Leaderboard

Looks like Blackmagic Raw isn't to far away! Someone from the Blackmagic forum went to a Blackmagic camera masterclass and noticed the P4K was running firmware with Blackmagic Raw installed.

FWIW, one of the favorite docs I shot was with a GM1 handheld. There's a lot of things to worry about with making movies. Sure, camera mass is one of them, but, to me, pretty inconsequential on the priority list.

I'll sell mine for 8K to you

My cage arrived today!

the preceding* body of professional work im influenced by was shot on film also, i can be objective about color, i went to art SCAD, SVA and Art Center, and took multiple color theory classes, because i was required to

More serious samples in natural light (or nice level of its absence) - GH5s and Terra 4k

Imagine if you owned a house, and thus EVERY law that was broken by anybody in your house, you are then equally "guilty" of the crime as well. Even if you were never there yourself, and had no knowledge whatsoever of the crime.

Will do! These are LogC + R709, converted LogC + R709, and Panasonic V35 R709 thrown in for reference: https://flic.kr/s/aHsmzCgFFP And these are all the raw files, LogC and VLog L: http://www.mediafire.com/folder/x3ub82eh21u63/ALEXA vs GH5 (Side-by-Side)

How to catch balloon in the dark

You mean A7sII right? The A73 looks garbage starting from ISO3200 IMHO with all its ghosting issues.

Despite their terrible 4K Crop, Canon is definitely doing some interesting things. Seems like their EF to RF adapter with a variable ND will be shipping at the end of this month, so that could be a big game changer. I've always hated digital stabilization, but has anyone else used it in the EOS R? It is surprisingly good and I haven't noticed any of the warping effect that often plagues digital stabilization. Most excited for NAB 2019 to see if Canon can put some new energy into the wide open (and rather dull since the original Sony FS5) $3-$7k cinema camera market. C100 III or XC-style Super35 ILC? Hope so.

The handheld look from a small mirrorless isn't bad if you use the neck strap and hold it out far enough to keep it tight. But still, IBIS would be needed for me to consider one.

Yeah the small size is great for photography, but for video these small camera's just jitter all over the place as they are too low weight. Sure Ibis helps, but I guess it does not look as natural as a handheld heavy weight camera.

I didn't mind the weight of the body when using it in Barcelona. It's in the D750 ballpark for weight, not the D5! It's the lenses that add the most weight when it comes to full frame. The 24-105 zoom was pretty light and 50mm large but not too bad weight wise. Panasonic could maybe have shaved 200g off the body but when using a heavy Sigma ART lens on it via a Canon adapter, I doubt this would be noticeable.

Based on what I read in my ten minutes trawling dpreview, Sony has already been (way) ahead of Canon in video autofocus for quite a while, but DPAF has more hype behind it. I have no idea whether or not this is actually true. Regardless, I've used DPAF a fair amount. The video above isn't enough to draw conclusions from, but if it is representative of what Sony is doing, it's well ahead of DPAF's current state.

Yes, that's why I didn't even consider filters for so long. Its not specific to Firecrest, those are the reference Full Spectum NDs for EC though (how the Day conversion was made). It needs a minimum of a 2 stop ND to fully cancel out the reflection; the glass also needs to be parallel to the sensor plane, as one ND I have is slightly off axis, resulting in a diverging reflection. Interestingly, the Alexa doesn't even have this problem, despite having CMOS, as best I can tell. The falloff is silk and there are no ghost reflections, as I believe the filter is 'integrated', and not a stack (that causes 'stair-stepping' falloff): GH5 GH5 (1/4 LC, DD1, Contrast matched) Alexa

Minor Firmware update but seems to address the various banding/bugs case issues @Snowbro has been complaining about: Firmware Version 1.1.0 incorporates the following enhancements and fixes. 1. Support for "continuous shooting" is available when "silent shutter" has been enabled. 2. Corrects a phenomenon in which an error may occur if there is a large number of files in a specific format on the memory card. 3. Corrects a phenomenon in which an error may occur when silent shutter has been enabled. 4. Corrects a phenomenon in which horizontal linear noise may occur when using specific lenses together with certain recording image quality settings. 5. Corrects a phenomenon in which the information displayed in the viewfinder may become abnormal. EOS R Firmware Version 1.1.0

This topic has already been covered here. A73 may rank #1 in color accuracy, Sony is often considered last position as far as overall color science appeal (Venice excluded). XT3 also ranks #1 in accuracy but offers some of the most pleasing color sciences imo as they are based on actual film stock (Eterna being my personal favorite). EOS R also gives you the choice in between "classic" EOS color science & "neutral" a more Alexa like color matrix. Of course this is all subjective. After all some people love shooting black & white. How is that for color accuracy? I want my exposure metering & WB to be accurate. Color is a different matter. I'll shoot in neutral profile or even log if i want the least color science influence. That test page also feels somewhat inaccurate/incomplete, as we know Sony AWB can fall apart under mixed lighting & XT3 can have weird color shifts when shooting Log.

