jhnkng

Meanwhile, Sony updates the FS5 firmware and calls is the FS5 mk2!

That's actually my site I believe I could easily create a flatter Eterna LUT, but I don't have the X-H1, and I don't know anyone in my area (Hungary, Europe) who has one.
(If you try my LUTs, make sure to switch the clip to video levels.)

As another C100mk2 shooter, totally agree.
@everyone   Here is something interesting - http://colorizer.net/
I will contact them about possibly creating an Eterna LUT. Would be great if others did as well. Regardless, really hits the mark of having a film sim LUT without the heavy contrast curve I dislike in the official Eterna LUT. I am certainly buying them a coffee.

Meanwhile, Sony updates the FS5 firmware and calls is the FS5 mk2!

Meanwhile, Sony updates the FS5 firmware and calls is the FS5 mk2!

Meanwhile, Sony updates the FS5 firmware and calls is the FS5 mk2!

Meanwhile, Sony updates the FS5 firmware and calls is the FS5 mk2!

Pretty much, but I find those USB chargers are slow — takes a few hours to charge to capacity. USB-C PD runs at like 14v instead of 5v at I think 2A, so it puts out more juice meaning you can charge batteries faster (it’s how USB-C laptops accept charge through USB). A 1hr fast charger for a single battery would be ideal, so as one is depleted you should have a spare, and one mostly charged. If it can take power from a V-Lock battery that’ll be even better.
This isn’t an issue if you’re charging overnight, and charging slower is probably better for the battery anyway. 

Meanwhile, Sony updates the FS5 firmware and calls is the FS5 mk2!

Meanwhile, Sony updates the FS5 firmware and calls is the FS5 mk2!

Meanwhile, Sony updates the FS5 firmware and calls is the FS5 mk2!

Well that's pretty darn cool.

https://photorumors.com/2018/04/10/major-firmware-updates-coming-for-the-fuji-gfx50s-x-t2-x-h1-x-pro2-and-x-e3-cameras/

Note I said:

Because with 4K 60fps raw, and even greater HD slow motion, and pretty high DR and good lowlight, what really is left? 

Of course just like the folks in the stills world there is a never ending list of "more" wanted!
 
But I reckon just like the stills world we might get soon to point we can worry less about the technical quality of the image, and more about everything else. (such as ergonomics, or having built in NDs, I/O options, TC, wireless, or focus tracking, etc)

I guess both of those truths actually are a good sign for all of us in this forum, isn't it? ;-)

Err.. what?

https://www.androidauthority.com/why-are-apples-chips-faster-than-qualcomms-gary-explains-802738/

TL;DR --

"There is no denying that Apple has a world class CPU design team that has consistently produced the best SoCs in the world over the last few years." 
Anyway, it's hardly surprising that Apple would try to bring their chip designs in house, like they have for pretty much every bit of their business (besides manufacturing.) In any case Apple sells a whole range of Macs, they're not all going to go internal all at once. At a guess the Macbook will be the first -- it's basically an iPad with a bad keyboard -- but certainly there may be Apple designed chips for the 13in Macbook Pro. We think Pro means heavy duty computing applications, but it's pretty obvious Apple sees "Pro" as meaning anyone who uses it for work. They've  prioritised things like size and battery life over raw power, when to be honest I think I'd rather an option for raw power at the expense of size or battery life. 

As a fun aside, I have a fully specced first gen 15in MBP with the Touch Bar, and my iPad runs Fortnite better than my very very expensive laptop. So don't discount what's possible with mobile hardware when you have the opportunity to really optimise for it. 

Also, err, Prores RAW. Developing a new codec that will be invaluable to only a very core niche of video professionals is hardly the action of a company who are abandoning the Pro market. 
 

When I first read the post title I figured it was a zombie thread from 2009.
The demise of Apple for professionals has been happening for 25 years now. I guess sooner or later they may get around to it. 

