ac6000cw

3 hours ago, John Matthews said:

I really wish they'd make a new version of it with better thermals and full-sensor readout with PDAF and a mic jack... it would be a winner.

Isn't that an OM-5 😉🙂

1 hour ago, Davide DB said:

Even the 14-42mm PZ is really compact when not in use and it's very cheap. That small extra tele could be useful too. There's even a cheaper rebranded version on Aliexpress.

Yes, it's a nice lens (used it as my main video lens back when I had Pana G6 with a 'power zoom' toggle on the body). It doesn't support dual-IS though. The Oly 14-42 EZ pancake is also 'OK' and has zoom and focus rings instead of toggles, so is a bit nicer to operate. I think build quality is better on the Pana lens though.

On 4/11/2023 at 5:48 AM, kye said:

The GX85 only has a 1.1x crop into the sensor for the 4K mode, and the 1080p mode doesn't have any crop at all.

Oops - yes, quite correct, I was thinking about the mid-range 20MP Pana cameras (GX9, G95, G100 etc.) when I wrote that, which have 1.25x crop in 4k. No excuse really as I own a GX85...

On 4/11/2023 at 5:48 AM, kye said:

I do wonder how much would be supported if we had full access to all the modes supported by the chip.  Obviously the chip in the GX85 can support being given a 4K read-out, can apply a colour profile and do whatever NR and sharpening is done to a 4K file, and can compress a 4K output file at 100Mbps.  To imagine that it might be able to compress a 1080p image at 100Mbps isn't that far-fetched.  Who knows what else might be available on the chip.  ALL-I codecs, 10-bit, etc.

I suspect the processing chips could do 100Mbps All-I 1080p, but having lots of video mode choices in a mid-range camera (aimed at ordinary buyers/users instead of video enthusiasts like us) I think would just be regarded as confusing.

On 4/6/2023 at 10:38 AM, kye said:

I'm contemplating the 45-150mm as well, but we'll see.

The Pana 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 is not much larger/heavier and has better OIS (but it's much more expensive used). It's been my main 'travel' lens for years.

On 4/6/2023 at 12:32 PM, mercer said:

It's a shame that Panasonic hasn't upgraded the GX85 and G85 with 10bit.

Apart from market segmentation and heat issues, I suspect the processing chips used in the lower-end cameras can't support it. They also have major crops in 4k and pixel-binned (probably) FHD, versus uncropped and over-sampled video in G9/GH5/GH6.

15 hours ago, billdoubleu said:

This thing is quite an engineering marvel and it would be amazing to see a 4k version from Panasonic sooner than later.

The pretty small GX800/GX850 & GX880 do have 4k video capability at 24/30p (& 25p for GX800), limited to 5 minute clips (20 minutes for 1080 60p, I think). There is no manual exposure control for normal video but you can use the 'Flkr Decrease' menu setting to fix video the shutter speed to 1/120, 1/100, 1/60 or 1/50.

However '4k photo' mode gives you video with full exposure control - but it's 4k30p only...

No viewfinder but you do get a flip-up screen. 

I own a (silver) GX800 - it's rather plasticky feeling but it works well enough (and at least it doesn't have the IBIS noise interference onto the audio that the - otherwise superior but larger - GX80/GX85 suffers from).

Having been a confirmed (amateur) Panasonic micro4/3 user for years, I dipped a toe in the Olympus world after the OM-1 came out and the used prices for the E-M1 iii dropped dramatically.

My Pana G9 beats it hands-down for basic video quality, but for me the E-M1 iii is such a nice camera hold and use (it fits my hands perfectly) that it's become the camera I take out most often. Battery life is excellent, as is the (adjustable strength) IBIS. You get used to the menus eventually...

The GX85 is another 'feels great in the hand' camera, so my usual travel cam is a GX85 with an Oly 14-150mm lens (overall smaller than some actual 'superzoom' cameras), and the G9 is the 'max video quality' and 4k50p option.

(Also got a cupboard full of other Panasonic cameras - G80, GX800, G6, LX100, LX7, and far too many lenses! )

Reviving an old thread, but if anyone is interested in the Harrison Consoles plugins, at the moment Plugin Boutique has six of them on offer at £8.95 each (mastering EQ, Legacy EQ, multiband compressor/expander, spectral compressor, a de-esser and a vocal processor) - see https://www.pluginboutique.com/manufacturers/302-Harrison-Consoles?s=price_asc

3 hours ago, Chxfgb said:

Which one of these factors could make a video incompatible with a TV? I would assume just the resolution, but someone else seems to think the other two could be possibilities. Thanks.

