Leaderboard

We are living in a post-truth / alternative facts world now so while it may be factually provable by optical calculations and various laws of physics that the only thing that determines perspective is the subject to object distance it is also equally valid to say a 'wide angle' lens has a certain 'look' that is independent of the format and personal belief in this or any other similar notion is just as valid. Indeed there is evidence to be had that there is a vast conspiracy involving all the camera manufacturers and scientists in the world to promote the idea of 'perspective' to sell more cameras and lenses. For many years now we have all been ready to accept the scientists opinion that the world is round but thanks to a growing number of brave and pioneering individuals and groups around the world the truth is finally emerging that the world is infact flat. Only just recently was I able to satisfy myself that this was indeed the case when I took my old school ruler down to the sea and held it up to the horizon - no so-called expert can argue with that can they!

Recently I took my antiquated Collectors Edition NX-1 out for nostalgia purposes. Came up with this. Shot it with the S-Lenses. Mostly 16-50 + 4 filters over it (BTW Autofocus is null & void with 4 Filters stacked on it) Ungraded Still below if Interested

I think for 1080p vlogging the Canon M50 will be a much better choice. I consider the X-T100 a cheap Fuji camera for photography. I bet the X-T100 has the same 1080p quality as the X-A5 which is not great. Low detail full of aliasing artifacts:

CAME-TV has a new camera rig that just came out, comes with a big block at the bag (for powering, monitoring, and audio): https://www.came-tv.com/collections/came-terapin-rig/products/came-tv-terapin-rig-for-panasonic-gh4-and-gh5 Is it worth nearly six hundred bucks? (for the non-mattebox/FF version) Hmmmm.... dunno, but I guess if it makes the client impressed with your "big camera" (totally not a stills camera! ha) then I suppose so. Or if you actually need all the functionality there, then it can make a worthwhile value proposition to consider vs buying the components individually yourself and building it up.

Work in advertising and haven't really had much time for my own projects the past years. But I am releasing a music video in June that I directed, shot (handheld BMPCC), edited and colored. For now, this is my latest, for mother's day:

The advantages of X-Trans are 1. Less aliasing without an AA filter 2. Better light collection efficiency. The disadvantages on the other hand are 1. Less color information 2. X-trans artifacts on certain patterns 3. Processing inefficient Having used a lot of Fuji cameras over the years, I would prefer if Fuji moved to Bayer. The AA is not that important with the >24MP resolution and the low light advantage of the X-Trans is maybe 1/2 a stop. For photography, I find the gain of color information far more important. For example I found the output from X100 to have much better colors and I know a lot of people the feel the same. I agree with Chris that the only reason that Fuji keeps on using the X-trans is for marketing purposes. There are a lot of people out there that believe that X-Trans is what makes Fuji colors nice, but in reality it is what holds the Fuji colors back. Not to mention how much it would improve their video performance in general.

A quick test of another @jonpais Sigma recommendation as I could get one really cheap here today is the 60mm 2.8 in E mount.

Some frames from my first day out with a Sony A6500 and a Contax Zeiss 85mm f1.4 (top) and Contax Zeiss 35-70mm f3.4 macro (bottom) on a Metabones CY to E Speedbooster. I am not fond of the camera or the rain.

