ntblowz

8K is cancelled.
Just use AI to make it better...  IMAX does!
https://ymcinema.com/2023/10/02/imax-ceo-we-use-ai-to-blowup-images/?expand_article=1
From IMAX CEO, Richard Gelfond:
"we use it to blow up images. We use AI to make the images look better, we sharpen the edges, and we take the grain out. We have been using AI for supplements for a while." "However, the best reference for that utilization of the IMAX proprietary algorithm and AI tech, is the talked-about sci-fi project, The Creator. The movie was shot entirely on Sony FX3 which is not an IMAX-certified camera. Nevertheless, the ProRes RAW footage was undergone special treatment by IMAX AI technologies, in order to boost the imagery and make it capable enough to hold up against the huge canvas." Other streaming services only store feature films in 2K and upscale to 4K for people who stream in 4K, and now IMAX, the supposed best quality folks upscale using AI.
We all knew that streaming was a low-quality distribution, and now IMAX is too...
How can they get away with this????  
Maybe.... *gasp* ....because it's not visible?  I mean, you could say that AI is good enough for IMAX, but you could also say that visual perception is so low that you can't even tell that IMAX is upscaling with AI!  It works both ways!!
😂😂😂

I've just made a YouTube video 'Why I Am Switching' and it's because I am swapping the pig for a cow.
So I can make a moovie.

I would probably only use high resolutions (4K and up) for projects with a heavy amount of VFX which is where I would find the ability to scale and reframe useful. Or if I specifically want that super crispy look. In term of visual quality FHD and 2K are more than adequate for narrative films. Most movie theaters are only projecting 2K DCP. 35mm film prints were only about as sharp as 720p. I even kinda prefer a softer look, and I suspect a lot of others do considering how many people use high res raw shooting cinema cameras, and put vintage lenses and diffusion filters on them. Many of my favorite films are shot on 16mm, and I've always loved that soft, grainy look. 
I'm a big fan of/greatly respect David Fincher, who uses the highest resolution cameras he can for more flexibility. I personally don't like shooting this way. I prefer to have less flexibility in post. I get optional paralysis and would be too tempted to keep tinkering and tweaking endlessly when the options are limitless. It's easer to force my choices in production because the options and time are limited enough to allow me to make some snap decisions, or to force other decisions. I'd rather get the look I want in-camera.
I'm more interested in seeing how upscaling software will advance. The martial arts action film The Raid, which was shot on the Panasonic AF100 (remember that camera??) is being upscaled/remastered in 4K and the frame grab samples released by the director look good.
 

Yeah, if you can bypass whatever the camera is doing and get the RAW straight off the sensor then it should be a good image.  Sony know how to make sensors, and the FX3 shouldn't overheat....
From the Atomos page on the FX3: https://www.atomos.com/compatible-cameras/sony-fx3
I never hear people in the pro forums talking about Canon, only ARRI / RED / Venice.
Gotta shoot fast and get that IMAX image!
Absolutely.  It's one of the reasons I am so frustrated, especially as now they've "unlocked" this quality via bolting on an external recorder instead of just giving us better internal codecs.  I mean, for goodness sake, just give us an internal downscale to 2.8K Prores HQ with a LOG curve and no other processing!
Even the tiny smartphone sensors look great in RAW.  Scale that up to MFT or S35 and imagine the quality we'd be getting from every camera!
My favourite WanderingDP video explains everything...
 

I’ve just ordered 68 units.
And a pig.

I just saw the film in a good theater. Not Imax but latest technology. 
I believe that, before continuing to puzzle over the whys and wherefores, one should see it 🙂
Long story short:
There is so much CGI that having Atlas Mercury and P+S Technik lenses AND a good DOP, the film could have been shot with a GH2 🙂
No Spoiler
The plot is not bad and the movie is not bad. IMHO if you like sci-fi, it deserves to be seen if only for not being yet another Marvel crap or third-hand Star Wars junk.
The script occasionally swerves but I can live with that.
There are scenes without CGI, of course but the cinematography is nothing much.
IMHO the real beauty are the CGI scenes and the worlds imagined by the designers. Some of the landscapes are really striking. The futuristic Nepalese Buddhist temples are outstanding. I haven't seen such fascinating landscapes since the second Blade Runner. They reminded me of some of the gems among the DUST channel shorts. By comparison, the sets of the various Star Wars spinoff series are South American soap operas.
Bottom line: perhaps we underestimate the quality that the cameras we keep in the drawer (in the right hands) can express.

