All Activity

Anyone here has one of those for sale it basically replaced from iso plastic ring and makes isco focus closer

I had only original S5 before the S5II, but the various 8k and 4k H.264 4:2:2, H.265 4:2:0 and Proress samples from S1RII looked clearly not that over-sharpened during the short period I played with them in Resolve. They were much closer to S5, colors were kind of richer, and in low light shots it looked cleaner and good. I was seriously tempted to switch back, but did not want to get rid of my new Nikon lenses. I was also put off by the various crop modes and over heating. Now, with Z6III, ZR and 4 Nikon lenses it would need S2H with good EVF, 4” screen and H.265 IQ comparable to R3D NE for me to switch back. Proress Raw HQ file sizes are even bigger than what R3D NE has, and raw controls worse in Resolve, so that is not an option for me.

I'm of a more ramshackle mentality, but even my loosey-goosey philosophies hit a limit. fyi, this particular doc was about people that are trying to help conserve raptor migration through SoCal. So, lots of bird shots. Which we don't really do, nor have done. The whole thing became kind of a production experiment. We were only answering to ourselves so we could take risks like that. The scope of the project kept changing, but the finances never did. There was very little money in our pockets, and what we did have we needed to save for travel. And being a seriously-non-affluent-filmmaker, it basically came down to a make-do-as-we-can process. Our personal finances, as well as the various situations of the shoot, were all over the place. We were borrowing/renting lenses and gear in a very haphazard way. Sometimes it worked. Mostly it did not. Meanwhile, the stuff we had in our own collection was inferior. For instance we used a POS Vintage Photax 500mm w/2x extender for an entire season to get a lot of the BIF shots. That was an insanely unfortunate thing to do, but it's what we could afford to have on hand. The biggest bitch was not having a real tripod. We truly wished we had friends/colleagues that could have let us use a pro Sacthler or Miller. More than willing to carry some sort of hefty rig into the wild if it would've allowed smooth shots when filming at a +2000mm FF equiv. That FOV reach is f'in hard to control. As a side note, it was pretty wild running around with birders carrying equipment that was so expensive and professional while us "filmmakers" were often using, basically, consumer toys to grab video. At the end of the day, the images are passable by a certain standard, but when you pixel peep you can tell it's all held together with spit, bubblegum, hopes, and prayers. "f8 and be there" was the mantra we had to talk ourselves into and accept. "The best camera is the one you got." ...That sort of thing.

Photo and video. So many so-called reviews are really just biased opinion pieces that are all about getting views, sponsorship and ad money, rather than authentic unbiased guides, but that is just how it is. I think anything around that pixel count will deliver similar results whether it be Nikon, Canon, Sony or Lumix and never tried a 100mp medium format Fuji or Hassie and it would be quite interesting to shoot one or the other back to back. On-line, unless told or pixel peeped to a high magnitude, I doubt anyone could tell and for me personally, there is a sweet spot of professional pride in my craft as it were and for stills that is FF and for video FF or APSC and possibly even 4/3…

Yes, but again it's all about intent. If the ppl making the movie elected a particular piece of gear bc that was their intention it's a good sign they know what they are doing. Most artists are really picky about their instruments and cinema is no different. Why? Bc the creative intent changes with the instrument selected to convey the idea. Great photographers know this and have to think clearly what will be sacrificed by changing their usual gear for any given task. The Arri trope is all about the industry. Ppl making bad movies just mark a bunch of high-end gear bc it will make it look like every other movie out there from the last 15 years.

I couldn't agree more, Most of my stills now are on the S1R2 and the files are fantastic. Only step up for me would be a GFX100II. I don't think any of the typical reviews can address this, I think you have to shoot and work on files for a few months to get a good feel for what you can do (and can't do) with them.

This video from @Tito Ferradans has some info on it, but he doesn't show everything needed so you might need to watch a bunch of YT videos and search to see if other people have shared how they do it.

Yes, my OCD would not be able to cope with that. I don't like even having 2 different cameras within the same brand, never mind other brands... I can just about get my head around having and mixing in drone footage, but that is because the alternative is not realistic and as a fan of minimalism (well, as minimalist as I can be without compromising any major element), I'm all in on one system now.

