andrgl

Idk, to me the full frame example clearly pushes the woman's hair off her right shoulder, whereas the m4/3 leaves it draped over her right shoulder. Damn distortion...

I watched until the blackmagic part and then stopped out of fear of getting brain cancer.
 
"Hey let's compare 12-bit 1080p to 8-bit 4K, they look the same, therefore 8bit and raw are the same. Don't mind the resolution. Resolve has similar knobs for both, they're the same! Let's shoot this test with optimal light so as not to strain any of the codecs, yay!"

Hmm you can get 4 Xeen primes for the price of the Sigma pair.

I know the used market in Sweden is pretty bananas and we can get really good deals.
But this one was so nice I had to share it. If anyone wants me to help out for over seas shipping Im there.
It includes a mount and everything!
And only €82!!!! Wow! Get it while you can!!!

If anyone else comes across any ads where the seller, like this one, clearly is asking for a fair deal please share

+1 for black magic resolve. Great program. And free. 

4k export is enabled for the free version of resolve.
What's not included is 3d stuff, noise removal and lens distortion fix.

Colors are like the LX100. Everything too orange. skin tones are seriously off.  

4k export is enabled for the free version of resolve.
What's not included is 3d stuff, noise removal and lens distortion fix.

You're an idiot......
 
Magic footage looks great, especially for it's target market which is online......
 
People worry about the wrong things, yet 5 years ago something like this was not even possible.....Every time I come to this site it's someone always speaking nonsense..... I wonder why I even visit here as 90% of the people here just live off forums and actually produce no work at all.......
 
 
* Regarding video quality, GoPro looks better but the Mavic definitely wins in ease of use. I would purchase the Mavic based off of ease alone, image quality is not everything.........
 

Obviously the 1DX II blows the a6300 away in numerous other ways. I just didn't realize till recently the technical difference they have in resolution was so huge. Even with significant sharpening of the natively unsharpened 1DX II image, you can tell the 6k-to-4k oversampling of the a6300 still delivers so much more detail. It's a shame to see the notorious soft Canon demosaicing present even in the 1DX II where I thought Canon pulled out all the stops. And I wonder when anyone other than Sony (and Samsung with the NX1 which doesn't quite match the a6300) will offer that apparent revolution-for-4k-resolution feature of 6k-to-4k oversampling of full sensor readout... (and without overheating. )

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/2e8ol7fwb0od20o/AACWr3GJ2EpKMThOs2NmjLnFa?dl=0
Downscaled from 6K Wide to 4K Wide, ProRes422HQ
Footage is in KineLOG
 

