maxmizer

Rai TV (italia) came to me to cover an event I've organized in Poland. The cam operator had a Canon C100 mkII but he has never used autofocus at all during the whole duration of the event, it is not reliable enough according to him.
It seems that pros don't use autofocus at all, neither on Sony or Canon cameras or whatever.
Questioning the pro might be more reliable than forum.

8K is the future, buying a 4K domain would be like having an HD reference in your site or something like "eos" or both...

I shoot in 8 bit.
The 2 extra bits I don't have are talent and skill.
Those are the bits I need most to be honest.

Well I guess if you are Really good at exposure, proper lighting, not shooting into the sun, etc, 8 bit works. It has somehow worked for many years,
But in a professional venue they have every base covered. Better cameras, great cameramen, great audio, great lighting, great graders, great editors, great actors, on and on.
So it is hard for the average person to compete with the Pros, but now I think the gap has been closed a Lot. But you are not going to do Green Screen, VFX effects in 8 bit very well.
But I think we beat ourselves up too much anymore on output quality. I am not saying to not try as hard as possible to achieve it, but at the cost of always being in debt, worrying about it all the time Bah I say.
Look back how bad 8mm cameras were, super8 even. Nobody said damn that sucked. They were happy to see what had been shot, not complaining about the quality. And I would imagine most of the people that watch videos have no clue what 90% of the problems we piss and moan about even exist. I would say the most important thing that drives me crazy is poor Audio, not poor video, in a short or a long. And other than one person on here, we rarely ever even talk about that subject.

Exactly!

I'm wildly guessing this is linked to the new RED smartphone.  Probably using the same sensor?

GoPro Hero 6 Black 505€
I bought a Yi 4K+ 268,06€ shipment included.
That´s the problem of GoPro.

The micro four thirds standard specifies electronic communication protocols, mount specifications, and flange distance. It does not dictate a specific sensor size. So any implication that Panasonic couldn't put an oversized sensor in the GH5S without violating the standard is completely baseless.

@seku "Imho, the raised shadows from the GH5s and the GH5 seem similar..."
That's exactly the same I'm talking about.
@PannySVHS
Neumann's robot intro film is made with 30k Zeiss lens and I didn't even see really lowlight shots. From the clips of harbour, the best one is with Voigtlander 10.5 at ISO1000, at iso4000 there's noticable degrading in quality.
To sum-up - at the same time I apologize for bothering you - I did noise reduction and slightly color grading with Andrew's clip, and GH5 image is near the same at iso 6400 (!) out of camera. GH5s image has less resolution in all futages that I saw on the internet. Yes, out of camera GH5s looks cleaner than GH5 above iso3200, but it is result primarily of hard software operations inside of camera. I'm not at all technician, but I have to think also about possibility that high processing power for such strong internal manipulation in GH5s is maybe responsible for initial lack of ibis. Saying all of that, I don't thinks GH5s has not some advantages - but price for it is too high, especially considering that shockingly good ibis is one of the breakthrough advantage of GH5... Talks about amateurish side of using of ibis is complete nonsense - GH cameras are production instruments that work marvelously at the place and circumstances where other highend cameras couldn't. Explanation like using in the car-shots are childish caprice. I'm afraid that GH5s will very soon become obsolete. Fuji video oriented camera with ibis is knocking at the door, with lowlight performance probably easy surpasses GH5s offer and quality... As much as GH5 looks as thorougly thought  out product, GH5s looks like half baked... IMHO

