Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 02/21/2017 in all areas

  1. 13 points
    I saw a film, swore to myself it was shot on 16mm nope it was shot on the red dragon. (Dayveon) Then I thought it was shot on zeiss ultraspeeds. Nope it was Canon K35s, which I think are similar to Canon FD glass. I saw another film, swore to myself it was shot on the alexa, nope it was shot on the c300 mark i (motherland) I was sitting 30 rows in the back, in the front, all over the place. I couldn't tell anything After all that, after everything we do, and say, at the end of the day, none of us can tell.
  2. 4 points
  3. 3 points
    When this thing was announced it totally blew my mind. And I have been wanting one ever since the first time I read about it. If you don’t know what this is all about just think of it as a Speedbooster. But instead of turning an APS-C into Full Frame it turns a Full Frame into a Medium Format Camera. And as you may know, medium format in digital is pricy to say the least. I will have more info and go deeper into this later on, this is just my first impressions. Opened the box literally just a few hours ago. Its very sturdy and all metal. It balances well after putting on a hefty lens. The lens I tested tonight was a 80mm f4 Macro. I have others but wanted to see some closeups to check sharpness. Its much sharper than I expected. Sharp enough I guess... Also Ive seen no excessive vignette. Any vignette in the samples are added in post. I also added grain. Portrait of GP Closeup Selfie Closest Focus With vignette and grain. Without vignette, still grain.
  4. 3 points
    I'm always amazed when I see work projected in a kino environment, instead of on a monitor or a screen. Mushy, crap footage you thought looked bad can take on very natural qualities. Footage you thought looked great, now looks stunning.
  5. 3 points
    Parker

    Razer Blade - Returned, A Poem

    Personally, I can't stand OS X. I've never understood why most creatives seem to prefer it as an operating system. Why?! Granted, I grew up using Windows and worked in IT for a couple years, so I'd venture to guess I'm probably more of a power-user than the average, everyday person, but still, just in things like ease-of-use, customization, more advanced program management and multi-tasking, I'd take windows every time, hands down. In fact, the only reason I can possibly think of using an apple computer or their OS -- ever -- is if you're a fcpx user, since hackintosh is such a pain to get reliably running. Maybe there is some special secret to loving OS X, but if there is, I certainly haven't discovered it yet.
  6. 2 points
    Berlin is amazing! It feels like NYC from like 20 years ago. The people are great there. There is a renewed experience, to make the city something, after everything that went down in the 20th century. It's really something amazing to be apart of. Nice guys on all your comments. SAM, yes, you can have my F65. I will go back to shooting on a t2i
  7. 2 points
    Agreed. Raw is great to have, but I've never really needed anything more than 10-bit, 4:4:4, flat and at a nice resolution. A lot of the time, even that is overkill.
  8. 2 points
    Supposedly it is excellent. But at that price point your getting into URSA 4.6k territory. If you can afford it, that camera is incredible (though storage media/viewfinder can kill the "affordability")
  9. 2 points
    Kisaha

    Razer Blade - Returned, A Poem

    Seriously, or not operating systems have gone far, OS X, or windows, are equally good, what problems you have with windows? I wonder..what? - Not a poem.
  10. 2 points
    markr041

