Leaderboard

It was a great occasion to enjoy some of Photokina with Dave Altizer. This video was an experiment in many ways, to plant a seed for more EOSHD YouTube content. I hope you enjoy the start of EOSHD TV - let's see how this goes in the future when I rope more unlucky people in front of the camera and come up with more content (the channel won't just be interviews). We talk about a range of camera-nerd stuff in the video, not least of all that's on the table in front of us. The Fuji X-T3, the Hasselblad X1D and Fuji GFX 50S medium format cameras, along with the other interesting finds at the show. Warning: contains controversial opinions!!

The Cameras In this corner, we have the Sony F3--episodic TV and corporate/commercial workhorse, best known for its use on season 1 of Key and Peele and the feature film Safety Not Guaranteed. Super 35 2.4K sensor that downscales to 1080p in-camera. 10-bit output up to 4:4:4 RGB. In this corner, the Sony A7 III--a modern hit, barely out and already one of the most popular mirrorless cameras around. Full frame 24 megapixel sensor that downscales to 4K from both the full sensor and from the APS-C crop. 8-bit 4:20 internally, with the option for 4:2:2 externally. The Test I generally light my work, so I thought I'd test with a scenario I often face: talking head interviews. One big soft key, a soft backlight, something splashing the background, maybe a practical. Now, this is a hella lazy, sloppy lighting execution--the backlight is a little too far around, background splash not nearly strong or interesting enough, and there's a huge bit of blank wall amidst the clutter--but it does contain some useful information. More on that after the camera notes. Just keep in mind that it was a rush job and try not to be too critical. Each camera used the same Leica R 35mm Summicron set to f/5.6. This was to keep color, contrast, and sharpness consistent, as not all my Rs match perfectly and I wanted any differences in the image to be down to the cameras. I did not adjust the tripod distance, instead opting to let precise frame matching go in favor of minimizing inconsistencies. I'll do another test that keeps framing identical. Since I unfortunately couldn't get ahold of a color chart for this test, I have a few various colored objects in the scene to act as references. The sweater is a deep forest green, the hat is a pale pinkish-red, the UHaul logo is a distinct orange, and the furniture blanket is a nice primary blue. They don't line up with anything specific on a vectorscope, but I find the subtle differences in how these colors, along with my skin tone, are rendered is quite telling. Yes, that is me in the video. I am not a model, or really comfortable on camera at all. My being in the hot seat was PURELY a matter of desperation, as my roommate was busy and I didn't have another day free to do the test. So you'll have to deal with my pale, blotchy face and greasy hair this time. The F3 has two sets of clips: one taken internally in XDCAM, one externally in ProRes HQ (10-bit 4:2:2). I don't have access to a 4K recorder, so the A7III files were all recorded internally to the SD card. If you have any other questions on my methodology please feel free to ask. Even with the studio conditions, it's very possible that something was overlooked. What to Watch For Personally, these are the elements I found most interesting. -The colors of the various objects listed above, as well as their relative brightness. The A7, for example, makes the blue moving blanket much brighter. -The big patch of blank wall behind me is a great place to watch for midtone noise, compression artifacts, and banding. -The black portion of the moving blanket, back right corner by the boxes, and the shadow by my left