teddoman

2 hours ago, yerrato said:

Back in the Spring, Andrew said it was pretty much done and going to be released in a week or so... but it never happened???

ProColor 4.0 is out, but it's not really advertised very well on EOSHD. It'd be easy to not notice it. I just downloaded it.

But I guess it's not a Pro Log version.

If you can sell directly to a buyer on FM or EOSHD or another online board that has a buy and sell forum, that's your best option for getting the most money. If you're in need of a dealer trade in, you'll take a hit on price (you pay for the service through the low trade in price).

Interesting theory about picture profiles conflicting with electronic shutter. On the A7R ii, I noticed that the in camera HDR mode doesn't work with a picture profile enabled or with electronic shutter enabled. Then, on the A9, in camera HDR does work with electronic shutter enabled but obviously there's no potential conflict with picture profiles since they are non-existent.

I wish Sony would just default to a different setting when there's a conflict, or allow you to select a fallback setting in the event of a conflict. It's a real pain having to switch 3 menu settings on a regular basis.

To me, A9 video seems positioned as high quality video for photographers only.

There's no full frame 4K PDAF photo/video combo option in the Sony lineup right now. Do full frame 4K videographers want combo bodies with more MP and PDAF, like an A9S (with fps crippled on the photography side), or another refinement of low MP CDAF S bodies great for low light? Do videographers buy the S bodies for low light or for full sensor full frame 4K? A lot of videographers also seemed to be happy buying an R PDAF combo body over an S body.

On 2/7/2018 at 12:57 PM, Grégory LEROY said:

Can you show me the list of MC-11 compatible lens pleas?

If you look at lenses on the Sigma website, you can sort for lenses by MC-11 compatible, it's one of the sort criteria. I think there are also lists out there too.

This new Sigma 14-24 in Canon mount is MC-11 compatible and under focus specs it says "full time manual - yes" which kind of sort of suggests it's not FBW

On 1/28/2018 at 1:55 PM, jonpais said:

@Eric Calabros That may be so, but HDR increases the brightness of specular highlights, like the glint of a sword in the moonlight, which is wonderful to behold.

I watched Mark's GH4/Shogun HDR video on my Pixel 2 while watching the video simultaneously on my regular desktop screen.

The Pixel 2 seemed contrastier and glossy, while my desktop monitor seemed more matte and lower contrast. The wood on the windows seemed glossy and shiny on the Pixel 2, for example. If it's reflecting some light source in the room, perhaps those are the specular highlights getting brighter?

I don't know if other differences in these screens explains my perception or if it's this support for HDR functionality.

On 2/5/2018 at 2:14 PM, Grégory LEROY said:

I was answering Jonpais  stating "Sigma lenses are fbw"   (I was surprised)

My question was about focus by wire. Andrew doesn't seem to posses any Sony lens (at least expensive ones). So I was wondering if for video grapher possessing an A7RIII, sigma art lenses were providing the best of both world: video autofocus and physical manual focus. Nobody talk about manual focus, but it seems to be a big advantage over sony native lenses (or not if nobody talk about it, i don't have your experience with mirrorless)

There's no lens, even sony native with such characteristics: video autofocus + classic manual focus (not by wire). I don't like sigma lenses. the only lens I've broken is a sigma but in that (video) scenario it's seems wiser to invest in sigma art lens, canon or sigma mount instead of Sony ( I only have a nikon camera, so no adapting for me)

Interesting that the lens manufacturers don't have a specific designation for FBW lenses. You have to know that Canon STM lenses are all FBW, for example, but there isn't a separate designation for FBW vs non-FBW lenses.

Apparently the Sigma 20mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art is not a FBW lens, so perhaps it's not totally true that all Sigma lenses are FBW. It shows up on the list of MC-11 compatible lenses (Canon mount)

I use a card that I keep in my wallet (so I always have it with me)

20 minutes ago, Robert Collins said:

No he didnt test the sensor readout for video.

