All Activity

In wonder if the Snapdragon X processor laptops will be good for productivity. Sone laptops makers including Microsoft seem to compare them with the M3 chip laptops. If they are truly that good, good riddance to enormously heavy laptops with terrible battery, and plug-in dependant performance.

Turn casual moments into unforgettable dates – choose the best casual dating site! Free connections, confidentiality guaranteed Authentic Maidens [URL=https://matchnow.life]Exemplary casual Dating[/URL]

in the still photo world, people care full frame much more. aps-c or aps-h are considered lower quality. i don't know why in the video world, people don't care about full frame that much. maybe the full frame has more rolling shutter in video mode, which is not important at all in still photography? personally, for still photography, i don't care about sensor size, i use nikon v1, pentax q, canon nikon pentax minolta olympus aps c, and 5d3 full frame, and kodak 645 pro 36x36. actually kodak 36x36 is the best, 5d3 is good, but not significantly better than others. nikon v1 1 inch sensor has better dr than many larger sensors. pentax q is good at iso100.

you are right. r5 has low priority in magic lantern community. on the other hand, if there is no magic lantern community, r5 would have no 8k raw in stock mode. even so, r5 raw is compressed. people tested it against the 5d3ml, the dark area of r5 raw was not that good.

I am not limited to 24p. If the camera has 60p, I will use it. If the cameras, like the magic lantern cameras, use 24p to maximize the resolution, I will use 24p. I don't limit myself. magic lantern is true lossless raw, so even at 24p, slow panning is usable. r5 canon raw is compressed, i think the compression ratio is 3 or 5. the dark area loses the details due to the compression.

Better image, DR, and usability for non sport situations

4k/UHD video = 8MP stills which I think is perfectly fine even on a large screen at normal viewing distance. One of my favourite photos (which other people have also liked) is only a 2MP JPEG, taken in 2015 with a Pana G6 while simultaneously recording FHD video. It's the light, shade and the sweep of the glinting rails that makes it work, not the resolution:

I find the R5 disappointing for DR in video mode, apparently the R5c has a little more. I think the reason none of Canon's mirrorless have Clog 2 is because they don't have the DR to make use of it Yes the C70 has RF mount but criminally doesn't have an EVF which for my way of shooting is too important a feature to leave out I would be happy with apsc too although Canon don't seem to be interested in creating any decent apsc lenses for RF

And now to those who still think this is not possible with this camera... ...let alone the skin tones possible to extract from this combo beauty there ; )

Without mention this: And yet another simple tool like this one: https://petapixel.com/2022/08/15/app-provides-a-cheap-way-to-remotely-focus-blackmagic-cameras/

For a dedicated video camera, the C70 also has great DR, internal ND, and decent audio - and it has RF mount. Put on Canon's focal reducer and your lenses will look almost exactly like they do on FF (though then it will be EF). I'll do a side-by-side with my R5. I never noticed raw video having a lot less DR than stills, but I never did any formal test. I mostly just thought it seemed pretty mediocre/blah for both. 😄 As time goes on, I care less and less about having full frame for video. I bought two dedicated cameras for video work in the last year and they were both RF mount with S35 sensors (though the K-X is more like APS-H than APS-C). I've liked everything I shot with both, except for self-inflicted technical problems (which were no fault of the cameras').

Yes. When starting I was afraid that 4k resolution would be too low and the workflow would be too cumbersome. Turns out the resolution is just fine for my purposes (watching content on smaller screens), has quite some headroom for zoom in. And although the framegrabbing workflow is a bit cumbersome, extracting the perfect frame in combination with 60p in 4k is awesome!

I thought you were all about 60p, 5diii is only any good at 24/25p Have been using the R5 recently and the DR in video is a long way below the DR in stills, I use Panasonic S5ii when DR is likely to be an issue especially in the shadows - there is something strange going on with the R5 and R6 in the shadows, as though it is cut off prematurely For an allrounder video camera with internal ND, audio etc there are some great deals on Canon C500ii at the moment, would get my vote although wish it was RF mount For a stills and video camera the Nikon Z9, Z8 looks hard to beat

there are very few cameras better than 5d3ml. Alexa ev or other Alexa members may have better dr, but only s35 sensor, and much larger body size. f35 has ccd, but s35, and cumbersome body too. they may be better than 5d3ml, but to me, it is more a give and take option instead of they are blowing 5d3ml out of water. r5 has 8k raw, but not uncompressed. so on for others. I think 5dml already reaches a plateau, even though other cams are better, but not so much. 7d2 gives 1080p 60p slow, which is the weakness of the 5d3. 7d2 1080p s35 may also have effective dual pixel af, which is very useful for tracking. anyways, I think ml cameras are the best deals in this world.