ear under the hair are good spots to look at shadow noise/compression. -Obviously, the face is there for skin tone reference. I'm pretty pale, and exposed a stop above key to keep noise down, as I generally do in a real interview. This pushed my skintones into the flattest part of the LOG curve, smoothing them out a bit, but in this scenario that's not entirely undesirable. Just something to keep in mind. Additionally, my eyes are a pretty deep shade of blue, with some green flecks. The cameras and color profiles render them with mixed levels of success. -My hair, beard, and eyes are all good places to look at for fine detail rendering, noise, and moire/aliasing. -The lightbulb and background splash were an attempt to look at highlight roll-off, but upon review it doesn't seem all that useful. The next test will use a stronger light doing a better scrape for DR/gradient, as well as a bulb with a filament to see how each camera renders hot highlight detail. The Footage These clips are straight out of camera/recorder, with no grading or edits. I could've at least trimmed them for brevity/convenience, but I...didn't want to. So. Sorry. You'll find them at this link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=159ig4Dq7emsxIE6GWpwj8H9SX73XMSQU Feel free to download them and play around. I can show you my grading results, but I find nothing helps more than massaging footage yourself. Here are the settings for each clip: F3 1. 1080p Cine1 F35Like ISO400 172.8* shutter f/5.6 (I don't know if F3 internal profiles suck or I just suck WITH them, but getting a good SOOC result with it still eludes me. Think I'll try the AbelCine stuff next.) 2. 1080p SLog1 SGamut ISO 800 172.8* shutter f/5.6 (ISO 800 is native in SLog, which is why it jumps here. Everything is otherwise identical.) 3. 1080p SLog1 SGamut ISO 1600 172.8* shutter f/5.6 (An attempt to test overexposure. In retrospect, I should've opened up to f/4 instead, but this still shows clipping behavior when cranking up ISO for exposure.) 4. 1080p SLog1 SGamut ISO 6400 172.8* shutter f/16 (High ISO noise test. The levels themselves are pretty good, so this is more a test of how much penalty you pay for cranking ISO to get by with smaller fixtures inside.) A7III 1. 4K Cine4 SGamut3.cine ISO 400 1/50 f/5.6 Full Frame (with +15 or so saturation. My favorite out of camera profile so far.) 2. 1080p Cine4 SGamut3.cine ISO 400 1/50 f/5.6 Full Frame 3. 4K SLog2 SGamut3.cine ISO 800 1/50 f/5.6 Full Frame (I prefer SLog2 to 3 for banding and skin tones. Like F3, 800 is native for SLog) 4. 1080p SLog2 SGamut3.cine ISO 800 1/50 f/5.6 Full Frame 5. 4K SLog2 SGamut3.cine ISO 1600 1/50 f/5.6 Full Frame 6. 4K SLog2 SGamut3.cine ISO 800 1/50 f/5.6 Crop Mode 7. 1080p SLog2 SGamut3.cine ISO 800 1/50 f/5.6 Crop Mode 8. 4K SLog2 SGamut3.cine ISO 6400 1/50 f/5.6 Crop Mode 9. 4K SLog2 SGamut3.cine ISO 6400 1/50 f/5.6 Full Frame Again, I'm happy to clarify any questions on my methodology. This was mainly to give me a nice broad spread of information on how my most used settings compare for quality. Conclusions I'm more curious what you guys think, so I won't say too much right away. My main take-away is that the F3 is nowhere near obsolete yet...in fact, it's my preferred camera for noise, color, skintones, gradation, and overall look. The A7 has the obvious advantages of full frame, strong internal recording, size/weight, and IBIS. Next, I want to see how each camera does with fluorescent, LED, and daylight skintones, as well as mixed color temps, motion, compression/bitrate issues, DR, and resolution/detail. If you have any suggestions for future tests, or anything you'd like to specifically see compared, just let me know and I'll do my best to throw it in. Thanks, and hope you enjoy!

