ac6000cw
-
Posts
675 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by ac6000cw
-
-
I own the E-M1 iii , OM-1 and original G9.
With the video IBIS set to maximum (Oly) or in Boost mode (Pana) and something to lean on (or you're good at standing still), I would say 'yes'. Not used a GH6 or G9 ii, but the E-M1 iii & OM-1 stabilization can be almost magically good sometimes.
-
8 hours ago, John Matthews said:
It's a spec war; they'll have to, regardless whoever says what. Of course, the same argument could have been make about PDAF and it too them how long? I guess we'll soon find out if they learned something from all of that.
Yes - If Panasonic is intent on being a significant player in the full-frame hybrid market, they have to offer 8k video now that Sony, Canon & Nikon offer it. Fuji even have it on the sub-$2000 (APS-C) X-H2.
As Panasonic and Leica have been long-term camera development partners, if Leica are going to have 8k video on a camera soon Panasonic can't really be far behind in offering it. I'd be very surprised if the the new Leica doesn't have largely Panasonic electronics and software inside it.
-
-
8 hours ago, kye said:
I've said it previously, but I actually don't have a huge list of wants for an updated GX-line camera, and the GX85 is now my daily driver as-it-were.
I've heard people ask for a range of improvements but they all seem quite modest actually. Things like PDAF, 10-bit, LOG, full-sensor readout, etc. These may well only require a sensor upgrade and a processor upgrade, perhaps to existing chipsets that aren't even the latest generation, which may not actually require that much additional power / cooling / space.
At the moment the GX85 already has:
- IBIS / Dual-IS
- Tilt screen / touch screen
- EVF
- half-decent codec
- etc etc
Plus, it's right at the limit of actually being too small from an ergonomic perspective. The grip design on it is really quite effective and I enjoy using it, but I probably wouldn't want it to be any smaller. If it had a slightly larger grip then that would actually be an advantage ergonomically, wouldn't make the camera much bigger in practice because it would still be smaller than most lenses, and would allow for a larger battery size.
I agree the GX85 is one of those cameras where the design and features were 'just right' when it came out. Its main problem (for me) is the on-board audio is poor (terrible electrical/IBIS noise breakthrough) and there's no mic jack, so getting decent audio means using a separate recorder.
Wanting a genuinely pocket-sized camera with decent video and on-board audio, plus reasonable stabilization and a mic jack, I've just bought a refurbished Sony ZV-1 (original version). Only had it a few days and been able to test it much yet, but so far I'm quite impressed with the performance of such a compact camera (and the build quality seems pretty good - it's a nice solid-feeling camera, like the GX85 is). It's only a 1" sensor, but it's BSI with reasonably low rolling shutter and decent low-light performance.
Quick size comparison of HX99/ZV-1/GX800/GX85/X-S20 - https://camerasize.com/compact/#797,847,699.397,673.397,908.706,ha,t
(I also own the Sony HX99 small-sensor/30x zoom camera on the far left - that really is small!)
- John Matthews and kye
-
2
-
On 11/20/2023 at 4:04 PM, John Matthews said:
My Priorities for Panasonic:
1) Release a VERY SMALL M43 camera body with PDAF and full-sensor readout in 4k NOW!
2) Release a GH7 with variable ND and PDAF.
3) Release a high-end video camera with variable ND and PDAF for L mount.
4) Release a pancake (28mm or 40mm or both) lens for L mount.
I'd also love them to do 1), but I can imagine some of the YouTube influencer/reviewer comments:
- It's expensive
- It overheats recording 4k60p after 10 minutes
- if it's really small and light - "There's no IBIS"
- If it's got IBIS - "It's not small enough and it's too heavy"
- The battery life is too short
- It doesn't have a fully articulated/flip out screen
- There's no headphone jack
Most of the above list would not actually be issues for the vast majority of potential buyers if it was cheap enough, but it would be a hard sell if it's almost as expensive as a G9ii
Maybe the answer would be to market it as a Leica camera?
-
On 11/18/2023 at 9:21 PM, MrSMW said:
And if that happens, two even better lenses; Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 G2 and 70-180mm f2.8 G2…which will at least change focal distance in the same direction!