    EOSHD Pro Color for Sony Cameras

    Many example videos using EOSHD Pro Color settings are either taken exclusively at night or mucked up with Luts that completely alter the color, so you cannot see what the Pro Color settings do. So here is a video shot using the Sony A7s ii in daylight with no Lut applied in post. The main subjects are flowers - nature's color palette (although there is also a cat). There are plenty of blues, greens, yellows, whites, reds, etc (though no human skin).
  11. 2 points
    Though question since I don't agree with your assessment of the advantages of Medium Format. I still shoot film, both medium format and full frame (small picture). And I definitely don't use medium format to get faster films. If anything I use the opposite. Thats why I kickstarter backed the modified Kodak Vison 50D from Cinestill. A 56mm is till going to be a 56mm and nothing else. And if one likes the look of a 100mm one needs to use a 100mm. The DOF is identical on all formats but on the medium format you get more in the frame. A good example is when I use a 17mm on APS-C. Its great for street photography with the deep DOF of a 17mm (on any format). But I can fill the frame with a person without going as close as I would have had to do with FF. More like the distance of a 35mm on FF. The problem is if I try to shoot a closeup of someone, then I dont get a look of a 35mm at all. The person is all distorted with a huge head. This is why medium and large format is nice and can't be simulated with equivalent lenses. But I will test all this and this discussion is a never ending story so lets leave it for now. If one only care about SDOF and firmly believe that a focal length can be changed with different sensor sizes. Then he/she can just settle with a 1" sensor like the RX100. Because with the "equivalent" theory thats just as good as FF, MF or large format. No difference at all. But if one can see a difference between for example m4/3 and FF. Then he/she will see the same advantages and disadvantages between FF and MF. And of course MF and LF.
  12. 1 point
    lucabutera

    Samsung NX Speed Booster

    This is all to try, I'm sure you will differrent performance with different lenses. The focus speed depend on the glass quality and the weight of the lens. I must say I'm surprised by anything other 30mm f.2 who initially had given for losing. I repeated the test with day light, the result was that on three shots he took in the 16-50 S 0,45 sec. 0.30 sec. and 0.36 sec. but on three shots only once he take the target. The 30mm took the shot in 0.96 and 0.83, but always perfectly centered focus. My conclusions are that the 30mm is a lens with excellent optical quality and decent quality focus, the engine is a little noisy but accurate. The 16-50 S is a lens all do great, it has an excellent quality and an ultrasonic motor, fast and quiet, however this speed pays worth less accuracy. This is only my opinion, based on practical and not scientific tests.
  13. 1 point
    If the stabilization is Software I don't think it will be Applied to undebayered Data because normally it implies rotation,etc. Maybe they could write the Data from the giroscope to a file and use that for a Software stabilizer on the Computer. But those are many Maybes.
  14. 1 point
    at 120mbps I didnt have my fast card at the time. will try again tomorrow 180mbps
  15. 1 point
    webrunner5

    Film Grain

    I thought it looked about right except for shots with people in them. Then it lost too much sharpness. Maybe at 75 to 80 percent could work? But Mattias had this in a topic he replied to you awhile ago. This IS the look you are looking for, just do it LoL.
  16. 1 point
    Yeah if the ML team has the inclination, and it's possible, the 77D could be a great option for low cost, handheld ML Raw. The software based IS in the XC10 is the best IS I have ever used. It's better than the IBIS in the a6500 and the GX85... no question. Other than a strap I was pulling taut, there was no other physical stabilization. During this shot(s) I walked forward backward and shuffled sideways... try and do that with a Panny...
  17. 1 point
    mercer

    De-Clicking Lenses

    Some of these vintage lenses look so great wide open and take away some of the harshness of ooc 4K, that a lot of the times, the variable ND can act as a clickless aperture.
  18. 1 point
    enny

    De-Clicking Lenses

    Hi guy i have set o yahical ml 2.8 lenses what do you think about De-Clicking lenses is it something you would do. I just did it to my 135mm its simple but i ind iris to be really smooth and now i can get really good control of the iris i mean like milliliter movements of iris.
  19. 1 point
    tupp

    De-Clicking Lenses

    De-clicking is definitely be beneficial if one shoots documentaries/events that often require the aperture to be ramped up/down during the shot (especially when using an on-camera mic). I have a few vintage Nikkors, but I rarely ramp the aperture while rolling, so I haven't really needed to de-click.
  20. 1 point
    Yeah, a C100 minus the top handle with the Sigma 17-50mm could be a cool combo. I briefly had that lens for my Nikon and it was almost as steady as a tripod for static shots... or light movements.
  21. 1 point
  22. 1 point
    Tito Ferradans

    Anamorphic on a Budget.