Happy to report that adding a non glare screen protector to the Pocket has made a huge difference. Much easier to see the screen in direct sun while still being bright and sharp. Still easier to see in the shade obviously but now not unusable in sun. As others have said, I'm also a big fan of the menu system, add to that the scroll wheel with push action, dedicated ISO, SHUTTER and WB buttons plus three custom buttons and you can change all the most used functions easily with just your right hand on the grip. I have my Function buttons set to 1)False Colour 2) LUT Toggle 3)Focus peaking toggle.

I think in being fair to the smaller sensor cameras, we must by default be equally unfair to the larger sensor cameras. A truly even test let’s the cameras stand on their own merit. To be certain... manufacturers have been short changing us on DOF in M43. The numbers sound the same, and so we forget they are in fact not equal to their FF equivalents of the same F stop designation. The truth is, to get the same performance, build quality, optical quality and speed, it is far more costly to pull off in a smaller package. A 12-35mm f2.8 M43 lens would need to be closer to F1.4 to match its FF counterparts. I suspect such a lens would retail for well in excess of $2k and perhaps as high as $3k. To my knowledge, nothing like this is currently available at any price. In all honesty, I did not conduct this test with DOF in mind. Rather, I merely wanted to understand how close the cameras could match up to one another. And also understand the overall image quality of the various models. I think FCPX made the 1DXMK2 look badly in the solo scene. But the side by sides are acutely representing its image. AF: This played out as I thought. The 1DXMK2 nails auto focus. I was rocking back and forth to highlight this point. The Panasonic does not have AF in video... so I could not test it. At least that’s what the manual should say. Suggesting it’s not great would be kind. Once locked you just have to try to stay very still. AF has tricks in the C200. It can hold focus until it Re-acquires you. It’s very good, though the edge goes to the 1DXMK2. Fuji X-T3: it’s good. I changed position and it found me with little delay. And once found, it sticks pretty darn good. With the lens I was using I did notice some focus breathing. It can be distracting depending on the scene. But that’s the lens... and it’s on you to work around.

I don't understand why camera tests should be "fair". Its strange to me. Its like the popular "everything else equal". It never is

Something I didn't mention in the article, was how damn responsive it is. There's the zero-blank out when taking a full res 46mp still in movie mode, and with 400Mbit/s write speed XQD card the buffer clearing speeds are almost instant. No lock-ups or waiting at all. Menus are much more responsive than Sony and start-up too.

Here is a quick shootout of the Fuji X-T3, Canon 1DXMk2, Canon C200 and Panasonic GH5S. Granted FCPX refused to not blowout some of the footage of camera B. It's displayed correctly in some of the head to head comparisons. I think it might have been caused by a software bug in FCPX. In any case all four cameras were filming in base ISO in controlled lighting. Opinions welcomed.

LOL Quote of the day : -)

It's always valid to point out testing conditions that are not controlled. That said, most of us agree that equivalent dof is NOT important in this test, and are satisfied with the conclusions we can draw from watching it. Feel free to conduct your own, and focus on the comparison points you find most important.

Here is the lens breakdown: Canon C200 - 24-70mm F2.8 ii @ 35mm F4 Canon 1DXMk2 - 16-35 F4 @ 35mm F4 Fjifilm X-T3 - 23mm F2 @ F2.6 (35mm FF equivalent) Panasonic GH5S - 12-35mm F2.8 @ 18mm F2.8 (36mm FF equivalent) About: I tried to get everything as close to the M43 configuration as possible as I figured it would be at a disadvantage given the smaller sensor. DOF looks different on the GH5S, because... DOF is different on the M43. I was running a $1000 lens on the GH5S that was rated at F2.8. To get shallower I would have needed to use the Leica 42.5mm, but did not have enough equivalent lenses to this focal length to accommodate all the other cameras. So 35mm was choosen. Setup: In some cases physical proximity to the cameras was different. Because there's was only so much space to set everything up. Honestly, I was surprised when comparing these cameras side by side how much less shallow the M43 image appeared. With the S35 sensor the Fuji looked pretty similar to the Canons. Colors: Color wise the C200 was easiest to work with. It requires next to nothing to look good. Shoot at base ISO for the log profile you intend to add and you are done. It looks great all day long. The Fuji was shoot in Eterna... reflecting back perhaps Flog would have been easier to tweak? The 1DXMk2 was shoot in neutral picture profile. The GH5S was shot in VLogL. The standard Panasonic LUT was then applied. FCPX: The project was set to wide color gamut. I had read that this is desirable when editing Raw footage. But doing this seemed to cause issues with the 1DXMK2 image. It looked fine in the editor, but rendered with blown highlights. I believe FCPX did not know how to handle its 8 bit image with the WCG project setting. The other cameras were all shot at 10 bit or higher. I tried several approaches to try to regain the highlight detail of the 1DXMk2, but nothing seemed to work. It continually looked great in the editor, only to render blown out and harsh. I believe davinci is the better editor when dealing with a mix of 8 bit and higher. Unfortunately, my free version of resolve does not output 4k DCI... so that was out of the picture. Fruity chocolate: I don't think it's Apple's to (insert here) as they say. I used the lenses I own. This is a real world test. Question: Does Panasonic make a M43 equivalent to the Canon 24-70mm? Well, Panasonic would tell you, "yes... it's the 12-35mm". So that is what I used. And frankly I'm not alone in this thinking. While anything can be jerryrigged together, that leaves you compensating for something the cameras lacks. This of course applies to all M43 cameras, not just the GH5S. You are at a disadvantage regarding DOF. It's a limitation you get used to... or choose to find workarounds for. While I have a MSB, I seldom use it. My Canon glass runs better natively... so why use it on an M43 body? Also doing so negates any size advantage. I wanted to get the lenses close to each other. So everything was set to match the smallest sensor. The full frame cameras running at F4 while the X-T3 was at F2.6 IIRC.

