Just sold my Mark ii body. Still have lot of canon L glass and a 70D body. I do lot of video and next project may start in July. I am not fully satisfied with the MK iii video specs after seeing GH4 footage. I want a main VDSLR and totally confused whether to go for MK iii or GH4

Beware the Panny enthusiasts faking you out. I went from a 5DM2 to a GH3. If ergonomics matter to you, take a look at what Panasonic did not fix and decide if it matters to you. Image wise, you will notice the difference in DOF that the smaller MFT chip size affects. YMMV

Tough choice. The 5DMKIII is better than the MKII but unless you are shooting RAW video with the MKIII, it is tough to recommend as a video camera these days. It is just soft in comparison.

Great still camera and the RAW video is really amazing, I mean really amazing. So if RAW can work with your workflow, get the MKIII. If not, I do not know what to get these days. The GH4 or Sony A7s are probably better choices for video.

Rent or lease a C100?

Between internal shooting and RAW on the 5D3, there's also the option to record to an external device. With Atomos, you could go cheap with the Star (no monitor), more costly with the Blade (monitor with focus indication & waveforms), or middle with the Ninja 2 (simple monitor). And with so little aliasing and noise, you can sharpen in post.

But it really depends on what you shoot. If you want shallow DOF for narrative works and "feeling", the 5D3 is nice. For documentary works, there are other solutions out there these days.

Thanks everyone.
Jon, I shoot history based documentaries covering Archeological sites, museums and low lighted caves. I have canon 17mm TS and canon f/1.2 lenses. My work is unique and it is based on many years original research therefore I want to keep it relevant for atleast 5 years. Now even youtube is testing 4k codec , GH4's 4K attracts me. 1DC is out of my budget and its 60 seconds limit is a big let down.
5D3's raw ML firmware is still not stable moreover we dont know how long RAW HD will last (as a format).
May I ask you Jon , what are the other solutions?

You would have to replace all your existing lenses if you move to Panasonic, also bear in mind the gh4 is not a low light king and it's fairly noisy at 6400 iso, a 5dIII would suite you much better in "low lighted caves".

Noa, you are right .I am caught between low light, TS lens compatable - 5D3 vs 4K or even better UHD - GH4

You can also wait for the sony a7s which can see in the dark and get a external recorder for it if you want 4K capability.

...we dont know how long RAW HD will last (as a format).

Of course, RAW is the capture format, not the delivery format, so we don't really need to worry about the life of RAW. (One can convert it to 16-bit TIFFs, if you want a less camera-dependent format.) The questions is HD vs. UHD.

Well, that's one question. There is also the question of "more pixels" vs "better pixels". The easy answer is that we want both. Get a RED Dragon sensor and you can have it all. But on a budget, which do we choose?

In the near term, we're moving to UHDTV1 (4K). Japan has its sights set on UHDTV2 (8K). There is also a lot of work related to high or extended dynamic range and wide-gamut video. I've seen Dolby Vision demonstrated a number of times (as well as other EDR technologies), and it's really striking.

Dolby Vision (http://www.dolby.com/us/en/professional/technology/home-theater/dolby-vision.html)

You won't be able to master EDR right away, but shooting RAW could allow EDR re-mastering down the road. If you shoot 8-bit 4K, you'll never be able to pull true EDR out of your clips.

I think the choice depends on two things:

1) Over what timeframe do you want to re-release? You can monetize now in HD and release soon in UHD or further down the road in EDR. Do you want the faster UHD cadence or the slower EDR cadence?

2) Which best suits your content? Are you more impressed with the light or the detail? I can imagine a dark cave with a bright lamp and strong reflection favoring light. Or maybe it's more about the details of the artifacts and grains of dirt and sand.

So, is it best to capture more, standard DR pixels or fewer extended DR pixels? Or is "both" the real answer? It's your choice.

FWIW, most of the EDR material I've seen recently was shot on a standard Arri Alexa. It doesn't do UHD but it captures far more than 8 or 10 bits.

