Jump to content

Chris Santucci

Members
  • Content Count

    35
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Chris Santucci

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Not really. The user buttons on the smaller GH4 are much easier to depress accidentally than with 5D, especially with the thumb while normally gripping the camera.
  2. It's set to 3200 ISO and with lens wide open. Maybe he should try a laser next :-p
  3. Because it's completely normal to achieve clipped highlight level X a thousand percent. Yep.
  4. I'd rather have the better color and 10 bit color depth. Sony color and skintones especially are less accurate. But if you need to shoot in the dark, Sony is great.
  5. Impressive on paper, but I see no skintones in the demo.
  6. I did a lens comparison a while back between Leica R, Zeiss ZE Primes, Canon L series primes, and 60's/70's era Nikkor primes and there was no difference to my eye between any of them except for a slightly wider dynamic range with Leica. All other optical aspects like sharpness and color were visually identical. That's a pretty wide range in years and lens cost and I would suggest that even the top cinema prime is no more than maybe 5% better optically than any of these I tested.
  7. Interesting... What does this file look like to you? Are the grays neutral? '>
  8. I never touched saturation just so you know. All I did was remove all that GREEN and add a tad bit of blackness. ALL the still frames associated with this post look excessively green (and a bit flat) to me. When I download the doggy image and open it in photoshop, the big reflected highlight under the Beagle shows a pronounced amount of green. And I keep my 32 bit monitor calibrated and do all my (considerable amount of) grading on it.
  9. No offense to the authors, but these still frames are horrendous from the standpoint of color. "Stunning results?" Really? Here, I fixed the dog image for ya:
  10. Funny how *sharpness* elicits oohs and aahs from certain people who then put 40 or 50 year old (sometimes uncoated) lenses on these cameras. Nobody wants to see ultra sharp footage of people's faces, especially when the skin tones are produced by a GH series camera.
  11. Wow, people are still whining about stills cameras that have added video functions? And an 800 dollar model at that!?!?! What's next? A scathing critique of a Flip UltraHD camera?
  12. How is all this 4K going to be delivered? Mostly on tablets and smart phones, right? And laptops? And 20 something inch monitors?
×
×
  • Create New...