Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Eno

  1. "And take the 6K/60p with an 8K sized pinch of salt. It seems like an awful lot of data to record onto SD card to me!"

    The fastest current SD cards can write more than 250MB/sec or 2000 Mb/sec of data, that's plenty enough even for 8K 60p in a compressed codec.

  2. 21 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

     Dual Pixel AF operates in all modes except for none crop 4K or RAW at 60p/50p recording."


    In the press release this wasn't clearly mentioned.

    Anyway, the "new Digic X processor purportedly offers 3.1x faster image processing and 380x faster computing performance relative to the older Mark II", but can't handle PDAF in 4K 60p (without crop) or RAW. Anyway you look at it smells like "cripple hammer".

  3. 54 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

    You should check your facts because 1dx iii can perfectly AF at FF 5.5k 30p RAW it cannot at 60p

    Second the camera reads RAW in buffer then you need to do AF and in parallel compress the RAW data write to the card and process a 4k supersample proxy 10bit 4:2:2 and write to a second card all in 16ms max. But yeah is crippling as everybody has this tech and spec in a weather sealed body.....


    You should check you fact! NO, the 1DX mk3 does not have PDAF "enabled" in RAW video at any frame rate!

  4. 16 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

    You need to process these pixels to do the AF while you are reading and pumping out to a CFExpress card in parallel in a weather sealed body..... No one as done it yet in a sealed body..... and with fan only two cameras that starts at 16k usd did achieve this….. So yes there is not technical reason is just a cartel crippling 🙂


    Should I mention that Canon braves itself with the "new Digic X processor purportedly offers 3.1x faster image processing and 380x faster computing performance relative to the older Mark II", that can't handle AF during 4k 60p with no crop or RAW 30p. So you tell me if either Canon are lying about it's capabilities and it's not that fast or they intentionally crippled the AF in 4K 60p and RAW recording? I bet it is the latter, they are masters at crippling user desired features!

    The camera reads the RAW data in any mode and the card reader writes the data anyway (until it's limit speed). The lack of AF during RAW recording is indeed just a "cartel crippling" as you personally said.

  5. 4 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

    It is an huge amount of data to read and process in a small not ventilated camera. No cartel of whatsoever..... just cost and tech challenges.  

    This is pure BS you know? Reading RAW sensor data is easier than reading and encoding it. There is absolutely NO technical reason why there is NO AF on RAW output on 1Dx3 but the Canon crippling hammer!

  6. 12 hours ago, Cliff Totten said:

    Panasonic is NOT being "stubborn" with PDAF.

    Believe me,....Panasonic is TIRED of hearing their AF complaints. They KNOW....believe me,...the know! They are doing the best they can with what they have.

    I really don't belie this is the case!

    Whoever produces the sensors, produces them after buyer's specification. I really believe Panasonic are suborned as a mule in regard to implementing PDAF, as are Sony in regards to proper ergonomics, menus and touch interface. Japanese arrogance has no boundaries!

    Also look at Canon, they finally gave 4K 60p with no crop and raw video but it is without PDAF. I bet they all have a cartel agreement between them so that no one offers a products that will bring out of the business the others.

  7. @Falk Lumo

    Some people confuse the terms but there is a fundamental between pixel binning and line skipping, the later being the worst possible way to read a sensor for video. Line skipping  exhibits huge more, aliasing effects and reduced low light performance (exactly like on the Z6 RAW output).

  8. @Andrew Reid, some little observations:

    The write speed on the Z6 on the card is 240 MB/sec max and not 500 MB/sec as you imply: https://www.cameramemoryspeed.com/nikon-z6/fastest-xqd-cards/

    The Z6 camera is now listed at BH at $1,796.95 instead or the $1,996.95 original price: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1431706-REG/nikon_1595_z6_mirrorless_digital_camera.html?sts=pi&pim=Y

    I see no 30-40% reduction of the original price.

    The lenses cost the same as on launch day:



    Nikon announced in April 4 2019 that we shall see eye AF in one firmware update (we got that in May) and the external RAW recording later in the year: https://www.nikonusa.com/en/about-nikon/press-room/press-release/jp1hlujr/Nikon-Brings-Powerful-Cinematic-Solutions-to-NAB®-2019-With-Z-Series-Cameras-and-MRMC-Broadcast-Automation-.html

    That's just 3+ months ago (not 6 months as you have written); patience is a virtue. :)

  9. 1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

    Well Sony and Fuji's engineers clearly disagree.

    It works in 8bit. Clear advantage over Rec.709 colour profiles.

    I've used it and seen the difference for myself. It isn't a 10bit-only colour space.

    S-Gamut is also a wide colour space, and that can be compressed to 8bit as well.

    Well, I don't know what to say.

    The LOG format can be indeed compressed in 8 bit, but it looses a lot tonality in the process, it has more DR but not colors.

  10. 46 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

    Maybe you just haven't used the A7R III. BT2020 is an option alongside Rec.709 in the Hybrid Log Gamma picture profile, 8bit.

    No I haven't used it, but by definition Rec. 2020 is a wider color space (which needs more bit depth than 8 bit).

  11. 4 hours ago, jonpais said:

    I need to get my eyes examined, because the two pictures above look practically identical to me.

    Indeed you need to do that cause there's a 0,4 stops difference between the two (that's almost half a stop better ISO performance on the G9 RAW files compared to the GH5). :)

  12. @jonpais

    That's only your point of view, mine is totally different. :)

    I really don't have any use for V-Log, 10 bits, ALL-I codecs, unlimited recording is nice but irrelevant for event shooting, featured clips and commercials etc. I really do appreciate the 300 euro less per camera (cause I need several of them). I really do need the better image quality offered by the G9 (yes it's there and can't be added via firmware - below it's a raw comparison between the two). I really do need the bigger EVF, the 80 Mpix multi shot mode is fantastic for corporate work. The G9 screen resolution is probably the same, the GH5 uses 4 dots per pixel (RGBW instead of RGB), 3,2 inch vs 3 inch it's a very small difference.

    It's funny how you complain about the lack of video features on the G9, which except for the GH5 have no mach in any other ILC on the market, from any company. :)

    If you are so trilled about those extra video features on the GH5, go for it! Who's cheeping you not to buy it?

    I do 50/50 photo/video work and I'm really very contend with what the G9 offers in regard to video and trilled about the improvements in the still side of things. And yes I will pay for it as soon as I can place my preorder. :)


    G9 vs GH5 ISO 6400 RAW.jpg

  13. The real question is: are you willing to trade the fantastic video features of the GH5 (most of which are very important on the paper specs but probably never going to be used anyway) with the G9 better image/video quality, better AF, better stabilization, one of the largest EVF's out there, all of those at a lower price?

  14. Good video in a canon DSLR is ancient history, Canon themselves takes very good care not to repeat the 5D mk2 "mistake" from the past. For us video makers there's nothing to see here, all that Canon wants from us is into buying the very expensive Cxx line cameras and if we want both very good photo and video capabilities we should look elsewhere!

  • Create New...