Shirozina
-
Posts
805 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by Shirozina
-
-
4 hours ago, Aquilasfx said:
uhm in your previous message, you suggested 761AT tripod that is a single tube legs... ?
I just recommended the head (GH06)
4 hours ago, Aquilasfx said:Anyway my question is what could be better from these two systems:
- Miller Air Carbon Fiber Tripod System solo 75 2, with air fluid head
- Sachtler Ace M Mx
I used to flight for my jobs often.
I think you need to state what kind of shots you want to achieve with it.
-
-
Single tube legs are not as good as twin tube designs for fluid heads as they don't have the torsional stiffness to resist bounce back at the end of pans. Also if you are shooting a locked off shot outside with a long lens they are generally more resistant to wind induced vibration. They are though generally smaller and lighter than twin tube designs if this is the main consideration.
-
I'm not seeing red clipping unless I apply a LUT or Color space transform?
-
Looking at both my Metabones and Viltrox speedboosters there doesn't look like any room to fit a VariND mechanism in there. For a normal adapter I don't know why it hasn't been done by more manufacturers.
-
5 minutes ago, Jim Giberti said:
For people looking to maintain the convenience factor of the P4K - with the new update, original Canon batteries, which is all we're using with our cams, are lasting an hour+, with accurate readout.
We just shot concert scenes for new film - a typical long day of production (of course not continuous) - and with sensible management both cameras used only two batteries each.
I don't think most people, except shooting events, would need anything other than 3-5 Canon LP-E6Ns for a given production day.
I had just ordered a few more so that each camera had 6 in the kit.
They're inexpensive, small/convenient and professional gear.
I've got LPs in our stills kits (5Ds) that are going strong after 5+ years of rugged use.
That’s good to know
-
1 minute ago, Anaconda_ said:
My Viltrox still works. I'm pretty sure I'm on the v2.3 firmware for it and don't have any loss of aperture or anything wrong.
Yes it's the latest viltrox firmware that's not working with the latest 6.1 BM firmware
-
8 minutes ago, KnightsFan said:
What is a different concept altogether?
Downsampling - as you said it improves the S/N ratio. It also improves resolution over 1:1 sampling. So 2 aspects or the image quality that are improved.
-
12 minutes ago, KnightsFan said:
So if the photosites are the same size, then the FF camera has MORE photosites. This means you will be downsampling, which improves SNR.
Not necessarily - that's a different concept altogether.
-
36 minutes ago, KnightsFan said:
Put a fullframe 50mm f1.8 on a FF camera. You capture all of the photons that land on the 24x36 sensor area. If you put that same lens on M43, the same photons exit the lens, but only 1/4 of them land on the sensor. The other 3/4 are reflected or absorbed by the area around the sensor. It's immediately apparent that at equivalent F-stop on the same lens, a smaller sensor gathers fewer photons. There is no "spreading" of light unless you add a teleconverter--which comes out exactly the same as using a smaller sensor.
The teleconverter analogy explains why a M43 camera gathers less light. Taking FF as a starting point, expanding the image circle 2x with a teleconverter is the same effect as shrinking the sensor size by 2x. In both cases, only 1/4 of the original photons land on the sensor, meaning 2 stops less light.
Of course, it's absolutely correct that "sensor quality, image processor quality, and size of pixels" affect ISO performance. We can easily find at least one example of a smaller sensor outperforming a larger one for noise. To use sound as an analogy, it's easy to find two amplifiers that output a different SNR even when given the same signal. The fact that some small sensors outperform some larger sensors does not change the simple fact that with the same lens, fewer photons land on a smaller sensor.
Huh??? - fewer 'total' photons fall on a smaller sensor area but given identical sized photosites the same amount of photons fall per photosite given the same exposure.
-
10 minutes ago, DBounce said:
All other things being equal... yes... and if I am wrong, just use your smartphone and be done with it.
Thanks - great advice and good to learn new things.
-
Back on topic to something maybe useful - Firmware 6.1 is out ( sorry no BRAW). It has some minor improvements but at present if you are using adapters ( Viltrox, Metabones etc) you will loose aperture control so be warned. I assume they will fix this shortly.....
-
Does more light = better quality?
-
31 minutes ago, DBounce said:
Is this a trick question? Since... FOREVER! As an extreme example... ever shoot with a smartphone? Ever shoot with a 4 x 5 camera? Photography is ALL about capturing light. And Cinema is moving Pictures.
I'm familiar with 'quality of light' but not 'volume of light'? - does it go up to 11?
-
7 minutes ago, DBounce said:
So to my point, overall volume of light is less on M43. And if you are downsampling or shooting high res stills the difference is real. Also, clearly size and weight advantages are things you yourself have admitted may need to be sacrificed for certain shots. So in practice you just end up carrying even more lenses... and having to switch between SB and native... occasionally forgetting that the SB is attached between lens switches... been there... done that.
These silly arguments might make sense for someone who has never shot with M43, but frankly I've shot with M43 for years. So I am fully aware of the strengths and weakness of the system. Native M43 glass always seems lacking when compared to full frame. I'm not saying good imagery cannot be produced with M43; I'm simply saying, it requires a bit more effort. It might appear strange, but I like when a camera is so easy to shoot with, it feels like cheating. That's a feeling I get with the 1DXMK2. It's just that dam good. Can't say the GH series ever instilled that level of confidence in me.
