Davide DB

To me the camera on the ronin is a Sony and I would guess is A7s III

In the meantime, in a galaxy, far, far away...
https://ymcinema.com/2023/08/24/panasonic-develops-a-variable-built-in-electronic-nd-filter/
I don't know if the choice to go on a larger "uni-body" could help to have this feature on all lines...
I think this feature could go live on a next S1H II

If you're gonna shittify the footage this much to achive the "film" look (which is not a criticism, I actually like doing that sort of thing myself) then you don't really have to worry about what camera it's shot on.  As long as the source footage isn't a mess you'll be fine.
 

2/3 right here:

Famous Sony footnotes kicks again:
Sync speed with "External" flash is 1/500. With base ISO of 250, its the same as 1/200 with ISO 100.

Almost all major prosumer Sony cameras overheat I guess. Maybe the ones where the node size is too large, that lacks a heatsinks, or fan or some other issues.
Sony doesn't care for overheating. This one shoots 120fps at 24MP, but for only 1.5-1.6 seconds or something. Guess that means that their RAM isn't really huge. Also, it could probably be used to cook in the winters during shoots 😁

Exciting! Been waiting for a global shutter hybrid for years. Would love to have no rolling shutter and an unlimited flash sync speed. Now I just have to wait about five more years until it's available at a price point I can afford, and from Panasonic 😄

Hi there, interested in possibly purchasing an older GH camera to mess around with video and color grading for that "film" look.

Found this video shot on the GH3 with 20mm 1.7 9 years ago by Thomas Rault.

I used Resolve and Cineprint16 film emulator and I like the look. I do think it's a bit dark and the indoor scenes have too much color.http://dreamplayhouse.com/gh3/gh3grade.mov

Hey, would rather recommend to upload it to youtube or vimeo. People might be hesitant to download from a private website.:)
Also, screenshots sometimes awake interest. cheers
GH3 should grade wonderfully with its 50mbit codec. I enjoyed grading G6 and G7 footage. 709 8bit classics.:)

Look around what are people local to you shooting with? 
Most likely they're using Sony FX6 (or perhaps FX9) bodies. So just follow the herd and do the same. 
But there are pockets of local groups of people around which have gone in another direction, such as they're mainly using Canon C500mk2 for documentary / corporates / etc which have a reasonable budget. Often all it takes is just a few key leaders or production companies in that local region to go together down a certain path, and the whole local region follows them, and there isn't a single Sony camera in sight. 
However, if you are working purely for yourself / in house, then it doesn't  matter what brand or camera model you choose! 
But if you are working for others, then following what others use matters a lot. 
Had a friend who purchased the Sony FS7 right when it was released, did pretty well working with that, and he got to a point that he felt like he was "outgrowing the FS7" and had the money to buy something better. 
By this point in time the ARRI ALEXA Mini had been out for a couple of years, had proven itself, and no longer did you have crazy insane long wait list times if you wanted to buy one himself. 
But a ALEXA Mini was way outside is budget range. 
So what is the natural upgrade from a FS7? The F5/F55 are "upgrades", but are more similar than different. Definitely not what he was seeking. 
What then? He settled upon the Panasonic Varicam LT, which had recently been released (came out the year after the ARRI ALEXA Mini). He sold his Sony FS7 to raise extra funds, with his extra saved up money, he purchased a brand new Panasonic Varicam LT. (but he only got the Varicam after very extensively testing it, renting and borrowing it from others. Not just to run tests on it, but to use it on real world productions too. I worked on a couple of those productions which he shot with a Varicam LT, prior to him buying his own. He really did very very thoroughly all of his homework before settling on a new camera to buy)
Seems like a rational decision. Was the next step up in price (over double the price of a FS7) and quality from a FS7. Has much better low light performance, & much better color science than the FS7. Plus did timecode and raw better than the FS7. In a way, the Varicam LT was even "better" than the ALEXA Mini, with better slow motion, better low light, better audio, and true 4K. (only downsides being it is bigger/heavier than a Mini, and it is "not an ARRI")
Well, what seemed like a great idea on paper, in reality was one of his worst financial decisions. 
Because for the higher end jobs above the FS7 level, then usually they only want an ARRI camera. He's not landing the higher end jobs with the Varicam LT. (plus ARRI cameras are cheaper than you think, relative to the total cost of a project. It doesn't make sense for them to pinch pennies and settle for the cheaper Varicam LT)
Thus he wasn't earning any extra money due to spending almost double the FS7 amount on a new Varicam LT camera. 
But it was even worse than this, the Panasonic Varicam LT was losing him money. 
Because the bread and butter FS7 jobs were no longer hiring him as much, as they don't want to go with some weirdly different new camera, they want the tried and trusted Sony FS7 which all their other shooters use and slots perfectly into their workflow and productions. 
Owning the Panasonic Varicam LT was a lose-lose situation for him. 
Quite sad really, even though on paper the Varicam LT was undeniably a much  "better" camera than a Sony FS7 (even "better" than an ARRI ALEXA Mini in a fair few ways as well).  

