Subforums
-
The EOSHD YouTube Channel (23,286 visits to this link)
17,289 topics in this forum
-
- 5.8k replies
- 1.8m views
-
- 9.1k replies
- 2.6m views
-
- 1.2k replies
- 461k views
-
- 0 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 700 replies
- 305.6k views
-
- 1.8k replies
- 752.4k views
-
- 73 replies
- 6.8k views
-
- 23 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 9 replies
- 214 views
-
- 0 replies
- 82 views
-
- 5 replies
- 514 views
-
- 314 replies
- 146.9k views
-
- 12 replies
- 5.6k views
-
- 51 replies
- 3.2k views
-
- 16 replies
- 757 views
-
- 30 replies
- 33.1k views
-
- 1 reply
- 173 views
-
- 8 replies
- 13.1k views
-
- 45 replies
- 12.3k views
-
- 13 replies
- 502 views
-
- 6 replies
- 2k views
-
- 2 replies
- 581 views
-
- 7 replies
- 399 views
-
- 7 replies
- 3k views
-
- 120 replies
- 63.3k views
-
- 560 replies
- 259.4k views
-
- 18 replies
- 2k views
-
- 2 replies
- 339 views
-
- 20 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 57 replies
- 18.8k views
-
- 60 replies
- 19.4k views
-
- 3 replies
- 780 views
-
- 126 replies
- 58.1k views
-
- 88 replies
- 58.3k views
-
- 71 replies
- 34.3k views
-
- 14 replies
- 956 views
-
- 19 replies
- 1.9k views
-
- 10 replies
- 853 views
-
- 79 replies
- 55.7k views
-
- 26 replies
- 19.8k views
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics17.3k
-
Total Posts351.8k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
I am sure i have read / heard the internals are the same, so i presume its just different housings. Considering the pricing i guess which ever is dearer to make, takes a small hit on the profit margins. which is probably the mission1 ils, but then its probably going to sell less, so they can probably live with that. It is a niche product i think as well. I see the mission 1ils as a stepping stone. Once you have had a gopro or other action camera and done different things with it or if you have some kind of cinema expectations, you can become aware of some its limitations. I think the ils will help with bridging that gap perhaps even dragging things up a level. I suspect that you might even need two gropros the mission one for traditional gopro look and the mission 1 ils for the stuff the mission 1 cant do. Be interesting to see how things pan out. We have all seen some amazing stuff done with gopros however that all comes from a core group of people with a gopro , maybe 10% perhaps alot less then 10% i'm not sure. I was inspired by chris benchetler chasing el nino a series on snow skiing enough to buy a gopro 9. I realize he had a whole crew and helicopters to help however the gopros used for the pov was amazing. The only issue not a lot of snow around here... I'll have to continue with my thoughts later, got to go to town otherwise people are going to starve...🙄 -
Thanks! The more I get into this, and the more I think about what my own associations might have been, the more I realise how variable things are. Obviously people talk about how there isn't a single "look" for film, or even for an individual stock, as it depended on where it was developed and even who was running the machine that day, but if we zoom out then the look of film for one person might have been Hollywood movies at their local Megaplex and for someone else it might have been indy films at a tiny theatre with a super-worn projector, and for someone else it might have been the 8mm or 16mm their parents shot and projected. Even the examples on YT are stunningly different. I've linked to these videos before, but it's just amazing to me how different they are... S16mm on Bolex at night (IIRC on 500T and potentially pushed a stop?) S16 on Laowa Nanomorphs (Vision3 50D): I can tell you, the 35mm projection of Goodfellas I saw was absolutely nowhere near how sharp and clean this is! That's very encouraging to hear. I've shared this in a number of places and mostly got no feedback so I was wondering if it was more a case of "if you have nothing good to say then don't say anything", or potentially "you can't be serious, this guy is so far from the mark it's a lost cause and there's no point in me saying anything!" I didn't think I was doing that badly, but with film emulation some people have rather exacting standards! Assuming I've reached the goal of it not being obviously fake, I'm thinking about what I would do to grade it further, and the thing that comes to mind is a split-tone and the colour. Unfortunately the split-tone in FLC (and IIRC the separate OFX plugin in Resolve) aren't that great, so once again it looks like I might have to go the custom route. I'm also keen to play with the Subtractive Sat, Richness, and Bleach Bypass sliders too as I think they might be the key to getting a range of interesting looks. Some people do film emulations and have the saturated areas super dense, whereas others don't emphasise it so much. I remember someone posting their film emulation power grade to the LGG forums and the saturated areas were so dark I thought they were playing a practical joke on the forums, but people gave serious replies and they responded seriously too, so I just shook my head and didn't post any feedback. -
