markr041

The Sigma fp has an APS-C mode you can choose already. And you can shoot RAW video in that mode. The camera works perfectly with any APS-C lens in video and stills. All options work in both FF  and crop modes.

On 8/27/2020 at 7:40 PM, kye said:

I've developed a few thoughts on this over the years.

My grand unified theory of cameras is that highly skilled people can make almost any camera look glorious, unskilled people can't make any camera look good, and that for the rest of us in-between it's about how easy or hard it is to work with the equipment that matters.

Watching one video can tell us a lot of things.  It could show us the potential that the equipment has.  It could show us what is possible in a difficult situation (for example, low light, high DR, etc).  It could also give us a clue about how hard it is to work with if we know the skill level of those involved in making that specific video.

However, one data point is one data point, and for a more general view of a camera we have to watch many videos, and even then there is a limit to what we can tell without actually using it ourselves.  Reviews attempt to bridge this gap, but they are subjective and biased (consciously or unconsciously).

I suspect it's the case that amateurs draw conclusions based on one video because they don't know any better, skilled people know not to draw conclusions from one video because it's folly, and geniuses draw conclusions from one video because they can.

I agree that talented people can produce excellent videos with any camera. But that is irrelevant to evaluating a camera's ability. 

And, sure one video is a data point. But not all "data points" are of equal value, as you then go on to suggest. A video shot in a setting with limited dynamic range, where the author has decided to discolor skin tones, where most of the frames are out of focus (very little detail to ingest), is not going to be a very valuable data point for evaluating a camera.

What are the key issues for image quality? 1. dynamic range - so we need a setting with a big dynamic range. 2. color science - so we need to see the natural colors it is capable of reproducing, not some person's imaginative discoloration of skin tones. 3. Resolution - so we need detailed scenes, not faces and bokeh. 4. rolling shutter - so we need horizontally moving subjects.  5. low-light performance - so we need - lowlight! The posted video (cute children shot with a very peculiar lens) that people actually said convinced them to get a Komodo failed in providing information on any of these. It may win a prize somewhere, and the dp may win an award, but it is a near useless as a data point for evaluating a camera. 

There are threads for showing off one's artistic vision in video,  a thread about a camera is not the place for that. Wow, really? Again, the Komodo may be a great addition to the cinematic tool kit at a reasonable price,, but I do not see anything here that demonstrates it is better than other offerings (actually, global shutter seems to me the biggest deal, so let's see that in action).

I can easily tell the difference between 4K and 1080 on YouTube. I can even tell the difference between 2880P (5K) and 4K on YouTube, even on 1080 screens. I don't use Safari.

Further Canon explanation from above video: "Hybrid IS combines the feedback from both the acceleration sensor and angular velocity sensor, moving the image stabilizer lens elements as needed. This effectively compensations for both rotational and linear camera shake."

Canon explains: https://global.canon/en/news/2009/jul22e.html

Hybrid IS adds parallel shift compensation to standard tilt compensation.

I have only seen it mentioned for macro lenses.

Also: 

I dislike this footage - the framing makes the widescreen aspect inhibiting, since the videographer constantly cuts off peoples heads, and I do not like how the particular discolorations ( we call it "grading") chosen in post affect skin tones.  And, videos of cute kids are second only to pet videos in terms of cuteness. But, so what? This will have zero influence on whether I like the camera.

How on earth could a particular video that is heavily graded and uses a very special-type lens convince anyone that the camera is somehow better than the many other cinema contenders less than $10,000? Of course, this phenomenon of judging a camera by one video is all over this forum and many others devoted to equipment. I bet the videographer (once he masters framing with an anamorphic lens better (I get it that it could be on purpose)) could make a cinematic-looking video from a Sony RX100, under the same lighting conditions.

Of course, if one is for some other reasons set on acquiring this camera, this video (if you actually thought it was good) would reaffirm your interest, since it does show what it can produce. It just does not speak to whether another cheaper, more-user-friendly, more-versatile camera could do better, but then again the scenes have limited dynamic range (wonderful diffuse light that always helps), there is lots of out-of-focus areas (and subjects) and the lens, as has been said, matters a lot.

