gethin

I've been shooting real estate vids on the z6. 

I want to start shooting small docos on it. Just for youtube and myself.  The preamps are rubbish.  
Can anyone recommend a teeny sound recorder? I've just ordered the rode wireless go, that I can mate it with. (I've got this we thingy:https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/673340-REG/Tascam_DR_08_DR_08_Portable_Digital_Audio.html but it is really beat up, and i dont trust the 3.5mm inputs 100% - totally not ideal for doco reording. Need it to be bulletproof). 

Also the inbuilt h.264 is probably OK, I'm shooting flat. Anyone using Andrew's flat profile? Pros/cons?

Any other little bits of kit that would improve the experience?  I dont know about and external recorder - relatively big expense for how much benefit? I've not seen any news about z6 raw either - is it out yet?

looking forward to hearing what you think of the z-cams. Very much liking the footage I;ve seen so far 

3 hours ago, Emanuel said:

 

How game changer is such contribution?

massive.  prediction: the sort of processing I do on real estate pics will be pretty well dead in 5-10 years time.  They won't be as good, but they will be "good enough".  I can imagine the new image processing software will just have  bunch of looks, and ai will do the rest. This is the reason I'm trying to get out of the game now.  It's bound to come to video, too. 

Neat video is the bee's knees

On 9/6/2019 at 5:39 PM, Adam Kuźniar said:

I hate these kinds of stupid comments. He should absolutely expect a perfectly usable product for 200 euro.

you beat me to it.

The pico mic looks pretty good. bit more expensive, but you get 2 mics in a kit. 

What's this sigma camera is going to be like I wonder? I'm a bit over the big boys.  I'm not loving the Z6.  (Actually I wonder if anyone does. It's a fiddly pain in the bum). 

I'd be curious @Andrew Reid how you'd find the z-cams.  I'm loving the image I'm seeing from them (if only the E2 wasn't 3x the cost of the BMPCC4K), and their super35 bodies didn't have EF mount. 

On 8/28/2019 at 1:27 AM, fuzzynormal said:

Thanks for the tip.  Unfortunately I couldn't restore thumbnail goofiness by media cache manipulation.  Also, the weird thing about the interpret footage option is that it works with source file footage but not proxies.

I always edit in proxies, so...

Anyway, dead horse and all that.

Ah yes, Because of that I end up creating my own proxies for DJI h.264, otherwise I just edit with the source footage (my 4k nikon stuff edits OK). 

Hey the other thing you can try is resetting the workspace, that sometimes jogs thumbnails back to life.

and the thing that pushed me to download resolve was 4 hours spent trying to do the most basic of things in premiere (import h.265 4k, speed it up, export it). 

Premiere and media encoder kept crashing. I downloaded resolve, and having never used it, did all that, stabilised and exported it in the half an hour you'd expect it to take

I posted the wip on my insta page 

And it didn't crash! 

9 hours ago, ntblowz said:

so much wobble...

 

 

Nasty, makes it a poor choice for a gimbal camera.  You need faster readout for warp stabiliser not to poo itself.  

Oh dear. As Fagan said: I am reviewing the situation.

Was about to send them my z6 for warranty repair. Might as well wait now, or might get rid of the bloomin lot. I hear plumbing is profitable.

The weird thing is I don't love the z6. I really love the d800. I even loved the d5x00s. They were a nightmare to use but the image always surprised me.  The z6 is clunky like the d5300 but 5 times the price. 

On 8/18/2019 at 12:01 AM, fuzzynormal said:

So much this.  WTH/F Adobe?  There's no reason with their budget that they couldn't have released a cohesive "PRO" version of their editing software with strict hardware requirements and support so it's an effective reliable tool.  Nope, just an endlessly buggy BS.

My favorite new annoyance is this:  I do a lot of slow-mo, and I like to shoot in 60p.  So, I batch apply 50% speed to my clips for my 30p sequences.  In bins I can scroll the thumbnails, which is helpful.  However, latest version, for no discernible reason, will now "blank" all thumbnails of clips with any speed variance applied.  They get turned to black.  So now I'm looking at a bin full of black thumbnails.  Basically, making thumbnails of clips with speed adjustment useless.

https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2622768

Yes, it's not the end of the world, but it affects the workflow.  One needs to fight Premiere to work effectively.  That's always been the problem.  It just doesn't play nice. I've been using Premiere on and off since version 1, so I know it's always been a problem child.  

