mercer

I read a lot of this post and here are my two cents... cool camera... too expensive... too big/ugly.

I briefly used a GH6 and although it was rather utilitarian and not small... the body felt good in the hands and the dual hinged screen was amazing. The extra depth for the fan, didn't seem awkward. The only qualm I had with the camera, which was big, was noise in the midtones. I wish I had more time with the camera because I think there may have been a work around if I kept testing, but unfortunately I just didn't have the time to dissect it. I may give it another go because having internal ProRes and amazing IBIS was such a great combo for my needs...

It felt like the closest thing to a Cinecorder (another term coined by @BTM_Pix ) since my time with the FZ2500. The GH6, in my opinion, is the most underrated camera to come out in the past few years.

The G9ii seems cool too... when the price drops.

Interesting announcement. I'm glad BM removed the "Pocket" moniker. I'd like to believe they're working on the true successor to the only "Pocket" camera they've made... but I doubt it. As @BTM_Pix has already said... Sigma did that for them.

I guess I'll be the resident contrarian and say that I don't think the Leica L mount was a smart move. They probably won't be able to fit internal NDs when they use this mount and will concoct some type of adapter with built in VND instead. I had the Fotodiox version for my FP and it was horrible. It created a gross, smudgy veil across the frame with even the slightest of ND. At first I thought it was due to me using a wide angle lens, but nope, it was there with a 50mm as well. Shame too because the version I had for M43, years ago, worked great.

Obviously, I understand that the L Mount opens up a lot more lens options. If anyone has read my posts over the past 8 years, you know I have a lens addiction, so mirrorless mounts are great so I can dust off my Minolta MD, Canon FD, and with some cameras, I can even use my c-mount lenses.

That said, even with EF, there are still a lot of lenses available, but more importantly, to me, when adapting lenses, the EF mount adds the flange distance needed on the body and not on the adapter...

And with that said, I understand that BM is dealing with a tweener market... part of their customer base wants to adapt any lens under the sun... the Leica L mount gives them that... and another portion want to use new lenses... the EF mount doesn't offer that anymore (another reason why I thought Canon made a mistake ditching EF) but the Leica L mount does.

Also the lack of ProRes is just imbecilic.

And with ALL that said... I'm sure it will be a great camera and have a lovely image, and I'm sure there are other Swiss Army features that it offers that will benefit a lot of folks... I'm just not one of them...

Blackmagic... if you're reading this... go back to your roots and give us a tiny S16 sensor, 4K camera with a built in monitor and acceptable battery life... your entire ethos was to bring small, affordable cinema tools to the masses.

For me... I already own 2, full frame, cameras that shoot raw video and at that price point, although respectable, I'd rather pony up an extra thousand and get an R5C for Canon Raw, DPAF and a better Cinema platform... or $500 for an R5 for Canon Raw, DPAF and IBIS. Easy choice.

Anyway...

2 hours ago, Brian Williams said:

Maybe this has been discussed before, (Or maybe people don't care about such things at this point in technology), but I just discovered this app for my Pixel 7 Pro called Motioncam Pro that can do C4K raw CDNG, and to an external SSD at that.

Again, maybe this app has been around for awhile and I'm late to the game, and I know its just a tiny sensor, but for someone broke like me, who can no longer afford my old GAS lifestyle, this is a pretty fun and cheap way to get back into the grueling fun of raw video.

The app can even export gyro data for use in Gyroflow, for stabilization.

Nothing too exciting here-

 

Nice work, Brian. The sound of a lawn mower going over branches brings back many memories of my childhood.

I liked the quality and can really see the raw look, especially in your dog's hair.

Since I've exclusively shot raw video for years, I'm curious to hear how the post process is? I could see this being a great B-cam when I need to go incognito. Did you use the gyro function?

47 minutes ago, markr041 said:

I am confused - you say there is C4K RAW video, but the aspect ratio of your video is hardly that - is RAW only available with this truncated AR?