That is the sum of it. Enthusiast weighing up A vs B vs C vs what they already have, yes, even 500 is a BIG difference. Business user however, turning over 50k+ PA, it's still 500, but 1% of gross turnover and 50k is a very small business. And that is based on 1 year so if you can use something for 3+ years on say a 100k turnover, it's a difference of near zero consequence. 3k camera on 3 years at 100k = 1%. The difference being if it's a tool that makes you money and if that tool can also save you time, or improve your output in some way such as maybe it's more flexible such as open gate, or any other factor that works for you, then it becomes an asset. A depreciating asset (as all this stuff is), but the cost is not that big a consideration. Maybe but maybe not because it would need to have 'more' really (as you suggested), so it would have been wrong to badge it IMO as an S2H, even though, based on current evidence at least, it may very well be the replacement for the S1H that we have got. I always thought they would go a 2 model route and said so on this forum, but I thought they were going to make the S1RII (should have been badged S2R) and an S2H, the S2R with the Leica SL3/Sony A7RV sensor and then the more video-centric S2H. Instead we got what we got and for me, the pick of them is the S2R S1RII, and though it's a good body, would rather have seen something more innovative such as the ZR style body with 4" screen but articulating like that of the S2R S1RII. If...and it's a massive if, they do come out with a replacement for the S1H, I think if they go for this body style with that kind of rear screen, it would be a monster hit for Lumix.

IMHO the biggest issues with the S1ii is that it wasn't badged as an S1Hii, with Netflix Approval, an added top control panel, and more unique design features (moving or multi angle EVF, 4inch LCD etc). It seems everything about it is superior to the S1H, including dynamic range, exposure latitude (?), rolling shutter, weight etc.

I sympathise deeply - well done for getting through it. I shot a number of trips with a nice camera + smartphone + action camera, and only in the last few months did I shoot my first trip where every camera had colour management support. Matching footage from multiple older/budget cameras that don't have log profiles and colour management support is perhaps one of the hardest challenges in colour grading. Not only are the colours and gammas a challenge, but matching sharpness and NR and compression artefacts are also things that can make clips stand-out from each other. I've lost count of the number of times I spot a 1-2s clip from an action camera spliced into a high-end production based solely on how much sharper it is than the rest of the footage, which could all be avoided with a simple low-strength small-radius blur to take the edge off. Obviously ultra-low-budget docos are often subject to using whatever cameras are available at the time, and docos often need to use more rugged cameras like action cameras etc to survive different conditions, not to mention dealing with footage from other sources. To me, a camera has to be pretty bad or pretty ill-suited to make it worthwhile to break consistency with the other material already shot. As much as you can, pick a camera, pick a few lenses (or just one lens), do your due diligence to get familiar with them, and then just get on with it. It's only when you can see past the camera and the lens and the filters that you'll be able to see what you're pointing the camera at.

Having just bought an S1ii I can agree that the price is high for most people. In my case I got it with the 24-60 2.8 for 3800 which is about 300-400€ less than buying both separately. With the 3 jobs I had over the last 3 days I’ve paid it off (once I sell one of my S5iis). So it’s all relative, if it’s a tool that makes money (whilst making my life easier in my case), then maybe it’s good value?

🤷‍♂️ but as with the OG S1R and it’s 47mp sensor (Tower Jazz was the speculation at the time?), that was unique to the brand, the 44mp S1RII sensor is Panasonic’s own apparently and totally unique as far as I am aware? IMO, it has that mojo that the S1R had in that there is something unquantifiably special about it. I think most reviews/reviewers go mainly off the spec sheet and very very few have proper Panasonic full-frame history/experience but those that actually go and shoot the thing properly, know. I’ve shot 8 weddings spread over 24 days, stills and video with it now and can see immediately when I drop the files on a timeline, how much better they are than those of the S5II/S9. And this is no “because I have one” fanboy hallucination, because I have near zero brand loyalty and if I think something else will do a better job, I owe no company or brand anything. Plus have no YouTube channel, have ever received a free piece of kit or anything, so simply user feedback opinion. Define ‘better’. It’s one of those things that is not any single thing but the sum of several smaller things… As above somewhere or perhaps the other Lumix thread, ‘less muddy’, not that the material coming out of the S5II/S9 is muddy, but using words, it’s the best I can do. I’d throw up some sample footage myself for download except I only shoot log with the baked in Phantom conversion LUT for workflow purposes but the comparison with S5II/S9 is the same because that is what I have done with those cameras since I had them. The pricing was a bit too high straight out of the gate, but I picked mine up for £2700 which was acceptable compared with any kind of brand swap which I looked at which would have been anything from 5-10k based on my needs. So did I remain ‘brand loyal’ purely on cost then? Nope; cost + familiarity/continuity + capability, but starting afresh today, I’d go Nikon with adapter E Mount glass.

