Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by sandro

  1. 1 hour ago, kidzrevil said:

    @sandro it was gamma c at 16-235. I forgot which settings I used for Gamma C but I am working on some new ones anyway. Really wish I didn't have to use 16-235 but I dont have a choice til I find something to use other than premiere

    You just color corrected manually?

  2. On 2/6/2016 at 3:15 AM, kidzrevil said:

    I've been shooting gamma c at default contrast -10 sharpness and -1 / -2 saturation and wow. Blown away. These were shot with 16-235 but Today i am experimenting with 16-255 as I've read technicolor cinestyle used that range to optimize the image for the encoder. 16-235 remapped to 0-255 automatically in premiere and I assume the same would apply to the 16-255 footage ! for this look I did NOT use LUT's aS I noticed LUT's were exaggerating compression artifacts in the image even when denoising before applying the lut. I went old school and just installed my own toe and shoulder using curves and kept the curve in the midtone region linear. Using the zeiss milvus lenses it looks my theory is true. You can beat the in camera sharpening if you use a high contrast lens that can resolve up to 6k. I assume the noise reduction and sharpening algorithim sees the areas of the image are true detail and leaves those areas filled with fine detail alone. This camera deserves the moniker "baby red" because the image quality is stunning WHEN TREATED CORRECTLY.










    Sorry to quote this old post but I just love this look, it's my favorite. It's incredible this has no MBL! Do you have any particular color correction setting "saved" for this look?

  3. 1 minute ago, SMGJohn said:


    Yeah you need to follow your target with a manual lens and use a high shutter speed of course just cramp that ISO up max that is what they used to do in the film era, they used really high ISO film and used a high shutter, some would shoot 800ISO film at broad daylight just to get that fast shutter speed.

    There are restrictions that you must account for, with a digital camera you can just aim, shot and look at shot if you like it or not but with a manual lens/film camera you must aim for the perfect shot and kind of predict peoples movements, it is very hard to do but that is what I was told from old journalists who grew up in the film era and autofocus was not something they use back then even if they had the camera that could do it, the AF was awful back then.

    One of the journalists I spoke to documented wars like Yugoslavian civil war, Chechen war and Georgia and he said similar things but he had even harder time because there was a variable environment, you often would move indoors, outdoors all the time as you follow the troops around. 

    So best to just use high ISO, set up camera for the lightning conditions and use a very narrow aperture with high shutter, thankfully you have live view on NX1 so it is FAR easier for you to get the shot right than these veteran journalists had to deal with.

    What if you can't predict where your subject will be and it also passes by at high speed? I would love to use manual lenses whatever the system but seriously why create problems if you there's something already there and working? AF won't make a bad photographer :)

  4. 1 minute ago, kidzrevil said:

    @sandro think its a skill level thing bro. A different technique to getting your shots or improving your current one can help....I remember saying you had a problem with getting shots of people skiing....when I was in the navy I was getting shots of fighter jets...in motion with a manual focus lens. If your not getting the shots you need in manual focus and auto focus then yeah I don't think there is any camera or lens combo that can help till you improve your technique

    I already explained and discussed with you and others in details here and in other threads what the problem was and you compared the shots you took in manual compared to skiers when you a tight plane of focus which is a complete different thing. I shoot manual focus since 12y and I know what I'm talking about.
    The NX lens lineup is limited and will never be expanded and the lens available are not as assicurate as DSRL and probably impossible to buy. What is there more to say? I said I personally wouldn't use this system for stills only if planning to use on a variety of situations.

    Le'ts just drop this topic, I'm just tired.

  5. 28 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

    @sandro I wouldn't rule it out as impossible...wasn't impossible for the 1,000's of sports photographers that came before the invention of digital bodies and AF lenses...

    You probably didn't work for the of sport of worked for. Yes it is POSSIBLE but would you use whatever lens adapted on the NX1 and get 90% of shots out of focus just because the NX1 sensor is awesome? Come on... i

  6. 41 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

    @sandro yeah I read what you said and no offense I think your issue is user error. No AF is perfect and if people are still getting great shots with cameras that have worse AF tech than the nx1 you may want to consider the issues you are having user error and possibly you may want to try using manual focus in certain situations. Thats just my take

    I'm sorry but in sports manual focus is impossible. 

  7. 7 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

    I dont think they bothered to look into it. The flange distance wont be compatible with certain lenses but not all....they need to take another look at the specs

    Disagree. That Samsung sensor is incredible and works well with adapted lenses

    Not because of the sensor but because of the native/AF lenses...I explained it before.

