Jump to content

Taranis

Members
  • Content Count

    245
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Taranis


  1. 6 hours ago, jonpais said:

    Sorry, no touch focus. Funny, because just out of habit, that is the very first thing I tried to do. ?

    Sounds like something they could easily give us in an update though. I have my hopes up! :)


  2. 6 minutes ago, Django said:

     

    Indeed, and you'd think reviewers or even Fuji would mention this rather major issue with it's kit lens.. i didn't even know lenses had FW updates tbh.. speaking of which i found the following page rather cryptic (only a .DAT file and zero instructions?):

    http://www.fujifilm.com/support/digital_cameras/software/firmware/lens/xf18-55mm/download.html

     

     

    It's here: http://www.fujifilm.com/support/digital_cameras/software/firmware/lens/xf18-55mm/


  3. 2 minutes ago, SuperSet said:

    Has anyone done any tests with highlights turned down and shadows turned up to see if skin tones get funked? 

    This was the problem with my Panasonics and Slog. 

    Did you check this one yet?

     


  4. 1 minute ago, SuperSet said:

    Im sure it's already been mentioned but after watching another XT2 video this morning, I couldn't help but notice that the DR seemed to be more limited than my NX1 in Gamma DR mode.   Color looks banging but the highlight roll off is pretty harsh. 

    May Yuryev compared the X-T2 to the A6300 and found that F-Log has about the same DR as S-Log2. Which is more than what the NX1 provides in Gamma DR. What you see is probably the film emulation modes with unchanged highlight and shadows settings.


  5. 11 hours ago, Emanuel said:

    Really? I wouldn't be so sure of that... : P

    Even though the QC explanation route or because there's also a chance for a lens design flaw as much as reported with the Lumia 1020 model; as already written earlier in a previous post of mine along this thread BTW : ) I bet it's much related to the focus system present on Mavic;

    it's all about tap to focus design, I believe.

    Remember it's the first time you have it present alongside a drone.

    I believe that's why you're able to get it 'sharp edge to edge' throughout some other footage samples, as well. 

    But, as you wish, that said, I don't see a single reason why people are used to praise any-lovely-distortion when we simply mention the magic words 'anamorphic glass', despite to easily irritate themselves when a similar feature pops up in a Chinese piece of nouvelle technology designed and made somewhere in the other side of Pacific ; ) Shouldn't it be called cinematic in the same way? ;-)

    Yeah sure it could be called cinematic. But then make all units blur the edges. Or make them all sharp. Or allow me to control this "feature". Right now it's too accidental.


  6. 34 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

    Indeed. And this is one of the reasons why I like this device. No oversharpened edges. Makes it much more cinematic to my eyes, than the usual stuff I've usually seen from the other toys. As matter of fact, this is the first bird of this category to catch my attention.

    Yeah, but what you like is not a feature but some kind of lens flaw in a few devices. Image you get your copy and it is sharp edge to edge. The horror! :D


  7. 10 hours ago, kgv5 said:

    I have done some measurments of recording times with the newest build (with fine resolution settings)

    Everything tested with 24fps 10bit on 5d3 113, CF sandisk extreme pro 128gb 160mb/s. 1320 is the maximum vertical resolution for 5d3 when recording raw video.

    3168x1320 2.40:1 (1.81x crop) - 14 sec

    3104x1320 2.35:1 (1.85x crop) - 18 sec
    3104x1298 2.39:1 (1.85x crop) - 21 sec

    3008x1280 2.35:1 (1.91x crop) - 38 sec
    3008x1258 2.39:1 (1.91x crop) - 56 sec

    2976x1266 2.35:1 (1.93x crop) - 60 sec
    2976x1246 2.39:1 (1.93x crop) - 123 sec

    2880x1226 2.35:1 (2x crop) - continous

    And wider aspect ratios - just for fun:

    3520x1320 2.67:1 (1,63x crop) - 6 sec
    3296x1320 2.50:1 (1.74x crop) - 12 sec

    Now I would like to see the comparison: 5d3 vs 5d4 - raw 10bit 3008x1258 (quite usable recording time - 56 sec) vs MJPEG 8bit 4k. Not so much different crops - 1.91x 5d3 vs 1.7x 5d4. Similar bitrates. That would be very interesting.

    I'd love to see some outdoor shots with this high resolution.


  8. 2 hours ago, kgv5 said:

    I am testing this on 5d3 113. I am really shocked, with the old PC mlvfs (with pismo) 10 and 12 bits works like a breeze I am using resolve 12.5, sometimes only the first frames are corrupted but the rest is perfect. 10 and 12 bits recording is really a huge boost in recording times.

    The most important and useful modes for me now:

    1920x648 (1920x1080 16:9 after desqueeze) 50 fps 12bit - continous - (previously only 2,35:1 was continous)
    1920x648 (1920x1080 16:9 after desqueeze) 60 fps 10 bit - 25 sek

    1920x1080 37 fps 12 bit - 13 sek
                                  10 bit - continous

    2560x1320 25 fps (max vertical resolution available) 1.94:1 aspect - 10 bit - continous

    2880x1226 2,35:1 25fps 10bit  - over 2 minutes
                                  24 fps 10 bit - continous

    I checked those recordings in resolve and sometimes there are first and last frames corrupted but no problems during clips.

    Can you also do some DR comparison?


  9. 5 minutes ago, AndrewM said:

    Two comments:

    Moire: moire is a result of detail that has higher frequencies than the sensor array. It is exacerbated by the bayer array, which means you are sub sampling in odd ways. The only way to get rid of the possibility of moire is to filter out all those frequencies. But the stronger the filter that does this is, the more detail you lose. Sorry, math. Until someone invents a filter that breaks the rules of physics and cuts off frequencies instantly, there will be a detail/moire trade off. That is why what we should really be arguing for is Sony to use the switchable OLPF from the rx1 in more cameras. 

     

    Camera release schedules: we have a choice. We can have cameras on a consumer electronics schedule, which means dropping prices and more features for your money, but with rapidly decreasing residual values and something close to built-in obsolescence. Or we can have a model on which things cost more, innovate less, but retain value.  There are benefits to both, and I think we have all felt the pain of spending significant money on something that is no longer the new shiny sooner than we wish. I'd rather just have things as soon as they are ready, instead of waiting four years in the hope of them coming. Why are we complaining when a company delivers the features we've asked for?

    On a sidenote: Don't know if it was mentioned already but Fuji's X-Trans sensor was developed to help with moiré, it's not magic but still something.


  10. 1 hour ago, Cinegain said:

    Yeah, that says a lot, doesn't it. Honestly, Albert Fast has been doing great stuff with the G7! And it's an cheap as fuck camera that doesn't overheat! He uploaded this a few days ago:

     

    I like his videos but I'm starting to get sick of these "filmic" colors. [hijack] I liked his NX1 videos better. [/hijack]


  11. 11 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

    Those are some great results. I wonder why there's such a discrepancy with the rolling shutter results between these guys and the dvxuser guy

    There must be a difference in their measurement method, as all their results are lower than those of SamuelH:

    X-T2 UHD: 21ms vs 29.5ms
    A7SII UHD: 25ms vs 30.4ms
    A6300 UHD: 34ms vs 39ms

×
×
  • Create New...