Jump to content

tupp

Members
  • Posts

    1,148
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    tupp reacted to Attila Bakos in Color detail issues in Fujifilm video files   
    There must be some clever algorithm behind this as it seems to have proper 1080p resolution around well defined edges, but everywhere else it's clearly less than that.
  2. Like
    tupp got a reaction from Andrew Reid in Color detail issues in Fujifilm video files   
    Very nice presentation!
    The "washed-out" colors from the Fuji files perfectly demonstrate a fundamental imaging principle:  Color depth is a direct function of resolution and bit depth.
    Here is the color depth formula for RGB digital systems: COLOR DEPTH = (RESOLUTION x BIT DEPTH)³
    The Fuji color smoothing (or any other chroma sub-sampling method) reduces the resolution of the chroma channels, and, thus, reduces the color depth -- even though the bit depth remains unchanged!
    The video mentions that Fuji files yield a UHD luma channel and HD chroma channels.  However, it certainly appears that the Fuji chroma smoothing reduces the effective chroma resolution to significantly less than HD, which makes your comparisons a dramatic example of how resolution affects color depth.
    By the way, the reason that the Fuji jpeg stills have better color depth (even with the Fuji chroma smoothing) is likely due to the fact that they have a higher resolution.
    Thanks for these comparisons!
     
     
  3. Thanks
    tupp reacted to Attila Bakos in Color detail issues in Fujifilm video files   
    I found something strange when I was looking at the chromaticity channels of Fujifilm video files and did some search online, and to my surprise noone is talking about this, so I decided to make a video about it. If you're a Fuji user, you might be interested.
     
  4. Like
    tupp reacted to MrSMW in Let's All Dismiss Olympus   
    OM-1 is better than OMD E=MC2 EMiii etc
    Just make the next camera OM-2…if they survive and the leaked pics do indeed show the use of the OLYMPUS brand name with the company name, bottom right.
    I hope it’s a decent bit of kit as the industry needs success stories not more criticism of yet another new camera that doesn’t hit the spot for the majority.
    Z9 and A7iv other than a few niggles seem to have been well received recently, some others less so. 
  5. Like
    tupp reacted to Video Hummus in Let's All Dismiss Olympus   
    Depends on the contract of the license but it will either be installed payments per year or quarter or it could be a % of sales of each unit sold.
  6. Thanks
    tupp reacted to ac6000cw in Let's All Dismiss Olympus   
    Re. the use of the Olympus brand name on cameras going forward - this was in a dpreview news item on Jan 5th 2021:
     
  7. Like
    tupp reacted to M_Williams in Let's All Dismiss Olympus   
    No, they certainly do have the rights. Unless they have an agreement with Olympus that stipulates some pretty odd things. Can't really say more.
  8. Like
    tupp reacted to webrunner5 in Let's All Dismiss Olympus   
    Years ago the Olympus EM1 was the only body that had Phase Detect AF in it. Had to use  it if you wanted to use the old 4/3 body lenses which were crazy good. Olympus has always made a lot of great lens.
  9. Like
    tupp reacted to Video Hummus in Let's All Dismiss Olympus   
    Ok, so why didn't they come up with a better, more memorable name than some bargain basement OM SYSTEM? They could have bought the rights to the Olympus "Stylus" or "Zuiko" trademarks. 
  10. Haha
    tupp got a reaction from webrunner5 in Let's All Dismiss Olympus   
    It seems that one has to register to see the live camera announcement on Tuesday.
    Hooray for the social media event planners!
  11. Like
    tupp reacted to fuzzynormal in Let's All Dismiss Olympus   
    Yeah, I think they just got lost in the shuffle of on-line PR.  The dark horse.  I always liked 'em and wondered why videographers seemed to ignore the brand.  My guess is a mix of slightly not the latest-greatest specs and lackluster marketing.
  12. Like
    tupp reacted to fuzzynormal in Let's All Dismiss Olympus   
    So I'm wondering, is it a brand issue?  Oly never really gets any love from the video folks.  Is it simply because their specs are always behind the curve...or...what?
    Samsung made a splash with the NX1, but Oly never really got much attention.
    Why have you stayed away from their cameras?  Not judging, just really curious why there never had more support in the video market.  Goofy company business?  Not impressed with their offerings?
  13. Like
    tupp reacted to MrSMW in Let's All Dismiss Olympus   
    Must be a reason surely why they have chosen to throw away the heritage of over 80 years of the brand name OLYMPUS.
    I’d hope so otherwise it’s not the wisest move…
    Say someone bought Ferrari and then had the bright spark idea to change the name to ‘FR-Cars’.
    Err, wot?
    Unless the new company does not have the rights to use the brand name?
  14. Like
    tupp reacted to Media Lab by Belal Khan in Is the EOS-M *THE* Digital Super-8 Camera?   
    Shot and edited over this past weekend. Been wanting to test out the Canon 35mm f2 IS and see whether or not it would be good for shooting on the M, especially with regards to image stabilization while shooting hand held.