1. Exporting at a certain bitrate (footage at 8 Mbps worked, but not footage at 10Mbps)
2. Color depth (footage filmed on a camera that shot 8 bit worked, but some 10 bit camera footage didn't)
3. Resolution i.e. too high resolution for the TV (this is my guess as we are trying vertical footage, so the height could be more than the TV allows for)

Of course, I would figure it out myself but I don't have access to a video editor right now, or a TV for that matter. The issue is that the the footage shot in 8 bit was also encoded at 8 Mbps and the footage that doesn't play was shot on a 10 bit camera and coincidentally encoded at 10 Mbps.

The problem is probably caused by 10-bit files and/or too high resolution. I think 10-bit is more likely to be the problem on older TVs e.g. ones that don't support HDR etc.

As Michael S says, for maximum compatibility use common/older formats e.g. H.264/AVC 8-bit 4:2:0 1080p

22 hours ago, BrunoCH said:

Yes for 4K the bitrate are very similar (I am around 780Mbps for ProRes HQ in 4KDCI) But for 6,2K I have a bitrate of around 2300 Mbps with ProRes HQ. This is really different from the 720 Mbps of H265

But 6.2k frame size is 6240 x 4160 (from the file info you posted), which is approximately 3 x the pixel count of 3840 x 2160 UHD (25958400 vs. 8294400 pixels)

So in terms of compressed bits-per-pixel it's basically the same - 88 bpp for 6.2k @2284Mbs, 87 bpp for UHD @720Mbps

Surely the important thing is: does using auto-iso all the time work for you, in the shooting situations/environments you experience?

Personally (as an amateur) I basically use auto-iso all the time, because I'm nearly always filming documentary stuff outdoors in uncontrolled lighting conditions that sometimes can change very quickly. It's one less thing to think about and adjust manually, when I'd rather be concentrating on keeping things framed sensibly and in focus. For me it means I'm more likely to get usable footage of e.g. wildlife and other 'in the moment' events.

If you are using auto-iso, remember that exposure/light metering settings will affect the behaviour of it, so you might need to change those to suit the subjects you are filming (like you have to with AF settings sometimes). Modern cameras are pretty good at dealing with most situations, but they can't know how you want the image to look in difficult situations e.g. in a very high contrast situation, is it better to burn out some of the highlights or lose some of the deep shadow detail? - that's an artistic choice...

Another thought if weather sealing and top-notch IBIS in a fairly compact ILC body is important are the Olympus/OMDS E-M5 iii and OM-5.

Both have PDAF and basically the same video quality (up to DCI4k@24p & UHD4k@25/30p) plus mic inputs. Essentially the E-M5 iii is most of an E-M1 ii and the OM-5 is most of an E-M1 iii in smaller & lighter bodies. You lose the dual card slots, the headphone jack and the large battery (and Log video on the E-M5 iii).

Never owned either of them, but I do own the E-M1 ii & iii - the video C-AF is definitely more flexible and better behaved on the E-M1 iii and you get auto-iso capability in manual exposure video. That also has adjustable movie IBIS (3 levels) but I don't know if that has carried over to the OM-5 (the user guide for it doesn't go into that level of detail).

I'd also vote for the GX85/GX80, maybe paired with the 12-32mm 'pancake' zoom and the 25mm F1.7 prime - both are cheap used, lightweight & good. It's just a nice, solid-feeling camera to hold and use, and has in-camera battery charging. One downside for video is the noisy audio (and no mic input). Mine usually has an Oly 14-150mm lens on it, and I use it as my travel 'superzoom' camera - laid on its side that combo fits in quite a small camera bag (or I put a neoprene wrap around it and stuff it into a small bag or rucksack).

The LX100 is smaller and lighter and has a nice fast lens, but the rear screen is fixed and the stabilization for video is mediocre (as is the video C-AF). IMHO it's a great camera for stills but only 'OK' for video. (I own the first version, have never tried the mk2 version).

1 hour ago, John Matthews said:

I was looking at the high ISO raw files of the R6 ii (on DPREVIEW)... they only look about 1 stop better than older M43 cameras. Is it a Sony sensor?...I'm used to seeing much better high ISO performance.

AFAIK, it's a Canon designed and manufactured sensor.

According to the info here - https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-R6-Mark-II.aspx - it's front-side illuminated and non-stacked, so relatively 'old tech' in design terms.

(Not used either the camera or Rodelink, so this is theoretical based on looking at the data as an electronics engineer)

Based the datasheet info for the Rodelink receiver:

Quote

Output connection: 3.5mm TRS jack socket – dual mono with thread lock

...i.e. an unbalanced output, so either do what Kubrickian suggested (plug it into the 3.5mm input on the body), or try an 'unbalanced' 3.5mm to mini-XLR adaptor (the one you linked to is described as a 'balanced' adaptor which are wired differently).

