Hanriverprod

The documentary was destined for broadcast, and post wanted 10-bit for some compositing stuff with stock photos. XF-AVC isn't yet an option on the C200, so Raw would've been my only choice there. 
The actors weren't blindly improv-ing for 5-10 straight minutes. They started by working directly from the script, then the director would talk to them about the character and encourage them to change the words up for their comfort. Then the actors would add new lines and topics, and feel their way to a richer, more natural conversation. This meant the conversations had to play out in as long a take as possible, at least in the first angle, as otherwise the dialogue would suffer. Very cool working method, and we got some great stuff.
More to the point, I was hired on as the DP. You've never worked professionally, so this may be new to you, but I would never presume to tell my director how to work with his actors. I'd never work again. As the shooter, my place is to collaborate with the director and bring his vision to life. "You shouldn't work that way" or "I can't work like that because my camera..." etc are not options. 
Commercials and corporate work are generally for broadcast, meaning that I'd have to use RAW. Also, this was another instance where clients requested 10-bit 422. In addition, it had to be delivered to their post people for a relatively quick turnaround. If post called me and said "what the hell is this codec and how do I edit it?" and I answered with some shit about the Canon utility and how great it'll be once NLE support is widespread, guess who's never hiring me again?
We were not able to have electronics within a wide radius of the Tesla coil, as there was a risk of the field it creates frying anything nearby. Also, all available house power was going to lights and the robot, and we had a generator to handle the coil. There was nowhere to set up a DIT station, and we were shooting somewhere pretty of of the way, so no extra personnel for that either.
Plus, as you said, it wouldn't be ideal. We would've needed to bring down the robot arm, dismount the Faraday cage, change out the card, format, re-mount the cage, run the camera, then re-position the robot arm. And that would've taken 2-3 people to do quickly--people who were needed to reset the rest of the scene elements in a timely fashion. We were shooting night exterior, and we only had one day with the coil. There was no extra time to wrestle with media.
That's why I say this camera falls into no-man's-land. The 8-bit isn't good enough for me and many of my clients, and the RAW isn't practical for many shooting scenarios I encounter day to day. And the fact remains that I need enough media for a full day of shooting; it's an actual problem, not a straw man argument.
For you personally, shooting RAW all day with minimal media may be a viable option. For many of us, it is not. Implying that we are being disingenuous or lazy for pointing that out is reductive and misleading.

Very nice! Here's mine with Canon 85mm and Lie709

Sigma 18-35:

The more I use the GH5, the more I love it.
http://imgur.com/a/Ff6ME
 

Panasonic needs to leave dfd af and figure out how to compete with dpaf because amateurs and professionals without large crews know how much time and energy this saves on a shoot. Panny can come out with the best features but dpaf is joining the idea of canon colors on why most will go with them knowing that their overpriced cameras are being crippled.

Panasonic needs to leave dfd af and figure out how to compete with dpaf because amateurs and professionals without large crews know how much time and energy this saves on a shoot. Panny can come out with the best features but dpaf is joining the idea of canon colors on why most will go with them knowing that their overpriced cameras are being crippled.

Panasonic needs to leave dfd af and figure out how to compete with dpaf because amateurs and professionals without large crews know how much time and energy this saves on a shoot. Panny can come out with the best features but dpaf is joining the idea of canon colors on why most will go with them knowing that their overpriced cameras are being crippled.

Panasonic needs to leave dfd af and figure out how to compete with dpaf because amateurs and professionals without large crews know how much time and energy this saves on a shoot. Panny can come out with the best features but dpaf is joining the idea of canon colors on why most will go with them knowing that their overpriced cameras are being crippled.

Panasonic needs to leave dfd af and figure out how to compete with dpaf because amateurs and professionals without large crews know how much time and energy this saves on a shoot. Panny can come out with the best features but dpaf is joining the idea of canon colors on why most will go with them knowing that their overpriced cameras are being crippled.

