BenEricson

On 4/29/2021 at 1:43 AM, ade towell said:

On these crazy DR claims (Canon aren't the only ones), when does this becomes false advertising? I start to lose respect for companies when they spin these figures, at some point they should be made accountable. If Arri has 14 stops of useable DR and the market leader (Arri don't feel the need to mislead), how do the others get away with their false claims?

Canon claims 15 stops and the sun still renders out a disgusting clipped out BLOB if you shoot towards it. On film, it would be a tint pin point. Black Magic Pocket 6K same story. Immediately looks cheap when you point it towards a bright light source. 

I would like to believe they will figure out how to get more highlight detail, but I really doubt it.

If anyone is interested, I bought the RawLite OLPF filter but it took so long to ship, that I ended up buying a pocket that already had one installed... (took over a month to arrive.) If anyone is interested, I will give you a deal. Unopened. I paid 390 shipped.

https://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/53711-olpf-for-og-bmpcc-or-bmmcc-32500/

2 hours ago, herein2020 said:

I do the same. I know everyone loves the shallow DOF look for interviews, but I'd rather give up a little of that than risk AF. I tend to stick around the F2.8 or F3.5 mark when I'm shooting interviews to give me some wiggle room. My main focus is getting the subject as far away from the background as possible and if that's just not possible then its just not going to be as out of focus.

I'll push it to f2.8 on a 70 - 200 tight or f2 on a 50mm on wide in manual mode. Of course you need to monitor the camera, but with a decent monitor this isn't a huge problem. f/1.8 on a full frame sensor is a whole different story. 

13 hours ago, EphraimP said:

Without autofocus reliable enough for a talking head interview, internal NDs and XLR ports, Panny cameras aren't in the ballpark for me. I already have an X-T3 and an X-T4, so I don't have any need for another hybrid mirrorless system. I'll be checking out the C70 in about a week or two. We shall see.

I'm just curious... Why use auto focus for a talking head interview? I've shot 100s of interviews with the C300 Mkii for years and now the C70. I would never do that, simply for the fact that it can be unreliable. I suppose if you're shooting on a gimbal or the person is moving around, or a unmanned camera, but a traditional interview I always have focus on manual. 

I could never work without NDs or XLR though. Kind of the number one selling point with the C70.

30 minutes ago, EphraimP said:

I do have a Ronin-S and I know you can balance the C70 on it. I tend to like the hand held look for doc videos over a hyper smooth gimbal look.

I'm with ya. This is why I would vote for the C300 Mkii or C300 Mkiii if you're doing a lot of handheld work. The weight of the camera, coupled with a view finder, makes for smooth handheld footage. 

It all depends. The Internal IS on the Canon is only okay to me. I would probably never risk using it on a paid job, maybe to fake a tripod shot in a pinch, but I couldn't imagine shooting that over an IS lens or choosing to warp stabilize in post.

2 hours ago, EphraimP said:

Sorry.

Nah, what I'll probably do is buy the C70 on a 0%, 1 year payoff plan (thank you B&H!) and write the camera off against the taxes for my LLC. Nothing wrong with leveraging other people's capital to grow the business. If I decide to sell it in a year or two, doesn't look like used prices are dropping fast. 

Canon Dealer's will all do 0% APR / 2 Year.

I own the C70. Used it on a job the other day. The camera is solid. I think the price is fair for the image quality you get. If I wasn't trying to use it on a gimbal and shot a ton of handheld, I might consider a used C300 Mkii package for peanuts or a C300 Mkiii.

8 hours ago, kye said:

The Laowa 7.5mm MFT lens isn't that much larger than the 14mm Panny lens, and is 22mm FF equivalent, so is nice and wide.  It's a nice lens too.

Good call. It also is very wide but still has threads for an ND filter.

3 hours ago, alvaromedina said:

This video was shot entirely with the pocket and the panny 14mm 2.5...the exposure and the color grading sometimes is really bad, but overall I really like the organic texture it has, like old indie feature films.

Beautiful. I wouldn't say anything in that looks bad. It all looks great to me. From the first shot the image just feels right. 

Curious how your setup is rigged? I might need to pick up one of those lenses. I wish they made a pancake 8mm. I know there's a 10mm SLR Magic. Maybe a little heavy though.

Visually really cool. The subject is super interesting. Wasn't even thinking about the gear.

I would love to see more shots with a deeper DOF to see detail around the garden. I guess more wide shots in general and less contrast. I also thought the bright red modern car felt a little out of place, but maybe the juxtaposition is interesting. The piece has such a nice timeless feel and place without it.

Look forward to seeing the full length doc!

1 hour ago, HockeyFan12 said:

Oddly though I felt C300 Mk II was a step down for color from C300 Mk 1, F5 was a step down from F3, etc. but C300 Mk III looks like an improvement and Venice color is excellent, FX6 looks promising too but yet to work with it. So we might be heading back in the right direction.

