abortabort

I don't know, there are always factual errors in every one of Andrew's posts. Like the one about the GH4 being 'the first 4K camera for $2000'... Uhm, nah.

AX1 does 150Mbps 4K with XAVC-S, 60Mbps is a chosen limitation of the AX100 aimed at consumers. http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.sonydigitalimaging.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/AX1_Brochure.pdf&sa=U&ei=9nY_U7zKE4nwkAWakIHADQ&ved=0CBUQFjAE&usg=AFQjCNEnzhcRHMt1363hqjOHZH4woLmqtg Edit: 150Mbps @ 50/60fps 100Mbps @ 24/25/30fps But this shows XAVC-S is not limited to 60Mbps.

Or maybe I am.thinking of the AX1, but XAVX-S I believe can do higher than 60Mbps.

From memory the AX100 does 100Mbit 4K and 50Mbit 1080p.

First of all, don't call me 'dude'. If a punk cinematographer calls me 'dude'... they don't get a job. Simple as that. This is YOUR forum where you pretend to be a professional cinematographer, at least try to act like it. Secondly - "Better stuff out there"? Really? So when it was announced a few weeks ago there were better 4K options for $2K were there? I guess those featured prominently on your site yes? Thirdly - Your site stopped being about 'DSLRs' a long long time ago, in fact you fairly recently dismissed DSLRs as nothing interesting happening there. You reviewed the RX10, RX100 and RX100 II, you have articles on the Arri AMIRA, BMCC, Olympus OM-D, Panasonic GH4, Sony A7R, RX1, C300, C500, C100, REDs, Digital Bolex and on and on.... Not a single one of which is a DSLR. But you choose the 'it's not a DSLR' card on this? Fourthly - The only reasonable thing you have said is that the lens is slower than the RX10, yes, yes it is. Bravo. I forget that 'dudes' like you think that being a 'lite 'pro' cinematographer means having tiny DoF in every single shot otherwise it's just not 'pro' and if a camera can't do that it totally isn't worthy of their 'pro-ness'. Lastly - Are you really 'that' stupid smart that you think you can pull 8MP frame grabs out of 4K and expect them to be poster sized print quality? Good luck with that.

First of all, don't call me 'dude'. If a punk cinematographer calls me 'dude'... they don't get a job. Simple as that. This is YOUR forum where you pretend to be a professional cinematographer, at least try to act like it. Secondly - "Better stuff out there"? Really? So when it was announced a few weeks ago there were better 4K options for $2K were there? I guess those featured prominently on your site yes? Thirdly - Your site stopped being about 'DSLRs' a long long time ago, in fact you fairly recently dismissed DSLRs as nothing interesting happening there. You reviewed the RX10, RX100 and RX100 II, you have articles on the Arri AMIRA, BMCC, Olympus OM-D, Panasonic GH4, Sony A7R, RX1, C300, C500, C100, REDs, Digital Bolex and on and on.... Not a single one of which is a DSLR. But you choose the 'it's not a DSLR' card on this? Fourthly - The only reasonable thing you have said is that the lens is slower than the RX10, yes, yes it is. Bravo. I forget that 'dudes' like you think that being a 'lite 'pro' cinematographer means having tiny DoF in every single shot otherwise it's just not 'pro' and if a camera can't do that it totally isn't worthy of their 'pro-ness'. Lastly - Are you really 'that' stupid smart that you think you can pull 8MP frame grabs out of 4K and expect them to be poster sized print quality? Good luck with that.

AX100 won't give you the wide you desire. GH4 will struggle to give you the wide you desire, but still possible. Something like the Sigma 8-16mm should take you down there. Also the Panasonic 7-14mm as the other option. Nothing else is really wide enough. Speedbooster will need to take whatever lens down to around 7.5mm to give you 18mm on the GH3, so that's another option. Maybe a Samyang 10mm? Some of the 10-whatevers will as well. 9mm of the Olympus will be 21mm - About 14mm on your current 12-24.