Oh my! if it ain't one of the greatest selling points since sound put on celluloid, then this camera ain't selling s*#t!!
Seriously, why a "pro" wouldn't want something like this in his workflow, it's beyond me..
I am 98%, the people that do not care about Dual Pixel AF, have never worked with it, at times it is really liberating (it is just a tool, for the right moment it can be valuable though).
I am putting another 25euros on the Rage Against The Machine album.. but don't tell anyone!
 

Panasonic needs to leave dfd af and figure out how to compete with dpaf because amateurs and professionals without large crews know how much time and energy this saves on a shoot. Panny can come out with the best features but dpaf is joining the idea of canon colors on why most will go with them knowing that their overpriced cameras are being crippled.

Believe it or not, that amazing Varicam 35 reel that blew us all away a few years ago was shot on the same 10-bit AVC-Ultra codec.
 

I agree...if I was shooting something alone I would never be out there with a Cine cam of any kind, nor even a rigged out a DSLR style cam...the more low key, the less chance of getting hassled... by police or robbers for that matter...also I should have included IMO in my previous post, as it's all just speculation on my part, as to what Panny will do with this camera...I am working on getting a feature into developement plus have a book optioned (true story) that would make an amazing series on Netflix or Amazon...I would not be a target for this cam either, as if my projects came through, I would opt for the Varicam LT, as it would be perfect for my purposes and already approved for shooting on, if Netflix produces your project.
Yes...but it's probably just a rendering...remember the Craft Camera...I think Panny posted a picture, that they knew would stir lots of speculation...the reason I'm hoping for a locking m4/3 mount, would be that then you could adapt anything and if the s35 sensor cropped to m4/3 and s16 as well as it's native s35 you would have an extremely versatile mount that would also encourage the purchase of Panny lenses, which makes sense for Panasonic business wise....anyway...they're certainly getting a lot of mileage with a rendering and a few forum threads lol??
Agreed...the event is streaming live on their FB page on Friday at the Paramount Theatre...against my better judgement I'm so sucked in by now, I'll be compelled to watch...I'll post the link below in case you're interested.
 
https://www.facebook.com/events/1800044130310599/

Ever since I gave up my Nikon D5200 a few years ago for the Panasonic GX7, I've been dearly missing one lens. The 17-50mm f2.8. I tried the 12-35mm f2.8 on the Panasonic but didn't like it. Then the Samsung NX1 came out along with the 16-50mm f2-2.8. At the time, it was way above my budget. So I've since considered other systems such as the Sony but for one reason or another, they didn't fit my needs. But now, over 2 years later, I've finally been able and willing to pick one up. Luckily as well, the camera body is entirely unused. The manufacturer sealing was still in place. 
One of the first things I do when I get a new camera is to compare it to my other camera(s) for things like colour, dynamic range and noise. I've made many such tests before but never usually post them. This time I've taken the time to do it properly and edit it together for all to see. 
First up is the X-T2 vs NX1 shootout. The main point of this was to see the differences in colour and tonality. See the video description for all the fine details on settings.
And next is this high iso comparison with two other cameras I currently have. Again, you can see the video description for all the setting details.
Some thoughts on the differences between the X-T2 and NX1:
AF-C and focus pulling with AF works much better on the older NX1 than the X-T2; in video anyway.  The 16-50mm f2-2.8 is a ridiculously good lens, image wise. And the focus rings works just like a classic lens. The grip and button layout of the NX1 is far better. I've always felt the retro styling of Fujifilm were a detriment to their functionality. The downside to the NX1 is that it is far inferior to the XT2 in low light. The last shot in the shootout was shot at ISO 800 on the NX1 and 1600 on the XT2, yet the NX1 shows less detail and more muddiness due to the noise reduction.  Also the NX1 is far sharper in 4k and HD but has more aliasing and moiré in the latter.  
Anyway, I'd really like to hear your thoughts on the difference between the images I'm yet undecided of which system to keep, even though the NX1 would finally fulfil my want.. or need of a 16-50mm f2.8. 

