ac6000cw

15 hours ago, Snowfun said:

Having read this topic I now find myself looking at a Sony AX53...

The internal gimbal is intriguing.

The ability to zoom that far (x20)  in such a small package is definitely appealing. No one would claim it has perfect image quality but at the price and for what it claims to do... definitely attractive.

10 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

Been wondering about this for years! Why not bring the sensor of modern mirrorless to camcorder bodies. 

It's because if you have larger sensor the optics get larger as well - the sensor in the AX53 is 1/2.5" size - this is very small and allows an internal 20x zoom to be fitted inside a small (but not tiny) body.

Put in a 1" sensor (which is about 4x the sensor area) with an internal x20 zoom lens and the body would get much larger and heavier. The next level up in the Sony range is the AX700 with a 1" sensor but only a x12 zoom - it's around 2x the weight and 2.5x the price. That takes it into the price area of a good MILC with a superzoom lens e.g, the A6700 with 18-135mm lens bundle is about the same price as the AX700, but has an APS-C sensor with 4x the area of a 1" sensor, weighs less and can record 10-bit 4:2:2 4k60p & 4k120p video.

3 hours ago, Davide DB said:

But does the fact that it is under the auspices of the JPEG consortium mean that the implementation is free without cost?

I doubt it - for example, AFAIK including MPEG/AVC/HEVC in a product requires license fees to be paid to the patent holders (normally via a patent pool licensing organization). As end users we don't usually see those fees directly, because they are paid by the companies selling the products i.e. the fees are included in the purchase price.

6 hours ago, kye said:

My point was that the math that sits underneath the many branded names is mostly the same.  TicoRAW will be just another branded version of something that someone else wrote.

My original post was wondering what it was...

intoPIX and Fraunhofer IIS are the two major contributors to the JPEG XS patent pool - https://www.jpegxspool.com/ and https://www.jpegxspool.com/s/JPEG-XS-Patent-Pool-Licensed-Patents-01-Oct-2023.pdf  and https://www.tinynews.be/jpeg-xs-intopix-belgique/

As JPEG XS uses a wavelet transform, there is a reasonable chance TicoRAW uses a wavelet transform in its implementation, especially as JPEG XS has built-in support for RAW Bayer/CFA images - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XS#Sensor_compression

But as intoPIX is a developer of video compression technology, TicoRAW unlikely to be "just another branded version of something that someone else wrote."

20 hours ago, kye said:

No, TicoRAW is the brand name for an implementation of a particular compression algorithm.

Yes, their raw image sensor data compression system.

Do you know what intoPIX actually use inside the TicoRAW implementation?

20 hours ago, kye said:

People don't really know this, and the manufacturers sure don't want to tell people, but there are only a few compression algorithms in use for video.  Some manufacturers will tweak the algorithm to get better performance in some metrics, but it's still the same algorithm and still subject to the same limitations etc.

This is from the page on the Discrete cosine transform: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrete_cosine_transform

Discrete cosine transform (DCT) isn't a compression algorithm, it's just a mathematical transform (of a block of pixels into spatial frequency coefficients) that's particularly useful for 'natural image' compression systems. It doesn't compress the data (in fact it increases it, as the output coefficients are usually higher bit depth to maintain precision), just transforms it into a different representation. That makes it much easier to discard/downgrade the coefficient data afterwards while minimising the impact on image quality - how clever you are at doing that (and the subsequent lossless data compression) is basically what determines the compression efficiency (data reduction versus perceived quality) of the image compressor.

DCT is far from being the only game in town though - there are other front-end transforms in use as part of image compression systems. But I agree it's very popular (for very good reasons) in natural image compressors.

27 minutes ago, Davide DB said:

 

could you elaborate on this?

I think it's because Z-mount has the shortest flange to sensor distance of the common mirrorless mounts. So it's possible to make a (2mm thick!) E-mount to Z-mount adaptor e.g. the Megadap one, but not the other way round.

20 minutes ago, kye said:

Ah, ok.

I wonder what compression N-RAW is using.

It's TicoRAW from IntoPIX - see https://www.dpreview.com/news/9624409613/nikon-is-licensing-intopix-s-ticoraw-technology-for-its-z9-camera-system and https://www.intopix.com/tico-raw

4 hours ago, kye said:

Assuming you're talking about h264 vs h265, the h265 is about the same quality as h264 but h265 only requires half the bitrate to accomplish that.  The price is that h265 requires MUCH more processing power to encode and decode. 

