newfoundmass

I get your frustration, and understand your bigger point, but @MrSMWcomes on these forums and is one of its best posters because he shares his actual experiences in depth. I don't think he's ever been mean or condescending to anyone. Maybe try being a little more polite to people like him that come on here and share their experiences? 

Yeah, in fact : ) A Japanese feature film. There's a specific thread open now here:
 

They need to switch AF if only for the PR/marketing. 
The issue I have is that a lot of people spew the "Panasonic auto focus is useless" stuff without having used it. They're basing it off of YouTubers that only had the camera for a brief period and who did unrealistic tests. It's different when it's @herein2020, @MurtlandPhoto, or you saying it because you guys have used the cameras, learned how to work around the limitations, but ultimately decided that AF was necessary for your needs.
My work would greatly benefit from Sony or Canon AF. But Panasonic ticks every other box, giving me things that I value more. All cameras have limitations, unfortunately, it's just a matter of finding a camera that matches most of your needs. 
To bring this back to the R7, that's part of the reason I am complimentary about this camera even though it isn't perfect. Assuming the overheating isn't an issue, the R7 is a really good option for a lot of people like me that shoot events. And it's competitively priced. An event shooter could buy 3 of these and have a really strong multicam set up for under $4,000. That could be a huge deal.
I was leaning towards leaving Panasonic because I have concerns about its long term viability if it doesn't improve the AF and eliminate that stigma. To me, the long term viability of a company matters when investing in equipment. I don't want to sink money into a camera system that could be gone in 5 years, leaving me SOL if I need customer support, etc. Getting such a good deal on the Lumix S5 though got me to stay, at least for now. Things could change in a few years, but until then I'll keep getting the most that I can put of these cameras. 

That's pretty much the sum of it for me.
I was maybe a little hasty moving to L Mount from Fuji and if Covid had not happened and things had been as they should have been, I probably would not and have soldiered on with Fuji. Almost 99% sure that would have been the case as I had sold off almost all of my kit and had a pre-order in for a pair of XH4's and a couple of new lenses.
But Covid did happen and I did switch to an L Mount system and I am happy with it, - especially the output I get from it.
However, it's a concern as a business user, - the stability and longevity of their camera division.
I made a decision recently I would wait until the end of my season, so early Oct, this year.
Then if a Series 2 S line is on it's way either with phase or a proven excellent tracking DFD AF system, I shall probably stick with L Mount but have some kind of reshuffle because although my 4 cam approach works, I'd rather switch to a 3 cam system and have all 3 cameras preferably identical.
The only system that actually meets my requirements is a Fuji XH2s based on. Or possibly r or whatever the next camera coming this Autumn is like, but essentially they now have the bodies and the lenses that work for me and 2.5 years ago, they kind of didn't.
Sony and Canon are both viable options but as much as I'd like Nikon to be, I don't think it is...but would have to check the latest spec etc, especially after firmware upgrades.
A 3x body R7 approach could be my next best option after Fuji...
But, I need to see what happens first with Lumix and Sigma body-wise towards the end of this year as that will be the deciding factor.
I feel I am 'almost there' with my current set up, but from a logistical POV more than anything, not quite...

I think that kind of stuff is done to make dumb people feel smart. Like those memes on Facebook that say something like "99% of you won't be able to find the hidden word", or whatever, even though it's fairly obvious. Your racist aunt will share it, with the text "found it!" regardless. 
I'm not sure what the end goal is, there has to be one, but it seems similar. 

Impressive stuff. Even more impressive that they enabled this for all their second generation Pocket cameras. The P4K is what, 3 years old now? Adding that huge of a feature on that old of a camera is pretty awesome. 

They need to switch AF if only for the PR/marketing. 
The issue I have is that a lot of people spew the "Panasonic auto focus is useless" stuff without having used it. They're basing it off of YouTubers that only had the camera for a brief period and who did unrealistic tests. It's different when it's @herein2020, @MurtlandPhoto, or you saying it because you guys have used the cameras, learned how to work around the limitations, but ultimately decided that AF was necessary for your needs.
My work would greatly benefit from Sony or Canon AF. But Panasonic ticks every other box, giving me things that I value more. All cameras have limitations, unfortunately, it's just a matter of finding a camera that matches most of your needs. 
To bring this back to the R7, that's part of the reason I am complimentary about this camera even though it isn't perfect. Assuming the overheating isn't an issue, the R7 is a really good option for a lot of people like me that shoot events. And it's competitively priced. An event shooter could buy 3 of these and have a really strong multicam set up for under $4,000. That could be a huge deal.
I was leaning towards leaving Panasonic because I have concerns about its long term viability if it doesn't improve the AF and eliminate that stigma. To me, the long term viability of a company matters when investing in equipment. I don't want to sink money into a camera system that could be gone in 5 years, leaving me SOL if I need customer support, etc. Getting such a good deal on the Lumix S5 though got me to stay, at least for now. Things could change in a few years, but until then I'll keep getting the most that I can put of these cameras. 