I've only shot with an A7SII once, but HD resolution is important to me too, and I was also initially skeptical of the A7III, so hopefully I can help. My benchmark for good HD quality was my GH4, which looked pretty great IMO in both its 200mbps All-I and 100mbps IPB modes. I film stuff with lots of camera & subject motion and detail, so I would use the All-I mode if I was moving the camera a lot, or the IPB if it was a simpler pan or tilt (IPB is sharper at lower motion levels but degrades as motion increases; All-I is less sharp than IPB's max, but stays consistent despite motion). After the GH4 I went to the G85, and the lower 28mbps HD was definitely softer than the GH4's HD, unless it was an almost static shot. One of my only disappointments with that camera though- price, IBIS, and the slight color and ISO improvements over the GH4 outweighed the HD quality dip for me. I was all set to go to the GH5, which by all accounts has pretty stunning HD resolution, when the A7III was announced, at 50mbps in 1080p60, and 100mbps in 1080p120. Bitrate isn't really an absolute measuring tool though: there are plenty of cams that can pack tons of detail into even less, and Sony says its encoding is two-pass vs. everyone else doing one pass, so it seemed totally possible that it could be fine. And bitrate is only part of the equation anyways: how the cameras are reading the sensor in HD mode is the real key here. I wanted FF for photos, and AF for video, and I had been tolerating the G85's HD pretty well, so I went for it, and I'm mostly happy. Its HD is better than the G85 to my eye, but not quite up to the GH4, although the 96p was garbage on the GH4 so having 120 that's at least decent (and not cropped) kinda helps balance things out I guess. I haven't shot with an a6300/6500 but from what I've seen online, their HD is pretty awful, and the A7III HD is definitely better. These two videos from Max Yuryev helped put my mind mostly at ease, hopefully they will play at the relevant bits: So, a little worse than the A7SII, but better than all the other Sonys, especially the a6500. Personally the AF and better rolling shutter alone outweigh that small difference with the A7SII, not to mention all the other improvements, but it's still kind of a personal call to make. Motion cadence, I find it fine, but I shoot mostly at a (gasp!) 30p base, not 24p, so I am probably not the best judge of this. The 24p stretch thing was like 1% I think? Not even noticeable unless you're A/B'ing identical shots back and forth. And I believe one of the firmware updates has fixed it anyways? Oh, and here's a handy tool over at DPReview, for comparing video res between cameras. Doesn't tell you how it performs with motion, of course, but it's something. https://***URL removed***/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr29_0=sony_a7iii&attr29_1=sony_a7sii&attr29_2=sony_a6500&attr29_3=sony_a7riii&attr72_0=1080&attr72_1=1080&attr72_2=1080&attr72_3=1080&normalization=full&widget=602&x=-0.48927038626609437&y=-0.17768028516588977

Actually, I'm used to exclusively shoot with Voigts, so even in the middle of suburban night I am rarely, if ever, above iso 800 (That's the reason for question about rethinking matter of lenses.)

Someone should tell Picasso that his art does not accurately reflect real people. Art doesn't exist in a vacuum, it is always created and viewed in reference to previous work. Over time, film has deviated from being completely in reference to the real world, and has developed its own conventions, symbols, and nuances. New films are viewed in reference to other films, not the real world. In the same way, narrative storytelling, sound design, musical scores, and all other aspects of filmmaking are built on previous films, not just real life You seem to be implying the color should be accurate to real life unless the artist specifically wants it to be different. This implies that using color as accurate to expected film convention is the work of a "hack." I think this is false. Would you consider Max Richter's album Vivaldi Recomposed to be creative?

