Emanuel

24 minutes ago, Dimitris Stasinos said:

Actually this is the best footage i have seen so far from the mavic pro. These images have the right amount of sharpness to my eyes. Also in the statue shot we can finally see the advantage of bigger focal length / shallower depth of field, as selective focus is not an option for a P4 owner. This is an example of how an experienced user can show the true potential of a product.

Yes, indeed.

One of the lighthouse shots (at 1:14) is pretty representative of such feature. Actually, the add-on is evident for that particular shot, comparing to the previous ones immediately before. Finer narrative tool.

My perspective as well :-)

This one seems legit too:

BTW, here's already accessories offer:

9 hours ago, Cinegain said:

Here the limit is 250 gram... and you may fly it up to 30m. You must respect everyone's privacy (another reason why dashcams are forbidden). You need to be in a special exemption programm if you want to fly the quadcopter for anything other than purpose of flight itself (because that would actually still be considered hobby model flying... hook up a camera however, and that's out of the question). There's then a lot of costs and restrictions involved. Yeah... not my idea of a fun time when such hassle is involved, unless I'd be making a living out of it. I could only imagine getting one for holidays and taking it to places where they don't care as much that you're flying a quadcopter around. Where people would look up and wave at the camera, fascinated to see something like that, rather than calling authorities that you feel disturbed in your peace and violated in the general public privacy.

That place really sucks, sorry : ) Dashcams are forbidden... what a joke : D Put a smartphone doing the role, what will they say? Will they confiscate your phone? In the name of what? Where's the loss of your privacy then? LOL :-)

On topic, here are several different options:

No, racing is only addressed there for the motivation made. I mean other reviews I've seen. That's all. Opinions and reports of people who have tested the quad.

1 minute ago, graphicnatured said:

The one you posted saying "nothing compares in this panoramic."

Well, that one is a spot especially made for that. Drone racing, that's the plot.

3 minutes ago, graphicnatured said:

Compared to my Phantom 4 the Mavic looks really squirrely and all over the place. I'll reserve real judgement for when I fly one, but from this video only it appears clearly the Phantom 4 is way more stable in flight.

What video?

10 minutes ago, Snowfun said:

Other than the possibly superior stability in a breeze of the P4, it's difficult therefore to see any reason not to go with the Mavic.

Without mention as far as I've seen from someone else testing, the bird Mavic Pro beats the older member of family despite the possible superior stability you refer.

I don't see any better IQ on the Phantom 4 side versus the Mavic Pro, actually, on the contrary... IQ is beyond artificial edges to my eyes or sharpness as you wish.

8 hours ago, Geoff CB said:

RS is on of the most defining differences between high end cameras and consumer ones. If I cannot use pans in a shot that takes away a storytelling tool. And the A6300 isn't simply bad, it's horrendous, it's easily the worst performing RS of any consumer camera. It makes it unusable in any professional filmmaking setting, relocating it to use in interviews and event work.

Simply because a6300 is not a professional video camera, neither for stills. It is a camera for amateurs, low budget indies who can use it carefully as B camera. In a tripod as most part of shots in any serious narrative piece, it can actually shine if the shooter knows the limitations of the device. If so, it can be a very interesting tool, really not expensive.

54 minutes ago, Nikkor said:

Oh comon emanuel, thats slomo footage. The 6300 does have the worst RS around, and RS is a problem.

Horses for courses. No one can say RS is not there. Awful? For testing? Yes, it is. But, a good shooter should know how to use the tools, as we all know but tend to forget in the most geeky way of pages populated of geeks we all are too : ) a shooter is beyond that! :-)

In the last part, there's 4K footage.

Current choice, current panorama...

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/panoramic

That ad is only a joke because Mavic wins the race hands down... ;-) It is a game changer, fellows!

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?349857-Bye-bye-Karma-GoPro-You-had-no-chance&p=1986661181&viewfull=1#post1986661181

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKInNs0z-20

13 minutes ago, Marco Tecno said:

What about 4k?

Last part. Listen: people are hysterical about RS, high ISOs and so on. There, you/we/you all have access to a good lesson how to properly use that capture device, even handheld... shooter oblige ;-)

On 06/10/2016 at 5:08 PM, Nodnarb said:

The rolling shutter on the a6300 is just awful. (...)