I own the C70 (Same Sensor.) I think the potential for nice color is definitely there. Really clean sensor. The color work flow Canon has provided is really terrible though. The LUTs are 6 years old and were built for the original C300 Mkii. Nothing has been updated. The LUT pack for C70 even includes LUTs for gamma profiles that no longer exist. (Clog2 / BT.709)

I think at this point, when a cell phone can shoot nice photos and videos, the camera manufactures really should be focusing on a solid post work flow that produces beautiful, consistent results or they will lose customers. 

1 minute ago, HockeyFan12 said:

But it is weird, one knock against the S1 is the GHX series has better skin tones for some reason imo...

I think the color in general has always suffered as the light sensitivity gets better. Look at the original Black Magic Pocket, Digital Bolex, Arri Alexa. None of the those are lowlight cameras but in the right light they look really really good.

10 hours ago, austinchimp said:

One of the things I'm struck by when I watch old movies shot on film - from the 70s through to the 90s - is how natural and beautiful everything looks, before every shadow had to be dark blue and every skin tone had to be sunburnt orange or desaturated grey.

Yeah, those Rec709 grades with like 7 or 8 stops of dynamic range look so rich and vibrant. Film print style. Even 35mm film shot right now has a lot less punch than it used to. 

I always though the baked in profiles on the C300 Mkii or maybe the 1DC or 1DX look really really nice. Yes, you have to be more intentional with your exposing but the results are really nice.

Not all log footage is the same though. Flat film scans are incredibly easy to grade. You don't need any LUTs, just a standard correction will look really good and natural. 

6 hours ago, austinchimp said:

Wow Panasonic really nailed colour back then. When I look at this and the colour from the 5Dmkii I have to wonder what the hell happened since then? Maybe my negative perception of colour in consumer cams 2014-2020ish mostly comes from Sony dominance and the pandora's box of giving S-Log to the masses.

Nah, it's pretty bad. Do a search for even Canon C70 footage. Nothing you can find will look this good. There's tons of flat looking footage, but almost nothing with a standard balanced REC709 grade. The C300 Mkii looked good to me as well. One of the easiest cameras to get beautiful skin tone out of.

9 minutes ago, TomTheDP said:

Interesting, the film still looks so nice in the highlights though I am sure the Pocket could as well with different grading.

You'd have to under expose the pocket quite a bit to get a perfect circle like that. Most digital cameras will produce a blob, rather than the clean circle film produces, (unless you're shooting a silhouette.) RAW would probably get you closer. I always use ProRes on the bmpcc. 

On 3/26/2021 at 6:52 PM, kye said:

I'm curious what image characteristics you prefer from the Micro over the A7S3?

I watched Potatojets video on the FX3 and was particularly impressed by the DR and handling of highlights in the sunset scene where he was backlit and had the sun in shot:

For me it is the way the pocket or the micro handles saturation on the top end. The example above is going to pure white in the highlights. The sun is golden at sunset.

Here is a shot I took on the pocket a few years back, the second photo is Kodak 250d from a project I did last year. The 16mm film really has no clipping point in the highlights, so of course it looks better, but that characteristic of being able to easily push saturation in the highlights is there in the pocket as well. The version with contrast was graded by a colorist. Images are subject, but I would rather let the light fall naturally than create some sort of HDR looking image.

This is why A/B comparisons are pointless and often tailored to fit the narrative. If you do something in the real world like shoot directly into the sun, this is what you get. 

On 3/26/2021 at 1:08 AM, tupp said:

Your rig reminds me of @ZEEK's EOSM Super 16 setup.  It shoots 2.5K, 10-bit continuously or 2.8K, 10-bit continuously with ML at around 16mm and Super 16 frame sizes.

That's a cool little rig. I think I like the image I see from the pocket more, although I have always loved the files from any ML Canon camera. The ease of ProRes HQ is definitely easier from a work flow perspective.

7 hours ago, kye said:

I've posted them quite a few times, but it seems like people aren't interested.  They don't follow the links or read the content, and after repeating myths that Steve easily demonstrates to be false, the people go back to talking about if 6K is enough resolution to film a wedding or a CEO talking about quarterly returns, or if they should get the UMP 12K.

There’s some irony here... 

People talk about the UMP 12K because it is new and exciting tech. If Steve only cared about image quality, he would just shoot 35 or 65 and be done with it. For better or for worse, he’s clearly a tech dork and is obsessed with perfectly the digital capture techniques. 

Image quality is all subjective, anyway. 

7 hours ago, bjohn said:

Worth pointing out that f8 or at most f11 is as high as you should go, otherwise you start running into diffraction softening on that small sensor. I lost a lot of footage when I was first starting out with the original BMPCC because I shot it at f16 and didn't realize the image would be affected so badly by diffraction; I've seen it at f11 as well but not as badly. ND filters are essential to ensure you don't have to stop down too much. There's a good tutorial on diffraction and sensor size at https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm

Yeah, the sweet spot on the older c-mount glass is definitely F5.6 to F11. You can get a nice natural softness / glow at F4 or 2.8, but the wider lenses also vignette at times.