Had a 15 year run there when I was on Final Cut and that was nice.  One of my colleagues is still using FCP.  I might return to it although I don't find it as appealing as the traditional version.  Ugh, I dunno.  Gave Resolve a spin but their version of using proxies was unreliable and everything I do is proxy editing...so still looking.

I get the black thumbnail thing from time to time.  You can usually fix it by trashing the files in your media cache (or sometimes the media cache files).

Also rather than batch applying speed to your clips, try selecting them all and go modify>interpret footage and specify it there. I think that's a more robust way of doing it. It basically tells premiere to treat that media as if it was shot at that speed (and ensures for instance that it will play every frame if you're slowing your footage to the same fps as your edit timeline). 

On 8/19/2019 at 1:55 PM, kaylee said:

omg andrew whoo iss sheeee in your new iconnnn

/adobe = im over it!!!!

resolve = god tier. using v. 16 rn and im lovin it™

heres a short i made last year that i did 100% in resolve, the free version, NOT KNOWING WTH I WAS DOING (lol). came out ok~!

>>> for real: im teaching my friend resolve rn, and what im telling him is, "It's easy, but the learning curve is steep, and Resolve may seem pretty odd at first, it did for me~! Nodes are like layers in Photoshop, etc etc..."

cool! I like it. mysterious

On 8/19/2019 at 8:38 AM, Mako Sports said:

Congratulations ?

The stabilizer is included in the free software

thanks! good to know

25 minutes ago, Trek of Joy said:

I went all in on Resolve at the beginning of the year, just the free version, and haven't looked back. You already know its the best grading software around, and the Cut tab in v16 is really nice, everything is streamlined and very logically laid out. I have free access to Premiere and I have to use it to collaborate with another editor and an ad agency my company works with, I dread using it every single time. Its just so clunky. Until they do a full FCPx style refresh, I'll only use it when I have to. Everything else is 100% Resolve.

I've never used anything other than the $10/mo photo plan since Adobe went subscription, and for the money Lightroom and Photoshop can't be beat - in my opinion. Capture One is the only alternative I've seriously considered, but the cost and not enough time between jobs to spend learning a new workflow makes it a no go for now. If I can get a week to really do a deep dive, I may download the trial version and do a bunch of tutorials to get a feel for it. But I can do most of my adjustments really quick in LR, tagging and keywords are simple, its super LUT friendly, panos and HDR merges are simple, and then fine tune in PS with a few adjustment layers, there's little to be gained by switching. Again my opinion.

Snapseed is great, but limited in comparison, same for mobile versions of LR and PS. LR Mobile is included in the photo plan as well. I use it a lot when I travel - which is frequent - and I like it a lot. I'd like to have the ability to merge panos and HDR images. Though Adobe says a full version of PS is coming soon. I also use Lumafusion as a mobile video editor, and despite its limitations, it's brilliant and only a one time charge of $20.

But I also don't get the hate toward the subscription model, its cheaper than buying new versions every couple years (again the photo plan) and you get regular feature updates and mobile versions. $120/year is made back within a day or two of renewing my subscription. Otherwise there are plenty of alternatives. The anger in the comments of every Dpreview story on Adobe are hilarious, its just consumer goods, but people treat their business model like some kind of personal attack on them.

Chris

Well Chris I have grown to hate Adobe with a passion. It's not because of the subscription model, its because the subscription model has earned them billions, whilst their products have stagnated and their support has gone down the toilet. I was an unofficial adobe evangelist. Photoshop was amazeballs in 1997, but it essentially hasn't changed much. Their algorithms remain untouched. As do the paradigms. But all of that is nothing compared to the towering magnificence of their ability to ignore bugs.  There is one that dates back to lightroom 2. I had a workaround, but now that's broken too. It's broken my workflow. Their tech support is a joke. It's like falling out of love with someone: suddenly you realise the love is gone and all those little things you out up with for years now drive you nuts. In fact you realise you can't stand them and never want to see them again, the treacherous harpies!  

There's probably a meme out there with that guy turning round from his gf and looking at a girl he's just walked past. Well, that. 

Feels so good. Not sure it'll still feel good in 2 weeks time when my subscription runs out.  I have 20 odd years of Adobe workflow to re-do.  (I may end up resubscribing to Photoshop and lightroom but if Snapseed was a desktop app I would think about ditching them too).  So resolve is the no-brainer choice.  Can i get away with the freebie version?  And if not should I buy the bmpcc4k? I cant remember if the free version includes their warp stabiliser equivalent. 

