Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jasonmillard81

  1. Everyone is biased.  My eyes are biased to the a7s. That doesn't make me a bad person nor an unreliable source of opinion purely because I am partial to a certain look.  It is like music.  I am biased to Led Zeppelin over Kiss...if I was comparing their albums I would have an inherit bias as I prefer a certain sound to another.


    So many variables affect reviews such as these like the user's skill set with each camera.  Maybe certain cameras lend themselves more easily to ones inherent skill set and therefore produce better images to rivals and thus it is biased.


    Bias is inevitable...impartiality at 100% doesn't exist in these contexts.


    What you're inferring is that there was a complicit intent to poorly expose and grade...I doubt that is the case.  Other tests have confirmed some of the 1-dimensional tests like these.  Unless you have human subjects, a variety of scenes, and side by side comparison with almost the same lens used to diminish variability then you get these results...take from it what you will....complaining about it as you do on a board is subtractive in nature not additive.

  2. Well, if you actually look at the test - the results are also really down to the profiles used. It's not a 'raw image data' test like DxO does (although that isn't useful for video anyway)


    Sony A7S with Slog is more flat than GH4 Cine-Like, so not surprising the A7S scores better. I think the GH4 could do a bit better with a similar log profile, or a tweaked cine-like profile maybe.


    Anyway, I'm not debating that the A7S is better for DR, that's to be expected. Nice score.


    What I find most disturbing about the GH4 are twofold:


    1. aggressive LUT/Color Corrections the color breaks apart and looks like an iPhone 4s gone bad on instagram

    2. the amount of noise, particularly in the blacks, that creep in around iso 800 and above...especially when it is isn't bright daylight 

  3. Sorry...this post doesn't fit in the current narrative and direction of the forum but I had to add this:



    I am blown away by how amazing this image looks...apparently another test comparing cine to L-lenses shows how much more resolution the cine lenses have...but at 5,000 a lens I all never own one, just wanted to share!

  4. Homerus, while I agree with the fact that I am not a fan of the video due to the high frame rate and compression...but that is due to the camera not Andrew.  And coming on a board to insult anyone, regardless of who they are, isn't going to be received well.


    Using language such as "I am not a fan of how this was particularly graded, here is how I would have done it if you would like to try..." would go a lot further than the manner in which you communicate.


    I agree that so far much of what I have seen on the a7s does not compare to 5d raw...however most of the profession and semi-pro users who are making a fuss about GH4 and a7s are those who need quick and easy storage solutions for on-the-go filming as well as quick turn around for clients...which it seem is not in line with much of the 5d ML raw experience.


    We need to understand that audiences differ...5d3 raw will not make its way into most pro or semi-pro shoots, though aesthetically I think it is overall superior to the a7s and gh4.  Point in case...I was evaluating whether to sell my 5d3 and go a7s since I like it much better than gh4...then realized I have a killer stills camera that can shoot amazing, almost Arri-like cinematic images (given the glass) if I had patience and some storage at home.


    I for one love the a7s and look forward to what prosumer DSLR's will be capable of doing in the next 1-2 years when I am ready and have learned enough to upgrade bodies.



  5. Quirky I agree...I also liked the suggestion and rationale why a Hackintosh is a great idea in previous posts...but for me I think stock iMac 27" it is with upgradeable RAM (32gb)


    However...where I am stuck is the actual storage workflow.


    There are 3 basic variables:


    1. Intern HDD for OS and software

    2. External Raid 0 for editing

    3. External HDD for backup


    I am not sure if internal HDD is that important compared to the external Raid 0?  For example...if I kept the stock 1tb 7200rpm SATA internal but got a GRaid usb 3 (4TB) for editing/importing/exporting HD video and pictures then put the final product on my External HDD for backup and deleted the raw riles etc on the Raid 0 is that a good solution?

  6. The fear with Hackintosh as I have read more and more is the fact that it will take someone like myself days to build and install the proper boots etc. (which I am not informed on) then after all that reading etc. I cannot just update my apps and OS anytime I want for fear that it will force certain components to stop working.  It seems more of a tinkering thing for people well-versed in such hardware/software integration, but for a guy like me who just wants to be able to work on it I am not sure it makes sense.  If you have evidence or places you can point me to read further to counter my perspective please do as I would rather get a higher performing machine for a third of the cost trust me.  I cannot bring myself to work on a PC/Windows machine again and enjoy the simplicity and finesse of OSX systems.