I’ll have to try it. I knew FilmConvert has a ML Raw profile, but I never really tested.
When I started this thread, I was toying around with an RX10ii... thinking I could avoid some common color banding issues of sLog2 by having the 4 Luma values of monochrome. It actually worked exactly as I hoped and loved the 120p video but every time I went out to shoot something, I picked up my 5D Mark III, so I sold the RX10ii since it wasn’t getting used.
But there is something very cool about the RX10ii and if I have some disposable income in the future I can see myself buying it again and treating it like a S16mm B&W camera for run and gun projects. 
Nice frames, please post the short when it’s competed. What camera did you use?
Looks cool as always, Matt. Excited to hear you’re working on another feature. Any details?
To expand upon your points, I believe that B&W easily adds a level of suspension of disbelief that can really strengthen some films. Eraserhead being a perfect example of this. It’s like anything can happen in a B&W world.
I’ve had an idea for a film for years that needs to be shot in B&W... if only I can find the time to pre-produce it.
The blended, Super imposed frames at the end is such pure cinema. It felt as if I was watching a film from the 40s or 50s. Great work. 

I love shooting black and white, but I don’t get to do much motion in black and white. I did shoot a short a few years ago in black and white: 
 

I love shooting black and white, but I don’t get to do much motion in black and white. I did shoot a short a few years ago in black and white: 
 

C’mon now Jon, Panasonic doesn’t even give the all-i 1080p to any of their sub $1000 cameras. All companies have product tiers with more features in the higher tiered products.
The 5D4 is nearly two years old with the older processor. And to many, mjpeg is a solid codec that editing programs can cut like butter. Some of my favorite Panasonic videos were shot in mjpeg with the GH1/GH2 hacks.
I don’t really care what cameras people use. In fact, I love the competition these companies have. It only helps us. But this notion that Canon isn’t innovating or they’re holding back is ridiculous. They’re the first company to have fully manual video mode, first 4K DSLR, first 4K 60p DSLR, first company with usable video AF, first company to put a Log Profile in a DSLR... etc...

That's the funniest thing I've read all day!
I never get the endless Canon bashing here, as if they're the only one that segments its lineup. Olympus doesn't put the focus stacking and pixel shift in all its bodies - or PDAF for that matter on anything below the EM1. Panasonic doesn't put 10-bit in anything other than the GH5(s) or a competent AF system in anything. Sony doesn't put anything beyond 8-bit 4:2:0 with the same 100mbps bitrate we've seen for years in anything below the FS5 and so on - yet people here are shitting themselves with excitement over the a7III and its non-existent weather sealing, partial plastic body, cheap spec LCD/EVF and so on because of oversampled 4k and what looks like a great AF system for a mere $2000. Fuji, geez, just check the XH1 thread. Where are the threads bitching about the G9 being crippled for not getting 10-bit? Or the a7r3 with its cheap ass single UHS-II card slot and no 10-bit or even a higher bitrate at $3200? The a9 is even more offensive at $4500. Everyone segments its cameras. Its a shitty reality we're forced to deal with. As to Canon, they're clearly waiting to release the mirrorless 5d4 without cannibalizing 5d4 sales.
Chris

I've used the same technique to remove banding as well as moire in the past. In Premiere Pro, make an adjustment layer over the affected clip, and set the colour blend mode to "color". Then drag a Gaussian Blur effect onto the adjustment layer, and use the mask tools to mask out the unaffected part of the frame. If you look closely it doesn't remove the pattern completely, but it does remove the colour banding which I find is good enough for most applications. Also, if you get a lot of banding in your footage check to see if it's the LUT that is causing it -- I've noticed in the past that some of the LUTs I was using would occasionally cause horrible banding. 