I completely agree! Nikon should have hired the entire Samsung camera team and gone to work. Samsung tech, Nikon design input, optics, marketing and brand name appeal = sure fire hit, especially if they did both an APS-C model and full frame like Sony do.
Magic Lantern say they were in contact with Samsung just before NX1 was cancelled. Never known such a push into enthusiasts hearts by a big company. Usually they are more interested in selling toasters and microwaves by the millions.
Nikon are way too dependant on Sony for sensors IMHO... One change of mind at a Sony management meeting and bang, there goes your sensor supply. Even though there would obviously be contracts, I doubt they are all that far reaching long-term contracts.
Here is my ideal spec of a Nikon mirrorless camera for 2018:
Full frame, 24MP (6000 x 4000), with clean ISO 12,800 6K video in both H.264 and H.265 format, with further option for ALL-I and paid upgrade to ProRes 422 LT Nikon flat profile IBIS At least 240fps in 2.5K... 4K 120p would be nice too Huge battery in the main body grip, without need to extend size of camera with vertical grip. Make literally the entire grip a battery (like Hasselblad). NX1 inspired ergonomics and control layout Nikon colour science but updated for Rec2020 and HDR standards - wider colour gammut Dual Pixel AF with robust tracking - even with EF mount adapter No F-mount nonsense - do a shallow flange like E-mount for adaptability Wide range of fast primes and official adapter for F mount Nikon logo, understated pro design... but not retro hipster bullshit Df style plastic affair! NX1 or Leica SL style please! I believe this is what we have to look forward to in near future... just don't know who from...
Now do it for $2.5k instead of $3.5k and you have yourself instant market share.

I've had this question before, and I think it comes mostly down to compression. Big budgets are shooting ProRes or raw, not low bitrate h264. I haven't watched all of Max's stuff but from what I can tell from experimentation, there is definitely a tradeoff between dynamic range and color information when not shooting raw. I'm a great colorist (from years of dealing with S Log), but after reading/watching Max's take on the negative tradeoffs, I've been experimenting with using more contrasty profiles and have found that for compressed footage, even 10 bit, the image is much more robust by starting off closer to final image in camera. This is more true the higher the compression, and especially the higher the noise. I stopped shooting SLog on my FS5 on 120/240fps all-together, and on dark overcast days pretty much don't use it either because there's so little color in the world to begin with.
To me, the real advantage of Log on compressed images is keeping the shadows and highlights from getting macro-blocked together and lost forever. But this definitely comes with the sacrifice of color fidelity.
I've also come to realize that 90% of viewers don't care if blacks or whites are clipped, so long as people (skin tones) look great and there's a smooth roll-off.

Could say the same for the Red Raven, and that one doesn't even have a speed booster option.

I've been playing half-heartedly with ML on my EOS-M for a while but in general lost interest due to annoyances such as the focus pixels, low resolution and workflow. However, inspired by recently released footage from Kodak's new Super-8 camera and fond memories of playing with real Super-8 footage in art school, I decided to mess around with the EOS-M again to see how close I could get to the Super-8 aesthetic. Turns out I surprised myself!

I've only shot a few early tests so far but the following video is, I think, very usable as a digital Super-8 stand-in. The basic specs are as follows:

4:3 ratio (like Super-8) 
1440 x 1078 resolution (plenty for Super-8)
18fps (same as consumer Super-8)
12-bit Lossless RAW (continuous!)
5x zoom (haven't accurately calculated crop factor/sensor size in relation to Super-8 yet - would appreciate help with this)
3X3 Crop mode (Experimental build: magiclantern-crop_rec_4k.2017Dec19.EOSM202)
Also- no focus pixels! (I have no idea why this is. They reappear if you go up to 14bit lossless or use any of the standard 10/12/14-bit modes). 

Below are two versions of my initial tests - the first is with FilmConvert film emulation applied, the second is without FilmConvert, just some basic contrast and saturation tweaks. Sorry the grade isn't very good I'm getting used to both the EOSM DNG's and FCPX's new grading tools.

FilmConvert:
https://vimeo.com/253014693/badd381eb4

No FilmConvert:
https://vimeo.com/253014620

My post workflow is very simple: convert .MLV files to DNG's with MlRawViewer and then drop them straight into FCPX. Do a bit of colour correction with an adjustment layer if needed, then export clip as ProRes 4444 XQ. Bring it back into FCPX and conform the 18fps to the fps of the timeline (I always use a 25p timeline and *think* this requires slowing the 18fps clip to 72% but I'm not confident my maths are accurate - it certainly looks close to normal speed to me though).

I'm not very technical so you won't find much explanation of why it's working from me. I'd appreciate contributions to what's going on here so I understand it better and other can replicate if they want to. In particular I'd like to figure out the effective sensor size I'm using, and also why there are no pink dots.