The biggest problem, aside from the fact of a low frame rate, is the dynamic range - the face has conspicuous blow-outs for example. I do not see how this kind of video could be matched with any competent mirrorless camera shooting 4K.

I can see why this is fun; I had it using magic lantern on an EOS M - shooting RAW with a $300 camera! But, it sucks.

I'm confused as well... as someone who posts test shots, I understand what it's like to put yourself out there on a public forum. So I applaud anyone on this forum that is willing to share.

Since you post a lot of shots from your camera(s) of the week, I'd think you may have the same reservations and extend the same courtesy.

Truth is, I loved everything about Brian's post and despise almost everything about your reply...

It's a shame that with all of your money, you can't seem to afford common courtesy and manners.

Sony cameras have always overheated. I think it might be considered a feature at this point  

But I hear Panasonic's next camera is going to have a defrost setting for raw video and a popcorn button. Jiffy Pop in beautiful 6K anamorphic.

9 minutes ago, PannySVHS said:

Hey Kye, it´s the brittle HD 50p on a 25p timeline, coming from my Panasonic LX15 compact camera. @kye

8bit 25mbps 420 prowess, with super high shutters:)The 4K mode from this camera is very nice as shown in the examples by a talented visual artist, which I posted in another thread.

Compared to that, HD 50p is missing some hues for sure. But 4K grades pretty nicely. I had not been giving it enough work one year ago. But with a day off, I found my colour grading workflow and built some curves and powergrades for this lil marvel to get some beautiful colours out of it. Compared to the GX85 it is more tricky to grade. GX85 can be done in one node. This camera though needs some massaging. But it deserves it well, because it can holp up to the GX85 if graded with some efforts. These grades can be applied on future footage of course.

A bit of a tricky camera to handle, slippery, flimsy, but with patience it turns out to be a true little marvel indeed. At first I didnt like it at all. But inspired by the beautiful examples filmed with this camera, I gave it a real chance the last week and with open eyes and mind I recognized this camera has a lot to offer. One could complain that sensor estate for UHD is 2/3 inch sensor size only. But then there are not so many 2/3 inch sensor 4K cameras out there, with a 36 to 108mm lens to fit in your pocket.

Nice work! If you ever see an FZ300 for a good price, buy it. I think you'd like it. 

7 minutes ago, stephen said:

BRAW codec is already open standard.

Open Standard and Free to Download Cross platform and license free!

Why ? I have no idea, you have to ask Blackmagic how their business works 🙂

L mount 20mm Flange focal distance is not a lot but if you don't have to put a shutter there, and have a bigger camera body then maybe it would be enough to squeeze an ND filter. Sony proved already that it is possible. This is one of the ways for Blackmagic to differentiate from hybrid cameras. They already did it in a simplistic way in BMPCC 6K Pro. A more compact and sophisticated ND filter solution is maybe not out of reach for them. Tracking auto focus and IBIS, no, this would be Panasonic territory and too expensive for Blackmagic to achieve.

I believe BRaw is only open standard for software programs, not for use inside cameras. I think, if I'm remembering correctly.

But yes, at the end of the day, I'm just talking out of my ass... what do I know. I still think it was a bad idea for Canon to abandon EF when they went mirrorless. And then if they feel like they had to, I thought they should have revived the FD mount.

3 hours ago, MrSMW said:

But what would they do with it other than strip it and even then, for what? Internal raw and ND's? I think they could already easily do and give us that if they wished.

I like the little fellas, the underdogs that punch above their weight, but it can be a struggle sometimes for them to survive, especially when it comes to tech which costs big money to develop and is often hard to protect.

I looked closely at BM and their 6k Pro and like Sigma's FP-L, they are 'almost but not enough' cameras to me as in just too compromised for my needs.

Although I think it's unlikely, Panasonic might want to purchase Blackmagic's camera division just for BRaw. Just as Red has patents on internal, compressed raw, I'm sure Canon and Blackmagic have patented their versions as well. I assume there are only so many ways you can compress an internal, raw image, and there may not be too much room left for Panasonic to develop their version. And since Panasonic's cinema division is in a dire need of an upgrade, purchasing Blackmagic's "pocket" ecosystem could make sense...

