j.f.r.

13 hours ago, deezid said:

I'll take two of these if it has the real Varicam (LT) look. That would be amazing.
If footage looks like shot with a GH5 (processed, homevideo like) I buy the C200 instead.

100% Fact you have no idea what you are talking about.......

C200 looks like video (especially when that is it;s intended market), GH5 I would say in-between and more cinematic now using anamorphic mode with lenses. Panasonic Varicam LT resembles film and if this new camera will provide the same image it will be amazing and one of the best cameras at this price range in the market. I easily put Varicam footage right next to Amira and in many situations much better when shooting at higher iso's

The fact few people if any can tell the difference lets us know all we have too.......

Both cameras look great and if most people here cannot tell the difference, 99.9% of the audience will not be able too either......

Go and create the project you've always wanted, the camera is no longer an excuse /

Definitely the GH5 footage I was looking for...... Greta location. Art Design and "Mood" created. Watching on a 2.5k Monitor and looks LOVELY, very good job and definitely would recommend this camera based off of this footage (if this is any indication of what is capable , Panasonic has something Special here).

3 hours ago, Simon Shasha said:

In the end, the colour science and 8bit codec killed the A7S for me. I much prefer my Blackmagic Pocket and Micro.

A clean image at crazy high ISO isn't really something I look for, I'm more interested in colour-science and bit-depth - this is why I sold my A7S and A7RII, and still have my Blackmagic Pocket.

All shot in SLOG at around  20,000 - 50,000+  ISO

On 2/16/2017 at 7:36 PM, Simon Shasha said:

I have a rule. Even with A7S. If you need more than 1600ISO, you probably shouldn't be shooting there in the first place. Either change the scene's location, or use lights. Simple.

Your post lacks any and ALL form of common sense, especially when the base iso for this camera (Sony A7s)  in S-log is 3200 iso..........

Now commenting on the GH5 or therefore any GH camera, it's not designed for high iso work. You need at a minimum an S35 sensor camera if you want to push higher iso's.......

From my experience GH cameras should be shot no higher than 800iso and in EXTREME cases 1600iso and will definitely need noise reduction.

On 1/23/2017 at 5:35 PM, DaveAltizer said:

I love my 1DC. I pre ordered a GH5. I feel like it'll be a serious competitor and a true "upgrade" in a lot of ways.........but I can't get away from that OH MY GOSH so beautiful mojo my 1DC makes. But if the GH5 is a serious upgrade then I would love to sell my 1DC and Zacuto Gratical (lack of focus peaking tool). Every dollar counts for where I am right now in life trying to pay off debt and move to LA  

Im not making any rash moves until I get my hands on the GH5 and do some tests but would love to hear your thoughts. 

1DC better color, much better iso performance

Would never trade a pro Canon Camera for a Consumer Panasonic one, this thread honestly makes no sense......

Panasonic GH shines in production situations, it's poor light and reaction to mixture of color temperatures is something I would never use "run n gun"......

You need to think to yourself what is it you are pursuing in life and go after it.....

Are you a Cinematographer, Director, writer, editor, etc....

6 hours ago, Geoff CB said:

Always keep in mind with the A6300/A6500 series, the Rolling shutter is atrocious compared with other cameras. The Sony may look better in locked off shots, but the GH5 has a better codec, better motion, better battery life, no recording limit, more shooting options, and a better grip and controls. Better DR, to me, is not worth it in comparison.

Most films are shot locked off or a professional balanced system...... GH5 has similar compressed codec..... Also where int he world do you pass your "opinion" as facts, GH5 does not have anything that anyone could technically state as "better motion".

One thing as a fact though is the GH5 has a smaller sensor and therefore is not as sensitive to light as the Sony......

The biggest problem with Panasonic GH Hybrid cameras has been "noise" and overly sharp natural footage, if this cans somehow be addressed in GH5 then it might be a good Hybrid camera, but working in the 2K range I would honestly save up a bit more and buy a Canon C100 Mark II.......