Colour looks partially too desaturated in the skintones. Colour in this video reminds me of some GH4 videos shot in Cine D and graded. Not bad but also not astonishing.
Here is an example of a GH4 video which compares pretty well to the Fuji video imo. Dynamic range is recognizably less in some parts of the video. It´s a different colour palette and a good example of 8bit goodness under these harsh light conditons. At 2.10 it´s falling apart for a few seconds but other than that, not bad for an 8 year old 8bit camera.
 

Ok, i did more testing today with a wider lens (10mm so 15ish mm equivalent) and i tried some more complex moves as well..
Few more notes:
-45º shutter angle is pretty much a necessity so all the clips have been recorded with that setting (i tried to introduce some motion blur back in in a couple of clips as well and it might even work, i just need to understand how much of it to use)
- The camera doesn't seem to record any Gyro data if the lens stabilisation is ON (i'm not entirely sure about this but certainly the option to select the Gyro stabilisation doesn't appear inside Resolve on the clips shot with OIS) so you have to remember switching off the lens stabilisation if you plan to use the gyro. I reckon it kind of make sense though because without knowing the data from the lens gyro the result would probably be a bit messy 😅
- I have noticed some strange sharpening artifacts in high details area when a clip has been stabilised using gyro but thankfully it seems to only affect the GUI and not the monitor output nor the final render (I'm on Windows 10)
- The results are overall very good, in shots with simple moves there isn't a great deal of difference between the gyro and the algorithm based stabilisation (the building tilt shot and the cushions shot for istance) but in other shots where there are more complex movements and lots of geometric elements that can (and did) wreak havoc on the traditional stabilisation methods the difference is day and night. I would not suggest this is a gimbal replacement by any means because is not but it's definitely a feature that will enable camera movents that are most probably not possible in any other way when you don't have or want to use a gimbal so it's quite exciting!
ps. on the clips where there is severe warping from the perspective stabilisation i tried to use the clips without OIS as well to see if it would fare any better but it made very little difference, it was unusable anyway.
 
 
 

Made a quick and dirty test today with my BMPCC6K and the new 7.9 software.
First clip is shot on a Canon EF 50mm 1.8 (so no OIS and 75mm equivalent)
Second clip is shot on a Canon EF 24-105 f4 @ 24mm (36mm equivalent)
 
Overall the new stabilisation works very well especially in situations where the traditional point based stabilisation can create visible warping (i included samples of that as well for comparison)
Things to note:
- The workflow is fantastic and probably the real advantage of this over any other gyro stabilisation solution.. it's just a new option in the stabilisation panel in Resolve, no extra software and rendering needed!
- Like any other gyro stabilisation system nothing can be done to reduce motion blur so, unless you have a miniscule quantity of motion in your shot, you need to shoot with faster shutter speed. I found 45º to work the best (apart from the weird look due to the lack of motion blur, i'm experimenting in dialling that back in afterwards and see how it looks)
- Another potential issue with gyro stabilisation is rolling shutter but, according to blackmagic, it's automatically compensated in the algorithm and it doesn't seem to be a big issue (even if the 6K is not the fastest camera around rolling shutter wise). 
Much more experiments needed but i wanted to share with you my first findings, this is a very exciting development!
 
 

So you don’t think Panasonic cameras as a brand, have an autofocus related image problem, on-line, on YouTube and within the photography/video community?
I’d say it’s their single biggest and perhaps only problem and yes, unless they address it, they will continue to lose sales.
But no, before you ask, I do not have any data to back this up, just common sense logic.
You just have to read the volume of folks either jumping ship (after “giving it a try”) or just choosing something else because of the majority negative chatter.
Make a poll. Post it here or anywhere else and ask the question if you think Panasonic has an image problem (right or wrong) due to it’s AF and the overwhelming response would be, “yes it does”.
Ask those who are not using Panasonic or were using, if they would, if Panny had great AF and I’d bet a large portion of the farm, much larger numbers would be all over it.
They are also a somewhat frustrating company in that they do not encourage community.
In fact they slam the door in it’s face.
They put quite a lot out on their channel but then do not allow comments.
They might put out a BTS of how something was made and the content of that BTS will be, “I shot it with Panasonic gear that really allows me to tell a story”, but that’s about the sum of it. And comments/questions/discussion/community disabled on that also.
Beyond that, no idea what point you are trying to make, but in my own personal opinion, there’s more than a bit of self foot shooting going on with old Pannyboy…

‘Mr SMW enters the chat’.
The problem with Panny AF is not the AF itself, but many (most) folks perception of it based on nothing but chatter.
It’s the number one thing they must rectify because the negative press they get over it must be killing sales.

