All Activity

No issue with the term, "Medium Format Look" but this...? This is just a dumb statement. Would love to know where you developed this ignorant and misguided opinion.

The tools we have at our disposal are quite frankly ridiculously good. The weakest link in the entire chain is the human one. By far.

Gentlemen, I think we can all agree that at least the FF aesthetic exists and it is all shallow DOF. Youtube told me so!

I forgot to mention that, back in the day, the cost of 1500 feet of reel would be roughly the equivalent of the cost of one Panasonic S9, not including the development. Also, to get the camera to be quiet enough for dialogue, you'd need a blimp only adding to the complexity. None of that on the S9! Good times.

when you do stitching with gfx or other digital cams, the sensor, especially the stitched gfx 100 mp sensors out resolve the vintage lf lenses by many miles, only the latest rodenstock lf lenses have enough resolution to match. but they are expensive.

We shall let go and let people have their opinions and estimations. Back to GH7, Prores Raw Cine 4K is slightly smaller than S16. Dedicated S16, 16 and 2/3 modes would be nice for the future, with full widths and various ratios. Footage so far looks fine regarding textures but otherwise rather dull.

I think it's more a case of misunderstanding instead... No one called it magical, someone has decided to coin the expression based on those "feelings" ; ) a few other readers read the interpretation of that but not what people exactly said on topic. At a certain point it is not what people have written but what has been written those people said : D One side doesn't like the name the other side has called to it. And claims any introduction a large sensor size may bring cannot be called a look many identify as a specific one of its own. All that could easily be possible to be refuted if under same variables nothing would be added to couple a larger sensor size when it is actually not. :- )

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.