The R5 seems like it would be a really weird choice for the ML people since it already shoots 8k raw - and I haven't noticed the DR in raw on my R5 seeming all that different from the DR on still images. Whatever differences there are, IMO they wouldn't be enough for me to use ML raw and have to convert each clip before importing into Resolve vs just being able to directly open the Canon raw files directly. Better for ML to target bodies like the original R6 which didn't include any sort of raw video - or even better, flesh out support for the M series which is tiny, cheap on the used market due to being a dead system, and has some models that are at least 4k capable. At least, if I were on the project, I'd be more excited to tell people "Now you can shoot 2.5k raw (or 3.2k or whatever SD card slot can support) on a $400 M50" than "Now you can shoot otherer more differenter raw on your $2,300 camera that already has raw."

Awesome stuff! The fact that the profile is fully supported in colour management pipelines really unlocks the potential of the camera, and if you are interested in stills and video then being able to pull the right frame from the video means you can capture The Decisive Moment without having to be HCB.

Depending on what you typically shoot, it might be a significant difference just because the DR for each is quite low by modern standards. I've run into DR limitations frequently because I tend to shoot a lot at sunset and also in uncontrolled conditions in full daylight where you have to choose between what is in sun and what is in shade.

Also, to add onto the very good points of @eatstoomuchjam, you likely have a display problem too. Most modern computer devices (and potentially lots of smart TVs too??) run a 60Hz display. This will display 30p and 60p image streams perfectly with equal spacing between each new frame, but put a 24p video on there and you get jitter because the display isn't updating at a whole multiple of 24Hz. Displays at 120p or 240p will not have this problem, or if you drive the display with a 24Hz input and have the display in the 24Hz mode. This is the primary reason that I own a BM Ultrastudio Monitor 3G - it drives your reference monitor with the exact frame rate and resolution of the timeline, without any jitter. I've compared 24p vs 30p vs 60p videos on a 60p display as well as through the Ultrastudio and there's a big difference - I prefer the 24p in both scenarios because it doesn't look so artificially smooth as 30p and 60p, but depending on what you value in an image and how you perceive motion, the jitter might tip the balance for you. Unless you've got a dedicated output driving the monitor in the timeline frame rate, you really can't say anything at all about each frame rate because you're not seeing them properly.

I'd be glad to add something with my recently-acquired Komodo-X or my C70, but there's no way I'm ever going to refer to my camera as a "beast." I shot a 48hfp thing with the K-X this last weekend and I definitely want to have more excuses to shoot with it and get comfortable before my next planned shoot in June.

You should really post examples of what you mean. I don't think I've noticed a decent IPB codec (like most modern H265) look that much different from an all-i codec for what I'd think of as slow panning. I have noticed differences between cameras with higher and lower RS, even when doing what I'd think of as slow panning, but it's not out of the question that some of that was entirely in my head. Anyway, using vague and heavily subjective terms like "slow" and "looks jumpy" is going to just result in a bunch of people arguing without anybody even really being sure what the other one is arguing about.

5d3ml if operates in full sensor mode is a vista vision cam, eos m is at most a s35 cam. 5d3ml certainly is better in terms of resolution and dr.

why is this one better than go pro?

to correct this. if only operates in 1080p full sensor s35 modes, actually lcd is high res high fps realtime. the preview issues are in the high res modes.

even the latest fx9/fx6/fx3 will have issues in slow panning if they are not operated in raw modes, how can other lesser cams survive the 24p yet the thin codecs? I have tested with nano flash 280 mbps iframe, on f3 at 24p, still the slow panning looks jumpy, although much better than the stock codec. at 30 p / 59.94 i sdi output on c300 og, the nanoflash 280 mbps iframe really is smooth. so that 6 frames really matter, even when using 280 mbps iframe, a codec is similar to or higher bit rate than the prores raw. how can thin codecs of 24p provide "filmic panning"? oh, does filmic really mean fuzzy or dizzy? lol.

yep, that was me. long time GM1 and GX85 user. I think you might have meant this video: good times.