solovetski

After my close friend decided to upgrade to the Lumix S5 II X he gave me an incredible deal on his Lumix S5 that I couldn't pass up. As a result I just finished packing up my trusty GH5, 12-35mm mk II, 35-100mm mk I, 25mm, and 14mm to ship off to MPB. For the first time in nearly a decade I will no longer have any M43 cameras or lenses. I think my time in the system has finally come to an (unplanned) end. 😞
I'm feeling some kind of way about it right now, honestly. I still believe in the promise of M43, I just don't know that Panasonic will ever realize it or if the market will ever be there to make it viable. It's a damn shame, honestly. I'll be happy with my full frame cameras, and having three of the same bodies will make things a bit easier for me, but I still can't help but wish there was a professional level compact M43 camera that could fit my needs and fit in with my two S5 bodies. I just don't see it happening. 
I had planned to always have at least one M43 camera in my kit. Eventually I was going to upgrade to the GH6 in a couple years, once they were even more affordable on the used market, but I couldn't pass on another S5 with kit lens for $750, so plans changed. It just didn't make sense to keep the GH5 and follow through with my original plans anymore, as these three S5 bodies will get me through until I can snag some S5 II bodies in a couple years when people upgrade to the latest camera.
The GH5 was a total game changer for me and my work. I'm sad to see it go, because in many ways it did things that I never thought a camera would be able to do. It really cannot be overstated how much the IBIS changed things for people like me. I no longer had to set up a cumbersome shoulder rig, I could simply hold it and get steady shots even as I rushed around a wrestling ring and dodged people flying all over the place! Life goes on though, I guess.
 

It should be pointed out that it is not mandatory to have a short shutter speed for photos.
Let's review two examples.
The first is this guy, who is obviously playing at an extreme level here, with huge energy and drive:

It is an incredible photo, there's no doubt.  But does it convey the sense that he's pushing himself to the limit?  The more I look at it the more it looks like it could be a still life, maybe he was on wires and it's a setup.  In a sense, it implies motion but doesn't actually express any.
Contrast that feeling to this image:

There is no denying this.  Not only is it a great photo, and not only does it show that world-class people are pushing themselves to the limit (the three guys on the right definitely are!) but it shows the results of that effort.
Now scroll back up to the first image - what is the energy level of the first image now?
I would suggest that the obsession with short shutter speeds is part of the same obsession with getting "sharp" images, which is driving lenses to be clinical, sensors to be enormous, megapixels to be endless, computers to be behemoths, and images to be soul-less.
To be a bit practical, there are likely limits to how much blur you want in a scene, and it's relative to the amount of motion involved, which often varies quite significantly, even from moment to moment in a lot of sports.
Some more examples of varying amounts of blur..
This one is a great image, but if it was important who the defender was then it's too blurry.  If not, then maybe not..

Sometimes it's not important to get anything completely sharp..  images without feeling are of limited value, and I find that motion is full of feeling.  Here's one that is full of emotion (especially if you knew the subjects):

Also worth mentioning is that you don't always have to have the subject still and the background blurred, it can be the other way around, but it changes the subject of the image somewhat.

and with video you're taking lots and lots of photos so the creativity is endless...

Remember - don't let the technical aspects blind you to the point of capturing things in the first place.

Things used to be a lot more conventional. Films tended to carry the look of the film stock they were shot on. Nowadays it is easy to go crazy with exposure as you have a 100% accurate monitor to reference. On top of that everything is digitally color graded to the point where it can be hard to tell what camera they were shot on. Though I can still often tell as the sensor/color of the camera often seems to shine through the manipulation. That isn't always the case of course.

But regardless it's all just personal preference. Take Roger Deakins for instance. He prefers to do everything in camera, where as others will do a large amount in post.

But in terms of the Alexa having a clean image I agree to some extent. At least compared to film it is cleaner, higher dynamic range(maybe), and probably sharper. That is just taking into consideration the Alexa Classic sensor. These are all conclusions Deakins had after shooting with the Classic on his first digital film "In Time". His word isn't God but he certainly had his fair share of experience shooting 35mm film content. I have never shot on 35mm film only for photography.