Well you're talking about two elements of actor craft here. Acting performance and then staging (blocking). Are you worried about the actors performance or how they're blocking and staging the scene ? Or both ? For sure they're related, but in my view (and I'm a DP not a director) actors want to be lead through a conversation about blocking. It's a negotiation. But there's nothing worse than demonstrating by example or showing them another scene or being literal. Blocking is one of the most mis-understood elements of the craft of filmmaking,. And no one ever says "great staging" or "amazing blocking" when talking about a film they like. They're talk about editing, performance, the photography, the design...but never ever blocking. It takes a while tor realise how powerful a tool this can be and it really SHOULD be the director that drives these choices. From staging / Blocking comes coverage. And it factors hugely in performance. Normally I prefer to have the set cleared, you listen to the actors say the words and then you block. This is a very very crucial and creative time for the director and actor. The director may have really specific ideas about how they want the scene to stage and move through it's dramatic beats. Or you might be looking for them right there and then in that moment and you work WITH the staging as you block to try and labour, extract and bring these beats into the light. Good actors will be able to adapt their blocking as you talk ab out beats that are important. They find ways to "physicalise" what you're asking for emotionally and dramatically. If the issue the OP has here is just "overacting" my best would be to ask the actors to "do less" or "scale it back". As an experiment sometimes it's fun to run the scene without speaking the lines. Just do it in body language. Try a rehearsal like that. Then tell them to do the silent rehearsal with as little body language as possible. There are some great and obvious examples of blocking WITH CAMERA (hey I'm a DP) and how the actor blocking is DRIVING what you do with a camera. here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfqD5WqChUY and here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2THVvshvq0Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT3FZdMqtVk https://medium.com/@dalonsoperez/mad-max-silhouette-and-clear-staging-fd67eda4b4d9 JB

Hey, finally done with the trailer to our debut feature film at 55Media shot almost entirely on the Panasonic GH5 (some shots on the GoPro6 and P4P) in just 12 days. Our best work yet. Movie is still going through post-production. Production company: 55Media Director/Writer: Uche Aguh Director of Photography: Dennis Schmitz (me) Assistant Director: Ukairo U. Ukairo. Starring: Jarius Drew Sowells, Kayode Akinyemi, Vincent Ramirez, Thiree Pinnock, Julian Horton, Obum Nwankwo and J Shawn Durham as 'Daddy G' Editing done in Premiere. Colorgrading done in Davinci Resolve. Dealing with the usual quirks of this camera, but results are still great. More information: www.imdb.com/title/tt7928156 www.55media.net

Sony do, although it's not totally comprehensive. I'm in the process of porting my Panasonic hardware controller to Sony so watch this space.

Yeah a card with your Vimeo link would be better.

It's my 'around the house shot getter'. Wouldn't mind a successor with new sensor tech, articulated touchscreen & mic-in so it could become an actual 'daily driver' again.

Most exciting thing about this announcement is that Sony has no excuse anymore to not include a flip around screen. ???

Does anybody still use LX100? I I still love it, though feel the lack of DR often.

Xtrans - IMO - is keeping Fuji a little behind the curve. It was great with 16mp images, but with the 24mp sensor its seems to be holding performance back, as Fuji themselves have stated Xtrans eats up a lot more processing power compared to a Bayer array. They said no zebras because the processor is maxed out downsampling 4k. And despite all that, its still a really fast camera. I've commented numerous times on Fujirumors that I'd like to see a Bayer version of the XT2 with the XProcessor Pro and I get roasted. Fuji has painted themselves into a corner as well, if a Bayer XT2 theoretically outperformed the Xtrans cams, it would make all their claims about Xtrans superiority nothing more than a big steaming pile of poo. It seems they're sticking with Xtrans for the upcoming XT3 and Fuji has cultivated a fanboy user base of old-fart photo types that whine about any advancement - like IBIS, flappy LCD's and touchscreens. Though bumping the bitrate in the XH1 was a nice surprise, hopefully its foreshadowing a future GH5-esque, video centric body. Cool beans about the XA5 getting a AF update. I've thought about getting the XA5/XT100 as a cheap backup stills body, and to do a Fuji Bayer vs. Fuji Xtrans comparison. Cheers Chris

I thought they'd released a bug fix version, didn't realise they'd pulled the new stuff out completely. Here you go, here's the V4. FWUP0010.DAT

Yeah it's a 2.4x crop so similar to GH4 4K and the c-mount lenses need to be over 25mm to cover. Wide angle and zooms tend not to work. Check out the Blackmagic Super 16mm c-mount lens thread here... And the lenses sticky always worth a look My M50 has arrived as well and been shooting c-mount with it. Zeiss Tevidon 25mm F1.4 favourite so far, looks lovely! The Canon TV 50mm F1.4 is also nice. It's just that they are a bit soft wide open and the M50 doesn't apply much sharpening to the picture so it can look a little mushy... filmic and analogue though, which is better than over sharpened and digital.