No difference, viewing angles are still really good.... there really doesn't seem to be any negatives to it plus is stop finger prints getting all over the glossy screen. I just bought a generic, no name Chinese one that is meant for an iPad from a small phone repair shop. It was AUD$19. I had a hard time finding any stores that sold any name brand versions. Measured the screen, cut it with a guillotine for straight edges and applied it.

@Mmmbeats if you've been looking at the Zeiss range you have probably come across the Zeiss survival guide.. if not, it's quite an interesting read ? looking at the zeiss contax lenses myself recently, liking the look they give.. those classics look really nice too.

Cheers everyone. Seems GH5 and XT-3 are very similar in low light and Dynamic Range (with a slight edge to XT-3). Recon I will suggest GH5S as primary option as battery life, unlimited recording time, lcd screen and waveforms are big pros as well as xlr adapter so I can do wireless lav and shotgun mic at same time, and I am used to it having used the GH5 for a year. The autofocus is the big pro point of the XT-3 though. Maybe I can persuade them to buy both!

This page is pretty much all the newer stuff available. But the Classic stuff is mostly for Photography, so not ideal for video. MF, click aperture, and short focus throw. And maybe even a bit Too sharp. Even the old Contax Zeiss stuff converted is a bit too sharp for my liking. But you can tame them down with filters. Hard to make crappy lenses better with filters LoL. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/photography/Ntt/zeiss+classic+lens/Ntt/0/

everywhere all the time slooooowmooootiooon ..... 98% new videos from BMPC4K is slowmotion, this is new trend BM shooters ? I want normal speed please !!! I know you did not have it yet, BMCC shooters, but do not overdo it ...

Thanks again Andrew. Was a blast! Next time we will both have proper microphones!

Had a pleasant walk today. A couple of screen grabs. S-Log2, S-Gamut3.cine + Resolve. FE50/1.8

Mirrorless always have and maybe even always will be slower than a DSLR. Specially a beast like the 1DXii.

I got the X-T3 as a hybrid. I don’t consider the GH5S a hybrid. It’s too video centric while having inadequate resolution for stills.

This video I posted before is shot at ISO 800 and 1250. I see Very little noise in it. Granted the guy actually Knows what he is doing so that helps LoL. You are going to see a ton of total shit tests from people that have no clue how a Cine camera works. So I would take a lot of it with a grain of salt until some true legitimate tests are out. And yeah just about Every Cine camera has noise in it. You are Supposed to be skilled enough to overcome it shooting, or in post, or both. There are very few automatic anythings in a Cine camera. You have to sort of know what the hell you are doing. https://vimeo.com/292482866 I could swear that I remember from one of the early BMD video interviews that they said the areas inside where the sensor was was covered in plastic to protect it from water, dust getting into it. Now how does it protect the fan I don't know. I am sure you are not going to stand under a waterfall with it, but I doubt it will be as terrible as it seems like it might be. I am sure some crazy person on You Tube will take one in the shower to see if it goes up in smoke or not LoL.

