Shirozina

Anyone else find the rubber port covers annoying esp when you have a cage? - they just pull off if you pull quite hard but smoothly and maybe add a smear of washing up liquid to ease them out and back in again if you want to put them back.

The Smallrig isn't so 'weaponised' looking either. I'd fear if you got the Tilta system out on the street you would soon be surrounded by an armed response unit!

2 hours ago, maxmizer said:

Neat video makes the difference anyway ?

Resolve Studio NR is pretty good as well and I reckon you can squeeze another stop of usable DR out of the GH5 with good NR in post....

GH5 NR is pretty good and it's still active even when you set it to -5. That being said why not shoot some low light scenes with different levels of NR and see which you like best?

I've got the viltrox m43 to eos.I have an MB EOS to Sony and although I can't compare them directly they are both about the same in terms of performance I'd say and I'm not tempted to upgrade to an MB. Even if they sort out AF on these adapters I don't see the point as the AF action is only good enough for obtaining focus prior to shooting as it's hunting behaviour is no use when you are shooting.

Cheap ebay NP-L battery sled with LP-E6 dummy has an additional power socket so you can power a monitor with it as well ( as long as you use the larger capacity NP-L's). Don't as yet have an easy way of mounting it and the monitor until I get a cage but it looks like a potential and cheap solution.

2 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Well it has 14 five star reviews out of 14. Can't be too bad. ? The last 2 reviews of the 14 say they are using it on a Atomos recorder. So sounds like a winner.

Non of the review said they had used it with 4k 10bit 60p on the GH5 though. I've just bought the Atomos cable after noticing drop-outs on an standard HDMI cable.

3 hours ago, kye said:

So, if I understand correctly, colour information is worse than in a theoretical 8-bit RAW codec then?

Who is doing 8bit RAW? - that's a crazy idea......

6 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Just can't believe how cheap this camera feels in the hand! 

 

That's because it is cheap for a camera with such an amazing feature set - very cheap.

25 minutes ago, kye said:

but in 8-bit files you may find that information may well be missing to do a seamless job of it.

That's not the bit depth but the Chroma subsampling in Y'CbCr codecs. Even in 10bit  the colour information is very compromised compared to the Luma information. 

9 minutes ago, capitanazo said:

yea i used optimized media, but i got like 8% of my cpu, well i think for now there are no codec that use the gpu so effeclty

 

Render cache as well? - mine goes up to 80-90% when rendering  this

38 minutes ago, stephen said:

IMHO the strength of the RGB CFA's over the photo sites is related more to the exposure than to color. Stronger filter = less photons reaching the photo sites. But still one pixel (photo site)  = one basic color (R, G or B). The other two still need to be generated/interpolated in software in order pixel to have all RGB values.

 

Don't agree - if the filter density is lower it's intensity is also lower and thus it's ability to measure actual colour as it's determining the hue values by the differences in signal between the R G B The problem manufacturers face is that higher density CFA's reduce exposure and thus low light ability of the sensor so they trade these off against each other. They in effect give you just enough colour information to keep the average user happy.....  

52 minutes ago, stephen said:

OK maybe this statement is not that accurate. The point is that RAW has to be developed before you have the color of every pixel. You have the values for each pixel from the bayer sensor but they are one of the 3 basic colors only - Green, Red, Blue. With different intensity. Before the debayering / development you don't have "real" colors - RGB values for each pixel, only one of this values - R or G or B. The other two are interpolated, "made" by the software. So before developing the image you can't measure anything related to color. 

This process has 3 variables (actually more): 1- the sensor and other electronics around it. Let's call it hardware. 2- the software that do the debayering/interpolation. 3 - the human deciding which parameter to use for the development. For color there are many parameters that can be changed in the software. So how you are going to measure for accurate color the developed image coming from RAW (because RAW can't be measured), when it is dependent of so many parameters and most of them are not related to the camera ? 

Yes watched the video and totally agree with Tony that for RAW there is no point to measure color accuracy of the camera or cameras color science. As color depends on too many variables and parameters outside of the camera. You can literally get any color you want in the program. 

Now Mattias and many other people argue that every camera (sensor and electronics in the camera) has specific signature and they affects the RAW image and as result the final/developed image. This is true. It that sens not all RAW are equal. Yes indeed it's one of the variable (some of the variables) in the process and for sure has an impact for the final image. Dynamic range of the sensor for example definitely affects the final image. But for colors specifically my argument is that all those differences in the sensor are easily obliterated by the software. Remember 2/3 of the color information is made by the software. It is the software (algorithm) and human behind it, who has the final saying what color a pixel and whole picture will have. So for me when people says different sensors / hardware give me differences in colors they mostly mean: different sensors/cameras gives me different colors in MY workflow. :) You can perfectly color match photos from different cameras/sensors. Same for video. 

So we agree to disagree here

The strength of the RGB CFA's over the photosites will determine how much colour info can be recorded vs how much needs to be interpolated.

