All Activity

I've played with diffusion before and not really liked it, but diffusion is a difficult topic because (the way I see it) it has four broad effects depending on the size of the diffusion. The largest size of diffusion spreads light across the whole frame, reducing contrast. I'm not really a fan of this one. The smallest size spreads light into neighbouring pixels and essentially is the same as blurring the image. The medium-large size spreads light between objects in the frame, creating halos and a strange appearance I'm not fond of. The medium-small size spreads light far enough that it softens texture in the image. This is why all the Hollywood actresses wanted diffusion because it hid any skin imperfections. Apparently Cooke lenses all have this kind of diffusion in them but only for the frequencies of light around skin-tones - potentially a key part of the "Cooke Look". Going back to your previous comment: This has stuck in my head and after re-watching the Gawx videos I suspect this might be contributing to it. I might have to do some investigation on this. Also, now I have the anamorphic adapter and my new wide angle adapter, I'll step things up in terms of making things look a lot dirtier. Anything in particular you think I should test? (apart from having people in the image, which I think will end up being me).

Yeah, I suspect it's one of those things that drives one person up the wall and most others don't see or don't care. There's a ton of them that other people talk about that I can't see. Which movie? I must admit I haven't seen any of the Wong Kar-wai films, but definitely should. I remember seeing some moving-camera wide-angle footage from a high-end lens announcement once and despite the equipment all being top-tier it still looked video-ish to me. My latest film is a bit pushed, but not nearly to that extent. In terms of pushing the grade, I completely agree and feel like having a strong look (and especially a strong tint across the whole luma range) might be part of the aesthetic I'm trying to capture. Not to say that you can't get it without a tint, but I think it might help.

I'll have a look but the widest non-MFT I think I have is probably 28mm. BUT, if you mean no electronic contacts (which means the camera doesn't know the lens and wouldn't compensate for it?) then I have 7.5mm F2, 8mm F4, 15mm F8, 17mm F1.4, 17.5mm F0.95. Happy to do some quick tests - let me know what you want to see 🙂

I think that the elephant in the room at this point, at least in the US, is that camera vendors were already overcharging for the newest models - and now tariffs are pushing them to the point of just plain unaffordable. Fuji's price increases hit today - the GFX 100 II went from $7,500 to $8,300. GFX 100RF just went from $4,900 to $5,400 - making it now more expensive than the RX100 III, though still not by a lot. It seems likely that a bunch of manufacturers will boost prices all over the world to maintain some consistency and to force the rest of the world to at least partially finance the US tariffs (which is probably one of the reasons that the Sony is so expensive everywhere). If so, I wouldn't be surprised if that's a thing that reduces camera system changes and greatly decreases new camera purchases... also since the US economy is already starting to show signs of distress due to poor management from the current administration.

I’m not sure what Sony are thinking lately after the FX2 and now this, but neither have been very well received. We still seem to be in an era where camera companies are only partially listening…and then sticking two fingers up at their customers. They will probably turn it all around in a few months with their next couple of launches and all those who hopped over to Nikon or Lumix recently, will lurch back to Sony. Or maybe in our community we only see things from our relatively small bubble and the greater consumer mass couldn’t care less?