Interesting that the Pro and ILS versions are the same price - that's not something I would have anticipated. Seems to me it's a pretty niche product. To justify it you'd have to really value something that it can do that other cameras can't (like shooting action stuff!), or you'd have to be looking at it as an all-rounder / your only camera and therefore not really want the things it can't do. I'm guessing that will be the case for enough people that the GoPro leadership and management bros will be able to look out at the world and see enough zealots who think it's totally rad dude and get the impression that they're doing the world a favour by just existing. There are a ton of options actually. The classic recommendation is the Laowa 7.5mm F2, which is rectilinear (not fisheye) and small/light and nice to use etc. It seems like you're not really that up with what is available for the MFT ecosystem - there's new lenses being released all the time. I recommend searching B&H, in the mirrorless catalog, and just select MFT as the mount and then explore what's there. B&H have 29 entries for prime MFT lenses under 9mm, including options at 3.5mm, 4mm, 6mm, 6.5mm, 7.5mm and 8mm. Some of these will be duplicates, but there's still a lot of options there. There's even a 4.5-10mm F2.8 zoom from Laowa in there, which appears to be a new product coming soon. B&H is the best option for new/current lenses: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/Mirrorless-Camera-Lenses/ci/17912?filters=fct_lens-mount_3442%3Amicro-four-thirds Then there's this page from Alik Griffin which is awesome and lists all MFT lenses ever made: https://alikgriffin.com/micro-43-lens-buying-guide/ No idea how many lenses are on that list, but it's about 35 pages long, so quite a few. Everyone who went FF think that MFT stopped suddenly in their absence! What would you define as "optimised for MFT"? Is it sharpness? or something else? Are there specific criteria that MFT has that differs from APSC sensors perhaps? If so, does it also differ between bodies or manufacturers? Like, I'm sure the sensor stack on an Olympus camera is different to the Panny ones? Genuinely curious, as loads of lenses are made for the new FF mirrorless mounts and seem to cover every one of them (E/Z/L/RF/M) but people don't seem to be talking about them not being "optimised for <insert mirrorless mount here>".
-
By eatstoomuchjam · Posted
That depends on which back-bone modded camera you get. Their modded Sony RX0 has a 1" sensor, passive MFT mount, and the exact same crop factor as the Mission 1 (if I remember right). My modded Insta360 One RS also has a 1" sensor and a passive MFT mount. It suffers from lack of any option for wired monitoring - so one either needs to focus on the tiny action camera screen or over wireless which can get laggy at the most inconvenient times. It's pretty great, though, for setting up to record with fixed focus (I shot the eclipse with it, for example). The GoPro has at least some option for wired monitoring so that'll be nice. It's possible, even, that one of the older 0.58x boosters made for the OG BMPCC would work (if you could find one). My Metabones 0.64x and 0.71x boosters work fine with the Insta360. Though it's sometimes more fun to use it with a 1.4x or 2x teleconverter. With a 1.4x, the Canon 100-400 becomes a 140-560 with an equivalent view of about 380-1500mm. That can be pretty fun in nature. I don't need to anticipate it. I've lived it and I know the limitations don't bother me too much. But mainly, the ergonomics of an action camera are poorly-suited to trying to hold the camera and manually focus. Mission 1 seems to be a little bigger than some others and it has a small protruded grip on the right side which could help a bit. But otherwise, one ends up with the right hand curved into a weird claw, trying to hold the camera steady while the left hand turns the focus ring. If the focus ring is stiff, it can look pretty funny. Mounting a handle to the camera can help and it feels a little more like carrying around an 8mm or 16mm film camera. Passive MFT mount means that indeed, autofocus won't work. It also means that aperture won't work on a majority of Panasonic/Olympus lenses - and in some cases, manual focus won't work on them since they're focus-by-wire. Removing Pany/Oly doesn't leave a ton of lenses that are optimized for M43. Veydra mini-primes were nice (and still are, can't remember who bought the Veydra brand)... There are some nice Voigtlanders that are MIcro 4/3 designs. But a lot of the other third-party makers just take their S35 or FF lenses, jam on a M43 mount, and call it good. For me, I'm much more interested in it as a platform to mount my C-mount and some D-mount lenses. Like I have a 13mm f/1.9 Yvar which could be fun - or a positively tiny 15mm f/2.8 Yvar. But like I said, I think a lot of people are going to find that a 1" sensor with a passive MFT mount sounds like fun, but will balk once they start using it and realizing, for example, that they actually need a monitor to effectively focus it. -
By eatstoomuchjam · Posted
I was going to comment on the gate weave. For me, it's a little much. If you told me it was shot on 70's-era 16mm, I probably wouldn't second guess you after watching it. I think that in some shots, the blur/lack of detail might go a little too far - like the shot of all the trees with orange leaves seems a little too blurry to me and looks a little closer to super 8 than to 16mm. Otherwise, great job!
-