But we know (for the A9) it is much lower than for stills - in fact by the rolling shutter tests I have seen, the readout is the same as the A7riii.

So did Sony intentionally cripple the A9 for video (quite probably) and was the reason they didnt include picture profiles because they deliberately didnt want people buying the A9 for video expecting that the fast electronic shutter would lead to less rolling shutter (again quite possible but just guessing.)

Still if a 24mp A7siii or a 12mp A7siii takes advantage of the incredibly fast readout from a chip like this, it would virtually eliminate rolling shutter on a FF sensor....??!!

The only A9 numbers (in video) I've seen are in a review by Imaging Resource which puts the readout speed at 1/40 - 1/75.

1 hour ago, Robert Collins said:

http://blog.kasson.com/

This engineer has done extensive testing of the readout speed of Sony sensors.

A7r2 1/15 second

A7r3 1/30 second

A9 1/160 second but only in stills (not in video) (which could be very interesting in terms of the A7siii)

In terms of your above comment, he tests full sensor readout for stills. So the readout for a proportion of the sensor could be faster (I guess.)

Do you recall if he measured the readout speed for the A9 in video?

On 1/30/2018 at 5:59 PM, Andrew Reid said:

Yes it's out of focus. What's source of that scaffolding shot - the video from previous page?

A9:

A7R3 III Super 35

A9 is actually even sharper and cleaner than the A7R3 Super 35 4K mode.

Yes the scaffolding shot is from the 4K comparison video.

Worth noting that this image compares A9 full sensor 4K to A7R3 Super 35 4K. It'd be interesting to see a direct comparison of S35 on both cameras.

Interesting. On the A9 I can see both of those settings, both in movie mode and in M mode, on the main shooting screen with the M in the upper left corner.

The focus racks in Andrew's video seem a bit on the abrupt side. The focus rack on the Metabones/Canon 35 1.4 L video seemed a little smoother.

Andrew's video is close up, so that probably makes the transitions more noticeable. In the Metabones/Canon 35 video, he's not shooting very close to his wife.

Also possible that the AF tracking sensitivity and AF drive speed settings have an impact on focus racks using Sigma and Metabones adapters. If so, might have affected these 2 videos.

14 minutes ago, Don Kotlos said:

Personally, the lack of picture profiles in A9 makes it a nogo for video. AF looks to me pretty much the same. 

Then there is the difference in resolution:

I noticed that too, but I think that was user error by the reviewer. Maybe the A9 shot is not in focus?

Both are being oversampled. Hard to think of a reason why full readout of 24 mpix (A9 FF resolution) would give you a mushier image than full readout of 18 mpix (the super 35 sensor area of the R III).

On 7/9/2017 at 6:34 PM, tellure said:

Watch-skimmed through that whole ~1hr video but couldn't find anything on the video features in there, seems like it's all stills.

The sexism of that focusing video does suck but if you watch the responsiveness it seems pretty good.  Makes me real hopeful for the A7S3/A7R3.  Just need to see how well tracking works in video now.

There's finally a side-to-side comparison of the 4K of the two cameras now. Slight edge to the A9 on video AF over the A7R III is apparent, though it's not a particularly challenging test for sure.

Great explainer. Helpful primer on photographic data. You should be a teacher, if you aren't one already.

I do a lot of video in the evenings under artificial lighting, and last year, I really started to notice the noise on the A6500. I just couldn't unsee it. It's most noticeable where there's a uniform background, like a wall or a sky.

I haven't used Panasonic in a long time, so maybe the A6500 compares well to the GH series. Samsung NX1 had quite a bit of noise starting at mid ISOs, as I recall, so this isn't unique to Sony.

For me personally, the noise was just starting to get under my skin, so I decided to try Sony full frame, now that people are selling their mark ii bodies at good prices.

A7Sii definitely has lower noise, but it is by no means absent. You can still see it, it's just less than the A6500. 

