Andrew Reid

Hey Stab   I know what is going on here... Had it on mine.   The mount is slightly loose to the Nikon Speed Booster so as you twist the lens barrel to zoom, it moves in the mount very fractionally and the aperture lever gets shifted around with it.   Try tightening it by levering out the mounting things* on the adapter.   * I have no idea what the name is for these!!

GH4 is as sharp as you want it or as soft as you want it.   It is however, more detailed than 1080p, because it's 4K. This is not hard to figure out is it!?     Download the above 1080p file Michael and take a look at the resolution from both cameras.   5D3 actually has a little bit more aliasing on high contrast edges.   Sharpness between the two is identical. The GH4 does not look 'over-sharpened' and those sloping edges are actually softer on the GH4 (top) to 5D3 (bottom, more jagged).     Facts are facts.   Personally I find a use for both. Prefer 5D3 for raw 1080p, GH4 for 4K video. Not better. They're different.   A7S I am very much looking forward to, for low light.   Each has a use!

Really? Link to Poplin's Bandcamp page was at the top of EOSHD.com, at the header of the article under the Vimeo clip, maximum exposure, and then again in the credit titles at the end of the video.

Nope, -2 shadows, +2 highlights - an "S-surve" gives higher contrast... and better colour.

  Doesn't have to be! Resolve 10 really flies with CUDA and rendering raw to ProRes. 40fps+, almost twice as fast as realtime playback to convert the masters to something widely editable.   The main problem for me is the temptation to keep the raw files... it's a very strong temptation and you feel compelled to give in... Resulting in a lot of hard drives.   What is needed is a way to offload the raw data to an external device while the camera rolls and have the external device transcode to very high quality ProRes on the fly.

A lot of people are viewing the GH4 4K material on 2.5K or 1080p displays and there's crude downscaling going on which results in an over-sharp image and even some heavy aliasing. A lot of the YouTube stuff looks thin and sharp because of compression and bad downscaling.   First time I graded the GH4 files I was pretty happy and yet we've only realised half the camera's potential so far. Once we get the Atomos Shogun we will be getting uncompressed 10bit 4:2:2 4K out of the HDMI port. DXOMark tested the raw output GX7's sensor (similar to the one in the GH4) and it rates for about 11.8 stops dynamic range, pretty much identical to the 5D Mark III.   The GH2 and 5D2 have been around for ages and the GH4 is a far bigger step up from the GH2 than the 5D3 is from the Mk II.   Michael - ignorance of the reason other people choose to shoot with the GH4 does not make a good debate. Also remember that the filmmaking world is small and you are using your real name on the forum, if you piss someone off, eventually it will come back round. There's no career advantage to behaving like a complete prat in front of half the digital filmmaking community.

The criticism may seem pedantic and eye-roll worthy but I think we can actually learn a lot from it as filmmakers.

 YouTube version Music by Poplin via the >EOSHD Music Challenge I've been trying some run & gun shooting with no rig, just a gorilla pod and GH4 all handheld. In the process I developed three image profiles for the GH4 which I've assigned to the mode dial on my camera. This is the first footage to show what the GH4 is capable of with the EOSHD Cinema profile. Read the full article here

  True. Apparently the licensing fee has expired on EF but not yet for EF-S.

  What exactly is limiting about Nikon glass which adapts to almost every camera on the market?   Are you confusing it with the Nikon MOUNT itself?   Nikon lenses are just as adaptable as the Contax Yashica stuff.   Nikon lenses adapt to Canon mount as well.   So if you end up with an EF adapter on your GH4 you can still use them.

Now available...   http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/cameraraw8-5-cc.html   It's a beta and expires end of July but by then the final version will be out anyway.   So for those GH4 raw stills you can't go wrong with this in the meantime!

To: Thom York From: Google   Dear Mr York   We have heard you are a musician. We think that's cool. Have a cigar.   Yours sincerely   Google bot

Yes but someone has to manage and negotiate on behalf of the artists. Can you imagine the hassle that Google would have to go through negotiating rights with the individual artists by email!?