Don, I guess people are too much focused on color. I even find myself on much more love about great B&W BTW... LOL Nothing about that on and from my observation. Neither on his enthusiasm I am one of his early supporters and loyal reader of his helpful findings : ) You see how people can distort some point? Damn you, Glenn! hehe : -)

FWIW I've been shooting this for 2 days and one of the great things vs previous BM cams is the ability to control exposure using ISO on the fly. Having ISO in small increments starting at ISO100 is a big change and there's virtually no degradation. Clean, very 3D image in UHD and 4K. HD looks beautiful as well.

I am really glad he did the test. It just proves that nearly everyone on here has a different concept of what is good color to Them, and that some of it is probably influenced on the device they are viewing it with. So no, nothing is ever going to be fair because everyone sees color output different with with their eyes, ergo color blind of sorts, or using a un calibrated monitoring device. I think he did a great job. Ir would have been nice to have included a new PK4 to see if a 1000 Dollar camera can hold up to the 7500 Dollar Canon C200. Hint, hint.

There are a Ton of PL lenses on ebay, and a lot of them are Carl Zeiss for not a lot of money. Pretty universal mount that works on most cameras.

No, I’d have a comparison based on how I would use the setup. If I had a C200 or 1DXii with the 24-70mm f/2.8, I’d use it wide open. If I had an X-T3 and 23mm f/2, I’d use it wide open and if I had a GH5s with the 12-35mm f/2.8, I’d use it wide open. Sensor size fairness is for kindergartners, I only care about how I would use the camera/lens in a real world scenario.

Sorry there is no valid criticism here. The biggest takeaway was color. DOF and sensor size doesn’t affect color. The DOF just made it easier to spot the odd duck of the bunch. If anyone wanted to mention fairness, anybody could have argued that C200 had the biggest advantage being that its Raw 12bit video and a $7500 camera.

The guy who uploaded this is a pretty well-known commercial director in the Philippines. So I'm not surprised about the grading and the kinds of shots that he got from the P4k ?

Tolerance aside, and fairness aside... I would have shot all of those cameras/lenses wide open and let the results speak for themselves.

but this isn't a sensor size comparison test, he's just doing a quick real world comparison between several cameras. I didn't even look at dof when judging, I only looked at skin tones, and it was clear to me which looked better. It was very good in that regard. If anything, it also highlights the fact that you need prohibitively expensive glass to get equivalent dof on m43.

I slowed down the other lenses to f4... none were wide open, save for the M43 camera. Consider the following: GH5S = $2500 - body only + $1000 lens. Fuji X-T3 = $1500 body only + $350 lens. Tell me, how much should I cripple the much less costly Fuji so that the Panasonic can be competitive? At some point it becomes unfair to handicap the other cameras. By right handicapping should not even happen, as I know of no one that purposely slows down their lenses out of respect for those with m43 sensors.

Good stuff! Controversial opinions are good when they are presented with some arguments behind them - it doesn't matter if you agree or disagree because either way they make you think and perhaps challenge your own beliefs and philosophies. Congrats Andrew on EOSTV!! May there be many more episodes to come!

Yup, always great to download those from this site. https://nikonpc.com/ My favorite profiles are Flaat_10 and S5pro_F1a

Been looking, hoping, waiting for a decent b camera (that also takes stills) from Canon to cut with the c100 for what seems like forever - watching that video the EOS-r is still not it. Come on Canon, it is getting embarassing I've used that 10-18mm EF-S lens on the c100 and it is plenty sharp enough

Keep in mind folks Jordan used a slow cheapo 10-18mm EF-S lens on that Hawaii footage. So he's already in APS-C crop mode, adding further crop with EIS, shooting mainly in 1080p with an optically bottom range slow aperture ultra-wide lens. Hence some noisy/soft shots. not exactly the best testing combo imo. DPAF Face Tracking, it isn't magic. If you got several faces in the shot, it may trip. A73 is even more unreliable in such circumstances. EIS also has it's limits, it isn't IBIS or a gimbal.. if you're doing severe motion, you'll get some warping. I'll be putting all these things to the test once I get my unit next week but you do have to be a little realistic over expectations/limitations of all these features.