Lumix is the opposite of Sigma 🤪
Which is another one of those annoying little things that all add up when you have mere critical seconds…
14 hours ago, ntblowz said:Well Sigma is operating the same as Canon! But doesn't make RF lens.. so it is the odd one out.
Panasonic versus Olympus/OMDS micro4/3 lenses are another example of opposite zoom rings on the same mount...
-
23 hours ago, kye said:
I've heard people say that film has rolling-shutter-like behaviour from the rotating shutter and isn't a true global shutter, but it's just that the RS was very fast and so wasn't noticeable in almost all situations.
The animation below from a Wikpedia page about rotary disc shutters illustrates their operation (and film pull-down) nicely, showing that the sweep of the edge (the rolling shutter equivalent) is quite short in relation to the exposure time:
(Image By Joram van Hartingsveldt - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=924146)
Film projectors have basically the same mechanism, except that usually the shutter operates at twice the rate to create 48 Hz flicker which is much less noticeable/annoying to viewers than 24Hz.
- kye and Andrew Reid
-
2
-
$6000, same ballpark as the a1.
-
37 minutes ago, kye said:
Continuing the discussion about overall size of total rig, I just found an interesting lens for APS-C - the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8.. it's interesting because it's got a fixed aperture and is small for a APS-C lens.
Yes, especially as some full-frame cameras (e.g. S1, S5, S5ii, S1H, a7 IV, a7C II) have an APS-C crop in 4k50/60p, so it's a sensible video lens option for those in addition to native APS-C cameras.
I think MrSMW uses it sometimes on his L-mount cameras?
-
1 hour ago, John Matthews said:
The viewfinder royally sucks- might as well not have it. I also had many moiré problems with it.
What's the problem with the viewfinder?
Is the moire mainly producing 'false colour' or just patterning (like the 'jeans' example you posted earlier), and is it an issue in both 1080p and 4k?
-
The LX100 size comparison is interesting (I own the original version, but usually use a micro4/3 ILC instead):
From L to R: Sony ZV-1, Pana ZS100/TZ100, LX100 and G100+12-32mm
The LX100 is actually quite chunky in comparison to the ZV-1 and ZS100/TZ100 (the LX10/LX15 is about the same size as the ZV-1 and shares it's lack of viewfinder).
I think the LX100 is a very nice stills camera, but the video C-AF is poor, the OIS is only 'OK', there's noticeable aliasing in 1080p, the power zoom isn't very smooth, the rear screen is fixed and if you look at a spectrum analysis of the audio it's got a deep, narrow notch in the mid-range. But at least it has a viewfinder.
I'm actually quite tempted by a used G100...but it's probably just GAS really...🙂
-
10 minutes ago, kye said:
In those modes the sensors resolution is higher and the chart doesn't have fine enough lines to create moire
No - the base sensor resolution is the same, it's how the data is read out from the photo sites and processed that changes in different modes. If you sub-sample a digital image to reduce it's resolution without low-pass filtering it first (to keep the frequencies under the Nyquist limit), you'll get aliasing-related artifacts (like moire) at some point dependent on the image content.
Video (and film) suffers from temporal aliasing as well, which we reduce by introducing motion blur (a form of low-pass filtering).
-
18 minutes ago, John Matthews said:
I'm fairly certain all these cameras will have moiré patterns at some point whether it be 1080p, 4k, or 6k.
I agree, but some are better at minimising the impact of it e.g. like the GX85/G95/GX850 you mentioned above. Moire in 1080p is more noticeable on the Oly E-M1 ii & iii than on those, despite having a higher-res sensor (and noticeably soft 1080p video).
-
1 hour ago, kye said:
The 6600 does not have an OLPF, and the moire is present the moment the light is collected on the sensor.
This is the same comparison with 4k video - https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=panasonic_dcgh5&attr13_1=panasonic_dmcgx85&attr13_2=sony_a6600&attr13_3=panasonic_dcg95&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=200&attr16_1=200&attr16_2=200&attr16_3=200&attr171_1=1&normalization=full&widget=478&x=-0.5653754912361596&y=-0.0730609051110552
...and this with still images (same test image and same cameras, so same sensors and filters) - https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=panasonic_dcgh5&attr13_1=panasonic_dmcgx85&attr13_2=sony_a6600&attr13_3=panasonic_dcg95&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=200&attr16_1=200&attr16_2=200&attr16_3=200&attr171_1=1&normalization=full&widget=478&x=-0.5653754912361596&y=-0.0730609051110552
Note the A6600 moire is much reduced in 4k video and is almost non-existent in stills mode.