Here’s a quick review.

Hey Everyone, I've uploaded some brand new seamless concrete textures onto my site...you find them here: CONCRETE (Tile-able) https://soundimage.org/txr-concrete-pavement-seamless/ As always, they're 100% free to use with attribution, just like my thousands of other images, music tracks and sounds. NEED SOME CUSTOM TEXTURES? I've been creating custom music for a while now...mostly for indie video game developers...but I thought it might be fun to try creating custom textures. If anyone needs some help, feel free to contact me! 🙂 In the meantime, stay safe and keep creating!

I'm talking about in cinema, there's no use case for it. Sports yes.

Did they finally revert to the original S1 image, and drop the over-sharpening?

I had to squint very hard to see the review amongst the advertorial at DPReview. Nice firmware updates and nice specs. Pity about the stuff Panasonic can do nothing about... - L-mount is a not such a popular mount compared to Sony E, Canon RF, Nikon Z and Fuji X / GFX, despite having been released 2nd after Sony - The price is wrong, it should be at the Z6 III level - The competition is really fierce and has a very big loyal user base eager for more - A7 V will outsell the S1 II massively and the EOS R6 Mark III specs are really competitive with not a cripple hammer in sight, Nikon with REDcode, Fuji with the best sensors - All the others have moved into Panasonic's video niche in a big way, so now Panasonic must stand apart without their biggest unique selling point (GH4 days are long gone) I don't wish ill to Panasonic but they have majorly fucked things up in the camera market and all those great specs and generous firmware updates won't save them It's all the marketing and planning team's fault, not the engineers. For the loyal ones, enjoy the S1 II and S1R II, they're great cameras even if they won't sell very many.

Dpreview released their S1II review today, holding off on a gold rating solely due to the camera's price... Andrew isn't alone in his criticism of Panasonic. I was expecting to see the price come down a bit already. If the firmware truly resolved the overheating issues the camera was having, I think the only issue remaining is the poor H264/H265 output of the camera I've been reading about. And the lack of clarity on when / what the S1HII will be... Still, its becoming a more compelling package.

It's been done. The water damaged stuff requires a whole next level of repair skill though.

Director Lav Diaz has shot films on the GH3, GH5 and GH5s before. Occasionally when he has more funding or is chasing a particular aesthetic he works with 16mm film or a pro digital cinema camera. I had assumed this was one of those times, based on the international star and the generally stunning image. It's a wonderful and thought provoking film with some of the most memorable cinematic imagery of the year. The tech was more than capable in the right hands.

I think it CAN be the most important choice for SOME films, but for MOST films, I genuinely think it matters less now than ever before. I'm not going to say that the ARRI Alexis 35 doesn't have a place and that everything can just be shot on a GH7 or FX3, because that's not true at all either. But how many of them could have been shot on something else and not been any worse for the wear? One of my favorite films of the year is "The Long Walk." It's shot on the ARRI Alexa 35 with Panavision anamorphics (just like the much uglier "Terrifier 3" I mentioned in a previous post!) and looks very good. But if you had switched that ARRI Alexa out for something else, I don't think it'd have had any impact on the film because the acting and story was that good and was what stood out the most about the film. That's not a reason to NOT to film with an ARRI, but it's an example of how less important it is today than ever before. "28 Years Later" is one of the highest grossing films of the year and was shot on an iPhone. Can anyone honestly say that it would've been more successful, financially or artistically, if it'd been shot on an ARRI? Probably not. Conversely, you can't really say that "The Conjuring: Last Rites" would have been less successful if it had been shot on something other than an ARRI, say a PYXIS or lower end Sony.

Hey Andrew, how about this one? Would be quite the deal if it could be fixed. Camera is about an hour from me so I am tempted to experiment. Otherwise an expensive paperweight. Salt water damage is probably up there with one of the worst things to do dona camera.

I'd lime to know why the GH7 was used for this particular movie/documentary. Practical reasons regarding size? Cost? Absolute technical image quality? We just don't know. I also think camera choice is the most important reason any creator is going to make, aside from script. If the piece doesn't look right no one will watch it, even if it's Citizen Kane Part Deux. That's why some Hollywood creative trios are almost set in stone: director-writer-photographer. If I go to an IMAX I expect to see something spectacular. If I go to the cinema for an indie doc, my expectation changes. If I turn on my TV and watch channel 6 I pretty much expect soap opera visuals.

Finally someone used trees as resolution test chart instead of his own face