  8. This is my first attempt with ricardo's settings. However I didn't use delut cause I wasn't able to make it work, instead I used Premiere's SL GOLD RUSH LDR with personal tweaks (no input LUT). I'm satisfied with the result expect for sky banding present on the original footage. Maybe a higher bitrate would been useful. I used the stock 80Mbit 120p.


    Anyway I'm impressed by the amount of details this sensor deliver at 1080p from 28MP at 120fps. Samsung really made a beast. I could only imagine what a NX2 could have been like!

  9. 1 hour ago, tugela said:

    No, the aperture is wide open in stills mode in live view. To see what it will look like with the aperture closed, there is a button on the lower front right side that you need to press to preview the actual image. That is what that button is for, it activates the aperture to the set value. Normally it is wide open unless you are actually recording.

    I just tried and you're right. Thanks I didn't know about this behavior. 

  10. On 8/9/2016 at 8:03 PM, tugela said:

    The reason you don't see it in live view in stills mode is because the aperture is wide open all the time. In video it is stopped down to the set value, and that is when the adjustments are made. With an electronic lens this is done independently. A true cine lens will have mechanical gearing to do it, but that is a more expensive option. Consequently modern electronic lenses designed primarily for stills just use the independent control. If it is really an issue for you then try using an old mechanical lens, although you will of course lose autofocus.

    There was a thread about two months ago discussing this very issue, that you participated in, so you should know all of this already.

    Anyway something is not right here. There should be zero difference between live view in still and video mode. Still mode previews the picture "as is" (shooting mode or whatever it's called is off) so the aperture is what you see, it's locked. UNLESS the aperture is set to maximum and exposure preview is done via software which i doubt. 
    I'll have to recheck this because I'm not convinced.

  11. 12 hours ago, tugela said:

    The aperture adjusts as you zoom to get the correct amount of light for a particular f value, since your angle of view changes. This does not happen immediately since it is controlled electronically. It happens in stills mode as well, you just don't notice it because by the time you take your picture the adjustment has been made.

    One of the prices you pay for a purely electronic lens. They likely all do it, not matter what manufacturer makes them. The only ones that won't are those that adjust the aperture mechanically through direct gearing to the zoom.

    I meant I don't see in still live view. It's almost unbelievable that even the $1500 S lenses basically make zooming during video useless due to these shifts.

  12. 5 hours ago, chauncy said:

    About the NR jump. Yes. It happens to everyone from 1600iso to 3200, it's weird, it's a bug or just the way they handle it with the hardware of software. There's no way around it. It's a limitation

    Try enabling half stop ISO and see if you see a jump from 2000 to 2500. I believe the jump is there exactly. Seems completely software though... It seems like the jump also affects exposure.

  13. 39 minutes ago, ttbek said:

    I'm struggling to think of many examples for any system that cover that range.  24-70, plenty, 24-105, a decent number, 28-135 they're around, 24-150!?!  There are some 18-135 lenses that would hit that as an equivalent range, but you say you're looking for that as the APS-C range... so we're looking for a FF lens that's 42- 225ish.  The only things that come to mind are the other superzooms, none of which are optically stellar.  I guess there is the Sony 24-240 FE lens, only a 10x zoom rather than the more typical 20x+ of 18-200.  Fun fact, the 18-200 is the only NX lens that saw production in Japan, makes one wonder if there was any foul play, lol.  It's not missing focus so much in the bright sunlight as it is just that soft at the longer focal lengths, manual focus it, it isn't any sharper.  At 18 the lens is quite decent, but if you only needed the wide end then there's lots of other options.  Go with two lenses, even like the 16-50 PZ and 50-200 combo work out well and are cheaper together.  If you're using it for video it's quite decent, and I guess it's video where having that range in one lens is most useful.  Anyway, the 18-200 is the only lens I have bought for which I'm unsure why I still own it.  Sometimes I think I'll avoid the hassle of taking more lenses and just take the 18-200, give it another chance on a walk... 10 minutes later I'm back home to take two other lenses instead. 

    OK it would have been fun to see a cheap Tamron for the NX :D You're right no super zoom is steller but no one is ad bad as the 18-200mm...

  14. 2 hours ago, Kisaha said:

    If the S lenses are out of your league, I do not understand your constant complaining about the NX line. Do you know how much the NX1 plus S lenses cost? If you can't afford that, there is no chance of you to upgrade in any other system (Fuji/Sony A7s-rII/Canon 5DmkIII with L lenses etc. Even a6300 with the new Sony lenses are double the price).


    Other systems have third party lenses, Samsung never allowed any to develop. I'm not changing system anytime soon...

  • Create New...