Here at a camera store in Berlin we have the 3 musketeers. 2012 vintage RX1R OG, the one without the AA filter. It's very nice and I can't understand why it only goes for $900 used. Because it's got a much better lens than the Leica Q. No red dot though. RX1R II, the one with the tilt screen, phase-detect AF and pop-up EVF. It also shoots 120p, albeit no 4K. It also has a further innovation - the AA filter can be switched on and off. This was Sony when they felt they needed to catch up with Canon and Nikon by really pushing the boat out. 2014-2015 vintage Sony. The $2000 mint condition used RX1R II is reasonably rare but when you do find one, it's still cheaper than the Leica Q OG and closer to the Leica Q2 in terms of image quality. The pop-up EVF is mechanically a thing of beauty and offers a big field of view. Although without a rubberised eye cup, it isn't the most ergonomic or comfortable. So to the new one, the one with the 10 year gap. Sony have made sure to price it so that nobody buys one, which is good because they want you all to buy E mount lenses. Just to summarise the street prices: RX1R: $800-900 used RX1R II: $2k used RX1R III: $5100 / 4900 euro The lens is identical to the previous cameras. Which is fine to be honest, but I had more issues with the AF in macro mode on the RX1R III vs II. Weird. I also dislike the finish and build quality, doesn't feel as premium. It feels a bit like the A7CR. Not great and nowhere near a Leica and the RX1R II also feels more premium. I do prefer the buttons though on the new camera, they are raised for a more tactile feel. Gone is the pop-up EVF, in place of it a smaller standard one. The resolution of the live-view feed is better, but the overall optic is worse and more pokey. Gone is the articulated screen. Which is a really weird one. In comes a fatter battery - very welcome. 4K is there with no crop in 24p/25p... However, there's no IBIS or even OIS, which is a downer. The AEL button has changed to an AF-ON... Again a welcome change, because the first two models had no back-button AF at all. Well done Sony. So if you're looking for a full frame compact, the first two models are a steal. I got the RX1R II again. I regretted selling it the first time out!

I mean he’s pretty good at framing. Nothing super spectacular here imo I mean probably because it’s a very watered down imitation of one of the most stylish movies ever and ultra wide handheld is instantly a super engaging look when done correctly. when’s the last time you dared to grade one of your videos that green or that ‘unnatural’? Good looking moving images are the result of not just having intention behind as much as possible, but also trying to stick to certain daring decisions (that might fuck you over) imo.

Hey Everyone, I have some cool new ground textures to share with you. They're 100% free to use with attribution, just like my thousands of other textures, music tracks and sounds. You'll find them on my TXR - GROUND - Seamless page. https://soundimage.org/txr-ground-seamless/ Speaking of music...don't forget to check this out: OGG GAME MUSIC MEGA PACK - OVER 1400 TRACKS (AND GROWING) https://soundimage.gumroad.com/l/ylyre My Mega Pack contains over 1400 music tracks (and growing!) in higher-quality Ogg format. Great for video games, films, podcasts and more. This is a bundle of my genre music packs: Fantasy | Sci-Fi | Funny/Quirky/Weird | Puzzle | Chiptunes | Action | Dark / Ominous | Horror / Surreal | Misc These tracks sound almost as good as my original WAV recordings, but are much smaller in file size. Perfect for video games. Ogg tracks also loop better in game engines than Mp3 format. A MUSIC PACK THAT GROWS WITH YOU I add new music all the time and send users updates so you can download my newest tracks as I release them. Enjoy...and as always, please stay safe and keep being creative! 🙂

Have you got a non native MFT lens at that 14-24mm range that you could have a quick test with as the taking lens ? Trying to see the wood from the trees regarding the extent of the (expected) barrel distortion of the adapter without the camera's built in correction of the native lenses adding or subtracting from the party.

Having bought the Sigma for my S9 (largely because of your enthusiasm for it 🙂) I have to 100% agree - it's a perfect companion to the S9 in size and weight, with nice smooth zoom and focus rings. As I normally shoot video in 4k50p which forces an APS-C crop anyway, it being an APS-C lens is actually a plus for me as it forces APS-C for everything so I don't have to deal with changes in viewing angle between stills and video. The 12MP APS-C stills are OK for my purposes, and I have the compact FF 18-40 f4.5-6.3 if I really feel the need for 24MP stills. So I tend to regard my S9 as an APS-C camera with a bonus FF stills mode 🙂. The adaptor is only doing what it's supposed to do with an APS-C lens on the front, same as using a native L-mount APS-C lens (e.g. the Sigma 18-50 f2.8).

Have you considered the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 even though it is a crop lens, or do you need the full frame? it’s an exceptional tiny zoom with a 27-75 FF equivalent range and I’m still considering whether when I pick up my second S1Rii if I don’t sell the S9, would this work for me in any viable way, or would I just be trying to keep hold of it?!

