FHDcrew

2 hours ago, kye said:

They're getting better by leaps and bounds, but almost all those gains have been "spent" on smaller pixels / higher resolution.  If that hadn't been the case, you'd probably have had every other feature you've ever wanted by now.

Fair points for sure. 

On 2/4/2026 at 8:01 AM, MrSMW said:

I have been recently unsubscribing from so many YouTube channels as part of my on-going “I unsubscribe from this world of fuckwittery” lifestyle choice.

How about Matti Haapoja’s “epic fpv sea transition” video that was just an artlist AI ad disguised as a helpful video. The same bro who was gonna “take a break from YouTube and really get back to his creative roots for a year” now shilling Higgsfield AI whilst reviewing yet another lens in a sea of perfectly imperfect but still perfect lenses that are all the same and can be made to look however you want because there’s no bad gear anymore just the potential to either acquire or lack skill. 

On 2/4/2026 at 11:44 AM, fuzzynormal said:

We might be surprised at how many people out there are in the hobby for, more or less, that reason. 

On the other hand, being truly creative at cinema and storytelling is rather elusive.  That's my experience anyway.  Good stories are hard to do.

My path has been both of these lol. I’ve been a massive tech enthusiast since I was 8 years old…so I definitely have loved learning about and getting hype over gear, although it’s also very overblown and I don’t like the cycle we are in now. 
 

But I also fell in love with the creative process, the ability to improve my skills to be creative and get better at crafting cool images and edits to tell impactful stories. I’ve both drooled over camera’s and simultaneously gotten immense satisfaction when I figured out how to make my 7 yr old 8 bit Nikon footage look and grade just the way I wanted. I’m a gear head who also thinks spec wars are overblown anymore. A camera nerd who gets sick of the hype machine, but still enjoys to watch. A creative, who was horrible at any science or math class in high school, but who loves tech and can understand complex broadcast equipment and understand the technical aspects of this industry easily. An artist who hates painting and drawing but constantly has visual ideas. I’m a weird mix of both of those lol. But I also think many of us are this way. 

On 2/3/2026 at 1:31 PM, eatstoomuchjam said:

Just keep in mind that gyroflow-style solutions usually require fast shutter speeds.

@Djangoif you go c50 + gyroflow route then invest in the RSMB motion blur plugin. It’s the most realistic and dependable motion blur plugin I’ve owned and does a nice job adding back in convincing motion blur when you need to crank your shutter for gyroflow. 

3 hours ago, Andrew - EOSHD said:

The dynamic range is only crap in the world of luxury peepers.

Literally the older canon r5 has ample dynamic range in the real world they all have ample DR. 

Just now, FHDcrew said:

Very true. My first camera was a Panasonic G7. The g9II still obliterates the g7 in lowlight lol. But yeah most of the full frame options from the last 7 years are all outstanding. Also it’s funny how 5-7 yr old full frame bodies are still excellent. My Canon R6 came out 5 yrs ago. The Nikon Z6 I used to shoot with came out 7 yrs ago. I filmed recently with an original Sony a7iii at 8,000 ISO (but a very very well exposed image) and the image was incredibly clean. We are so spoiled with choices anymore. 

Makes me feel we haven’t gotten amazing IQ leaps in the last 5 yrs…I mean heck the fx3 sensor in the a7siii also came out 5 yrs ago and I don’t see any “superior” lowlight cams on the market. Only “comparable”. For example a c50 will hold its own against the a7siii. But it’s not better. Or worse. Just a 5 year newer camera. 

On 2/3/2026 at 11:46 PM, kye said:

I suspect the low-light capabilities of MFT would be described as "Very Good to Excellent", but the latest FF cameras now have low-light capabilities that would be described as "Absolutely Incredible" and so MFT lags by comparison.  You can't cheat the laws of physics!

Very true. My first camera was a Panasonic G7. The g9II still obliterates the g7 in lowlight lol. But yeah most of the full frame options from the last 7 years are all outstanding. Also it’s funny how 5-7 yr old full frame bodies are still excellent. My Canon R6 came out 5 yrs ago. The Nikon Z6 I used to shoot with came out 7 yrs ago. I filmed recently with an original Sony a7iii at 8,000 ISO (but a very very well exposed image) and the image was incredibly clean. We are so spoiled with choices anymore. 

