hyalinejim

Hmmm... looks like data rate for 422 1080p 25fps is quite low at 123mbps. That could be a really nice alternative to All-I

51 minutes ago, DWX said:

the R5 & Z9

Just curious, what does the R5 do for you that the Z9 can't?

8 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

But to where??

If it was in stock and if money was no object I guess the Z9 would be an almost perfect camera. But those are two big ifs, especially the second one 😆

@kye is absolutely right and I get nervous whenever I'm shooting for somebody else and have to hand over all my footage because they'll see all the shit shots that normally never see the light of day!

9 hours ago, Avenger 2.0 said:

Just bought myself a 5D3 with 300k clicks and some battery/memory cards for just €200 😎

Wow! I still use a 5D3 for stills. Nothing wrong with it as long as you don't underexpose.

3 hours ago, Mmmbeats said:

There is a possibility that I missed focus on the 1080 Pixel / Pixel shot

Yes I think it's focused more on the tree than the letter box. The detail on the tree looks pretty good though.

Presumably the 1080 pixel-pixel will be identical to the center 50% crop of the 4K pixel-pixel, which looks all right. It's worth considering that the loss in sharpness must be attributable to some degree to the optics and a usable result might be garnered from a razor sharp lens. I think if I really needed a shot of something very far away and didn't have a long enough lens then I would use 1080 pixel-pixel.

1 minute ago, SRV1981 said:

Would MP make a difference in high shutter speed sports photography if not cropping in?

I can't see how it would in an of itself. However, a camera with lower MP is more likely to be older so might have a slower burst rate than a newer camera does.

Absolutely 12MP may well be enough depending on what you want it for. I even did a project during lockdown where I sent 6MP cameras to people and asked them to take self portraits which I then cropped and THAT was enough resolution for Instagram.

We have all this resolution and then we end up looking at pics not too much bigger than a postage stamp!

That's pretty ouchy for the Olympus colour. Is it still in its native log gamut or has it been converted to Rec709?

1 hour ago, Mmmbeats said:

I'm using mainly the old GH5 batteries

Do you find that they last about as long as the new GH6 battery? I probably will only need the basic functions so there's little point in wasting money on new batteries if my old ones will do the trick.

1 hour ago, Mmmbeats said:

Righto

Thanks for these, will pixel peep later!

On 6/4/2022 at 11:45 PM, Owlgreen said:

The footage looks damned good to me

Yes, the colours at golden hour are lovely here and the dynamic range and colour reproduction seems good under the harsh NZ midday light (seriously, I've just returned from over a year of living in Auckland and the light in New Zealand in the daytime is so unforgiving. My theory is that it's because there are fewer atmospheric pollutants compared to Europe, where I'm from,  that give a hazier diffused effect that is actually quite pleasant!)

And this locked off shot has lovely colour - nice skintones, nice greens.

Rolling shutter performance looked great in the video but I didn't see too much use of IBIS lol!

I think this would be a great camera but it would take a bit more convincing for me to switch from Panny M43 to Fuji.

10 minutes ago, Mmmbeats said:

I'll do it later today (UK time).  It's really the first day I've had with any semblance of time sanity for quite a while.  Thankfully I've been getting some exciting but demanding jobs all in a row lately.

No worries if you're too busy or just want to relax. I'm happy enough based on the review I referenced earlier that the 1080 is good. I plan on picking one up on Tuesday and will do a comparison with the GH5 in 4K and HD then as I'm sure @kye and @mercer will be interested in the results

44 minutes ago, Brian Williams said:

Also- and I realize I may be completely wrong here- do any stores have the camera yet?

There's a thread in the Fuji forum where three people describe their experience of trying a pre-production unit in-store. Now, one of those people is a dpreview mod. If that's trolling then I'll have to disagree with @MrSMW and say that dpreview is the site that has the higher class of troll 🤣

45 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

Caveat emptor indeed regarding anything any DP Review poster posts

Sure, there's a lot of noise as there is in any online space, not least here. But does that mean we should disregard every contribution ever made on a given forum? Well, not if we have even a moderate capacity to separate the signal from the noise.

Caveat emptor: from a dpreview poster who got to try the camera in-store...

"The thing legit locked up on me and required a battery pull five times inside of a half hour with it."