7 hours ago, nahua said:

Thank you @Neumann Films for the test footage!  Just awesome stuff, I really love the look of the images!  I think there's a lot of latitude in images and they look really good.  Kinda of a cleaner GH4 with more color information.  Attached are stills of my color gra

Premiere Pro worked well to view all the files, but the 10bit files didn't work with Davinci Resolve.  So I rendered to Prores in Premiere Pro, color graded in Davinci, then edited final in Premiere Pro.  Neat video for clips #2-4, warp stabilize for clip #5.

Looks like overly sharpened, small sensor footage with "Plastic" skin tones.......... Honestly imo looks terrible, far from natural

13 hours ago, Jimmy said:

Doesn't the gh4 score 13 stops on dxo?

I'm happy with 12 stops... but maybe it will be a little more.

The 10 bit footage had at least a stop of recovery in the highlights.... maybe we can overexpose?

Not even close..... BlackMagic cameras are 11.5-12 useable , so I would rate the GH4 at least 2 stops or more under....

12 hours ago, Vesku said:

I wonder why these cameras cant have iso100 for video. It would be good for noise and for keeping shutter speed lower or aperture bigger in daylight. GH5 seems to have starting iso400!!

Iso 100 has nothing to do with noise....... Noise comes from a camera sensor being starved of "light"........ You can shoot at 3200+ iso and if your sensor has light it will look better than shooting at 100 iso in the dark.........

So to clarify a camera with an HIGHER iso rating is actually much better in regards to sensitivity of light than one rated lower..... Iso 400 is much better than iso 100....

Okay, I'm serious about upgrading my BMPCC because of FPS. But am I going to feel sorry over a camera like this with no RAW? I've been shooting with the Ursa Mini 4K and love it but saving up for all the add ons for the Ursa is just months and months away from me. Does the DSLR market really put up a fight against Blackmagic today?

Two totally different tools..... GH5 is a Hybrid Camera, all in one.

BlackMagic cameras are geared towards "production" and require a workflow from shooting to post processing. In my honest opinion all cameras have their +/- and should be tailored for their specific needs. There's NO one camera that does it all........

8 hours ago, jagnje said:

I do a tv show, and for the first seasson I used a 600d, second seasson I used a a7s&a7s2...took me far longer to get the lights right and I had to do some pretty unussual geling on them. After 2 shows I ditched the s-log. This seasson I`m giving the panasonics a try, and by the tests so far I`ll be alot happyer that with the sonys. It`s probably preference but I just cannot get exited about anything sub 10k from sony, and I shoot with them weekly....I hate it how they overflooded the market and that they are becoming a staple on smaler production. Most of us who work in the filed agree, yet we have to shoot with them because somene said they`re great! 

They are great, unfortunately you just don't know how to use them...... Not every camera can just magically get you the image you want without knowing what you're doing, also why in the world were you using S-Log in an indoor environment with lights.......

13 hours ago, wolf33d said:

I got it from digital rev. 

Emanuel. Well in this case the mavic image is atrocious even when non zoomed trust me.

As for GoPro, try Protune with low sharpening and if you still think it looks shit.... Well. 

For me GoPro IQ > Phantom > Mavic. Mavic is a NO GO for video quality. I would get the Karma instead for a better ratio IQ/size

 

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.........

On September 19, 2016 at 7:25 AM, ricardo_sousa11 said:

I was thinking of getting an Sony a7sII this week, but I guess ill hold...4k @ 60fps with 422 10 bit ? Damn! I was very skeptical with the rumors, but now that its announced, this is amazing!

I didnt see the conference, but is the sensor still M43 ? Any mentioning on the price or release date?

Blackmagic Ursa Mini says "Hi".........

Truth is the most important thing in an image is definitely color information and compression. This is what sets apart "nice" images from "Amazing".......

Ursa Mini 4.6k best image quality from any camera under 20k.......

3 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Perry Mulder on the Kinefinity facebook group (https://www.facebook.com/groups/kinefinity/) gave it a quick grade the sample footage to try it out:

 

 

 

Great way to destroy the footage with horrible color correction.... Also this camera is D.O.A.