Lok Cheung's input (the other part by another usual suspect is here) on 360º acquisiton for traditional use -- my bet, actually: That London ride is exactly where I think the sensor size factor (the same for Osmo Pocket 3) makes all the difference (coupled to 10-bit realm, obviously, just not exactly all the way long like in that example but counts more than the usual reviewers tell)... No less. My shot too :- )

Camera is in my hands. Feels a lot more premium with the cage. Good way to beef it up as an a-cam without feeling like a huge rig. My weird plan was to rock the sigma 18-35…i already own it and it covers 24-35mm roughly on full frame. But the darn viltrox EF to l mount adapter, while great, forces the camera into an apsc crop no matter what I do. Thinking of selling it and snagging a used canon 16-35 2.8 l or 24-70 l EF.

The most reputable 360º tech/gear reviewer out there or alike : ) here is his entry:

Absolutely - it's a fantastic price for just the body and I'm envious that you found it! If it were me, I'd still at least make a request that they give a partial refund since the item wasn't as-described and then I'd just take whatever they suggest, whether it's $20 or whatever. It never hurts to have an extra $20.

Put a lady's stocking on the mount of the lens to soften the image, maybe?

Might be worth a shot though what I land is still an amazing deal for just the body. Might give it a go though.

This guy knows how to sell the 'thing'... I bite : ) Sold. Just posted less than a single hour ago. 8K50p confirmed. Simply WOW. No match.

Can you contact the seller and ask for a partial refund since it's missing the lens? Seems worth a shot, at least!

I used it for approx 90% of everything I shot in these last 3 jobs with just the 50mm f1.8 and my own baked in LUT. The latter still needs a few tweaks, but that is a work in progress... https://firehorsephotographyfrance.com/journal

This is a fascinating video because to me, the whiplash shots looked like cinema and the rest of the shots looked like video. High-quality video for sure, with interesting things happening, but it had a video look to it. It's becoming obvious to me that I'm chasing something that others either aren't seeing or don't really care about that much. I can absolutely see the difference between my random plant shots and the Gawx videos I posted... My random plant shots without the blurring or film emulation applied look like video, the same footage with the film emulation applied look like film (but not like cinema), and the Gawx videos I posted look like cinema (which happens to also look like film). Perhaps the most interesting thing about that comparison is that making things look like film (at least to me - I'm likely to be pretty easily fooled into thinking something looks like real film) doesn't make them look like cinema. I don't think it's about composition or camera movement either, because the video above (The Pursuit of Art) have that and still look like video to me. I don't think it's about careful lighting, because Gawx managed to get the look on external scenes in full sun in the middle of the day. His other videos are very carefully lit, but if this was required then he wouldn't be able to do it with the Museum one. I don't think it's the camera, because as you say, Gawx did it with two different cameras, and one was a phone - hardly the pinnacle of equipment for getting a cinematic result! Of course, all the above things matter. Pretending they don't matter is silly, but that video is super-interesting because it proves that they're not enough. Also, the Whiplash footage shows that it's not anything to do with the pipeline either, because the Whiplash footage went through the entire same editing and export and upload processes. I am simultaneously heartened that Gawx could do it with a phone, outside on a sunny day, but also disheartened because I'm running out of things to test! I found a few interviews with Gawx that I'll try and watch in the hopes he gives some kind of insight into it. Perhaps the best way I can describe it is that cinema looks larger than life, and video doesn't. Watching the above started with footage that made me think some camera bros were on a beach with an A7S3 and then pulled out the drone, then the Whiplash footage made me feel like I was in a cinema looking up at a huge screen with a box of popcorn on my lap and the speakers shaking the room, and then suddenly I was back to looking at Gap Year footage with some FF bros again. It's like the scale of the image just collapses.

I think this S9 will fit my needs perfectly. Electronic shutter doesn’t bother me, as I do video 99.99% of the time. I still have my old Nikon Z6 I can whip out for the very few times I get asked to do photo work.

Liquidation auction are overstock, b-stock, Amazon returns etc so there’s always a chance for something to just be missing lol.

Typical liquidation auction weirdness, the S9 body is in great shape other than a small scuff on the lcd, but the 20-60mm lens is entirely missing from the packaging lol…still a good deal as is still around $400 less than the body only S9s sometimes sell for on eBay. My EF lens adapter comes tomorrow then I can do some proper tests and first impressions. Will share those.