>>3590349>I want really good native video performance, something I can reliably make short films/documentary style videos with. If you can't do that with the 5D IV, which has twice the bit rate and better video AF than the EM1.2, then the problem is not with the camera. Did they ever even add log profile to the EM1? If not then the EM1 is a big step backwards even with a speedbooster.
>I also want to be able to produce really stunning images that tell a story.The 5D IV simply out classes the EM1.2 on stills, especially in low light. How could it be otherwise with a 4x larger sensor?
Assuming you're not trolling I can't imagine why you would go with an EM1.
* Hate the 5D IV video crop? A Sony A7 III would adapt your EF lenses without additional glass and give you some of the best high ISO 4k video available right now without dropping a fortune on Panasonic's FF bodies. Its main drawback is bit rate.
* Want better video specs? The Fuji XT3 mops the floor with the EM1 when it comes to video and at the same price point. Twice the bit rate, 4k60p, FHD120p, and the footage is some of the sharpest/most detailed available right now without going with a dedicated cinema camera. And yes, there are EF speedboosters for Fuji.
You haven't said what problem you're running into nor what need you want to address, but I don't see how an EM1 solves any potential issues. I don't even know if it could deliver better high ISO in video with a speedbooster if there's no log profile. Even with a speedbooster it's going to get clobbered in stills. Hell, if the video crop is your only issue and you hate Sony swap the 5D for an R and add Metabones EF-to-RF speedbooster for video work.
