newfoundmass

You just look more stupid every time something comes out of your mouth. You don't know your ass from a hole in the ground about this stuff.

Yeah, if the industry moves towards full frame it will do so because the camera and sensor companies have moved them in that direction as opposed to a genuine overwhelming demand. 
All the films that inspired us didn't need full frame. Heck a lot of them didn't need Super 35; The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is one of my favorite films of all time and is Super 16. Another favorite, 28 Days Later, was shot on a standard definition DV camcorder! 
It reminds me of this manufacturered need for 8K. Are there genuine reasons someone might need 8K? Absolutely. For visual effects, etc. the more resolution to work with the better. But when most of us are still exporting for clients / web use at 1080p, 4K is more than enough. And as I've said before, even 4K is overrated, given I don't think any of us have large enough televisions to actually truly appreciate it! ? If I'm not within 3 feet of my 55 inch 4K screen the difference is virtually impossible to see! 

And yet you can shoot a professional film or short or Indy film with a P4K and no one will notice while watching that it wasn’t shot on a “professional” camera. They won’t even care if the story is good.

The "need" for full frame is largely manufactured by camera companies looking to charge you a premium and people have bought into it. The profit margins are greater for full frame cameras and lenses, so it makes sense. 
But as this push for "bigger is better" unfolds, sensor technology has improved by leaps and bounds. While camera phones have hurt the camera market, that so much is able to be squeezed out of these tiny sensors tells me that there's still tons of more progress that can be achieved. 

The "need" for full frame is largely manufactured by camera companies looking to charge you a premium and people have bought into it. The profit margins are greater for full frame cameras and lenses, so it makes sense. 
But as this push for "bigger is better" unfolds, sensor technology has improved by leaps and bounds. While camera phones have hurt the camera market, that so much is able to be squeezed out of these tiny sensors tells me that there's still tons of more progress that can be achieved. 

M43 isn't moving backwards, it's merely different. As long as there are cameras being made with smaller sensors there will always be people shooting with them. 
The success of the Pocket4K should tell you all you need to know on whether there's room for M43 cameras in professional productions. 
Because it's probably more than just the EVA with the new mount? 

Went out to shoot this mornings game, new rig (as posted above) and new monopod (one of ebay's cheapest).
I didn't have time to test the rig out before going to the game, and the verdict is....  The head on the new monopod is an example of you-get-what-you-pay-for and overall it's slightly too long, and moving the mic forwards resolved the conflict with my forehead, but not the conflict with the brim of my hat.  DOH!!
New plan is to move the mic to the side to make it hat-compatible, and to modify the monopod to remove the head.
This is my first attempt at putting the mic to the side:



I've disassembled the monopod, but unfortunately the head didn't mount to the body via a 1/4-20 so I'll have to order a 1/4-20 and install one myself.  I figure I'll be using it with the monopod basically vertical anyway as I'll be panning basically the whole time, so I won't need the head.  Watch this space...

Yeah, if it's a S1 video only camera I would be worried about MFT moving forward. I think they might do a GH6 and charge a premium for it but beyond that...it's full frame hype machine...until medium format video comes along...then large format. Can't wait to watch youtube videos at f0.85 FF equivalent ?

They're saying is an L-Mount cine camera ?

That's disappointing, I was really hoping it'd be a M43 camera (but was probably being naive to even think that.) 

All of the new full-frame L-Mount cameras (S1, S1R) are LUMIX. 

Hard to believe it, but EOSHD is nearly 10 years old!
2010 was a big year for digital cinema. The 5D Mark II was in full stride kickstarting DSLR filmmaking. Arri's first proper digital film camera the Alexa was released and revolutionised filmmaking at the highest levels. Now all these years later I'm still looking - not for the sharpest, highest K, most featured packed modern camera but for a camera costing less than $1000 which has the most Alexa-like image.
Not on a technical level, of course, but in terms of the feel of the images and how cinematic the end-results are when viewed on the big screen.
Read the full article

I just won a second TM-2X on eBay. A total bargain! This pleases me

Well, yes (with some more messing about with an attenuator cable), but you have to remember to turn it on and put it into record (or record pause) etc. - and the small handheld recorders I've used (not tried an H1 though) are generally bad for handling noise, so you also ideally need a shock mount for it.
The beauty of plugin-powered mics like the TM-2X is that you just turn the camera on and it's working - perfect for 'run and gun' style use, and it's got a shock mount built-in.
(P.S. I think the TM-2X sounds better in 'high sensitivity' mode - there is a low/high switch on it - so I use that mode and turn the recording level well down in the camera, but your mileage may vary, especially if you are in a very loud environment).