That is a 12 year old camera, now we have higher resolutions from ARRI, 3.2k, 4.5k, or 6k rather than 2.8k, RAW recording, even higher dynamic range.

But what I will say is at base iso of 800 the Alexa Classic isn't particularly clean. I tend to shoot 200-400 when I want really clean footage. That said it has a nice clean texture, meaning the noise is pretty consistent, lacking in color noise unless you really under expose badly. I rate the Alexa at 1600 iso, which again isn't clean but it's pleasant. That gives you 7 stops of highlight latitude but not much in underexposure. Most other cameras fair worse.

Deakins commented on cameras looking too digital. He doesn't care much for emulating film but did admit the Alexa has a natural texture and if that were to go away you might be left with something too clinical and lifeless. I guess the Alexa 35 has in camera textures which I guess solves that issue.

Deakins was one of the first to embrace digital and pretty much immediately conclude that it is superior to film, at least for him. I still look at 35mm film as the golden standard. I was brought up on it and there is something magical about it for me. In someways I was brought up on Alexa ALEV3 as well. Most of my favorite modern films were shot with that sensor tech.

There are some cinematographers noticing that the Alexa 35 Alev4 sensor/pipeline feels more digital. The motion rendering, the color science. ARRI has always been known for giving true to life looking colors with nice skintones. But compared to the newer sensor the starting point on the ALEV3 cameras does have a look to it. I assume it is similar to what Blackmagic did between the older and newer cameras like you mentioned. Going from a kodak 2383 to a standard rec709 look.

I suppose the option to actually shoot on film for people like me will always be there, assuming the budget allows. I've heard some very experienced cinematographers comment on how they can't seem to get the same look from digital as they do film. That may be them showing their age. Tools like Dehancer have made it a lot easier to emulate that look. I will admit I have seen a few videos that were incredibly well done in terms of film emulation. Although I would say they are the minority. I just prefer to get it in camera especially considering I am often not involved in post. Again that is just me and I am in the minority.


 

Absolutely.  Once you've managed to go through all the effort of hiring a team of people and hiring a good amount of lighting equipment etc, you're not going to quibble about the cost if hiring a dedicated cinema camera, that would be silly.
Of course YT is dedicated to new shiny things, that's to be expected.
The reason I have some frustration here is that this attitude of OLD = CRAP is unfortunately very common on this forum, where (I would hope) no-one has a financial incentive to promote new cameras.
I'm talking both subtly as well as directly, not only are the older cameras given less attention, but I have been explicitly told by forum members to stop talking about the GH5, even though it was relevant to whatever brand new camera body we were discussing and I was presenting a balanced view of pros as well as cons.  It's one thing to criticise a camera, but to say that it's no longer relevant or even welcome in a discussion due to its age, that's a whole other level.
To tie this together, I absolutely agree that no-one is using a BGH1 or GH5S as an A/B/C camera on a major production, but the fact that they're used at all by anyone in that world should give pause to those who think that they're no longer fit for use in low budget / no budget / amateur settings.
I mean, I thought the entire premise of EOSHD was to use and make the most of affordable consumer cameras for video.

....and in todays episode of "the camera YT echo-chamber doesn't know shit about the real world", here's a real-world and very high-end studio shooting VFX background plates with a gazillion BGH1 units, or arrays of GH5S paired with 12-35mm f2.8 zooms.
Their website indicates they've worked on Joker, Stranger Things, Mission Impossible, and dozens of other high-end productions.
The thumbnail appears to show 17 BGH1 units:
One shot from the Stranger Things rig detailed on their website shows "our standard nine camera array" is 9 x GH5S units - 5 at the back (with two facing sideways) and 3 on the front:

To all those who suggest that the size/weight advantage from MFT is gone, their page says "The rig was still able to fly as luggage and efficiently attach to a rental car, all while being street legal."  How much does a 24-70mm F2.8 weigh again? If you can't remember then the short answer is more than double the MFT equivalent.  In the video he talks about how each BGH1 + lens is about 1lb, and keeping the weight down allows them to rig the car up in such a way that keeps them from needing increased permitting and things like escort cars (which for 360 cameras appear in the shot).
So, the GH5S (2018) and BGH1 (2020 - 3 years old), which aren't FF, don't shoot RAW, don't have IBIS, and have been completely forgotten by the entire camera YT echo-chamber, are being actively used on some of the biggest and most VFX heavy films being made in Hollywood.
They also just casually mention in the video (11:35 if you don't believe me) they've been involved in over 2000 productions, and that "these cameras are able to match perfectly with all your A-cameras".

Yes, but have they shot weddings?

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/make-believers/mystery-romance-short-the-orange-of-daydreams
 
From the director of MAKE-BELIEVERS:
 
Any helpful hand is welcome, thanks for watching! :- )

The cart:

 

The camper as an all round business proposition, costs me approx 3500 euros less per annum over car + hotels etc with the added bonuses of always on site plus for family/personal use for ‘free’.
That’s my 90 euro cart fully loaded except back pack and 3 cameras on my person, but otherwise every bit of kit I use or might use on a job including 40m extension and 500wh power bank (both of which were in the bottom of the cart).
All lighting is mains, power bank or battery.
The gimbal is indeed mounted on a tripod for ceremony, speeches, entrances, exits etc, but on a quick release plate so can go into floaty mode within 2-3 seconds or go onto it’s mini tripod base also with QR plate.
It’s all about having the most minimal kit I can get away with, but without too much compromise and being able to use anything as quickly as possible and as fuss free as poss.
That is why my next ‘job’ is getting the number of bodies down from 4 to 3 or ideally 2 and currently only adapted Tamron/Nikon can do 2…

I used to work out of my little Mazda Bongo camper a lot back in the day.
Same logic regarding the savings and convenience particularly when I had to cover games late at night or be at pressers first thing in the morning.
Great to use it as a mobile office as well to file from too.
The biggest cost savings were covering long multi day events away such as football tournaments and particularly like here when shooting the Tour de France.
Using the camper saved me a lot and meant I could ram it full of boxes gear as well as utilise it as a mounting point for remote cameras !

Its got me quite nostalgic for covering the Tour again to be honest, although these days it would be far more lucrative shooting it as a vanlife vlog than it would as an editorial photographer. 

A video that motorcycle lovers will understand!
Made with a7iv & Tamron 28 75 in a demolished very old church somewhere in Kavala in Greece..
The video was made after acquiring a popular motorcycle.
Νeeds a little patience!
Here's the video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWSFLwbChcw

I don't think so.
Most of the photography blog were just endlessly repeating "more resolution cameras, more resolution lenses, more resolution computers" but using different words over and over again.  The odd post of "15 things to do with a fisheye lens" disguised this myopia, but it was the water that the entire camera internet swam in, and still mostly is.
Now cameras have huge resolution and social-media can sustain the endless resolution-navel-gazing that people seem to want.  I think there's room for one or two blogs that discuss non-resolution-based-topics, but that assumes that the writers actually have enough knowledge of non-resolution-based-topics to keep a blog alive.  That's drastically fewer people than there were camera blogs, thus the "market correction" we're currently experiencing.

Yes, I very well know that - it's the main reason I use micro-4/3 cameras and long telephoto lenses for wildlife video and stills. Full-frame lenses of equivalent 'reach' are far to large and heavy for me to want to carry around, so I accept some picture quality compromises instead e.g. low-light performance.
If you want to keep the lenses small, then use 'cropped' sensors e.g. APS-C or micro-4/3 (or maybe use 'APS-C' lenses on full-frame sensor cameras - I think Sony and Panasonic support that at least, maybe Canon and Nikon too).
You just have to decide which set of compromises you can live with...
I agree.
Whenever I look back at video I shot in the past on VHS-C, DV and HDV tape, plus a variety of small-sensor cameras (like HX9V and FZ100), and compare it to 1080p let alone 4k from my Pana G9, I'm reminded how much video consumer/prosumer quality has dramatically improved over time...(as have camera stabilisation and the displays we view it on).