Yeah you can use a speedbooster with them. The XH1 120fps is not as good as the XT3's. I'd consider the Nikon Z6 it has very nice 120p. I'd say the Nikon Z6, A7III, and Fuji XT3 have the nicest 120p on the market right now. The Pocket has great 120p though its cropped 2.8x The Nikon is a good option. Though if you already have M43 lenses a Pocket 4k would be an easier switch. Just be ready to use NR in post for a clean image at high ISO's.

Not yet. But it seems like external recording looks great on this camera (basically unprocessed and really smooth). Will rent it in the near future for sure. Also consider the Pocket 4K. Add a speedbooster XL and it will shoot at a 1.2 crop. If properly exposed even ISO12800 still looks really nice. When recording RAW it is basically unprocessed footage - something you can only get from way more expensive cameras.

I have it. Great build quality.

Awesome Page. There are some very interessting facts, which explain the Canon / Sony Color Discussion: A7III: Color reproduction by the Sony Alpha 7 Mark III is accurate, with only one color showing a strong deviation from the original. ∆E ranges from 8.9 at ISO100, to a small range between 9.7 and 10.0 at ISO400 to ISO 1600. Photo: The automatic white balance implemented by the Alpha 7 Mark III is excellent, with values between 0.0 and 0.2 at all ISOs measured between ISO100 and ISO25600. Video: Automatic white balance is not excellent, with scores of 1.5 (low ISO) and 1.4 (high ISO). Just for the record - DR: Photo: The dynamic range exhibited by the Alpha 7 Mark III is very good: over 10.1 f-stops (up to 10.3) at all ISOs tested between ISO100 to ISO800. Dynamic range remains high as ISO increases (9.8 f-stops at ISO1600) up to ISO6400 (9.2 f-stops). However, once again, ISO12800 shows poorer results, with a drop of nearly a full f-stop to 8.3. The extended ISOs are even worse: for example, 6.9 f-stops at Hi1. Video - Dynamic range is good: 9.0 f-stops at low ISO and 8.0 at high ISO. EOS R: Color reproduction is good, with only 6 colors deviating strongly, five of which are reds. ∆E is consistent and ranges from 10.3 to 10.6 at all ISOs tested. Photo: Automatic white balance is very good, ranging between 0.3 and 0.6 at all ISO s tested from ISO 100 to ISO 12800. Video: Automatic white balance is decent at high ISO (0.7) but poor at low ISO (1.2). Color reproduction is nearly as good as in still images, with a ∆E of 11.7 at both high and low ISO . Just for the record - DR: Photo: Maximum dynamic range: 14.1 f-stops measured at ISO 800. Dynamic range is more than 10 f-stops at all ISO s from ISO 100 up through ISO 3200. At ISO 100, dynamic range is measured at 10.9 f-stops, at ISO 400 12.9, and at ISO 1600, 11.0. Dynamic range is poorer at the higher ISO s, with a minimum tested among the native ISO s, or 7.9 f-stops at ISO 25600. Video: Dynamic range is good in video (9.7 and 9.0 f-stops for low and high ISO , respectively). Automatic white balance is decent at high ISO (0.7) but poor at low ISO (1.2). Color reproduction is nearly as good as in still images, with a ∆E of 11.7 at both high and low ISO. Conclusion: Color Reproduction and Color "Beautyness" are two different shoes. And Auto White Balance makes a different, too. Imho, the 5 deviating reds and the better AWB is the key, why a lot of people might prefer canon colors over sony - in terms of video.

Maybe they've deliberately chosen the 14th to announce it as its Valentines Day and they want to show some love to their customers. Or is it going to be a case of Roses are red, Violets are blue, Canon is Canon, No 4K for you.

I am either misinterpreting people's comments or everyone has lost their minds. If it was their material up on a paid service with no compensation or approval, they would be all up in arms. I've not read the safe harbor law, but common sense says it would not give companies the right knowingly leave copyrighted content up on their site, and, even worse, try to make money off of it. If it doesn't say that, then the people in the EU are on drugs.

Shot this mood piece to show a bit of Nikon's low-light capabilities in video. No use of noise reduction at all, so doing so should get you some super clean video with not a lot of trouble---IF your lenses are fast enough in certain circumstances. Also, you can get an idea of how well 420/8bit video grades--I did some fairly extreme things to get the looks I wanted.

Well, i store anamorphic and taking lens rigged together with rods and supports. And this way i really dont move it so much. You can see i use 2 long lens supports: one blocks the taking focus and the other one block anamorphic aligment and focus.

No and no.