Just a thought (my quasi-rant could be applied to any posts about cameras, so I do not mean it as a criticism of the Komodo). There is a sophisticated crowd here, so I am surprised to see this behavior, again and again.

Sound test:

8 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

 

And the Panasonic lenses have minimal focus breathing and are pretty much parfocal unless you are going for extreme focal length change, like going from 24 to 105mm focal length on the 24-105 kit lens - but more modest zooms are parfocal (of course, and f/4 lens probably helps hide any loss in focus)

55 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

EDIT>>

Sailing on by.

The rudeness of this site never ceases to surprise me.

28 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

If you are comfortable with the monitoring capabilities of the fp in terms of fixed screen, no false colour etc and the file sizes and the data processing of 12bit RAW CDNG then there is absolutely no benefit.

From my own personal point of view, my ageing eyes will thank me for the brighter, tilting screen and additional exposure aids and my ageing MacBook Pro will thank me for the ProResRAW or just plain ProRes if I want to.

Thats the beauty of the modularity of the fp in that you have these sort of options to stay compact or add more functionality based on your personal needs.

I agree with you about the modularity of the fp. But another advantage of the fp is its small size. You you can get a tilting 5" monitor that weighs much less than the Ninja V, is more compact, uses less power and has all the focusing/exposure aids and as bright a screen as you want (and probably more accurate color) if your main concern is improved viewing and exposing in the field. The Ninja V is not the best monitor for those purposes.

Have you actually used DNG files in your editor? They work completely smoothly. Also, Slimraw, a cheap computer program, losslessly reduces the DNG RAW files by 60%, if you are worried about storage. Editors/computers have problems with heavily- (and lossy) compressed video (H265 especially) because they must constantly decode and encode. High bitrate RAW is much easier to work with than any of those compressed codecs, and no less easy to work with than compressed high-bitrate ProResraw. If you haven't tried editing with the DNG files, try it and see and save yourself the hassle and bulk of an external recorder - double sets of settings, etc. 

So, what exactly is the point of recording 12bit ProRes RAW externally with a bulky recorder, when you can record 12bit RAW internally with just a tiny SSD attached to the Sigma fp? I don't get it? ProResRAW cannot be better than DNG RAW, can it?

And note, I have the Sigma fp and the Ninja V (and got an e-mail from Atomos with the link). I also have compared DNG RAW from the fp to BRAW recorded from the fp to the BM 12G Assist and could see no difference except, when really peeping, the DNG clips had more detail. What is going on?

On 8/8/2020 at 9:41 AM, mechanicalEYE said:

Has the Ninja V prores raw update been released for the GFX100 yet? Hadn't heard or seen anything  new on it.

 

Yes! Beta firmware enabling Ninja V ProRes RAW recording from the GFX100 was made available today (also Sigma fp).

Beta firmware for the Ninja V is now available for recording 12bit ProRes RAW to the Ninja V via HDMI from the Sigma fp. This enables 4KDCI  24p, 4K UHD up to 30p, and FullHD 120p. Other than the DCI 24p, all of this can be done internally in the camera in true 12bit DNG RAW.

On 7/28/2020 at 12:58 AM, thebrothersthre3 said:

The FP image is super clean. However there are the usual aliasing issues you get with pixel binning and line skipping. 

But, remember, there is also crop mode. This is simply a 1:1 crop (1.5X), so no pixel binning. Still 4K. This gives you approximately the APS-C (Super35mm) look, same as the BMPCC 6K in terms of FOV.

3 hours ago, rawshooter said:

Not necessarily. cDNG is also quite light on the computer. If file sizes are a concern, you can use the program SlimRaw to internally compress the DNG in the same compression ratios as BRAW.

I have shot using the Sigma fp with both BRAW and cDNG. In Resolve there is no difference whatsoever in ease of editing. And Slimraw reduces the cDNG files by about 60% on average.

13 hours ago, Roogii said:

Has anyone had issues with external SSD after the new firmware - My sandisk extreme is now putting my FP into a reboot cycle. Gah.

I have had no problems with my Samsung 2TB T5 SSD, the brand recommended by Sigma and by BlackMagic. Interestingly, Z-Cam recommends the Sandisk Extreme SSD.