I'm curious Andrew, you liked the RX10 seemingly a lot for it's great feature set (for a run and gun shooter), but hated the AVCHD codec. You are also (obviously) very keen on 4K at the minute. So my question is this - It's been weeks since CES and not one peep from you about the AX100? Obviously it is not in direct competition with the GH4, but it does seem to fix the issues with the RX10 and add a similar 4K capability into the bargain... And at $1999 no less! Seriously don't get why this wasn't plastered all over EOSHD? This is the first 4K for $2K camera ever, has a 2.7x crop sensor (vs 2.3 in the Panasonic) with a decent ranging lens, 100Mbps 4K, scraps the crap AVCHD in 1080p, even supposedly does 120fps. So what gives? It was like a week after you proclaimed going to 4K and everyone else should follow... So, could your trip to Panasonic have had something to do with both of those things (your post about everyone should go 4K and your complete silence on the AX100)?

Yes, but if as above you compare the total light path the A7/R is miles ahead of the Olympus, IS (for stills) isn't as useful as people make out, you still need usable shutter speeds for anything other than taking some pictures of plastic figurines on your desk and going 'oohhhh, aaahhhhh, look ma' I can handhold down to X shutter speed'... In real world shooting you still need a decent shutter speed most of the time, so the advantage of IS is lost. The disadvantage of a small sensor however remains. You say 'at least Canon and Nikon have a big range of IS lenses... Including fast primes like the new 35mm f2 IS - You say 'like' as if to suggest this is but one example, thing is that lens is the ONLY lens in the Canon range that has IS and is faster than f2.8. Hell even their f2.8 standard zoom (24-70) does't have IS. So you can't go 'like the 35mm f2 IS' because there is nothing else 'like' the 35mm f2 IS (which I use on my A7, with IS for what it's worth). In fact, SONY, until very very recently were the only company in the world to produce IS lenses faster than f2, that is until Panasonic's new 42.5mm f1.2. We can definitely expect OSS primes from them for the A7/R, but not Zeiss branded ones. I have used IS based cameras from the beginning and all my systems I have leaned towards IBIS, including Sony / Minolta, Pentax and Olympus. Is it nice to have? Sure. Is it necessary or make any real world difference? Not really. I can handhold my RX10 at 200mm @ 0.8 seconds shutter speed with good results, is that useful? No.

Yet another idiotic 'look' at this camera... Because there is nothing like it people seem to try to compare it to a number of other things and that just doesn't work. Let's start with the most glaringly obvious of these - You start by saying that after using this camera you bought a D700. Two sentences down you start moaning (like nobody have ever mentioned it before) that the primes don't have IS (or OSS, or whatever you want to call it). So Andrew, would you like to point me to the IS primes you use with your D700 instead? Well? Hmmm... See the thing is, when you start comparing something like this to multiple cameras, because there is no direct competition, things get muddied. Every single 'review' of this camera goes (in a round-about way) to this conclusion: 1. The camera doesn't have the IBIS of the Olympus (it's mirror less competition) 2. It doesn't have the AF of a 5D MkIII etc (It's full frame competition) The problem with this is the FF competition doesn't have the IS of the Olympus either, but that gets forgotten about, and the Olympus doesn't have the AF tracking of the FF DSLRs. Nobody expects the Olympus to focus track like a FF DSLR and nobody expects the FF DSLRs to have 5-Axis IBIS... But somehow, because the Sony is a full frame AND a mirror less it is expected to have both? I'm not suggesting the camera is perfect, FAR from it, but I just struggle to understand the lack of thought that goes into these comparisons. You can't bash it from both sides I guess is the point. Either it's a mirror less and needs to be compared to other mirror less or it's a DSLR alternative, don't go stacking cons from both piles and say 'look it's crap because it isn't better than both of these cameras'. Then getting onto the lens comparison with a speed booster, yes a speed booster will help, but it is only going to close the gap between m43's and APS-C, so still looking at a stop behind. So with the Sigma 'f1.3' we are really talking about an f2.8 zoom on the Sony, both of which are available and both would be MF, though the Olympus with have IS. What about some other, native lenses though... Well let's compare the 'crap range of lenses' that Sony have released thus far in m43's terms, they have 5 lenses announced at launch, 5 more this year, 5 next. The 5 we have at the moment would require m43's to have the following native lenses to compensate for the difference in sensor, but not resolution: 14-35mm f1.8-2.8 OSS (this is the cheap-assed 'kit' lens that comes with your body for $200). 12-35mm f2 OSS 35-100mm f2 OSS 17mm f1.4 27mm f0.95 All of these AF, are native mount and the zooms have IS. m43's users would be squealing and shaking with excitement had Olympus released such lenses for m43's, especially at what is a fairly modest cost, yet all there seems to be are complaints. I know this is a video oriented site, so the IS of the Olympus bodies and the codec choices, sensor readout etc are all important in this regard and the Sony is mostly CRAP in all these regards and it shows (though some other usability features are actually kind of nice), video on the A7/R sucks. Stills however are a different matter entirely.