I do a ton of corporate interviews, musing about some doc projects if I get some free time...
The #1, by-god awesome, holy-cow thing for me as an interview shooter and editor: freaking 4K. If you have a feel for narrative, human nature, drama, etc, you can guide and cut a great interview. But reframing has changed the game for me. You can hide cuts, and tighten up the shot for the most dramatic or impactful statements. When I come in tight, I can do subtle camera moves/pans which really just "work" subconsciously. I can shoot a little wider than usual for lower thirds or graphics and still have plenty of pixels for a wide range of shot changes, without moving the camera. That's my #1. I use the NX1 for all interviews now (the 4k footage is pretty astounding), with a Nikkor 28-70 2.8 zoom generally - that zoom looks fab and it allows me to adjust framing quickly, like I setup with a stand-in and then the subject is 7' tall. 
(#1-a? A morphing plugin for your NLE. When they work, they're lifesavers - get every f*cking UMM and pause and stutter OUT of your edit!!)(Unless those express the personality - for corporate stuff they're goners).
Other MASSIVE thing for interviews - if it's not "to the camera" (which I generally dislike) - who is the subject talking to? If it's me, I'm in a chair with a monitor on my lap, but I HATE looking down to check focus - people instantly feel like you've got something more important on your mind. So I have to go deeper with the DOF and if the subject is really active or excited - you'll lose focus. So I try to get someone to be an eye line. I QUIETLY whisper questions to that person - if you're behind the camera and you ask the question, even if you say "tell her...", their eyes will shift back and forth and it looks shifty. I'd much rather be riding focus behind the camera. With a follow focus and a 12" whip, so no jitters. I only wear headphones for initial setup and first roll with the subject, they are too "distancing" for me, unless I'm not the interviewer.
IF THE INTERVIEWER IS NOT IN THE EDIT - make sure they answer IN CONTEXT so the question is not needed. Most people understand this, and understand if you stop them and say "context, please" or lead them - "I'm sorry, could you start that with 'the reason I love what I do'..."
#3 major thing for a great interview - a third person with an eye for detail and grooming - most any lady or your gay buddy will do - (not trying to be sexist, just my hard experience) - even the receptionist - to keep an eye on hair, collars, lint, wrinkles, etc. There's too damn much to be focused on (for my tiny brain anyway) - most ladies like to be asked to be the grooming police and watch for that lock of hair that pops up halfway through, to watch for makeup issues on female subjects that guys don't even SEE. Have them look through the monitor for issues like shining skin, too. (I KNOW this sounds sexist and generalized, but I've found it to be true!!! If a lady looks decent in her clothes, she'll see what needs fixing.)
So for a doc, I'd think about your assistant - someone that can watch for those details, help setup and pack and carry, and either be an eyeline or can babysit focus.
I also use the NX for steadicam b-roll, I just stick the cheap little 16-50 OIS kit lens on it, very small and light on a Came steadicam, and I use the same QR on everything so I can be on the steadicam in seconds. From there, b-roll, establishing shots, whatever you need... lenses, tripod, jib, sliders, shoulder mount, etc. Have an ND solution if you'll be moving in and outdoors.
Good audio is a must, the DR60 is a great piece of gear, and the camera-out with its own level control means you can use it as a preamp and not need to synch (I use the NX1 and when gain is staged properly, no difference between the DR card or the camera). But you have the recorder files as a safety if you get an over (and the DR records a 2nd track at -6DB which can save your ass). Get some closed-back headphones (even cheap ones). You need a great mic, or at least a good one - Oktava, AT 4053, or at the least a Rode, but get a hyper, not a shotgun. For about $200 you can get one of the OST lav mics AND the XLR barrel converter, which converts phantom power to mic power. So you can use a lav and not mess with wireless and be all-XLR, no monkey-business 1/8 crap in the chain. There's a small OST that hides great in a tie knot.
LIGHTING - for a big window office where you want to hold the exterior, you generally need a 575 or 1.2k HMI par. And with many angles, your diffusion frame will reflect in the window, so you need strategies for that. Often a polarizer will knock down lesser reflections. Or you can ND the whole window if you have all day.
I keep a 575 in the truck, but I have a "one-rock-n-roller-cart" setup to make one trip in for most gigs. I TRY to use a quad biax - they're usually under $200, and I clip diffusion across the barn doors, instant softbox that's the right size for faces, small and easy to move, no cold-start issues, etc. I also bring an Aputure 672 LED for rim/hair, or background (probably will get another sometime)... usually a small 300 fresnel if I want warm BG light... I also have a 400 HID setup that works with all the photoflex softboxes, but that's a DIY grow light thing (it kicks ass and looks legit, about 1200 watts of nice daylight). I also have a 2" daylight fresnel with a 150 HID globe and ballast, again DIY but looks like actual gear, about 500 watt equivalent) handy little problem solver. And a bunch of CTB and CTO gels cut to size and ready in a big ziplock. Usually doesn't take many lights to get a nice looking interview setup. In a pinch I can be setup and ready to roll in 20 minutes, though that's kinda stressy!
For overhead mic, I use a steel roller stand - it's heavy enough to not need sandbags but easy to tweak the position. Those are pricey, $180 or so, but worth it. I don't bring c-stands to most interview gigs, too hard to pack, too heavy. Use good quality folding stands though, the Matthews steel kit stands are good. Find a good solution to pack all your stands in.
I generally bring the steel roller w/ arm - decent stands for key, LED, fresnel - I bring a couple black flags (18x24) for spill or if the hair light is hitting the lens as a flag; a cookie and grip stuff; a couple extra boom arms and heads. Usually 5-7 stands in a bag. An 18" and 22" popup reflector/diffusor, gaff tape, spring clamps, and A LINT ROLLER!!!
There are LEDs that would make a suitable key (the Aperture doesn't have the kick except for very dark setups), but they're a grand and up, the biax quad is still a trouper for me.
All of that on one cart - I use two motorcycle tie-down ratchets to hold it on the cart.
That's my business interview setup, but I'd likely use the same for a doc interview.
Last week, basic setup:
 
 

Out of words
 
 
 

Don't get me wrong. All the new cameras announced have unreal specs. But I'm just surprised that none of them are going beyond 60fps. 
It seems like a pretty big omission to me. I kind of expected that to be the next feature for this generation of cameras. Especially since we already saw some limited HFR modes in the newest rx100.  
Maybe the GH5 will have 120fps or higher. But I haven't seen anything mentioned about it. And none of the other new cameras seem to have any high frame rates either. 
I think that's the only big thing missing, and if any of them included it, it would really set it apart. 
 

Google Ruslan Pelykh.
I have a Sony RX10 II which I use along with an A7R II. It has limits, mainly do to with Sony's menu and the small sensor. Deployment somewhat slow.Considerable advantages too: shared profiles with other Sony cameras, making matching easy; takes the same XLR attachment; good range fast zoom. (Most of) this was done with the RX10 II over the summer, testing out some of its features.
 

Said in 2004.
Said in 2016
Said in 2025.
 
Good job SanDisk keep up the good work.

You can buy one from me right now – Blackmagic has made me a beta tester due to my honor points on this forum. I have shot some excellent pyramid footage near my home that i cannot upload at this time. Please PM me for western union details

Ive been happy with the Rode Podcaster for quite a few years now. Very nice and "dry" sound.
Works great for a booth since its the kind of mic you get close and personal to. And its pickup pattern is very shallow, meaning very little need for soundproofing compared to something like a yeti. It picks up very little reverb.
If I was looking at Blue I would be leaning more towards the Spark for VO. Yethi to me is more of a round table and in camera type mic.
If you want something more professional a popular Radio Broadcast mic is the Shure SM7B. We have it in all our studios at work and I think they are nice.
Then you need to feed it phantom of course and have a proper audio interface.
The podcasters and such are quicker to get going with since its USB.
 
