Subforums
-
The EOSHD YouTube Channel (23,683 visits to this link)
17,307 topics in this forum
-
- 706 replies
- 320.7k views
-
- 1.2k replies
- 489.6k views
-
- 5.8k replies
- 1.9m views
-
- 9.1k replies
- 2.8m views
-
- 0 replies
- 2k views
-
- 1.8k replies
- 782.3k views
-
- 473 replies
- 158.6k views
-
- 53 replies
- 5.5k views
-
- 0 replies
- 5 views
-
- 8 replies
- 689 views
-
- 5 replies
- 641 views
-
- 23 replies
- 2k views
-
Internal 32-bit float stereo paired with lossless 120mm reach from a 20mm lens — all inside a genuinely pocket-sized 10-bit 1-inch sensor gimbal camera? 1 2 3 4
- 68 replies
- 5.3k views
-
- 568 replies
- 269k views
-
- 1 reply
- 88 views
-
- 62 replies
- 21.8k views
-
- 16 replies
- 919 views
-
- 25 replies
- 2k views
-
- 64 replies
- 8.3k views
-
- 11 replies
- 652 views
-
- 30 replies
- 2.4k views
-
- 7 replies
- 849 views
-
- 108 replies
- 80.3k views
-
- 12 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 42 replies
- 11.5k views
-
- 31 replies
- 7.4k views
-
- 4 replies
- 959 views
-
- 129 replies
- 67k views
-
- 83 replies
- 11.6k views
-
- 12 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 6 replies
- 3.8k views
-
- 19 replies
- 13.7k views
-
- 24 replies
- 2.6k views
-
- 9 replies
- 1.9k views
-
- 11 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 1 reply
- 1.2k views
-
- 14 replies
- 9.5k views
-
- 14 replies
- 8.7k views
-
- 2 replies
- 928 views
-
- 0 replies
- 1.4k views
-
Popular Contributors
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics17.3k
-
Total Posts352.2k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
By Ilkka Nissila · Posted
If you can afford the cards and temporary space on an internal drive, you could shoot in R3D NE in camera and then after transferring the files to the computer, convert it to log h.265 and delete the original files. By doing this you can get high-quality h.265 and avoid the long-term accumulation of storage otherwise needed for the raw files, not much different from having a high-quality h.265 codec in the camera, apart from the fact that you would need large memory cards and some space on the computer's internal drives for this step. I'm not trying to make an excuse for Nikon for the h.265 but suggesting a workaround who have this camera for one reason or another, and need a practical workflow. -
The funny thing is that 8-bit cDNG on the FP would actually make the challenge more interesting, not less : ) Sigma really does offer CinemaDNG internally in 8, 10 and 12-bit, so “8-bit RAW” is not an oxymoron here. The FP even uses a different dual-base ISO behaviour for 8/10-bit CinemaDNG than for 12-bit RAW. Which could make a nice test in itself: how much of what we normally attribute to “8-bit limitations” comes from bit depth, and how much comes from the usual baked codec / chroma / processing pipeline? -
Good morning, everyone! I spent two days on nearby Thassos, where I visited the Trypiti Cave for the first time. It’s an amazing natural spot nestled among the rocks, with seawater forming a small, "hidden" beach behind them. Here is the video covering the two-day trip. -
By filmmakereu · Posted
I think the gap isn't another database of specifications. We already have plenty of those, and the old DPReview reviews are still remarkably useful for understanding what a camera was when it launched. What seems to be missing is a "today" layer. How easy is it to live with in 2026? Are batteries and accessories still readily available? How well does the codec fit modern editing workflows? Are there reliability issues that only became apparent over time? What does the current used price actually buy compared to newer alternatives? I'd also like to see a stronger filmmaking angle rather than just image quality. Some older cameras still have a rendering or shooting experience that makes them genuinely enjoyable, even if they're objectively behind in dynamic range or autofocus. Most launch reviews answered, "Is this a good camera today?" The more interesting question now is, "Who is this camera still a great tool for?" -
Compressed RAW is probably the part I'd focus on before adding more film simulations. For the dropped frames, a small diagnostics page could be useful: sensor timestamp delta, queue depth, compression time per frame, sustained write MB/s and dropped-frame count. That should make it much easier to see whether the bottleneck is capture, compression or storage. I'd also preserve per-frame black/white levels and WB/colour-matrix metadata where the device exposes them. Especially useful if you want the RAW processing and calibration to remain consistent across ISO changes. Interesting project.
-