Jon, thanks for elaborated reply. If I translate your advice into practice, it should be an UHD camera capable of recording 10 bit RAW. I think apart from BMPC ( which I am not considering) there is hardly any option. The unit supplied with GH4 has a dual link output for 4K video in 4:2:2 10-bit. Sony A7S is able to output uncompressed UHD 4K at a 4:2:2 color depth over HDMI which is only 8bit.

Jon, thanks for elaborated reply. If I translate your advice into practice, it should be a UHD camera capable of recording 10 bit RAW. I think apart from BMPC ( which I am not considering) there is hardly any option. The unit supplied with GH4 has a dual link output for 4K video in 4:2:2 10-bit. Sony A7S is able to output uncompressed UHD 4K at a 4:2:2 color depth over HDMI.

Jon, thanks for elaborated reply. If I translate your advice into practice, it should be an UHD camera capable of recording 10 bit RAW. I think apart from BMPC ( which I am not considering) there is hardly any option. The unit supplied with GH4 has a dual link output for 4K video in 4:2:2 10-bit. Sony A7S is able to output uncompressed UHD 4K at a 4:2:2 color depth over HDMI which is only 8bit.

There is always an option, it just may not fit into your budget. :) Jon, as usual, is right on the money.

I always ask for budget consideration in these types of decisions because there needs to a realistic expectation of what is possible with the money allocated.

How much is your targeted budget?

How profitable is your work and how important is it to the survival of the project to have 4k 10bit RAW video? (actually true RAW video would be 14bit or higher) 10bit is more for uncompressed.

This really should be easy to answer. In reality, those specs are up in the "Hollywood" territory. Not many of us fly at that altitude! The cost of storage will probably be more than the cameras mentioned above...

Project is not profitable. We just do it for heritage conservation. It is an important cause. I can’t spend more than $5K on camera. Yes, the cost of storage and archival is major concern for me.

I think I am not flying high because I don’t know what is an Arri Amira. We started making films on PMW EX3 with NanoFlash recorder. Second camera was 5d2. Now I feel we are passing through a transition period from HD to 4K and at this point of time 4K is difficult for my type of budget.

I am also preparing for the next step up from 5dmkii and 70d, but I feel like the infrastructure needed to support 4k is far too expensive to put into place along with the costs of a new camera.
1080p still looks pretty great for my needs, and I am hoping for a FF camera with a better codec (and/or clean HDMI out), functional audio, dual pixel autofocus, and a bigger dynamic range that allows me to use my L lenses.
The C100 is very interesting, but seems a little too expensive for what it offers. I hope we are on the cusp of a FF beast that ticks all the boxes, the technology seems to make it very likely, but I am not sure the 'business' side will allow it...
I am willing to wait and watch a little longer and make the best of the tools I have at hand, which are pretty great, if not a bit frustrating at times.

If the price of storage and the overhead of post production is a concern, I'd skip both UHD and RAW for now. These are both very hungry technologies at this time. This is especially true if the project is for posterity rather than profit and the budget is tight.

Overall, it seems that low light is the most important requirement. The 5D3 (or a C100) might be the best solutions. On a budget, you can add an Atomos Star to improve coding performance and picture quality. The key point is to adjust your exposure and colors very accurately in the field. If you're not pulling chroma keys and you're not doing aggressive color correction, and you can accurately set the camera, 10-bit 4:2:2 isn't necessarily needed.

Beware the Panny enthusiasts faking you out. I went from a 5DM2 to a GH3. If ergonomics matter to you, take a look at what Panasonic did not fix and decide if it matters to you. Image wise, you will notice the difference in DOF that the smaller MFT chip size affects. YMMV

That made me laugh! I just got slammed on the OESHD forum by the "British film maker" Andrew Reid for saying the GH4 looks too sharp=video than my nice smooth, creamy, spacious (larger sensor) 5d3.

