Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 03/22/2024 in all areas

  1. PS... order placed with cvp so we'll see how it works out!
    4 points
  2. All good points, but perhaps most significantly, it has a cooling fan..... in something approaching the size of an action camera. Sony, etc, have no excuses.
    3 points
  3. TomTheDP

    Nikon buys Red?

    True latitude tests are the best indicator. With firmware 3.0 the Z9/Z8 does peform incredibly well and like you said bests the Venice 2 which is crazy. The Venice 2 captures 16 bit linear RAW which I would imagine gives you a much beefier file to work with. That said 8.2k 12 bit RAW with that kind of latitude is more than enough for any application. One of the biggest draws of the Z8/Z9 for me is the NRAW, Prores RAW, Prores, and H265 options all in camera. Pretty much can fit to any workflow in any NLE without needing to transcode. If they actually put REDraw that would be awesome for possible compression options. No Opengate square aspect ratio options for anamorphic but hey you can't get everything. I appreciate Nikon's new move of not holding back. Feels like Lumix until recently where they seem to put out the same thing over and over again.
    3 points
  4. I took my GF3 around Europe and into the US and shot using only the kit lens and the 14/2.5, mostly on full-auto, and with RAW images I was basically never disappointed. The only thing that I missed was the look of Canon colour science, so I bought a 700D after that and really liked the images from it, but the additional size would have made me question if I would take it travelling. The best images I took were enabled almost exclusively because I was shooting fast, thinking creatively, and going mostly un-noticed - which are all direct results of having a small automatic camera. When I was first learning video I was absolutely stunned by how fragile and, frankly, crap the video from mega-dollar prosumer cameras was in comparison to the RAW still images from an ultra-budget pocket camera. If I was still shooting stills I would have on from discussing equipment probably a decade ago.
    2 points
  5. I think Pana versus Oly/OMDS lenses having zoom rings that operate in opposite directions is really annoying... Anyway, here are pics of the Pana 12-32, 14-42 PZ, 14-42 kit and Oly 14-42 EZ on my GX80 (all with filters on the front), with the zoom set to give maximum lens length (which was max wide on the Pana and max tele on the Oly - minimum lens length was in the mid zoom range). Also the ZV-1 set to maximum lens length, and a GX80+Oly14-42 and ZV-1 side-by-side. Note the 10cm mark on the ruler is approx. aligned to the front of the body, so the all the lens lengths are between 55mm and 60mm i.e. around the same... (The ZV-1 has a JJC filter adaptor stuck to the front of the lens tube - https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B07GWQ6CXL )
    2 points
  6. I've got the Pana 12-32, 14-42 (non-pancake) and 14-42 PZ lenses, plus the Oly 14-42 EZ (power zoom) lens. No LX10 (or GX800 anymore), but my ZV-1 might be an interesting size comparison. I'll take some photos of the extended lenses on my GX80 with a ruler alongside. Note that of the pancake lenses, only the Oly has a focus ring, but it doesn't have any OIS - swings and roundabouts...
    2 points
  7. Phil A

