Derek Weston

Question: does the a7r II have variable frame rate -- as in: below 24fps -- like the GH4 did?

Also: has anyone seen the limit for exposure time where shutterless exposure is concerned? (electronic shutter) I'd love to see it up near 30 seconds for night shooting.

Also II: any chance at that we get lossless compressed raw? It really bugs me that the 11bit raw is lossy. 

 

Two questions:

- Can you take photos in video mode without having to restart the video?

- Is there any reason to think this video is any different than what is offered in the d810?

The E-M1 does a 2.2x crop anyway due to IBIS so a nice match to the 4K recording area on the E-M1/GH4 sensor.

Interesting... so essentially this just means we won't be downscaling the image. 

Very interesting. I may splurge for this if their in camera stabilization works extremely well on 4k too.

here here.  I rarely see anything uploaded to vimeo which really commands the need for perfection in the acquisition dept.  I suppose a lack of moire is great for a moire test.    

 

What seems to be drastically forgotten in this thread is that the d810 is a 36megapixel stills beast that also shoots video.  Just like the d800 and a7r.   Until there is the capability to read the full 36mpx sensor and downscale the 8k? feed, the video will always have flaws.  The fact is, if it's an improvement over the d800 and a7r (which both deliver great video considering the 36mpx sensor is making things very hard for the cameras).  Both d800 and a7r pretty much match the 5dmk3 in terms of internal (to card) h264.

 

Ultimately I find it mad that anyone is seriously attempting to pull this camera apart in video terms, particularly when comparing it to vastly inferior cameras in the stills dept.  It's a flagship full frame photographic camera which needs a 20k£ medium format back (and costly medium format lenses) to better it.  Nothing that shoots really good video also shoots stills half as good as the d800, a7r and the d810.

This. It's an absolute beast of a camera and I enjoy it quite a bit more than the gh4 as an all around tool. (note that I'm still a pretty heavy stills guy)

I mean, if you were going equal on stills and video... this would have to be right near, if not at the top of the list.

No, Nikon are not trying to market the D810 at all towards video users, judging by the press release sent out to stills sites like DPReview...

 

In the heading of the PR it refers to the camera as an "HD-SLR", delivering a TRUE CINEMATIC EXPERIENCE.

 

Then under that is a sub-heading which says:

 

"Powerful Video Features and Enhanced Performance, the New Nikon D810 is the Essential Asset for Pro Photo and Video Applications"

 

Another mention of video in the first line of the main text...

 

"Today, Nikon Inc. announced the D810, the next benchmark in D-SLR image quality for professional photographers and cinematographers"

 

And then references pro video 6 more times in the very first paragraph.

 

"The D810 delivers enhanced response and performance for a wide variety of photographic, cinematic and broadcast disciplines. Whether photographing weddings, fashion or landscapes, shooting documentary-style cinema or video for broadcast, this is the one D-SLR that provides the ultimate in versatility and capability."

 

And direct from the horses mouth in the next paragraph, says Masahiro Horie of Nikon:

 

"The D810 becomes a powerful storytelling tool to create images and broadcast-quality video with unprecedented detail"

 

I can only assume he is talking about a different model?

 

Nikon then mention no less than ELEVEN video features. (Highlights include ability to change aperture while recording, and zebras. Oh my!)

 

And it doesn't stop there, they want to sell us the lenses as well

 

"NIKKOR lenses: Cinematographers and filmmakers are supported with more than 80 NIKKOR lenses, many of which are a popular choice for cinema applications because of their brilliant optical quality and characteristics."

 

Then finally, the cherry on top...

 

"Additionally, Nikon will be offering two kits designed for videographers and filmmakers; the D810 Filmmaker’s Kit consists of the D810 body, AF-S NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G, AF-S NIKKOR 50mmm f/1.8G, AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.8G lenses, 2 additional EN-EL15 batteries, ME-1 Stereo Microphone, Atomos Ninja-2 External Recorder, and Tiffen® 67mm and 58mm Variable Neutral Density Filters (8-Stops)."

