sudopera

Humbled this week while I am in Nicaragua using an older camera that would never be my first choice...the GH4. I have been pleasantly surprised by the image quality once I figured out how to dial in the picture profile. Shooting on Natural with contrast, saturation, sharpness down all the way and using filmconvert to bring the image back to normal. Shooting mostly with Sigma 18-35 with speed booster on a MoVI M5. Love the long battery life. The very efficient 4k compression. The audio preamps for in camera audio. Weather sealed body. Great slow motion in camera.
My previous experiences with the GH4 SUCKED. Hated the IQ and never gave it a chance. I think once you dial in a solid workflow and picture profile...you have a killer video machine! More to come later. Ill post in this forum post. Should have a video soon. 

Dug up an old thread to share some screen shots from a 4.6K video I just shot for photographer Daniel Kelleghan. Full video should be up Monday. I'm so blown away everytime I use the camera. The color and DR is just insane.
Shot in ProRes UHD with the Sigma 18-35.
 

Well, for me there is one answer: Tiffen Dfx!
It's a bundle - indeed a LARGE bundle - of digital filters as plugins hosted by Premiere, Avid, FCP X and Resolve (with or without own GUI) or as stand alone app. It's not exactly cheap, but it does better than any glass filter by the same brand. Because you can very subtly choose the luma/chroma range for each of them in post, they have many parameters to tweak, and there simply isn't anything comparable on the market. In this webinar, jump to 52" to see how you can deal with skintones:
For my taste, the filters applied here are almost too crude. These are extreme examples for the audience to see what's going on. I shot a restaurant scene that was way too bright and lacked any atmosphere. There are incredible light effects in Dfx that let you make the candles in the scene appear as if they were the sole light source (fall-off, shape, skin-protection, what have you). Highly recommended. There is a trial too.

Well, here's what we can take as given (because it already exists on other Panny cams):

DCI 4K
10-bit HDMI out
5-axis IBIS
1.5-2 stops improved low light performance
V-Log L
Retooled color science (released on the DVX200 in a recent firmware update)
Anamorphic support

Here's what we can reasonably expect, given the sensor size and competition:

120fps (or more) at 1080p 
Increased DR (at least 12 stops)
Low RS (at least the current amount, but hopefully a bit less than the GH4--certainly less than the NX1/A6300/A7S)
Tweaked processing for V-LOG L (to address the artefacts it caused in the GH4)
Anamorphic de-squeeze in-camera
Dual card slots

Here's what I'm hoping for, considering Panasonic's track record of providing meaningful upgrades with each iteration of the GH series:

The return of the multi-aspect ratio sensor, providing a "more competitive crop factor" (ugh) compared to the GH3 (1.32x with speed booster)
Lower megapixels for improved low-light performance (if the forums are any indication, stills shooters can't be responsible for many GH4 sales)
In-camera 10-bit (possibly in AVC-Ultra)
4:4:4 HDMI-out (RAW seems unlikely, but 12-bit out would really set it apart from the rest of the pack)
An improved YAGH (battery-powered, XLRs, full-size HDMI out)
The same/similar body to the GH3/GH4 (or at least have it take the same batteries)
Dual-recording (4K masters and 1080p proxies)

Well, actually Zeiss did not invent this. It's a rebranded NiceDice LensGear and comes a bit cheaper:
http://new.studio-afs.com/lensgear-en-2/ 
http://www.videodata.de/shop/products/de/Objektive/Sonstiges-Zubeh-246r/NiceDice-LensGear-Small.html
 

Battle-Tested (used) KineMINI 4K From $2,499  4K 12bit RAW
http://www.kinefinity.com/shop/kinemini-battle-tested/?lang=en

Being sceptical in the face of the unknown is often understandable but should not be considered as informed or even an intelligent opinion on anything. Until the facts are known, It is no less value than speculation. It is true that many tech giants would not dream to let a pre-release product hit the press without it in immaculate, production ready apperance, with every single aspect being identical to the final shipping model. But this company is not a giant and is still relatively 'unknown' to the masses even though they have been shipping working cameras for a few years to many happy customers. I think the issue that a few people may have is 'burnt finger syndrome' - where it's easy to identify a less familiar company  (or even better a 'foreign' company) that reveals a promise that many would assume is too good to be true, and are looking at the first sign to pick things apart. It's understandable to a certain degree, but remember this company has a track record of delivering cameras within a couple of months (not several months) of them being announced. This time of year when NAB is buzzing is where everything is a bombardment of crap to process all at once, having any solid knowledge or informed opinion on anything until anything actually ships is like listening to a group of old women gossiping. Let the dust settle, keep a healthy open mind, make an informed opinion before thinking to put some serious dough down on ordering anything expensive.

The buttons are really the 'pressing' issue. 

I don't think you'd get an "MF Look" though. People talked about an MF look for The Revenant, but that was shot with a huge sensor and they needed MF lenses to cover it and used hassy lenses that were designed for a 6x6cm image. Then there's the 645 format, which is closer to FF 35 but still pretty big. I don't know that you'd see much difference other than any specific character that comes from the lens (or from only the center of the lens without a speedbooster). When you get into "character" you may have to go farther afield than MF glass that was designed to be really precise. I've been shooting video with 1960's era Canon FL lenses on the NX1 and it really does have a gorgeous look, probably good for music video or fashion stuff, kind of like it has the perfect amount of diffusion yet is still very sharp - and the color is really gorgeous and a little muted.  But hey, I'm tearing up a zoom to paint all the insides silver and make a really flare-heavy lens, so to each their own. But the FLs and wildly jacked-with lenses are going for specific character rather than optical perfection. I shot color and B&W on Mamiya 6x7 for years and I can't say there was anything specific about it other than amazing quality when you mix great glass with really big media. I still have my 4x5" view camera, same deal. Though i could stick an old petzval lens on that thing and get some wild stuff certainly (but a large format petzval may not be as badass on a sensor 1/100th the size or whatever the math is).  Anyway, post some tests as you progress with this, we're all geeks here!

