Andrew Reid

Happy holidays Eric. Thanks for the site. Looks great

Yeah the battery life is weak with the small Sony batteries. But you can use a v-lock adapter if you want to use an external battery or... just put a much larger Sony battery on the back and carry 3 more with you. Plastic has an upside in that it is very light. Shogun weighs very little, that's good. That said, I think there should be an upgraded model made, with upgraded build quality. The firmware is still early days that's true. Plenty to be added via firmware updates. For now though I am just happy to get such a lovely screen and the massive bump in image quality. It's well worth the $2k. And the punch-in zoom & waveforms work really well. Haven't tried peaking yet. Not really needing it!

Yeah the Sigma 20mm F1.8 is good for the price. Not quite as good as the Samyang 24mm F1.4 especially in the corners and it distorts more than the Zeiss Jena 20mm F2.8 (which is around the same price) though. If you don't need the faster aperture get the Zeiss, it's superb. Sharp as hell!

You've definately under exposed the A7S shot on the left. You can either take my advice or leave it, but the way it stands at the moment it isn't acceptable to have such biased and incorrectly setup tests posted on my forum. S-LOG needs to be 2 stops to the right on the A7S exposure meter, you can raise the ISO in low light to achieve this. Shoot ISO 12,800 for example and expose to the 1D C shot at ISO 3200 in Resolve and you will have a cleaner image than under exposing S-LOG at ISO 3200. S-LOG to the Shogun isn't working optimally yet so you should be using CINE 4 in low light with the black levels +15. And actually I never ever said the 1D C didn't have a good low light image. What I said is that it's not better than the A7S in low light and it's $12,000. Facts my friend. You are applying a flawed setup to your test and passing it off as a real world result. I find it quite disingenuous actually.

​Well, that much is evident!

​Hey Julian did you get my email last week with the guide? Let me know. Cheers!

Unfortunately there's no squeeze option on the Shogun in the current firmware. Make this thread as loud as possible and I will feed it back to Atomos. They are listening.

Next time it happens please cut and paste the error page onto a PM to me and then I will be able to investigate the fix. Thanks! The IP Board software is v4 beta which is why there's still some bugs to iron out.

S-LOG 2 is missing a bit over HDMI to the Shogun and Doug has under-exposed it. You need to compare the A7S in CINE 4 to the 1D C. Sometimes I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall in my own back yard!

​You're absolutely right.

Great thread everyone, really wonderful stuff. I recently got a Nikon 28-105mm F3.5-4.5 AF-D. Not an expensive lens it cost 150 euros. If you are looking for an affordable full frame zoom, this thing is astonishingly good. Really surprised with it. It's sharp, very little distortion considering the range. Less distortion than most £600 modern Canon or Nikon zooms. It's parfocal, so focus doesn't shift when you zoom out. Very rare trait in such a cheap lens and great for video shooters. It's macro abilities are INSSSSAAANE!! 2:1 macro at 105mm at the flick of a switch. Macro range goes from 50-105mm. What modern zoom does this? The only downside is that it doesn't focus as closely at the wide end, 28mm. F3.5-F4.5 becomes a much more attractive aperture on a Speed Booster. On a full frame sensor it's fine because you're still getting a very shallow DOF and these sensors tend to have very good higher ISO performance as well - in that respect F4-ish isn't too far off F2.8 if compensated by raising the ISO a bit. It has a manual aperture ring so you can use it via a cheap passive adapter on pretty much anything, even my Samsung NX1 likes it. I use it on my Nikon D750 the most, often for stills where the AF isn't too shabby for an older lens. It dates back to 1999. Highly recommended.