For what it's worth, I'll be the second critic to say this. I shot with Panasonic cameras for over a decade starting with the GH1 and owned every GH camera through the GH5s. I then owned the S1 for about a year. I molded my shooting style around the strengths and limitations of Panasonic cameras with AF being their biggest limitation. The S1 was the best of the bunch. I worked within the limits of Panny's AF: well lit situations, with simple movements, usually in 60p, with middle apertures (f/4, f/5.6). Even then the AF only worked OK... I had to be hyper attentive to what the focus was doing to make sure it wasn't going awry. I thought it was good enough, even though I knew it was limiting how I could use the camera.
Then I switched to the Sony a7iv and it was a complete revelation. The AF is incredibly accurate, fast, and feature-rich. It works so well and is so intuitive that I have no reservations about using it for any scenario: wide open, poor lighting, fast movement, complex frames. It just delivers the goods. It allows me to take my focus (pun totally intended) off the AF and turn more attention onto sound, exposure, framing, action, and everything else. Switching to a camera with great AF made me realize how much I was compromising by using a camera with poor AF. Old schoolers might call it lazy but I don't care. I've been reinvigorated to create new things because now this critical feature has been unlocked for me. I wish Panasonic could have done it for me, but nope.

Cool - one person did their own testing and evaluations in their own particular scenarios with their own lenses.  Only about 50 more critics left to see if they're talking from experience or hype 🙂 
I mean, I shoot MF so I really don't care, but it's pretty obvious that most critics are remembering the AF of the GH5 v1 firmware and haven't actually fact-checked themselves in about half-a-dozen cameras and dozens of firmware updates.

They are incredible camera series... Here's one produced by me shot on P6K G1:
 

For some reason, I seem to get the most excited about using the worst cameras I have.  I know I'm not alone......  @dreamplayhouse @PannySVHS @QuickHitRecord @mercer
I have some spectacular cameras..  the GH5, BMMCC and OG BMPCC.  The GX85, XC10, X3000, iPhone don't have 10-bit or RAW so aren't in my top tier, but definitely are no slouches....   and yet, it's the GF3 and SJ4000 action cameras that make me the most excited.  My eyes somehow skip over the nicest lenses and camera bodies but yet linger on those cameras and cause "what if" thoughts.  I have similar thoughts about some of my worst lenses too.
It's like there's a satisfaction from getting results that are better than they should be.  A thrill about 'cheating' perhaps?  It's not about image quality, otherwise it'd be the GH5 or BM cameras every time, but it's not.
I think there's something in here about limited dynamic range.  I've noticed that many people seem to be afraid of contrast these days too - maybe it's from staring too long at LOG footage and forgetting that film created rich contrasty images?  Sure, these lower-DR 8-bit 709 cameras clip pretty hard, but according to imaging-resource the GF3 has about 10 stops of dynamic range.  According to ARRI, colour negative film has 5.5 stops of DR between 2% and 90%.  Who knows what film they were talking about but it's a real measurement from a reliable source so it's in the ballpark and worth consideration.  According to Sony rec709 has about 5.2 stops - pretty similar to film.
This means that we can take the 10-stops from the GF3 and add contrast so that we compress a couple of stops into a highlight rolloff and a couple more into the shadow rolloff and we'll be in the right range of contrast.  This equates to 'stretching' the dynamic range of the middle stops.  Assuming that the in-camera profile hasn't compressed any highlights/shadows then we only have to stretch the middle stops by a factor of two, which is do-able - just, but in combination with poor quality compression it benefits from a little blurring to smooth over any jagged transitions.
I also think it might be the level of detail and sharpness.  Steve Yedlin showed that a developed 35mm film has about 2-3K resolving power and high levels of noise (Resolution Demo pt 2 ~19:00).  The sharpness is interesting too - film is resolution limited by how soft it is, whereas digital isn't.  However, on moderate bitrate cameras the codec tends to obscure fine detail (but not creating artefacts so bad they have overly sharp edges), so this is a comparable aspect too.  It's one reason I shoot 1080p on the GH5 - to control the fine detail to a more organic amount.
BUT, regardless of the above..  I just know that I get more excited by these 'lesser' cameras than the better ones.  I'm looking forward to getting better at grading with higher contrast looks, film emulation looks, and other nicer and stronger and more nostalgic image processing.