 

The next person to suggest Nikon aren't aiming their stills cameras at video crowd... will automatically be flagged as 'idiot' by the forum software which has a new idiot filter.

Beats not having those features.

Definitely trying to grab some of the dslr video market. Using a product that was engineered for stills first, though. 

Is what it is. 

Purely from a stills perspective:

 

1. Nikon has a proper lens lineup, with a much better AF system.

2. Nikon 14 bit RAW loseless vs some weird semi-lossy RAW format Sony uses

3. Much better ergonomics on the Nikon.

This. Lens lineup is a big drawback for sony right now. You can use an adapter, but that's a compromised solution.

Light weight with the Sony is a plus and minus depending on usage. 

Outside of medium format sensors, the Nikon offering is the out there for static type shooting where detail and dynamic range are at a premium.

You can practically shoot one shot HDR with the d800... I've processed thousands of files. Used to be with Canon. D800 easily wins here.

D800 video can look awesome. Engineering effort was definitely a photo first effort though.

Same here. Maybe in the future they'll make a video focused product. This is only marketing we're reading.

I had one for a week for stills. Sent it back. Ergonomic issues and preferred the 5D Mark III.

Destroys 5D Mark III  DR wise and 36mp flat out kills. At least for static type shooting... I shoot landscapes and easily the best tool in its price range.

If you're into people photography moreso, run and gun, then I see the 5D Mark III being more competition. (but no way I'm going back from 36mp... much more flexible files for post processing)

Killer stills camera, but at 36mp it's sort of a lost cause for high end video. 

Is it really 15 stops of DR in video? I saw the dxomark tests which puts Sony A7R between 14 and 15 DR in photo but it doesn't mean that it will have 15 stops dynamic range. 

 

The APS-C Canons for example have 11 stops in stills but barely have 8 stops in video. 

It won't have that DR unless the video is raw. It'll be really good though, it seems. 

You can load your video into Photoshop CC, convert to a Smart Object, use Adobe Camera RAW as a filter, then render back out.

Hey, this is pretty significant. I haven't seen anything that touches this ability to pull shadows and adjust highlights. The work flow will be a little funky... but this is a big deal.

I am sorry to say that it seems to me that this review is somehow biased. Subjective qualities shouldn't be confused with objective ones.

There is a strong emphasis on the pros, which are undoubtably many and a trivialisation of the cons. Mainly noise and DR.

From the various videos posted, it is objectively evident that the GH4 performs very bad above ISO 1600. Many users say the wouldn't use it above 800. Also since most shoot 4k fot a better HD, i am focusing on HD. As another poster noted, and this is also not subjective, there is a huge DR difference between BMPCC (and obviously the A7s) and the GH4.

Personally i'd go further an add that the image from the BMPCC is miles better and it costs 4x -that is four times! less. Is it as crisp - no, is it 4K - no, but the quality is not just crispness as many have noted and to which I totally agree.

And also I don't understand why compression and small size is a good thing when comparing the GH4 to higher end cameras with higher bit rates and it is a bad thing when the A7s does it, compared to the 200mbps HD of the GH4.(which almost no one uses anyway as they shoot 4k which is HALF the data rate of the A7s. A 50mbps rate which is constantly under attack).

Again, I believe that the GH4 is a great overall camera from the many different reviews I have read/watched but a rounded review, if it wants to be unbiased, should point out- not hide, the cons. And to my opinion, and I believe to many others, these two points Dynamic Range and Noise are quite vital.

I might have misread the review, bu this is how it comes out to me.

Dynamic range with 10bit pro-res data (via external recording) ought to be just about even with blackmagic pro-res. 

Just ordered a 8-16mm Sigma to work with my metabones adapter. Will review.

So I've decided I need a cage or something to simply add weight to help balance it out -- to kill micro-jitters.