After "the British film maker" wrote a paragraph of excuses explaining why it appears the GH4 looks too sharp, he insulted me for bring up the issue. The esteemed film maker, even suggest the GH4 was as good as the 5D3 in a low light test and posted a comparison video, and his pycho-visual narrative.

He has written another tutorial on how to use the GH4, so I understand where he is coming from...... just follow the money!

I suggested to "the British film maker" to change the name of his forum to GH4HD! It is very misleading that he is still riding on the popularity and name brand of the Vernerable Master, while at the same time bashing Canon...... it gets old fast.

Tiffen will make a fortune selling softening filters to all the Panny-lovers!

That forum is only about the GH$ and the amount of Canon bashing there is out of control. I just need to put in a good word for the venerable 5D3.

I'm glad you mentioned something about the smaller sensor, because while I can't quite put my finger on it, GH4 footage looks a bit compressed compared the the Venerable Master.

The Panny-lovers always tell you but for $1700 you get 4K....... they neglect to contemplate the storage issues, new computers, not to mention lens, adopters, and that crazy interface unit that cost more than the damn camera! It's almost taken on the appearance of mass hysteria!

The Panny-lovers always tell you but for $1700 you get 4K....... they neglect to contemplate the storage issues, new computers, not to mention lens, adopters, and that crazy interface unit that cost more than the damn camera! It's almost taken on the appearance of mass hysteria!

Now you are starting to sound like "that" other place, what issues does the camera have with lenses? Every lens you would have for the gh3 will fit on the gh4. You can use a 100mb codec which is not a dealbreaker, storage is cheap if you stay on HDD route. New computers? I don't know about you but I buy a new pc every 2-3 years, never a high end one but the technology advances so fast that everytime I buy one it handles formats my earlier pc's struggled with with ease. People had the same comments when we went from SD to HD and look where we are now, my current pc eats avchd for breakfast while it once choked on it.

The gh4 can do 4K internally for those who need it, a few things that come to mind is the cropping ability and a more detailed 4k to 1080p conversion, plenty of samples available online that show that current 4k camera's such as the gh4 and ax100 have more detail then any other 1080p only camera currently available. Again to some that might matter.

Also how about future proofing, 4k will be the norm anyway so why not shoot 4K now, downsample to 720p, 1080p or whatever size you need for current delivery and keep a 4K master for when you want to use the footage again in a few months/years, for instance people selling stockfootage will benefit from selling the same thing again in 4K when that is being used by everyone.

That interface unit or also called "the brick" is something you wouldn't easily shoot out in the field with but I can imagine for some people shooting higher end work, maybe commercials, would have the need for that kind of connectivity and/or better output quality. I think Panasonic is aiming at different markets with this camera and just the fact that they make it affordable for just about everybody is a accomplishment of it's own.

I"m not a fanboy and won't be buying the gh4 anytime soon eventhough most my current gear is m4/3 related but knowing I can get the gh4 in one or 2 years time when prizes go down and when I need it and fit all my existing accessories, lenses, adapters, batteries etc onto that camera (I have the gh3) is a big deal for me as I know every investment I make today is a good one.

GH4 , absolutely

you get better clips , plus you could adapt the lenses that you have now, also you get a real lanc-like remote (with 2 pana servo zoom). But mainly for the quality (and that's the only reason for a non-camcorder, isn't it?)
I wouldn't worry too much about the less bokeh, since I firmly believe that this bokeh-mania is about to end. (it was a good ride for a year but now it's time to put the bokeh where it belongs, for full zoom only: if done for everything can be distracting and annoying: real life doesn't have bokeh... fiction does, but fiction after a while gets boring).

Now you are starting to sound like "that" other place, what issues does the camera have with lenses? Every lens you would have for the gh3 will fit on the gh4.

Perhaps you misunderstood me I have a 5D3. Personally I'm not going to invest in new glass at this point in my life. The GH4 has more of an issue fitting Canon glass than other glass.