    E-Mount Zooms

    I just bought the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 for my Fujifilm, but it's also available in E-Mount. I'd rather sacrifice some range and have a smaller lens. Else there is also the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8
    2 points
  8. Yes I'm talking shooting in 8 bit 709. When I mentioned log I meant 10-12 bit. I was saying even though the master is 709 you can potentially make 10 bit log better looking than a baked in 709 profile. For instance the emotive color lut looks nicer than the 709 profiles out of most cameras straight off the card.
    2 points
  9. I'll answer it for you and I've used the A7s3 and FX6 but not the A7IV. Both cameras have heavily processed shadows that ruin the image. The A7s3 and FX3 are superior because you can shoot RAW externally and bypass the processing. Dynamic range isn't useful when it's being ruined by noise reduction. The fx30 has much less processing at the lower native ISOs and would be my choice over either of those cameras. Or get a Nikon Z8.
    2 points
  10. Picked this up second hand at a good price as my introduction to anamorphics. Here's some tests shot last night.
    2 points
  11. These threads do tend to descend into either-or types debates. I have a recent iPhone and, yes, I do use this for video. I also have a range of Blackmagics for a number of different purposes. But I still feel that the AX53 possibly has a place. The zoom. The internal gimbal. The compact size and ease of use. And possibly even the "retro" vibe and "invisible amateur tool" aspects. Coupled with the fact that if I drop it or it falls off a mount... it really doesn't matter. I am thinking of it as a GoPro/Insta alternative... yes, a niche, perhaps, but there will be a lot of people out there for whom a decent camcorder would definitely fill their niche. As @kye said - get a lot of different shots with an easy to use camera and focus on the edit.
    2 points
  12. The reality is if you lift the shadows in both Z9 and A1 "uncompressed" raw images, at base ISO, you get different results. If you do demosaicing on A1 images, and apply temporal NR, you get even more different result. If Nikon ditch the NRAW, its probably related to license costs, not the quality of the codec.
    2 points
  13. I really think Redraw is coming or at least a varient of it. I get market segmentation but Nikon already displayed its willingness to put internal RAW in their cameras with no caveats. REDraw is coming to Nikon mirrorless. I don't think this will kill sales for any of the "RED" cameras. They are made for a traditional on set workflow. No one is going to want to use a Z8 with HDMI on a large production unless its a crash cam. Plus the RED Komodo is priced the same as the Nikon Z9 to begin with. It's not like its ARRI where they don't sell any cameras lower than 50,000 usd. RED never had the capacity to put out a mirrorless body and compete with the likes of Nikon or Canon, now they don't need to. We shall see soon enough.
    2 points
  14. Makes sense. I think the main differences between these Sony cameras are rolling shutter and the ability or lack of ability to record RAW if that is a feature you want to use. Dynamic range is all very similiar in latitude tests and imatest measurements. My pick for Sony is the FX30 as it is the cheapest and has a damn good image and a lot of cheap 3rd party lenses for it too.
    2 points
  15. I'm confused... you obviously don't want one, so why are you in this thread about camcorders arguing that no-one wants them? I'm not interested in buying any cameras that exist right now, but I'm not sitting in all the threads arguing with people about them.
    2 points
  16. ghostwind

    Nikon buys Red?