I guess everyone has their own requirements when it comes to lens designs. Personally, I have never carried a lens in my pocket, not even a pancake so that is not something high on my list. However, storage in my camera bag is always somewhat of a puzzle so shorter/compact is always welcome. I also value discretion which is why 70-200mm are usually not my thing. Plus compact lenses pair better with mirrorless cameras. So the RF 70-200mm f4 speaks to me. I know for others, weight is the major concern and it wins there too. 
Others do prefer fixed length mainly for proof reasons and that's valid although the RF-L extension zooms are weather sealed.
Overall I think the RF 70-200mm F4 is a win. Maybe not to everybody but plenty of reviews out there give it praise and some even consider it their favourite lens:
 

Some good info here
 
 

Wonder how many normal people still use their new purchase camera after 1 month when the novelty died off.
But phone on the other hand you use it every min lol.

Wonder how many normal people still use their new purchase camera after 1 month when the novelty died off.
But phone on the other hand you use it every min lol.

Canon R5 is the true game charger and I m glade I got it, since after firmware update there is no overheating warming for me, and I have actually shoot 8K footage to be used on LED wall for a commercial project with it.
But most of the time is still 4k for me.

Sony ZV-E10 or Canon R50 with USB (computer will recognize it as webcam, no software needed) or if u want to use those 4k hdmi usb adapter (elgato camlink 4k) then any used cam with clean hdmi out will do.

I'm reminded of the comments from @John Brawley talking about how he used a super-minimal setup based on the BMMCC when shooting The Resident.



Obviously these are all completely controlled sets with lighting etc all dialled in, so external shots out in the world would need a bit more rig perhaps.
John spoke about how the size of the rig allowed him to get much closer to the actors like you see with him holding it out in front literally between the actors, which would have been a different equation had it been bigger / heavier.
 

It's a "no excuses" filmmaking world now.  Obviously the new tools basically mean that creative folks can make studio level cinema.  
For instance, there are super-talented colleagues in my town that have made feature films on their own with pretty much zero crew.  Their latest is a wild and lovely silly movie, but it's better than most things out there and looks just as good.  
Literally made on 1% of a studio budget.
https://www.heavenofhorror.com/reviews/the-island-of-lost-girls-2022-fantasia/

Let look at their minimum setup
I see fx3 with atomos ninja v and npf battery, this setup will be around 1.25kg 
 
Vs 
Fx6 with battery will be 1.34kg already, add the same ninja v setup will be 1.9kg
So that is 50% more weight already.

Yeah definitely can and maybe some pro project too.
Just 4k prores is 6GB per min, that like 360GB for 1hr, good thing it can record to SSD which is hell cheaper than fast sd card.

Yeah definitely can and maybe some pro project too.
Just 4k prores is 6GB per min, that like 360GB for 1hr, good thing it can record to SSD which is hell cheaper than fast sd card.

I agree and I think this idea is nonsense.
I use m43, Panasonic/Sony FF, and yet I preorderer the G9II.
So why the hell I bought this "big" and "expensive" m43 camera ?
There are a few reasons :
- Neither my A7IV or S5II can give me the fantastic stabilization of the G9II with "relatively small" telephoto and super telephoto lenses.
- Neither of these FF cameras have an acceptable rolling shutter or 60fps Open Gate/120fps 4K. Yes, the A7SIII has good rolling shutter and it has 4K 120fps, but there are always trade-off (much more expensive, low MP, no crop mode,worse details in 4K 120fps).
- While they are a lot of really excellent lenses of the FE mount and a few on the L mount, m43 has a lot of jewels as well. 
I can't see me stopping using some of my Panasonic Leica or my Oly Pro lenses. Some are irremplacable like the 100-400mm PL, some are outstanding to the point that even comparable FF lenses are no match, like the two f1.7 Panasonic zooms (contrast and colors are wonderful). 
I also tried to replace my 12-32mm, 12-35mm and 35-100mm with some FF lenses on my S5II and my A7IV, I can't. There are some options for Sony to replace the 12-35mm but they are not compelling for me (weight, price or features associated with the camera).
- This is subjective but I love the colors from the GH6 and I expect the colors from the G9II to be almost the same. I don't like the colors of the S5II as much, even less the colors of the A7IV.
So at the end of the day, there is no perfect camera and system, but they have strengths and weaknesses.
No, we can't get the low light performance of the S5II on the G9II. No, we can't get the FF look at some focal lenghts (like the 50mm GM f1.2) with our m43 cameras and lenses. 
But as pointed out above, m43 gives a lot of advantage as well. And if we should use m43 only with small cameras, we could not get everything this system can offer with the G9II.