You are the first person I've heard that tells me there is no issue or added expense with 4K! You are now sounding like that other place too!

Concerning new computers: My graphics card is failing on my old Macbook pro 2010 dual core machine. I still used FCP6, and Snow leopard. I stayed on FCP6 because I felt like I had some issues going to Mountain Lion, mainly with my audio software "Reaper", so went back to Snow Leopard.

My failing Graphics card forced my hand, so I bit the bullet, and bought a new dream machine a Macbook Pro Retina quad core 2.8 ghz ,16 gigs of Ram and a 764 gig SSD drive........ all so I could get FC-X!

There are a lot of slaves out there who still run FCP6 or 7 on unsupported obsolete software on antiythera devices. Going up to 4K is quite the leap for many...... perhaps not for you.

Ramji, since you sold your 5Dii, you probably need something fast, but, for those of us heavily invested in Canon glass, I would just hang in there until Canon releases the 5D mark IV. I'm sure it will kick the GH4's butt! ...... patience is a virtue well worth waiting for!

I'm not going to invest in new glass at this point in my life
Why should we use canon glass on a panasonic camera? Plenty of excellent m4/3 glass out there from Panasonic and Olympus. I could get myself a 1500 euro 4K camera right now if I would need it without any extra investment and just start using it, but then again I am a m4/3 camera system user. I don't see any reason of complaining that canon lenses wont fit just because you happen to own one, I wouldn't complain that my m4/3 lenses won't fit a sony camera because I choose a system and stick with it.

Are you serious?

Sure, you say you won't buy a gh4 because your canon glass won't fit and you don't want to invest in lenses that do, that's like me not wanting to buy a sony a7s because my m4/3 lenses won't fit either but that doesn't make it a camera with "issues". You complain about "that" other site bashing on the canon but you do the same here with the Panasonic, there is always something bad if you really look hard, it works better if you work with the positive. :)

Why should we use canon glass on a panasonic camera? Plenty of excellent m4/3 glass out there from Panasonic and Olympus. I could get myself a 1500 euro 4K camera right now if I would need it without any extra investment and just start using it, but then again I am a m4/3 camera system user. I don't see any reason of complaining that canon lenses wont fit just because you happen to own one, I wouldn't complain that my m4/3 lenses won't fit a sony camera because I choose a system and stick with it.

Again, I don't think you understood me. I wasn't suggesting YOU buy Canon glass for your Panasonic camera! I said, that added expense involved moving from a 5D3 to the GH4 involves clumsy adaptors and new glass...... it's actually faaar more expensive with the interface included than the 5D3.

BTW, aren't XLR adaptors in camera's kind a obsolete?

I'm quite happy with the lens I have, and I'm very happy with the 5D3.

When it comes to impressing clients, if you mention you have a Canon 5D3 you are more likely to get the job, especially if it has one of those long white lens on it.

Tell them you got a GH4........ they say, Huh?

Even "That" other place is riding on the coat tails of Canon's name brand reputation. Yet if you mention image is everything..... and I mean figuratively as well as literally, being seen with a name brand big nice camera with a long white lens might verge on vanity, but most people involved in the film business are rather vain anyway so you'll fit right in and get the job!

if you mention you have a Canon 5D3 you are more likely to get the job
Talent will get you a job, not equipment :) It's not the camera but the person behind it that makes the difference.

Sure, you say you won't buy a gh4 because your canon glass won't fit and you don't want to invest in lenses that do, that's like me not wanting to buy a sony a7s because my m4/3 lenses won't fit either but that doesn't make it a camera with "issues". You complain about "that" other site bashing on the canon but you do the same here with the Panasonic, there is always something bad if you really look hard, it works better if you work with the positive. :)

I don't need a lecture from you about "positive" after you misconstrue everything I've said so far. Let me make this as clear as I can!