    Hey Mike, Thank you! :D The Kiptar is too big for me now. I never had one and I don't fancy it too much. But there's definitely someone in this forum that has one and loves it.
  23. 1 point
    Hi, I thought we were talking about £800 wedding packages not 5000 euro ones. Even then I hardly think that they do need so much time in post no matter what they say. I do think that both photographers and videographers ,with the former being the main culprits ,are very out of touch with what their output really costs. Doing two working days work for 2500-5000 euros is quite a lot of money. If it wasn't for the sentimental value that photographers/videographers take advantage of , the cost would be way down. Nobody employs a photographer for a friday night pissup with their mates since alcohol will provide them with all the sentiment they need.. Sure you can spend too much time in trying to nail something that will definitely not be noticed by non experts. Brides like the shallow DOF, colour me like a princess look.. It can mostly be achieved by the right light gear off the camera rather than tons of post processing. Photographers are much lazier in setting up favourable lighting since they have so much latitude in post and if push comes to shove nobody looks bad in B&W . The layman in the street cannot begin to fathom the amount of lighting required to shoot proper video. You are very correct in saying that we should always work with people that you can learn from and never stop the process of learning.That is a great attitude!
  24. 1 point
    jonpais

    Panasonic GH5 - all is revealed!

    @Borbarad Pretty much the entire interview consists of questions to the effect of why can't the camera do this? why can't the camera do that? Why can't the camera record 5K? Why can't it record 4K 60p 4:2:2 10 bit internally? Why doesn't it shoot HEVC in video mode? Why can't you record audio in VFR mode? So, not very interesting to me, maybe to someone else though.
  25. 1 point
    Shame I was out of town when you were in town Ed. A friend had a film in the festival, and I also missed that! He shot it on the 5D Mark II with Magic Lantern RAW... apparently looked just like film on the big screen. If anything, the small screen is more critical as you're sat so close to every pixel. What did you think to Berlin? Weird isn't it?
  26. 1 point
    SMGJohn

    Samsung NX Speed Booster

    I think the speed difference comes down to the fact that the motor in the 30mm has only a fixed focal length to move while the 16-50mm is a zoom and zoom lenses are ALWAYS slower than quality prime lenses, and yes Luca is right the zoom is slower at 50mm than it is on 16mm because the motor must move the zoom more at the longer ranges than it will have to in the wider ones. It be interesting to see how it acts as an adapter though.
  27. 1 point
    I was a Windows user for 10 years. Mid-20's, I just wanted to start getting on with what I use a computer for, rather than nurturing and babysitting a powerful OS and set of customisable options, custom hardware, etc. So far last 10 years I have been on OS X. The simplicity of Mac OS doesn't mean it's any less powerful than Windows, quite the opposite - much better memory management, less legacy code, better optimisation, better drivers and newer architecture all-round. The UX is more consistent and the presentation is less flakey. Across all apps, the user interface is familiar, similar and refined. Across all apps in Windows - BAM different every time. Windows slows down and starts getting unreliable after 6 months and you need to Google constant issues. Eventually it needs a re-install every year, whereas Mac OS will run for 5 years and be as fast at the end of it as it was at the start. The UNIX OS is it is based on is a fundamentally more optimised, minimalist piece of code than bloated Windows. You see it in Windows 10 - you have the new control panel interface, but the old one is still there under the hood and you can open that too. Also I fail to see what extra features Windows 10 actually offers over Mac OS to make it compelling... Aside from the Surface Pro tablets, which I've tried too and ended up returning eventually because touch on a desktop OS isn't all the way there yet in terms of how useful it is long-term for serious work... It is quicker for some things but holding a finger to the screen for hours of creative work is actually much more tiring than using a plain old mouse and keyboard.
  28. 1 point
    JazzBox

    Light m43 wide angle for Glidecam

    At the end I went to try both Panasonic 14mm and 15mm and the 15mm was great. I sold my 12-40 and took 2 Pana-Leica 15mm and 25mm, the lengths I used most of the time on 12-40. In the next future I'll took a 42.5 (the cheap Panasonic one or the Pana-Leica), but for the moment I can go 40mm with the 40-150 f/2.8 from Olympus, that is very good. Ciao
  29. 1 point
    Gregormannschaft

    New Sigma art glass!