  7. I liked the creativity of the video but do not like the a7s or gh4 in slow-motion at all whatsoever and do not find that they have been able to be cut with regular 24/30 footage...it has nothing to do with Andrew...scour vimeo and youtube to see what I mean.


    I'd give a leg up in pure aesthetics to a7s though it seems functionality of gh4 is probably better for most...I may just keep 5d3 and use raw since I don't have clients and use it for personal use...if I need to get a quicker turn around I would surely invest in the a7s as I find its aesthetics better than gh4...


    Good video.

  8. I have determined that the headache of running a Hackintosh is not worth it and appreciate the opinions.  I could never migrate back to Windows for so many reasons.  I had spent 10+ years on PCs and 5 years on macs...it is no comparison as far as hardware/software integration superiority the winner is Mac (for me at least).  I currently switched to an android phone due to the larger screen as I read a lot on my phone...boy I cannot wait for the iPhone 6...again the functionality of basic usage is far superior.


    I was contemplating buying used but fear the unknown.  I get an edu discount and a $100 app card to buy from apple so I may just bite the bullet pay a bit more but have the safety of knowing what I am getting and with a sweet warranty.


    I think i'll go stock 27" iMac so I can upgrade the HD and RAM on my own using easy-to-do video footage on youtube.


    Any other suggestions/reactions?

  9. Fair response.  I would not that I am a public school teacher and do this for my students and don't own thousands of dollars in gear.  The prospect of running a system that would cost me around $1200 but would cost over $2200 from Apple is obviously enticing.


    I may just go for either the 21.5" or 27"  iMac.  I am not sure if I should get the 27" so I can upgrade the ram and HD myself through watching videos or just max out a 21.5".


    Any input on the most cost efficient way to get a decent mac system configured would be highly appreciated!

  10. Hey all,


    I have been trying to figure out what Mac desktop I was going to purchase and remembered plenty of successful people have built Hackintosh's.  My knowledge on such topics are limited and was curious if anyone had suggestions, even for prebuilt machines or distributors.  To get a decent iMac it would cost easily over $2k.



  11. Quirky I agree... I enjoyed Andrew's tests and work. I also am able to appreciate Erik's post.  Every single camera will those who use models of inquiry that look for the good and some will choose to focus their writing and reviews on deficits.  Both help us all make informed decisions.  I personally felt in Andrew's tests that the gh4, a7s, and 5d3 raw if seen separately and not compared would make just about any of us pleased to be invested in the system.  I personally have an eye more attuned to a7s and 5d3 raw but still have seen excellent gh4 footage (usually by someone who knows how to grade and expose properly) I have conversely seen crappy 5d3 raw and a7s footage.  The end user is the biggest determinant of how a product will look.  You may be someone who is used to shooting and grading 5d3 footage and would probably be more inclined to do so with a7s (though slog seems to be a pain) and if you're a MFT shooter gh4 for you...either way pick your poison and system based on professional or personal needs as well as budgetary constraints and be happy...I personally have no further use for looking at bushes and trees with violins narrating the emptiness of such videos.  Wasn't there a vimeo blogger who posted some great stuff with a t3i that was well shot, graded, and had great narrative?


    Anyway, I look forward to Andrew's final a7s review and his personal subjective opinion on which of the 3 he would make an A cam as I do also anticipate the same type of review from Bloom in the next few weeks.  Until then, lets be constructive and reduce inflammatory rhetoric.

  12. If people are buying a product based on a single person's perspective and then pissed after the original reviewer changed their mind thus infuriating the buyer of the said product, the buyer should see mental help ASAP. 



    I enjoying asking questions, getting responses, and taking a long time to decide.  But if I went out and bought an a7s based on Andrew's video and commentary alongside whatever Philip Bloom says, and realize my 5d3 was a better choice for me due to aesthetics in the video I would not be pissed at them and use it as a learning experience.


    Some of you give too much credit to individuals, it is scary.  Then again this is how masses follow religion :)

  13. Great points all.  One thing I am coming to learn and have not attempted much of yet is color grading (using LUTs etc.)  Some of the worst footage is by average schmoes like me who post poorly recorded and edited footage albeit 5d3 raw, a7s, or gh4.  I have seen some pretty great work and the common theme is excellent coloring...that seems to separate video look from cinema look.  I think the nuance is that some cameras grade better than others.


