light and auto focus so they're popular with sports shooters, however most ENG shooters I know still shoot with JVC and Panasonic. The Panny AG-DVX200 is very popular with my friends that shoot for the local CBS and NBC affiliates and does pretty good in low light because it has a four thirds sensor. Colors are much better than Sony's too. Sony though is probably the best for sports. It's why we used them for sports live streaming and events.

My old company used to shoot with 2 Sony PXW-X70. While I'm not a big fan of Sony's colors, those cameras are fantastic for sports, especially because of the SDI that we'd hook up to the switcher for live streaming. My current set up for run and gun: GH5 with Sigma 18-35 w/ Viltrox focal reducer. G85 with Sigma 18-35 w/ Viltrox focal reducer when I need a second camera. Audio: Saramonic MixMic with Azden SGM-250CX. I got a really, really good deal on the MixMic and even though I have other XLR adapters / mixers, I appreciate the form factor on my GH5. Azden PRO-XD Digital Wireless Microphone System but only if I absolutely need it; even though I haven't experienced any interference when using it yet I still prefer wired mics. Polsen OLM-10 Omnidirectional Lavalier Microphone sometimes going into a Zoom H1 but usually into the camera if possible. They're very affordable but I've been pleased with the sound, especially with a few tweaks in post. Stabilization: Magnus VT-350 tripod. It's a lower budget tripod, I wish it had a better head, but it goes up to 82" giving it considerably more height than other tripods in the same price range, and can hold a pretty heavy load. Moza Air. Got this on sale from B & H, worth every penny. Cases: got a couple of decent ones that were sold at Sam's Club that were a steal for $20. I tend to go with budget gear as long as it gets the job done. This year I've done a lot less run and gun shooting, so I've been investing that money into other stuff.