TheRenaissanceMan

0_0

You should seriously run a service. 

Battery life is probably shit as well, especially compared to the GH4, NX1, C100, and even the D750.

I need to get in touch with some Swedes...

I saw them selling used for around $1800-$2000 immediately after release. Used value on cameras ain't what it used to be. 

200mbps 10-bit is a far cry from uncompressed 14-bit DNG for file sizes and workflow. 

It seems to me with storage prices plunging lower and lower, double the files sizes for quadruple the tonal precision seems like a fair middle ground between 8-bit 4:2:0 and uncompressed Godzilla files. It's not "the holy grail"--no one said that but you--but it is a noticeable increase in quality. Funny how you put down the importance of higher color depth after spending an entire article beating on the NX1 for not being as good with color as your 4:2:2 camera. 

My money is on Samsung or Panasonic. The other important question is whoever puts a full sized HDMI out on their body. No, really. I think a lot of users don't even consider the 10-bit of the GH4 because micro HDMI is so breakable and easy to slip out during a take.

Definitely purple flare on the Tokina, but I see that with a lot of older lenses.

If you have time, I would love to see a comparison between the 4K and 1080p modes, as well as an over and under exposure recovery test, rolling shutter test, DR test (just a super contrasty scene, like a dark interior with a bright window) and a low light comparison, all on both 4K and 1080p. 

I think I read somewhere that, like contrast, setting sharpness too far down causes problems. Maybe you could try a few sharpness settings and see what happens. I agree the colours look a little strange, but that may be down to the custom profile. Maybe you could do another video running through all the picture profiles with the same contrast/saturation/sharpness/NR settings so we can see what gives the best look. I like what I've seen of Standard, but there's very little out there to compare it to.

Great work on the shoot, though! Backlit trees are a good stress test for the codec and DR, which both look solid.

...what?

Crushed "blacker than black" is an important part of the film look. When the light falls off in film, it drops off fast and hard into inky blackness. Go watch any great movie shot on film and you'll see what I'm talking about. 

Murky grey-black screams hipster video, and "don't crush the shadows" has always been a broadcast mantra with nothing at all to do with narrative filmmaking. 

 Um...no...

If you're willing to accept a narrow viewing angle, they can get damn close. Besides, consumer OLED is only a couple years off, and comes with the benefits of power efficiency, smaller size, larger color gamuts, and perfect viewing angles. 

Regardless, there's a difference between the look of a display without perfect black levels and grading your video so badly that black becomes middle grey.

If the A7S and other low-end Sonys had SLOG3 and SGamut3.cine, I don't think we'd see these huge problems with color. Tonal precision would remain low, but at least with the new SGamut we'd have the option of the Type A Look Profile in Resolve that is specifically designed to emulate the Alexa's color. 

Huh. I wonder how that latitude/noise stacks up in FF 4K mode. 

 Sad as I am to see it go, most people don't care. That's why they discontinued it.

Ah...must've gone over my head. You're too smart for me.

So you're saying that no matter what compression scheme we use, right around 12 stops of dynamic range is where 8-bit starts to show its weakness? 

Someone on another forum (I forget which) says they managed to find the 20mm pancake, 30mm pancake, and 45mm for less than $400 combined. Even as a second system, $750 total for that kit is amazing value for what you get.

I'm planning to sell my EOS M and pick one of these up soon. While it'll mainly be used with my Canon FDs and Minolta Rokkors, I will for sure be buying the 30mm f/2. It's a tiny pancake with great image quality, a wide aperture, and a nice versatile focal length. The best part: You can grab them used for less than $200. 

If you're a hybrid shooter, why the hell not?

It isn't. That's why they make text charts like the Xyla. http://www.provideocoalition.com/cameras_sony_fs700_dynamic_range_presentation

Wow, that's really cool! 

...but wasn't this topic about 8-bit 4:20 and 4:2:2 camera footage shot on physical cameras? I think we all understand that 8-bit can work very well for digital creations and is still the default delivery method, but the issue is whether it's an adequate acquisition bit depth for high dynamic range LOG-encoded footage. 

I've heard you shouldn't dial your contrast lower than -5 or -6 or it'll ruin your colors without giving you any more DR. H.265 is just too compressed for that. 

So they finally found a use for that sensor. Wow. I could see this having some cool applications in documentaries, or even a specialty rental for a feature. Very interested to see more footage from this thing. 

For stills, it's surprisingly good at 3200. For video, best sticking to the native ISO in SLog. 

Was anyone denying that a good sensor is the first step in achieving good image quality in video quality? No? Cool. 

Was anyone denying that some 8-bit codecs can be pushed more than other 8-bit codecs? No? Cool. 

Are people saying that higher bit depth is essential to getting peak image quality out of LOG files originally designed for 10-bit, like S-LOG? Yes. Posting examples of 8-bit C-Log footage proves nothing, because it's a much less steep faux-log designed for lower bit-depth cameras. So let's focus on some non-Canon examples. 

In the pro video division, at least, they do work with professional cinematographers on suggestions and feedback. Look at the work they've done with Art Adams. He asks for it, they provide it. He suggests it, they design it. They're incredibly responsive. 

On the stills side, I haven't seen nearly as much of that. Battery life is still a massive problem for most professionals, as is the lack of adequate professional support and lossy RAW compression. Problems with prosumer video are either ignored or aren't addressed until much later, when they're almost ready to replace those models anyway. 

It's fun to be black and white about these things, but there's a reason high-end cinematographers require Prores HQ at an absolute minimum. 

Also, why's everyone bashing the BMPC? It's not great in low light, but the highlight rolloff is actually really nice. 

Andrew: There's a slope of diminishing returns going on. 14 bit to 16 bit is a pretty small difference, 14 bit to 12 bit is noticeable but not huge, 12 bit to 10 bit is a drop in quality but acceptable if you want efficiency, and 10-bit to 8-bit is absolutely huge. 

If these distinctions didn't matter at all, why would professional cameras offer 12-16 bit recording? If they could get the same results with less back end, don't you think they would? How can you argue against the importance of color depth when you just spent an entire article railing against a 4:2:0 camera for not matching up against the colors of your 8-bit 4:2:2 camera? How can you argue against the importance of bit depth when you spend so much time talking about LOG profiles, which are designed for the sole purpose of imitating the same tonal precision as larger-bit footage in a smaller container? 

I'm not denying you your point of view. If you think 8-bit is awesome, okay. But it's important for a reviewer with your level of clout to be clear about their priorities and thought process, as that informs all your conclusions. Sometimes it feels like you've changed your mind about fundamental things without telling anyone, which makes your thought process as a critic a little inconsistent and tough to follow. 

Sorry if this comes across as rude or over-critical, because I don't mean to be. I've written as a film critic for a few years and I know it can be a struggle to get people on board with your train of thought. But there's an important difference between "10-bit doesn't matter" and "10-bit is nice, but I don't think we need it. Here's why."

Just a matter of clarity.

Cheers.

Full frame vs APS-C mode.

High ISO.

Rolling shutter.
Color rendering in all available color matrices.

Resolution.

Over/under exposure test. See how the sensor/codec responds to bringing up underexposed footage and bringing down overexposed footage. 

Highlight/shadow rolloff. See how the camera renders a normally exposed scene with one or two very dark shadows and another with one or two bright highlights.