Oh I dunno, maybe because Sony didn't make that sensor? 
https://www.google.com.au/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=d850+sensor+manufacturer&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&gfe_rd=cr&dcr=0&ei=WZh3WvOQC6PM8gfdsZrwAQ
And according to this list (https://nikonrumors.com/2015/12/16/list-of-all-nikon-dslr-cameras-and-their-sensor-manufacturerdesigner.aspx/) some of the most important cameras Nikon has produced (The D3/s & D4/s which arguably pushed the industry towards low light ability rather than sheer megapixel count) were sensors designed in house. It goes against the grain of "Internet Wisdom", but Nikon has more of a hand in designing their sensors than anyone gives them credit for. In any case, shoot any two Nikons of the same generation and the files mix together just fine in the edit. So why does it count against them because they can get a Sony sensor package with Nikon specs and marry that to a Nikon processor and code that does the actual magic, and save themselves the time and cost of developing a sensor from scratch?  
 

Oh man, what have I started! I thought it was a quick throwaway comment on a pet peeve of mine -- didn't think it would last this long!

Sorry Andrew, totally derailed your topic.

Look, I have no inside info or any actual knowledge in image sensors (beyond using them) so anything I add is just whatever Google tells me. But I did find this presser from 2010 from TowerJazz announcing a partnership with another company to provide BSI components:
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20100201007494/en/TowerJazz-Soitec-Sign-Agreement-Offer-Backside-Illumination

I have no idea if TowerJazz actually shipped any BSI chips, but it seems to at least point to a capacity to ship BSI chips from around 2010. 

In any case this is the last I will add to this specific topic... I think I've done enough damage. 

 

Maybe I'm not asking Google the right questions, but I think you might be the only one writing articles on the internet that is so fixated in "how custom is custom" for Nikon sensors. Since no one outside of Nikon knows, it could be one way or the other... making you either a brilliant analyst or conspiracy theorist. But one would've thought that the design part of the equation is a pretty important part of the overall process.

While we're on this point, there's an assumption that because Nikon has been known to use off-the-shelf Sony parts, it means they are somehow inferior to Sony. But the results speak differently. Even here the general wisdom is that Nikon has better colour than Sony, and that mojo happens in the processing. So if 50% of your mojo is in the code that you have full control over, and you can just buy the other 50% from an excellent manufacturer -- why reinvent the wheel for your volume products? Especially since lenses play an equally important part to the image capture workflow, and Nikon has a lock on that.
 
Uhm, you're not quoting anything at all -- just pure conjecture on your part, unsubstantiated by even a "I can't talk about it because NDA".

Also --
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/nikon-d850/nikon-d850A.HTM#q-and-a

"The D850 uses a brand-new image sensor. The 45.7-megapixel full-frame sensor is Nikon's highest megapixel sensor yet and is also their first backside-illuminated (BSI) full-frame sensor. The sensor was designed entirely by Nikon, although they told us that the manufacturing was contracted out, which is not unusual. However, it remains notable that the sensor, unlike some found in other Nikon DSLRs, is not off-the-shelf but rather built specifically to Nikon's specifications. As expected, the new sensor also has a built-in ultrasonic cleaning mechanism and dust-off image reference capabilities."

But maybe they're wrong too? Or maybe Nikon lied to them? Or maybe you read "built specifically to Nikon's specifications" and see that as proof that Sony is the Wizard of Oz pulling the strings from behind the curtain? 
 
Things change. I thought the jazz section of Tower Records in Japan was called Tower Jazz, but I haven't been in there for ages. I have no idea who TowerJazz is, but gee, let's have a think about why Nikon might've contracted a different manufacture this time. Maybe they've designed something new, and don't want Sony to have it since they're now competitors in the camera space? Maybe TowerJazz offered them a deal they couldn't refuse? Maybe it was a pragmatic business decision based on cost, ability, and timing? Maybe they worked with TowerJazz engineers to work out the kinks of the new design? 

Fun diversion -- Panasonic and TowerJazz formed a company dedicated to making Panasonic chips in Japan, including image sensors.