I said the GH4 to my eye is rather sharp, I like the 5D3 image better, that's not an "issue" that personal taste! I also, like the better low light capabilities of the 5D3, and for me...... notice I said for me, low light trumps sharpness for MY needs.

The "issue" perhaps you are talking about is the fact that the Panny-Lovers love telling people you can get a 4K camera for 1,699.00. If you buy nothing else for it than the interface they sell, it puts the cost way over the 5D3. That's not including the cost of archival, storage, fast cards, lens etc. if you are moving from a 5D3 to GH4, which BTW, is the subject of this thread!

So I would respectfully request you to cease with your condescending remarks, and keep it clean thanks!

Talent will get you a job, not equipment :) It's not the camera but the person behind it that makes the difference.

Tell that to all the panny-lovers....... yes, I'm quite confident that my 5D3 is far more talented than I am, I have a lot to learn before I can exceed the 5D3.

I would much rather watch a guy save a whale caught up in fishing nets filmed on a cheap video camera, than half of this mindless stuff on Vimeo with all the depth of field shoots of flowers, and such.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcXU7G6zhjU#t=43

Just providing constructive feedback, nothing wrong with that, only isn't calling people "panny lovers" a bit condescending? Try to be a bit more respectful, makes this a nicer place. If you would show me some of your work and if it's really good, it's not because of the camera, it's because of you, if it's mediocre or bad it's also because of you, gear is not a replacement for talent, something your clients will see as well.

I don't see any reason of complaining that canon lenses wont fit just because you happen to own one, I wouldn't complain that my m4/3 lenses won't fit a sony camera because I choose a system and stick with it.

One other misconstrued thing you've said. I never said Canon Glass won't fit, I said you have to use clumsy adaptors. If you would like more info on this, here is a video from B&H I watched yesterday in which the Panny rep. says fitting most lens with adaptors on the GH4 is no problem "except" Canon glass is a little more difficult. He says this about half way through the video.

Yes, I agree stick with one system.

Panasonic GH4 Webcast: Live from B&H - YouTube

Just providing constructive feedback, nothing wrong with that, only isn't calling people "panny lovers" a bit condescending? Try to be a bit more respectful, makes this a nicer place. If you would show me some of your work and if it's really good, it's not because of the camera, it's because of you, if it's mediocre or bad it's also because of you, gear is not a replacement for talent, something your clients will see as well.

From my point of view there is nothing you have said that is constructive, I've spent most of my time correcting your reading comprehension skills, perhaps English isn't your first language and I understand that.

Panny-lovers call themselves Panny-lovers, my god man! You are overly sensitive, or you are just looking for trouble!

I'm not respectful?....... it's getting old. There is not one post in which you have not included a condescending remark towards me.

All my lenses fit and work perfectly on my Panasonic, I mentioned in the beginning of this thread this could be an issue when switching brands, I know that my investment in 4/3 glass also has locked me into that system but I don't mind because it works for me. I actually sold my Sony camera's and sony glass to move into the m4/3 system and that is what the TS should keep in mind when moving from Canon to Panasonic. Also I"m done talking here, your comments and attitude lead nowhere.

Well that's basically what I have been saying.

BTW, I had a look at your videos, and they are very very nice, I'm in awe! I don't think I can compete with you. I'm not a professional film maker (yet).

I just bought a Shark slider a month or so ago so things are gradually improving. Im a guitar maker by trade, and have an interest in audio as well to show case my guitars. When I do a video of me working in the shop unfortunately I'm rather limited by a one man operation. I can't do all the cool silder shots and out of focus stuff I would like.

I'm editing a recent trip to Thailand but the theme is pretty lame because I hot swapped my hard rive with all the good footage and it went kaput! Nothing special just my first attempt learning the ropes of FC-X.

I'm shooting a video tomorrow in church in Cerrilios NM of a world class, classical guitarist playing some Bach, this will be the first for me outside my home..... and yes, I'm quite nervous about it , wish me luck!