I personally disagree that it was marketing, because we are in a fishbowl where we "affordable cine camera enthusiasts" are seeing saturation coverage on it. But outside of that world, hardly anyone knows that - and that would actually be Gareth's and Oren's point, that hopefully no-one would know any better. Other films don't attract press for the camera they shot on because they're shot on an Alexa or maybe a Venice, and that's not news.
There is also the fact that the film did really badly, so at best it can be seen as a failed experiment.
I think Gareth is just a guy that came up using affordable cameras and After Effects and he wanted to get back to that to some degree after getting somewhat reamed by the Disney machine on Rogue One.
It also seems like a pretty compelling story that he went on holiday to all those locations and took the FX3 with him, and he probably just really liked using the camera. Then he had a bunch of camera techs who were able to solve all the problems for him of making it usable in production for a feature of that scale.

I have both the 10-25mm and the 25-50mm, these lenses are the pinnacle of M43.
Sure, they are very sharp, not extraordinary sharp as my 35mm GM, my 50mm S Pro or even my 24-70mm S Pro, but they are among the best you can find in M43. No, what make them special, apart from their focal range is their rendering.
Their local contrast (and colors in my opinion) is crazy good, especially the 25-50mm, one of my favorite lens ever.
I also have some of the fast little primes like the 20mm f1.7 II, the 15mm f1.7 and the 25mm f1.4 II.
They are not as sharp as the PanaLeica f1.7 zooms, but, the 20mm f1.7 is tiny, produce nice colors with good global contrast, and the image has a very good sense of volume, it is why so many people love it. The focus is slow and noisy (really noisy), but accurate, and from what I've seen the G9II makes the AF almost usable (certainly usable for me).
The 15mm and the 25mm are more expensive, slightly bigger, slightly less sharp wide open (especially the 25mm f1.4 which can be nice for video), but their AF is faster. 
They have not the same sense of volume as the 20mm in my opinion but they have solid local contrast, thought not as good as the Oly 25mm f1.2 Pro by exemple.

Those are good recommendations.
For pro lenses, I currently have 12-40 pro, 17mm pro, 40-150mm Pro f/2.8.
For non-pro, I have the 9mm, 14mm, 14-42 EZ (with a killer automatic lens cap), 17mm, 25mm, 45mm, 75mm, 75-300mm. I also just picked up (in a kit) the 12-32, and 35-100 f4-5.6, but I'm not sure I'll keep them.
I want the 25mm pro 1.2 when I find it at a decent price... and I'm determined I will. It would be great with the already amazing 17mm Pro.
I have thoughts on all these lenses that I'll probably share soon. (time permitted)

If you take the example of the 20mm on Olympus, it's a train wreck in video with PDAF and C-AF (at least with Face detect). The motors will make grinding noises in all the audio (if you need it). However, it works great in S-AF as it should. The Olympus 17mm (1.8, not 2.8)or 20mm would be better options.

