newfoundmass

Zhiyun-Tech Crane-M 3-Axis Handheld Gimbal Stabilizer
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1296818-REG
 
$199 for the next 24 hours 

I think everyone knows it's a work in progress, just quite surprised at the current point of progress in that work.
If the purpose of it was to gain feedback then I don't get the differentiation between it coming from their FB group or the wider world to be honest. Unless they've got a Reduser scenario going on there of zero criticism I expect the feedback was similarly lukewarm?
Don't take this as being snippy because it's not meant to be - I'm actually rooting for them - but if the people on here who weren't thrilled with what they saw and they were in the market to buy one, then it might not be doomed but extrapolate that out versus people who were thrilled with it and it's not great.
As I say, I'm not looking to contradict you necessarily but I think there is some relevance to the perception issue they've caused by putting this out there. Especially as its on their YouTube channel and not just a closed FB group.

It's one of those perennials that pops up quite regularly when people are looking for a "standard" zoom lens for Panasonic cameras so it's in a few threads.
It pops up as an option because the lens range and speed it has isn't one that you can get in a native MFT lens and if you could it would certainly cost far more than the £300-400 price you can pick up a used LX100 for.
It's not a solution for everyone but it can make a lot of sense for many situations because you're basically getting a free backup camera into the bargain. Be aware though that the LX100 can't have the Cinelike D hack so you are restricted to standard profiles (or the excellent EOSHD profile) which is why it won't work out for everyone.
But if it does then it's an alternative worth considering.
It's one of a couple of such anomalies (like the Leica Q and Sigma DP0 Quattro) where even if you own the interchangeable lens version of the cameras (Leica SL and Sigma DP Quattro in this example) it's still actually cheaper to buy the fxed lens version of the camera if you need that focal length than it is for the equivalent lens for the interchangeable camera.
As I say, it's not for everybody but if it fits your needs then it's there as an option 

I ummed and ahhd about a used one during my lens buying frenzy. Slept on it and decided it was too good a price not to get it and went back into the shop the next day and they were literally handing it over to it's new owner when I arrived.
Apparently it's not polite to exclaim "Oh for fucks sake" in Japanese shops. Who knew.
Anyway, I thought we'd all agreed the other week that the best general purpose zoom lens for MFT was actually the LX100

The Panasonic LX10/15 meets the original spec.
It has 3x zoom, the original poster didn't say it necessarily had to start at a 24mm equivalent.
You can look at that crop one of two ways in that it's giving you less on the wide end than the RX100M5 but it's giving you more on the long end, which is something that may be more important for his/her needs.
I have both the LX15 and the RX100M5 and my opinion is that I don't hate the crop (as I'm fond of the FOV anyway ) and I can always re-frame by stepping back so in that way I can match the RX100 max FOV. But what I can't do on the RX100 is make the lens faster so I have no possibility to match the LX15 in that respect.
It comes down to picking what is more important I suppose for how you will be using it. I could make the point to be honest that 24mm is a bit of a meh focal length anyway as its neither fish nor fowl so neither camera goes wide enough really but again that's down to personal preference.
With regard to the video itself, with the Cinelike D hack the LX10/15 bridges part of the gap to the Slog profiles of the Sony and might well be all the flat that people need in that form factor. You can use Cinelike D at any iso whereas the lowest of 1600 and 3200 for the Slog profiles does start making a bit of an issue of keeping it's original ethos of being a compact as you have to put a filter thread mount on it for  a pretty nuch permanently  mounted variable ND. Of course you can use the other flat but not LOG profiles in the RX100 to do the same thing but it does take away that extra advantage over the Panasonic if you do that.
Again, though it's horses for courses, and if the purpose of wanting a compact is to primarily offer a better video option while travelling then that may play a part. If it's for more controlled shooting as a b camera for interviews or whatever then that'll be less of a factor.
For what it's worth, I have thread mounts on both of them of course ?
Speaking of thread mounts, in light of the debate on the Sony RX100M6 thread, I've picked up a very high quality screw on Sony 2x TC for a ridiculous £25 to have an experiment with. Suffice to say from early tests, my RX100M5 can now be an M6 whenever it feels like
It works on the LX15 as well and a bit of lateral thinking has me now hunting down the wide equivalent for a similar bargain price to take care of the other end if I really need it.
If I had to keep only one of these cameras then it would have to be the RX100M5 but that is purely because it has live HDMI output which is non negotiable for what I'm primarily using it for in a work capacity.
If it was just for personal use as a compact camera where that wasn't a requirement then I think I'd go for the Panasonic with the Cinelike D hack because it's half the price, it's far more than half the camera for what I'd be using it for and not least because whoever does Sony's user interface is a sadist.
Oh and it doesn't burn your hand if you have the temerity to want to use it for a while
 