I think there are three things going on.  
1) People can't colour grade and they're trying to buy their way out of learning.  
As Resolve has grown in popularity the number of people that got access to a colour-managed workflow or colour space transformations has grown, and the number of people that can get the look they want from whatever camera they are using has also increased.
2) People don't remember what film looks like.
The number of "filmic" images that look nothing like film has gradually turned from a trickle to a vast deluge, to the point now that many people trying to get the look of film may have never seen it, or wouldn't recognise it even if it showed up with the film-strip not yet cropped out.  Over the last year or so I've been rewatching older movies and TV shows shot on film, from back when this was how all TV and movies were shot, and at times I've watched several hours of film a day for weeks or months straight.  Most so-called "filmic" content online looks nothing like film, in practically any way.  It does, however, remind me a lot of 4K GoPro footage, but with 15 times the dynamic range of both a GoPro and most film processes.
3) People have changed what they like.
As time goes on, "cinematic" looks more and more like video every day.  The so-called "cinematic" videos that people like, speak fondly of, share, and aspire to, all look nothing like what cinema actually looks like.  I lost count of the number of times I argued online about sharpness and resolution and depth of field and colour science and colour grading and began to question myself in the face of almost universal online opposition.... then I'd go see a movie and I'd be reminded that I was right and everyone else was blind, has stopped going to the cinema, is full of shit, or all of the above.

I'm fed up with Atomos, I wasted a huge amount of time doing tests for them for the stuttering issue in ProRes RAW. They didn't even try to replicate it. I reported the problem at the 8th of February, since then I provided tons of test material. And where are we now? They still think it's my unit, or my SSD or my HDMI cable even when I told them I tested with multiple units, multiple cables and SSDs. Unbelievable.
In the meantime some other guy asked BlackMagic about the same issue (so apparently this is related the the X-H2s), and they sent it to their engineering team right away, they reproduced it and notified Fujifilm about it. HUGE difference between the two supports. Seriously, even Fuji is better than Atomos, because they don't reply at all, so you won't waste your time with them 🙂

After watching at @Andrew Reid's entertaining new YouTube video discussing m4/3, and more specifically, the GH6, I decided to look for some videos on YouTube and Vimeo. Strangely, I had a hard time finding many videos. I am mostly interested in the internal ProRes features of the camera, especially in 1080p and DCI-4K. 5.7K is not really something I would need right now.
To my surprise, I had a real hard time finding many samples. The lion's share of the videos were ProRes Raw samples, which look very nice, it's just not what I find intriguing about the camera.
I know times have changed and with that interests have as well, but when I saw a c-mount lens attached to Andrew's GH6, I was dying to see some footage of it. And I thought there would be a bunch of samples on YouTube of people experimenting with different optics on the most advanced m4/3 camera ever made...
But nope.
Obviously, a lot of videographers/filmmakers have moved on from m4/3 to the greener pastures of FF. Being a FF shooter, I understand the appeal, but I still find it sad.
So that brings me back to the title of my post... what's the deal with the GH6?
I heard there were some issues with pink streaking... has that been solved or has it been discovered why it happens?
With all that said, are there any good or creative videos floating around? Have the Nick Driftwood's or anamorphic shooters moved on from GH cameras?
I haven't owned a Panasonic camera in a while, but I really enjoyed the ones I have owned/used and I find it sad that the interest is waning.
@Andrew Reid can you tell me your experience shooting c-mounts/s16 lenses with it? Do you have any samples you would share?