"The worse news, and why you don't see any of the reviews that lean positive about the AF actually show video results. It's as bad as ever. Pulsing and hyper actively finding faces in doorways just as bad as the XT4 did. It's like the box you see on the screen is doing something completely different than what's actually recording. At F5.6 like most the positive reviews use, it's pretty confident but holy smokes even at 2.8 with the brick this thing was all over the place."

I hadn't seen Richard Wong's lemgthy review which is very in depth. It looks like 1080 is good on the GH6.

One other interesting finding is that rolling shutter is massively reduced in 4k 120, which might be useful for certain situations, although that frame rate comes with its own limitations, I believe.

And face tracking autofocus seems very usable.

1 hour ago, SRV1981 said:

highlight roll-off

I agree with @kye that highlight roll-off, when shooting log, is dependent on the tone curve applied/created in grading.

In addition to this point it's worth considering that if your camera doesn't have enough stops above middle grey to capture the highlight information you're interested in retaining, you have the option of deliberately underexposing your footage to preserve the highlights and boosting the exposure in post - at the expense of increased shadow noise.

12 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

so much of what I see from those cameras (GH6/S5, etc.) looks like video to me and what I am seeing on a C70/FX3 looks more cinema-like.

It's partly because, on average, the people using the expensive cams are "better" at everything involved in making an image than those using the cheaper ones.

When I was starting out with still photography about 15 years ago I assumed that top of the line Canon cameras (1d, 5d) had image quality that was streets ahead of the bottom of the range (Rebels). While they were slightly better, of course, the real difference was due to the fact that I was looking at the work of professional users versus hobbyists.

Another good example is to compare Olan Collardy's marketing video for the GH6 versus the BTS vid, also shot on the GH6. One looks great and the other looks meh. Same camera, different users.

On 5/19/2022 at 3:18 PM, Mmmbeats said:

I did follow up on shooting some quick test shots at 1080p

@Mmmbeats or anyone else who has a GH6. Would it be possible to do one or the other of these quick tests as there is no hard evidence anywhere that I can find about GH6 1080 quality.

1. Shoot the same scene on a tripod comparing GH6 4k with GH6 1080 and upload an extracted still from each

OR

2. Shoot the same scene on a tripod comparing GH6 1080 with GH5 1080 and upload an extracted still from each

I am very close to buying a GH6 but if the 1080 is not good then I don't want it. I'd love to see the evidence with my own eyes before I make the purchase. 

I'll be eternally grateful if someone could take 15 minutes out of their day to do this.

3 hours ago, FHDcrew said:

Oversampled 1080 directly is a severely underrated workflow in my opinion.

There are at least two other users here, @kye and I, who agree with you.

This BTS is interesting

This is not exactly back on topic but semi-related I guess. When sorting by new for R7 videos on YouTube I keep seeing a bunch of what I guess are fake comparison videos featuring slightly differently processed stills purportedly from two different cameras. There are a few accounts that do this, using the same template, and views have been racking up over the last few days. Is this a thing now? It looks like AI or bot created content.

1 hour ago, kye said:

making a camera neutral and accurate

I don't know if anyone here actually wants that. Accurate colour looks all right in reality but in a digital image it looks pretty poor to me. The only time I want accurate colour is in a reproduction scenario; products, artwork etc. The rest of the time I want a digital image to be transformative - to improve upon reality.

Ha ha, there's a comment on the cinematographer's Insta (Olan Collardy)

"It's the wizard, not the wand"

I'm going to try the remember that one!

2 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

Some splendid colour. They went a bit overboard with grading, especially the red cloth

I totally agree. I'm travelling between continents at the moment and don't have access to a calibrated screen but on my phone it looks great.

The reds thing is interesting. I don't mind a certain amount of oversaturation of reds (you get this with classic Canon and also with Noritsu film scans) as it contributes a lot to vivacious skintones, which we also see here. But if it were me grading this I would have tried to pull the suit back a little bit using masks.

It's interesting to see forest scenes here. I often think Panasonic fails spectacularly with the greens and greys of woodland scenes, making everything look quite drab both in stills and video. It's not as pronounced in this vid but I still see a hint of it, I think. 

Overall a great video from a visual standpoint and miles away from the usual dross that gets posted using the standard profiles or VLog + Pana lut. It would be interesting to know which lut they used as a starting point for the grade.