Jump to content

richg101

Members
  • Posts

    1,828
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by richg101

  1. Is buying this in the States and bringing it back over a really bad idea? It's 700 euros cheaper. That's a massive difference. They really fleece you over here in Germany.

    take the camera as hand luggage.  put the box in your luggage.  how can they prove you didn't bring it with you when you came into the US?  They're too busy stopping people taking drinking water onto the plane to worry about your camera:)

     

  2. Unboxings are handy.  the onslaught of consumers / wannabe video bloggers with terrible manual dexterity making the videos thinking it will make them money...  Baffling.  

     

    I actually found this video rather enjoyable to watch.  And it does pay tribute to amazing details put into packaging design most people wouldn;t ever comprehend

  3. the difference in price is huge, and the difference in performance is very slight.  1080p from the a7s is flawless IMO.  best sub 1000£ you'll ever spend if you get one.  There is zero wrong with the image from the a7s.  I've compared a7r2 in compressed and uncompressed raw and the difference is so small it's pointless to fill up the card with files twice the size.  the 14bit raws vs 12bit raws argument becomes so tiny when you compare two cameras that are so similar yet so differently priced.

     

    ps.  grab a new a7s - it'll be £150 more than a second hand one and you;ll have peace of mind.  Sony make consumer products designed to break and be replaced so having a full warranty is a good bit of peace of mind.

  4. masking tape over all of the open seams and over the glass.  

    junior hacksaw the face of the ring with the text on it so you dont go all the way through, but you have a nice 'nearly through' slot.  cut downwards onto the threaded part in line with the slot you already made.

    use a slot screwdriver in the slot and rotate the screwdriver so the ring splits.  you might need to do this on both sides, or even three times.

     

    the glue wont be very strong, but if required, soften it with some nail varnish remover.  you can also use the nail varnish remover to clean the glue off when the ring comes off

     

     

  5. from the pictures it looks like one of the main elements has sheered or cracked due to the cement breaking down at different rates at different areas of the glass surfaces., meaning the thinner central portion has been put under stress and has given way.   it might have taken a knock to start the process.  

    If I'm right you've definitely bid a crazy figure for something that wont ever be repairable unless you find another damaged iscorama for cheap.  to give you an idea, I was gonna bid on the lens and my top bid would have been $400, simply to have replacement front and rear elements for when another iscorama comes in for repair.

    a possible, and only a possible...  it's likely that it may actually not be cracked at all, and instead the separation simply looks like a crack.    

    If it does turn out to be just the cement then I've recently started offering iscorama recementing services - I;ve done one so far and it went well.  However the work involved is dangerous, and it comes with a risk.   that on top of the fact that it could be the flint element that's sheered and if so will be irrepairable is definitely something to consider before you pay the seller!.  

     

     

     

      

  6. The A7RII doesn't have Slog 3, just Slog 2. Slog 3 has been a bit divisive on the A7SII so you're not missing out on too much.

     

    Agreed.  I'd also say that unless you;re shooting on an external recorder, 100mbs simply aint enough for a log profile and the associated hassle.  With so many 'LUTs' being made by people with no understanding of what they're actually meant to do I see most s-log footage being 'lutted' to the point where the original dynamic range could have been 7 stops and the delivered result would look the same.  I don;t think I'd ever select one of the log profiles.  I;d rather shoot in Neutral with the contrast and sharpening dialled down and actually feed the in camera compression algorithm with something nearer the final result so more information is dedicated to detail that'll make it into a rec709 crush down. Let the zebras protect highlights and pull shadows up in post if required!:)

     

     

  7. The A7R2 in aps-c 4k mode is outstanding - clean to 25600iso, little to no nasties at all.  

    Full frame is a little ropey but still good IMO, and still way better than what you'll be used to with the a7ii.