I analyzed the raw data in the DNG converted from ProRes RAW and now I know exactly how it's messed up.
I adjusted my tool and I think I have a working fix now. It fixes the raw data itself, so the result will be perfect in every software that reads DNG.
Before (see the broken line in the middle):

After:

 
I'm still testing my tool, it can read 12/16bit DNG, uncompressed, or lossless compressed, the lossy formats are not supported. It uses multiple threads, on my recent i7 laptop it converts with 25-35fps.
It's a pain to convert twice but at least I got it working, and learned a bit of C++ on the way.
If only I could fix the framerate issue as well, but no chance for that.

im unemployed, check out my reel!
https://vimeo.com/797642822

It's more than just a legacy thing. Canon & Nikon at the DSLR height really took care of their customers with loyalty programs, pro services etc. For major sporting events they have their infamous stockpile rooms available to sponsored photogs:

 
Canon I feel go a step further and since they have the cine line offer services at their Burbank facility in LA. Here in Paris, if I have an issue I can call and meet someone. Nikon used to have a walk-in office Boulevard Beaumarchais, as well as the Nikon School. They do have Nikon Plaza now in the 6ème, pretty cool location too with interesting events and of course the Nikon Film Festival which has become a huge thing in France.
Leica are on a similar but different path. Much more intimate. You have official boutiques in every major city. The staff there are extremely knowledgeable and passionate and every shop has their own certified Leica engineer in his white lab coat. Its not just for show as he will fix your camera on the spot. It's basically the traditional experience you'd get at a high-end watchmaker or hand tailor.

This type of service to me is invaluable and definitely builds a human connection with the company and hence, loyalty.
Sony I'm afraid has nothing of the sort AFAIK. You have an issue, you file a ticket online and have to send the camera/lens back to some warehouse in the Netherlands, if they even accept your claim (I've had mine rejected, no dispute possible).
Imaging is just a fraction of their other core businesses. What they have been very strong at, is social media presence, especially YouTube. They keep converting influencers by basically buying them out, luring them to exotic locations for camera releases and then making deals with them. Its fair business I guess but a little disheartening. I've had several Canon shooters I follow switch overnight, no real explanation.
Anyways, I am a Sony shooter. Not really by choice but because the industry basically demands it. They make good products no doubt, lousy policies though. Its strictly business to them, zero customer care. So yeah, loyalty wise its no surprise people dip in & out with them. My $0.02c.

I still…even with the bmpcc4k and R5 8k raw haven’t be able to replicate this look and motion from 5D3 Raw.
 
 

Sony not offering firmware updates doesn’t bother me. I use Lumix cameras.
But being serious, I have never purchased a camera based on a promise of what it might or will be at some point in the future. I will buy it (or not) based on merit with what it comes with.
If something is updated with something I find useful, then that is a bonus, but not an expectation.
I’d be very happy with a pair of FX30’s plus a single A7V straight out of their boxes.

Leadership position syndrome. Sony have become the new Canon. Little to No firmware upgrades. Heavy segmentation. Paper spec cameras that overheat. Zero regards towards criticism. 
That being I always tell people, buy a camera (or any digital product) for what it can do today. Don't expect added specs down the line, you're most likely setting yourself up for disappointment. 

I own A7S3. There have been no major updates for this camera in a fucking eternity! Now they release ZV-E1 which has the same sensor and processor (according to Gerald) and every a7S3 owner is obviously pissed off. Its got so many new features that we all want but not going to get, cos SONY IS... I really dont know, what is their reason to justify this obnoxious attiude. Do they want to simply increase sales a tiny bit by doing it, in exchange of a major reputation damage? What are they thinking? Maybe we need to start an online petition, ah? There are a ton of videos on youtube complaining about it over and over again, Philip Bloom did a video, Gerald adressed it, in the comments people are raged, but still nothing. Sony is not adressing, not talking about it, not giving any timeline of new firmware updates, they are completely silent on the subject. 
Maybe Andrew can interview them and ask that question directly? WTF is going on? That would be nice. I dont understand why a company would create such a terrible case in the first place. The loayalty and attitude of your fanbase and community is extremly important espescially nowdays, when fewer and fewer ppl by cameras. For me it became a substantial reason to even think about switching. I am looking at Panasonic - they are very generous with their firmware and camera support for years. Now they have PDAF, they have the best IBIS in town, I just want them to make o compact (not a huge 1kg monster), affordable camera that has FF 4k60p and might seriosly consider switching. 