18 minutes ago, majoraxis said:

@BenEricson does Zhiyun offer a Lidar autofocus add on module like the DJI 3D auto focus system?

If so, the Weebill would be an even better value than Ronin RS2, if not maybe they have one in the works.

I mentioned the RS2 Pro Combo because you can add the DJI Lidar 3D Auto Focus system, though not as good as the AFX auto focus system when it comes to the distance it can achieve auto focus at.

27 minutes ago, majoraxis said:

@BenEricson does Zhiyun offer a Lidar autofocus add on module like the DJI 3D auto focus system?

If so, the Weebill would be an even better value than Ronin RS2, if not maybe they have one in the works.

I mentioned the RS2 Pro Combo because you can add the DJI Lidar 3D Auto Focus system, though not as good as the AFX auto focus system when it comes to the distance it can achieve auto focus at.

You're probably a bit more experienced with this sort of thing. The sensor on the pocket is tiny, so at F5.6 or F8, you should have no problem zone focusing and getting really good results. If you want to shoot at F2 while walking backwards and maintaining focus, there are certainly better gimbals and cameras. 

I am more speaking to the fact that the gimbal is tiny, weighs next to nothing, takes me 1 minute to balance, and the batteries last forever. The Ronin is twice the size and more than twice the price.

Save your money and buy a Lumix 12-35 2.8 IS and a nice external battery for your pocket! You can solve the problem with stabilization by using an IS lens and the battery fix is very cheap and effective.

20 hours ago, majoraxis said:

If you are in the market for a top of the line gimbal, fly your BMPCC on a Ronin RS2 Pro Combo ($999) and add the DJI 3D auto focus system ($169).

No need. The Zhiyun Weebill is 400 and does a great job. Smaller, lighter, more portable, battery goes forever with the bmpcc. Gotta be close to 8 or 9 hours.

Attached a photo of my setup. I'm working on a project with vintage C mount lenses. Not trying to win some sort of depth of field contest. The camera has beautiful texture and looks great at F8 or F11. OLPF shows up next week. Throw a 4 stop ND on there and rate it at ISO50 with a light meter.

On 2/23/2021 at 12:02 AM, hyalinejim said:

I've had a bunch of fun with 35mm film camera bodies, a few rolls of film and my existing lens collection. 

Started with Olympus OM bodies that I used my manual focus Zuiko's on.

Also shot a bunch on Canon EOS bodies with EF lenses. This is autofocus, auto everything, if you want it.

Everyone has a Canon lens lying around, right? Give it a go! It's loads of fun.

You can still get a crappy Canon for almost nothing. Check out the specs at:

https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product_search_result.html?t=camera&s=film&s2=eos&a=E&sort=new

Agreed! Started shooting 35mm stills on the OM1 like 6 years ago. Recently, medium format or fully auto point and shoot cameras. The Olympus Stylus Epic takes great photos. I think you can learn a lot about lighting and composition by constantly shooting stills, plus its a lot of fun.

19 minutes ago, tupp said:

Well, the 16S, the Bolex, the Krasnogorsk, etc. all had their eyepieces at the rear of the camera, so they weren't shoulder mounted.  There were a few tricks that one could practice to keep them stable.  There were also other brackets (such as belt pole rigs) that could help.  Of course,  weight could always be added for more stability.

True. I own a Bolex Super 16 with the pistol grip. The weight and 3 point contact make for extremely nice handheld footage. A pistol grip / EVF / would probably work really well on this camera as well. The weight should be good as long as the lens is heavy enough. 

On 2/20/2021 at 1:14 PM, tupp said:

Back in the film days, there were no IS lenses, so one had to learn how to be smooth when handheld.

The BMP4K weighs less than the mag on an SR3! A 105mm with no shoulder rig and multiple points of contact won’t end well. 

The balance, weight and ergonomics of the rig are huge factors to how smooth the shot looks.

25 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Manual lenses only
(only you want to pay a LOT more for your adapter)

I paid 400 for the optitek or whatever it is. (Since then I have sold the whole setup.) 

That’s kind of a lot if you’re paying 900 for the body. It’s just nice to have image stabilized lenses as an option. Not sure what they go for these days

I’ve used both the Fs700 and the F3 quite a bit. The F3 is in a different class with color and skin tone. The image itself is also quite a bit cleaner. I remember having to over expose by two stops constantly with the FS700.

The high frame rate features on the FS700 are amazing, but if you’re shooting primarily 24 and 60p, the F3 is great.

Keep in the mind, the F3 uses a different mount. They do make an adapter for EF, which can be found for a reasonable price on eBay. Also, to get the most out of it, you’ll want an external recorder. The black magic video assist is cheap and works well.

I do agree, a smaller DSLR is so nice to have for a gimbal, plus the lowlight from an A7S would likely come in handy.