I think he was talking about N-RAW versus h265. The bitrates for N-RAW are here - https://onlinemanual.nikonimglib.com/z9/en/06_video_recording_02.html#id226OJ0Y0V5Z - 4.1k at 24 p is 350 Mb/s in Normal quality mode.

36 minutes ago, Danyyyel said:

I calculated that it was about 350 mb/s bitrate  (I dont know if it is capital M or small m)

Capital M = 'mega' = x1000000

Lowercase m = 'milli' = /1000

So megabits per second = Mb/s.

1 hour ago, Video Hummus said:

It says “wholly-owned subsidiary” of Nikon. So my guess is key technology will trickle from Red to Nikon (global shutter sensors, raw compression on high end Nikon gear, etc…) Red probably continue to do what they do but with Z-mount ecosystem integration.

Maybe they should introduce Z-mount versions of their (low-end, for RED) RF-mount Komodo cameras, branded 'Nikon RED', 'Z-RED' or 'RED-Z', with maybe switchable color science compatible with either Nikon hybrids like the Z8/Z9 or other RED cameras. That might provide upward and downward paths between RED and Nikon cameras without diluting the RED brand.

The Chris & Jordan Peta Pixel review is a bit mixed (especially for video) - poor battery life, some IBIS jerkiness and of course high rolling shutter...

1 hour ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

My guess is that the core RED stuff will remain largely unchanged for a time.  It'd be hard for any business not to love those margins.  I think the writing's been on the wall for a little while now, though, that aside from patent IP, RED's time as a viable company is limited.  Competition from cameras that cost 1/4 of their prices gets stiffer every year.

I agree - the RED cinema cameras will keep the RED branding - it would be silly to dilute/erase the RED brand image.

(pure speculation) From a branding point of view, maybe Nikon might add some subsidiary RED branding to few video-orientated hybids e.g. 'RED Cinema' or 'Video by RED', in the way Panasonic and Sony use the Leica and Zeiss branding on some products?

The SL3 is released - https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/leica-sl3-initial-review

From the review:

Quote

The Leica SL3 is a 60MP DSLR-shaped mirrorless camera built around Leica's L-mount. It brings a lot of technology from the Leica M11 models but also features a radically redesigned interface.

Key specifications

60MP BSI CMOS sensor

5-axis in-body image stabilization rated at 5.0EV

ISO 50-100,000 (base ISO 100)

Hybrid phase/contrast-detect autofocus

Eye/face/body and animal detection AF

DCI 8K video in H.265, 1080p in ProRes all with no time limits

5.76M dot OLED EVF with up to 120fps refresh

2.33M dot tilting rear touchscreen

4fps 14-bit shooting with AF, 5fps in 12-bit mode, up to 15fps, 12-bit with focus and exposure locked at first frame.

The Leica SL3 is available immediately at a recommended price of $6995. This is a $1000 increase over the price of 2019's SL2, though inflation means this is lower in real terms.

Quote

Video modes:

8192 x 4320 @ 30p / 300 Mbps, MOV, H.265, Linear PCM

8192 x 4320 @ 25p / 300 Mbps, MOV, H.265, Linear PCM

8192 x 4320 @ 24p / 300 Mbps, MOV, H.265, Linear PCM

8192 x 4320 @ 23.98p / 300 Mbps, MOV, H.265, Linear PCM

7680 x 4320 @ 30p / 300 Mbps, MOV, H.265, Linear PCM

7680 x 4320 @ 25p / 300 Mbps, MOV, H.265, Linear PCM

7680 x 4320 @ 24p / 300 Mbps, MOV, H.265, Linear PCM

7680 x 4320 @ 23.98p / 300 Mbps, MOV, H.265, Linear PCM

7680 x 4320 @ 30p / 300 Mbps, MP4, H.265, AAC

7680 x 4320 @ 25p / 300 Mbps, MP4, H.265, AAC

7680 x 4320 @ 23.98p / 300 Mbps, MP4, H.265, AAC

4096 x 2160 @ 60p / 600 Mbps, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM

4096 x 2160 @ 50p / 600 Mbps, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM

4096 x 2160 @ 48p / 600 Mbps, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM

4096 x 2160 @ 30p / 400 Mbps, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM

4096 x 2160 @ 25p / 400 Mbps, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM

4096 x 2160 @ 24p / 400 Mbps, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM

4096 x 2160 @ 23.98p / 400 Mbps, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM

3840 x 2160 @ 60p / 600 Mbps, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM

3840 x 2160 @ 50p / 600 Mbps, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM

3840 x 2160 @ 48p / 600 Mbps, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM

3840 x 2160 @ 30p / 400 Mbps, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM

3840 x 2160 @ 25p / 400 Mbps, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM

3840 x 2160 @ 24p / 400 Mbps, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM

3840 x 2160 @ 23.98p / 400 Mbps, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM

3840 x 2160 @ 60p / 100 Mbps, MP4, H.264, AAC

3840 x 2160 @ 50p / 100 Mbps, MP4, H.264, AAC

3840 x 2160 @ 30p / 100 Mbps, MP4, H.264, AAC

3840 x 2160 @ 25p / 100 Mbps, MP4, H.264, AAC

3840 x 2160 @ 23.98p / 100 Mbps, MP4, H.264, AAC

...plus FHD modes

49 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

And likely not good news for Canon extending their current arrangement for it with RED either.

IIRC, that included RED being able to use the Canon RF-mount on their cameras - so I guess in theory a Nikon-branded RED camera could have a Canon lens mount on it... but the Canon-RED agreement might not allow that if RED were taken over by another camera company.

So are we going to see some Nikon Z-mount cinema/video lenses eventually to go with a RED-designed camera, or is this takeover primarily about REDs IP/patents and high-end video processing knowledge?

6 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

If only the 60mp FP-L had:

IBIS

4k 50/60p

A tilt screen 

Those are exactly the issues I have with the FP or FP-L - I like the small form-factor, but a camera without IBIS for video is basically ruled out for me, as I film almost 100% hand-held (and stabilizing in post is sometimes very difficult with the subjects I film, as well as being time-consuming).

56 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

In the absence of the "new" Olympus not doing anything to move the MFT story along either in terms of a compact then something like the A6700 is that camera now.

As well as being a larger sensor, it ticks every box of what is being asked for in terms of being dual native ISO, 10bit 4:2:2 internal, IBIS, class leading AF, LOG and a very good out of the box profile in S-Cinetone.

I've also thought about trying/buying an A6700 a few times for the same reasons... pity it doesn't have a higher-res viewfinder than 2.36M-dot (having a 5.76M-dot EVF in the OM-1 is really nice, as is the 1.62M-dot rear screen)

18 minutes ago, ac6000cw said:

For anyone interested, here is a collection of 10-bit OMLog400 and HLG files (and a couple of stills) from my OM-1 - https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1527WMHFXJmDvTGI74QINJQdstgJPhXyt?usp=sharing

Just added a graded, 8-bit Rec709 version of some of the clips to the folder - 'OMLog400 test graded 8-bit Rec709.mov'

10 minutes ago, ac6000cw said:

Here is a collection of 10-bit OMLog400 and HLG files (and a couple of stills) from my OM-1 - https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1527WMHFXJmDvTGI74QINJQdstgJPhXyt?usp=sharing

Just added a graded, 8-bit Rec709 version of some of the clips to the folder - 'OMLog400 test graded 8-bit Rec709.mov'

On 3/1/2024 at 6:30 PM, PannySVHS said:

That is an exiting prospect to be shown off to us! @ac6000cw  I know it is often a bit of a hassle to do. But if you come around and share some OM1 goodness with us that would be super nice. 🙂 I will hopefully get around to treat us with some HD 100fps goodness from my S1H some time soon. I've seen some 100fps from the A73 and it looked pretty nice despite the puny codec. So I figure the S1H with its 10bit 200mbit codec will do pretty well.

Here is a collection of 10-bit OMLog400 and HLG files (and a couple of stills) from my OM-1 - https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1527WMHFXJmDvTGI74QINJQdstgJPhXyt?usp=sharing

All are FHD, using shutter priority ay 1/100s (auto-ISO and auto-aperture), auto WB (with the 'keep warm colors' option on) and C-AF set to a medium central area - so pretty much 'point and shoot' video. Lens was Oly 12-40 F2.8 pro. IBIS was sensor shift only, mostly on the maximum stability '+1' setting (which can cause jerky pans - the standard setting is '0').

For anyone interested, here is a collection of 10-bit OMLog400 and HLG files (and a couple of stills) from my OM-1 - https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1527WMHFXJmDvTGI74QINJQdstgJPhXyt?usp=sharing

All are FHD, using shutter priority ay 1/100s (auto-ISO and auto-aperture), auto WB (with the 'keep warm colors' option on) and C-AF set to a medium central area - so pretty much 'point and shoot' video. Lens was Oly 12-40 F2.8 pro. IBIS was sensor shift only, mostly on the maximum stability '+1' setting.