4K Burst with 1 second pre recording, 4K Multi Focus, 4K Timelapse. I think the 4K of this camera isn‘t as much about video as it is for stills. What I do find interesting is, that the camera can do 30 minutes of video recording. Seems like the X-Trans sensor and X processor really generate a lot of heat The X-T100 is claimed to have much better focussing than than the X-A5. And those algorithms as well as 30 minute video recording are coming to the X-A5 in a firmwareupdate soon :D

Ive enjoy this little pocket 4K "camcorder" vey much so I had to put together a review.

I think since the X-T20 is already such a bargain, it would be churlish to complain about the T-100 not doing proper 4K. It's not like Fuji is pulling a Canon and leaving us no alternative but to spend $3000 if you want Super 35mm 4K on their stills cameras. They have offered plenty of very good value for money 4K cameras - indeed one of them became 4K for free, with a firmware update. Pretty generous if you ask me. The 4K 15p on this should have stored each frame as a JPEG instead, and they should have called it a continuous shooting mode. Marketing it as "video" is the mistake.

Cheers Don. Understanding equivalence was a super useful, practical insight for me. So if a thread keeps a constructive and inquisitive tone, I am glad to see people explaining and listening to each other

I'll put my hand up too and say I never use AF and only sometimes use IS. IS is great on static shots, but problematic on moving / tracking shots. Just like gimbals, with many "tells" for bad operating. But I'm not everyone. JB

im gonna make a camera that films in 16k at 3fps but the 3fps part is a secret, you have to buy the camera to find out about it and before you buy you have to sign a nondisclosure agreement

This actually isn't true, its a myth repeated throughout the interweb when people discuss Fuji. I shoot manual with auto ISO, I constantly move the SS around - especially when shooting stills - I wouldn't have bought Fuji if I had to move two dials as that would be a major PITA. All you have to do set the SS dial to "T" and use the front or rear control dial like you would with any other camera. I've never actually used the SS dial with the XT2, its locked while set to "T" mode. The XH1 also has a 1/48 option when shooting 24p, something my a7r2 lacks. Note the T right next to Bulb mode, just lock the dial there and pick front or rear control dial (rear is default) to scroll SS's, and you can access all of them, not just what's on the dial. You can also assign ISO to the front dial. Fuji's are incredibly customizable. Chris But with Fuji you can just use the front and rear dials to control SS and ISO, you don't have to use the top dials exclusively. I don't use them at all. Below is the menu where you move ISO to the front command dial. I agree the stinkin headphone jack should have been on the XT2 and XH1 and I'd like to see a bigger battery as well. I'm betting the GFX battery makes its way into the higher end models starting with the XT3. It took Sony 7+ years to update the battery in E-mount bodies, they're not exactly at the forefront in that department. Same for the 100mbps video.

There is one thing for sure, and that is that contentious people like LvT promote robust discussion. And I would say that is probably a positive outcome. I don't agree with the key premises of Andrew's argument, nor the conclusions that follow, and I think it is reasonable to contest the argument on that basis. Perhaps I have missed something as well and I can learn from the discussion. But I'm not sure that personalising things is particularly useful, more of a distraction. Sometimes, a different conception of the problem leads to different conclusions.

