All Activity

I've already said that "magical" is my own summarization of how people seem to describe their imagined "medium format look" since requests for any sort of functional definition seem to result in things that are demonstrably false or claims that the look is ineffable. So this special term which defies all definition, but is to be considered useful in discussion must be pure magic.

What are you talking about? As long as you can hit infinity focus with the extra rear extension of the camera adapter + distance to camera sensor, you can use any lens that you want. I've taken a bunch of panoramas with the GFX 100 mounted on the back of a speed graphic with an Aero Ektar. After stitching, one gets an image which is around 44x120mm (around 400 megapixels in theory, but the AE is definitely not resolving that from edge to edge). I could use a number of my other lenses too - the AE is about 178mm and is nearly the shortest lens that one can use on a speed graphic with a GFX->Graflok adapter (and good luck with a lot of movements) - but a 250mm or so lens would be almost ideal. With a Crown Graphic or any other LF camera without a built-in focal plane shutter, I'd imagine you could get down to 135mm or so and still be able to focus a GFX to infinity.

I've found that with just about any raw format, if I change the white balance in the raw developer tab in Resolve, it works just fine, but I'm going at most from like 5600k to 3200k. If you're going more than that, YMMV.

m43 or 43 is a cool format actually. ff camera bodies can be very small now, but the lenses are not so easy to scale down. m43 lenses are really cute. also, in the photo world, m43 especially Olympus cameras and lenses are used for birding or other wild life niches, which makes sense very much. 43 lenses are not so smaller than the ff or apsc lenses, but their iqs are great, especially Olympus shg lenses, very very beautiful iq.

*MFT (sorry for the dyslexia of my senseless word corrector : D)

Magical "medium format look" is different of medium format look... I'd rather call it larger sensor size look. I actually don't like anything closer of the definition of being categorized as format either. I believe that a small part of @eatstoomuchjam's beef against this manner of speaking is this. I haven't read anyone to call it magical anyway. That said, yet someone praising that route can still be in love for a platform like MTF is ;- )

Hell, I get excited about my camcorder (VX-980)- and that's even smaller than 1", AND it crops in on that too. The one thing it does that my GX800 and S5ii don't do is basically remove wrinkles on faces (without doing some beauty effect). For older people, they would much rather look at a "smoothed" effect. Although it gives a detailed image, it doesn't do it with such confidence as the GX800 and S5ii do. Also, if I hand my wife my S5ii, she's immediately overwhelmed (and I completely set it up for her). If I hand her the VS-980, she knows exactly what to do.

Oh I dunno, lots of places:

I agree! It's quite frustrating. Why can't people just accept each format for what it is?? Heck, if we saw a BMPCC 2.0 released which has an even smaller sensor than the GH7, I would still be excited about that. And we shouldn't be hating upon it specifically for the S16 sized sensor. Sure, we might complain about the lack of modern day affordable S16 cine lenses! That we could use on the BMPCC 2.0 But that's a totally different question to complaining about the S16 sensor size itself.

"Depends". If you're somewhat far away from the source, such as standing across a pool of water from a waterfall, then a directional mic could make sense. Your specific phrase of "the sounds of the forest around (behind) me" isn't what OP originally said. They said at the of a cliff, with the forest behind them. What they see in the distance, from the cliff edge, could be vastly more important to them, than the forest that's behind them and out of shot. Scratch audio might or might not be used in the final edit, sometimes it is. I kinda classify all on camera mounted mics, be it for "ambient" or whatever, as scratch mics. Got a get a mic off camera if you want better than scratch audio.

Just "something" to get audio into the camera. Yes, perhaps it might need a little strip of rubber if it is very lose, but probably not. No, they are supercardioid

Lol maybe I'm wrong "The Nikon Z6 III is rumored to have a stacked sensor (or partially stacked?) from Sony. That same sensor is expected to be used in the upcoming Sony a7S IV, rumored to be announced later this year. I was told that Nikon got a special and exclusive contract with Sony and only Nikon and Sony will use this specific sensor. Nikon had to buy a lot of them in order for Sony to agree on exclusivity. This explains the rumored high price of the Z6 III."

Normally, on a 16:9 screen - thin black bars top & bottom, on 16:10 screen - thicker bars top & bottom, on 21:9 screen - bars on left & right sides.

I guess eventually you may accumulate several m43 bodies, gh7, chunky yet robust pro body, something like em10 v, small body with interchangeable lens mount, even smaller m43 body with integrated f1.4 prime lens, like Sony rx1. probably each format will have these several layers.

If I'm outdoors standing on a cliff and want to capture the sounds of the forest around me, I definitely wouldn't go the supercardioid route. While not an identical scenario, when I was looking for mics for my pro-wrestling work, I went with stereo ones that could better pick up the spectators and arena atmosphere. My beloved supercardioid mic (the Azden SGM-250CX, a very underrated mic IMO) did a poor job of it, because it mostly picked up what was going on in the ring itself, which for me is actually a negative because it picked up the wrestlers talking to each other during the matches. Scratch mics are generally mics that pick up audio that isn't used in the final edit but only as a reference. It doesn't really apply to your question, I'm not sure why he brought it up. Yes, but you really don't need 32-bit for the uses you've described. Simply plugging a microphone into the GH7 and setting your levels will be more than enough for what you're talking about doing. I use 32-bit float audio because I deal with situations that are unpredictable, where audio will suddenly get way louder out of nowhere so I need to be able to bring it down in post. For what you're doing, you really won't have that problem. A simple stereo mic that you plug into your GH7 is more than enough, and will save you hundreds of dollars in buying an adapter you don't need to achieve what you're talking about.

