TheRenaissanceMan

​Well actually, they used IBIS in their Alpha SLTs as well, but you have a point. I think people just want IS on all their lenses now, including the primes, and most I.S. lenses tend to be zooms. Canon's actually way ahead in that regard, and it seems Panasonic is only now catching on to what they figured out 3 years ago. 

And let's add the important caveat that this is all only in regard to video. I'm not sure how the new Sony FF IBIS does for stills, but I'm told it's pretty great. And I remember a topic from the Micro Four Thirds forum about why people chose the system. You'd think the most popular answer would be size and weight or the excellent lens library, but the overwhelming majority said they stayed in it for Olympus' 5-Axis stabilization. It had increased their hit rate by so much and allowed them to do tripod-esque exposures with nothing but the camera that they'd never go without it again. So certainly for the stills people there's still a place for IBIS. 

​Those qualities aren't purely based on sensor size, but the encoding, processing, and the chip the camera uses. Just because a background has less blur doesn't make it harsh--in fact, the SLR Magic lenses for MFT have bar none the nicest bokeh I've ever seen in lenses. All of them. 

​I don't know, Ebrahim. I have no problem getting super creamy bokeh at most distances with my SLR Magic 25mm at f/1.4-2.8, and that's on the Blackmagic Pocket. The background is less blurry, but it's still out of focus and not distracting. I'd also take a look at Mattias Burling's videos with the Pocket and Digital Bolex. Beautiful rendition of out of focus elements. 

Granted, that doesn't apply to the NX500. If it had an E-mount, no problem. Adapt M/43 or C-mount glass and go to town with this sensor size. But no lenses made for a 2.6x crop will fit on an NX mount. I understand how that change in aesthetic may bother some, but it's not a dealbreaker for me. No one in their right mind would use this as their A-cam anyway. I'm considering as my stills camera which I can also pull out when I want to do 4K or need a B-cam. For that, it definitely fits my needs. 

I don't think it's fair to slam Samsung for their motives when we have no way of knowing them. They may have discovered that the workload of 2.5K produced too much heat and had adverse effects on the longevity of the camera components. They have have had buffer or record time issues. We'll never know.

H.265 is the future, but it makes life difficult for the type of shooters eyeing this camera in the here and now. If it were an option alongside H.265, that would be one thing, but it's our only option. I don't like having to use dodgy third party applications to make my video usable, and all of them have different quirks and problems with their transcoding: Samsung's produces banding, ffmpeg changes the gamma and brightness, etc. So until it's addressed by major NLEs, I consider it a negative. 

I still don't consider the lack of a mic jack to be a total killer for enthusiasts. Most of them own Zooms or Tascams anyway, and lack of mic jack didn't kill the A6000's prospects by any means. 

​Thank you so much for keeping us up to date with your discoveries! I look forward to seeing your tests with VLog in 10-bit.

​And Panasonic! 

​I didn't quote you, and hence was not responding specifically to you. The dismissive tone also isn't necessary. But since you brought it up...

As to shooting in APS-C mode, I completely get it. They could shoot on better glass at higher t-stops with more manageable DOF that way, and the film still looks completely passable. 

I believe their intention was to make the film look otherworldly, but true to the naturalism of their imaginary setting (if that makes sense). Adding some LEDs would have added to the technical image quality, but detracted from my verisimilitude by looking artificially lit. I'm not sure if they utilized bounce from the moon, but if not, that definitely would have helped. I kind of enjoy that it looks a little "rough around the edges." It amplifies the paranoia of the piece by making me feel like the characters are being watched. Technical perfection isn't everything.

Bahahaha! Everyone raves about how the A7S opens up new creative possibilities, than slams the first real short to make use of its capabilities, even though some of you apparently paid so little attention that you didn't even know where the film takes place! I love it. Do you have any idea how hard Kubrick--hell, ANY filmmakers from before digital--would've creamed themselves over this? 

As a writer, a filmmaker, and a published critic, my opinion is that the short is good. The acting is good not great, the story is clear, concise, and kept me interested, it has a unique, ethereal look, and it the title left me with something to ponder. My friend, a very passionate physics major, insists that space is the next frontier, we'll die out eventually if we don't get out there, it could hold the answers to so many global problems, blah blah blah. But what if what's out there isn't our refuge at all? What if it's a trap, and we're the refuge for it?

That's not a lot of meat on its bones, but it's better than shaky street scenes, travel videos shot from the tour bus/boat, and endless boring landscape montages. 

It's important we give credit to the craft. After all, isn't that why we're all here?

​I hope so. M4/3 really needs another jump in sensor tech if they're going to stay in the game, and they need it within the next year. Whether it be Panasonic's rumored micro-prism system replacing their standard CFAs, organic sensor tech, or even something less exciting, like returning to 12MP sensors...idk. But they need something to get them in the spotlight again, because the value proposition against APS-C is fading, as is their advantage in lens selection.

​Absolutely! Even on Olympus footage, I see this weird...how to describe it...warping, undulating effect when walking around with a wide angle lens. It makes me physically ill to look at. And if the A7R II IBIS is jerkier than Olympus', as the A7 II samples I've seen indicate, then it'll be completely unusable below 40mm and inadvisable below 85.

IBIS sounds great in theory. Stabilization on every lens I own! But in the end, if it doesn't produce good results, it's just padding out the spec sheet.