Here are two of the most recent videos I did. They were shot on the 24-105 f4....... I guess my real claim to fame is that the guitarist Rapheal Andia is playing one of my guitars.

The proper way to carve a neck on a classical guitar - YouTube

Audio interface Metric Halo ULN-2 and Oktavia mics modified by Michael Jolly, and fitted with MJE-K47H capsules.
Jason Mullen plays Gillian Welch "Revelator" on Vimeo

Ramji, since you sold your 5Dii, you probably need something fast, but, for those of us heavily invested in Canon glass, I would just hang in there until Canon releases the 5D mark IV. I'm sure it will kick the GH4's butt! ...... patience is a virtue well worth waiting for!

I would not recommend waiting for this to happen. Canon showed us with the 5D MKIII that DSLR video takes a back seat to the Cinema line. This means they will never product a DSLR with video capabilities that outshine the lowest of the C-series lineup. So until a C250 shows up with 4k I would not expect a "killer" 5DMKIV from a video perspective.

As I alluded to this before, when it all gets distilled down, my opinion is that 5D MKIII RAW video looks the best unless you need to deliver in 4k or need 1080p60. Yes, you need some beefy CF cards and more post work but the images are downright amazing if handled properly. All for the cost of some CF cards.

I would not recommend waiting for this to happen. Canon showed us with the 5D MKIII that DSLR video takes a back seat to the Cinema line. This means they will never product a DSLR with video capabilities that outshine the lowest of the C-series lineup. So until a C250 shows up with 4k I would not expect a "killer" 5DMKIV from a video perspective.

As I alluded to this before, when it all gets distilled down, my opinion is that 5D MKIII RAW video looks the best unless you need to deliver in 4k or need 1080p60. Yes, you need some beefy CF cards and more post work but the images are downright amazing if handled properly. All for the cost of some CF cards.

I take your word for it, I'm not knowledgeable about this. I just thought it was a logical progression in the direction of the 5D3.

I love the raw video from the 5D3, but I'm a little afraid to download ML and risk turning my camera into a brick..... I'll gradually work up the courage.

It took me a long time to decide to install it. I was waiting for the ability to uninstall ML completely without leaving anything behind. This came in March of this year. Once you install it you realize it is not that big of a deal. It just sit along side your main camera menus.

Tim, maybe when the time comes I'll ask you to hold my hand..... ha ha. It will happen , but not while Mercury is in retrograde.

It does take some research to become confident. Which can be difficult as the ML website is kind of crazy.

There are a few videos on youtube on how to install magic lantern, it looks pretty straight forward.

GH4 , absolutely

you get better clips , plus you could adapt the lenses that you have now, also you get a real lanc-like remote (with 2 pana servo zoom). But mainly for the quality (and that's the only reason for a non-camcorder, isn't it?)
I wouldn't worry too much about the less bokeh, since I firmly believe that this bokeh-mania is about to end. (it was a good ride for a year but now it's time to put the bokeh where it belongs, for full zoom only: if done for everything can be distracting and annoying: real life doesn't have bokeh... fiction does, but fiction after a while gets boring).

Perhaps you have a healthy dislike for Bokeh due to these rather mindless so-called film makers who get a 5D and go on Vimeo and post non-stop videos of flowers going in and out of focus, graded with Davinci Resolve. With the onslaught of film makers due to the DSLR revolution and democratization, there naturally will be an increase in mediocrity.

Everyone is a film maker these days but not everyone is an artist. It's like composing music in "Garageband" anyone can do it and you don't need to understand a note of it.

Lets face it, film without out Bokeh is flat and boring! Watch the masters do it, not the amateurs. I fell in love with the 5D image, so far I've yet to fall in love with the GH4....... she leaves me a little cold. It's like a girl with fake boobs, it kinda grabs your attention, but when you investigate it's a little weird.

I think the GH4 could work well in conduction with the 5D3. you don't need bokeh on panoramic landscapes.

