As the title suggests, I think when looking for future camera answers, I need to look at defining the question, before I look too hard for the answer.
Look very closely. Ok, maybe too close.
Do I need more resolution?
No.
720p is my main submission format, 1080p my preferred “backup”, as long as it is robust, sharp and clear. No-one at this stage wants or needs more, so premium quality yes, increased size no. Even when I shoot 4k on the EM1’s it is simply to get better 1080, because their 1080 sucks.
Do I need better dynamic range?
Probably.
Doesn’t everyone always, but having said that, you shoot to what you can get and no-one knows the difference. No camera has ever supplied infinite dynamic range, so you use what you have. I find this with stills also. You use the DR you have, making the negative space work for you or fix it with lights etc. Shoot in gloom, for the gloom. Want to capture the bright outside and dull inside together? Add lights, which would likely be needed anyway regardless of your DR capacity. Movies like “Children of Men” use the best camera gear, but no added light and documentary shooters like Mark Bone work it well even with entry level semi-pro gear.
Do I need better format choices?
Yes.
Plain and simple, some type of true LOG or RAW would be great. I process my stills from RAW and I know the difference. Natural on a Pana and Flat on an Olympus are good, but rely far too much on pre-shot precision and locked in choices. This also helps answer the above question.
Do I need better ISO performance?
Probably. Maybe. Not sure?
Fast glass does most jobs well enough. F1.8 at 1/50th does not push me too hard in most circumstances. It’s only when deeper DOF becomes an issue that it, well, it becomes an issue. ISO 1600, f1.8 at 1/50th is useable even in poor light and unlike stills, it is movement tolerant. Effectively video has about 4-5 stops more movement tolerance.
Better AF?
Not really which surprises me.
I have good solid AF in the OSMO and EM1’s and good AF in the G9 (better with Pana glass), but to be honest, over reliance on AF is probably indicative of poor technical skill. Would I like perfect AF in all my cameras? Of course, but I have it when I need it and I have yet to find an AF system that can read my mind. That’s right folks, AF cannot read your mind.
Better MF?
If possible, but I can get by.
I do have a screen now, a cheap Feelworld F7 which helps a lot and the G9 is pretty good as is, but a better screen on one camera would be nice, even though it would not help the others. With the Oly’s I will always use their screen for Touch AF, because it is good enough and the ergonomics are perfect.
Better Stabilising?
Not really.
The OSMO and to some extent all my M43 cameras are strong here. Very slight improvements in newer models aside, these are a boost in an area where technique, smart thinking and more practice can net vast improvements, new tech only minor ones. A Gimbal for the bigger cameras would be better than camera stab, but I would loose that “hand held” feel. The G9 has nealry perfect “locked” stab for interviews.
How about Bit rates and colour depth?
Maybe. This gets a little tricky.
The G9 has 10 bit, 422, Long GOP, the Oly can do 8 bit, 420 but in All-i. I would love both in one to be honest, but again, improvements in any of the above would likely be enough to bridge this for me. On a practical note, 4-800 mbs All-i is a huge load on a system, when in the end result you may not be able to translate the difference.
Recording time?
Maybe. Again a surprise on reflection.
A real bugbear I felt, but if I look at it logically, there are very few times when I need more than a continuous 30 mins and if I do, running two or more cameras allows me to stop-start one, with a second angle to cover the gap (and the G9 is always ready to go). Not ideal I suppose, but how many times do you actually look at long periods of unbroken footage without at least an angle change? The other thing is of course, “unlimited” is usually still battery life limited, which may not be much longer than this anyway.
So, what is really missing?
If I accept that each of my existing cameras can provide decent enough quality in their specialist areas, but if I want a better, more professional base format to shoot with, then one real improvement path I could make, is the BM Pocket Cinema 4k for B-RAW or Pro-res formats or the Ninja V on the EM1x for Pro-res only. The BMV Assist 3G with Pro-res and B-RAW is also tempting for a lot of practcal reasons (batteries, cards), but I am still not sure it works with all my cameras, or in 4k.
If ease of processing pathways is important, the BM’s are the best ones really, avoiding the whole Pro-res to DNG conversion thing (or I could learn another software package).
Another option, and one that is a small compromise, but still a solid improvement is the GH6, which adds full VLOG and Pro-res internally (still needs an expensive card or Ninja etc), dual ISO, even better 1080p options, 10 bit, 422 colour depth, All-i compression and improved AF and stabilising (for Panasonic) with no recording limit. This camera then becomes the replacement for all the others for video (except the OSMO), freeing up all of those for either backup video or stills and has good colour compatability with the G9.
There is also the very real benefit of very sharp 100mp hand held high res and native 26mp for stills. This would be an admission that video for me is part of a hybrid life, not a sign of a stills shooter becoming a full cinematographer.
I could also buy it in a kit, which fixes my standard lens problem and it still has compatibility with the Ninja etc.
So, after all of that, it turns out that the only camera that can actually lift my game and answer all my questions, is the GH6, with the BMCC4k as a good value alternate.
Go figure.