35 minutes ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

It was certainly mine. Giant difference in skin tones, and richer more accurate color overall. What was your experience?

Looks good if you have contrasty ( sunny day) lighting but can't handle anything on an overcast day. Main problem is the shadows which tend to go brown and muddy. ACR seems to retain clean colour in the shadows. This is using Sony cameras. I suspect PhaseOne didn't spend a lot of time profiling these cameras for some reason? The only advantage I see in C1 is the sophisticated CA correction. For me ACR just gives a more consistent result through a range of different lighting situations. 

2 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

If default developer colors in RAW are important to you, just switching to Capture One will be a better investment than any camera system change.

That's not my experience at all.

7 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Same manual WB on both these shots.

Different colour science, sensor, processing and codec.

So which is the most accurate? By manual WB are you using a grey card/exp disk or just setting both cameras to the same Kelvin and Green/magenta tint values?

4 minutes ago, TILT said:

I won't use any coupler, I'll use their 2 pin (fake lemo) with a NP-F970 plate. So, I'd prefer a battery door that closes. Not huge deal anyway. Gaffa tape will save the day.
And yeah I chose ssd over v90 sd for a good reason. 189EUR for 128GO whereas I get 500GO for the same amount. No brainer.

How does the battery door close with a wire coming out of the dummy battery?

My issue with Sony as a RAW stills shooter is the RAW dev apps. C1 just doesn't do a very good job at all with their colour profile unless you have perfect lighting . ACR is IME a lot better and forgiving of less than ideal lighting and they do seem to keep tweaking and updating their profiles. For all the RAW dev apps which have near endless controls for tweaking the image any way you want they lack the scopes that NLE's have to actually help you make those adjustments. It's no good saying either that a good 'colourist' should be able to use their eyes - our eyes are continually deceived and fooled by various colour 'tricks' so good scopes are essential for good grading IME. 

47 minutes ago, thephoenix said:

hi all

wondering if it would be a good id to go straight to a 2070 GC instead of a  1070.

2070 prices are not that far from 1070 and the gain might be significant.

what do you think ?

If the gain is significant and the cost is similar - er let me think about that.....

7 minutes ago, TILT said:

 

BMPCC4K -1350EUR
SAMSUNG T5 (500go) - 139EUR
VILTROX 0.71x - 89EUR
SMALLRIG Cage - 134EUR

1623EUR total, a bit less than a brand new GH5. I can't see me spending more than 2000EUR total. If I want an extra SSD + rig parts.
We can shave off 200EUR for Davinci Resolve as well.

The only flaw that pisses me off a little bit is the goddamn battery door. Blackmagic we need a BMPCC4K Battery door MKII, please. That one swings open with 0.2 G force.
 

 

You also need to add to a GH5/GH5s many of those things and additionally have you seen the cost of V90 SDXC cards you need for the 400mbps codec?

Nothing wrong with the battery door if you remove it as it serves no purpose other than to slow down battery changes.

21 minutes ago, Alex Uzan said:

It's not always about the price.
I'm sure every Pocket 4k possible owners would be glad to pay more to not have to change Battery every 40 minutes.
Or buy an additional screen, loosing all tthe tactile functions.

The Pocket "good" price will cost more to the users efficiently.

I don't find the battery life a problem (it's more like 30mins BTW) and if you want RAW, ProRes, 4k60p and dual ISO without any other unnecessary features then I think BM did an excellent  job esp on the UI and priced it at an amazing level. No camera is perfect but not having a perfect camera is not a reason you can't shoot excellent footage -  It seems a universal reason to moan on forums though....

51 minutes ago, leslie said:

um i think it should be cooling things down, do you suspect its doing something else ?

besides you could drill some holes in the base plate or cage if you feel the need

Is it cooling the Sensor, CPU, screen?. If the screen has a heatsink attached to the back of it then an articulating screen is not going to be an easy option.

1 minute ago, RWR said:

Umm..tilting screen separates itself in that sense from the recording bits. Probably helpful to managing heat at the recording/processing core.

Until someone does a teardown we won't know what the cooling system is doing.

Resolve is hardly a bug free experience but at least they are continually patching it. 

5 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Seen it before.

Part of the problem with Sony is that their colour matches a chart but looks clinical on real-world subjects.

We are talking about video by the way, not RAW where the colour processing is in post.

In warm sunlight, the Sony too often looks dead.

Canon 1D X JPEG:

Sony A7S II JPEG:

On some screens this will vary. The Canon might look like it has too much magenta and red in the skin tones. That's the display that's at fault or the browser, not the camera file.

The Sony looks dead no matter what you view it on

There is obviously a different WB between these 2 pictures and lens flare on the Canon shot giving a nice warm bloom to the image (what are the picture profile settings). BTW - I prefer the Sony as the colour looks more realistic. I'd always take accurate colour over 'nice' colour any day as it's easier to make accurate colour nice with a simple grade but much more difficult to make 'nice' colour accurate.