Ive had a couple of cameras with vents. The BMCC, BMPC4K, D16, Red-1 and XC-10. None of them have given me any issues with it. The BMCC and BMPC4K also had the vents close to the tripod plate but it was fine (btw, I still suspect this is a BMCCii thats been renamed). No one can guarantee that it will work just as good on this camera, but I wouldn't worry about it if the camera ticks your other boxes.

I had the 1DXM2 and GH5S correct but had the X-T3 and C200 switched. The 1DXM2 (which I once owned) always crushed the blacks and shows in this sample video. I was happy to know that I had the X-T3 and C200 switched considering that I am so close to buying the X-T3! Thanks!

Don't worry, I cut the screen protector before moving onto heads.......wouldn't want to get any blood on my new camera!

There is a Korean auteur called Hong Sang-soo. His most recent cinematic releases were done on the F3. I had the pleasure of seeing them on the big screen and the images were very good. I personally don't think the two compare if you are talking about cinematic imagery.

Z7 what's inside ? https://kolarivision.com/nikon-z7-dissasembly-teardown/ quote:"Another unique aspect: the cover glass of the Z7’s sensor is about half a thick as the Sony’s, coming in at 1.1mm. This means the Nikon will have better performance with adapter lenses right out of the box. " Sony users discovered adapted " rangefinder wide angle lenses" have "image" problems on A7 bodies https://phillipreeve.net/blog/rangefinder-wide-angle-lenses-on-a7-cameras-problems-and-solutions/

Lol at the BMD sub-forum getting renamed.

Here is a quick shootout of the Fuji X-T3, Canon 1DXMk2, Canon C200 and Panasonic GH5S. Granted FCPX refused to not blowout some of the footage of camera B. It's displayed correctly in some of the head to head comparisons. I think it might have been caused by a software bug in FCPX. In any case all four cameras were filming in base ISO in controlled lighting. Opinions welcomed.

Buy the BM Ursa Mini 4.6k now and start shooting.

I don't mind that some people like the EOS R. I agree with them it gets a shot and a job done. No argument there. All that matters to me is my own needs and mine are different. I need to switch back and forth between stills and video on one body, so to be thrown off by 1.8x the focal length between 4K and a RAW still is not going to fit the workflow. To drop to 1080p seems poor value for money, and to use a Speed Booster would necessitate a second body or an adapter swap when going from 4K to a RAW still. If you are composing a shot in video mode and hit record, bang - 1.8x crop - your composition is going to be completely different. Different deal breakers for different people!

I had a go at the EOS R today. Took a while to wrap my head around it and get it fully setup the way I liked but was a happy camper after that. I'm happy to report the 1080p is a lot sharper then 5D3/5D4 (almost C100 sharp) especially with the awesome RF lenses (the 50mm 1.2 RF is crazy btw). 4K has poor RS.. but the ALL-I codec produces pretty thick quality files with nice motion. C-log looks really good too (with classic EOS cinema & C200 color matrix options). Movie IS coupled to the bi-directional lens IS was really steady. Stuck my 35mm 1.4L via adapter and was pretty much close to native performance.. All in all i'm pretty pleased/impressed by the camera (despite its obvious limitations) and look forward to trying it out further once I acquire it next week. PS: i'm having trouble reading the 4K MP4 files inside Davinci/FCPX (getting media offline error) anyone know what that's about??

Don't know if this was posted yet, but checking it out now.

If you could share this lut I'd be very happy!

So we are comparing it to the EOS R are we It is 4k60. EOS R doesn't even do 4K60! No-additional crop in 1.5x Super 35mm 4K/24/25/30p. GH5 isn't 1.5x crop. It's 2x crop. Quite different. Speed Booster = full frame. On GH5, close but no cigar. Codec - FAR superior to EOS R. Rolling shutter - FAR superior. Build quality - superior. Low light - superior (yes, really). Handling - superior. EVF - superior. Price - $700 less!

I love 10-bit.

recent shoot playing around with nx1.