    Dunno what tests those were, but I've shot in all formats on my Z9s, and N-RAW is definitely better than H265. More latitude, less/no NR, less/no sharpening, etc. Not to mention, of course, the freedom to change WB and exposure in Resolve in post.
    2 points
  17. Half of the shots in this video I shot are in 8-bit rec709 but graded in post. Learn your gear and 8 bit is just fine.
    2 points
  18. Potentially of interest to the people who want the smallest possible 4K MILC to carry around, the people at I'm Back (mostly known for making a ridiculous replacement film back with a tiny sensor for classic film cameras) are kickstarting a new mirrorless system that they call "Micro Mirrorless." Looks like it's based around IMX177 - so it's a 12 megapixel 1/2.3" sensor capable of 4kp24. It looks like they have plans for an adapter that allows lenses from other systems to be used (though of course with a 6x or so crop factor courtesy of the tiny sensor. From photos/video of the mount, I don't see any electrical contacts so I'm assuming that the adapter will be passive (hopefully it's micro 4/3 so that speed boosters are usable). Mostly, it's something to keep an eye on - I thought about taking a flyer on it since it's so cheap ($315 with 3 extremely mediocre lenses), but then I saw that they're not planning to ship until December 2024. If there's gonna be that much of a wait anyway, it puts me over the edge to "see what real people say about it after (maybe) receiving their rewards and just pay full price (which is still only around $400) if it's any good (90% chance that it won't be)." In the meantime, maybe I'll just build one of those Raspberry Pi "cinema cameras" which use a similar (or the same?) sensor. Anyway, assuming that it funds/ships, it will be the smallest shipping 4K ILC around. As almost always, I dissuade anybody from risking money on kickstarter product speculation. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/samellos/micro-mirrorless-yashica-im-back
    1 point
  19. For me, my willingness to use kickstarter is perversely whether or not the company already has a track record of delivering quality products successfully, either through kickstarter or through other platforms. Like recently, I backed a 4x10 film camera being made by a guy who has been selling a well-regarded line of pinhole cameras for years. I'm very confident that it will ship eventually. I've thankfully only been burnt a couple of times on pretty small things for products that never delivered... products that delivered and were awful? That's another story. Anyway, as I said, my interest in it, if I have any at all after it's released, would be as something I can mount on the back of a telephoto lens - or as something that can turn a pretty normal portrait lens into a long telephoto. Could be nice for travel where (at present) a long lens (200mm+) is a big and heavy thing that I often leave home.
    1 point
  20. I think this is about the sum of it, at least from the ‘quality’ side of things. I think raw only came to iPhone with the 12, but could be wrong and for me as someone who only shoots raw, probably part of my personal ‘disconnect’ from photography using my phone as in I have not been using it’s full potential. Also, whilst I don’t need to be in ‘full on pro mode’ all the time (when not actually working), I probably need to get out of ‘point & click phone mode’ when using my phone and use it more like a camera. If that makes sense? Something I probably need to explore…
    1 point
  21. Yup. Had my fingers (wallet) burned over a revolutionary tripod I backed. I can't remember how long the saga went on for, but it was at least 3 years and painful for all involved. Never again! But in regard to this product, maybe I am just not the market, but nah, I'd rather go with any number of alternative existing options or my phone. Surely this kind of thing these days is so niche it's near pointless? But what do I know...
    1 point
  22. Yeah, phones are getting really good now, with RAW and Prores and Apple Log and recording to SSDs. The thing I think is missing is a wide-angle selfie camera. Trying to film yourself using an ultra-wide but without being able to see yourself is possible but hitting record, then turning the phone around, and shooting while presenting a bright image of the frame to everyone around you is strange and awkward on almost all levels! I don't know if the diopters for action cameras also have NDs. They might, considering that a diopter is as technical/geeky as an ND would be, but action cameras are practically designed inside and out to have a short shutter, so it kind of goes against the whole ethos in a way.
    1 point
  23. QuickHitRecord