Found something decent shot on the Kinemini 4k - nice and organic looking.
Also love the use of lenses in this short. 
https://vimeo.com/159982174
 
 

thanks

Stick to Nikon ai-s - lovely lenses.
Here's some useful links, that really helped me out when choosing which lenses to buy (the first link has spot on evaluations, the second is just serial numbers/dates):
http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html#rating
http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html#35

Nikkor, I own the Mir 24n 35mm. It's an excellent lens for video, very creamy look and long smooth focus ring. Also like Bioskop.Inc states it focuses so close it is practically a macro.
If your looking for something in the Zeiss league you should look into the voigtlander lenses, I own the the 28mm, 40mm, and 90mm and they are all very sharp with great colors and rendering and small.
I have a D750, i'll throw up a Mir 24n test with in up in the next couple of days.

I use the Mir-24 (35mm f2) a lot for video work & it is good - probably the best Russain lens that i've used (I just use Russain lenses or Nikon ai-s).
It comes in Nikon or M42 mount (i've got the M42 version) - the different mounts have different bodies & the Nikon version apparently has more/better MC.
However, I don't really think that its in the same league as a Leica, but then what lens is - it is as good/better than the Nikon 35mm f2. Very good lens, focuses very close (almost macro) & cheap for the Nikon mount version - quality control with Russain lenses can vary.

I believe there are now electronic contax 645 lens adaptors allowing aperture control.  contax 645 will be the best bet - they still just about deliver on digital backs since are modern by the standards of other mf lenses in the price range.  the cheap mamiya mf glass is cheap for a reason.  The number of RED guys waiting on their Vista vision/8k sensor upgrade who are stockpiling mamiya mf lenses thinking they'll be a good move for what is effectively a full frame sensor is staggering.  Instead of putting the money towards full frame lenses that on the whole do a better job for less weight and cost.
If your budget allows then go contax 645 for best results.  f2.8 hassy V lenses (50mm, 80mm, 150mm) are amazing lenses and a good investment since they have 80mm image circles so are somewhat future proof.  the 50mm matches a good full frame 50mm, the 80mm outdoes most 80-85mm lenses for full frame and the 150mm/2.8 hassy smashes nearly all 135-150mm f2.8 lenses for full frame.  The 110/2 is just a madman, but sadly is very costly.  if sony ever release a mf interhchangable then these will be a very desirable lens.  these lenses are gonna be the only ones worth using with the medium format speed boosters that are coming out too.
 
Personally I;d suggest contax 'CY zeisses' and leitax nikon remounts.  at f2.8 on full frame they'll kill medium format lenses for overall image.  only once you go medium format does the advantage of the medium format image circle become worth the weight and expense.
  

Any 645 glass will work just fine on FF, but a little bit boring when used cropped.You will not gain quality, maybe even loose a little wide open.
The mamiya 55 2.8 for example will give ugly bokeh compared to a Fullframe 55 2.8 lens, because it's a cheap wideangle lens.
Btw, you can't control aperture on contax 645 lenses because they are electronic.

To be thrilled or scared, the question is now.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/microsoft-holoportation-star-wars-hologram/?mbid=social_fb
 

You are right, but still I think it would be about time to have it internaly in all future cameras in enthusiast/pro range.
It seems the way the things are going now, when BBC decides that it requires 10bit 422 for broadcast, maybe than we will get 9bit 210 

You are right, but still I think it would be about time to have it internaly in all future cameras in enthusiast/pro range.
It seems the way the things are going now, when BBC decides that it requires 10bit 422 for broadcast, maybe than we will get 9bit 210 

I see... yes... something's going to happen in the future...

Zach is in the X-Men and therefore defies all expectations.
I'm also interested in the 360 cam stuff. I expect Sony to release 458 of them in the next year.

I haven't even acknowledged those comments because he's deluded.  There's nothing wrong with his camera.  My pocket reacts exactly how his does - as does every other bmpcc.  All his actions do is increase the price of future products from BM because they have to add costs for the idiot factor.  
 
BM's customer service personel:-
"We got another email from a customer expecting his camera to perform with a iphone torch as lighting.  What should I do boss?"
BM's customer service manager:-
"just send him another one.  Don't bother wasting Mr Petty's time.   The sooner we get his unit back, the less time he can spend shooting crap 'low light tests' and uploading them to youtube"

 

Exposing skin tones by numbers can get one into trouble.  In the first place, skin tone varies.  Consider a shot in which an exceptionally pale skinned person and a very dark skinned person are standing next to each other in the same frame -- which one's skin do you set to 70% IRE?
 
Secondly, what if the shot is supposed to be low key, with the subject darker than normal?
 
Generally, the exposure should be as high as possible to reduce noise, without undesirably blowing out areas and/or without making it difficult to regain normal looking highlights.
 
Use your eyes (and your lighting skills) to determine the relative values of the subject/set, and use the zebras to determine the highest feasible exposure.

If you added a curve adjustment, this would be sick. I am a huge fan of Color Finale as an all purpose, fully formed color tool, but the LUTx adjustments are genius, so if you guys would give me one less effect in the inspector by having a simple curve adjustment tool... That would be great!!!

Hi, ok I do work for CoreMelt so I am biased but just wanted to say that we really think this is rock solid to load every LUT you might have or find on the internet.  If you find any LUTs that it won't load we'll give you a free license if you send us the LUT so we can fix it.  And feel free to make suggestions for improvements we will be doing regular updates to this.