I still can't believe its stacked, even at higher price. We'll see.

I had one of those deals in France. It was just too good to pass up in November of 2022. When you wait and buy, you usually don't end up losing that much when you sell it back. However, what happens when you love the look of the camera? With the GH7, it looks as though Panasonic has addressed EVERY problem there was with the GH6 with the exception of a chunky body, but many people like that too. The image is 98% of the image of the S5ii (with the right lens), but you have that screen which is so much better than the flip-out only screen on the S5ii- it's a major usability issue. Also, there's the high frame rates. I currently have the Olympus 17mm f/1.2, a prefect lens for that body... we'll see in November. I will probably dump the idea though if a M43 small camera comes along because I'm still a believer in keeping the format relatively small and that is not the GH7.

Yes, ProRes RAW is true RAW and can therefore be converted to CinemaDNG, while Blackmagic RAW is not true RAW and therefore cannot be converted to CinemaDNG.

R3, is that you?

B&H had a remarkable deal on Open Box GH6 starting last spring and it lasted until late this winter. I bought one last spring for $1299 and it was brand new. B&H does that some times... I guess they're clearing out inventory. Stupid me, I returned it. I was going to buy it again if it dropped to $1099. Over the holidays it went down to $1199 but I didn't bite. I really liked the CineLikeD and the monochrome profiles. VLOG was good, but I was trying to lean on the DR Boost which created some pretty harsh chroma noise in the shadows. At first, I hadn't noticed it until @BTM_Pixpointed it out to me and then I couldn't unsee it. I was so stoked about the DR Boost concept of the camera that I stupidly got annoyed with the cam as a whole. Now I am regretting it big time because although the GH7 is vastly better, I don't really want to pay the extra money for it. BTM also recommended the cheap Meike 25mm lens and it was a treat to use with that cam and I've always wanted to test out the Pan/Leica 15mm 1.7. If I can find a deal on a GH6, I may bite. Great camera otherwise! If not, I'll wait to see if the GH7 drops a little by the holidays.

lf twich is not available to the p/s lenses. also p/s lenses can only go to +-8mm, ,y mire ef to m43 p/s adapter can go to +-11mm, lf technical cameras can go much greater ranges. you talked about film look on lf mf, you are right in the photo world, a lot of choice. but Hollywood movies almost exclusively use Kodak vision 50d 250d, 200t 500t. so film look on movies is very defined. r1mx etc are tuned for this film look. I have looked adapting DSLR or mirrorless on lf before. the main thing is you have to have the latest rodenstock lenses, which is about $5000 for one. kind of defeating the purpose using lf with its ample vintage lenses.

Oh yeah, please no one listen to me if you're doing event shooting. All of my experience is shooting narrative with a script, rehearsals, etc. No, I wouldn't say that. If you use a color managed workflow, you can absolutely change the white balance in post when shooting ProRes Raw or HQ--within reason. If you seriously mess up your white balance (shot at 150 Kelvin and need it to be 6500) it might not go well. But shooting 3000 and changing to 6000 usually looks fine, as mentioned in another comment. Do some tests to see whether it works for you. Note that it depends on a color managed workflow, because WB changes should be performed in linear gamma. Creative picture profiles typically don't have accurate transformations so they are less useful for changing WB in post. Common log formats typically have LUTs (or, even better, mathematical transformations) to change between gamuts and gammas. Small WB changes might look okay without being in linear space, but the larger the change, the more you'll wish it was done accurately.

Thanks for the tips guys. I'm not getting the impression that I can adjust the white balance the way I'm used to with photography which is to take a separate photo with a white balance card for post. Is video a completely different beast where I can't fix the white balance after the fact when shooting in ProRes RAW or ProRes HQ 422? I would prefer the method that I had described in the OP as there are situations where there isn't time to get the white balance right before shooting. I figure the format that I'm shooting in should allow the white balance to be changed easily without harming image quality. I do agree that I should not use auto and instead set a preset that is as close to the actual white balance as possible and correct it in post. I just don't know if I can capture the equivalent of a RAW photo with the white balance card and then use that to get the white balance right in the video.

That sounds like a great idea, especially the Deity as it's nice and small. What do you mean by a scratch mic? I'm assuming it'll be compatible with the Panasonic adapter to record 32-bit audio? Will it fit inside the mic holder in the XLR2? Microphones seem to come I various sizes. I thought these kinds of mics were unidirectional. What makes it even decent for capturing ambient audio? Thank you.

I just had a look at my GH6 footage that I took before selling it and I must say it looked great! It has a super organic feel to it and loved the colors in just Standard profile. I also tried shooting in Vlog quite a bit, but Standard really did it for me. I took it to the French Alps last summer and it performed so well for photos and video. Sure, it didn't have PDAF, but when you learn to work around it, it's really no big deal. Honestly, I hope to have a similar opportunity with the GH7.