..this is simply not true. ZV-E1 is 2699€. That's only about 30% cheaper. and you are not getting the mechanical shutter or the full IBIS. or the passive cooling. and you are losing a lot on the outside starting with the EVF (which is useful for video too in bright daylight). and in the end the high-frame rate and chunky codecs end up unusable because of overheating. all you are really benefitting from that sensor is high ISO and low RS. All the rest is crippled.
Even all the cool AI features end up ruining the IQ because the 1:1 4K sensor can't oversample. A shameful "cinematic mode". Zero vertical shooting options. Piss poor mobile communication. Really this is what you applaud? This is the best Sony can come up with for this market?
No competition? So you mean to tell me "VLogging" can only be done on a "ZV" camera? 
Sorry I find that a bit ridiculous. I follow a few "vloggers" and none use a ZV camera.
The pre-existing ZV lineup is pretty awful too.
No I'm not the target but I know people that are and they wouldn't touch this camera with a 6-foot selfie pole.
To me they got everything wrong with this cam. Its all hype and fluff. Basically a tourist trap for hype beasts.
 

I absolutely think mine is the best purchase that I have made in a long time. I can't speak to MF lenses, I don't have any MF EF mount lenses; but I have not had any issues with EF lenses set to MF via the switch on the lens. The only IBIS issue I have had so far is I had to turn off the horizon leveling feature when using the R7 on a gimbal; otherwise the horizon slowly rocks from side to side. Also, the IBIS wobble is pretty bad around 24mm and wider but I try to stay 35mm and longer when filming people anyway so this doesn't really bother me.
The only other issue I have with my R7 is sometimes the record button won't stop or start recording when in video mode. I either have to press it a few times or I have to hit the button on the touch screen; this mainly affects stopping a recording but a few times it has refused to start recording as well. I think it has something to do with coming out of standby or the power saving mode but I haven't tried to figure it out; possibly assigning the shutter button to start/stop recording could fix it.
As far as overheating, it does great in that department so far. When set to 4KHQ @ 30FPS after about an hour of continuous recording the overheat countdown display will appear but as soon as you set it to line skipped it immediately counts back up and disappears. 
IMO the R7 is actually superior to the R5 in almost every way except resolution and of course its not FF. It handles heat better, the IBIS is better, battery life is better, hybrid hotshoe so audio is better, and cheaper dual SD slots so storage is also better. The only thing that the R5 is better at that I care about is lowlight since the R5 has the dual native ISO option. I could probably level the playing field there as well with a speedbooster but haven't shot much lowlight lately.
I know everyone is going to shout from the top of their lungs that the R5 has a FF sensor so it has to be better, but personally I couldn't care less about sensor size, 8K, RAW, the pixel peeping level of IQ improvements because the R5 downsamples from 8K, or the shallower DOF for a given focal length.
To me personally, the R7 as a 50/50 hybrid camera has no equal in Canon's lineup except possibly the R6II. I combined the R7 with the Meike RF to EF mount vND adapter and now have what I consider as close to perfect as currently possible for a hybrid photo/video event camera. The R7 is definitely not perfect by any means, and I still consider most of my negative findings to still hold true, but thanks to what the R7 does provide I can now shoot entire events and many other types of projects with a single camera.
The thumbwheel around the joystick has really grown on me, it is so convenient right under the thumb and with the physical photo/video/power switch which is also right under your thumb, I can power on the camera, take a few images, switch to a few video clips and power it off all within a few seconds without ever taking my hands off the camera; so ergonomically for hybrid work I also consider the R7 superior to the R5 (which has no dedicated video switch).
Color wise, it matches up perfectly with the R5 and C70 if all three are set to CLOG3, and from there I just drop it into Davinci Resolve and use managed color.