Here we go again. ☹️

It's hard to suggest which one you'd be better off going with without knowing what kind of stuff you're going to be shooting. 
The Nikon Z6 would probably be better for narrative work, given how powerful it is with an Atomos recorder. 
The Sony is probably a better choice for documentary and vlogging. It also has the advantage right now with more native glass, though the Z6 with adapter opens you up to Nikon"s massive lens offerings. 
Do you own a GH5? What about it do you feel limits you? While I know full frame is the craze, I feel like it's way overblown. M43 and APS-C are more than adequate. 

I just realized I probably could've just used one of my Zoom H1s as a stereo mic into my camera ?
Oh well. 

So I'm going to put the TM-2X on my ringside / handheld camera and try the Movo VXR3000 on my hard camera to try and get cleaner arena / crowd noise. 
The two announcers will use my Audio-Technica AT875R and Azden SGM-250CX mics into a Zoom recorder. Making use of what I have.
A Zoom H1 will go under the ring to get good ring noise. 
Not perfect but I'm hoping I'll see better sound that isn't so flat. I don't have the most knowledge about audio, it's one of the things I'm still learning, but it seems like a good start. ??

It's hard to suggest which one you'd be better off going with without knowing what kind of stuff you're going to be shooting. 
The Nikon Z6 would probably be better for narrative work, given how powerful it is with an Atomos recorder. 
The Sony is probably a better choice for documentary and vlogging. It also has the advantage right now with more native glass, though the Z6 with adapter opens you up to Nikon"s massive lens offerings. 
Do you own a GH5? What about it do you feel limits you? While I know full frame is the craze, I feel like it's way overblown. M43 and APS-C are more than adequate. 

If you're coming from layers, it might help to conceptualize nodes as being similar to analog audio systems. Say you have a mic going to the input on an EQ, out to a compressor, and then to a speaker, like:
Mic -> EQ -> Compressor -> Speaker
You can stick headphones in at any stage and you hear the audio signal at that point. You aren't applying EQ to the mic, you're placing an EQ on the signal between the mic and compressor.
That's how nodes work, too. With layers it's often like you are "applying color correction to an image," whereas with nodes you're "piping the image signal through a color correction operation." You can use the viewers in Fusion like you'd use headphones on that audio path, to see what the signal looks like at any given point in the chain.
I don't know if that helps at all.

Nodes are certainly much better for composites and fine tuned control of effects that don't change much over time. Layers are generally easier for motion graphics, or effects that take place over time. Just for fun, I did a recent motion graphics bit in Fusion which I would normally do in AE. It wasn't too bad at first, but it was a nightmare to retime things. I think that with a few small changes, Fusion would be almost as good as AE for motion graphics though, while keeping all the benefits of a node based compositor. Some of these may be possible already, but I just haven't learned about them yet:
- Easily make collapsible node groups / nested node graphs. You could then sort your "layers" into collapsed node graphs. This would solve the problem of a massive, un-navigable node graph
- Merge node with unlimited inputs. PixaFlux has this awesome merge node with unlimited inputs. Each layer is just composited onto the next. It saves SO much space on the graph.
- Sensible, intuitive merge options. What does an apply mode of "Normal" with an Operator of "In" mean? I have no idea, so I have to memorize what different things do. It would be so much easier to just have "Add" "Subtract" and "Multiply."
- Nodes with multiple outputs. How about an RGBA split and combine? Or keyer nodes that output the image and the matte as separate outputs?
- I still haven't figured out how to manually adjust tracking markers, or how to redo a portion of a track.