So the bad 1080p moire on the A6600 isn't coming from "the moire is present the moment the light is collected on the sensor" (which would show up in stills mode), it's being caused by the way data from the photosites is being collected, sub-sampled and processed. I suspect the image data used for 1080p video on the A6600 is being line/pixel skipped on sensor or as it's read out from the sensor and then de-bayered. The GX85 and G95 1080p is probably pixel-binned on-sensor, so it's better but has some moire, whereas the GH5 generates 1080p by reading the data and de-bayering it at high resolution then resamples it (using super-sampling) down to 1080p.
1 hour ago, kye said:Once that happens there's nothing you can really do to get rid of it.
I agree - although I think some cameras/manufacturers do a better/cleverer job of minimising it at the de-bayering stage
-
On 10/26/2023 at 5:59 AM, John Matthews said:
So what I was saying earlier about a correlation between pixel density and moiré is true. The less space there is between pixels, the less chance of moiré. In this case, 12k capture is better than 4k when it comes to moiré.
On the G100, it really sucked for 1080p moiré at precisely the distance one would vlog at. Go back 50 cm and moiré would be gone due to the frequency of the patterns. I imagine the GX80/85 has a similar problem in 1080p.
On 10/26/2023 at 9:27 AM, kye said:I don't think it works that way though. A 12K sensor would be sensitive to moire if there were repeating patterns that happened to align with the gaps between the pixels, just like a 4K sensor.
It might be that common causes of moire are around a certain size and therefore impact one combination of sensor resolution / sensor size / and focal length more than other combinations. Also, lower resolution sensors might be more prone to moire as they're typically older and there were larger gaps between the pixels than there are now.
Lower resolutions are likely to have issues on cheaper cameras too, due to the camera line skipping and therefore effectively creating very large gaps between the active pixels.
Sadly, there's lots of different ways to create moire, and many of them tend to come from strategies to make the product more affordable!
The older Sony APS-C cameras like the A6500/A6600 are/were terrible for moire in 1080p - this is a DPreview 'video still' test chart comparison of GH5, GX85, G95 and A6600 at 1080p - https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr29_0=panasonic_dcgh5&attr29_1=panasonic_dmcgx85&attr29_2=sony_a6600&attr29_3=panasonic_dcg95&attr72_0=1080&attr72_1=1080&attr72_2=1080&attr72_3=1080&normalization=full&widget=494&x=-0.4377130790929456&y=0.008264403455490291
(The GH5 shows how sensor to video processing should be done, the A6600 shows how not to do it!)
In modern 'stills' cameras based in Bayer pattern sensors, the moire is basically caused by the large gaps between the different colour sites, so you get serious colour aliasing (when there's no effective OLPF in front of the sensor) if the light pattern happens to match the photosites of a single (R, G or B) colour.
From https://www.redsharknews.com/production/item/5209-what-really-causes-moire-in-cameras :
-
2 hours ago, John Matthews said:
I already have most of the other lenses you mention with the exception of the 35-100; instead, I have the 40-150 Pro f/2.8. I'm not sure it's a better lens.
At twice the weight and 1.6x the length of the 35-100 F2.8, I didn't even contemplate the 40-150 Pro F2.8. I did consider the Oly 40-150 Pro F4 as it's about the same size & weight as the 35-100 F2.8, but decided I'd prefer the faster aperture.
Compromises...
Basically my target weight limit for body + lens is around 1 kg.
-
4 hours ago, John Matthews said:
Just thinking through a big camera and small camera setup in terms of lenses, I think it makes sense to alternate between "pro" lenses and "consumer" lenses throughout the popular focal lengths. For example in MFT,
fisheye, 10, 12, 17, 25, 42.5, 75, 150, 300 (or more)
This would allow to mix and match better and have the right tool for the job. In the past, I thought I'd just copy the focal range for the pro and consumer camera, having the same focal range in both, understand better the focal length and essentially working consistently. For example,
Pro: 12-35, 35-100, 200 (don't have any of these lenses)
Consumer: 12-32, 35-100
Conversely, one could just choose the 10-25 and 25-50 (don't have those either) to cover most of the focal range, then choose small primes on the consumer side.
