Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ajay

  1. I've never understood Canon's logic. I once owned the 1DX2 and they never put Clog of any kind on that camera...their flagship camera. They did put it on the 5D Mark IV, but never on the 1DX2. That's about the time I switched to Sony and have been with Sony ever since. I had plans to switch back to Canon (since I still own expensive Canon lenses) with the R5 but what kept me from switching were record limits, overheating and the hard to edit codecs. I spend too much time already putting videos together and then to add transcoding to the workflow was just too much for me.

    I was hoping the new firmware would match the codecs of the A7SIII and A1 cameras. Their files/codecs are such a pleasure to work with. Makes editing easy.

  2. Can Catalyst Browse be used as a transcoder for ProRes Raw? This might be a solution for those using Davinci Resolve. Can someone try that has the Ninja? Thanks!


  3. I understand about the competition between the two companies. I'm not holding my breath for Resolve to accept the format. What I'm looking for is some kind of workflow and tool to convert ProRes Raw to something else that is lossless or close to it that Resolve can work with. I need a method and some kind of conversion software.

  4. Since more and more cameras are now using the Atomos Ninja V to record ProRes Raw I am curious as to what is the best way to bring the footage into Davinci Resolve since it does not natively edit Pro Res Raw. How painful or painless of a process is it? I really don't want to switch NLE's. I've put way too many man hours into learning Resolve and like what I've got.

    Thanks for any input.

  5. Here's an example of what's happening at higher ISO's. The ISO threshold for the star-eating NR happens at different levels based on the picture profile. For S-Log2 it's between 80,000 and 102,400.


  6. 55 minutes ago, Hangs4Fun said:

    One thing that is going to be a downside on this camera is that we can't disable the noise reduction which usually do for my astro photos and time lapses (I don't shoot nearly as much video when it comes to astro)

    I tend to lean on quality fast optics versus ISO when shooting astro (stills).  I used my 16-35GM until the 24GM came out.  At f/1.4 and hands down the best anti-sagital flaring I've ever seen in a lens, it one of the best IMHO.  Only downside is I typical shoot between 16 and 18mm on astro.  But what I've been having a lot of luck with is doing 2 or 3 shot pano's in portrait orientation.



    I think you should be okay with stills. It's the video side that eats stars. There could also be some NR going on with raw stills but it's looks really good with time exposures and time lapses should look outstanding as well. Attached is a shot I took the other night with the Sony 20mm 1.8. It's a 10 sec exposure at ISO 3,200.

    You should be able to test the "star eating feature" even with skies that aren't the best. As long as the stars look sharp, the dimmer ones disappear. That would really be helpful if you could determine if recording externally will resolve this. Thanks!


  7. 20 minutes ago, Trek of Joy said:

    Is it really obvious? I don't shoot astro so I've never really noticed the star eater problem - but I've seen the talk about it for years. I have a Ninja and I'm going to test this weekend if it doesn't rain - big if with another hurricane in the Gulf. I'd be happy to point it at the sky for a minute to check though.


    That would be great if you could give it a try. The stars have to be in focus for them to disappear @ ISO 102,400 in Slog 2.  Hopefully the weather will cooperate. Yet another hurricane in the Gulf! Crazy. Thanks!

  8. Anyone with the A7SIII and a Ninja want to do a test for me? I have the A7SIII and I'm having difficulties with the camera shooting the night sky. It appears that at certain ISO levels, it eats stars. They will disappear from view. For example using pp7 (Slog2) between ISO 80,000 and 102,400 it appears that some NR kicks in and wipes out a bunch of stars from the night sky.

    I'd be curious to know if recording raw externally will prevent this from occurring. I might invest in a Ninja if this works. I just hate to order it and then find out it still looks like crap.

    It's a real shame since the A7SII doesn't have this problem. Rather bummed at the moment.

  9. I also took ownership of the A7SIII last week. A few minor inconveniences but for the most part a solid camera. Here's a few things I have found on the negative side of things:

    1. No Clear Image Zoom in 120p, all other frame rates it works.
    2. No animal eye detect in video mode, only in stills. Human eye detect does work in video and stills mode.
    3. In video mode, tracking only works by using touch on the display to activate. No way to assign a button to start tracking when using the viewfinder. Strange and frustrating if you plan to use the EVF instead of the display.

    Another note, at least on my 3-year old iMac, 4k 422 10-bit is hard to edit @ 120p in either XAVC S or XAVC HS while 420 10-bit edits fine with both of those codecs using DaVinci Resolve. I ran some tests using 422 10-bit and 420 10-bit and cannot tell them apart, even when applying heavy, excessive grading. I could use All-I but will probably stick with XAVC HS 420 10-bit for what I do.

    The EVF is really amazing.

    I am waiting for a CF Express type A card to test 240fps HD and high-end All-I 120fps 4k using S&Q.

  10. 26 minutes ago, Rinad Amir said:

    Sorry for asking i must of missed this but

    Can you record 4k120p via atomos V ?(a7siii)

    Thank you in advance

    Not at present. 4k 60p is the max. There's been rumors that maybe Atomos may build an adapter/interface/modual for the V that allow this but at present the max you can record is 60p.

  11. 3 hours ago, Hangs4Fun said:

    They were spot on though, and exactly at 10am, I saw the page, added to card, checked out, and had my conf email all in the first 10 secs, lol (sad, really if you think about it, I mean, it's a dang camera; hahaha). 

    I am just as sad. Did the same thing and I'm also a PRO Support member. Let's hope they get more than one or I'll have to fight you for it!🙂

  12. 27 minutes ago, horshack said:

    Why is the FAT32 workaround not viable? The only situations it's not suitable are video modes where the data rate is too high for SD cards, like 4K120P and raw shooting.

    When I mean viable, I mean in a real-world professional use setting. I just couldn't phantom a wedding videographer, preformatting their chips in FAT32 using Linux or some 3rd party software, then record x-amount of footage, then making sure they record enough extra footage so that what they want to keep makes it to a recorded block of data before pulling the battery. That's not viable IMHO.

    And for myself personally, I do mostly wildlife shooting and use 4k120P quite often. I also leave cameras running to catch a particular moment when the subject does something of interest. But, that is just my personal use.

  13. So getting back to the camera...I don't think there is any viable workaround and Canon's not going to give you much. I stated earlier today, I've given up hope to make this into a decent video camera. Here's why:

    • Pulling the battery, segmenting clips using FAT32 is useful for confirming that the camera really can work for extended periods w/o overheating but it's not a viable workaround. Doesn't seem to work with CFast either.
    • Magic Lantern - Canon has changed things up making it more difficult to boot the added firmware, let alone decode. Probably not impossible, but a lot of work will need to be done. Then even if you can create workarounds, Canon could potentially sue.

    I've enjoyed the work that some many have done on this to reveal the Canon Cripplehammer but it's probably time to close up shop and move on.


  14. 1 hour ago, Logan said:

    The first review Chris and Jordan posted has overheating in the title and is heavily highlighted in the video. *You* are the one spitting lies here.

    Ummm... Although I do like Chris and Jordan, their very first review DID NOT mention overheating at all. I reached out to Jordan about this and he stated that they hadn't encountered the overheating during their initial testing and stated they would do a more thorough test of the camera once they had a production unit. This was on July 10th that I wrote to him. (The video from Chris and Jordon on July 9th about the camera did not mention overheating.)

  • Create New...