I had the RX100 V for one day. The camera is tiny... like insanely so and the features really are impressive. The image was very nice. But I got the dreaded overheating warning while in the menus without ever pressing record... in the middle of December... in 40 degree Fahrenheit weather... so... I returned it.
I had it set to record 4K, so maybe in 1080p it would be okay. But if you’re shooting in 1080p, you may as well save some money and go with the Canon G7X Mark II. It’s more ergonomic, with good stabilization and AF and better color science.
Or the OP could always go with an a5100 with the tiny kit zoom if 1080p will suffice. That camera is as small as a lot of compacts with the option to use other interchangeable lenses if the need arises, plus there’s the tilting screen with touchscreen PDAF.

Ok why don't YOU suggest a camera worth a crap. Other than the Sony RX... and the LX100 what then?? Why buy a camera that sucks ass. When he asks for a tilting screen and 4K that fits in your pocket there is not a hell of a lot of options.
This site is Suppose to be about half serious video. Not what camera do I take to Disneyland, or If you could only have one lens crap. Go to DPR if you want to see an answer to those questions.
It might Also help if the OP gave us a clue what he, she is even going to use it for, or shoot??  think what the OP wants doesn't even exist to be honest. Use your Smartphone. They are better than just about any compact camera. That's why few even exist.

I agree with the general Panasonic wave here. RX100 line might be tech rich but the 5' rec limit & overheating can be a real problem if video is the primary use. 

I have to say I'm bewildered why they've released this footage.
The camera is very interesting but let's be honest they lost a lot of buzz when the Pocket 4K was announced. 
The only way to get that back was to put images out there that made everyone who'd pre-ordered or was going to pre-order the Pocket 4K to think "Mmm....hang on...we might have been a bit hasty here".
Surely no one is anywhere near thinking that based on this?
Manufacturers have a difficult enough time as it is with people making their products look bad by shooting garbage with them without joining in with it themselves.
You can go too far the other way and make a glossy promo film of a £1500 camera with an unrealistic hidden supporting cast of gear and crew so it's fine to show something that is more realistically obtainable.
But it still has to be aspirational surely?
If they don't look like they care then why should we?
This is less to do with what the camera is capable of but what the company itself is capable of.
Showing such half baked and half arsed footage is not going to convince anyone that the company is in it for the long haul with this product. 
The first impression they made with their other interchangeable lens camera wasn't entirely positive and the massive price drop on it was testament to that so they were already playing catch up in terms of perception.
As soon as the Pocket 4K was announced they must surely have known they'd really be up against it to claw back ground from an established brand coming in with something that drastically undercut it like that.
This just doesn't inspire any confidence in them whatsoever that they can build any sort of momentum to counter the Pocket 4K.
I'm the last person who wants to be a sheep and just buy what everybody else does and I like to see the underdog have a go so I'm really disappointed that this is what they've chosen to release.
It's easy to say that we shouldn't write it off based on this footage but this close to the release of the other camera it would have been better to release no footage than release this.
Better to keep quiet and have people suspect the footage from your new camera may not be all that than to open a YouTube channel and confirm it, as Mark Twain would've put it

Well I just got my Apple iPhone 10, 256 GB back from my son for good. I have not taken anything yet, but the spec on it are pretty amazing to be honest. Now that they have dual camera, and hell 4K 60p, stabilization, DoF defocus, I don't see why with a good 3rd party App, why you can't make something worth happening. Maybe not a Blockbuster movie, but a pretty damn good output surely is possible with the skill a lot of people on here have.
It has to be more fun than dragging out a Arri Alexa setup LoL. That new DJI phone Gimbal for 199 bucks looks damn good. I am going to look into it in a few days. Like they say you always have it with you. Would make at least a hell of a good B Roll camera.
This was shot in Jerome, Arizona with my iPhone 6s Plus.
 