    I shot all of this in full frame mode on the a7r2 _  https://vimeo.com/142447881   password: scotland

    I was shooting with a 24mm f5.6 lens so the iso was usually at around 3200-12800 in some of the lower light scenes.  As you see, the image is good, even on the flawed full frame mode.  As you probably know, the still mode is unreal, and having a full frame 42mpx camera for stills and a camera that shoots flawless 4k in aps-c mode, as well as damn good (if a bit flawed) video in full frame mode is a great package - particularly now it shoots uncompressed raw in stills

     

  8. No, the smear isn't due to the rangefinder. The rangefinder adds CA, but nothing else. I guess the 85mm T1.5 just doesn't pair well. Thanks for the tip on the olympus lens. I totally forgot OM was EF adaptable.

    ps.  the earlier 85mm/2 zuiko lenses are available in 'non MC' versions.  or at the very least they're not marked as 'MC' meaning the coating quality probably isn;t as refined as a later MC version.  Personally I'd select the non MC version to match the older coatings on your sankor:)

     

    it would appear the 'silver nose' version is the older one.  http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Excellent-Olympus-OM-F-Zuiko-Auto-T-85mm-f-2-from-JAPAN-109-/272022055907?hash=item3f55c72be3:g:A8IAAOSwo0JWH5x-  coatings are brozy rather than blue/purple/green

  9. does the vertical smear change direction when you rotate the rangefinder?  

    look for any 85mm/2.8 lens.  as a rule most 85mm f2.8 lenses are superb quality.  The jupiter is the best bang for buck,  closing to f2.8 and its a good choice.  if budget allows...  a 85mm/2 olympus zuiko is a nice lens

     

  10. I've been doing some digging and think I may have found a very good solution for cheap point source lighting (for a nice single shadow).

     

    https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=LED+AR111+19w&tbm=shop

    runs direct from 12volt dc, integrated heatsink so no fans needed, and just as important -optics designed for the emitter. 19w of power - about the same as a 100w halogen, cri of 90.

    A set of 3 would make a lovely miniature redhead setup since we now have cameras that are happy running at 3200iso with little noise.

     

     

  11. OK richg101   Sorry but I disagree and so does the real life output.  I have taken two shots attached here at 100% crops.  They were taken on the Samsung at 24mm and the Canon on the A7RII in APSC mode at 24mm.    Both shot in RAW and imported into Lightroom with sharpening turned completely off on both.  Exported both to 4K resolution to be fair as the Samsung is slightly higher res and to emulate what happens when each frame of Video is created.  Then I have cropped in at 100% on where I focused and here are the results.  The Samsung benefits very slightly from a higher starting res at this pixel level magnification of very fine detail, but the difference is very small, hardly any difference and CERTAINLY not what is show when the same test was run as Video output rather than Raw stills.  So the Variable here is ............Video output versus Still capture and I am sorry but by far the largest loss of res is NOT the lens but it is lost in the conversion in camera to Video.  By the way, hardly fair to have a 16-50 F2 zoom compared with a 55mm 1.8 prime?  But as you can see here that would not be the difference in a shoot out with these two camera's when Video is chosen.  :-)  Sony is the first image and Samsung the second image.  Happy to post edge resolution but its still shows the same result.  To be honest I probably could have shot the Samsung in Video and taken a similar grab for a similar effect, the Samsung seems to be able to create 25 frames at it actual still resolution in a fairly lossless way when resolution is considered. Still grabs from Samsung footage look like still shot images.  Not so for the Sony.

    DSC00058crop.jpg

    _SAM0004crop.jpg

    even the thumbnails here show a drastic difference in resolution.  the top image is smeared (take the sell by date numbering as a reference.  blow those two images up 2x and the difference is even more obvious.

     

     

  12. Your 24-70 lens WILL NOT match the resolving capabilities of the samsung lens.  It just won't.  The 24-70 will have been designed with an approximate 30lp/mm onto a full frame sensor.

     

    full frame capability of the lens 30linesx2pairs x 36mm(sensor width) = 2160pixels (wide) optical resolution onto full frame

    apsc capability of the lens 30x2pairs x 24mm = 1440pixels (wide) = not even full hd resolution

    Add to this that the lens is marketed as a digital and film lens meaning it's not optimised for either, its a middle ground.  It was also developed before 35mm sensors were any greater than 4mpx.  It's old technology.  Red strip or not, it aint a stellar lens by modern standards

    The samsung will likely have been designed to 60lp/mm meaning for the same image area 60x2 x 24mm = 2880pixels wide.  immediately the lens is delivering 2x the optical resolution onto the same image width, and 4x the optical resolution onto the total area - That's a big difference.  The samsung will have been developed to cater to the 28mpx sensor of the nx1 - some of the most tightly packed pixels on any sensor yet.  It'll also have been designed specifically to be APO corrected for the thickness of the sensor cover glass.  

