I wouldn't either !

Very nice!

Thanks! I liked IQ very much, everything was shot in available light, and there was so much latitude in post. It was graded just in Premiere with three way corrector, and exterior scenes with Filmconvert. Vimeo compression really messed the fine grain up, even though I uploaded ProRes Proxy. Here's the pro res version if someone wants to see it without compression mess

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2B3usuwrCefMVpKWnNSQU5rN1E/edit?usp=sharing

Thank you Mark!

Nice!

@marciocons

I like the grain and sharper matrix of older intra settings..

Since I about 3 years work with 23.976p framerate, I don't mean sell 3 bodies of GH2, and I love my new GH4 too.

Thanks @MendalFly I used Nikkor 24mm2.8 Ais and 50mm 1.4 Ais, also Sankor 16 anamorphot for the last shot.

Looks great

As some of you know, I hate buying new cameras. Today I very much enjoy explaining that I work with 200$ little hacked camera. This year I'll probably get new camera, GH5, or something from BMD if they announce something crazy at NAB.

To raise awareness (lol) here I'm sharing few more stuff I did with GH2 in 2016:

One little sailing regatta promo video:

A documentary about historical and geographical features of the place I live at (there is also some Canon 1Dc footage here, the mushy shots :)).

Stay tuned for some 2017 GH2 productions :)

The GH2 is a very capable camera, even in 2017, even in the near future.

While TV broadcast stay in the Full HD 1080p as a standard for television, all the 1080p cameras will remain usable. Sony NEX, Canon EOS, Nikon, Lumix, etc... Any 1080p camera will be good enough.

Most of cinema screens are 2k, and 4k cinemas are considered special theaters with higher ticket prices.

When the television broadcast make the turn to 4k as a standard, then the 1080p cameras will start to be obsolet. But not obsolet from day to night, not so fast, it will be a transition with both 4k and FullHD living together for some time, maybe some years.

Also there is an important thing to consider when we think 4k versus FullHD: which screen will be used by the audience to see the content? Smartphones? Tablets or Notebooks? Desktop computers? TV sets? Home theather projectors? Cinema Theaters? This is very important to consider.

There are researches in the internet showing the average percentage of screens used to watch online videos (youtube, vimeo and others). These researches shows 4k smart tvs as only 2% to 5% of the total screens used to see the online videos. Also these researches shows desktop computers decreasing and smartphones and tablets increasing. So a FullHD camera will remain very capable, even after tv broadcast turn to 4k standard because most of people will be using small screens, and 4k for small screens is just overkill.

Home theater and corporate projectors are 1080p as a maximum resolution, 4k projectors are just impossible expensive.

I think there are some important reasons for 4k:

1 - your own pleasure: if you have a 4k tv set you will want to delight yourself and your family and your friends with a 4k wonderful image.

2 - your eyes got trained and now you have already perceived that the 1080p cameras, all of them have some amount of aliasing, even the GH2, and you want to shot 4k and downsize to 1080p to get the best possible 1080p.

3 - your audience have 4k screens, for example a wedding video for a new couple who have a 4k tv set.

4 - you have sponsors for a project, and sponsors are rich people who owns 4k tv sets, and you wan to delight your sponsors with the best image.

5 - you are not so good cinematographer and you need reframing and stabilizing in post production.

6 - you are selling video on demand content and there are some amount of people hungry for 4k content (don't forget: script and direction are more important than resolution)

Maybe there are more reasons for 4k, if you know them, please share...

Think like this: today 4k is the IMAX film and Full HD is the 35mm film, today 4k is a plus. But when 4k becomes a standard for tv and cinema, it will be the 35mm film and the Full HD will be the 16mm film. Remember that there will always be audience for a good 16mm film.

@inqb8tr I have had the same feeling about all this. GH3 was exciting as ergonomics upgrade - never though it can compete with the GH2 in terms of IQ and character. GH4 was groundbreaking but only in terms of resolution, and at a time when said resolution wasn't widely accepted yet. Now, the GH5 really feels like the proper upgrade from GH2, it is such a complete tool! I still love and use my GH2, but times change and now the GH5 will be my A cam. Of course, Blackmagic has always been extremely tempting, but the ergonomics is terrible. If only there was an Ursa Mini inside a GH5 body and at its price...