Looks like DSLR footage.......

5 hours ago, Jimmy said:

Yea... the market was flooded with 4K 60p 15 stop DR low light DPAF great skintone cams back then!!

I will never ever own a c700 as the size doesn't suit my style, so won't lose any sleep about this launch. But it seems a nice camera.... unless you are thinking about a $30k camera and we're somehow banking on the c700 to shoot your masterpiece... why get worked up?

RED EPIC is a much better camera released YEARS ago and I mean YEARS........

Please log off of the internet.........  I seriously ask myself why I even visit this site as more than 90% of the people here have no idea what they are talking about.....

Also regarding the $30k price I would rig up 3 URSA MINi 4.6K and accomplish any and everything I wanted too..... So like I said, Canon is a JOKE!

5 hours ago, Ivanhurba said:

This could be very well Canon's homerun for high-end productions they were expecting to have. Looks good and complete. Sure, out of our range, but it looks they didn't skimp on anything and it's priced accordingly.

lol.....  RED does MORE for LESS.......

Canon is at least 3-4 years late with this camera, what a JOKE!

3 hours ago, tugela said:

"Motion" is the new buzzword for that unquantifiable quality that makes a less sophisticated but more fashionable camera "superior". We have seen the same nonsense in the past about frame rates, bit depth, color, dynamic range, "filmic" (whatever the hell that means - it seems to change year by year). Basically it is a psychological tool to use when demonstrating one's own superiority over peers, they are lesser because they "just don't get it".

Perfect Example.........

Panasonic needs to work on Dynamic Range first, then Color, Noise Level and finally Motion.......

Just wanting to add more pixels definitely doesn't make it a better tool.......

GH4 image while greatly detailed and sharp overall lacks depth, colors and most importantly motion. This is something more professional cameras get correct, so simply throwing more pixels doesn't solve this problem. Alexa Mini 2.8k RAW I would choose over Dragon 6k........

So in retrospect, keep the sensor 4k and work on all of the other aspects as resolution was never a problem!

On August 21, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Grégory LEROY said:

Hello everyone,

Are Sony engineer smoking crack? I rent the sony A7SII camera, shoot some SLog2 footage and oooh my god it's horrible..Skin tones look like corpse, sky look like on LSD and those file are impossible to transcode.

Can you share your workflow to color correct those horrible colors on DaVinci resolve? Any free LUTs to recommend to me?

Thank you

 

On August 18, 2016 at 11:45 AM, The Chris said:

Apple quietly made a few upgrades to the Late 2015 iMac retina update, most notably the screen is now 10-bit and the SSD's are PCI-e 3.0 - which makes them ridiculously fast. I tested one side by side with my 6-core mac pro and the iMac smoked it. So I sold the trashcan and bought a loaded iMac, 1tb SSD, 32gb ram and the 395x card. How fast? Check this out.

 

Here I am thinking my external SSD around 450MB is extremely fast..... Thank you sir for lettming me know I am living in ancient times.......

Also here's two professional projects we shot on Red Cameras for pro Nba team Miami Heat. We used Red Epic camera with Cooke S Lenses. Any questions regarding the project (technically) just ask

peace

48 minutes ago, Cinegain said:

I do kinda get his point though. There's always people that are going to complain that equipment is too expensive for them. Ok, we get it. He can't buy the 16-50mm f/2-2.8 S lens and 400 USD is a stretch too. What I don't understand is... if that's not your ballpark... then don't look at it and complain about it. That's unproductive. And what I also get is that stuff just costs money, from a designing and engineering perspective. If you want something that's brand new and any good, there's probably some money involved to make it. That's just how it works. Complaining about something that's already fairly priced might be regarded disrespectful to the ones making 'em, although I wouldn't really go as far as saying it's disrespectful to the art in any way, except from the fact that everybody is dealing with the fact something is a certain price and they either sacrifice somethings to get the funds or just forget about it already.