It was probably needed to mask the sound of disappointment seeping out of the rapidly deflating balloon of expectation.

For pure image quality and speed, the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 is the obvious choice. If you'll be shooting entirely off of a tripod or similarly stable support system (slider, etc), the lack of IS in the Sigma won't be an issue. If you'll be shooting on a monopod or a flying stabilizer  you can get away with no IS if you're careful, but it'll be nice to have.
For handheld you definitely want a lens with IS, which rules out the Sigma. I would look at the Canon 17-55mm f2.8, or if you want to save a few bucks, there are third-party 17-50 f2.8 alternatives from Sigma and Tamron, which are decent, but personally the Canon is so cheap now used that I would go for that.

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. 

Hello guys,
I want to avoid using my bad nikon d5500 preamp so I plugged a zoom H1 to it.
H1 line out -> camera             H1 line in -> radio Transmitter line out
Does it worth it the extra bulk? have I done something wrong? any recommandation?
Thank you
 


R0182350.DNG

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

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

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

I'm not really worried about what someone calls me.  I've sure heard worse.
I don't really care what you think of me either, but thanks for taking the time to let me know.
I don't wish to derail this thread any more than it already has been.  Don't bother reading below if you don't wish to.
I accept the way I use a camera isn't the way others use a camera.  I love a robust, informed and respectful discussion about features and approaches to workflow.   I'm happy to argue the pros and cons till the cows come home and I love being proven wrong. 
But some users posting here seem to want this argument to be more than that. They are specifically trying to look for contradictory quotes from me for the purposes of muddying the issues being discussed.  I'm happy to chat about that too.
With regards to use of language, I'm going to respond in kind when I perceive that someone is vilifying someone else with language that absolutely has a problematic past.  All I actually did was ask the poster to re-consider the language being used.  The poster then argued he didn't use the word in contention.
Language is highly subjective and contextual.  I merely pointed out that I don't think it's an appropriate way to describe another user of this forum because it's akin to saying you're the equal of someone that's effeminate ( you're the SAME as a woman ) or gay because of how often they change battery.
That's what sissy means.  You may have thought he meant something else.  But I didn't have to look it up to understand he was saying.  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sissy
"Sissy (derived from sister), also sissy baby, sissy boy, sissy man, sissy pants, etc., is a pejorative term for a boy or man who does not conform to male gender stereotypes. Generally, sissy implies a lack of courage, strength, athleticism, coordination, testosterone, male libido, and stoic calm, all of which have traditionally been associated with masculinity and considered important to the male role in Western society. A man might also be considered a sissy for being interested in traditionally feminine hobbies or employment (e.g., being fond of fashion), displaying effeminate behavior (e.g., using hair products or displaying limp wrists), being unathletic, or being homosexual."
I guess you're OK with that choice of language or you genuinely thought it meant something else by wanting to argue it,  but I'm going to call it out if I don't think it's appropriate and invite the poster to edit their post in case they don't realise that some may find it offensive. It's just decent courtesy on a public forum like this.  We're not at the pub with your mates.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that not a single one of you posting here is a woman.   And actually I would love to be surprised if there was someone lurking who wanted to out themselves and weigh in with their views.
I don't think you get to decide if it's offensive or not. You can still call me names for pointing out though if you like ?
While you may not care about such language because you can take a joke, it's not you that's being vilified.
Why do you think women don't post in forums like this ?  Because they are out there.  They read these forums and choose not to engage because of the boys club that this place can be.  Especially when talking about the very kind of issue that makes them not feel comfortable and welcomed in a forum like this.
This is not about being PC . It's about us as men calling out language like this because it does matter.  You're wrong if you think those who are vilified aren't here lurking and choosing not to post.  Maybe it doesn't matter to you, but to those one describes by using this language, it matters a great deal.
Maybe you can try asking them.
JB
EDIT . Oh and by the way, in the ACS, the Australian Cinematographers Guild, female members make up about 10% of the membership and only 2% of the accredited members.  I can't think of many other fields where the gender disparity is so high, can you ?
 