Awful RS, you said?

Nothing compares to Mavic Pro in the current panorama, nothing.

7 hours ago, tugela said:

The NX1 is markedly superior to the RX100M3, both with stills and video. But it does not fit in a pocket however.

I didn't ask it. I only mentioned the NX1's low light performance versus Sonysssss... ;-)

I never disliked Samsung products, even though, those blues (hue) are a particular signature of this camera, not exactly from multiple choice straight out the box. You shoot with one, blues and magentas will invariably look the same each time you use it. But, it is up to you, if it is you're liking... I much appreciate à la Fuji: you have accurate skin tones and that's it. You can color it in wherever route you want with no much time around it.

PS: That is, in the case you'd be using 1000ft rolls (+/- 11 minutes), because 400' cans (35mm) take less than 5 minutes @24fps...

1 hour ago, Emanuel said:

Does your NX1 match this low light performance à la Sony's MILCs?

Comes to my mind the first Cinealta F900 (BTW, 2/3" sensor format) imagerie seen circa 2001; a couple of kilos/pounds more *cough cough* 100x more expensive; without lens, player recorder setup neither...

Let's not forget as far as the limit of 5 minutes concerns because of overheating, a few here were used to shoot film within the 10-minutes limit, so... ;-) Some complaints on these boards remind me those kids used to modern life with no clue about hard life in some other latitudes...

:X

5 hours ago, tugela said:

(...) The RX100 was no where near as good as my NX1 (or even my old Canon) in terms of picture quality (...)

Does your NX1 match this low light performance à la Sony's MILCs?

Comes to my mind the first Cinealta F900 (BTW, 2/3" sensor format) imagerie seen circa 2001; a couple of kilos/pounds more *cough cough* 100x more expensive; without lens, player recorder setup neither...

Let's not forget as far as the limit of 5 minutes concerns because of overheating, a few here were used to shoot film within the 10-minutes limit, so... ;-) Some complaints on these boards remind me those kids used to modern life with no clue about hard life in some other latitudes...

X5/X5R are another league... Let's not mix up apples to oranges ;-) Phantom 4 or Karma have nothing to do with. The reception theory ; ) can fit but people are still stuck on the wrong variables, obsessed with definition when this doesn't necessarily mean better IQ, on the contrary, more often than we could aspire to.

On 07/10/2016 at 4:05 AM, thefactory said:

I use my a6300 mostly for photos these days or b-cam. Main camera is a7sii which i love shooting on. More dials, less fiddling around. I wont be rushing out to buy the 6500 but i'm very much looking forward to these features in a A7riii a7siii or maybe even the rumoured a9 emount. 

 

A peculiar pair...

https://***URL removed***/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr29_0=sony_a7sii&attr29_1=sony_a6300&attr72_0=4k&attr72_1=4k&normalization=full&widget=369&x=0.6309463228602367&y=0.1607126303325922

3 hours ago, JazzBox said:

To me it is pretty good! The shot on the roof shows that moire is not too severe... so it is already a good point in my opinion.
Two days ago I shot a music video and there was also an operator with his Phantom 3 Pro, it seems more "digital" to me from the shots I have from it.

Mio caro, exactly my POV! We both share the same cinematic perspective on motion pictures, let it alone the aerial footage. Unfortunately, people are too uneducated with their small displays. We live in a sad age where artifacts are the king. Sawtooth borders (when not aliasing) are taken for sharp content... What else can we say? *Phew*

To me, this is the first small drone to focus my attention on it. For the same reasons you mention.

Still from the European press presentation in Lisbon (I know very well those locations and how curious is to me to see them to be shot like that with so tiny capture device -- DJI should/could/can slash the GoPro business with that toy/cam beyond the drone industry) take a look from 3:48 minute on:

AF won't do any good if you'll end shaky neither. 

Other than that, only the small sensor size could hurt. Seen it as a competent B camera, of course :-)

Well, it is faster than the previous model, you can have access to better AF, they say low light performance is increased from improved high ISOs and cherish in the top of the cake, you reach 6.25 seconds of 5.5K RAW... Not bad.

http://petapixel.com/2016/10/06/sony-rx100-v-worlds-quickest-focus-fastest-shooting-af-points/