I love cars, especially the fast and exotic ones. Yet you won't see me complain that a McLaren is too expensive. Or even the Audi RS5. If it's not in my ballpark, I'll just have to look at other stuff that gets me from A to B. Can't afford a car, like... any car? Look at public transport! Can't do that either? Take a bike or go on foot! I mean... you want a cheap f/1.4? Get a 25mm APS-C covering C-mount lens from AliExpress/eBay or something already. Or a nice vintage piece of quality glass. Sure I agree. Budget forces perspective, a new way of thinking and resourcefulness. But you've got to explore that. You can't just sit around moping. Be creative with what you've got on focus your energy on the right things. That's all.

Good Post......

Now for the other ridiculous forum members you think a $400 lens NEW or easily $250-300 used is expensive then all of you miss the point. Would you tell a sad Wedding photographer that his $2000+ Telephoto lens is too expensive for what you can achieve.....

Think about any tool that is used in your profession, would you consider it too expensive..... Now a $400 lens which is more than beyond consumer friendly and someone says it's too expensive is just beyond insulting to the engineers who created this. Would the Sigma 18-35mm 1,8 at $800 be considered expensive when nothing like this ever existed before at this price....... I can go on with examples, but my point being you don't disrespect the craft, the art and the history.

There's a reason those Cooke lenses cost thousands of dollars, it's all about perspective and more importantly understanding the history.

If we lose this perspective and value I believe in term is what will ultimately kill this art........ BUT there will always be a market for the low end, high end

peace

@Lee Kelly  Are you a working professional DP, that is my first question.

I loved RED cameras for the cost, heck I have one in my avatar from a shoot and was amazed and how accessible this made it. Prior cameras costed well over 100k (film) and RED really brought/made this possible for people with low budgets (50k) to be able to use them. Now if you have EVER used an Alexa and more specifically an Alexa Mini then you would know why it's simply one of the best looking digital images from an camera Ever....

Now for us "Poor" folks I will be buying an Ursa Mini 4.6k  for my personal projects and work on any and everything else.

ps. Alexa Mini looks Amazing, Red Dragon looks greta as well, in the end though don't let any camera limit your creativity and shoot your projects on anything you have possible as CONTENT will always be MORE important than any camera you use.... PEACE

4 hours ago, sandro said:

I'm an hobbyist at the moment so yeah it's expensive

Your post honestly disrespect a craft that people have put their life into.... Personally I think you should honestly do some history, research and most importantly value this craft which many people feed their families with.

Cameras becoming so accessible was a great thing, but also it allows people to walk in and disrespect the art....... 

On August 13, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Lee Kelly said:

I do find it quite fun to read opinions on a forum that for the most part is littered with hobbyists, about things they dont really have any authority on.

Red Dragon is amazing. It is a proper camera which needs to be controlled by a professional. The images, when shot correctly are awesome and anyone who thinks its dead is kidding themselves. All you need to do is look up what blockbuster films and Netflix shows are being shot with Red to realise that, that particular sensor is waaaaaay ahead of the others in many areas. Sure, Alexa is also amazing but they havent quite got to the resolution levels that people like Netflix and David Fincher and many others consider future proof. Maybe the projector and bandwidth technology hasnt quite hit the mainstream as fast as some of these people would hope, and all that extra info is somewhat wasted and 2k is more than 'enough' for what we are delivering but who wants good 'enough'? Oh right...Hobbyists.

I disagree 100%...... Alexa Mini (less resolution) looks much better than Red Dragon 6k, honestly no working professional I know or worked with would say otherwise.

10 hours ago, sandro said:

I bet quite expensive though, mitakon i guess would make one cheaper?

$400 is expensive? I consider any lens about 1k the beginning of expensive for independent film makers, but the truth is you/me/everyone needs to step it up in order to reach those "next" levels.

Buy a RED camera, and watch your clientele grow. Money is relative, you think "Cheap" you get "Cheap" I did projects for Free, then got paid like $500 I believe later on, then did some more free stuff, then did something for $1K then something cheap, then above $3k+ then something less, then above $20K....... It's all about working and one thing leads to another, but I can always say it's about progressing and if you're not progressing then why do it.