 

It sounds like you’re threatened by this camera so you’re making sure you point out any and all shortcomings you can. Isn’t sissy a bit emotional ? You’re reaching.
Some people will be happy with 10bit 422 as their maximum image quality as long as they have a tilt able screen and autofocus. 
Most serious image makers know that 12bit raw and 10 bit ProRes for half the price trumps the MILC features you’re desperately trying to remind everyone your precious GH5s has. Mostly because “filmmakers” don’t tend to use those features anyway. I don’t use AF.  But I shoot narrative drama.  What I need isn’t what others need.
For the majority, they will prefer the utility of the form factor, longer battery life, AF and IBIS on the GH5 and will find the bare minimum for serious work 400Mbps codec to be good enough. 
People who care about image fidelity will likely prefer what a Pocket 2 produces side by side and will also decide that they can work around the shortcomings that pertain to the way they work.
The same way others will prefer to work around the shortcomings of a lower bit depth more compressed and sub sampled image because other features are important to them. 
On board batteries on an Alexa mini on my last show were lasting about 40 mins by the way.  I guess you’re calling me a sissy. 
JB
EDIT  by the way, I don’t think it’s at all appropriate to use sissy, a word that means effeminate man or homosexual. Maybe you want to change that.

Hi. 
Thank you for the words. 
I only used a Gimbal in Curiosity and it was only for a handful of shots. The orbit around the actor on the bush track and the wide in the water pumping station along with a few shots at the end.
Intrigue, the other clip, is entirely hand held aside from a couple of obvious car mount shots (where I forgot to turn IBIS OFF)
I have mixed feelings about gimbals and just like IBIS, they’re good in certain situations. I tend to use something like a gimbal for tracking shots rather than relying on IBIS. 
As I mentioned way back, ibis works best to stabilise hand held shots that aren’t tracking in some way. Which is not the same as locked off shots. 
Any good operator knows that on a long lens the shot is easier to hold steady if you keep it moving slightly. This can be a gentle rock of changing weight as you operate the shot. By keeping the shot “alive” you’re less likely to notice jitter.  With very light and small MILC and dslr style cameras they’re actually harder to hand hold when they have less mass. 
IBIS helps smooth out the jitter on hand held shots like this that aren’t tracking but you’re also not locked into one position.
Depending on the storytelling style you might prefer hand held in a more “natural” style too.  After trying gimbals out for a while when they first became available I’ve tended to not really use them except for very particular shots that they’re great at.
But for 97% of my work it’s not stabilised by gimbal or IBIS, mostly because I only use these kinds of rigs for shots where I need IBIS. 
JB
 

I'm not sure what point you're making ?
I use many cameras in the course of the work that I do.  One of the reasons I CHOOSE to use a camera like the EM1 Mark II is because it has IBIS.  I just used it recently on a pilot I was shooting in Chicago for some tracking shots in a vehicle.  The small size is perfect and the IBIS works great.  Those shots are in the finished pilot and the director loved them.
But I wouldn't use IBIS all the time because it's not really a replacement for a dolly move or slider, though a lot of people expect it to be able to do those kinds of shots. 
Does that clarify your confusion ?
JB
 

I neither want to derail this thread, nor I agree with everything jcs has said over the years, but for anyone feeling depressed, the above steps can be a good alternative to medication. 
He shouldn't be banned though. He was never offensive to anyone, he just often expressed his opinions as facts like everyone else in any forum ever existed. Oops. 

Go to dvxuser and find jcs.  Banned here for too much new age alien drug speak.  Super rich coder dude from the hills of beverly. Not sure if he will have time, but he knows the ins and outs of the c300ii and is very amicable.

I just learnt from this video that the Rode XLR adapter converts the 12v phantom power down to 3-5v 
Edit: Note it's the VXLR+ not the regular VXLR that does this. Using a regular mic with regular VXLR will likely damage it.

I'd suggest working backwards from what you're trying to do.  
1) Work out what types of shots you are likely to want for your style of film-making - it can be useful to look at your previous work and look at what ended up in the final cut
2) Work out what you need to get those shots - there's no point having all the primes in the world if the situation requires being able to quickly change between a wide and tele shot to capture a moment, but also if your look is more important than getting every shot then a slow/bad lens may never make the final cut
3) Then work out what is the nicest / lightest / sharpest / fastest lenses you can afford
You might have the nicest lens in the world but if you miss the shot then the lens is worth less than a bad kit zoom that would have at least framed it right.