This is a great side-by-side comparison of the noise on Sony bodies at higher ISOs, it makes it very easy to compare:

What I have found is that it's hard to satisfy the urge to get the perfect cleanest footage. Once you get used to cleaner footage, you want it even cleaner. Maybe I need to shoot on an old Canon body every once in a while, maybe I'll appreciate Sony more  

On 11/12/2017 at 7:43 AM, Mattias Burling said:

Could it be because you have your screen brightness on medium or something from the start?
What happens if you put it on maximum and then record?

Ive had the A7sii but can't remember any such issue.

This.

My A7S ii screen brightness was set to manual and zero (by default?). If you put it on sunny weather, then record 4K, the dimming is noticeable. In 4K, it probably dims the screen to default (zero) brightness, because the dimming is only noticeable if your screen was originally set to sunny weather (which is probably +2 brightness).

On 11/1/2017 at 7:26 PM, BLACKOUT said:

Hello folks I have the Procolor 3 downloaded, but the actual instructions to get it to the SDcard I'm missing .Drag and drop onto your SD card (presuming magic lantern style workaround?)does the file need unzipping etc.....

Thanks in advance.

It's just a pdf file, extract it on your desktop and read it, then manually input the settings onto your camera

6 hours ago, tugela said:

The problem with trying to draw conclusions from sales figures like these is that sales tend to be strongly weighted to the first few months after release. In Sony's case their major releases were in 2015, while 2016 was a slow year with minor releases. So lower unit sales is not surprising. We can expect their a7 mark 3 versions to be released in 2017, so they will likely have much higher unit sales this year compared to 2016.

So I guess my A6300 was a "minor" release. Just don't tell my spouse :-)

13 hours ago, Emanuel said:

what thread?

I tried to find it and couldn't, sorry. But I have come across people saying they have tried dummy batteries as a solution. There are youtube videos on it too.

21 hours ago, Charlie said:

Anyone actually used an A6300 or 500 for an actual video project shoot?? a short film, anything where you need the camera to operate all day??

I really wanted to go with on of these cameras but the overheating issue cripples theses cameras for serious projects. How can you take the risk.

It requires a workaround. I saw a thread the other day where someone ran their Sony camera for 5 hours straight using a dummy battery.

On 12/16/2016 at 11:51 PM, Don Kotlos said:

Unfortunately Picture Profiles do not give the same colors between jpeg stills & movies.

This is one of the main reasons I don't shoot in manual mode since I cannot preview the colors and WB correctly. 

Finally got a chance to do a quick tripod test. Clearly these images are different, which suggests Don is right that PPs don't work the same in M mode when taking photos. 

EOSHD Pro Color:

M mode photo with PP setting as EOSHD Pro Color:

2 hours ago, Bruce said:

Hi all.  Sorry to use this thread for this and I totally understand if this post gets deleted:

I bought Pro Color for Sony cameras, clicked the link after paying, and then had a computer crash before I could download the document.  For some reason, I didn't get it in an email, either.  I have a shoot tomorrow I'd like to try it out on, but I need the settings.  I emailed Andrew about it and thought I'd try here, too.  Just to be clear:  I'm not asking anyone else to send me the settings.

Thanks,

- Bruce

If you didn't get the email for the download instructions, how about spam folder?

7 hours ago, Don Kotlos said:

Unfortunately Picture Profiles do not give the same colors between jpeg stills & movies.

This is one of the main reasons I don't shoot in manual mode since I cannot preview the colors and WB correctly. 

Really? I'll have to test out the PPs in jpegs.

And what's this about preview in manual mode? Just last night I was playing with WB in manual mode and could clearly see a preview on the LCD screen if that's what you mean. I'm using an A6300.

13 minutes ago, cantsin said:

When you shoot raw stills, in-camera color settings/profiles (including EOSHD profiles) don't matter. Color profiles only affect JPEG and video.

One of the side benefits will be nice SOOC jpegs. I shoot raw + jpeg, so that's definitely a plus for me.