Here's my concern with M43... it's becoming a harder case to make. Fuji's S35/APSC X-T3 offers better coverage... without the need for a SB, outputs 10 Bit and is $1300 bucks. If there is a size/weight cost advantage to be seen in this example, all three must go to the more affordable Fuji. There are some markets that seem to be heating up... I would say those would be Full Frame, with the release of mirrorless offerings from most of the major players... then APSC... with the runaway success of the X-T3, and lastly Medium Format... which is seeing some quite affordable offerings being released. I do not have a crystal ball, but if I were a betting man, I would not be betting on M43 to be a force moving forward. I also think Panasonic did themselves a disservice by holding back on S1/R... No flippy screen was a nail in the coffin for many would be purchasers. Poor AF for video was a terrible decision. IMO, usability trumps ultimate image quality; as the former means you actually produce content, whereas the latter means you get to please pixel peepers that spend their time blowing up frames to 400%... who watches movies like that?
Since when has 'volume of light' been a factor in image quality ( or any factor at all)? I never shoot stills on my GH5 so it's not an issue with high res. I carry far less lenses with M43 than I do with my full frame kit. 12-40 + 35-100 can cover everything and is way smaller and lighter than 24-70 and 70-200 EF lenses on my full frame still kit. I have shot with M43, APS-C,full frame and Medium format but I've never come across an instance when I have found glass 'lacking' due to it being a particular format. There is good and bad glass in all formats. Naturally if you like shallow focus shots this is harder on the smaller formats but so is getting deep focus on larger formats.
-
28 minutes ago, DBounce said:
but in practice, you loose a fair amount of light with those smaller lenses
Huh - an F2.8 lens lets in the same amount of light per sensor area on an M43 camera as it does on a medium format camera. Yes I have a speed booster for times I may want a bit less DOF or want a faster lens for low light - and I have a speedbooster for my full frame and APS-S systems too for the same reason.
-
2 minutes ago, anonim said:
I don't know the future, but judging from actual development rate/state, m43 has at least 1, or even closer to 2 year advanced (in comparison with FF hybrids) technology implementation in some very important areas for video shooting. So, it seems that m43 users at least have 2 years for dying preparation after last product achievements - which maybe it is not so bad.
(In that regard it is easier to digest the fact of absence of possibility to buy-it-now Pocket 4k until next New Year.)
Indeed - the GH5 has been out for a while now and it's still as good or better than newer cameras in terms of key features like codec (400mbps 10bit 4.2.2) and IBS not to forget the low cost. I've got a P4k but it isn't a replacement for my GH5 by a long way.....
-
1 minute ago, Dan Wake said:
Shirozina explained better please, so that video show fake stuff?
I can't comment on the video as I don't know how he exposed or processed the images. I can only state I don't see any bad color or light gradients with my P4k as long as I expose it and process it correctly.
-
1 minute ago, Dan Wake said:
I dont own I comment
I understand
- Jonesy Jones and Ehetyz
-
1
-
1
-
17 minutes ago, Dan Wake said:
the color/lights gradients are so bad compared to the highest dynamic range camera that even a child would point the finger on that, it's so evident. imho as consumers we can ask to the market to upgrade, evolve faster, to a higher dynamic range sensors on prosumer devices, it's too bad really that only very expansive cameras can solve it. I hope (cross fingers) next poket cinema camera will solve it #blackmagicdropthebombplease
Have you experienced bad color gradients in your own footage on your own P4k?
-
I use a SMALLRIG DV Battery Plate Adapter ( 12v output)
with a ST1210/S2 Plug Connector ( separate purchase from ebay)
Mounted on a small QR plate
This allows room under the battery plate to mount my mSATA drive using a couple of rubber O rings so it's a single quick mount unit for power and data - perfect!
-
15 minutes ago, Kisaha said:
Not true! At least in body weight/size and price. GH5/GH5s/new Olympus are bigger, heavier, as expensive - as even some dSLRs are, and definitely a lot bigger and heavier than Z/A/a/NX cameras. Go check the numbers and you will see the truth. Cost, also. Even in the lower of the low there are full frame options now.
What that indicates is, that we haven't (not even close) fight the thermal monster yet. That applies to every digital appliance, especially to the ones that have to perform at the top of our digital performance capabilities, like cameras, editing laptops, military and industrial applications, e.t.c
Bodies yes - lenses no.
-
On 2/1/2019 at 6:29 PM, deezid said:
Not that I know of. Really hope to see a fix to color science 4 soon (BMD UMP and Pocket 4K).
Would recommend not to shoot any ProRes footage at the moment as the issues are baked into the footage then. Using raw it's not a big deal.
The problem seems to be in the conversion LUTS and or Resolve's color space transform rather than in the native camera image.
-
10 hours ago, DBounce said:
@Towd I still believe the end days of M43 are drawing nearer. Look at Olympus's latest entry. Also the GH line will seemingly be taking a back seat to the newer S-line. At least it should given that the new S-line is Panasonics new flagship.
An M43 system will always have a have a a size and cost advantage over full frame systems even if it's inferior in other areas.
HDMI v2.0 cables for external recorder
In: Cameras
Posted
These work well on my GH5 +Ninja V at 4k 10bit 60p
https://www.cinegearpro.co.uk/collections/bmpcc-4k/products/came-tv-foot-ultra-thin-and-flexible-hdmi-cable-aa-european-warehouse1ft-2ft-3ft-6ft
I've got the Atomos one as well. Non of my collection of existing HDMI cables worked with 4k 10bit 60p.