There is no good way to judge colour online - lets review all the possibilities:
log images are shown
this is the purest experience of the camera, but you can't judge anything with this
  log images + manufacturers LUT is shown
this is the best way to judge images, but its random chance how good this will look and doesn't really show the potential of the footage
  graded images are shown, but they look crap
this tells you nothing as you can't tell if the camera is bad, the LUT is bad, the colourist is bad, or all of them
  graded images are shown, and they look good
this tells you what is possible but not what is possible for you.  great images could be because the camera is great and colourist is ok, camera is good but colourist is very good, camera is mediocre but colourist is world class BTW, if camera forums and camera YT had the same level of knowledge about cameras as they do about colour grading then every video would be trying to work out the exposure triangle and failing.  Even rudimentary colour grading and colour science knowledge online is rare outside professional colourist circles - I know more about these things that most and I am at the very very very shallow end of the pool so if I know more than you do then you're basically no-where...

I don't have iPhone 15 and can't share any examples or direct comparison with Android RAW.  Few months ago tested iPhone 14 Pro then two months ago  Xiaomi 13 Ultra + MotionCam (Android RAW). I like raw video from Android more as picture quality is obviously better. I expect iPhone 15 with Apple Log to be better than iPhone 14 Pro but not by much. I don't see dramatic difference so far between iPhone 14 Pro and 15 Pro with Apple log. Not in the examples published on youtube. Maybe log footage was not well graded. 
Yes can share some of the clips made by Xiaomi 13 Ultra + MotionCam and iPhone 14 Pro on the thread dedicated to RAW video on smartphones.
Here is a frame grab from one of the clips made using Android RAW video. Background blur is natural from the lens, not computational

The size of the arsehole when said earwig has been created by Panasonic's MFT design team.

Anyway, I've pre-ordered one.

Right, now I get it.
Throughout this thread I thought that people were saying "Look how huge it is.....   by giving it the body of the S5 they made it huge" when actually they were saying "Look at how the mk2 is the same size as the mk1 - that's outrageous - every camera update should be drastically smaller!"
TBH, if we're going to judge everyone that didn't give us what they could have given us, we'd all better be saving up for an Alexa, because the people who worked on every other camera released in the history of the world are going in front of a firing squad tomorrow at dawn.

I know the Single Biggest thing that would make the G9ii sell in the truckloads.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
...
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
A Netflix Certification 😎

Not sure why they would get into a market where everyone and his dog seems to be convinced that their current products will render that market obsolete to all but a dwindling niche of people.
It would be like Tesla making a petrol driven car.
Samsung, Panasonic, Sony, Leica and RED have all tried to make phone based cameras to reach a prosumer/pro market of film makers and photographers.
It never ends well.
In the case of RED, it was up there with the ET cartridges in the landfill episode in terms of "lets forget that ever happened"  failure.
I don't even think that Apple are that arsed about selling the software for creators anymore as long as everyone is using their hardware to run everyone else's apps.
Whatever profit they were making on FCPX that they now lose to Resolve they can easily recoup with the price gouging on RAM etc.
Apple are currently sat on a cash pile of $165 Billion.
Set against the entire worldwide market for cameras this year of $5 Billion.
When you can release incremental updates of your products every year and still have people worshipping at your feet at the product launches, I'm not sure there is much motivation there to get a piece of a market that - despite our obsession with it - is actually only comparable to, for example, the sewing machine market.