So, I have decided on my school and future pathway.

Now time to pick a camera.

It turns out I have a better tax return coming than I originally thought, so this has become both more exciting and more complicated.

I suppose I need to first take stock of what I can do now, what I can and cannot do and what I do want to do in the future.

In M43 I have several cameras capable of 4k in some form, but only the G9 Mk1’s make the grade in good quality 1080 and they are limited in recording time and codec choice. Options increase in 4K land where even Olympus comes into the frame, but again, codec and time limits. I could upgrade one or both the G9’s to V-LogL, but at this stage I feel that is $100 (each) better spent and all could be upgraded with a Black Magic Video Assist, but we are talking $1000au or there abouts for a partial upgrade of one camera at a time.

If I do not add to my M43 offering in video, I relegate the format to stills only, which I feel is a waste of a ton of great glass and a betrayal of the truisms I have come to learn about M43 in general especially for video.

M43 can do the job, no doubt.

With my little video-centric full frame kit, I have gained 14 stop dynamic range V-Log, battery limited recording and many video-centric camera features as well as clean high ISO performance, possibly even a little better than the newer cameras, but in reality, thanks to my limited range of lenses, I really only have a 50mm (75mm in crop mode*) to realise that difference.

The S5 Mk1 also has some advantages over the newer cameras (according to trusted sources). The image is less sharp, or to put it another way, less over-sharpened. Video sharpness is not ideal for some filming, but can be added in more easily than taken out.

*I intend to use it as a crop/full frame hybrid, doubling my lens “range”.

Stabilising, focus, frame rate options etc all take a hit, because these are easier to achieve in M43 land.

What I really lack is a shoulder/handle rig “follow camera”, with capable AF outside of my nifty, but limited OSMO, as well as any All-i recording formats and a second body with unlimited recording and true V-Log.

The more I can get in camera the better. No reliance on external recorders, gimbals etc with the exception of the SSD-out memory option.

So, what is important?

AF has limited uses for me as I do not vlog. If used it needs to work and be controllable. It is not a replacement for practiced intent and if used, extra depth of field would help. Note also, there have been reports that AF is less reliable with some filters on (Black Mist etc). Limited win to the G9II and M43 in general.

Stabilising is more useful and a priority. The S5’s are good, even the Mk1 good enough for some uses and better than most, but again the format advantage and slightly newer tech of the G9 makes it genuinely useful. Useful but like AF not perfect, so it needs to be seen as a handy problem solver, not a game changer, or a replacement for better technique. Another limited win to the G9.

All-i recording and near or full RAW codec access is the next level up, the pro safety net for some situations. Not strictly needed in 95% of my shooting situations, but possibly limiting if unavailable. The 5x and G9 share this space equally and with the SSD-out support needed, but the cheaper S5II is out of the race. No difference.

Formats and Dynamic Range. Not sure open gate is a real thing for me, and Super 35 does not scare me, but the G9 has no cropped formats which is cleaner and does not require hat-swapping**. Again, I have the S5 I, so adding a lens or two to that will still offer good full frame/S-35 options. Win to the G9/M43 format.

**Dedicating a needed function button or custom setting to frame size swapping.

Lens choice. Clearly a win to the M43 now as I have basically a full unused set in the wings***. Full frame has that lovely S prime series which I have started and most cinema kits (7Artisan Spectrum series) make more sense in full frame. Win to the G9 now and the 24mm would round out the S5 I.

***8-18, 12-60, 15, 30, 45.

Future proofing. I am deeply in M43 land and happy. I like the advantages it offers, am aware of the exceptions and have enough gear to see me through the next half decade. Updating M43 is a matter of the odd new body to replace the fallen and these are often more capable and cheaper than full frame options.

The trend is to switch to full frame at the moment, but equally, M43 is hitting a purple patch, offering plenty of the good stuff and mitigating most of the bad. It will always suffer by comparison in certain criteria, but only if you look on the surface. G9 for my time and place, the S5 kit could be added to later if needed. A full conversion is out of the question and not needed.

Slo-Mo. This is real and a practical tool. 1080/300 and 4k/120 are game changers for me. The G9 wins hands down adding a full stop more over the full frames.

High ISO capability. By recent standards, the G9II has high ISO capability, but the full frame sensor, especially a dual ISO, lower pixel count setup will always win.

I also doubt very high ISO work would share stressed AF and stabilising needs. I have control over my environment and do not need to guarantee results in ridiculously stressful situations.

If needed I have the S5 and fast glass (f1.8 at 6400+) and M43 with same (f1.# at 3200), which makes both useable within “realistically applicable” limits . Full frame across the board would add a couple of clean stops, but needs fast glass to achieve that, which then pays the depth of field cost and excludes my other backups. S5 limited win and I have one already.

Option 1

The G9II ($3000) is the best video camera for my use case as it offers the best AF, stabilising and widest range of frame rates (with no forced crop), the best rolling shutter performance, as well as the dual front buttons I have come to rely on. It also adds the not insignificant benefit of upping my stills capabilities and drawing from a wide range of very good glass. Basically there are no catches.

The 10-25 f1.7 ($2400au) gives the G9 the same effective performance as a f2.8 lens on a full frame, but with all the above advantages as well as being the most “realised” video lens and a more useful range (20-50). This does introduce the problem of massive filters because I have so far topped out at 67mm, so another $300+ minimum is to be factored in. I have fast primes from 9-75mm and decently fast zoom from 8-150mm, so this is really only a limited “one lens” solution with video advantages.

Prioritising the M43 train of thought would be logical, feels right and would work, but my half hearted full frame excursion may be called into question.

Option 2

The S5 IIx ($3000) brings that high ISO advantage, but only if fed good glass and is it relevant to have two high ISO monsters? If not, it is basically a G9II with fewer frame rate choices, forced crops and less sure footed stabilising and AF.

If I add the 24mm ($1000) I would have a 24/35 and 50/75 set if I embrace crop format and a later purchase of the 85mm could add a decent 130mm for sport and a little compression.

On balance 2 Full frames and 2-3 primes is solid, but hobbling my M43 video capabilities in favour of a video limited full frame kit seems pointless and for my uses, handiness is more important than specialising.

Option 3

This is a hybrid of 1 and 2.

If I accept the G9II is the best video/stills all-rounder and I am well serviced in lenses with plenty of fast primes from 9-75mm (18-150) and a couple of under used Leica zooms covering 8-60mm (16-120) as well as all the other glass, I can still get the 24mm f1.8 for the S5.

Completing that 2 = 4 lens kit, making its one real advantage of high ISO performance fully realised, makes sense and leaves the door open for maybe a 5S IIx later.

Total cost sub $4000au.

I would then have interchangeable action/interview cameras with the other, the older G9’s, and the OSMO as backup.

Everything stays within my envelope of sanity and both kits are empowered.

Sorted………