On 2/3/2026 at 11:46 PM, kye said:

It wasn't that long ago that cameras weren't really usable above ISO 1600 or 3200

Yep. Also you can lowkey get full frame at a similar size with slower lenses and higher high ISO. The Canon R6 at 25,600 ISO is much cleaner that the G9II in 6400 ISO. 2 stops cleaner. But also r6 is applying a lot more internal NR which is up to users taste on if they like. I don’t mind saves me time in post but I get how some might want a more pure image they can Denoise later. 

Also it needs to be warp stabilizer; any of the stabilization algorithms in Davinci resolve don’t do as well and end up making the result worse. Warp stabilizer set to substance warp is quite good however. I actually am currently paying for just after efffects alone and have some scripts that let me quickly render a single clip in Davinci resolve, apply warp stabilizer in AE, render and import quickly back to Davinci. 

2 hours ago, Django said:

Interesting, I'm usually not a fan of post stabilisation as it often crops a lot and you get weirdness depending on the shot.

I completely understand. What I can say is for some reason solid handheld technique + Canon IBIS + Canon DIS + ADOBE warp stabilizer is very consistent and stable. Worth a try. But I do get it, gyroflow is great too and uses real motion data. I’ve done a ton of filming on canon bodies though and this technique works really well. It’s not 100% perfect but I’d call it 95% perfect with a bit of tweaking. 

Sadly sold the G9II. I realized I need good high ISO performance, and seems PDAF is disabled at real high ISOs. I scored a canon r6 for $929 and other than the overheating it’s great. And I can live wijt the overheating for how I shoot. IBIS can genuinely compete with LUMIX by having DIS on standard and using adobe’s warp stabilizer, somehow warp stabilizer absolutely thrives at stabilizing the type of leftover shakiness and artifacts of canon’s IBIS + DIS combo. Very consistently stable without warpy artifacts. Great high ISO performance. Lovely image in CLOG3. 
 

I did like the G9II. Its image was great. Best Ibis I’ve ever used. Very comfortable.  Just realized I need better high ISO performance. Yes I could have gotten a super fast zoom like the sigma 18-35 1.8/speedbooster or Panasonic 10-25mm 1.7. But sometimes I REALLY need to push things at weddings or concerts, shooting at ISOs like 25,600. That’s beyond what the Gh7/G9II can handle. 

Just now, FHDcrew said:

Something interesting about canon bodies with IBIS is that I find with a good walking workflow and adobe’s warp stabilizer the results rival gyroflow. Especially on wide lenses I can very consistently get beautifully stable resultS across multiple canon bodies with IBIS. For some reason adobe’s warp stabilizer absolutely thrives at stabilizing the type of footage coming out of these camera bodies with a good workflow. I’ve been able to get amazing results on an original canon r6, r5 and r7. For best results put DIS on Standard and then use warp stabilizer to carry it the rest of the way. 1-3% on warp stabilizer smooths out the jittery IBIS motion. 5% looks like a steadicam. 10% is near gimbal level. 50% is insane. 
 

so in some ways the r6 iii with this workflow could be more useful. The IBIS helps in this workflow meaning you in a lot of situations can keep your shutter at 1/50 and stabilize. Gyroflow without IBIS you really have to shoot at 1/200 or above. 

This does require a good technique ofc meaning good crouched heel toe walk, holding the camera a bit loose and even using a neck strap helps. But when I shoot this way with canon IBIS + DIS Standard and then use warp stabilizer, the results are excellent and very consistent.  

5 hours ago, Django said:

Pros: IBIS for aggressive handheld run-and-gun.

Something interesting about canon bodies with IBIS is that I find with a good walking workflow and adobe’s warp stabilizer the results rival gyroflow. Especially on wide lenses I can very consistently get beautifully stable resultS across multiple canon bodies with IBIS. For some reason adobe’s warp stabilizer absolutely thrives at stabilizing the type of footage coming out of these camera bodies with a good workflow. I’ve been able to get amazing results on an original canon r6, r5 and r7. For best results put DIS on Standard and then use warp stabilizer to carry it the rest of the way. 1-3% on warp stabilizer smooths out the jittery IBIS motion. 5% looks like a steadicam. 10% is near gimbal level. 50% is insane. 
 

so in some ways the r6 iii with this workflow could be more useful. The IBIS helps in this workflow meaning you in a lot of situations can keep your shutter at 1/50 and stabilize. Gyroflow without IBIS you really have to shoot at 1/200 or above. 

Miss him. He also randomly deleted or privated a bunch of his older videos; I noticed this happen maybe 2-3 yrs ago. Tons of old Blackmagic videos, his awesome Canon XC10/XC15 review, etc etc. 

