squig

16 minutes ago, John Brawley said:

Well, I have major issues with the testing methodologies espoused by many that produce the magenta corner result.  I was sent an image from a RED DRAGON that had the same test results applied according to the author, a 400% boost in saturation to bring out the result, and it looked worse than what's usually cited on the UM4.6K.

JB

400%!

12 hours ago, John Brawley said:

I probably have cameras that some here would define as magenta issues, but I never seem to shoot in circumstances that ever seem to reveal them to the QC processes I go through, namely a tech check for each days rushes, an assistant editor assembling the shots, another editor then cutting the shots (and intercutting with other cameras mind) then going to online, then grade, then through the QC process for delivery, which is very stringent. 

I've seen some cameras that absolutely have a problem and as far as I know anyone that can demonstrate that kind of severe problem has been able to RMA their camera

JB

Not oversaturating like a muppet helps too.

26 minutes ago, Liam said:

purchased for my t3i just on the off chance it would work alright that compressed. or i could have some fun in jpeg and see what a 1dc would be like when i get one in 50 years. but actually liking it a lot! was comparing to my dialed flat profile and "vivid skin tones" (which is also really nice, though i think it may white balance oddly, a few kelvin clicks differently than anything else). enjoyed grading it more than my dialed flat profile by far. still can't get that file as nice. Thanks Andrew!

Artifacts, but maybe no more than usual on this thing... (also, there's an actual pattern there in the out of focus area that looks like banding I think)

posting an ungraded jpeg too, in case that helps anyone. a little closer to one of the 4k camera images maybe

hope my smile brightens some people's days

Try lighting the shot without the computer screen, or balance the computer screen light with the room practicals; otherwise it's going to be a nightmare to grade. Much easier to fix these things in pre.

5 minutes ago, kaylee said:

i hear ya. sounds like a plan. tbh a big part of my complainyness comes from learning stills shooting 35mm film, im one of those many legacy photographers who likes ff as much for aesthetic reasons as because it reminds me of my childhood ? 

I like the full frame look, but having shot films full frame since 2009 I get how S35 is more practical.

2 minutes ago, mercer said:

How do you like that 1.8 Sigma? I have been eyeing the 24mm or 28mm 1.8, from that same series, for a while now. 

It's a good lens; it sux at f/1.8, but it gets better from f/2 and is very good at f/2.8. It's as sharp as my Leicas. Bokeh isn't bad either. Focus throw is very short, but I don't do much focus pulling at 20mm.

1 hour ago, kaylee said:

@Sam232

 

IF THE 5D4 HAD A KILLER 2K MODE WITH A BUNCH OF FRAME RATE OPTIONS I WOULDNT BE AS MAD ABOUT THE HUGE 4K CROP

WTF CANON ARRRGGHHHH

The crop's about the same as the BMMCC with a speed booster. The crop alone gives the MkIV a 2 stop low light improvement over the MkIII. Where I'd normally be shooting at f/5.6 on the MkIII, I'd be shooting at f/2.8 on the MkIV to get the same DOF. It could compliment the 5D MkIII raw well, depends on Andrew's log profile and noise. I've already got a Tokina 11-16mm and a Sigma 20mm, so the wide end is covered.

Filmconvert 5D MkIII Resolve ML raw BMD Film profile with a few tweaks.

Resolve grade.

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

Some friendly advice:

The bright patch of grass isn't green because it is overexposed.

Since C-LOG raises the shadows, you should have exposed for the highlights and the dark areas would have been recoverable in post. Once the grass is burnt it's gone.

I don't agree you got the better results with the standard picture profile - the grass is fucked on that too.

Have fun!

Looks ok to me.

30 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

If you want smaller then the Terra 5K/6K is only about 5D size! :-o 

And if you want a great stills camera the D750 will be available for a dirt dirt cheap price by the time a ML raw hack for 5Dmk4 arrives.

Size matters but it's more about not needing 4k for narrative work, and the extra post expense that incurs. Both the MkIV and MkIII with ML would make a great 2 camera narrative film set up. Now I'm running with the MkIII and BMMCC as a b-cam.

The D750 is great, but something smaller with an EVF suits my needs better, something I can pocket and have on hand for production stills and BTS video. I've got my eye on an X-T2 23mm f/2 combo.

7 minutes ago, dhessel said:

Compressed raw on the current cameras that can run ML is not going to happen. Chances are it won't be happening on the Mark IV either.

I don't care.

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

I don't understand the talk about 5Dmk4 and ML raw because:

 

A) it won't happen any time soon. Expect 2017 minimum before it is out and solidly working great. 