    Lenses

    Haha. The line! I know. It's so hard to stay on the right side. I'll admit that I've slipped a little and in a moment of weakness, I purchased a $50 point-and-shoot as an every day carry (big mistake; I was quickly reminded that I just can't get excited about cameras without a substantial grip). But other than that, I've been very disciplined these past four months. My interest in c-mount lenses revolves around the EOS-M. I enjoy the combination of 16mm glass with this little camera in 1:1 crop. There is an aesthetic there that is more interesting to me than anything I've been able to get from my S35 and FF cameras. My theory is that sampling from a smaller piece of the sensor in combination with tiny glass throws out enough detail and in turn, brings some mystery/intrigue/engagement to the footage that is missing from most digital S35+ footage. And this is coming from someone who ignored c-mount lenses until 3-4 years ago; I didn't see the point. Before my self-imposed embargo, I decided to put together the most economical raw-shooting camera package that I could possibly think of. I got there with the M and three Cosmicar c-mount lenses (I also have a set of three Kern Switars, but they were significantly more expensive). Working with such a lightweight, low-cost kit and yet fully functional kit is freeing. What I'm missing (though, not really) is an inexpensive zoom lens that can go wider than 15mm, but most have that ugly track that I can't get past. However, the Meteor is an intriguing lens. And they are still quite affordable. I think I can say that rigged up, the EOS-M/c-mount combo makes me want to get out there and shoot more than any of the other 30+ cameras I've owned (other than maybe my beloved FZ47). It's way more fun than any other cine cameras that I can think of. If I get a couple of nice shots with it, or I am able to crop in a little further in-camera to eliminate some vignetting on an otherwise overlooked lens, I feel like I'm breaking the rules. It offers just the right amount of limitation, which I find to be inspiring.
    1 point
  24. Or ANY camera you will just either pick up more or even have with you at all times ie, ‘EDC’. Which is why something like the Fuji X100 series or Ricoh GR are just so popular, - big quality out of a small package, but perhaps more importantly, fun to have and use. On that note, the Ricoh GR3x is ticking the most boxes for me right now based on only really interested in stills only, pocket-ability and love the 40mm focal length.
    1 point
  25. You assume correctly. Yeah, I'm not saying in any way that it's perfect or that I don't get why a lot of people prefer a wider angle. It's why Sony came out with the ZV1 II - I just wish they hadn't taken a note from Canon and taken away a useful feature for every other useful feature that they added. The next time I buy a new iPhone (probably when the new one is announced later this year), it might even remover that use of the ZV1 for me since the newer ones can apparently record to an SSD now. I assume that there are also close-up diopters for those action cameras that also feature ND? One of the reasons that I shy away form using any of my action cameras for that kind of thing is that it's annoying to have to remember all of the necessary accessories and it's a bit fussy to have to put them on/take them off when the light changes (e.g. when walking into a building). With the ZV1, I just push a button and an ND filter pops into place. 🙂 Also, even if I were still regularly vlogging, I definitely wouldn't be trying to do it at the Vatican. When traveling abroad these days, I pretty much bring the GFX 100 II and a few lenses (and maybe a DJI Mini 3, depending on where)... and maybe a film camera, depending.
    1 point
  26. Lurking these boards these cold days over here since I unfortunately had the loss of my life... one's of very own* mourning path, last month* : ( ...it's rewarding to see that our posts from more or less recent past don't go away so unnoticeable at least over here, after all: Just to give my regards @kye and to the rest of the gang :- ) *in Portuguese
    1 point
  27. Cool you have a setup that works for you. I guess the thing that I noticed with the different focal lengths was that you needed the width to make it look like you weren't holding a camera. I assume this angle is the ZV-1 on the handle? Whereas this is a GoPro on a similar handle: It just doesn't have that same "I'm holding you as far away from me as I can!!" sort of vibe 🙂 I do recall parts of Asia also having signs up that said "No selfie sticks", as well as places like the Vatican IIRC? The Vatican also doesn't allow tripods either, so not sure how the handle would go if it splits into legs. Make Art Now also got a reasonable frame with the Insta360 Ace Pro by putting a diopter on it to shorten the focal distance: But, in the end, it's what's in front of the camera that matters 🙂
    1 point
  28. That's all pretty reasonable. Though at least for me, the ZV-1 works well at its widest - partly since I don't often want to film myself in extremely crowded situations. I have a mount on my dashboard with a 1/4x20 (it's on a little t-track that is made for the mounting points on a Jeep) where I can use it to film myself while driving (nearly the perfect focal length for this) and then since I'm usually going out to the middle of nowhere, there's really nobody to care that I'm there. When I put the ZV-1 on the little Sony bluetooth handle, it puts it just about 4-5 inches further from me which works out well enough for a head & shoulders shot (which is still tighter than a lot of the kids prefer, but I like it). This is an example - most of the "vlog" parts were with ZV-1 - either dash-mounted or on the handle. I think the car-mounted cameras were a Hero 9 and an Insta360 One R with 1" mod. Just about everything else including the silly thing with the Racetrack rocks at the end was on the original GFX 100. About the only thing that I'd change would be for the handle to be about 2-3" longer, to have the internal ND on the camera be another stop stronger, and for the lens OIS to be a bit better for bumpy roads (Jeeps, by design, have pretty stiff suspensions). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faS2uFTCZBM
    1 point
  29. QuickHitRecord

