Questions about cinema cameras, video and equipment. I'm confused!

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Robodelfy Regular Member • Posts: 232
Questions about cinema cameras, video and equipment. I'm confused!

Sorry for the mish mash of questions, I didn't want to start lots of threads. I've been doing so much research but there's so many arguments in the comments that I end up more confused than before!

I'm an MFT user, on a lumix g85, I use the Nocticron 42.5, Lumix 12-35 2.8 and Mitakon 25mm 0.95 lenses mostly. I am mostly interested in video, more on the cinematic side than vlogging or documentary stuff. For a while I'd been feeling frustrated with my set up, even with some great lenses. I felt the images coming out of the camera were just not as good as many I was seeing from full frame users. I felt the colours were always horrible out of the camera and even in premiere/lightroom were hard to get right. I struggled a lot in low light situations, the lack of dynamic range, and trying to get shallow depth of field with my wider lenses. I kept seeing sony users videos and photos and thinking 'wow!'

So I was getting very close to  selling all my gear buying an A7iii and a couple of lenses, but it was going to cost me a lot and something was holding me back!

I've been reflecting more about what I really want to focus on, and it's video much more than photos. And my main priority is the image, so the dynamic range and colour science. I know people throw around the terms 'cinematic' and 'filmic 'all the time and it doesnt mean much, but there is something to the look of films which most DSLR and Mirrorless cameras just don't match. I dont mean framing of shots, or DOF, just the picture...that organic film like look, with a certain softness, a certain colou. Its hard to explain but I'm sure you know what I mean. When I see Sony or GH5 footage it looks like digital video in most shots, like TV shows

What would you say are the main causes of these cameras looking this way compared to popular digital film cameras like Alexas?  Because the new Sony's claim 15 stops of dynamic range which is as much as most of these cinema cameras. Is it true though or just marketing?  Or is it that the sony has 8 bit colour? Or does it have to do with the compressed codecs compared to RAW video? If anyone can clear this up for me I would be eternally grateful! Because I dont really understand what makes the image of a 'cinema' camera so different, or is it more in the lenses!

So this got me thinking about Blackmagic again, as some of the only affordable cinema cameras. The new BMPCC4k is on the horizon, and I have my MFT lenses already. I've been looking at footage from the original BMPCC and really so much of it looks better to my eyes than any of these new cameras. It looks like a movie!

Then finally I've read that the GH5s has much improved colour science, and the low light ability. But I've watched videos, and it doesnt match the filmic look of the BMPCC.

So now I'm stuck, as I don't want to lose the ability to take photos, but I need to prioritise cinematic quality footage. I thought of these options :

- Sony A7iii for videos and photos. (expensive!!) or wait for A7siii

- Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4k when it arrives for video, and keep a G9 or G85 for photography. (not ideal for photos, but might be ok).

- GH5s for video, but I've not researched this enough

Sorry for these ramblings, if anyone got through this I appreciate your opinions

Panasonic G85 Panasonic GH5 Panasonic GH5S Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic Lumix G 42.5mm F1.7
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow