Food for thought: Micro 4/3 > APS-C or 36mm for 4K

I'm doing some research for my next system. Micro 4/3 is high up the list, but I might stay with APS-C. For 4K, low light notwithstanding, the E-M1 II has 4K better than or equal to a D850 or Leica SL, and equal to the EOS R or XT-2:

 

Link: Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review

 

IMHO, of course. Keep in mind that you don't need a gimbal for the better Micro 4/3 bodies. Video is not part of my requirements, but it is interesting - and surprising - nonetheless. It goes to show that you should never assume how a camera performs without looking at its output.

 

I should point out that I'd never use cameras like these for video/cinema if I could help it. If I had a choice, it would probably be a RED body of some kind. Just remember that RED bodies are bigger than any mirrorless body, and they aren't cheap. But for low budget productions, you really have some good choices these days.

There's nothing wrong with 4K video with a Micro 4/3 sensor. You can do well with a 1" sensor, which is 30% smaller yet. We are talking about 8 MP per frame, which is barely a challenge for a cell phone these days. You can use either full frame or APS-C with a Sony A7 or A9, each with unique properties. FF video is resampled, not binned, which takes a lot of processing power but produces clean images with little noise. The APS-C format does not use resampling, and is cleaner for the effort. More important to me, I get 50% more reach, since much of my video is at a distance.

 

You don't need a gimbal with a light camera, as hundreds of parents filming their children at recitals can attest. However you need a fluid head of some sort if you pan in real time, follow motion, or need to locate and zoom in on a subject, smoothly or quickly. A DSLR or MILC can, in fact, produce cinematic results for thousands of dollars less than cameras dedicated to that purpose. You can even add power zoom and pull focusing to the rig, but some things are easier with a Arri, Red, or Sony Venice. Don't forget, big cameras need a trailer full of whirring hard drives (4,2,2m 10 bit video runs at 440 Mb/sec. 4,4,4 12 bit is over 1 Gb/sec).

 

I live in a video world for work, and still world for fun and travel. However I'm giving serious thought how to combine the two worlds. How would I plan, shoot, and edit video clips to produce a YouTube travelogue, for example. I have already found that a good fluid head can do everything a ball head can do, and many things better.

You don't need a gimbal with a light camera, as hundreds of parents filming their children at recitals can attest. However you need a fluid head of some sort if you pan in real time, follow motion, or need to locate and zoom in on a subject, smoothly or quickly.

Well, IMO it's not that the M43 bodies are light, it's that their stabilization is so darned good. Way, way better than the OIS-only stabilization of DSLRs, and better than the IBIS of cameras with larger sensors.

IBIS is a tremendous aid to still photography, but a lesser extent to video. It's a good idea to turn IBIS off when using a tripod, and IBIS alone does not react to low frequency disturbances well enough to stabilize hand-held video on the move. The artifacts range from gross instability to slow drifting, to sluggish response when panning. A steady-cam rig or gimbal and IBIS/OIS make a great team.

 

I've seen nothing to substantiate better IBIS performance in a smaller sensor. I would expect the results to be largely comparable to a FF sensor. A smaller sensor must be magnified more for the same display size, along with any motion induced artifacts.

Edited February 6, 2019 by Ed_Ingold

The Olympus M4/3 cameras have some really great lenses available- and use both Oly and Panasonic/Lumix lenses. Hard to beat some of the pro level Oly glass, although it is expensive. That said, the selection of available lenses overall gives one many options. I have an older 1st generation EM1 and like it well enough. It's got some miles on it, having been to England, Senegal, and Europe with me, not counting domestic trips. Rugged little beast, and reasonably weather resistant as well.

@Ed_Ingold Ed, have you given any thought to the newish Fuji XT3? I have a friend in video, currently moved from M4/3 to a Black Magic that after adjusting to it, is liking her results. But when she started her upgrade search, she mentioned that a lot of people she knew in the video world were very excited about the Fuji even though Fuji wasn't known for its video. Apparently, they've made great strides in video with that camera. Have you checked it out in any fashion and had any thoughts on it you'd be willing to share?

Fuji lenses are highly regarded in the video industry, and the XT3 is something I'm considering. The camera is reasonably priced, but I would need some expensive lenses and a new travel kit to carry everything.

 

Two of my Canon cameras use Fuji lenses. I haven't looked at their cameras recently, but that may change. I find that using an MILC produces high quality results at relatively low cost, and uses existing lenses. I'm particularly impressed with the color and dynamic range I'm getting. Automatic exposure and focusing are much more sophisticated than on most dedicated video cameras. On the down side, events longer than 30 minutes require an external recorder, which is a lot of extra gear for a mobile operation. There aren't many good choices for motorized zoom and pull-focus. The latter is an essential tool for cinematic photography, which is not on my plate at present.

 

I digress. Full frame and APS-C have a solid position in video, into the future. On the other hand, M43 and even 1" sensors can produce broadcast quality results, and smaller lenses cost a LOT less than those designed for FF and APS-C. If I were shopping for cameras, I would look for the following minimum requirements.

• 4,2,2 internal recording, 8 bit, 30p
  
• HD at 50 MHz, UHD at 100 MHz
  
• Dual cards, CF or SD
  
• Sequential card option for recording, with hot-swap capability.
  
• Clean (i.e., no shooting data) HDMI or SDI output
  
• Zoom from 28 mm to ~600 mm (equivalent). I see a Sony 100-400 GM zoom in my future, in Super-35 (APS-C) mode for the reach when needed.
  

10-bit recording would be nice, but requires a much higher bandwidth, and greater compression for internal storage. External storage at low compression requires up to 440 MHz. 30 fps is adequate for most purposes, including cinematic style. If the shutter speed is too high (shutter angle too low), 30 fps will produce visible stroboscopic effects (e.g., action sports and baton twirling). 60 fps works better in that regard. (120 and up are for slo-mo effects).

 

Fuji and Panasonic MILCs have dropped the 30 minute clip limit, probably others as well. I suspect this will be a paid option from Sony for future firmware upgrades, as it invokes a 15% import duty.

IBIS is a tremendous aid to still photography, but a lesser extent to video.

Whoa, hold on there, partner. :-) IBIS is a tremendous aid to both. I would argue that it's more useful for video. A slightly shaky Pentax K1000 is not going to affect the quality of the image, especially at a higher shutter speed. But slightly shaky video? Nobody likes looking at that.

IBIS is only useful to video when you're trying to hold the camera steady without a tripod - seated in the audience at a recital, braced against fence rail or door post. It does nothing to smooth slow translational and rotational motion if you try to pan, zoom or follow action without a tripod. If you goal is a quirky, verite style of cinematography, IBIS alone will get you there. Even then, a steady-cam rig or gimbal is almost a necessity. Everything else needs a tripod and, generally, no IS at all.

 

Most of these things mean nothing to still photography. It's only when time is a continuity rather than a series of instants that the details count.

 

Try taking a half-dozen stills with the camera in high-speed mode, and stepping through the results in post. Watch the horizon tilt, the background change against the subject, or the centering change. Each image might be razor sharp through IS, but that's not the same as "steady."

 

I confess I'm more of a "The Blue Planet" connoisseur than a fan of "The Blair Witch Project."

Edited February 7, 2019 by Ed_Ingold