Don Kotlos

The optimal test would be to record with a HLG instead of an SLOG with an external recorder at either 8 or 10bit. SLOG curves compress midtones more than HLG curves, whereas the opposite is true for the highlights. So shooting 8bit HLG should produce better results than shooting 8bit SLOG. The test with the SLOG should be the upper limit of any differences in the bit depth. Now how much visually it makes a difference for HDR delivery I couldn't tell since I don't have a HDR monitor   

I think here you see the problems of both bitrate and bit depth with slog. The title is a bit confusing since this does not test the HLG directly. I would expect the differences between 8bit & 10bit HLG to be smaller. 

2 hours ago, jonpais said:

No proof it’s any better than mirrorless when it comes to dust.

Actually I have much worse experience with dust & DSLRs than I had with mirrorless. Most people don't realize that dust enters the space between the mount and the sensor no matter whether there is a mirror or not. These dust particles will then go on the sensor and in the case of DSLRs can also go to the mirror, the ground glass &  the AF sensor. Cleaning the DSLR is NO FUN and very hard to do when not on top of a clean desk. The flange distance has nothing to do with the dust or any harm to the sensor, if anything it makes cleaning it much easier. You can easily spot the dust particles and remove them with the tip of a cleaning cloth in a matter of seconds while hand holding the camera. No way you can do that with the DSLR. This whole argument sounds like it is coming from people with very little experience with both systems. If people actually searched around they would find that this is a myth and actual users report the opposite.

Here is an example: https://photographylife.com/mirrorless-vs-dslr

"Movement of Air: as the mirror flips up and down, it moves plenty of air inside the camera chamber. And with air, it also moves dust and other debris around, which eventually ends up on the camera sensor. Some people argue that their DSLR cameras are better suited for changing lenses than mirrorless cameras, because there is a mirror between the sensor and the mount. There might be some truth to that. However, what happens with that dust after the mirror moves inside the chamber? All that dust will obviously circulate inside the chamber. In my experience shooting with a number of different mirrorless cameras, I found them to be actually less prone to dust than any of my DSLRs."

That is my experience as well and I have been using these systems for years. 

8 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Its the TechArt Pro adapter that intrigues me for the Sony mount cameras.

AF for any manual lens you can get a Leica M adapter for (i.e. all of them!) is pretty amazing.

It even works with modern AF Nikon G lenses if you have an M adapter with aperture control.

 

I am amazed of how fast it appears to be. It feels like it is fake!

On 3/13/2018 at 1:36 PM, dbp said:

This has been my number one fear of Sony cameras. Admittedly, it's more based on what I've heard than what I've personally experienced. Edited one wedding where the second shooter had an A7S, that's the extent of me working with the footage. It was a bit lacklustre, color wise.

Honestly, I've never been terribly impressed with Panasonic's color either, so to take a step even further back in that category is not enticing.

In my experience the A7rii had very good color and shooting with A7riii I find it has improved even more and I am guessing the A7iii as well. The a7s had the worst color of all the A series but the new cameras are miles better. 

The fact is that with picture profiles you can adjust the colors to your liking, something you can't do with any of the other consumer cameras. Imagine that one of the reasons I am unwilling to leave my Sony is the great color. Take it from an actual user. 

If you have the GH4 and you find that it does not give you the still performance you need, then my suggestion would be the A7III. It offers amazing quality both in stills and video, very long battery life and AF performance.

 The GH5/s would be my obvious suggestion but the stills are not much better than with the GH4. 

2 hours ago, jonpais said:

I’m not buying the ‘videoish’ argument at all, at least until those repeating this nonsense can share better, more cinematic work of their own than the two extraordinary examples below. Incidentally, the boxing clip was shot entirely handheld, no stabilization. Both videos benefit from the filmmakers’ uncustomary understanding of light, location, composition, their choice of optically outstanding lenses and excellent grading that enhances the atmosphere and supports the story. Both also use V-Log for the utmost flexibility in post. As far as pricing and branding go, I’ve got no problem with either the name or paying $2,500 for such an incredibly versatile camera as the GH5s.

I also believe GH5s is the best choice for professional videographers at this price point at the moment. $2500 is a great price. I might not be the target market since I need/want IBIS and PDAF, but that doesn't change fact that it is an amazing camera. All the footage that I have seen has great colors without any of the typical digital artifacts. Also along with the GH5 they have one of the best 1080p out there. High bitrate intra frame codec, downsampled from 4K with minimal rolling shutter. 

3 hours ago, jonpais said:

Lenses don’t have to cost a fortune. I’m picking a few full frame Sigma lenses.

Yeah sigmas sound good. With the a7riii I am using AF even more so the native lenses are great, but I also have a bunch of Nikon manual lenses. That is the beauty of the FE mount, you can adapt any full frame lens. For video, you can find excellent MF glass very cheap. 

Another good choice for video are the slrmagic cine lenses. I consider the 35mm f/1.2 FE @ $300 a bargain. 

Also, the S35 mode basically doubles your lenses. For example, the tiny loxia 35mm coupled with the clear zoom of A7rii gave me a 35-100mm range at f/2. That is crazy. With A7riii the clear zoom was reduced from 2x to 1.5x but I am not sure about the A7iii. 

8 minutes ago, Trek of Joy said:

That's always such a numbnut argument from the anti-video crowd. Improvements on the video side have a significant impact on stills shooting as well. I really don't understand how the stills-only farts can't see that. And more users benefits everyone in the system.

I am guessing that once cameras support 24fps RAW shooting video & photo crowds will have to unite by definition  

Great work!