1 hour ago, kye said:

Just make sure you're testing the options in the full image pipeline, so comparing finished 709 grades.  So many people only test one part of the pipeline and ignore the rest.

Definitely. I did a brief comparison of a VLOG frame and shooting the same in flat with ISO lowered, I used the same node tree I did with my Nikon z6 8 bit flat and was able to get color and highlight rolloff real close. 

12 hours ago, kye said:

I'm not sure how this would translate, but my GH7 does far better when I raise the ISO to get a proper exposure in-camera vs shooting under exposed and raising the exposure in post.  For some reason the shadows are quite noisy, even at native ISOs.  This is shooting in C4K Prores so it's not a codec issue.

Curious how you find the gh7 autofocus fares at the higher IsoS

10 hours ago, kye said:

Just a note to say that it would probably be worth doing some tests ahead of the event.

Certainly agree I took a bit of time to test some stuff out yesterday evening. I do switch my picture profile from VLOG to FLAT I can lower my ISO from 5,000 to 1,000. Gotta do further test though on my ultimate thoughts on the autofocus. 

Just now, FHDcrew said:

1 minute ago, Snowfun said:

Would it be worth quoting Genesis 1:3 as this would solve the high ISO need…

(with apologies)

I’m dead 🤣🤣

Just now, Snowfun said:

Would it be worth quoting Genesis 1:3 as this would solve the high ISO need…

(with apologies)

I’m actually thinking of in lowlight staying in Vlog and trying to keep my ISO at 2500 as much as I can. VLOG seems to have really solid under exposure latitude and AF seems to work at 4/5 stops under so instead of shooting at 12,800 ISO I could stay at 2500 ISO and raise exposure in post. The idea is that then PDAF stays enabled and gives me usable autofocus. 

9 hours ago, FHDcrew said:

Some first impressions of the G9II; finally starting to shoot with it but will have my first very demanding shoot this weekend.  I did some filming at a worship conference early this week.

Image is thick and grades well.  Lowlight is clean up to 3200 ISO and gets very noisy very fast.  So far I shot on the super efficient mp4 4k 72mbps.  When really pushing ISO at 6400 and 12,800 image seems to soften.  This might not happen once I try the all-i codecs that have substantially higher bitrates.

One thing I noticed, this camera has hybrid PDAF and Contrast-detect AF.  At high ISOs the PDAF seems to turn off or become severely reduced...i start to get autofocus pulsing and it is not as responsive.  It is not HORRIBLE and is still likely better than a gh5, but its not the snappy reliable PDAF that this camera normally operates at.  I need to do more extensive testing, btu it seems up to around ISO 2500 or 3200 you can expect good AF performance, but seems to worsen from there.

I will be shooting a big concert-style christian event this weekened and the venue has lots of contrasty DMX lighting which looks beautiful but is def a lower light scenereo.  I am toying with shooting in CineD V2 in lowlight.  What seems to happen is when I shoot in a flat 709 PP, I can lower my ISO and get a comparable exposure.  I know that LOG needs a higher ISO in lowlight bc its capturing a much wider dynamic range...and once you grade LOG if its exposed well the noise differences vanish.  But with CINEd V2 i can lower my ISO probably 1 to 1 1/2 stops and get a good exposure.  Im thinking in terms of how the sensor behaves, it would allow me to more frequently keep the ISO at below 3200 which in tern means keeping good autofocus performance since it seems to again worsen above 3200 ISO.  I am also thinking that since the picture profile will be more contrasty, if i need to crank my ISO ever the autofocus would be better because it is analyzing a more contrasty image.  I think it will still grade well; it is still going to be 10 bit and i suppose the extra V-LOG DR is not terribly necessary in low light.  Plus, the codec is still 10 bit so colors should manage well; i would run the footage through the same node tree i used for Nikon Z6 Flat 8 bit, which basically is modified CSTs in/out of Davinci Wide gamut with modifications to artificlaly smooth highlight rolloff.

Formatting is being super weird right now ignore post

On 1/12/2026 at 10:47 PM, kye said:

Digital zoom is definitely an underrated feature of these higher resolution cameras.

On my GH5 I used the 2x punch-in on my 17.5mm F0.95 to get 35mm and 70mm FOVs, and on my GX85 I used it with the 14mm F2.5 pancake lens to get 31mm and 62mm FOVs in a pocketable form-factor.