But again, I think it's unlikely. I'm gonna bet this is just a rumor. The link to the L-Mount Rumor website even looks suspect... or should I say the lack of info in the linked article.

I mean, why would Blackmagic want to share internal BRaw, their biggest, and only, feature with Panasonic, Sigma and Leica just for a lens mount?

This isn't 2013-2018 when Blackmagic had zero competition in the low end cinema camera market. A full frame camera will put them in direct competition with the R5, FX3, Z8, R3, Z9, FX6, and still have to worry about Red Komodo, Canon C70 and C300.

With that said, I assume BM wouldn't release a FF Pocket, more than likely it would be an updated Ursa, so that puts them in a different price bracket than any of Panasonic's current products.

1 hour ago, kye said:

From this perspective I think L-mount makes more sense, and sort-of aligns with their previous use of MFT and EF mounts, which were both "semi-open" systems with lots of existing glass from original and third-partie

But there isn't a lot of glass from original and third parties. That's the problem. And since it's a mirrorless mount with a shorter flange distance than EF, the ability to implement internal NDs will be a bit more difficult. I suppose BM can get into the lens adapter business and produce adapters that have some kind of internal ND system.

Yeah, this makes no sense whatsoever. In a lot of ways, Blackmagic and Panasonic are each other's biggest competitor, so why would they want to share a lens mount?

It's not like there are a plethora of lenses in the L-Mount catalog to benefit BM and why would Panasonic want to give their L-Mount customers a reason to easily buy into BM cameras?

Unless Panasonic is purchasing BM's camera department. 

As someone who loves shooting raw video, on FF, I don't think I could give up anything I currently have, but my dream camera would be an uncompressed raw 2K/4K camera with IBIS.

If your hobby is travel videos, or walking around cities and taking test shots of people, and you want to add some movement to those videos, then it works for the random shot for a couple of feet.

There's definitely some correction occurring here, but it's almost smoothed out by the 60p.

It probably looks better slowed down on a 24p timeline, though. 

@Geoffrey there's also the idea that you upgrade to keep your investment at a certain level. When a new camera comes out, the old model's value goes down quick. If you don't need the upgrades and don't plan on needing anything more for a few years, then yes... you might as well keep it. Who cares if the used value drops in half over the next year.

But in some instances small upgrades can eventually allow you to afford a higher price bracket of cameras. So if you sell the S5 now, you may get $1000 for it and you'd only need to shell out $800 for the new camera. If you wait a year, you may have to shell out more. If you skip a generation entirely, you may have to shell out a fortune more.

With that said, I've been shooting with the same camera for almost 6 years, so every case is different.

Good luck.

58 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

This is an interesting comparison between this lens and a modern equivalent.

 

That was an interesting comparison. It's amazing that with more technical advances in lens making, how boring the image has become.

To briefly change the subject and keep me from doing a deep dive... do you know anything about the 28-70mm 3.5-4.5 lens? It used to get so-so reviews compared to the "older" Zeiss C/Y zooms with some people speculating that it isn't even a true Zeiss lens. I read that it was released in '98, do you know if that was still a Yashica manufactured lens, or did Cosina take over production by then? If so, it could be a stand in at f/5.6 when I NEED a 28mm or 70mm FOV to go with my ZF lens.

28 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

That FP is just fooling with your emotions at this point 😉

Alternative viewpoint to those excellent images though is that it might just have something to do with the person taking them.

I really think it is... one day I'll take it out and I'll be damned if I can get something I like from it, the next day, I'm floored by the images.

So that leads me to believe it's user error... or the lens and camera's fault... I prefer the latter.

I'm reminded of a line from a sitcom episode I saw a while ago... "I have 2 or 3 moves in the bedroom and if they don't work, she must've had a lot on her mind."