     

    I'm not saying the A7R2 matches the overall res of the nx1 - it's clear the nx1 is doing great things.  but when attempting such a test you should always use the same lens, or at the very least, if one camera is being used with a lens optimised for it, both lenses should are optimised for each camera.

     

    I'm pretty certain that if you;d used the 55mm/1.8 on the a7r2 the results would be closer.  

      

     

     

  13. Lenses are listed in the post.  Samsung 16-50 F2  and Canon L 24-70 on the Sony,  Zero sharpening in post and minimum in camera on both.  First pair is NX1 vs FF Sony,  Second and Third image are NX1 versus Sony S35 and the forth image  is  NX1 versus Sony FF.  S35 is better but even in S35  grabs from the Sony, in resolving detail, the NX1 eats it.     Re Log exposure, no did not expose 1 stop over, so will retest for noise.  Sharpening is one thing but detail resolved is still significantly less.  For SUCH a high tech camera in S35 mode, I think Sony need to spend some time in Korea. :-) and learn how to get all the data of the chip and into the file.  If I didn't own the NX1 maybe I would be very happy with the Sony, but the NX1 has spoilt it's owners for 4K resolution.  IMHO

    in the lens dept the samsung has the edge.  the canon L lens designed for 24x36mm and without being corrected for the cover glass of a digital sensor used on aps-c will struggle to match the optical resolution of the modern samsung lens which has a greater resolving power into aps-c (2x the Lp/mm).  I think some of the contributing factor in resolved detail is actually in the glass dept.  

  14. same lenses on both cameras?  were you exposing for +1stop over with the a7r2?  s-log is noisy when not exposed at least 1 stop more than the ev meter suggests.

    also, with careful sharpening in post (when both cameras are set up with their optimum internal sharpening applied), the a7r2 is very allowing of harsh sharpening in post.

    I couldn;t really understand which images were from s35mm or ff, but ff tests are moot - the a7r2 aint a good cam for full frame 4k

  15. the sensor area in aps-c mode (or any part of the frame less than the full sensor width) will be an upscale.  you might have a 4k file, but it wont be from a 4k sensor area.  You might find that a central crop in the zoom mode (2.7k upscaled to 4k) is higher res than the aps-c 1080p mode (2.7k downscaled to 1080p).  or the clearview zoom might actually degrade the image too much to make the bypassing of the 2.7k-1080 downscale worthwhile.

  16. If you plan on shooting with the correct exposure / wb and with minimal crazy grades I'd look no further than the a7r2 and a battery grip for prolonged power.

    rolling shutter is there - in in copious supply, but a7r2 and sb ultra in s35mm mode is an astounding imaging device for 4k.  I expect rolling shutter is a little lower than that of the a7s2 in full frame mode.  at 25,600 iso I'm amazed how good the a7r2 is!  go any higher than 25600 on my a7s and it may look usable, but actually looks horrible in most instances.  the mk2 is only a very slight improvement from the tests I've seen so far.   

    I only say this to bring your attention to the a7r2, since this is infact a closer match to the fs5 and ursa due to the ability to shoot 4k onto s35mm.  the a7s doesn;t allow this and therefore limits its use with a lot of cinema primes if you ever plan on using them. 

     

  17. I agree.  this little lens is a great setup - you;ve rectified it's only flaw with this mod.  And i imagine the hassle of getting it to sk grimes and back, as well as his work cost a pretty penny.

    The strong english pound isnt gonna help things for your sale, but as a 'character' anamorphic lens the b+h can't be beat IMO.  having quick focus mod on it makes it rather tasty - particularly for users of the bmpcc and gh4

     

  18. Hey guys, so I am a bit of a newb with anamorphics. I currently have a Sankor 16C mounted to a 55 nikon Ai on a BMPCC. I have a Vid-At clamp and I was wondering if the distance of the anamorphic's rear element and the Nikon's front element matters? I mean does it affect how sharp my images will be? I am getting sharp images out of the combo atm, but I just wanted to know if there is a standard? I plan on using it with other taking lenses too. Thanks

    closely mating the element faces will result in better image quality due to the fact that you;re using the central portion of the anamorphot.  spacing it further will allowyou to use a greater amount of the anamorphic glass and in a lot of cases get more anamorphic aesthetic.  more distortion, a little more smearing/CA, and in some cases a perceived shallower dof when your subject is positioned in the centre of the frame.  

    I personally love the look of a anamorphot being pushed towards its edge limits!

×
×
  • Create New...