Maybe some could double as a lens in both situations (example, use the 9mm for both pro and consumer if it passes mustard).
Fact: the G9 ii is big for MFT; maybe the features will mitigate this, but the need for a smaller camera (for me) is necessary. The question is: which focal lengths should be pro and which should be consumer and not let the size of the g9 ii to get "out of hand".
I just curious to know what you would do if you need two systems (big and small), what would you choose/have you chosen?
If I had to choose just one lens to keep out of my collection, it would be the Pana 14-140mm F3.5-F5.6 - for the range it provides it's relatively small (75mm long) and light (265g), it supports dual-IS2, focus breathing isn't noticeable and on my copy at least the zoom ring is reasonably smooth. It's been my most-used lens ever since I got it as a bundle with a G6 years ago.
If I could keep a few more, then...
The Oly 12-40mm F2.8 - just a great all-round, reasonably bright, moderate wide to moderate telephoto, no noticeable focus breathing, 85mm long and 382g. (The Pana 12-35mm F2.8 is a bit smaller and lighter and gets you dual-IS - I was considering both a while ago and then a really good used deal on the Oly came up so I went for that).
The Oly 75-300mm F4.8-F6.7 - what I use most often for wildlife, pretty small (117mm long) and light (423g) for the focal range, and decently sharp for something that small/light/cheap.
Low light? usually just chuck the Pana 25mm F1.7 into the camera bag or pocket in case I need it - cheap/small/only 125g.
I also own the old Pana 20mm F1.7, but that's noisy when focusing, so I might swap it for a 17mm or 15mm fast AF prime at some point (Oly or Pana Leica probably).
I've recently acquired a used Pana 35-100mm F2.8 (to complement the Oly 12-40mm F2.8). Decent lens and not too large/heavy for a 'pro' lens, but it's got noticeable focus breathing so not ideal for video C-AF use.
(and yes, the Pana 12-32mm pancake is great when you want to keep things as small as possible, especially if you're taking two cameras on a trip, so that would be a 'keeper' too).
- solovetski, John Matthews and kye
-
3
-
17 hours ago, John Matthews said:
When I look at the 4k 120fps files, their only 100 Mbps in HVEC. Can a v30 card handle 5.8 open gate?
According to the G9ii specs, 4k/C4k 120p is 300Mbps HEVC.
These are the open-gate specs:
...so it's 200 Mbps up to 30p 4:3 and 300 Mbps up to 60p 17:9.
I've captured Olympus C4k at 237 Mbps and G9 150 Mbps 4k50p to Sandisk Extreme (non-Pro) 128MB & 256MB V30 UHS-1 cards with no problem, so 200 Mbs should be fine to a high-spec V30 card (V30 rating => 30 MBs => 240 Mbps sustained write speeds). In reality I've found the high-spec, larger capacity (128GB or larger) V30 cards are very fast, limited as much by the UHS-1 interfaces as anything else, so you may find that 300 Mbps works fine.
Datasheet performance figures for a UHS-1 Sandisk Extreme (non-Pro):
...and the Extreme Pro version:
-
Quote
59.94Hz [C4K] 4096x2160
119.88p, 300Mbps (4:2:0 10-bit LongGOP) (H.265/HEVC, LPCM)*
Quote59.94Hz [4K] 3840x2160
119.88p, 300Mbps (4:2:0 10-bit LongGOP) (H.265/HEVC, LPCM)*
(Quotes from Panasonic UK G9ii specs. It supports 100p as well)
-
1 hour ago, John Matthews said:
Am I correct in saying the G9 ii does 120fps 4k, but the GH6 only does C4k 120fps?
According to the specs here https://www.panasonic.com/uk/consumer/cameras-camcorders/lumix-mirrorless-cameras/lumix-g-cameras/dc-g9m2.html#specs yes, the G9ii does 120p in both UHD and C4k
-
Re. S5 ii moire and aliasing tests, the test-chart videos here are pretty comprehensive - https://www.optyczne.pl/70.4-Inne_testy-Panasonic_Lumix_S5_II_-_test_trybu_filmowego_Jakość_obrazu.html
For comparison, these are the GH6 tests - https://www.optyczne.pl/62.4-Inne_testy-Panasonic_Lumix_GH6_-_test_trybu_filmowego_Jakość_obrazu.html - and this is for the OM-1 - https://www.optyczne.pl/59.4-Inne_testy-OM_System_OM-1_-_test_trybu_filmowego_Jakość_obrazu.html
Unfortunately they haven't tested the G9 ii yet...