Allow me to be frank here. You sir, are talking out of your arse. As a self proclaimed "pro" on these forums you really should do better than to put out biased information especially with the thousands of dollars worth of equipment you're testing out, allegedly. Two Otus lenses for a test and you still can't put good info out there!? You say the rolling shutter on the A7S makes the camera unusable in many situations. Well the 1D C has the same 25-30ms rolling shutter in 4K approximately so your same criticism applies to that too right? "Unusable in many situations". This most clearly, I think, shows your bias... it's scientifically proven right there. It's not fair to mislead users through my forum with your bias. You either stop the bias, or leave. I don't work hard on a resource to have it bullshitted up, because someone spent a lot of money on a 1D C and now he has to justify it in the face of cheaper competition. The 1D C is not cleaner for noise. It just isn't. Again you can look at the raw sensor data at any given ISO and see for yourself. "The canon combination beats the sony in every aspect except price" Your reasoning here is because you attach a monitor to give it peaking, suddenly it does everything better? Is MJPEG suddenly a better codec than ProRes now? Does it gain a lens mount you can put all PL lenses straight onto all of a sudden? What about an articulated LCD for low-profile shooting without a monitor or a built in EVF again for the same use? No. I think your posting has a lot to answer for. I'll be awaiting such answers, and then make an editorial decision on whether I will keep onboard certain users of the forum who are really fucking it up for the rest of us at the moment so consider yourself warned. There are in fact 25 advantages of the A7S over the 1D C for video - http://www.eoshd.com/2014/07/25-ways-sony-a7s-trumps-canon-1d-c/

​So how did you expose? 1D C meter or A7S? It's not a hard question. If the A7S wasn't two stops to the right, you've done it wrong.

Staying on topic isn't your strength is it? The cyber attack was extremely damaging both materially and politically. The team which carried it out used such sophisticated techniques, the most secure government networks in the country would have had trouble keeping them out. If they now as a result of the film being shown turn their attention to nuclear power plants in the US and government networks then at the least they have another wikileaks style leak of confidential info to deal with, or worst case a major nuclear disaster. Is The Interview worth that? No! Don't under estimate the cyber attacks and what they can potentially unleash. Warfare is moving into the digital age. Diplomacy with North Korea was the way to prevent this. That was well underway, whilst The Interview was being shot. Now the only thing that's shot is the diplomacy. ​Not really, if history of war is anything to go by. A flash point can seem small at the time but it can end up really triggering hell. And it would be a shame to trigger hell based on such a pathetic flash point. A Seth Rogan comedy. It's not worth it! Ask Sony!

​Haha. You must be kidding me. Wikileaks? And here's the rest - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_States Do your research before posting your ill informed opinions. Kubrick pulled A Clockwork Orange himself. The UK government did not. It was passed uncut actually. Again do your research. Sex Pistols were not banned by the state. The BBC chose not to play a song. Hardly state censorship, more like an editorial decision by middle managers who didn't want to offend the narrow sensibilities of the vast majority of their viewers. Censorship is not always bad. Censorship in this case with The Interview is warranted because A) it is pointless trash and B the politics of it are damaging. When the napalm burns around schools and children in North Korea like it did in Vietnam, don't come running to me saying how worthy a cause it all is in the name of freedom. Because it isn't.

Personally I think Sony just want the film to die. A massive ball ache for them.

Yes the 580 was a great card since NVidia probably make 90% of their money from consumer gaming cards I don't think they'd cripple the line to protect the tiny niche Quadro line. The Quadro line has more stuff for pros than just performance. How does the latest NVidia card do for compute and CUDA? Must be better than the GTX 580 by now!

I don't think it needs to be got into in so much depth. It's a simple mess really. Trash film ruins international relations, pisses off a rogue state who respond with cyberwarfare damaging Sony. Trash film lauded as 'freedom of expression' by the US government, becomes infamous.

​Now you know how PAL shooters feel when they leave out 25p Yeah bit of an oversight by Samsung there. The 1.85:1 4096 x 2160 24p mode though is very good. Scale it to 3840 x 2160 in post by cropping the edges. It's only a TINY bit softer and you only have a TINY bit more of a crop vertically on the sensor compared to 16:9 mode in UHD. It's not like a 2.3x crop on the GH4 is it!?

Well Doug, first mistake is to shoot S-LOG in low light. Second mistake is you are underexposing. You are using the exposure meter on your main camera (lover?) the 1D C and using the same exposure on the A7S. The A7S in S-LOG needs to be 2 stops to the right. I've shot with the 1D C at high ISOs and it simply is not as clean as the A7S. Shoot a raw still at the same ISO on both and you will see it for yourself.