    Lenses

    Can anyone recommend any non-cinema c-mount zooms without the little dips caused by the internal runners when wide open? So far, I've only heard of two: Canon V10X15 15-150 f2.8 Cosmicar 22.5-90 f1.5 I'm still trying to make this a "no gear year", but that doesn't mean I can't look!
    1 point
  30. Just window shopping for tiny cameras (tiny-er than the GX85) and realised I don't really care that much about the size of the camera with the lens turned off, I care about the size when I'm waving it around actually shooting footage. Comparing the LX10 with GX850+12-32mm kit lens, I think the LX10 might be longer?? The zoom ratio is only 3.0 compared to 2.66 for the 12-32, so they're almost identical lenses too. Obviously, it's smaller when closed: BUT, the LX10 lens really really extends (at least for some of its zoom range)... and (as far as I can tell) the 12-32 doesn't extend nearly as much? These are the best images I could find of the lens extended: Also, the 14-42 doesn't look much larger either: Does anyone have all these bits and can give a more definite answer? If the incognito factor is important then it might be that the GX850 and 12-32mm might be better. In fact, the LX10 might not even have much of size advantage over the GX85 with the 12-32 lens, when both are fully extended... I got a direct size comparison image and superimposed the best quality images of the two lenses extended that I could fine (the lens images are transparent so you can see the overlays - the size match is almost perfect on both). Obviously lens extension isn't everything, but in use it's potentially a factor. Members of the public are aware that the longer the lens the more zoomed it is, so anyone who is uncomfortable with the idea of being filmed from a distance might really notice such a thing.
    1 point
  31. What a fascinating project! I wish them well, but it's not exactly what I need. I do think there is a niche here, though. The competitors are: MFT - much larger in comparison Action cameras - either don't shoot in high enough bitrates or don't have a good / large enough front-facing camera or don't have the lens options Smartphones - some don't shoot in high enough bitrates but all(?) either have one focal length on the selfie-side that isn't very wide or have several on the rear but no selfie screen at all (or it's tiny) The challenge with such a system would be the crop factor and getting lenses at the wider end - it's hard enough for the S16 crop of the P2K and M2K, but this is much worse. Perhaps the competition is a smartphone plus an action camera with front-facing screen? Still not the best combo.
    1 point
  32. MrSMW

    E-Mount Zooms

    Would easily be my first choice for APSC with a real world 28-105mm focal length and constant f2.8 aperture.
    1 point
  33. MurtlandPhoto