The crop function on the GH7 is different and a bit more restrictive.  You get continuous zooming, but only to the point where the resolution you've chosen is at/near 1:1 crop into the sensor.  So, if you've got the 14mm lens on there and you're shooting in C4K, you enable the feature and it pops up a box on the screen saying "14mm" and you can zoom in more and more by pushing or holding a button and it goes from 14 - 15 -16 - 17mm, but it won't let you go further.  If you're in 1080p mode then it goes from 14mm to 38mm.
Conveniently, if you disable the mode then it goes back to 14mm but if you re-enable it then it goes back to whatever zoom you were at previously, so it's easy to set a zoom level you like and then jump in and out of that FOV.

My testing didn't indicate any IQ issues with it, in 24p mode anyway, so I think it's probably downscaling from a full sensor read-out.

Not only is it really good for getting more FOVs from primes, but it's also great in extending the long end of your zooms

Some first impressions of the G9II; finally starting to shoot with it but will have my first very demanding shoot this weekend.  I did some filming at a worship conference early this week.

Image is thick and grades well.  Lowlight is clean up to 3200 ISO and gets very noisy very fast.  So far I shot on the super efficient mp4 4k 72mbps.  When really pushing ISO at 6400 and 12,800 image seems to soften.  This might not happen once I try the all-i codecs that have substantially higher bitrates.

One thing I noticed, this camera has hybrid PDAF and Contrast-detect AF.  At high ISOs the PDAF seems to turn off or become severely reduced...i start to get autofocus pulsing and it is not as responsive.  It is not HORRIBLE and is still likely better than a gh5, but its not the snappy reliable PDAF that this camera normally operates at.  I need to do more extensive testing, btu it seems up to around ISO 2500 or 3200 you can expect good AF performance, but seems to worsen from there.

I will be shooting a big concert-style christian event this weekened and the venue has lots of contrasty DMX lighting which looks beautiful but is def a lower light scenereo.  I am toying with shooting in CineD V2 in lowlight.  What seems to happen is when I shoot in a flat 709 PP, I can lower my ISO and get a comparable exposure.  I know that LOG needs a higher ISO in lowlight bc its capturing a much wider dynamic range...and once you grade LOG if its exposed well the noise differences vanish.  But with CINEd V2 i can lower my ISO probably 1 to 1 1/2 stops and get a good exposure.  Im thinking in terms of how the sensor behaves, it would allow me to more frequently keep the ISO at below 3200 which in tern means keeping good autofocus performance since it seems to again worsen above 3200 ISO.  I am also thinking that since the picture profile will be more contrasty, if i need to crank my ISO ever the autofocus would be better because it is analyzing a more contrasty image.  I think it will still grade well; it is still going to be 10 bit and i suppose the extra V-LOG DR is not terribly necessary in low light.  Plus, the codec is still 10 bit so colors should manage well; i would run the footage through the same node tree i used for Nikon Z6 Flat 8 bit, which basically is modified CSTs in/out of Davinci Wide gamut with modifications to artificlaly smooth highlight rolloff.

10 hours ago, kye said:

Digital zoom is definitely an underrated feature of these higher resolution cameras.

On my GH5 I used the 2x punch-in on my 17.5mm F0.95 to get 35mm and 70mm FOVs, and on my GX85 I used it with the 14mm F2.5 pancake lens to get 31mm and 62mm FOVs in a pocketable form-factor.

The crop function on the GH7 is different and a bit more restrictive.  You get continuous zooming, but only to the point where the resolution you've chosen is at/near 1:1 crop into the sensor.  So, if you've got the 14mm lens on there and you're shooting in C4K, you enable the feature and it pops up a box on the screen saying "14mm" and you can zoom in more and more by pushing or holding a button and it goes from 14 - 15 -16 - 17mm, but it won't let you go further.  If you're in 1080p mode then it goes from 14mm to 38mm.
Conveniently, if you disable the mode then it goes back to 14mm but if you re-enable it then it goes back to whatever zoom you were at previously, so it's easy to set a zoom level you like and then jump in and out of that FOV.

My testing didn't indicate any IQ issues with it, in 24p mode anyway, so I think it's probably downscaling from a full sensor read-out.

Not only is it really good for getting more FOVs from primes, but it's also great in extending the long end of your zooms too.

Definitely. It’s super versatile. 

Also the crop zoom function is so cool. Turns my little DJI 15mm 1.7 into a 30-40mm FF equiv. Just wish I could map the crop zoom to the lenses focus wheel when in af

The IBIS is so good that I’ve found that with e-stabilization low which barely crops in, if you have a really good heel toe walk the ibis can rival e-stab on high. It’s that good.