I detect a lot of anti-Chinese bias!
It's reasonable enough to raise the topic but save us the old "China makes junk" cliche, it's no longer as simple.
China is a developing economy and all countries go through eras of churning out cheap products during this phase. Japan did it. Even the US did it to some degree, but in a very different technological era. Looking at the camera companies - Sigma did it - made very cheap lenses in huge quantities for a LONG time before they started to do the high-end quality stuff we all respect so highly.
What is going on at the moment is Chinese home-grown technology is cost competitive and technologically becoming on an even par with western stuff, so that combination makes it a huge threat to US businesses like Intel and Qualcomm. There are political reasons for smearing Huawei.
There is also a distinction between IP, design and assembly / manufacturing. Most of China's developing economy has been based on assembly and manufacturing but now they are becoming big on original designs and products, which is another threat to the US economy. Especially in chip design and telecoms.
As for quality, perceptions and stereotypes always vary... You're entitled to your views. I find them outdated. RED cameras and iPhones are hardly poorly put together products - both made in China. Foxconn. No doubt if they had been made in an American factory by American hands you'd think they were better made, but that says more about prejudiced opinion than the actual facts or the skills level of the Chinese workforce. Across Asia there are a lot of people highly educated and dedicated to their work otherwise they wouldn't do the things they are doing. And Chinese space programme is another flagship advancement, whether we can agree on their politics or not, the writing is on the wall. The US is no longer top dog.
"There will be nobody left in China to do business with. Very bad for China, very good for USA!"
---
Of course when you have this twat starting trade wars, you're bound to get people whipped up into a sinophobic frenzy.
Let's look at the facts.
It's hard to imagine a President so out of touch with US businesses, who have benefited massively from cheap Chinese labour and manufacturing.
There isn't a single major US technology or camera company around today that doesn't need Chinese manufacturing or parts supply.
And yet Trump thinks attacking that is very good for the USA, because he has a simple world view - "we can make stuff here... it's easy... just build a factory"...
For a start, if you look at the quantities of natural resources, rare metals and energy required to make mass produce fundamental parts for modern technological devices and appliances, the US doesn't have any of it easily to hand like China does and digging them up at the scale required would cause massive pollution right on your doorstep. Is that would you want?
If smartphones were all made in the US they would cost 10x more at retail and wouldn't sell a single unit vs cost effective competitors.
The technology doesn't even exist at the required scale in the US to build the stuff, like it does in China, Japan and South Korea. We're talking here about the machines that make machines. Vast majority of the equipment is Asian.
We are talking vast scale of manufacturing, where a single factory is the size of a small city and employees over 1 million people. Add up the cost of those people with US wages vs doing the same thing in China and you start to realise what a fucking amateur Trump is when it comes to business and why he has made enormous losses and write-offs in every one of his business ventures.

Not just DIY lights. 

Who'd do a DIY shoulder rig from PVC today?
Or a DIY follow focus?
Or a DIY gimbal?
Or a DIY boom pole?
Etc...

For 90% of people on a budget, just getting a reasonable quality Chinese one is a better idea. 
 
Which statement more closely reflects your views, everyone is:
A murderer A mass murderer
Pick one. 
 
 

I sometimes do the 'low budget' equivalent of that outdoors, by having the TM-2X mic on the camera and a Tascam DR-05 recorder alongside it (which has two omni-directional mic capsules to effectively record somewhat diffuse stereo). Then I mix and match between the two recordings at the editing stage.
Also, if you want some behind-the-mic sound 'surround sound', remember that a simple 90 degree crossed-pair cardioid capsule mic arrangement (like a lot of stereo mics are, including the TM-2X) provides some of that as anti-phase signal (subtract the Left/Right channels to extract it in post).

Based on this particular requirement, where you are wanting to capture behind as well forward of the camera, I'd see if you could get a demo of the Zoom H3VR ambisonic mic/recorder.
Its slightly different (and slightly more expensive too) in being a recorder as well but it can be camera mounted and has a line out to feed the camera a guide track for easy sync later.
Because it records in the Ambisonics format you then have the ability to steer the listening position in post to create the balance that you need between the action and the crowd.
I am looking to buy one of these myself but haven't as yet so can't vouch for the quality at all (and the price of £300 is very cheap in comparison to anything else you'd need to have this capability) so as I say try and get a demo of it first.
This is a demo that B&H did of it recording a jazz quartet in binaural mode so pop your headphones on to listen.
It is meant for 360 viewing really but if you view it flat with the trumpet player and bass player facing you then you should be able to get the placement cues of the sax and guitar player to the rear of the listening position. 
When recorded in ambisonic mode, you will be able to alter the listening position to alter the balance to suit what you are after to make it more immersive.