    E-Mount Zooms

    I had the 18-135mm for a bit. It's a very compact and lightweight lens. Good range. Great AF. The weakness is obviously the f/5.6 aperture on the long end. It's fine for outdoors stuff, but I found myself really wishing I had an extra stop of light pretty consistently indoors. On my full frame cams, the 24-105mm f/4 is my workhorse. It strikes the right balance of range, aperture, and performance. I'd imagine the 18-105mm would be a similar experience on APS-C.
    1 point
  34. This strategy might've worked at the onset of the DSLR revolution when there was still a lot of room for cam improvement around essential features. But given where we're at with cam tech and needing for very little to tell a fantastic story - that is no longer the case. Right now, we actually seem to be arriving at a point where AI will disrupt our dependency - not just on using cameras to capture the world - but on the idea that we ALWAYS need cams/audio devices to tell visual/auditory stories that can 'authentically' capture our real world. That last part to me is one of the big things being blurred/contested. Either way, if you play it out, this particular type of subscription-based strategy will likely only work/make sense for large media companies, who for legal/tax reasons, do not buy gear from the used market. As someone who works for a large media corporation, what I am seeing/hearing first/second hand, is an increased interest in PTZ cams, along with AI apps that can cover multi-cam switching duties (a quick google search showed me one by CognitiveMill). In that case I can definitely see the subscription model working, bcuz PTZ's (from what I can tell) require no camera people per se - moreso tech support people who make sure these PTZ's are ready to go for any given multi-platform show, on any given day, and are on standby to troubleshoot any daily issues that come up. So in a case like that I definitely see the subscription model working - albeit at the expense of the loss/shrinking of jobs/shifts for camera people, etc.
    1 point
  35. Thanks for watching! I've wanted to get into anamorphic right from the get-go for precisely the reasons you mention. One thing I like about this adapter is that the flares are pretty subtle.
    1 point
  36. The camera itself can’t be powered over USB but that hub does allow the zoom on demand to be used simultaneously with SSD recording so that is a positive, albeit that BM doesn’t specify it in the manual. He reports no issues with doing it so that’s all we have to go on and it might well be that BM doesn’t specify it because there are a LOT of USB hub/SSD combos that people could use that would make it a support nightmare. The zoom on demand handle is very much a sledgehammer to crack a nut to get that external control though as it certainly takes away the Micro element and its primary function is only compatible with a few very average lenses. The hub usability (difficult to refer to it as compatibility until BM official support it!) does open up the possibility of them making a more appropriate form factor interface for some external control. Or maybe someone else will if there is sufficient demand from people buying the Micro as a cinema camera…
    1 point
  37. Perhaps the premise of the question would be interpreted differently if the two cameras were more different to each other. For example, if I asked the same about the GH5 vs GH6, then there would be things to talk about, and spending time looking at the various specs and performance would be worthwhile. It's also helped by the likelihood that I'd own the GH5 and be questioning an upgrade - so it's a question that would have real-world implications and would be of value to discuss, rather than a purely theoretical question. In the case of the A7S3 vs A74, the strengths are very similar or don't really matter (both have enough DR for almost anything you might want to shoot) and the weaknesses are similar too.
    1 point
  38. Ha! You have a point, but that was when 4K was cutting edge. Do any current Sony bodies without IBIS overheat in 4K mode? At least in the case of the R5, the heat management is a little bit improved, but also Canon just stopped doing stupid things like having a hard-coded cooldown timer instead of basing it on actual temperatures. That should probably set some sort of record for dumbest decision made in the development made in a modern camera.
    1 point
  39. Sonys were overheating well before IBIS became a thing 🤣🤣🤣 Also the kind of Card used, sensor and body size, heatsinks used, processors used, body type etc should decide how much a camera overheats. Some Canons have improved heat management after firmware updates.
    1 point
