Emanuel

Yep, Vimeo downsampling 4K to 720p will do that!!

Until he shares the original footage that test is completely bunk.

Thank you Emanuel for posting those links!!!

Ive found that this gentleman (...) has graciously included a link to his original files for download! check it out

ssss

I saw someone complaining on dpreview that the RX100iv shut down because of overheating after just two minutes while shooting 4K. So some assurances about the RX10ii would be great. 

I really am truly humbled by your kind words, they mean more than you think. I take much more than I give here, and it's an absolute pleasure to give people information and opinions back when they need it, because back in the day one could have really used one of these forums full of people who share a common passion and enjoy helping one another. Thank you. 

 

Just to clarify and state all the information: 

 

35mm is the film type used in photographic cameras in the 20s century for almost a century. The size of that film sheet was 36x24mm. 

Motion picture cinema cameras used the same film, 35mm, however the film was used rotated (vertically instead of horizontaly) so although it's the same film (35mm) the size of the area used on the film was smaller on motion cameras. somewhere around 22x16mm-ish, then this was modified to ''super 35mm'' increasing the size slightly to 24x18mm-ish. 

 

Digital photography came, and sensors inside digital SLRs were all APS-C size format, which happens to be close/identical to s35 motion film window size. 

Then Canon released the Canon 1Ds. A digital camera that has the same size format as photographic 35mm film photographers were used to, and Canon cleverly called this size ''Full-Frame'', making all professionals feel they have non-full cameras, the Canon 1Ds and later 5D made record-breaking sales due to having that Full Frame 35mm film size sensor. Nikon followed the trend and also produced their cameras with that size sensor, but called it FX format and called APS-C DX format. .

 

Then video came to these photographic cameras, while the highest-end digital cinema camera has the standard s35/APS-C size sensors, suddenly the 5D became the largest sensor video camera in existence and the only way to shoot video in with a large photographic 35mm format look, similar size to film stocks larger than s35 that were available anciently that were called VistaVision films. 

Having that large sensor is a new aesthetic to video and does have benefits in getting shallow depth of field and wide angles. But nonetheless, APS-C S35 IS the standard cinema size today, so they are favoured by cinematographers. Using an APS-C digital camera gives cinematographers their traditional focal-length/depth of field they are used to for decades, a 50mm lens behaves like they're used to, unlike on FF where it suddenly looks like a 35mm to them. And cinema lenses are designed to cover that size image not FF so that's a big factor. S35 is considered the sweet spot standard for cinema/video production, going larger gives shallower depth if field and going smaller givers deeper depth of field and both are compromises for the standard. That's not to say that many love the new Fullframe video aesthetic and many love the smaller sensor deep aesthetic, it's a personal artistic choice after all. 

So APS-C video shooting DSLRs took off, 550D, 600D, 60D, 7D, D7000, D3300, D5200, Nex series, Alpha a5100/6000, and much more. and to this day, s35/APS-C is the standard size of most video cinema cameras, like the Canons C100/300, Sony FS100, FS700, FS7, F5, F55, F35, F65, Panasonic Varicam, Arri Alexa, Arri Amira, Red one, Epic, MX, Blackmagic cinema 4K cameras, Ursa, Phantoms, virtually all cinema cameras, with exceptions of cameras having larger sensors closer to FF like the new Alexa 65, Red Weapon Vista. (There are size variation between all these S35/APS-C cameras but not worth mentioning, you can check each camera's sensor spec size in millimeters if needed)

 

 

When it comes to Crop factors, it's now a common standard to use photographic 35mm (Fullframe or FX) as a reference to know what a lens will look on smaller or larger sensors, Fullframe is considered 1X crop, none.

FF is the standard mentioned on release specs (like the RX10 here). 

To get the FF equivalent, you multiply the crop factor by the focal length to get the field of view, and multiply the aperture to get the depth of field, but you don't apply that to exposure, just DOF. 

-S35/APS-C: 1.5x crop.

So here a 50mm F/2 s35 lens on a s35 camera looks like an 85mm F/3 FF lens on a FF camera, in terms of field of view and depth of field, but exposure/brightness is still F/2. 

-Micro Four Thirds: 2x Crop. (GH4 in 4K is 2.3x)

-1" Sensor size: 2.7x Crop. (RX10, XC10)

-S16 sensor size: 3x Crop. (Bolex, Pocket Camera)

Using and calculating the FF equivalent of your lenses is only relevant if you are used to the FF standard as a photographer, but as a cinematographer who always worked with s35/APS-C, he knows how a 50mm looks and doesn't really care what the equivalent lens on FF.

It's however nice to know the facts behind it and helps if you ever need to use a smaller/larger sensor camera and be able to multiply the crop factor to know how your lenses are going to look. 

For someone used to FF, the RX10 looks like a FF lens that's 24-200mm F7.6 in depth of field and field of view, and F/2.8 brightness/exposure.

So I realize this is a pretty basic question that I probably knew the answer to at one time, but 24-200mm, is that FF equivalent, or 35mm equivalent? I know it says 35mm equivalent, but for some reason I'm just confused. (I always get confused with this lens equivalent stuff). For instance this chart says 35mm Full Frame as though they are the same http://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2012/10/allsensors.jpg So what is this lens equivalent to in FF? Roughly 36-300mm? Or is it 24-200mm?

The camra is great, the only problem is that A7s ii will have all this and the 5 axis stabilization - then you have to buy that too.   -:)

34ms. OUCH.

Actually worse than the D90? That camera was in the unusable territory, you can't  take anything but locked off tripod shots WITHOUT moving subjects. 

34ms. OUCH.

Actually worse than the D90? That camera was in the unusable territory, you can't  take anything but locked off tripod shots WITHOUT moving subjects. 

That's why I wanted to declare, specifications don't mean anything! 

So...does it have bad rolling shutter or not?