My test of 8bit DNG RAW straight to an sd card. I also conclude that having the full dynamic range of the sensor, no color subsampling, and no compression that DNG RAW provides may be a lot more important than 8 versus 10bits.

Just now, rawshooter said:

Yes, but only at ISO 100. All waveforms above ISO 100 do not meter raw sensor exposure. If you rely on them, you'll underexpose the sensor.

To correctly expose the second native ISO 3200, you need to switch the camera to ISO 800 first, set exposure according to zebras/waveform/meter, leave aperture, shutter and ND as they are and switch ISO to 3200 (and live with a two stops overexposed camera display while recording :-(( ).

Gotcha. Thanks.

3 minutes ago, rawshooter said:

Unfortunately, it doesn't. "Color Profile: Off" is still a Rec709 curve. And if you have the camera set to the second native ISO 3200 and rely on its exposure tools - waveform, meter, zebras -, you will underexpose it by 2 stops. (You can easily control that by shooting 3200 with what the camera thinks is clipped exposure and importing the material into Resolve.)

Quote

OK, thanks. Then for the first native (<800 as I understand it), the displayed waveform is ok? I use Resolve, so this sounds like good advice.

1 minute ago, rawshooter said:

Log would still be nice to have as a display profile to be able to properly monitor dynamic range and exposure of the camera in CinemaDNG - which now is guess work, especially at the second native ISO (3200).

As I understand it, using the Color Profile: Off results in correct reading on the waveform when shooting RAW.

8 minutes ago, rawshooter said:

In raw. But the h264 encoded .mov files are limited to Rec709. A log profile would only apply to h264/.mov.

Ok. That is certainly correct. Again, I do not understand why anyone would use this camera to shoot anything but RAW - that is its key advantage over almost all cameras - full-frame pure (no sharpening, no noise reduction), uncompressed, unprocessed, no chroma subsampling, wide color gamut, 12bit 4K with no overheating in a tiny form. Log is just totally irrelevant (I understand the question was why not log), but the discussion of log in my view for the fp is basically besides the point, the point being - RAW!

1 hour ago, rawshooter said:

It's not just that. A proper log profile also has a wider color gamut. If your log curve remains within Rec709, it won't make much sense (and will cause color banding when translated into non-logarithmic Rec709).

It looks as if Sigma has been unable to implement a wider color gamut with its current camera hardware/ASIC. So it was sensible of them to pull the promise (rather than delivering just a Rec709 profile with a log gamma).

Where is the direct information or test that the color gamut in RAW on the Sigma fp is not wider than REC709? My information is that it is closer to REC2020 than the gamut of the Sony Venice!

Here is the video comparing the gamuts of the Venice and the Sigma fp. You will also learn more about log:

Look at 15:33. Note that the Sony Venice and the Sigma fp are being used in the latest Avatar movie.

49 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

I will inform the engineers of Panasonic, Canon, Sony and other brands of their lack of full information. I hope they will do their homework. Thank you very much.

Really? You really want to keep acting out with ugly sarcasm just because you were found to have made a mistaken post? No one insulted you. Learn about cooling before you make claims is all that was said. Someone else also provided some information on the fp's cooling method who has more information than I do..

10 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

Thank you for not providing the full information to the community. Much obliged.

Look, I am not withholding information, I am not an expert on cooling. Another instance of your shooting your mouth off without knowledge. Why would you think I would be an expert on cooling cameras just because I posted information on a camera's actual performance? Again, do your own homework. 

Just now, BTM_Pix said:

Sigma designed a heatsink and attached a camera to it.

Seems they had some sort of intuition that full frame cameras in small bodies might run a bit on the warm side.

Considering the gulf in price between the R5 and the nearest camera with a comparable spec, I'm sure some enterprising company could make some money rehousing them into more cinema camera style bodies with a proper cooling system.

If this thing was £2K dearer and didn't overheat then I'm sure no one who wanted 8K RAW would baulk at that price.

People have been cinevising stills lenses for years so maybe its time to do the same with bodies.

Yes, there is a big heatsink in the Sigma fp's small body. But processors matter too for thermal efficiency.