  40. The very question is flawed. You're asking which sensor produces the best image, but the sensor is only a part of the image pipeline. The same Sony sensors are sometimes used in cameras from Sony and several other vendors and the image that gets output differs radically. Each manufacturer is applying their own denoising algorithms, color interpretation, internal debaying algorithm, etc. I'd also say that @kye is fully correct that there's really no way to evaluate which camera produces the "best" image. What is "best?" Is it the most faithful reproduction of colors? Or is it the interpretation of colors that I like more? Is it preserving every single detail from corner to corner? Or is it producing an image where my actors like how their skin looks? How contrasty is best? Is the image being color graded in post? Or is it being given to somebody straight out of camera? If one camera has better DR and the other has more pleasing colors, which one wins? This kind of thing is also why, in the example above, industry professionals could end up preferring the image from a $1k GH4 to a $25k Red or a $70k Arri. Were the images straight out of camera? Red and Arri might not spend as much time with the SOOC image because almost any production that can afford to use their gear can also afford to have a colorist. Meanwhile, many people shooting with a GH4 don't. If the images were graded in post, was the colorist more familiar with the GH4 than the Red or Arri? Could be. Did that test result in any of those Hollywood DPs choosing the Panasonic GH4 as the A camera for their next feature film? Nope. It's not useful to obsess about the micro-differences between two cameras. It's far better to actually get (or rent) a camera and spend some time shooting with it.
    1 point
  41. There is no such thing as objectively better. There was a famous blind test that included high end cameras like the ARRI Alexa and Red Epic Dragon 6K, but also much lower-end cameras like the GH4.. here's a couple of articles talking about it: https://www.4kshooters.net/2014/08/20/12-cameras-blind-test-bmpc-4k-bmpcc-gh4-arri-alexa-red-epicdragon-6k-sony-f55-fs700-kineraw-mini-canon-c500-5d-mark-iii-1dc/ https://www.4kshooters.net/2014/08/24/12-cameras-test-part-iii-arri-alexa-red-epic-dragon-6k-blackmagic-4k-kineraw-mini-gh4-5d-mark-iii-more/ But here's the kicker - the audience was industry professionals and some of them preferred the GH4 to the ARRI or the RED. In the end, everything is subjective.
    1 point
  42. Actually, I take back my comments that overheating testing is incomprehensible, because I found this.... (linked to timestamp) ...and in case you don't want to hit play, the BM Micro Studio Camera was used to film inside the race car of a 24 hour race in Daytona, and: it was being powered from the car it was recording 4K to a 4TB SSD in BRAW 8:1 it recorded for 24 hours straight with no overheating and no dropped frames the average temp in the car was 120F / 48C the suspension in a race car is stiff and shaking the camera too Just goes to show - all these huge cameras that overheat in air-conditioning are just flat-out design failures.
    1 point
  43. It's partly a theoretical point, but I'm not actually sure this has to be the case. It's definitely not the case if you're comparing 709 8-bit vs LOG 8-bit, as LOG 8-bit can be so fragile that you can't even make nice images if you don't need to change WB or exposure at all. The missing piece (and why I said "I'm not sure this has to be the case") is having the colour management to convert back from 709 into something where WB and Exposure adjustments will be made proportionally to the image (ie, like they were done in-camera). I've done a lot of work with the GX85, as I'm sure you've seen, and am still planning on doing more, and I got quite good results with the Gamma wheel when the image was in 709, and using the WB and Offset controls when I'd done a CST to a LOG space (in my case using DWG/DI in Resolve). The reasons that I suggest this are that: when shooting 8-bit there is far more data in the saturation, so the impacts of quantisation are much less when grading the final image to have a normal level of saturation when shooting 8-bit the image SOOC is much closer to the final image in terms of the gamma curve, so you're not stretching those bits that much further apart than they already are, whereas 8-bit LOG needs a lot of additional contrast to be added Of course, the ultimate is having 10-bit HLG, which has full 709 levels of saturation, has a gamma curve much closer to a 709-style output but still retains all the DR from the camera, and it has all the benefits of 10-bit. Once again, HLG isn't a standard so the conversion is a challenge, but I've found that interpreting it as either Rec2020 or Rec2100 works pretty well. I'm currently programming my own grading tool in DCTL for Resolve and my main aim is to incorporate the tools that I'll need to grade 709 images, considering that the GX85 is now my main focus and it's the one that is hardest to get right with the existing tools. Once I have a working prototype I'll be filming my rec709 WB/exposure tests again (with skintones this time) and will update the other thread.
    1 point
  44. I agree with @eatstoomuchjam that either would be fine, even for the more extreme situations. My experience has been that the GH5 (9.7 stops) often wasn't enough for people-in-front-of-sunset but that the P2K (11.2 stops) was hugely better. I wouldn't say that it's all you'd need in that situation, but it made a HUGE difference in that situation for me. Going up to the A7S3 (12.3 stops) would be a huge jump up again and would likely be all you'd need in that situation. But remember, that situation is a really demanding one, and waaaay more than you need in any other lighting scenario - the P2K (11.2 stops) is enough when the sun isn't in shot. It's fun to talk about cameras and look at the specs, but asking which is "better" involves so many variables that the situation really matters. Even things like how you feel matters because you use the camera differently.
    1 point
  45. kye