Oblique rays strike the center of the image as well as the corners. These are aperture dependent and are called marginal rays. The relationship between f-number and the marginal ray angle is given by f/# = sin(theta), where theta is the marginal ray angle. So, at f/1 the marginal ray angle is 30 degrees, and so on. The obliquity of the marginal ray does cause a form of pixel vignetting that perhaps should be called pixel apodization. The effect is that the edges of bokeh blurs - where the marginal ray obliquity is highest - is darkened relative to the center. The good news is that this is the definition of "good bokeh". I think Andrew's two sample images reveal this effect. I would guess that the bottom image was shot with the faster lens.

@Ollywood88 I love hearing your thoughts and perspective on the C500. I own and love my 1DC and have been hesitant to get rid of it. But C500 with Canon Raw makes a lot of sense for me and my workflow. Im having to convert all my MJPG files to ProRes on a daily basis and its a pain. If I could natively dump my footage into FCPX and actually have RAW. ooooh man. I love the C300 mk1 and debated getting one as well...so having the C500 in addition to the 1DC would be a match made in heaven since they were sorta made together. So funny that it has taken this long for this tech to be obtainable enough for people like me. I think the C500 cost like $30,000 or something when it came out. I saw one on eBay for buy it now at $4500. Insanity. Here's a project I DP'd on using the C500 over a year ago I did. (The editors had to edit on a 720p timeline....)

Good article but what about the image quality at 0.95 ? I tried the 25mm on my GH4 and I was not very impressed by the quality wide open: ton of vignetting and CA, very soft image. The advantage of 35mm lenses on FF is that you can find very good options (e.g Sigma Art) and stop them down to f2 or f2.8 where they really shine. Don't forget the traditional "whaaaaat's up guyyyyyys" at the beginning of each video, along with "SUSCRIBE" with your hands pointing down toward the button...

Will be joining the YouTube party at some point.

@Mark Romero 2 Sure, bud My only short to get into a couple of big festivals. Also a no budget project with a few friends, shot on a hacked GH2 (Flowmotion) with vintage Nikon AI/AIS lenses.

This was such a simple shoot, but the story really just fell into place and came together. This is a little piece on my Great Uncle that I shot several years ago on my 7D and a 24mm L Prime lens. This video changed my career...

Yes, and in combination with a Tiffen Low light contrast filter. But Keep in mind my objective here was to challenge the "unacceptable noise" comment that some people hold against this camera, and others in the same class in general. A little Neat Video goes a long way. Also, by the time you add in more contrast or an s-curve to the footage, a lot of those artifacts perceptually go bye-bye. This isn't anything new. It has to be done on a lot of Alexa, RED and certaintly Blackmagic systems as well. Sony set such a high and impractical bar in my opinion. The high ISO capability is literally teaching a generation of how to NOT properly light and expose a dark scene, esstentially stripping away a really good tool that has been succesfully used for many of decade. And now the expectation (bad practice) of using very high ISO gets wrapped up in other systems, like the GH5s. It still comes with other compromises too. Darkness IS information in terms of narrative work, and I feel like I'm going to be evangelizing this more and more, and I'm already blue in the face as it is. ? Yes, this emoji is yellow. The viewer does not need to see every detail in a scene to comphrehend what the scene is relating. That would fall more into line with documentation. A narrative piece is not a document of antiquity, it's a story, therefore an illusion. The human brain is really good at filling in the blank spaces. All you need to give the viewer are hints, the brain parses the rest. It's pretty remarkable, and testimate to how powerful the mind is. Take my profile image of the man sitting in the car. You only see small hints of a car, some seat, some steering wheel, both descending into shadow. But you as the viewer know he's sitting in a car and not a train. Correct? It's what you don't see that's drawling you in. So going back to high ISO, do you really want to see all the details in the scene? I say, shadows are friends, not combatants. I learned this actually in my fine art classess in college some 22 years ago, and it was practiced knowledge long, long, long before that, and has been effective for all kinds of mediums within the arts and sciences.

This is what I mean by depth: if you would film this with a smaller sensor and place the camera in the exact same place and try to have the same frame you would have to use a different lens, maybe a 1000mm, then the plane wouldn't look so close to the actors.