B) the price is insane if you're getting it just for raw, you're creeping up close to KineFinity Terra 5K or URSA Mini 4.6K pricing! 

ML have been doing Digic6 development for a while, it may happen sooner than you think. When I was recording 2 seconds of raw video people said continuous raw would never happen. A week or so later I was recording continuous raw.

It isn't cheap, but there's not a lot of 1080p full frame raw options.  The street price should be around $4500; the Terra and the Ursa mini 4.6k are $7000 AUD and they don't do 2k full sensor raw. I'd have to invest another 6 grand in hard drives and tapes to shoot my film in 4k.

16 minutes ago, kaylee said:

agree. or longer. or never

I'm praying to Kubrick, God of DSLRs and debauchery.

Right now there's only 2 cameras I really want to shoot with (besides my MK3): a 5D Mark IV with 1080p raw, and an Alexa Mini. Screw 4k. A D750 with raw would be even better than the 5D, but the guy who was trying to hack it hit a wall.

I prefer mirrorless for stills, why I still have the A7s, possibly soon to be replaced with the new Fujifilm.

51 minutes ago, mercer said:

@squig do you shoot with a specific picture profile with ML raw or do you just let raw ride and create your look entirely in post?

I'm messing around with different film stock LUTs (I've got a smallHD 501) and custom camera profiles, but the Canon standard profile works well enough for monitoring. I create whatever look I want in post, but I've been thinking about making custom LUTs from graded camera tests.

10 minutes ago, Taranis said:

Is RAW compression even possible with current builds of ML?

No, but it's 1s and 0s; anything is possible, somebody just has to figure it out.

15 minutes ago, Ed_David said:

My day job is i am in dental school.

??

Lulz!

I knew it.

16 minutes ago, Ed_David said:

The amount of sweat that pours down my face when a camera is not booting up. Thats a burned in image.

The BMMCC takes up fuck all room in my bag, even so its worth putting it there just so I never look like a complete fuckwit.

26 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

How dramatically the low light advantage over the 5D Mark III translates into video mode remains to be seen.

Only if Magic Lantern bring raw to the 5D Mk IV will I consider it, and even then it is highly unlikely to be 4K raw with the lack of CFast 2.0 slots.

But I agree with you overall...

Magic Lantern 14bit full frame raw in 1080p with dual pixel AF? I'll take 10!

Having slept with a Mk3 for 5 years I can already see from the DP Review test the potential of the Mk IV with ML raw, it's not a "game changer" but I'm pushing the Mk3 to its absolute limit all the time, so an incremental improvement: take my money. 4K raw doubtful, but compressed 60p 1080 is a maybe. I shoot everything with a 2.39:1 frame which is just over 60MB/s.

10 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

BMC 4k RAW 3:1 is 200 MB/s ca. 1.6 Gbits.... 2x the 1Dx II 4k60p data rate.... no way on a CF card, on CFast is doable like BM does.

5D Mk3 2.39:1 1080p raw is about 62MB/s. At that aspect ratio 4k 3:1 compressed raw is doable on a CF card, but I'd still shoot 1080p raw because it has enough resolution for broadcast/theatrical and there's no crop.

21 minutes ago, Hene1 said:

Some say this is only available in auto mode.

Ewwww.

13 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

If ML crack this baby, i'll be all over it.

1080/60p raw and 13.5 stops would be fine by me.

Hell yeah.

8 minutes ago, Taranis said:

Yeah but how do you write ~200MB/s to a CompactFlash card?

You 3:1 compress it.

1 minute ago, Andrew Reid said:

Yes I agree it's interesting to look at the signal to noise ratio improvements.

The problem I have is when these are hyped as making a 'dramatic' creative difference to images, which is what the DPReview piece implies all the way through.

You know how it is, it's all about the click bait these days. But even so, it was DP Review that alerted me to "ISO invariance", which makes a big difference to shooting technique.

54 minutes ago, Phil A said:

Seeing how some of you shoot with the BMMCC since a while I'd like to bring this thread up again.

Curious how the sensor which had slight improvements over the BMPCC fares with moire and aliasing? I've seen on FB that Zak got the OLPF installed to eliminate it but I wondered how the thing fares without it. A lot of moire? Identical between RAW and ProRes? I guess when using a field monitor with real 1080p resolution I would already see the moire while shooting to change angle/distance/focus?