I'd expect the same improvements to come to VLC on the Mac soon. Won't be long to wait. I'm surprised a general purpose Intel CPU can playback H.265 fluidly in software with no hardware support. Good news all round! Perhaps Adobe can get it working in Premiere after all and we won't need special support from the GPU (980 GTX onwards)

It's only humour if it's funny.

Did you just say jokes about Koreans starving to death are 'benign enough' or was it just me?

Care to translate?

The Interview has now got a limited release and is expected to be shown on Sony owned VOD channel Crackle. With the intervention of the US government, Seth Rogen is now the poster-child for freedom of expression. First of all Crackle's the wrong place for this trash. Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee, Jerry Seinfeld, that's the Crackle target audience, much better. Their regular audience is not dumb, not one whooping at butt jokes, jokes belittling race, jokes belittling gays, jokes encouraging bullying and racism in the guise of humour, which essentially is what I think The Interview boils down to, in a similar vein to The Hangover Part 2. "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." - Voltaire "When the monkey nibbles on the weaner, it's funny in any language" - The Hangover, Part II What I discover when I talk to the mainstream about these films and Seth Rogan's brand of humour is that so many people just don't spot the jingoistic nastiness in these films nor the blatant racism. This really baffles me, why can't they see it? Perhaps they've never travelled or fallen in love with another culture that isn't their own. Different cultures have different sensibilities. What's not offensive to Americans might be much more offensive to everyone else. When a country is trying to improve ties with a rogue state in order to diffuse tension and to eventually shut down their nuclear weapons programme, the last thing you want is a film like The Interview and the potentially unpredictable consequences, not least for Sony. Creative freedom is worth defending, the question is whether the 'creative freedom of Seth Rogen' is worth defending? Look at the early reviews for The Interview & the trailer, it's not hard to work out what it is. There's plenty of nasty passive aggressive stuff in it disguised as humour, pointed out in these reviews from people who HAVE seen the film - "Kim loves basketball - with the hoops lowered so he can dunk" "Much is made of Koreans rumoured to be starving to death." "Franco mugs shamelessly to make sure we understand that he's being funny, which he's not, and the script as a whole turns a satirical - or at least farcical - premise into sour buffoonery." "It feels as though the filmmakers targeted North Korea, one of the world's least-loved countries, because no one important would object to their mocking, almost sadistic treatment of its leader." "If the would-be butt jokes and gay jokes were funnier, I'd be willing to let it slide, but they are not." It's the ultimate sign of our times that this is now a film President Obama has ended up defending, championing it as an example of freedom of expression, but then he's been put in a difficult situation as well. If he rewards the hackers by backing Sony's original decision not to show it, more hacks and cyberterrorism will be encouraged because they will have the scent of a reward, an incentive to try. If he does fight back and reverse Sony's decision to show the piece of trash, that's hardly a "win" for anyone either. The political circus around this is more ridiculous than anything because it implies that under freedom of expression, filmmakers have no responsibilities whatsoever. We do. We can't be as offensive as we want with a major release and cause dangerous diplomatic tensions under the banner of 'creative freedom' and butt jokes. With power goes responsibility and Sony Pictures need to take some responsibility for the mess and damage as well rather than blaming it entirely on North Korea. It's not fair to say "it's only a joke" when there's undertones of Western supremacism all the way through the film. The joke about the basketball hoops needing to be lowered isn't about North Korea, it's about a race of people, that the filmmakers get a kick out of portraying as weird small people who speak funny...guys this isn't humour, it's bullying and something that reinforces plenty of real world bullying in every school in the west. The Interview was always going to be a blatant publicity stunt designed to stir up a diplomatic rift between the US and North Korea and Sony should never have green-lit it. The irony is The Interview is exactly the kind of trash Sony producers in the leaked emails were so keen to stop doing. Finally, here's a quote from the review in Time Out New York - "The Interview confirms Rogen as the most ambitious mainstream comedian in Hollywood. In the unlikely event that it proves to be Sony's downfall, at least they'll go out with a bang." Not so unlikely... and really? Was it all worth it for some crass jokes at the expense of Asians and gays?