Any other software I should look at?

They are amazing little cameras, but the one I had (the IV) wasn't a joy to use.  But Sonys passion is not for photography it's for $$. That's capitalism for ya. On the plus side it creates space in the market for mavericks like sigma and the E2. I can't wait to see where they are going to go. 

it looks to me like there is artifacting in there due to time warping. I suggest it was shot at a lower framerate.  

anyone interested should hop on the facebook group an petition for a small-flange version of the s35 and FF models, due to be released with EF and PL mounts only.  Kinson Loo is active on the page - one of the most appealing things about the camera: the management and techs are on there, and there is a sense they are learning and constantly perfecting the camera software. 

I will buy this. Or th moza aircross 2 if it ever comes out. THe ronin s is tooo heavy. 

Hey anyone here used to use balance gimbals like the glidecam?  I'm convinced that there is scope for a hybrid where the pan axis is just on a bearing. I used to get smoother slow moves with my blackbird.  The organic tail off of the spin is very hard to achieve on a powered gimbal. Currently whilst moving any wrist movements can slow or speed up a pan, whereas on the old school ones a pan would slow down no matter what your wrist is doing.   The other thing is that the joint on the old styley effectively removed some of the walk bounce.  

Nikon still do not understand video, and they don't want to.

I contacted Nikon Australia to point out that the auto mode had a minimum shutter speed equivalent to 360 degree shutter and no way to change it and they said: meh.  (And when I bring this up so many people blether on about shooting in manual mode and fail to imagine a circumstance where having a fixed aperture but smoothly variable shutter would be useful, so don't feel you need to waive your lack of imagination around now ?) . The fact it works like this is emblematic of Nikon's attitude to video: an annoying bolt-on they've been forced into and driven more by their marketing Dept than by their engineers. 

They can't imagine a time where stills will be the secondary function for photographers. A bit like Nokia before smartphones. 

On 7/12/2019 at 2:31 PM, kye said:

Yeah, I agree.

Although, personally, I separate out the weaknesses / requirements of the camera into things that I could work on and things I can't (or have chosen not to).  For example, if people shoot run-n-gun with the GH5 and get great low-noise footage then I'm very interested in how they do that.  If they do that by having great lighting then that doesn't apply to me and how I shoot (I shoot exclusively in available light) but if they've achieved that in post then I will absolutely work my butt off to learn how to do that.  So in a way, I will use the best examples of what is possible as 'inspiration' for me to push myself and learn more about the craft.

The GH5 is a funny one actually, because for me the GH5 produces absolutely glorious images and so (for the most part) I can just look at the camera as being infinitely good, and if there's issues with my films then it's basically my fault.  I know it's not true for low-light shooting (for example) but mostly I push myself super-hard to create magic.  It means that I'm basically always disappointed with the results, but it makes me learn at the fastest rate I can, so in that sense it's still worthwhile.  Every now and then the factors I've chosen not to control will come together and magic will get recorded to the SD card and it makes me really happy and makes everything worthwhile.

I also have a big skew in my approach because I completely accept that my shooting will be far from perfect, but then I work super hard in post to get the best results I can.  In this sense I think that tests like this are great for reminding everyone that there are many cameras that produce workable images, and my personal opinion is that if you know what you're doing then you can really elevate your work by colour grading and otherwise manipulating images.

I agree with all of what you said   It was the grading workflow that was the nail in the coffin for me: I was spending way too much time getting the image to a point where it was acceptable.  I admit I have a lot to learn about grading log footage, but for what I do it was totally bonkers spending that amount of time on it.  Akin to linus tech tips shooting with RED, what a whole load of faff, for a tech a blog, they'd get better results quicker with an an a7.  THe z6 is sooooo much quicker, I have a few presets I can dump on the footage for different setups, and usually I just have to tweak the curves a bit, then onto the next.  However, I just shot a local tv ad on the z6, and I was missing the GH5: no log, no 10bit, no stupidly high bitrate, no advanced monitoring   Mostly that stuff is a safety net, but just knowing that the gear you use is designed more for that style of shooting, and having those more advanced options available makes you feel more in control.  It's not great working a job and feeling like your kit isn't quite up to the task (even if that is just in your head!).  

