fuzzynormal

I subscribe to the theory that if you do good work, you get noticed. Now, you can work it the other way, and many do, but how genuine and authentic is the result? You have to decide. (Of course, not many people know who I am, and might never know) Now... that's for self promotion. As for FILM promotion, social media is a good tool. Targeting info to like minded people that are inclined to enjoy and buy your creative efforts is a lot smarter than advertising to random folks who wouldn't care.

A little strip of gaff tape on the adapter...

Don't know. I'm not shooting anything wherein I change focal length DURING the shot.

It comes and goes intermittently. Not a flash. https://www.dropbox.com/s/9u0oao2xdj6d2ib/DSCF0844.MOV?dl=0 I'm shooting manual. If a switch to auto fixes the problem, fine. I won't like it, but as long as it works for now. This exposure "bump" is ruining some of my shots and I'm on a paid gig at the moment. 10-24mm

Any confirmation that the 'Lens Modulation Optimization' setting was the culprit?

Well, I'm shooting full manual, that's for sure. I did wonder if it's "Lens Modulation Optimizer" since that's the only setting (I could find) that would be actively attempting to process the image while filming. Yup.

Actually just the default settings; haven't changing anything after the new firmware install. The color profile is 'Standard.' The camera is a year old. And, yeah, only happens with moves like a pan that change the amount of light in the frame. As such, I'm guessing there's some sort of processing/compensation the camera is doing. The footage. I'll upload a clip...

X-Pro2 Intermittent problem; can't isolate it or reproduce it with consistency. I'm seeing it on moves like a pan or tilt. It will either drop or raise exposure by what looks like a half stop. New firmware has been on the camera for a few weeks. Just started noticing the problem today. Not sure what's going on...or if it's lens-specific. Wanted to see if anyone else has a similar issue?

What viewer, besides people like us, re-analyze a video moment for more than 5 seconds? Yes, DJI video isn't perfect, but take it from a guy that actually was brave (stupid?) enough to use Phantom 3 footage in a paid production...Pixel peeping doesn't happen much in the real world.

I suppose 20fps would work good for a high energy action sequence. Fight, chase, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6ZJWPi_CBc This was posted here in EOS HD a few months back. Even if you don't follow the example, it'll prime you for the effective concepts if'n you wanna go the cheaper DIY direction. Of course, depending how patient you are with your editing, you can bypass all the $$ spending and just use proxies instead.

I got the same issues on a native pany lens. The 100-300. I'll mess around and see if I can figure out the problem as well. Lets not assume it's an adapter causing the trouble however.

Is 14 gonna be on Linux too?

I believe QuickTime 7 actually ignores dropouts. Or maybe I'm misremembering some of my past production experiences, but I think I may have been through this ringer once in days gone by, and Q7 got the job done. At any rate, I'm going to be archiving video stuff myself going back to the 1980's, so I have 3/4" to deal with as well...along with VHS, Beta, 8mm, SVHS, hi-8, DV, HDV, maybe even some Panasonic MII...so I feel your pain.

I have a doc I'm shooting this summer and my wife and I got the voightlander 25 and 42 f/.95 for the job. Not a lot shot with the lenses just yet, but I'm happy with the tests I've been doing. I've also been using my Oly 12-40 f/2.8 for corporate work. Looks fine. good rendering and sharpness.

Seems if you're going to shoot a strongly isolated subject and let Twixtor interpolate the frames, you'd probably get similar results via 60 or 120 source footage?

I like the way it works and that ease of use is important to me. I know a lot of people squint as hard as possible at pixels and then do as much to the spec sheet. I'm not that guy. Personally my opinion is that almost all IQ from these different modern cameras is suitable for most of my purposes... which is essentially doc films and corporate stuff. I'd shoot on a hacked GH1 if for some reason that's all I had --and not be too concerned about the camera. I'd worry about other stuff. When I'm doing things that demand more pristine acquisition I just rent.

I got two GH5's 'kuz of a film I'm doing, but also to serve a client's demands for 60p video in 4K. Thats kind of the only reason. If I didn't have that job I would have went with Olympus --as my film is 24p. Ironically, most people here are trying to run away from the "video" look, but that's what my paying job demands! On the other hand, my film will be on the other side of the IQ spectrum-aesthetic. Best of both worlds, eh? Regardless, it's a nice camera so far and It'll fit my needs just fine.

I do this. It takes hardly any time and makes the editing so much breezier. I've also served proxy files over LAN wi-fi and had it work. That's pretty handy when you need two edits of the same footage going at once.

With backlight and deep foreground/background contrast.

Imho, the thing to do with these cameras to make them look more cinematic, is to shoot with "vintage" (1970's) fast prime lenses. You get a 24mm f/2 prime and go to work. Nothing more, nothing less. The cohesiveness of shooting just 1 focal length is often dismissed, but I feel it's very important. For one thing, it sets the "look". Good, that's settled ...now go concentrate on other more important stuff. Like lighting, acting, blocking, costume design, etc. I swear to god, just accept the simplicity of using 1 lens and it will truly help make your footage look better than most...especially if your just starting out and trying to find your way. Keep it basic, clean, and beautiful. A gx85, a 24mm f2, and 24fps 4K. That's all you need IQ-wise. Seriously. That's more than fine. Consider that done. Don't worry about the tech at this point. Go make something worthwhile and compelling with it.

How subjects behave in a frame and move through it in context to the story and the camera is the essence of accomplished cinema. It is what it is. The movement and placement of actors in front of the lens creates, if one is doing it right, interesting compositions. To dismiss blocking is to dismiss the medium. To me it would be like trying to create a painting without paint.

I'd guess that image was taken with a f-stop above 8? Looks like maybe something as high as a f16? When in doubt I shoot more open on the f-stop (using ND if you have to) and the dust particles won't "resolve" onto the image (as much). Since, when traveling, I'm shooting video most of the time run 'n gun style and also swapping lenses, I default to using f2-f4 as a "safety" to avoid any aggressive dust issues I may be unaware of. It hides the problem.

I suppose Mr. E could be a proxy for our era seen from a certain rationale. But, deeper than all that, he's an selfish insecure narcissistic asshole. Something tells me those types of folks have been around since time immemorial.

Well, what were you eating yesterday, though?