This is a good technical review (with some downloadable video samples) of the video side of the OM-1 - https://www.optyczne.pl/59.1-Inne_testy-OM_System_OM-1_-_test_trybu_filmowego_Wstęp.html

4 hours ago, kye said:

I know very little about Olympus lineup and was secretly hoping that someone would go "there's always the Olympus XYZ - it's perfect!"....  what models might suit?

To add to what John has said, currently the best small (ish) Olympus/OM System camera is the OM-5 - that's basically the guts of an E-M1 iii in a smaller/lighter body (about the size of the GX85 if you ignore the viewfinder hump). I don't own one, but do own the E-M1 iii, so based on that: 8-bit video only, FHD is soft, UHD is OK, C4K is very good but is 24p only, video C-AF is good (uses PDAF), IBIS is excellent.

The OM-1 is larger and rather more expensive, but smaller and lighter than the GH5. 10-bit 4:2:0 video is H265 Rec2020 in HLG and OMLog400 only, 8-bit video is H264 Rec709 in Flat, OMLog400 and any of the 'photo' profiles. 10-bit video modes are more detailed/higher resolution than equivalent 8-bit video modes - so for best quality go for 10-bit UHD/C4K in 24p/25p/30p (UHD/C4K 50p/60p is a bit softer, 10-bit FHD is rather better than 8-bit on E-M1 iii/OM-5).

So far I've been quite pleased with the usable dynamic range on the OM-1 in 10-bit HLG and OMLog400 - the new sensor and 10-bit processing path is definitively a significant upgrade from the older E-M1 iii.

I bought a used OM-1 a while ago, and it's slowly turned into my favoured camera for video since then (despite some of its annoyances).

I think part of the reason for that is because it has a very fast readout stacked sensor, with rolling shutter time around 5-7 ms in FHD & UHD, which seems to give a 'solidity' to the video combined with fluid motion handling (I normally shoot at 50p), compared to my G9 with about 12-15 ms rolling shutter.

If my liking of the OM-1 video is due to low rolling shutter then maybe I'm subconsciously sensitive to the picture  distortions created by rolling shutter (including interactions with the IBIS behaviour). But then I'm often filming subjects like trains which readily show up rolling shutter distortions, so maybe that's sensitised me to it?

After owning a variety of consumer/prosumer camcorders (starting with VHS-C in 1995, then several DV then HDV), I skipped DVD-based ones and decided that the memory-card based ones (that I could afford) were getting too small and light to hand-hold with reasonable stability. Also viewfinders were becoming rare other than on the higher-end camcorders.

Having noticed that reasonable video was starting to appear as a feature in 'photo' cameras, I tried a Pana TZ7/ZS3 compact, then a Sony HX9V compact and Pana FZ100 superzoom. Decided that I preferred the form-factor/handling so  moved on to a Pana G3 MILC - nice and compact, good to hold, with a decent viewfinder, video, audio and stills. Upgraded after a while to a G6 with 14-140mm lens (probably my all-time favourite lens) - much larger sensor than any consumer camcorder but still a fairly compact setup for something with a 10:1 zoom lens.

As I'm very much a hybrid shooter, I prefer the m43 'compact MILC' form-factor (and the IBIS). The only 'icing on the cake' that I'd like is a quality power-zoom lens with a decent range - the (now obsolete) Oly 12-50 is about as close as m43 has ever got to that.

So no, I wouldn't buy a 'camcorder' form-factor camera again.

(When I look at some of my old VHS-C or DV footage, it just reminds me of how far consumer/prosumer video capture has improved over time...from less-than-SD resolution, interlaced, noisy, smudgy video to pristine 50p/60p UHD from a pocket-sized camera - wow!)

9 hours ago, enny said:

Can I use adapter in front of speedboster since I can’t find a specific one for my camera. I have old BMCC 2.5k m43 but can’t find specific one for my yashica mount can I just purchase EF to M43 camera mount then use EF to yashica adapter is this recommended or big NO

Thanks 

The Metabones micro43-EF Speedbooster product pages have info on certain types/models of manual focus lenses which are not compatible due to having rear protrusions which could damage the Speedbooster e.g.:

General m43-EF Speedboosters:

https://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPEF-m43-BT3

https://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPEF-M43-BT4

BM-only m43-EF Speedboosters:

https://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPEF-m43-BT8

https://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPEF-M43-BT9

(scroll down to the 'Manual Focus Lens Compatibility' section near the bottom of the page)

Yashica is not on the list.

5 hours ago, Jedi Master said:

What's a VST?

One of the most common audio plugin formats.