    Maybe that should be part of the discussion.  What has the best pliability in terms of grading in post?  5d3 raw? a7s? gh4? etc?

  14. Interesting developments lately, particularly with the a7s.  I guess much of the back and forth is over perspective and much of that is determined by what you already own and need?


    Maybe people can offer civil advice for those of use in each of the following positions (feel free to add perspectives I am not keenly aware of)


    1. I own MFT gear and have a hacked gh2 but love the look of 5d3 raw but am not sure which way to go.  The GH4 is clearly the sharpest of the lot but the colors and the ability to push in post may be limited.  Do I go GH4 and step up my color game or do I move to either a7s or 5d3 for FF look?


    2. I own canon glass and have a 5d3.  I have yet to jump into raw but am thinking about it.  Should I go get some Komputerbays and ride high or sell the 5d3 and purchase an a7s or gh4?  I love the look of raw but fear its file sizes and workflow.  Maybe there are easy workflows and storage ideas I am unaware of.


    3. I have nothing and starting out fresh.  I have seen amazing footage from all cameras, I don't know where to begin.  I'd like to do both docs and narrative filming.



  15. Very interesting data from the video.  I appreciate Andrew's time and care to these matters.  Some intersting insight from Erik as well.  I think the only way to even discuss the 5d3 is in its raw mode, otherwise it clearly is out of favor with the BMPCC, GH4, or a7S.  To say otherwise is subjective.


    The point about Erik being subjective and how it doesn't fit his particular criteria is valid and I agree.  However, it is still informative in the general sense of those who are on a budget and have to consider all options such as switching form Canon to Sony, and the costs to be incurred.




  16. If this camera can deliver image as appealing as the videos sony put out, which I find much more appealing than the GH4 image, along with decent stills it will not be too poorly priced as it will rival the 5d3 as well as probably drop in price by the winter.  I look forward to this much more than the GH4.

  17. Still so soon to tell...with only Sony sponsored footage in the wild It may be a few weeks before there is ample information to compare/contrast the gh4 and a7s to each other and other cameras.  

  18. themartist, thanks for the tips and corrective feedback...just out of curiosity do you disagree with what i've written?  I also like to engage in conversation despite having expertise or tons of experience, it helps me shape my opinion and build my knowledge, i've learned a lot from shooting on my own but a ton more by posting and reading here.  So I will continue to chime in respectfully, and hope to hear feedback on my commentary directly.

  19. Okay so this video is an absurd test that doesn't have too much real world application.  Having said that, much of what has been put out either from Sony or this video, has piqued my interest more than that GH4 purely base don aesthetics.  Between Andrew and Neumann, they're sick of hearing the debate over "filmic" or "cinematic" however I have to say that those terms do bare some weight on this issue.  Yes the final product is the total sum of creativity, lighting, acting, audio, editing, etc. etc. etc. some cameras produce images that are closer to what we see on the big screen than others.  It is as simple as that.  Regardless of how some of my favorite documentaries are mastered or how my favorite Hollywood blockbusters are shot, there are some DSLR cameras that do a better job than others at aiding us in achieving that look.  Having said that, while I am impressed with both Andrew and Neumann's most recent "tests" of the GH4 vs. 5d3 raw, I and layman friends I show much prefer the look of the 5d3 raw and a7s footage to that of the gh4 and others. 


    I look excitedly toward the next few days for pricing of the a7s and the next few weeks for more footage.  If the image holds to what has been shown thus far in a multitude of ways (doc work/narrative work) and produces great stills, I will be selling my 5d3 and switching (I'd prefer not to have to do raw as I am a public school teacher looking to do basic narrative/doc work for my classes mostly in history.


    Any one second my sentiments or have counterpoints? And can we get a function so I can like my own post?! haha :)

  20. I'm confused at the desire for the sharpest image...i think a balance needs to be struck...when watch cinema films if I was watching the level of sharpness most of the gh4 videos that have been posted exhibit I would feel like i was watching a home movie...however the reason ML Raw has been a smash is it takes an almost unusable level of sharpness in the h.264 codec of the 5d3 and adds enough sharpness to match the red that neumann posted...we should look at it as what is optimal vs. "the sharpest" I think a comparison showing human subjects is much more useful than static shots, I never understood that.  We shoot people much more than buildings and trees.  I think the 5d3 raw would be much more appealing to the masses (shooters and viewers) than gh4 image (camcorder sharp).  

  • Create New...