Subforums
17,133 topics in this forum
-
- 534 replies
- 211.9k views
-
- 27 replies
- 19.4k views
-
- 5.8k replies
- 1.6m views
-
- 2 replies
- 15k views
-
- 179 replies
- 19.4k views
-
- 83 replies
- 38.2k views
-
- 223 replies
- 35k views
-
- 57 replies
- 17.5k views
-
- 15 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 236 replies
- 109.2k views
-
- 89 replies
- 49.2k views
-
- 123 replies
- 56.1k views
-
- 66 replies
- 28.2k views
-
Grant Petty on the future of DaVinci Resolve Studio pricing: "We'll probably eventually charge some kind of upgrade for this." 1 2
- 26 replies
- 16.4k views
-
- 36 replies
- 8.5k views
-
- 44 replies
- 26.6k views
-
- 26 replies
- 8.7k views
-
- 33 replies
- 8.8k views
-
- 3 replies
- 4k views
-
- 12 replies
- 4.8k views
-
- 26 replies
- 8.2k views
-
- 56 replies
- 13k views
-
- 26 replies
- 21.5k views
-
- 0 replies
- 3.3k views
-
- 5 replies
- 4k views
-
- 680 replies
- 230.2k views
-
- 58 replies
- 24k views
-
- 5 replies
- 3.8k views
-
- 26 replies
- 13.9k views
-
- 11 replies
- 5.7k views
-
- 9 replies
- 4.6k views
-
- 4 replies
- 4.1k views
-
- 74 replies
- 38.9k views
-
- 45 replies
- 23.9k views
-
- 2 replies
- 4.5k views
-
- 1 reply
- 4.6k views
-
- 1 reply
- 4.5k views
-
- 4 replies
- 5.2k views
-
- 12 replies
- 9.4k views
-
- 2 replies
- 5.5k views
-
Popular Contributors
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics17.1k
-
Total Posts349.3k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
No indication C50 can do this either but they should definitely consider it if not already. I also hear they are releasing a bunch of "stylised" LUTs including day-to-night for the C50. As for open gate, if the R5C (or even the R5 II) sensor could actually handle full-height 3:2 video readout, Canon would have probably leaned on that already.. either through firmware or at launch. Instead, they built a brand-new lower MP sensor for the C50. That tells me the older 45MP architecture just isn’t optimized for it (whether it’s readout speed, heat, or the processing pipeline). So while open gate on the R5C would be fantastic, the fact Canon didn’t already enable it when they had the chance is probably the clearest sign it’s not coming. Also for product segment reasons. But you never know.. -
Yes, great feature and AFAIK the R5C can't do it. My question is whether there is a technical limitation that would stop Canon from adding open gate on the R5C in a FW update? -
By eatstoomuchjam · Posted
Huh? It's not moving the goal posts to assert that the fact that some 35mm lenses expose character, but not all - and it's also not moving the goal posts to point out that the same statements are true if you use an S35 lens on FF or a S16 lens on M43. I don't need to maintain a belief that I'm right when I am, in fact, right. In fact, I was the one who brought up Fraser's quote and said that it was based and that indeed, for the lenses that he was using, he was getting more character on a larger sensor. Which of us does that apply to, again? Physician, heal thyself. Terms with no actual definition are useless for discussion or debate. The true idiots are the ones who say that the music ain't old-timey enough. 😉 That is technically true, yes, but as ND64 pointed out, radically impractical if you're shooting wide open. But you can very easily achieve the same look with S35 and many people do it by using a simple focal reducer. And if you don't insist on shooting at T1.2 for maximum toneh all day long, you can also get a similar look on M43, even more so if using a focal reducer. If you're shooting a 50mm at f/4 on your FF camera and shooting a 25mm at f/2 on your MFT camera, they'll look pretty similar - with the main differences relating to the character of the specific lens in use. But the FOV and DOF will be similar enough for it not to matter much - and the gradients/falloff/etc will probably look better on whichever camera is capturing at higher resolution, not the one with the bigger sensor, also assuming that the scene is well-lit since the smaller sensor will probably start to get noisy sooner. -
By eatstoomuchjam · Posted
Good, I'm glad we agree. Sorry if I misunderstood you to be arguing with me instead of agreeing with me. Good. I was mostly responding to the comment about "true" open gate. I just prefer to use the ratios for clarity. Yes. For shooting landscape/wildlife, I tend to prefer sharp modern glass, but for portraits/video, I like vintage stuff and for my vintage lenses that work on GF, sometimes the ragged outer edges of the image circle are really nice. I already said that Fraser's comment was based. Agreed that people can choose whatever hammer they want - and I've also said that I'd consider renting the Eterna for a project if it made sense. I'm not, in any way, saying that people shouldn't buy or use it. I'm more suggesting that it's overpriced and that I think most people who are looking in that price range are going to choose an FX9, V-Raptor XE, or UC 12K LF - and that with a somewhat bigger budget, the UC 17K 65 also becomes an option. Fuji would have a lot more sales (and still plenty of profit margin) if they dropped the Eterna at $9-11k. Still plenty of competition in that price range, but then they're undercutting the 41mm wide sensor of the raptor. Since the XE was announced almost in tandem, I am guessing that Fuji's pricing was determined before that announcement. Suspect it will drop a lot after a little while, but at $16k, Fuji also have to be careful not to anger early adopters by dropping the price too soon. Maybe 1 year. -
This right here… Don’t waste your time trying to have a normal debate. Instead of admitting you were right about exposing more lens character at the edges with MF sensors he moves the goal posts and still says you’re wrong because “not ALL FF lenses look good on MF” You obviously never said that or claimed that but it’s a tactic people use to find ways to “correct you” after making a valid point. eatstoomuchjam won’t ever admit the might not know something and always needs to maintain the belief that he’s right. Either self esteem issues or simple EGO. It’s the same tired argument with the “MF Look” or something being “Cinematic”. Terms many of us understand and use but these idiots want to argue on an internet forum about how these aren’t a thing. Yet they’re on a full frame camera talking about how “technically” you could achieve the same look with Super 16. I’ve given up with most of the characters here, big waste of time.
-