I just can't get the BMMCC out of my head. While I actually like my a6300 I always thirst for RAW/10Bit ProRes and the low rolling shutter, on the other hand I'm afraid of the resolution (but I've seen some quite sharp & "commercial" looking videos with it) and moire (that might be a deal breaker). The BMPC4k and BMCC would actually be exactly what I like, but some of their specifications would make a rig necessary that's bigger than what I'd want to use (SDI to HDMI converter for my monitor, V mount battery, doesn't go on an one-hand-gimbal, etc.)

I haven't used mine much, but if Zak got an OLPF that's probably a good indication that it needs it.

45 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

No you wouldn't do it with any camera so why are we even considering the DPReview studio test as a true dynamic range test?

We're not. It's interesting to look at to get a bit of an idea of signal to noise ratio improvements. Sensor dynamic range tests are what they are: sensor dynamic range tests. There's lots of variables like testing methodologies, subjectivity, in camera processing, codec, log gammas, and post processing techniques that all together give the true available dynamic range. Most people believe the A7s and BMPCC have more dynamic range than the 5D Mark 3 raw mostly because of published figures they've seen. Back in the real world the 5D has the most finished graded range of the 3, and I only know that because I've extensively tested all 3.

I know what it's like to get all emotional about a new camera release; in my case it's expensive. I don't know if it's the encroaching grey hair, I got a life, I learned to love the bomb, or I just don't give a fuck anymore, but nowadays I'm a lot more focused on creativity than pixels. Pixel peeping is still a very important activity, especially for a freak like me with the audacity to shoot Hollywood money shots with no budget. 

So as you may have heard Canon have ramped up the sausage.. erm marketing machine and spat out another 5D. What Canon has delivered is pretty much what was to be expected: another incremental upgrade, nothing pixelorgasmicly™ groundbreaking, but there's a few things to consider before totally writing the 5D Mark IV off:

1) It's better in low light than the Mk3

2) There's more resolution in the DP review tests than the Mk3 which MAY produce a 1080 image something akin to the A7s, not quite ML raw resolution, but on par with the BMMCC. (not sure if it has an OLPF? Aliasing?)

3) the Mark IV looks to have a 1-1.5 stop dynamic range boost (waiting to see a trusted test like DXOmark)

4) 1080p h.264 HDR mode produces a nice dynamic range boost and could help a lot to produce a decent 8bit H.264 image (as far as 8bit H.264 can be considered decent).

5) Has anybody crying over the 4k crop ever heard of the Tokina 11-16mm? or the Sigma 18-35mm?

Would any of that make it worth $5000 (AUD) strictly for filmmaking? No fucking way; I can get a C100 MKII here for that money, but moving along....

6) Magic Lantern 1080p raw is a possibility (albeit not a probability).

If Magic Lantern eventuates, with the aforementioned improvements it would definitely be worth the $5000 to me. The two main issues I have with the 5D Mark 3 raw are the 11.7 stops of dynamic range, and noisy digital gain over 1600 ISO. Despite those issues there is no raw camera on the market that can match it in that price range.

So I'm going to wait and see if the Magic Lantern developers can do their magic; if not: too bad so sad.

14 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Who in the real world pushes their shadows 6ev anyway? The whole image just ends up looking like puke.

Even though they are ISO invariant, you wouldn't do that with the Nikons either.

31 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

Arri don't have internal raw either.... If the ProRes is good enough, most people don't seem bothered.

The Alexa Mini can do internal raw.

30k for a camera that can't do what a hacked 5D MK3 can do, what a joke Canon is.

Noise looks to be on par with the 1DxII up to 6400 ISO. I'll wait for the DXOmark figures, but I suspect a 1-1.5 stop DR improvement over the MK3, which would make it a great upgrade should Magic Lantern eventuate. It looks like it will be much better in low light than the Mk3.

5D Mk4 ISO 800 pushed 3 stops

A7s 100 ISO pushed 6 stops

A7s 6400 ISO

42 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

It's not a "DRAMATIC" (their words) or MASSIVE (your word) improvement though!

It's tiny!

Erm

5D Mk3 100 ISO pushed 6 stops

5D Mk4 100 ISO pushed 6 stops

At 6400 ISO they look about the same except the MK4 is sharper than the MK3 and the D750. While it's not ISO invariant like the Nikons, it is a huge improvement over the Mk3, and that noise isn't hard to clean up in ACR. It's almost as resolute as the D810.

D750 6400 ISO

5D Mk4 6400 ISO

If you need to push any DSLR video 6 stops good luck with that.

37 minutes ago, Ed_David said:

how's the notification of his actions on the other forums?

I'll write something up and send it to the forum admins when I get a chance.