Balanced adaptors are usually wired like this - https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51eO1-tF2uL._SX522_.jpg

Unbalanced adaptors are usually wired like this - https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61ysy5S3oiL._AC_SX466_.jpg

2 hours ago, ade towell said:

Wow that is a fantastic deal with the 20-60mm and 50mm being only £400 more. Am very tempted...

This is the twin-lens kit at Wex in the UK - https://www.wexphotovideo.com/panasonic-lumix-s5-ii-digital-camera-with-20-60mm-and-50mm-lens-3083261/ and at Park Cameras - https://www.parkcameras.com/shop/panasonic-lumix-s5-ii-with-20-60mm-and-50mm-twin-lens-kit_p016673m (both offer the £300 trade-in bonus, so I assume it is a Panasonic offer). Haven't checked the other UK dealers.

When they're 'on form' Panasonic can certainly come up with the goods - the S5 ii feels like a (FF) spiritual heir to the G9, and the S5 ii X the heir to the GH5 - good value cameras that punch well above their price point.

16 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

Yeah, I mean when you factor in the quality of the 1.8 Panny primes they are worth it, I think, BUT it's a hard sell when they are so much more costly than their competitors. You can sell an incredible camera like the S5II for $500 less than your competitors and that will entice people, but then you see those lens prices compared to their competitors, and it becomes a bit less enticing. 

Most of my work uses zooms, but I'll end up getting a couple of those primes. But it'd be nice to get a sub $200 50mm prime that was small and lightweight like Canon offers. 

In the UK, the S5ii (including 20% sales tax) is currently £1999 body-only, £2299 with 20-60mm f3.5-5.6, £2399 with 20-60mm and 50mm f1.8 bundle, £2499 with 14-28mm f4-5.6. In addition there is a £300 trade-in bonus until end of March. I think this is pretty aggressive launch pricing, and means the 20-60mm and 50mm f1.8 bundle is £399 on top of the body price - very good value I think (much cheaper than buying those two lenses used).

Panasonic seem to use the 50mm f1.8 as a sales-incentive offer quite often (like they do with the 25mm f1.7 on micro 4/3).

But I agree completely that the Sony FF cameras have a much wider choice of lens at all price points (and the few times I've considered trying FF, Sony has been my front runner for that reason).

Maybe now that Panasonic have competitive AF (and hopefully better S-series sales as a consequence) we might see more lens makers join the L-mount alliance - Samyang or one of the Chinese companies might be good to add some low-cost primes?

On 2/12/2022 at 7:31 PM, Mark Romero 2 said:

There are a few things that drive me mad with my E-M1 MK II, such as the fact that LOG and Flat Profiles are ONLY available in 24fps DCI (not in 23.978fps, nor in UHD 16:9), and you have to do a bit of menu diving to get in to those picture profiles. On the other hand, for non-log, using the Natural profile with reduced contrast, sharpness and saturation is really nice as long as the dynamic range isn't overwhelming.

Having noticed this post again - a correction:

With the recent firmware versions, both the E-M1 II and III support OM-Log400 and Flat profiles in C4K(DCI), UHD and FHD video modes i.e. they are not restricted to just C4K(DCI). Just enable 'Picture Mode' in Menu -> Video Menu -> Specification Settings.

I'd love to know why you can't adjust the sharpness in those profiles though...it's blanked out in the Super Control Panel, along with (understandably) the contrast, saturation and gradation adjustments.

Unfortunately dpreview's video resolution chart tests didn't cover 1080p. What they did find was that 4k 10-bit modes were noticably sharper than the 8-bit modes (except for 4k50p/60p, which appeared to be the same sharpness in 8 and 10-bit) - see https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/om-system-om-1-review#VD

I'm waiting to see what video functionality the OM-5 strips out...

On the 'Optyczne.pl' website OM-1 'film mode' review, there is a collection of straight-out-of-camera 8 & 10-bit files at the bottom of this page - https://www.optyczne.pl/59.5-Inne_testy-OM_System_OM-1_-_test_trybu_filmowego_Podsumowanie_i_filmy_przykładowe.html

The list:

Also some resolution test chart videos on this page - https://www.optyczne.pl/59.4-Inne_testy-OM_System_OM-1_-_test_trybu_filmowego_Jakość_obrazu.html

Their opinion (Google translated) of the 1080p modes was:

Quote

In this case, the matter can be summed up quite briefly - it is bad. Theoretically, the read times for each recording mode at the end of this chapter would suggest that Full HD is oversampled in most modes. A glance at the above video shows, however, that this is probably not the case, because the detail of the image is poor, and the amount of aliasing (suggesting, for example, line skipping) is considerable. For the record, let's add that the image looks best (although still bad in absolute values) in the mode using the full width of the matrix, slow motion with 1.27x crop fares slightly worse, and the worst shots recorded using a 1.4x digital teleconverter.