@kye yep I think warts and all reviews are very important. Too many reviewers will cut together the nicest looking footage: I guess that's natural.

for me I'd watched so much gh5 stuff I wasn't prepared for its shortcomings, (which for me was the highlight rolloff and the shadow noise). I realised in retropect all the nice footage I'd seen controlled those aspects. The thing I learnt from that (and I guess this test shows this too) is that the the perfect camera for you is not the perfect camera for someone else, and you have to modify the way you work to get the best out of a camera. That entails some compromises, and sometimes it can be a compromise too far that's makes you move on to different gear. 

I probably should keep my big fat yap shut, and I have a lot of respect for Mathias and I agree with the sentiment about technique and worrying less about specks but (obviously there going to be a but...) I try to tell potential clients that if they're comparing photographers to try and look at all their output, not just their portfolio pics. And that anyone should be able to get 20 good shots together. It's how they handle the most difficult situations and the level of consistency that is the mark of a professional, and I'd humbly like to suggest the same is true of gear.  It's when you push cameras to the edge of what they're capable of that you find out which ones work for you.  I'm constantly shooting in very high dynamic range situations. The z6 is a better fit for me than the gh5. I prefer the highlight rolloff on the z6 and like how much you can push the shadows. The same test shooting the dog backlit against a window would be more enlightening. Can you recover shadow detail, highlights, does the image still look nice with the background overexposed etc. 

20 hours ago, Castorp said:

Gethin, make an A2 inch print from that zhongyi and one from any of the Z lenses and see what happens. 

I don’t have the 14-30/4 but I hear it’s more than comparable to the 14-24/2.8G?

I will get back to Andrew later. I understand his perspective, but it’s a niche perspective which he doesn’t specify. He cares about very specific things, which is fine, but a reviewers viewpoint should be clear and not be made to sound like a general matter of fact. 

On the other hand, generalising and simplistic statements that stir emotions through dishonesty for the sake of clicks is the name of the game these days. 

 

Zounds! A2 printing. Methinks you're in the wrong forum ?  Horses for courses: I care more about character most of the time. Except longtitudinal chromatic abberation, I hate that. Especially hard to correct on video. 

I have both, no the 14-24 is sharper, but the 14-30 has a simpler distortion to correct. 

Erm, re trying to tell someone what they should and shouldn't do on their own website: priceless.  As I said - I prefer character than "perfection" Lol

On 7/4/2019 at 2:51 AM, Castorp said:

 

As of today the single best reason to buy a Z camera I believe is the lenses. 

 

whert? theres only 5 reasons, and none of them are that interesting. I only own the 14-30 f4. It's really handy, but it's not great, soft at 14, and farking expensive for a plastic focus by wire lens. And on that - what in gods name is good about it? They are a pain in the arse to fcus manually, let alone focus pull.  The 14-30 is soft enough that even zoomed all the way in focussing by wire is a nightmare. Nikon touted it's lens mount as enabling super-duper lens design, then brought out f1.8 primes and f4 zooms aimed at a consumer market. Totally batso strategy and SNAFU for nikon.  The only native z lenses I'm going to consider buying are wide, or light lenses, Because once you get over a certain size and weight, you may as well buy f-mount and keep your mounting options open (ie you can adapt them to everything else, whereas z-mount lenses are for z-cameres only). 

My lens research over the last few months has been on the

zhongyi 85mm f1.2, 50mm f0.95
laowa 10-18. 12mm zero d, 105 f2. 
sigma and nikon 105 f1.4, 

even if z versions are released, I still might consider buying e or F mount versions of these lenses because it leaves my future options open. 

If nikon had released z versions of a 12-24 f4, 16-40 f2.8, 50 f1.2 that is a similar size to it's existing f1.2 lens (with similar rendering),  and 20, 35, 85 f1.4 primes I would've looked hard at all of those.  And why not have a focus by wire option that keeps the travel of the lens ring locked to how much the focus changes? how hard can that be?

missing my 4K 60 though. 

4k60 ?
1.5x crop ?

It just leads to a load of faff. FOr what I do it wold be quicker to have 2 cameras. 

Yep I hadn't thought about sensor size. What's the Mavic 2 like in low light? The Phantom 4 is pretty crap, but the action cam footage I saw shot indoors was not terrible.  

I have to say: I'm not saying it was great, but that it was great for a$500 action cam. HDR 4k vid ffs!