Interesting preview Andrew. Still think the GH2 has some better handling qualities to it than a DSLR, which I mostly think are more important than outright IQ.

[quote author=Andrew Reid link=topic=812.msg5914#msg5914 date=1339160580] The HX9v did 1080/50/60p and there's also an Olympus compact that does it. 60 and 50p conform to 24/25p (50p perfectly so) and you also have the capability to do dreamy slow-mo. So don't confuse it with crappy 60i or 30p it is far better than that. Focus peaking and manual control in video mode is GREAT for this camera. As for clean HDMI out - not sure why you think the HX9v had that? It did HDMI out but it wasn't clean or enabled during recording. [/quote] Sorry Andrew for some reason I overlooked the many Sony models that do 60p now including HX9v, HX10v, 20v, 30v, 100v, 200v and one of their high end slim models (can't remember the model). But which Olympus model supports 1080 - 50/60p? In regards to clean HDMI output, I actually thought it was you Andrew who put me onto that through a video shot with the HX9v and Atomos Ninja on one of the trade show floors? I also recall it being of not much advatage in terms or quality, but that isn't the only reason to use an external recorder. Maybe I am wrong, but I was certain it was you and saying that because it wasn't 'pro' enough they hadn't disabled it? Perhaps my memory is failing me! I don't own, nor have I owned an HX9v so I way purely going off other users information.

[quote author=markm link=topic=813.msg5832#msg5832 date=1338833034] Why oh why did Black Magic cripple it with lens choice All they needed to do was stick a FOUR THIRDS mount on it or make one that could be interchangeable. [/quote] Ok so don't buy it. I think BMD made a good call, they are trying to take market from the Canon dSLR video set and what better way to do that then with a camera that their lenses work on natively? You can still adapt a heap of different SLR lenses to it as well as PL pretty easily, but EF mount is more difficult to adapt from another mount due to electronic aperture control, so having that built in to the camera means not having to buy a much more expensive adapter like the Metabones etc. While a short flange option like E-Mount would have been great, I think BMD made the right call. Who knows if there is demand for it we could see an E-Mount version of m4/3's version later down the track. Hell an interchangeable mount of their own that they sell E, m4/3's, EF, Nikon, PL etc mount adapters for would be even better. But for a first version EF mount was the right choice, it also seems to be becoming the de facto for step-up cinema cameras, look at the RED Scarlet launch and how much rejoicing in the street there was with the Metabones EF adapter for E-Mount. Basically EF is one of the hardest to adapt with a simple adapter, making it standard and built in is effectively saving hundreds of dollars and in itself is reasonably adaptable.