    Apparently native FE lenses are coming soon as well. I'd love to finally cash in on my 24-105mm L lens and get a Sigma 24-70 2.8. I'll take any kind of autofocus I can get with my Sony A7SII at this point...more for casual photography than for video.
  30. 1 point
    Santiago de la Rosa

    New Sigma art glass!

    Mmm 14mm adn 135mm sound interesting
  31. 1 point
  32. 1 point
    Rinad Amir

    New Sigma art glass!

    Am happy with 18-35 & 50-100 love sharpness it gives and colour
  33. 1 point
    Again, nobody has yet done a conclusive, worthwhile "equivalence" test. I don't mean to sound harsh (nor to hijack this thread), but the pages you linked either lack actual equivalence tests or give dubious, useless results. The first page linked doesn't seem to contain any equivalence test -- it is just an essay titled "Sensor Crop Factors and Equivalence." If there is an actual test of DOF equivalence on that page, please point it out. The second page you linked actually contains a DOF equivalence test that seems to demonstrate that optics for larger sensors yield quite a significant difference in DOF when compared to the DOF of to smaller optic. So, it seems to demonstrate that the equivalence principle fails. I spotted the differences immediately, and I will point to some of the more obvious discrepancies. Here are the two images flashed back-to-back in a gif file: The bottle in the foreground stays sharp in both images, but look at how the sharpness of the bush and car dramatically change (red circle). Look at how the sharpness of the cast shadow and grass change (yellow circle). Look at how the sharpness of the building changes (blue circle). Does the DOF in these two flashing images seem equivalent? It doesn't seem the same to me. Now, I am not very good at making gif images, and I apologize for the rough dithering, but you can further confirm these differences yourself by downloading the two images from the linked site and switching back and forth between them in your favorite image viewer. Actually, anyone should be able to see the difference inside the red circle, merely by viewing the two images on their web site. On the other hand, I have to confess that this test is worthless. In the first place, it appears that the tester failed to eliminate the variable of in-camera sharpening, so it is very possible that one camera sharpened its entire image while the other camera didn't. More importantly, the tester put a lot of air between the foreground and the distant background. Some of the "magic" of larger format optics happens in that air between the FG and BG, but this comparison has no objects nor charts in that air to reveal what is happening to the focus there. This fatal blunder occurs in almost every equivalence test that I see. The third link that you gave is the Brightland Studios test which has been referenced by me and others on this forum in several threads. I am afraid that this is yet another misguided experiment in which the equivalence principle doesn't seem to hold up. The tester made two comparisons using the same camera and zoom lens in both tests. First he compared the equivalence between camera's full sensor read-out and the camera's crop mode: With the front of the subject sharp in both images, the apparent counter top (red circle) in the distant background,changes focus, and does not appear to be equivalent in the two images. Likewise, there is another detail in the distant background (blue circle) lacking equivalence of focus between the two test images. There seems to be other subtle focus discrepancies, that I will mention later. The tester acknowledged that the camera might apply a different degree of image processing/sharpening in full sensor mode than it would in crop mode, which could make the focus/DOF of the two test images seem more similar. So, he made another comparison, in which he shot both images in full sensor mode, but one of the images was shot optically as if it was in crop mode. That "simulated crop mode" photo was then cropped to matching size in post. Thus, in this second comparison, there was optical equivalence along with no difference in image processing/sharpening between the two shots: As you can see, with the difference in in-camera processing eliminated, there are significant areas of non-equivalence. In addition to the counter top changing, the bokeh changes size and softness (red circle), while the front of the subject remains sharp. The Canon logos conspicuously change their focus (blue circles) which happened more subtly in the first comparison, while the top buttons on the camera (yellow circle) do likewise. Part of the tripod head (green circle) also conspicuously goes in and out of focus, and it does so more subtly in the first comparison. So, the equivalence principle certainly seems to fail here, as well. However, there are serious problems with this test. For one thing he used the same zoom lens on all images. Not only does the character of the lens look the same in each photo, but aperture position (virtual/actual) doesn't necessarily change with the zoom's set focal length. So the zoom lens' aperture position probably doesn't match the differing aperture positions found on a prime lenses of the same focal length. This discrepancy could make the DOF appear more uniform than if the test were done with separate prime lenses of different focal lengths. Also, these Brightland Studios tests suffer from the same lack of any objects/charts in the important long stretch between the foreground subject and the distant background, so there is literally "nothing to see here." The fourth and fifth links you provided seem to go to different pages of the same earlier thread concerning the Kipon MF focal reducer. I am not sure what you expect me to find on these forum pages, but I do not see any equivalency tests. By the way, on page two of that very thread, I address the Brightland Studios test in several posts. I am hoping that one day someone will do a proper equivalency test with charts/objects placed at regular intervals extended behind the foreground. Ideally, one camera would use a tiny format (2/3" or S16) while the other camera would be a large format (Gonzalo Ezcurra's Mini Cyclops, the LargeSense back, or a shift/stitch adapter). Of course, a full frame camera with this Kipon focal reducer would be interesting to compare, too.
  34. 1 point
    Phil A