I reserve the right to do some other tests but I must say that I am satisfied with the VND True Color Nisi filter. Already seeing the clips that don't have a minimum of color cast, I was thrilled. Then I must say that this VND also creates images with excellent definition, almost equal to the clips shot without a filter.

Honestly for stills you really don't need the latest and greatest. The exception might be for sports and wildlife. Most photographers I know still use older DSLRs, especially older photographers who have the mentality of using their equipment until it doesn't work anymore. I've tried to use that same mentality when it comes to video because at this point anything that has come out in the last 5 or 6 years is still very good. Had I not gotten such a great deal on the S5 I'd still be using the GH5, G85, and GX85 set up. 
 
I'd also add that the proliferation of people doing weddings has made that aspect of getting booked more stressful than the actual work itself. I took last year off due to COVID and being immunocompromised, and it screwed me quite a bit because it allowed others to slide into my place. I'm not mad, I'd do it again if I had to, but it has made getting back to pre-COVID levels pretty difficult. 

I've had very good results shooting wide open with the kit lens on the S5, too. I really do wish people would actually try using and learning these cameras before repeating how bad the AF is. It sucks that you need to learn to work with its strengths like that but it's very doable. Back button focus is also very helpful. 

Honestly for stills you really don't need the latest and greatest. The exception might be for sports and wildlife. Most photographers I know still use older DSLRs, especially older photographers who have the mentality of using their equipment until it doesn't work anymore. I've tried to use that same mentality when it comes to video because at this point anything that has come out in the last 5 or 6 years is still very good. Had I not gotten such a great deal on the S5 I'd still be using the GH5, G85, and GX85 set up. 
 
I'd also add that the proliferation of people doing weddings has made that aspect of getting booked more stressful than the actual work itself. I took last year off due to COVID and being immunocompromised, and it screwed me quite a bit because it allowed others to slide into my place. I'm not mad, I'd do it again if I had to, but it has made getting back to pre-COVID levels pretty difficult. 

To be fair in those cases, then the camera was either (Unsane) a bit of a gimmick to help market the movie, or (Hardcore Henry) integral to the storytelling of the movie. (you could never have done Hardcore Henry with an ARRI! Although, if Hardcore Henry was re-shoot today in 2022, I would be curious as to how it might go with a Blackmagic Micro Cinema Camera, Sigma FP, or a Z Cam E2-M4. None of those cameras where an option back when Hardcore Henry were filmed) 
If you're not one of those weird rare exceptions, when you shouldn't use a GoPro or iPhone to film your next feature film. 
But I agree with your general point: content is king. 
I agree, any  semipro/pro hybrid camera released in the past 5 years is going to be good enough for photography and video!
What's the WORST example we can think of which was released since 2018??
Canon R? Does 30MP images, and outputs 4K 10bit.
Nikon Z6? Does 4K raw output for goodness sake!
Fujifilm X-H1? Panasonic GH5S?  Olympus E-M5 mk3? Sony a7mk3? They might not be everyone's cup of tea today in 2022, but they each got a tonne of praise when released and produce nice 4K images. 
Maybe the only semipro/pro camera released in 2018 we could be critical about is the Fujifilm GFX 50R, but of course that is playing into a small niche focused on medium format photography. So full marks for those types of stills there, but only 1080 video. 
Oh wait, I just remembered the Pentax K-1 Mark II came out in 2018! We can't criticize its stills capabilities at all, but video... only 1080 😕 
So fine, we found ONE (two, if you count the medium format camera, three if you include the 50S mk2 as well) semipro/pro camera released in the last five years which isn't suitable for both stills and video. And it is so obscure, most of us haven't even heard about it, or have forgotten about it already. 
I'm trying to take this same philosophy and apply it to  my work as a Sound Mixer as well. 
(one of the reasons I enjoy listening to Scott Choucino, even though I'm not a professional photographer, as I feel there is still a lot of overlap that I can learn from)
Avoid the temptation to upgrade to DPA 6060! When my Sanken COS11D / DPA 4060 work just fine. 
Why get a Sanken CSM1 when I have 3x Sanken CS1e?
Resist the desire to get a teeny tiny Lectrosonics SSM transmitter when my still rather small Lectrosonics SMV do the job! (and I've got five of them!)
Put off the plan to do the big upgrade to Shure Axient Digital Wireless, when my Lectrosonics Digital Hybrids are still "the industry standard" and do a great job. 
Don't ever buy an Anton Cantar (as much as I'd love to have all those features/ergonomics!), as it isn't like I'm ever going to get anything which my my Sound Devices 833 with its 16 track recorder can't handle. 
 