    Mixed it up with 3x crop to get an additional 100mm+ focal length for tight detail shots.

    Shot 1080p MLV RAW
    ISO 100 throughout
    Aperture kept between f2-4

    Cranked up shutter speed to adjust for exposure as needed.
     
  15. Like
    tupp reacted to PannySVHS in Is the EOS-M *THE* Digital Super-8 Camera?   
    @tupp
    Thanks, mine is on its way, hehe🙂
  16. Thanks
    tupp got a reaction from PannySVHS in Is the EOS-M *THE* Digital Super-8 Camera?   
    @ZEEK just posted another EOSM, Magic Lantern, Super-16, instructional video, involving vintage glass.
     
    Magic Lantern offers square aspect ratios, but @ZEEK states that he prefers a wider frame.
  17. Like
    tupp reacted to PannySVHS in Is the EOS-M *THE* Digital Super-8 Camera?   
    @webrunner5Yes, Don, I think an OG Bmpcc with a cheap 10, 25 and 50mm C-mount might be easier to approach. Zeek just makes it look without hassle looking at it from my superficial perspective.
    I tested my Bmmcc only once and it looked perfect to my eye. It is not a hasslefree camera regarding rigging though. Out of the box the Eos M appears to be a fun camera once set up with the right ML settings.
    Thank you for the infos! @tupp
    It's interesting that we are looking for the perfect personal camera from different ends, looking at high end hybrids like r5, s1h, a7s3, xt3 cams and from the low end as well. I love low end cameras and i love this thread.:)
  18. Thanks
    tupp got a reaction from leslie in Laughable Chris and Jordan video on medium format   
    The thing is, they don't looks the same.  The testers even acknowledge that fact on the video (but they dismiss it).
    Furthermore, they didn't actually set the cameras to look the same -- they set the cameras mathematically, according to the DOF formula, but they disregarded any inaccuracies in the aperture markings, and they apparently didn't match the effective location of the apertures.
     
    Well, there actually seems to be general differences in the DOF from optics designed for different formats.  The difference is not in the location of the front/back DOF -- the difference is in how the focus generally "falls off" within and without the DOF range.
    Unfortunately, like 99.99% of all such equivalency tests, we can't see how the focus falls off nor can we see the location of the front and back limits of the DOF range.  Here is what we see in the videos main test :
    SOFT FG OBJECT  >>  AIR  >>  SHARP SUBJECT  >>  AIR  >>  SOFT INTERMEDIATE BG OBJECT  >>  AIR  >>  SOFT OPAQUE BG WALL
    Most such tests don't include the foreground object nor the intermediate background object, so I will give them credit for adding those items.  However, to properly conduct any DOF or equivalency test there must be a continuous ruled surface (or continuous line of closely-spaced, uniform objects) that runs from the near foreground to the distant background.  Such a proper set up will reveal the locations of the front/back DOF extremes and how the focus falls-off at those points and elsewhere.
     