I at first thought it might be a problem of supply (too much) and demand. But then I thought... no, there's plenty of demand and actually the supply of GOOD music is tiny compared to how much crap there is out there.   So somebody somewhere is hiving off the cash big time.

Editor's note: While the GH4 guide takes pride of place on my home page I am using the forum as the regular EOSHD news-feed and blog-roll.   This YouTube story puts the Vimeo copyright stuff into a whole new light.   Apparently YouTube are launching a streaming music service to compete with Spotify. It's subscription based and ad-free, but the royalties Google want to pay to the musicians is miniscule. We're talking REALLY minuscule here, and Spotify is no angel. Radiohead took steps to withdraw their music from Spotify when they saw the fees. Google is a much larger, much more cash-rich company, yet their royalties for streaming are smaller than Spotify.   On the one hand YouTube has enormous traffic, so the stakes are high. Google with their business head are right to drive a hard bargain with the music industry on this... Especially because the platform is the number 1 promotional channel for the music industry.   Because of that, Billy Bragg has accused YouTube of trying to 'strong-arm' record labels into accepting extremely low royalties for the subscription fee music service... I.e. if you don't join the service, you won't be welcome to promote your artists.   I can see how it works two ways for the record labels, but the problem for them is that streaming long term is going to replace record sales.   How the hell are they supposed to make money?   All the free promotion in the world is useless if you have to sell everything for a pittance.   It gives you an idea perhaps of a potential strategy the music industry is using with Vimeo. Stung by YouTube's low streaming rates and a minuscule share of advertising revenue, they are holding a gun to the head of Vimeo in order to (I think) to drive a hard bargain when it comes to allowing their music to be streamed on Vimeo clips.   Already I feel safer uploading a non-commercial artistic video of my own to YouTube knowing that at least (in some minuscule way) the record label and artist are getting paid, via advertising. I don't like advertising on my videos but it's better than not being able to exercise artistic freedom in music selection and having Vimeo reject the video outright and not give a penny to the music industry for use of the song.   If YouTube can up their rates to the music industry, then the advertising revenue will go a long way to freeing up visual artists in terms of using the music...   The musician gets paid, the record label gets paid, both get exposure and the visual artist gets a career leg up and the video isn't compromised by lack of choice on the sound track.   Seems like a perfect deal to me...   Let's pressure Google into making it happen. I'm totally with the small record labels on this one.   Further reading: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27694353

If Canon version of the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 is EF mount not EFS, all's good to wait...   I have the Nikon version, it's a spectacular lens.

Happy grading!   dfd08999706a7d549171626a2c550237   I'm going to give it a spin myself of course, but let me know how you find it...

DXOMark's lens ratings are flawed in my opinion because they depend on the megapixel count of the sensor.   Why introduce the sensor as a variable to your lens testing?   It doesn't make sense!

DSLRs are internally colour grading the image don't forget. Photo styles.   Yes I feel you're right about compression - that is one of the major causes of the banding.

  I liked this! I'm very much thinking of featuring the music on EOSHD. Cheers!

  That's an interesting thought.

  Good luck doing that in your NLE :)   If there is a way, do correct me if I'm wrong :)

Glenn, not unexpected to be frustrated with a user interface after 1 day of use.   I've been using Premiere for 10 years and it still has annoyances ;)   But you get used to it believe me... I like it...Straight forward and quick. It's FCPX I couldn't get my head around. Maybe I'll try again one day.

The EOSHD Panasonic GH4 Shooter’s Guide is now available 8bit DSLR codecs get quite a lot of bashing for banding, and it is something we're well used too... A sky or a wall taking up half the shot with only 4 or 5 shades where there should be a silky smooth gradient with thousands of tiny steps in-between darker and slightly lighter areas of the image. However one of the first things I noticed with the Panasonic GH4 was that banding was greatly reduced and it looked like my 10bit Blackmagic footage, even though it was still an 8bit codec (internally with 4K). Why such a turn-around for an 8bit codec? It turns out the 4K mode on the GH4 holds the key to hiding this banding... yet it is something we can apply to all DSLRS... Here's how...   Read the full article here

Never mind... figured it out. Works. Thanks guys, I'll blog this.