My fullframe body/lens doesn't have this sort of jitter and I'm fairly certain the reason why is mass and weight.

With that said. . . any good recommendations on a good handheld cage for under 200 dollars?

I figure one of the GH3 offerings would do fine. . . I've just now started researching, though. Any advice would be great.

Thanks.

Also, http://www.ken-lab.com/media-gallery/videos-youtube-vimeo

Those look awesome, but, man, not cheap. Wonder if a cheap gyro exists.

Fix a Manfrotto QR plate, the type with the metal loop used for tightening it, to the base of your cam

 

Then hook a luggage bungie cord through the loop and stand on the other end. Its a type of elasticated inertia which will smooth out the motion ;)

 

 

Plus its cheap........

Interesting. Having a hard time visualizing how you see the bungie cord working, though. 

Hi.

I am having trouble getting good stable shots in car (and handheld in general) with the GH4. I've been shooting 4k 24P widescreen mode. (want as wide an image as I can get)

Would going to 30p make a noticeable difference?

My lens is the 12-35 2.8 . . . has stabilization, but am not that impressed by its stabilizing capabilities. Is there any reason to think the 14-140 3.5-5.6 may have better stabilization?

I think it's basically a combo of the camera being physically rather small and lightweight, and the rolling shutter at 4k.

Is there a very small easy to use tool that would greatly help my situation? Weight it down and dampen movements?

Shoulder harness is too big and bulky for my situation.

FWIW, I feel its easier to get steady footage with my D800 24-120 VR combo, if that's a useful frame of reference.

(some combination of better weight, less rolling shutter, and or better vibration reduction)

The GH3 doesn't have a full 16MP raw output on the electronic shutter.

 

So much better.

 

Since GX7 and GM1 Panasonic have had the full pixel readout for stills without mechanical shutter.

Did you test maximum exposure time for an electronic shutter still? It was 1 second with the gh3. To have long exposure possible electronically would be a big deal for timelapse people. I've asked a few places and it seems nobody has looked into this yet.

Thanks.

Arrrghh. Sad pirate. Really wish this was available A) now and B ) had a really good external recorder available. (also now)

OMG, this should be the best low light camera for video ever made, let down for not having 4k internal but that huge ISO and full sensor readout should end DSLR's era in videography forever, even professional cameras are threatened by this little thing in low light, and the DR, man o man.

Could be a beast. Biggest worry is jello lens. Really like the fact that it's a full frame sensor... matches my nikon lens lineup. 

Agree that the quality could be hard to beat. 

No internal 4k is pretty much a deal breaker for me. (especially with needing something ready-to-go in my hands by May) 

Wonder if there are any other bit rate options. 

Still could be very good. 

Having downloaded and watched file. . .

To me the noise grain looks a little better on 5D III past 3200... but it's not significant and I like the GH4 image better overall.

If this is 5D raw, then I'm quite impressed. We're comparing raw to compressed.

Remember that we (should) see an appreciable improvement yet on the GH4 image once we're looking at 4k 10bit output. Dynamic range and noise should surely improve. We lose something in compression. (though I'm still loving the image)

Also. . . 

While the base DR on the sensor for the GH4 is better than the 5D III (per dxomark if you look at gh3 vs 5D III) it should definitely start losing that battle once you get above iso 400. That's when canon -- even pitted against Nikon, low ISO DR kings among still cameras -- really shines. In general that's where full frame cameras leave behind lesser sensors. (crops and 4:3 etc)

So that it does this well at all is impressive. 

With a comparison like this you can't count on the in camera ISOs behave the same way. You have to go for same exposure, not same settings. 

Had the same issue when comparing canon to nikon in video iso test.

Cool. I expected this to be the case. I know this from working with 36mp files from my D800. Down rezzed they clean up very well at high isos. 

That's the whole reason I moved to 36mp full frame -- resolution kills, period. 

I figured the same would be true for video, and it is.