It is therefore clear that this aspect of the movie mode has not improved compared to the "Olympus era", and OMDS engineers have something to work on in the near future.

Such sad news, especially involving someone so young - stay strong Andrew and take your time, along with the rest of your family.

4 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

They bought Fairchild (original BM cameras) and Truesense/Kodak (Digital Bolex) too but the lineage of the Arri stuff is definitely from Cypress as both the D-20 and the Alexa had a Cypress sensor 

The 'Fairchild Semiconductor' that onsemi bought in 2015 was a new version created by Nat Semi selling off their 'standard products' division in 1997, a reasonable amount of which derived from Nat Semi buying the original Fairchild Semiconductor 10 years earlier. As far as I can tell, that 1987 sale to Nat Semi (by then owner Schlumberger) didn't include the imaging division. Via a series of other companies Fairchild Imaging eventually became part of BAE Systems - see https://www.baesystems.com/en-uk/productfamily/scmos-sensors

(The myriad start-ups, mergers, takeovers, sell-offs, spin-outs and failures of semiconductor companies over even the 40+ years I've been an electronics engineer would make a pretty complicated 'family tree' I'm sure 🙂)

22 hours ago, jarmo said:

Just because Onsemi is USA based doesn't mean the sensor is developed in the USA.

Given that (as far as I can see) onsemi's image sensor capability mostly comes from buying the image sensor division of Cypress Semiconductor in 2011 for $31 million (based in Belgium) and US-based Aptina in 2014 for $400 million, I think there is a reasonable chance that the Arri sensor was developed in US.

As a bit of trivia, onsemi's roots as a semiconductor manufacturer go directly back to Motorola in the 1950s, so it's effectively one of the oldest chip companies in the world. (ON Semiconductor was spun out of Motorola as in independent business in 1999).

On 9/16/2022 at 8:31 AM, John Matthews said:

2) Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Leica, Arri, Red, Blackmagic, Hasselblad and now OMDS (maybe others) have no plan B- meaning they must deliver on cameras and sales or die. Sony, Panasonic, Fuji, Ricoh could pull a Samsung and kill their camera division immediately. With this type of move, Sony E-mount, X-mount or K-mount would die. A Panasonic failure wouldn't kill M43 or L-mount.

Canon, Nikon, Leica and Blackmagic are more than just camera companies - they have other business lines. Of those, Canon and Nikon are probably the most exposed to market changes, due to their historically large presence in the consumer market. Leica, Arri, Red, Blackmagic & Hasselblad are niche players in the overall camera market.

I think OMDS has a difficult transition to make into probably a somewhat smaller and more niche player. They do have the audio recorder side of the business as well, but doubtless some of that market has been lost to mobile phones.

On 9/15/2022 at 8:58 PM, John Matthews said:

If you're counting grams, the E-M5 iii is a good choice paired with inexpensive, small, primes. For the enthusiast, it's a camera that you want to take out. In a small bag under 1kg, I can cover 8mm to 300mm- that's really hard to do on FF (maybe impossible).

That's exactly what's kept me in the M43 eco-system. One of my interests is wildlife photography & video, and the Oly 75-300mm is only around 420g and 120mm long. Combine that with the ex-tele sensor crop capability and IBIS on a Pana G9 and you get the FF equivalent of 1000mm+ lens reach in a combo that fits easily in a modest camera bag or small rucksack (and the oversampled( GH5-level) 1080p on that is so good it's quite close to 4k quality). Take along the 210g Pana 12-60mm lens and that's basically 12mm to 300mm covered in two decent-quality zoom lenses that weigh less than 650g in total.

2 hours ago, John Matthews said:

 Unfortunately, they've "let go" of the general audience and went 200% on the niche markets where their cameras excel.

I think that was inevitable really - why use scarce, expensive component supplies to make low-end, low-margin cameras when you can use them for high-end cameras like the OM-1 instead?

Here in the UK, Olympus/OMDS cameras seem to be becoming almost invisible outside of specialist camera stores. The big John Lewis department store chain (which has always had sizeable camera sections in the bigger stores) has recently dropped the brand, despite keeping Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Sony & Panasonic.

It'll be interesting to see how 'down spec'd' the video features are in the upcoming OM-5 compared to the OM-1 - I'd love a smaller/lighter camera with 4k50/4k60 capability...

(...and OMDS please, please do something about your soft 1080p video - it's embarrassing in 2022 - and why is the OM-1 8-bit 4k video softer than the 10-bit version?)

20 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

Does the X have 4K 50p 10 bit

It doesn't - 4k is max 30p, and no 10-bit video at all.

(With current firmware, E-M1 ii, E-M1 iii and E-M1 X have the same basic video specs - the differences are mostly AF and IBIS performance)