[quote author=hoodlum link=topic=812.msg5885#msg5885 date=1339014322] dpreview has confirmed there is no 1080p24.  Here is some more info. http://***URL removed***/previews/sony-dsc-rx100/4 "The RX100 allows P,A,S or M exposure modes to be used when video shooting. Autofocus remains available in movie shooting, regardless of the exposure mode used. Alternatively the camera's focus peaking can be used to aid manual focus (which can be assigned to the front dial). This, combined with the camera's active image stabilization during movie shooting, makes it a pretty capable and pocketable camera for grabbing footage." [/quote] Very disappointing! I presume the 30p is wrapped up in 60i? So in PAL regions it should be 50i (wrapped 25p) and 50p. I don't care for 24p as 25p would have been fine, but to not have 25p is very annoying (or 24p for those in NTSC land). On the plus side, this is the ONLY compact I know of that includes 1080 50/60p. It is also the only compact I know that offers full manual control over exposure, AF + MF with control ring, focus peaking etc. While it isn't perfect, it is streets ahead of any other fixed lens camera and better than a lot of interchangeable lens cameras. Also the UI is taken from Sony's SLTs rather than their compact cams, so I am guessing clean HDMI out like HX9v is out of the question... Plus it is in the WORST place I could imagine.

[quote author=abortabort link=topic=812.msg5851#msg5851 date=1338880154] I hope this has clean HDMI out like the HX9v! Being that it is a Cybershot and not a NEX/Alpha, I am hopeful it will! [/quote] Argh! the HDMI port is right NEXT to the tripod socket!!! Hands down, worst feature of this otherwise seemingly awesome little camera :(

[quote author=Maxine link=topic=812.msg5848#msg5848 date=1338869540] Someone please tell Sony to stop making 60p video mode.Only soccer moms & dads will want this.And that is their market methinks. Where's 30/24P? It's just really annoying... [/quote] Erm well if it is like ANY of the other Sony's that do 60p it also does 24p and 30p. Or for PAL users 25p and 50p. The 60p mode is useful sometimes, but it isn't the ONLY mode. I hope this has clean HDMI out like the HX9v! Being that it is a Cybershot and not a NEX/Alpha, I am hopeful it will!

But if I understand correctly Andrew VLC doesn't utilise QT at all? Perhaps it is a core video thing then? (not that I know a lot about that). Edit: Which would go on to suggest it is a playback issue, rather than something embedded in the video during transcoding? You mention it is fine when played on a TV, which has rather different gamma characteristics, especially when using MDP to HDMI, the Mac automatically adjusts the output gamma. I am in no way suggesting you are wrong, it would just be good to get to the root of the issue.

Are you sure this isn't a Premiere Pro thing? Do you notice the same shifts using say FCP7? As you say Quicktime doesn't handle AVCHD, so is PP 'unpacking' the h.264 and then QT is screwing it up, or does PP use it's own codecs for AVCHD (not being able to rely on QT to decode it). What does 5DtoRGB use for it's encoder? Are you aware of other unwrapping/transcoding tools such as ClipWrap having this same issue? I know in the past FCP has done some funky gamma shifts in the output stages when exporting from a timeline unless you tell it not to.

[quote author=bwhitz link=topic=600.msg4217#msg4217 date=1334725814] [quote author=abortabort link=topic=600.msg4215#msg4215 date=1334723664] Didn't Panasonic just release a firmware update for the AF100 giving it 50/60p 28Mbit codec? [/quote] A 28mb/s codec? HAHAHAH... what is this 1997? [/quote] Apparently! Anyway at least it brings it in line with the FS100 I guess? http://www.digitalmedia-world.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4130:panasonic-upgrades-ag-ac160a-ac130a-avccam-hd-and-af-100-&catid=35:cameras&Itemid=30