Yes, if you have a GH4 as the saying goes "if you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail" yes. you will not use Bokeh. Then after 3 or 4 years the pendulum will swing and people will go back to the creamy look of film, instead of digitized sharpness.

You can get nice looking bokeh shots on the gh4 as well, I can push a background totally out of focus on my 75mm f1.8 Olympus lens and on my 12mm f2.0 or my 25mm f1.4 lens if I shoot subjects on a closer distance, even my rx10 at f2.8 and zoomed in just enough can give me a nice looking blurred background.

I only can't get a "move 1 inch" and I lost my focus kind of shot, I see many focusing issues on especially wedding videos and in about any case a 5D is involved, focussing can be very challenging on a full frame camera if you shoot wide open with fast primes and it takes some careful setting up and a skilled operator to nail the focus on each shot. I"m also with Anthony that that extreme shallow dof has had it's time, it can enhance certain shots but it's like shooting with a fisheye, it's looks fun for one shot but gets distracting if you use it on all shots. That's the main advantage of m4/3 camera's, not taking resolution into account, that you can get shallow dof but it will be much more manageable while having the advantage of shooting wide open.

F1.4 is the same on a full frame or m4/3 camera in terms of light gathering, only the shallow dof will be different, with the 5D the person would only have to sneeze and they will be out of focus, something to consider when going full frame if you are doing run and gun work.

Just don't use 1.2 primes. I never bought one for that very reason. You take a photo of someones face, their nose is in focus and their ear is not. Looks weird and un-natural..... if you don't use it wide open what's the point of having a 50mm f/1.2? Very limited lens, and very expensive.

So now that the GH4 is out, bokeh is out too? ha ha! Over done perhaps but, bokeh will be with us forever. I guess next we'll be hearing low light capability is a thing of the past as well, because the GH4 isn't as good as the 5D's. I expect with the GH4 we'll just be seeing a lot more landscapes..... ha ha!

I see trends with big Hollywood movies like the greenish tints, very dark scenes etc. these will come and go. Your average person likes realism..... film makers like creativity, always looking to push some kinda effect.

In the end it all comes down to content. Bokeha or no bokea is an argument for amateur film makers, true artists use whatever they need to express their intentions.

You don't see bokea all that much in big production films, because those films usually have some content, but man! It's all over Vimeo! With a little money for cameras and lens any ape can do bokeh and they do! Not all of us apes can write a good screen play, or make a good documentary.

F1.4 is the same on a full frame or m4/3 camera in terms of light gathering, only the shallow dof will be different, with the 5D the person would only have to sneeze and they will be out of focus, something to consider when going full frame if you are doing run and gun work.

While the light gathering of a T/1.4 lens will be the same for any given area, you are actually gathering a larger total quantity of light with a full frame sensor, since it has a larger area to collect light. But in terms of light gathering, the more important element is the size of individual photosites on the sensor. If you have the same number of photosites on two different sized sensors, then the larger sensor will have larger photosites, each will collect more light because of its larger size, and thus if everything else is the same the sensor will be more sensitive.

This is the logic that goes into the full frame, lower-pixel-count A7s camera - which would seem to be the low-light champ...

This is the logic that goes into the full frame, lower-pixel-count A7s camera - which would seem to be the low-light champ...

I expect many, many videos appearing shot in the dark, with no content, only because the camera can shoot in the dark, just like I see many, many videos appearing from the gh4 shot at 96fps, only for the sake of showing it can do 96fps.

I don't know if any saw Philip blooms latest video shot with a gopro: (vimeo.com/97455734), that's a camera the size of a matchbox and I thought it looked wonderfull, the scenery did help ofcourse but this was yet another example of using the right tool for the right job in the hands of the right person .

Just look at what you need the camera for and choose one that has those strengths and start shooting.

Low light queen?

Philip Bloom, Barbie Camera Challenge - YouTube

hilarious!!

Yes, the Kung Fu sequence is almost as funny as his comparative analysis of working with the BarbieCam as compared to the black magic...