    Razer Blade - Returned, A Poem

    I love Windows (used 3.1, 95, 98, NT, XP, Vista, 7 and 10; some better than others), build my own desktop systems, had a bunch of laptops. And my systems always run, they have no kinks, no hickups. My girlfriend is stuck knee deep in the Apple environment, every time I use her MacBook Pro I want to scream but she really doesn't enjoy my windows systems. I feel like Apple is getting a bit too deep into "form over function" territory and too expensive, but I think both products can be fitting. Kinda sad though how the professional line gets left behind. On the other hand when my gf's iPhone 6s Plus broke she used my old Samsung Note 3 and she felt it's a superior phone. At the same time I enjoy my company's iPhone 6s workphone more than my private Android since a while. You say tomato, I say tomato.
  35. 1 point
    It's a physical restriction to some degree. The camera sensor with IBIS can only move by a very small margin in all directions without leaving the image circle projected by the lens (one reason why the bigger the sensor, the weaker the IBIS results). To overcome this issue you would need a small sensor (e.g. m4/3) and lenses with a relatively big image circle. A gimbal in contrast can go full potato with movements. Therefore I'm quite sure we will never reach the same possibilities with IBIS that a full external stabilizer gives. Using both together is pretty sweet though!
  36. 1 point
    Like i said... i seriously don't care if there is a small crop, as long as it works. It's an s35 sensor... a small crop is hardly life changing. A small crop on the xc10 is much more serious due to the small sensor... yet i still dont care... because it works! The g85 cant have magic lantern... so no point thinking about it in terms of my original post
  37. 1 point
    jonpais

    Razer Blade - Returned, A Poem

    I'm a 59 year-old has been. haha
  38. 1 point
    Yep, same. I work with a lot of the same photographers. They'll complain about lighting issues and it's like... what are you even talking about? Not to mention having the opportunity to use flash. I can't run a bunch of continuous lighting in a room without pissing everyone off. It's just an entirely different ballgame to get a good looking product. And I have actually considered it with Raw. Get a couple of 256gb cards. It'd be a monsterous storage hit at first. But you could scan through and quickly get the good clips to 95% balanced, export to dnxhd HQ, or even SQ and delete the raw. Footage would look much better and would probably give you a leg up, since even the high end wedding videos tend to have pretty crappy looking color throughout lots of it. No fault of the shooters, just the nature of the gig with crappy codecs.
  39. 1 point
    There's a trick to panning with 5 axis IBIS cameras - you have to learn how the device behaves under different kinds of movement, ie. you can't just pan any old way and expect it to work. This is because, among other things, the IBIS is trying to keep the image still, while you're trying to move it. Plus some lenses are better at it than others. So a super slow or fast pan might not work as well as one that gets the speed just right for the camera to work out that it should release and re-grab at the right points. I think of it like stuttering. If you know what you're going to say before you say it you decrease stuttering a lot. As for the pistol grip, I keep seeing them put out improved models. Great advances in that area at the moment.
  40. 1 point
    dbp