It reminded me the La Soufrière from Herzog. Not only because of the absence of the expected sublime event but also human nature. Wikipedia describes it nicely: 

"Driven by either madness or complete harmony with nature, the subjects of Herzog's films exemplify life at its most spiritually extreme. The people who remained on the island had accepted their fate, and had given their lives to God. "

If you don't care about 4K while blogging then the M50 looks a very decent camera (I never understood the need to see a babbling face in 4K  )

In 4K other than the crop and lack of dual focus, there is massive rolling shutter that would make it useless for blogging anyways. Good thing is that you still have the 4K option for deep DoF static shots/interviews etc... 

9 minutes ago, KitaCam said:

Can someone advice on a quick method for uploading sample slow motion footage other than linking to YT or Vimeo etc. I've tried the direct upload here but failed with a file < 200MB. Perhaps there's a file size limit here? Cheers..

Wetransfer

Mediafire

Hightail

41 minutes ago, Simon Young said:

Just picked up my A7III and can confirm the flickering barcode artifacts when recording in full frame 4k. Oddly enough they don't appear in the S35 mode. Will return it tomorrow. It seems to be easily fixable with firmware though. It's a shame because the image is lovely otherwise and the camera feels snappy and responsive, autofocus is great.

Thanks, now I can take one thing out of the possible scenaria 

1) Use the barcode to identify early leaks 

2) They realized what a monster they created and intentionally crippled it to save A9, A7riii & A7sII

3) Sony f*cked up. 

4) Fuji did it. 

13 minutes ago, Renaud said:

Both actually , but stronger issue with apsc lenses. 

I just tried the S35 mode with two full frame lenses and it looks fine. No hunting whatsoever. So it must be with the APSc lenses only or something with the settings.

Is it the apsc lenses or the apsc mode?

FYI Sony has included barcoding within the video of A7III. 

At least three examples have it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlUHz9KucF0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJXM0T1otdc&t=42s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9zvL8jlhag&t=34s

I wouldn't rush to buy this camera until these issues have been fixed with some updated firmware. Who knows maybe the shipped camera does not have this. 

I also believe that an A7iii would work great for FF 4K with AF. A7rII could work as well, but I would avoid it since you might go into moire issues with fabrics in FF mode. 

From metabones:

Quote

How does Speed Booster® affect the depth-of-field?

The short answer is Speed Booster® on an APS-C sensor gives essentially the same depth-of-field effect as if a full-frame camera body were used.

The long answer is complicated. If we are referring to depth-of-field in the mathematical sense, that depends on the aperture, magnification and circle of confusion (CoC). Magnification in turn depends on distance and focal length. The 50mm lens now becomes a 35mm lens which behaves very differently in terms of perspective. The question is, do we still keep the distance the same? Should the CoC be kept the same? There are many missing variables we need to choose and fill-in before we could get a meaningful answer. When people claim Speed Booster® does not change the depth-of-field, they usually neglect to state the implicit assumption that the distance is kept the same (thereby changing the object size) and the CoC is kept the same. The same logic would lead to the conclusion that an APS-C camera has the same depth-of-field as a full-frame camera, too, which under the same implicit assumptions is mathematically true (the depth-of-field formula is format-size-agnostic, after all), but with which many people would disagree from practical experience.

However, when most people ask about depth-of-field, they are not interested in mathematics, but rather, they are after a certain kind of shallow depth-of-field "look". If this is the case, the short answer above applies.

19 hours ago, Attila Bakos said:

The same music video shot on the GH5 and the X-H1. The GH5 had some manual lens and it's either soft or the focusing is not perfect, so try to focus on color only.

Which one do you prefer? I like the colors of the X-H1 much better.

I don't understand why they went through so much trouble but did not bother to WB accurately for both cameras. 

I agree that the X-H1 looks better but that is probably only because in GH5 there is a significant shift towards green tint whereas the X-H1 is slightly towards magenta. 

10 minutes ago, Hitfabryk said:

Are you sure of that? Mine does not

If you don't use "Sunny weather" then it does not   This is how I was using it as well in order not to be annoyed every-time I started recording. In sunny weather the new non-dimmable screens are actually really useful. 

Yeah battery life is definitely not a problem with the new Z batteries. 3 of them would be enough to finish a short .

But I still prefer the Fuji/Nikon solution mainly because it is far easier to remove the grip without having to take the battery holder out of the grip, remove one battery, stick it into the camera, remove the battery door from the grip & attach it to the camera. And then do all that to put the grip back on. I don't take the grip off that often but it is a fairly involved process. 

Both batteries are in the grip. For some strange reason sony uses a fancy connection that is located inside the battery compartment of the camera. My guess is that there is no space left on the bottom of the body . There is no space even for weather sealing

An XC with an EF-M mount/APSC sensor would be indeed very good. I am sure it is going to cost at least as much as the XC15 but it will still be a great seller. A mini C line. 

Nice review @DaveAltizer

34 minutes ago, Mokara said:

Lol, that picture pretty much proves my point. That is equipment which clearly is designed for a different sort of person than the individual holding it.

The only thing that this picture "proves" (coupled with your comment) is your bias towards women. 

I suggest you take the Gender-Career implicit association test found here: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

The same could be said for at least enabling 10-bit with an external recorder, no? 

At least there you could argue that depends on the capability of the hardware, whereas the recording limit is mostly an artificial limitation of the firmware due to licensing (if you exclude overheating issues like with the X-T2/X-H1/RX100V). 

Can't be sure if this is the case of course, but I believe for example that Fuji at least would love to include a 10bit output if it was supported by their hardware.