[quote author=chinageeks link=topic=600.msg4211#msg4211 date=1334717076] Boy I wish Blackmagic hadn't given this camera aninternal battery. Sure, you can connect it to some external batteries, but having to fiddle with extra wires and batteries just makes it harder to carry around... As for Panasonic, I see this as good news. I know they've put a lot into micro 4/3, but I think a lot of people prefer larger sensors, and as any good poker player knows, the fact that you've invested a lot in something already never justifies investing more on its own. I think this is a good time to Panasonic to maybe rebuild a little bit around a bigger sensor, perhaps Super35 or bigger. I'd love to see that start with the GH3....but what are the chances of that? [/quote] I don't see the battery thing being that big an issue, it's a little annoying, but how long does a Scarlet run on a Redvolt for? Also in the Q&A it was stated that battery grips etc would be available soon, which seems fine to me. In fact the fact that the thing HAS a battery in the main brain box is a big plus to me - especially if there are other power options like external batteries and 12v plug in batteries that CHARGE the internal one, that means continuous battery shooting, when an external unit dies, simply swap it out - whilst still shooting off the internal. Seems pretty clever to me. Didn't Panasonic just release a firmware update for the AF100 giving it 50/60p 28Mbit codec? I can't believe that AG-AF line is going to be replaced with a s35 line - Panasonic developing a whole line of new lenses for just that series of camera? I doubt it. Panasonic didn't even develop their own mount for their stills cameras which arguably is a much much bigger market all in. IF Panasonic develop an s35 camera it will be PL mount and probably designed to compete against Sony F3. IF the AG-AF series are being discontinued it probably has more to do with the AF100 being discontinued before it's successor is announced, not a complete canning of the line. My guess would be that AF100 sales have dropped significantly and the new model isn't quite ready yet (or delayed due to 'seeing' the competitions hand). The AG-AF series would require such a small amount of development for Panasonic, that it would be silly for them to delete the line.

I'm sorry but I feel the 1D-C is a total and utter joke. The C500 looks really interesting however. So here is my beef with the 1D-C(inema): 1. No viewfinder, on a $15k camera... really? Ok so we'll use the screen, which is fixed... and 3:2 - Ok so a 15k camera that we can't actually see what we are shooting with it, good start. 2. Ergonomics - Well they're crap. On a proper video camera (or cinema camera) there should be direct controls for just about everything, on this... not so much. Yes I like the smaller size-ish of DSLRs, but the 1DX is a pretty hefty blob - this isn't a lightweight GH2 or even 5D. There is no place to add handles or accessories really, I mean you have the fairly fragile hotshoe and the tripod screw point and that is it. You will need to buy some serious rigging and monitoring and audio gear and still have very little controls that don't require you to dive into a menu. 3. Connectivity - Same as a stills DSLR such as 5D MkIII. On a 15k camera. Battery options are the same as well. A crap little 3.5mm headphone jack and mic jack, wow!!! So here is the problem, when the 5D MkII rose in popularity for filmmaking it was because it produced very pretty video and was really really really cheap for the quality of the output. Enthusiasts would overlook it's many many shortcomings with workarounds to get the most out of it, fundamentally it was a bad camera that takes very good video and is very inexpensive. You could spend a fortune on good rigging for it to make it handle somewhat ok, still flawed but very usable. So now they have come out with a new, very very flawed camera, one that requires a lot of extra gear to make it usable, but with very very very good image quality. Same flaws as before, but better image quality. BUT it is now very very expensive. Enthusiasts won't be buying in the ways they bought the 5D - accepting it's flaws for it's price. Professionals won't be buying it because it is simply too flawed to be considered a professional tool. Why would they buy it over the C500? Unless the C500 is up in the stratosphere, you simply wouldn't. This is a stills camera, turned video camera, gone completely wrong! Canon have basically hoped for a halo effect to move up the brand, problem is they don't seem to have understood why people were flocking to them in the first place. On TOP of this, in thinking they have the market sewn up, they have INTENTIONALLY impacted the quality of their cameras that people would have flocked to (5D MkIII) in an attempt to sell this model to those users. To ANYONE considering one of these - Buy yourself a C300. If you need 4K buy the C500 or Scarlet. If you are on a tighter budget, get an FS100 or FS700 (or new Panasonic AF100 successor when it is announced). If you are still in the enthusiast crowd that wants a DSLR to do more than it was designed to do, there are still lot's of decent options.