​If you don't shoot wider than 40mm (which I rarely do), it's not that bad. Pop the 16mm pancake on there and go to work. There's always 1080p mode if you need a super shallow close-up or a quick wide shot. The color and contrast will match, so most audiences will never notice.

​It's quirky for sure, and easily fixable. Not sure why they didn't just put proper movie mode dials on these cameras if they're gunning so hard for our market. 

​Not exactly a "lethal problem" when a beginner can solve it with a $100 accessory, is it?

​Samsung may have run into other problems implementing that mode. We have no way of knowing if it's even possible with the final hardware package they settled on. That preproduction footage did look nice, though. 

​The cropped 4K image is actually really, really good. 4K of pixels gives about 2.5K of actual resolution, which is perfect for me--not to harsh, but gives you flexibility--and the rolling shutter is much improved over the NX1. Then again, I don't have the violent hatred for the 2.3-2.8x crop sensor look that some EOSHDers seem to have. 

​It certainly does, but I think that assessment is a little hyperbolic considering we only saw one very controlled video using that mode. I think the bigger obstacles to the NX500's adoption as THE cinema camera under $1000 is the codec (most people in this price range don't want the hassle of transcoding every single clip), the lack of headphone/mic jacks (for convenience and flexibility, not necessity), the inability to use peaking while recording 4K (apparently it uses too much processing power), and most importantly, the lack of a viewfinder. If they're going to go head to head with Sony on price, they need to deliver on the features too. 

Interesting. ​In my experience, it's a fair bit better than both the A7 and the 5D, but not quite up to snuff with the GX7/G7/A7S internal. Around the level of the A6000, which is perfectly fine for most work, especially if you have enough space to just step back a few paces and shoot 4K for the money shots. 

Indeed! I really like the atmosphere here, and many of the users like Ed and Mattias have taught me a lot. Sometimes I wish the forums were better organized--Panasonic and Blackmagic have subforums almost no one uses, and nothing for Sony or Samsung--but that also keeps the "trending topics" up front and fresh for anyone who visits. 

Thank you to everyone who makes this forum a wonderful place. Who answers ignorance with friendly information. Who responds to attacks by showing their results and staying out of the dogfights. Who go out of their way to help induct people into what can be an incredibly intimidating field. From the bottom of my heart, thank you all for being here.

​Yeah, the primaries look wonderful. Pure and natural. The DR looks nice too, but like the GH4's stills (which I have extensive experience with), that nice wide DR clips abruptly without much transition. It has enough DR to tease out a good roll off, but you have to do it yourself. The VLog appears to skew the highlights a bit yellow too, which isn't a look I love. Reminds me of the F3 and some of the other lower-end Sonys. 

Still, VLog is a huge upgrade to the stock GH4 image. If they released that firmware tonight, I'd order a GH4 tomorrow. Dead serious. 

My one dissatisfaction with the TCSTV footage is that despite the great DR, the highlights seem to clip pretty abruptly. Maybe a Promist filter would help soften the transition a bit.

Jordan did an amazing job with the VLog in the latest TCSTV episode. Colors, DR, and skin tones all look great--and it's just the internal 8-bit! 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ye9TrMw_nHI

​In what way was the "dramatic integrity" compromised by the lighting style?

And it only took a year and a half!

Great little short, though. I love sci-fi that leaves most of the actual tech to the imagination. Excellent work by the filmmakers and a really evocative, otherworldly look.

Still, this is an amazing option for hybrid shooting on the cheap. It may well be my next camera.

I'm most interested in this entry: "Larger sensor read out data size with improved FHD quality up to 60P"

Does that mean less line skipping for 1080P, or is it just for slow motion, or what?

​I've seen it produce visible banding in a lot of photos, particularly when recovering shadows, which is half the point of shooting Sony's sensors in the first place.

Also, Nikon offers a more compressed RAW format, but it also has a lossless 14-bit option if you want the best out of your camera. Sony does not. 

​Downscaling reduces the size and appearance of noise, but it doesn't stop it from producing more on the pixel level with smaller pixels. Also, many cameras do not read the sensor in the same way for downscaled video as they do for stills/full pixel readouts. I have no idea how it's different, but it is. My other guess is that the downscaling in camera is somehow less effective than downscaling stills in post because it has to do it so fast and with less processing power. 

​http://blog.mingthein.com/2015/01/19/review-sony-a7-mark-ii/

Second paragraph. 

If I want small file sizes for my photos, I'll shoot JPEG or buy a Nikon and use the 12-bit option. I won't buy a needlessly crippled Sony camera for stills.

​Certainly for stills, but that's not the case for video shooting. 

​Awesome work, Zach! How did the 750 perform in the field? Was the battery life adequate? How were the ergonomics? Any problems nailing focus without peaking or anything? 

1&3 A7S, 2&4 A6K? Maybe?

I've only used the GH4 twice, but my Extreme Plus 45MBps/60MBps cards held up just fine with no errors and are a fair bit cheaper than the Extreme Pro.

​But still not good enough for most productions, which makes it pretty irrelevant and by no means NX1-beating overall.

​My understanding was that the NX1 beat it until ISO 3200, at which point they were about on par.

A larger sensor, all else being equal, will be better in low light. But all else is not equal. The GH4 is packing 16MP compared to the NX1's 28. In fact, their pixel pitch is nearly identical. A sensor with the same tech but less pixels would crush the GH4, but that incredible stills resolution comes with a noise penalty for video.