andrew berekdar

I'm curious to know why the s35 sensor size is considered an issue? I'm not sure what 'APS-C look' is...I'm sure Andrew Reid is aware that he is referring to a sensor format based on size and aspect ratio. This doesn't constitute a look does it?

When you say softer source is there a particular reason you suggest tungsten & CTB through diffusion over LED or fluorescent? Just a note in addition to the issues raised by others above - If you are going to use an open face tungsten lamp, be aware that if the bulb blows and the lamp is pointed at your interviewee you could have a very serious situation on your hands...

Everyone has their own opinion on 3rd party parties, but when it comes to relatively inexpensive ones like LP-E6 I prefer to save myself the hassle of not being able to charge knock-offs in my original charger, reduced lifespan, reduced operating time, inability to register battery and get accurate info (like % of battery life remaining) If you're investing in Sony NPF batteries then that's another matter. A tenth of the price for half the quality I can accept.

I'm not sure whether it is or isn't a music video, it's certainly an ode to the girl. Whether you find it romantic, creepy, indulgent, life affirming etc. is going to be up to you, influence by the preconceptions you bring to the video, and the context within which you are viewing it. In other matters arising, with 13 stops of DR there's no excuse for blowing out highlights on skin tones.

If you can get them while they're in stock...

Apologies, I forgot the H4n doesn't have a line-input option to by-pass the mic preamp, so you'll need an attenuator... Yes, here's a video showing that happening with the H4n https://vimeo.com/38171316 Which is why you need an attenuator of some kind to prevent it. Other recorders allow for a line-in. This explains what is happening to the voltage difference between line & mic http://geoffthegreygeek.com/audio-levels/ Hope this helps

The meter is referring to the signal in the NLE, not what was going in to the recorder. If you distort the signal as it goes in to a recorder, dial the recorder to 1, you'll end up with a weak (-24dB ) but already distorted signal.

Changing to the line-in input should solve the problem. Microphones have a low output, which is why they need to be boosted, but if you boost an amplified signal (i.e. from a mixing board) you can distort it, which appears to be the case here. Try to monitor the sound with headphones from the Zoom H4n you'll here the distortion but you won't necessarily be able to tell by the levels on the visual display. Good luck for tonight and let me know if changing the input to line-in sorts the problem out or whether you need to use the attenuator.

Out of interest what were your settings on the input your recorder? Did you set the input to line-in, rather than mic / mic+48?

What shutter speed / frame rate are you on?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1114784-REG/aputure_al_528w_528_bulb_daylight_tempratur.htmlhttp://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/270878-REG/Lastolite_LL_LR4896_48_5_in_1_Reflector.html http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/62235-REG/Westcott_1100_Illuminator_Arm.html and instead of a fresnel (for budget reasons) http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1114779-REG/aputure_amaran_al_198_198_on_camra_daylight.html and the best light stands you can afford

Although tungsten produces a better quality of light, I think a LED light powered by mains / cheap batteries will be a much more practical solution for you if you're self-shooter working on a fairly modest budget. The Aputure Amaran 528 claims to have a CRI above 95 which, if you're not familiar with it, refers to the accuracy of colour rendition (measured against a hypothetical reference source) and basically anything over 90 is considered pretty good. That's not to say the self-acclaimed ratings shouldn't be taken with a pinch of salt.... Aputure have a good reputation for making budget equipment, the only suggestion I would make would be to go for the 528s rather than 528w as the former has a wider spread and a slighter higher output which might come in useful, especially if you shoot it through a softbox / diffusion. For interviews on a budget I'd personally go for one softbox to use as a key light, a reflector on a arm for fill if necessary, and a tungsten fresnel (rather than the narrow beam version of the LED) to use as a rim / hair / back light or turing it towards the background to create some separation

Probably best not to judge any camera on a single video, Kroll's video is impressive but bear in mind he's shot it under very favourable conditions. Impressed by the detail in the image though, especially considering it was shot on the 24-105.

for your consideration.... https://vimeo.com/151363154

If you do go for the second hand Mk1 you'll miss out on the improved viewfinder, cleaner ISOs, 50/60fps on the mk2...sounds like you've made your mind up so you've just gotta bite the bullet on this one

Just to comment on the C100 mkii, I hear from colleagues who own them that the image falls apart early on in the grade, which I suspect you may be aware of. But if you're able to keep the BMPCC for projects which require a distinct look, and use the C100 for the projects where you want a look pretty much out of the camera then you've got a good combination. Horses for courses....

Hi, I'm in a similar position in that I'm looking to change my setup to allow for a more practical workflow but would like to have a camera I could use for more creative projects. Have you considered waiting to see if the Ursa mini 4.6k offers better low light with the new sensor? Or an Fs7?

Everyone has to get their kicks somewhere I suppose.... If anything your test shot has reminded me to take plenty of cards with me to paid shoots.

I don't understand why you wouldn't shoot in XAVC-I then?

Other than the edge tear issue (presumably caused by NR which remains present regardless of where the signal is output) is it safe to say that the other issues, such as banding, compression artefacts such as macro blocking etc., are improved greatly if used with an external recorder in both HD and UHD, s-log or otherwise? There are many comments about the contradictory practice of used something like a Shogun or 7Q with the Fs5 as it is no longer fulfils its run & gun / grab & shoot (or whatever branding Sony and its paid cronies want to push) function, but the fact is I don't want the expense or hassle of replacing tripods, sliders, jibs, Movi-10 etc if the recorder can easily be attached to a bar or magic arm to allow the Fs5 to work to a reasonable standard (and by reasonable I mean in comparison to the performance of similar priced or cheaper cameras). Plus this will avoid the issue of the Premiere Pro unfriendly codec when recorded as a ProRes file.

I believe Chapman is stating that the native ISO is 3200 in S-Log, where as in Cinegamma or Standard Gamma the native ISO is 800 / 1000 Native ISOs don't result in noise free images, and not all of the problems that he's responding to (or dismissing, depending on your point of view) are not only caused by the ISO, but compression and codec, bit depth, data rate, sensor, processor etc., all contribute to the issues. If anyone has shot in Cinegamma at ISO 800 in both HD and UHD in various shooing conditions I'd be interested to see the results

Are there any tests available to show which issues - banding / excessive noise in reasonable conditions / macro blocking / edge tearing are completely overcome when using an external recorder?