    Nikon buys Red?

    No, actually, you're right.. it's me, I'm the silly one. I'd forgotten that the threads about industry news always devolve into everyone arguing about inconsequential rubbish that has no bearing on film-making. Thanks for the reminder and best of luck y'all.
    1 point
  46. Danyyyel

    Nikon buys Red?

    The big difference is that when Nikon Nraw came out, their was no real good workflow. Their is actually a big DR difference between Nikon h265 and Nraw, because Nikon has been very conservative in the Nlog which is quite contrasty. CINED today has a nice set of DR test of the different cameras. And as Nikon featured very low in the Synthetic DR test with Xyla chart and Imatest. It shines in the truer real life latitude test. In their the Z9 is the better than every Sony camera by at least half if not 1 stop better DR. +4 stop above and - 5 stop lower. Even better than the Venice 2!!! Which is at least 1 stop lower. I think Sony perhaps focused on speed of the sensor, 3 ms. Because their are other Sony cameras that look better. The VV Red Raptor was half to a stop better and this test really show how the Alexa's are better, with at least 1,5 stop higher for the traditional Alexa and at least 3!!! for the Alexa 35.
    1 point
  47. I think you might be partly missing the point. 1) If Sony put a modern sensor in one of these things, it would have the same spec as a modern camera because it would BE a modern camera. There are a shit-ton of smartphone sensors that have excellent specs that are in the right size range. 2) When compared to a modern mirrorless camera and a superzoom lens and a gimbal, it would be positively tiny by comparison. Also, camcorders often have completely internal mechanisms (zoom and focus) potentially making them much easier to weather-seal. The benefits in terms of being less fragile in your bag etc might also be welcome. Also, also, for amateur use, a camcorder looks FAAAAAAAAR less threatening in public than a MILC and large lens... let alone when you add the gimbal. Put an A6700 with superzoom on an RS3 or Crane and you may as well have activated a homing beacon for all private security, toxic law enforcement, Karen's, etc to come out of the woodwork and hassle you. If you're holding something the shape of a camcorder, the fact that it's larger might even make you look less of a threat because buying a big camcorder might make you look a bit silly - the opposite look of a professional setup.
    1 point
  48. The Balanced Optical Steady Shot (BOSS!) is a pretty amazing technology really - it's a pity it never got much attention. I am a pretty big supporter of having stabilisation built-in because it means that motion is smoothed DURING the exposure rather than AFTERWARDS when the frame already has shaky motion blur baked into each frame. My Sony X3000 action camera has BOSS and it is very impressive in practice. I have gotten quite a number of almost gimbal-level stabilisation shots while walking, and I can tell you that I'm not that good at the ninja walk. I haven't compared it directly to the IBIS of the GH5, or even the dual IS of Panasonic IBIS plus lens OIS, but after using the GH5 for years I found myself being impressed with the X3000. Of course, the X3000 also has a very wide angle lens (maybe 15mm or so equivalent?) so that also helps. The other thing that is significant about it is that it, as you say, is basically a gimbal, which keeps the optics and sensor in alignment the whole time, so it eliminates all the corner warping that comes from OIS or IBIS. In terms of the image quality, I would suggest that with a 100Mbps 4K mode that if you add some de-sharpening (blur) and do some creative colour grading, potentially adding in some film emulation elements, that you could get a very nice image indeed. I am definitely a fan of a setup that is flexible and can just grab shots quickly and without fuss. Perhaps the best way to make your edits better through camera choice is to make your camera as fast and flexible as possible, and to get lots of shots and a great variety of shots, as this gives you more options in the edit.
    1 point
  49. I like the formfactor of the Canon XC10/X15. Give it 10bit and a good codec, 4K60, zoom with F2 at the wide and F2.8 at the long end. Voila! I think their launch video really shown off the mojo that camera had. I like really the motion cadence and the rendering of textures. Mojo. 😊 @hyalinejimhad posted a video of his with beautiful colors achieved in Rec709. Anyway, great launch video and a great concept for a S16 cinema camera.
    1 point
  50. If your budget is decent, the Canon R5 is really not much larger to begin with when compared with the Sigma fp, does decent 12-bit raw internally, and has a decent flippy screen. By the time the fp is rigged to do 12-bit raw (and you add a small grip so you can actually hold the thing!), it’s already about the same size as the R5 (and still has a fixed screen). It’s one of the reasons I sold my fp and fp-l and kept my R5. Sometimes I thought about shoving the fp into a small space without a screen to get something, but then I remembered there’s no built-in wifi and by the time you add even the smallest cineeye/hollyland transmitter to it, it’s… about the same size as the R5. 😛 If the new BMMCC 4K can do monitoring over wifi to a phone and can do 12-bit raw to a really small external SSD (like a Sabrent Nano or something), it could work well for that kind of thing. If not, by the time you add an external screen (even the VL35) and small SSD, you have a kit about the size of an R5 (with worse ergonomics). (With that said, your computer’s likely to be able to edit raw from the BMMCC a lot more smoothly than from the R5 - my M2 Max is just barely tolerable with R5 stuff in Resolve) Also, I’d add in (though I haven’t used) a hacked EOS M as an option for a teeny tiny camera that can record raw internally. From what I remember, it can do some sort of 2.5k, though that might only be in a 2.35 mode or similar.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...