11 minutes ago, John Matthews said:I learned a couple of things after watching a Lumix live stream. DFD is still used for S-AF because it's faster than PDAF. I've also heard that when working in low-light and small apertures (f11), only contrast is used due to PDAF not being efficient- this is true amongst all brands.
Yes - as far as I know, all mirrorless cameras with PDAF use some form of contrast detection to 'fine tune' focus after PDAF has got it close (and more so in low-light and with small apertures - I guess diffraction affects PDAF in that situation). Also I remember Olympus saying that C-AF in video (on their cameras with PDAF) uses a mixture of PDAF and CDAF.
But in reality, I think with modern cameras the main C-AF issue is how they decide what to focus on (and then track it) - the 'Ai' part - rather than how they do the focusing.
- kye and John Matthews
-
2
-
23 minutes ago, John Matthews said:
I do believe, perhaps falsely, that pixel density has a major role- the more, the better; I think M43 on the GH6 or G9 ii definitely has that going for it.
Provided the camera can process all the pixels on the sensor to produce the final video stream i.e. no line-skipping or pixel-binning,, then yes, I think in general a higher density is better. It's quite noticeable that the Panasonic S cameras are prone to it (but the high-res S1R not so much), but their micro4/3 cameras are not - but how much of that is due to processing differences and how much to pixel density plus lens resolution I don't know.
But if slow-mo is important to you, I guess the 4k @ 120p and FHD @ 240p on the G9ii also has to swing things in that direction?
-
4 hours ago, John Matthews said:
The one thing that bugs me about the S5 ii is possible moiré. I've never seen it on the GH6 and I bet the G9 ii will be the same.
That's one major reason I decided against an S5 ii - the others were the size & weight of long telephoto lenses and the APS-C crop in 4k50p/4k60p (I normally shoot everything in 50p, so it would effectively be an APS-C video camera for me).
So sixth months ago I looked seriously at more upmarket APS-C cameras for video instead, but having played with an R7 and an XH2s I decided they felt too large and/or awkward in my hands (the Sony A6700 wasn't announced then, and the FX30 has no viewfinder so ruled out). Then the XS20 was announced and I pre-ordered it... but before deliveries started a used OM-1 turned up at a really good price so I bought it and cancelled the XS20 order.
So in the end the fact that I already had micro4/3 lenses and the OM-1 just feels 'right' in my hands (and is weather sealed, with top-notch IBIS and a lovely 5.76M dot EVF) kept me in the micro4/3 world a while longer...
- ntblowz, IronFilm and John Matthews
-
3
-
9 hours ago, MrSMW said:
But then again, there is something to be said for seeing an entire shoot in B&W through the viewfinder and only later revealing the results in colour…
I assume that's really the main purpose (beyond being a marketing gimmick) of having a dedicated switch position - enabling a quick flip to B&W for composition purposes, especially if intending to generate some B&W pictures from the RAWs afterwards.
new cam
In: Cameras
Posted
Is this meant to be a dedicated video camera or a hybrid for both video & stills?
If it's for hybrid video & stills use, the X-S20 is probably better overall because it has a mechanical shutter and a viewfinder. One downside of the Fuji's is they don't support plug-in power for microphones, if that is important to you.
The FX30 is electronic shutter only and no viewfinder, but has a cooling fan (better for long recordings) and the E-mount lens choice is huge. At the moment Wex in the UK are selling a new FX30 body for £1879 (with a voucher code) until 31-01-2024 - https://www.wexphotovideo.com/sony-cinema-line-fx30-camera-3069656/
Also, if you are thinking about the S5 ii, note it has a major crop in 4k60p (so it's an APS-C camera in that situation). It's the same situation with most of the other lower-end FF cameras.
(If you can live with micro-4/3, a used G9 plus the cheaper/smaller/lighter Pana 12-60mm lens will get you excellent 4k60p and superb stabilization for peanuts - around £700 for both used)