 

Live stream in 10min.
Fun day today huh gang
http://www.43rumors.com/watch-the-olympus-live-stream-now/

Sony have always done this. 
Look up Betamax Vs VHS.
They always design proprietary media for the same reasons.  Notice all Sony cameras use proprietary media.
Canon don't allow their mount to be used.  But the patent for EF mount rannout around the time you started seeing other cameras in EF mount...2012 :-)
You'll notice BM don't say that they support EF-S because that's technically still protected.   
Canon still don't share EF protocols which is why you see issues with support for iris and IS on some lenses. 
JB

Nothing shot on the 1dc would be identifiably unique. It's just a camera.
What is far more recognizable is style of lighting or grading. 

Just want to show you my solution to use faderND filter as polarising filter at the same time (cost: £8.95).
It is very simple, but surprisingly hard to find such informations in the net.
 
If you have faderND filter, it is (always?) made from 2 polarising filters. Like mine:

When you use it, the problem is, that you rotate front polarizer and stop it on random angle, so you have no control over which polarization you accept (most importantly - which polarisation you completely cut off). So it is not only useless as Polariser, but sometimes it can cut off the reflections which shouldn't be cut.
 
The solution is simple - buy a rotating spacer ring like mine (here put on a 43-52 step up ring for 52mm FaderND):

I bought mine here (they have really cheap Europe shipping) - http://srb-photographic.co.uk/rotating-spacer-rings-1126-c.asp
If you use step-up ring - put the spacer ring after step-up ring (if you put it before, you can introduce a lot of vignetting).
 
How to use it?:
Screw Rotating spacer ring and than your FaderND. When you set up all parameters, first rotate FaderND to proper ND level (you have to hold spacer ring not to rotate, because it is rotating much lighter (in my case)), and then rotate whole filter with your new spacer ring to adjust first polarizer angle (spacer ring rotates really light, so it is impossible [in my case] to change ND level by accident).
To make it even simpler, I made a test (LCD monitor is polarised so it is very helpfull) and marked a vertical and horizontal position of front polarizer with lacquer dot (if it's on top, I know that it's close to vertical/horizontal polarization):

It is really very fast and simple to use. Don't throw your money on additional polarizer (and don't add additional glass in front of your expensive lens) you have it already, but you wasn't using it.
 
NOTE: Spacer ring adds some space before filter, so can make some vignetting if the filter is not big enough for your focal length.

Enjoying this cam a lot now after getting used to it over the last couple of days. Bought the 15/1.7 & SLR Magic 52mm Vari ND. Nice combo. Amazing little lens.

Quite fast, I think a bit faster than the 25/1.4 too.  The 20/1.7 was one of the first m4/3 lenses that I owned (with the Olympus 45/1.8).  I loved that little 20mm lens except I lost a lot of shots due to missed autofocus (mind you of my kids that don't stop moving).  It was pretty good for manual focus with video and I liked the angle of view and had nice rendering.

This is so tedious.
It's incredibly ignorant to keep on saying "off the shelf sensor".
To keep on re-iterating this means zero understanding of what it actually takes to make an image, especially so if you want to brag about being an academic in screen culture.
Olympus cameras are highly praised for their look, yet they use "off the shelf" Panasonic or Sony sensors. Somehow they're renowned for their look, because of the whole image processing pipeline, even though they use the same sensors used in many of the G series panny cameras.  Olympus don't have a patent on their "look" though.
So same sensors, totally different imaging outcomes, none of which are patented.
They do highly customise their sensors, and there are lot's of ways you can do so...the CFA for example...
Leica are the same, they have also used "off the shelf" sensors in the past and somehow they too are praised for their look, and also, surprise surprise, have no patent for their look, and yet, it's the very reason many buy them.
I thought you'd have wised up by now, but you keep digging in on the ASICS and sensor design.  Here's a clue.  ASIC's have nothing to do with the sensor design.  You assumed so because of Land's comment, but then you couldn't explain why some cameras don't seem to have ASIC's. I've challenged you and you haven't answered.
According to Land and you for quoting him, the prerequisite for a cinematic camera maker is designing your own sensor AND ASICs and yet you can't account for Canon, Arriflex or Blackmagic... what do you think they're using if there isn't an ASIC ? How is the ASIC linked to sensor design ? In what way is using an ASIC making the sensor design more credible ?  What do other camera manufactures use if they aren't using ASICs ?  ASIC's run the camera, not the sensor....
ASIC's aren't related to sensor deisgn any more or less than FPGAs are. You still haven't brought up the alternative yet because you don't know.  Go google FPGA. 
You posting history is entirely relevant when your credibility is at issue.  Your backflipping contradictory posts are just as insightful as when you first posted them.
And yeah, it's pretty normal for companies not to protect their IP using patents which require them to publish in detail the IP itself. I'm pretty sure RED will have a patent on RedCode, but not your precious ASICs.
JB