Spray & pray?
Spits dummy out.
I’ve never sprayed (other than weedkiller in the garden), or prayed (despite being forced by my parents to be an unbelieving choirboy for 5 years).
I need AF for the video side for a total of around less than 1 minute in 12-15 hours.
Any S camera with a native zoom such as the 25-105 f4 with the right type of AF selected and with the tracking tweaked, plus f8, will track even a pretty fast confetti run.
Leave that on a tripod and hit record with a centre weighted focus. It’ll work. 
Everything else, I use manual focus.
On the photography side, DFD is pretty fast and highly accurate. In some regards, better than PDAF.
If I come back from a shoot with over 2000 frames shot and 10 were out of focus, it will have been me not the kit.
If I had a blank sheet today, I’d probably go R3 or Z9 as my main workhorses.
Problem is, I’d still need 4 cameras as a prime user (except my tracking unit which is a zoom) or 3 if I flipped 2 of my current hybrid units (S1R’s) for 1 single unit such as an R3 or Z9, but then I’d have to shoot a zoom with it in order to run with just 3 units.
I just prefer the ‘purity’ of fixed focal length primes and really do not like using zooms unless I absolutely have to.
But no chance of any system changes in his year despite having a couple of teething issues getting to grips with L Mount (coming from Fuji) but 11 weddings into a season of 33, it’s all beginning to gel now.
Spent most of the first 10 jobs juggling different combos and with the last 2.5 years only providing a total of 6 out of what should have been 60 jobs, it’s only in the last 2 months I have had any facility to work it all through.
I don’t think I’ll make any more changes this season so it’s:
A pair of S1R’s hybrid with primes.
S1H in sticks with cine lens and VND between lens and body for longer stuff.
S5 also on sticks with 24-105 pulling tracking and longer focal length duty.
Crazy good quality coming out of it all now, only limited by the user. Or the muppetry that sometimes goes on at weddings 😉
As things stand, interested to see most of all what the L Mount Alliance produces next…

I guess it comes down to how anyone defines ‘hybrid’.
Your version seems like a video-centric one with maybe a requirement to sometimes take a still picture (because you don’t mention any photo requirements) and nothing wrong with that.
My version of hybrid is a typical 12-15 hour shoot day constantly flipping between stills and video all day long and if the flip time is longer than 1-2 secs max, that’s too long.
It’s also about the compact nature of the kit and being ultra mobile so whilst I could rig something out to improve the video capability, it would be to the detriment of the photography.
So zero rigging for me. Hybrid has to be purely camera and lens. But that’s just my need.
But then I split my needs and use 4 cameras…
2x handheld (hybrid S1R’s) + 2x tripod (pure video S1H + S5).
There are multiple Canon options for this I think I’d be happy with…but ouch, it would be expensive to switch to any of them!
And the overheating thing with some of them… The other day I had the S5 and S1H on tripods, rolling for 30+ minutes each (had to restart the S5 when it hit 30 mins) at 40 degrees C (104 F)?in the shade, but in direct sunlight.
Both were extremely hot to touch even before I hit record. I’m not sure if the fan even came on with the S1H but neither missed a beat and not a single overheating warning on any of my 4 cameras.
The S1R’s were super hot most of the day as in you wouldn’t want to hold them by the metal parts for too long!
It made me think how those plastic wonders that are the R6 and R5 would have coped…
Can’t prove it, but I suspect they would have shut down within a few minutes max in those conditions leaving me utterly f**ked for the ceremony!

First test under very bright sun, and little promo for an organic farm. Shooting animals that moves very quickly has forced me to make a lot of panning, but it was the first time with the camera to shoot outdoors, so please sorry the sense of seasickness with panning shots. Enjoy! 🙂
 

The XT3 doesn't have IBIS but the A7III's IBIS isn't very good anyway. The Sony has better AF, but the Fuji blows Sony away as far as image is concerned. I think Fuji is the way to go. 
The Panasonic S5 with the kit lens is even better if you want to spend a little extra.