    Camera advice. Best image, ignore rest. $3000

    Yep, tends to be big boy stuff, and I understand it. Funny though, the paradox is that it's *very* valuable for quick and dirty, low budget stuff, and events. The very places it's used the least is when it can help the most. A lot of times, lighting is minimal, set up time is minimal, they don't want to mess around staging stuff and repeating stuff, so you end up getting what you can get quickly and on the fly. It's very freeing to not have to worry about getting an accurate white balance while shooting. So many times I wish I could go RAW at weddings, but the storage would be horrendous. Crappy mixed lighting conditions, quickly moving between indoors and outdoors, harsh exteriors during mid day. All sorts of things where Raw and lattitude is invaluable. I love only having to worry about composition, focus, lighting ratios (if controlled) and getting a fat negative. The rest is all done in post.
  41. 1 point
    Yeah, way out of my price range, but maybe in a couple years it can meet me halfway.
  42. 1 point
    Kisaha

    Samsung NX Speed Booster

    @hini The 16-50 S is a 2-2.8f lens, the fastest standard zoom in its category, ever. It is like you have a 16-23 2f zoom lens, which covers the 24mm, 28mm 32mm and 35mm prime lenses with 2f. Not bad at all.. Then you can go the rest of the range with 2.8f, not bad at all, either, just not that unique.
  43. 1 point
    Liszon

    Razer Blade - Returned, A Poem

    I have been using windows for exactly 20 years now, and the secret is I believe to get a monster hardware under it. Especially because of that I would never judge OS performance if it runs on a laptop. They have all sorts of crazy resource management solutions built into them, thermal throttling, shit bios etc. Who knows what trickery they had to employ to get that 18mm thick Razor Blade 1 degree cooler than lava..
  44. 1 point
    jonpais

    Razer Blade - Returned, A Poem

    Since the GH5 has USB-C, I wish someone would test the speed difference between offloading 30GB to a new Mac with the cable vs an SD card on the 2015 MBP.
  45. 1 point
    jonpais

    Razer Blade - Returned, A Poem

    Sorry, I couldn't resist. 🤓 I think it's like saying Fuji users are all hipsters. I don't think you can judge people by the computer they use. As far as Xiaomi goes, if they had Apple's iOS, I'd get one in a heartbeat. Edit: I own the 2016 MBPr with touch bar and haven't experienced any problems as of yet.
  46. 1 point
    I made one from black cardboard and used a fishing line. Obviously, the oval shape could be nicer, but at least I know that this anafake does not worth 50 bucks. You get the fishing line in your bokeh, the lights will be clearly divided in to two and the "waterfall bokeh" will have a fishing line like horizontal line. You can get rid of this by using a thiner line, but it will kill the flares. Check the cinemorphs characteristics, it's the same, anyway, the cardboard will definatelywork with your speedbooster
  47. 1 point
    Don Kotlos

    Panasonic GH5 - all is revealed!

    Yes definitely the result of grading. You can see the difference at 11:42 with the LUT applied. It was by choice, but I also believe the should ease a bit the contrast on the shadows. Pretty funny that he went in all the trouble not to crush the blacks and then they used an LUT that crushed everything up to midtones Yes but still very good. Maybe one of the best skintones out of GH5 that I have seen.
  48. 1 point
    Cas1

    Panasonic GH5 - all is revealed!

    I think this scene has too much added contrast. I hope TCS can make the raw footage available, so we can actually see what the camera can do / has done.
  49. 1 point
    Davey

    Panasonic GH5 - all is revealed!

    Very impressive. The acting was so good that I forgot to look for any issues with the camera. I guess that if the story is good enough, the vast majority of people will not care one jot for anything else.
  50. 1 point
    "5 axis stabilisation" is bullshit, its a software only thing that you have with every normal Video editing software.
EOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
EOSHD Pro Color 3.0 for Sony cameras
EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony cameras
EOSHD 5D Mark III 3.5K RAW Shooter's Guide


×
×
  • Create New...