Hi Andrew, in regards to your point about third party lenses - I believe Sony opened up the E-Mount specifications available for all third party manufacturers rather than just those who license it.

[quote author=AaronChicago link=topic=514.msg3417#msg3417 date=1333471840] [quote author=bradleyg5 link=topic=514.msg3400#msg3400 date=1333434295] It's like you guys can't wait for videocameras to go back to what they already were.  Anything that is announced at a price over 5k is irrelevant in terms of what future indie filmmakers will be using. This would be a poor choice for somebody getting into video, you would need to already have commercial work lined up, nobody could buy this and THEN build a career around it. [/quote] If you're not making money in this arena, then obviously its a poor choice, financially. If you are doing a personal "film" project, then rent a camera and save yourself a lot of money. If you ARE making money then I would say this is a good investment. [/quote] Exactly. And this camera at this price to purchase will mean lower prices to rent as well. What I want to know, is that a big assed electronic follow focus ring in the centre of it's body? It certainly appears it to me and I could see this working quite well (possibly) with native E-Mount (and presumably A-Mount with adapter) lenses as a focus by wire system? It does seem to have a 'hold' button underneath it. I think this would be a very clever idea, not more having to strap your FF rings to your lenses, just put on new E or A lens and away you go? Could be just a styling thing I suppose, sadly, too

Hi Andrew, I was tossing up between the NEX-7 and A65 for video and basically decided on A65 for in body IS over the extra 1/2 stop and no crop of the NEX-7. As you own both do you notice a big video quality difference between the two other than those 2 factors? Also you talk like the NEX-7 is the only camera with that EVF but isn't it the same as the optional one for NEX-5n (which is tilt able) and also the a65/77? I know you were comparing to the c300 and GH2 but it does come across that way, where in fact the optional one for the NEX-5n is the same quality but also more flexible.

[quote author=theSUBVERSIVEBIRDS link=topic=243.msg1637#msg1637 date=1328414164] [quote author=EnriquePacheco link=topic=243.msg1633#msg1633 date=1328368898] What I do to be able to edit nicely on mac is convert to Apple Prores using Quicktime (before you have to install  this plugin https://eww.pass.panasonic.co.jp/pro-av/support/dload/avccam_impt/agree_e.htm) Then I conform to 25p using Cinema Tools. Hope it helps. Regards. Enrique. [/quote] Thanks! I'll take a look. So far, I found a software called RewrapAVCHD, it rewraps the MTS file into m4v and so does the Handbrake, but I think that the Handbrake actually converts it. The difference is that with the Handbrake you have control over it, with the RewrapAVCHD you have no control over it, you can't choose codec, quality, etc. Is there a difference between conforming the video and importing it as a 60p and making a slo-mo? Let's say I conform it from 60p to 24p and I import as a 60p and slow it down 2,5x to make it 24p - as the rest of the project is 24p. Is there any difference in quality or more like a workflow preference? Thanks! [/quote] Re-wrapping with a tool like that is probably your best bet rather than do an extra stage of recompression. I use clipwrap which by the sounds of things does the same thing but does add options for converting to ProRes etc. however I find cinema tools can't conform the ProRes output of clipwrap for some strange reason - so for 60p slowed down to 24p I would go rewrap, then through compressor to ProRes and then use cinema tools to conform to 24p. Rewrapping and conforming should take seconds, converting to ProRes will take longer. Conforming using cinema tools basically changes the frame rate without changing the number of frames so your NLE will see the clip as a 24p clip rather than a 60p clip. For example if you have 1 second of footage (60 frames) at 24p you still have 60 frames but it plays them over 2.5 seconds rather than 1 second. If you adjust it in FCP it simply drops frames.