  19. Thanks
    tupp got a reaction from webrunner5 in Is the EOS-M *THE* Digital Super-8 Camera?   
    @ZEEK posted these figures a little over a year ago: 
     
    Evidently, the 2.8K mode is closest to BMPCC, and it works with Super16 lenses.
    However, it would be wise to watch some of the EOSM settings videos from @ZEEK , to see how much the resolution must be reduced to get continuous recording.  Also, I think that reducing the resolution creates a smaller image capturing area.
  20. Thanks
    tupp got a reaction from PannySVHS in Is the EOS-M *THE* Digital Super-8 Camera?   
    Tragic lantern and another special ML build will give you ALL-I H264, as well.
     
    You can get continuous, raw, ML video on the full sensor (1736x976), plus a bunch of crop modes with higher resolution.
  21. Thanks
    tupp got a reaction from PannySVHS in Is the EOS-M *THE* Digital Super-8 Camera?   
    @ZEEK posted these figures a little over a year ago: 
     
    Evidently, the 2.8K mode is closest to BMPCC, and it works with Super16 lenses.
    However, it would be wise to watch some of the EOSM settings videos from @ZEEK , to see how much the resolution must be reduced to get continuous recording.  Also, I think that reducing the resolution creates a smaller image capturing area.
  22. Like
    tupp reacted to PannySVHS in Is the EOS-M *THE* Digital Super-8 Camera?   
    Eos M has a 3x bitrate hack as well for the hardcore 8bit wizzards.:) Allowing massive S35 sensor size instead that tiny Super8 gate. What window size does Magic Lantern Raw allow on the Eos M? Super 16 would rock.
  23. Like
    tupp reacted to PannySVHS in Is the EOS-M *THE* Digital Super-8 Camera?   
    Hallo Don, i think, i found an answer. The 2.5K mode uses almost half of the x-axis 5184 pixels of the Eos M sensor. That would equal about 10.7mm as the Eos M sensor counts 22.2mm sensor width. The og pocket counts 12.48mm width. So Magic Lantern Raw is providing a smaller sensor area than the OG Bmpcc.
  24. Like
    tupp got a reaction from PannySVHS in Laughable Chris and Jordan video on medium format   
    The thing is, they don't looks the same.  The testers even acknowledge that fact on the video (but they dismiss it).
    Furthermore, they didn't actually set the cameras to look the same -- they set the cameras mathematically, according to the DOF formula, but they disregarded any inaccuracies in the aperture markings, and they apparently didn't match the effective location of the apertures.
     
    Well, there actually seems to be general differences in the DOF from optics designed for different formats.  The difference is not in the location of the front/back DOF -- the difference is in how the focus generally "falls off" within and without the DOF range.
    Unfortunately, like 99.99% of all such equivalency tests, we can't see how the focus falls off nor can we see the location of the front and back limits of the DOF range.  Here is what we see in the videos main test :
    SOFT FG OBJECT  >>  AIR  >>  SHARP SUBJECT  >>  AIR  >>  SOFT INTERMEDIATE BG OBJECT  >>  AIR  >>  SOFT OPAQUE BG WALL
    Most such tests don't include the foreground object nor the intermediate background object, so I will give them credit for adding those items.  However, to properly conduct any DOF or equivalency test there must be a continuous ruled surface (or continuous line of closely-spaced, uniform objects) that runs from the near foreground to the distant background.  Such a proper set up will reveal the locations of the front/back DOF extremes and how the focus falls-off at those points and elsewhere.
     
  25. Like
    tupp reacted to amweber21 in Laughable Chris and Jordan video on medium format   
    Sets the cameras to match each other, and surprised they look the same. One of the dumbest exercises I've seen in a while. Full frame is nothing special compared to M43 by the same logic.
    Thinking that DOF is the only reason to choose a sensor size is ridiculous. MF is often shot at the other end of the aperture spectrum where the detail, dynamic range, and physical size of the optical and sensor area provide an advantage in image fidelity, or retaining the DOF while stopping down where a lens preforms better.
    Alas, a typical Dpreview video.
×
×
  • Create New...