That explains my skills with cinematography and color grading... if one of my moves don't work... the camera was in a mood.

In my previous post, I mentioned that I was going through my lenses and thinning the herd. Well today I have a few samples from the Zeiss ZF Classic 50mm 1.4.

I bought this lens a couple years ago for VERY little money. The body had a little wear, but the price was so good, I decided it was worth it and if I didn't like it, I could EASILY recoup my costs. When the lens arrived, it had a couple issues... the Nikon F to EF adapter that was included (a "bonus!" according to the seller) was stuck on the lens... the lever that is used to release the adapter from the mount was broken off. At the time it wasn't a huge deal because I was using it on an EF camera.

Here's a frame from it on my 5D3 with ML Raw...

So it seemed to be a good sample but when I tried to attach a VND, I quickly realized that the threads were messed up... I could screw the filter in but it definitely wasn't right. By the feel and sound of it, it seems like the lens was dropped in the dirt. Luckily, nothing was affected mechanically, or optically, so it's no huge issue. Eventually, I'll buy a step up ring but for testing purposes, a filter will screw on with enough patience.

Anyway, I bought a Sigma FP last fall and since then I have been testing different lenses with it looking for a simple little set up. So far I like the camera. It has a pretty nice image, but I'm not wowed by the IQ like I was when I first bought my 5D3... but that's a story for another time.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I built a basic set of fast Nikkor ai-s lenses and I plan on selling off everything else. I'll keep a few random lenses that I really like.

Back to the Zeiss... to test it with the FP, I needed to remove that damn bent adapter. Well it was no match for a pair of dykes and some needle nose pliers. In mere minutes I turned the "bonus!" adapter into a pile of metal shards.

So, after enlisting my actor friend, I decided to take the lens out for a test run with the FP.

Here are the results...

As I mentioned earlier, I have a hot and cold feeling toward the FP, but on that day, maybe it was the light, or the beat up, pseudo-modern Zeiss optics, I think I have one of those random keeper lens...

Now I just need to refrain from building a set of Zeiss lenses...

Easier said than done.

Thanks for reading my long, unscientific, anecdotal review.

At least it doesn't have vertical audio. 

As far as being a fanboy... I don't really care about brands. But I must say that I have always gotten along better with Canon cameras than any other brand. In fact, I am tired of using other brands and being disappointed. I'm probably going to go all in with Canon from this point forward. If that makes me a fanboy... of Gawd... I'm too old to care. 

1 hour ago, Emanuel said:

Oh Gosh, Glenn, you sound like a fanboy now! Well, I am used to praise Canon too but ; )

Nothing wrong on that, just when people are going down the hill, we cannot follow the trend only because it is convenient. They don't give a damn for anything other than taking advantage of an opportunity to take profit. No ethics nor aesthetics there but they claim to push the craft or art forward. How come? Morals count. Science too. What makes sense should. Like nature. Going against a natural law is something I can never buy. As much as math, we don't discuss or reinvent it, we just adequate ourselves to. No democracy down there.

:- )

Canon only exists to make a profit. That is their, and every other company's, sole purpose. They make a profit by providing products that the market wants/needs.

It's really quite simple.

As far as 'going against nature' or science, I can only assume you're referring to vertical video... based on your previous statement. I agree with you... I despise it. Luckily, in its natural form, this PowerShot camera shoots 16:9 video but you can turn it if you want vertical video.

That seems fairly acceptable to me. As much as I hate it, I understand that, due to smartphones' inability to make 16:9 shooting simpler and peoples' inherent laziness, there is a desire for vertical video and since Canon isn't in the smartphone business, they need to offer that possibility.

But out of box, this vlogging  camera shoots 16:9 in its natural form factor.

24 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

The wheel has already been invented so it's useless to write "ain't necessarily mean" when "don't necessarily mean" is the one to stand corrected ; )

The same way to always act accordingly the 'people and their needs' can become a wicked game as much as History is made by historians as for instance :- )

We're not talking about communism here. We're talking about a product that was designed and manufactured for a specific usage. Most of Canon's products are designed that way. They always were.