And so one feels like searching for the Naiads, beautiful and immortal freshwater nymphs that disturb the spirit of those who catch a glimpse of them emerging from the waters. Beliefs that embody the ambiguous feeling of fear and attraction to the waters.
So far no Naiads and Nereids but only many sticklebacks!
GH5MII and GH5S, various lens, natural light
Sound ON
 
 

Yeah, I have and use one of those:

The little 20mm performs pretty well on this video. Much better than on the previous Panasonic cameras.
However I'm concerned about the G9II focus accuracy in video, I watched and downloaded some clips and a lot of times the focus is not 100% accurate when viewing at 1:1, exactly like on my GH6 with most of my lenses when using slow frame rate in 4K/C4K/5,7K (below 48fps). It seems to affect only some lenses on the G9II, mostly the zooms.
Nevertheless, I decided to preorder the camera because I'm not a fan of the GH6 ( (outside of the very nice colors).
I have some great M43 lenses, so some features like the improved IBIS, DRBOOST at base ISO or even the come back of the I-Dynamic are very welcome. I just hope they will fix the AF, I also hope the IBIS in 5,7K and Open Gate are improved as well, because on the GH6, they are weakier than on 4K.

I see that in the reviews everyone uses the 12-35 or the 12-60 or telephoto lenses. 
I'd like to see how it performs with older lumix lenses. I use the 20 mm F1.7 and the Leica 45 mm F2.8 macro a lot. They have terrible motors and are very slow in focusing. I don't know how they will behave with PDAF and whether Lumix has released FW updates yet. If they haven't, they would be junk.

Yep. Just the other day I did a rare photo only event because they already had a video guy booked.
He shot the entire day on a RED with I think Canon EF 24-70 but had a play with one of my S5ii’s and was very envious of the size, weight and AF.
Interestingly (to me anyway), I could see how limiting it was, forcing him to work to the camera’s tune rather than how he otherwise might if he could work 100% faster and in a more flexible and reactive manner.
Which does make me think that the right or best tool for the job is not necessarily the most expensive one…
FX3 over his RED every single day!
Making a movie or a doc or anything that is not an event, OK, that might allow/justify something more ‘pro’, but like the guy I know who shoots weddings purely at 28mm, I personally think there is something being lost in that choice.
Using that RED highlighted that to me.
If he likes it and his clients like the result and don’t know any different, fair enough, but nah, wouldn’t be for me.

Powerman, Powerwoman, Powerthey, it matters not, their marketing attempt is worse than Lumix’s.

Remove a single letter from sJcam and spell a new word.
🤔

Interesting ITW of Oren Soffer here.

I recently asked for book recommendations to learn about human vision and was given a link to a free PDF.
It is incredible.
I'm only a quarter of the way through, but I'm absolutely blown away.  The human vision system looks like it was designed by committee and then re-imagined by Dali and Picasso, while on drugs.  It is a wonder we can see anything at all!
Did you know that the rods and cones (which detect light) are BEHIND a bunch of nerves and nerve cells and blood vessels, so the light has to go through a bunch of crap before you even sense it?   
The book is actually a mix of how the human vision system works and also what we have done with the tech to try and align to it, so it's a nice blend of biology and tech.  It's also very readable and tries to be as non-technical as possible.  This is a rare find compared to other books that are hugely tech heavy.
Take the red pill with me...  download it here: https://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/support/documents/colourbook/colourbook.php (download it by clicking on the box next to the file size).

Regardless of Petapixel, what's your feedback?
GP11 submerged in a 10°C water (so no overheating problems) lasts about 1h filming continuously at 4K@50p

I understand what you want to know and why, but I do not shoot 4K, only 5.3K, I don't shoot clips more than a few minutes in length, and I do not shoot underwater. So, I cannot help you. When one shoots short clips like I do, battery life is irrelevant - carrying an extra GoPro battery and switching are not important burdens. 
I would suggest searching "Hero 12 underwater video". I found a bunch of videos of people shooting underwater with a Hero 12 and who formerly used a Hero 12. You could ask them in the comments section about battery life. "Fintastic Films" is one example,.
That is better than listening to anyone quoting a site or to somebody, like me, who gets nothing from longer battery life (overheating is another thing).