The things that excite me about it as a viable Digital Super-8 camera are:
1. The shutter speed - only Magic Lantern allows that really, and it really helps give that authentic Super-8 feel. 
2. The 12bit colour space and RAW grain makes the footage film-like and organic. 

3. The fact you can adapt C-mount lenses to the EOS-M. The lens I used for these tests is just the 15-45mm EF-M kit lens in manual focus mode. However I have a Cosmicar 6mm f/1.2 on its way to me as we speak and if I can get it to infinity focus I think I'll have a 'normal' lens (again, I need to figure out the imaging area I'm working with).

4. Shooting 4:3 and 18fps, like Super-8, allows continuous shooting.

Things I don't like:
1. Live view is not perfect but using the info button you can jump between Canon's 5x zoom to focus and ML's rather choppy live view for framing.
2. I'm not seeing horrible rolling shutter but it's no Digital Bolex so that does give it away as digital footage somewhat.

I hope some others start playing around with these settings. With the 16mm Digital Bolex discontinued and Kodak's new Super-8 camera all the rage, there's a space for a small sensor digital cinema camera to get some love.

Yeah marketing is one aspect of it, but support is the main issue. I do not want to buy a camera overseas, and if there is a problem need to send it back to China. 
I actually really like the image. But I will not buy it, because I am afraid it will break and I need to send it back to China. + When I am tired of that camera and I want to sell it. There is not a big usergroup looking for the kinefinity camera's, so thats also something I always consider.

S35mm sensor.

I keep a tab open on the main forum index, that means old topics get flushed out by new ones to the 2nd page. If we have everybody opening a topic for each article they found interesting, there's no conversation anymore. I mean, if you want to start a single blog kind collection thread where you post all the articles that you find interesting, that's cool. But likely, we all come around the rumor sites, news sites or subscribe to these channels if that had interested us already. So... when we have that out of the way, we can come here and discuss our own experiences, like you say, help and inspire eachother, you know, human interaction, rather than a flood of posted articles.
And yeah, of course, what this guy says:
Now I could've dropped that video in it's own topic... but I didn't.

however I can not understand all this excitement for this stupid boy.
Where I live, it is the same Italian state that publishes killings, people laughing for the dead after a tragedy, and much more, without any restraint or compassion !!!
Example:
 

Thought I'd post this here for the curious who are not part of the Kine FB group.
The only adjustment made to the footage is applying an Arri rec.709 LUT.
Shot with Tamron 24-70 f/2.8.
f/2.8 - 4.0
ISO: 800
25 and 75 fps
4300K
Downscaled to 2K and exported in 422.
 
 

How so?
 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2527336/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec

I've built prototypes of an iscorama-style single-focus adapter, but its really only suitable for shorter focal lengths in the 35mm to 75mm range.  Also, its a bit large, and the front element moves during focusing, which may cause some issues with matte boxes.  I'm also building a second type better suited for longer focal lengths in the 75 to 200mm range.  I'm still debating whether to modify these for internal focusing, which would be good for heavy-duty cine use, but would make the adapters larger, heavier, and more expensive.  To be honest, I've put the adapter project on hold until I get a few focal lengths in my anamorphic prime series completed.
 
 
 

On every post I read about a camera (not just Sony!), here or on other sites, there is a comment like this. I'm just not sure what you mean. Can you post a link to a digital video image that doesn't look fake to you and elaborate on what looks "fake" to you in this video? 

Concerning the EVA1 comparisons, have a look at the following video at around the 20mn mark, there is talk/footage comparing GH5 to EVA1 IQ specifically regarding DR, color, detail, motion & sharpening.. 
the difference is pretty drastic imo (EVA1 owners shouldn't have to worry about their investment!)

Well, I am a "long time" panasonic user and I feel like they totally shit my mind...
They pulled out the GH5 early just to respond to the markets voice and the hype, but all the GH5S features should be included in the GH5. What was panasonics intention with this move? I will not sell my GH5 just to have the money for the GH5S. Screw you panasonic! I hope A7S III will come soon, than I trade my GH5...