I'd imagine in the 70s when most manufacturers/consumers were heavily invested in SLRs, the Canonet line of cameras probably seemed pretty pedestrian, but that didn't stop Canon from putting a pretty spectacular lens on it and marketing it to a specific consumer at a reasonable price point. Even the Canonet line had different entry levels.

As far as this camera goes, the biggest omission is a tripod thread. Otherwise, for sit down, YouTube Vlogs... what more do you need? Only a thoughtful eye can tell the difference between a $500 camera, a $3000 camera or even a phone in YouTube videos.

I mean, they're not marketing it for indie filmmakers.

But... since it shoots 24p, an interesting film could be made with it if someone could see past the limitations and see the possibilities. 

8 hours ago, kye said:

I didn't say it's good...  just that it's designed for vlogging!

The Canon PowerShot V10:

• Pocketable, flip-up screen, integrated stand
• 19mm equivalent FOV, and the EIS crop isn't that much
• Everything else is just like a PowerShot though.....  1" CMOS sensor, Contrast AF, low bitrate, etc

It's a sad day when simply combining an ergonomic chassis and a wide enough lens counts as innovation, but it does.  I've seen at least one camera YouTuber say that if they keep the form factor and improve the specs then this might tempt them away from the high-end S35/FF cameras they currently use.

Good points except I think it is good... if I am to assume that the frame of the woman is a sample from the camera? I don't mean this next statement for anyone in particular and especially not you, but the shooters that think in terms of gear first, never understood Canon, so it's easy for them to criticize Canon and this is the perfect example.

Canon makes products for specific groups of people based on their needs.

Or an Arri 65

https://m.imdb.com/title/tt11858890/technical/

3 hours ago, D Verco said:

Good move. Most of the F mounts are really good. I'd just look at a 3rd party option for the 50mm. Nikon's F mount 50mm was never as good as their other lenses. 

I just picked up a newer ai-s 50mm 1.2, for a steal, and it's one of the best 50s I've ever used. Even wide open it's fairly sharp and dreamy at the same time. The ai/ai-s 1.4 were okay, but I love the non-ai S.C. 1.4... probably the best $40 I ever spent.

The problem I have always had with zooms is that I was either compromising the shot for the luxury of not moving my setup, or I kept moving to get the sweet spot (pop) of the specific focal length I was zoomed in/out to... so the old saying about primes... Zoom with your feet... was still necessary to hit the sweet spot.

Of course, time was still saved because I didn't have to change lenses, but I also found that I was mostly using a small portion of the zoom range... usually between 40-65mm. At that point it's easier to split the difference and swap out the heavier zoom for a 50mm, and use my feet to zoom.

But then I was losing IS, so I needed a monopod or I wasn't able to hit that lens' sweet spot, so I started going a little wider, but then I'm compromising my specific style for the mechanics of the shot...

Point being... there are always compromises with run and gun. 

I know you're in school, but is it your end goal to be a videographer or a filmmaker?

Camera choice aside, if your end goal is to make films... either as a cinematographer or a director, or both, you may want to consider building a collection of manual focus/aperture lenses. The Nikon F mount is a great option with a long history of amazing lenses. I recommend trying to get the fastest lenses you can. They're a bit more money, but in the end, when you've decided you need them, you'll be happy you didn't waste any time with the slower lenses. To start out, the 28mm f/2 and 50mm f/2 are great lenses that can be found pretty cheap if you go with the non-ai or ai versions.

If you decide not to stick with Nikon cameras, Nikkor lenses will adapt to any camera you may upgrade to.

With that said, if you are considering filmmaking (narrative or other) you may want to look for an inexpensive camera that you can experiment with for short films, music videos, docs, etc... perhaps an OG BMPCC or even a P4K as it seems the prices for them are coming down on the used market.

Good luck with your choice.