@tomekk- those look like fantastic LEDs. Excellent spectrum examples on their site as well, and excellent R9 performance. As competition heats up, expect even better light performance, not just in color but also thermal and luminous efficiency per Watt. Fiilex-sized (and build quality) point-source lights with more power will be amazing! (Aputure produces excellent light, however not in the same class in terms of size, build quality, and industrial design (to be fair, Fiilex are much more expensive lights per Watt/Luminous output)).
Fiilex is just releasing the new 360 Pro Plus: http://www.fiilex.com/products/P360_ProPlus.php. At $995 ($845 without hue control (still has color temp control)) it's a few hundred more than the Aputure 120d, however it's also variable color (including optional hue control!), much smaller, IP24 weatherproof, and has many cool modifiers available. The Aputure uses 135W vs. 90W for the Fiilex (+ Fiilex is variable color), so I'd expect the Aputure to be brighter, however we'd need to see independent tests for lux at 1m for both lights).
Fiilex has more powerful lights (e.g. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1043613-REG/fiilex_flxq5ac_q_500_ac_5_bfresnel.html), at $2k we're no longer in the best-bang-for-buck category (the build quality and light quality is amazing. Would be interesting to see a comparison with the new Aputure 300d when released).

I think you forgot a few "smalls" ? But yes I completely agree with your statement. I don't mean to pat myself on the back here, but without shooting Raw on the 5D3, I never would have gotten an image close to what I've been getting. And when you're shooting completely guerilla style as a one man band... every little bit of IQ helps. For instance, I know this isn't the best image in the world, but I would never get this level of skin texture with an h.264 codec...

Even zoomed in, the actor's skin looks better than anything I've ever captured. 
So for someone like me, a shooter and colorist with a minimal amount of skills, and productions like mine, with a minimal amount of self-funding, to be able to do a minimal amount, or a simple but extensive amount of LUTS and still get an image that doesn't break proves just how effective Raw is for no budget productions. IMO. YMMV. 

Facebook post... Nikon Speedbooster .71x -> Nippon Kogaku h auto 50mm f2 -> Kowa 8z -> CineD 4k 4:3 50p 8bit

My lut is specifically designed to emulate the colour offered by Magic Lantern RAW, debayered by ACR, with the Cinelog DCP profile applied. The Panasonic lut is not.

I never see anyone mention this, but Panasonic actually has a Varicam LUT that can be applied to properly convert V-Log footage to Rec. 709.  I think its a really nice starting place for grading footage, and it will properly transform V-Log into the Rec. 709 colorspace.   I see a lot of people grade by just applying custom S-curves or contrast to their Log footage with great results, but I'm a big fan of getting your camera data into the proper color space.  I think its especially helpful for people new to color grading, since it gets them into a more recognizable starting place.
The Arri LUT generator tool is also pretty cool especially for generating LUTs with soft roll-offs for shadows and highlights,. Your starting place is a bit off I think compared to Panasonic's LUT, but it's totally workable.
They're both free and worth checking out:
http://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/varicam/35/dl.html
http://www.arri.com/camera/alexa/tools/lut_generator/lut_generator/
For those interested, Camera Labs put out some really nice ungraded footage to test these LUTs in their review of the GH5.
 

When learning still photography, I spent a lot of time (and money) buying LED lights to replace strobes (best bang-for-buck strobes I found were the Einstein E640s, fantastic light output and quality (one strobe can easily overpower the sun in broad daylight at the beach). However they don't fire 100% of the time (recommend perhaps Profoto as a step up or if doing full-time stills and traveling, etc.)). Even with gels and a light meter I couldn't get the LEDs which weren't great from the factory to produce nice skintones. Spending a lot more on Dracast LEDs, which are built like tanks, got closer, but they still didn't look great for skintones (magenta bias). The lower cost Aputure LSx series LED panels finally produced great skintones, as did the spot source LED Fiilex (fantastic skintones though not a great bang-for-buck and relatively low light output per dollar, plus the fan can be audible in recordings (it's pretty quiet, but not silent)).
We talk a lot about how Canon has too much red, and red objects don't look right, etc. The reason Canon does this, is to make sure skintones look good. However for certain lights and conditions Canon's red bias can look no so good and must be fixed in post.
To get a better idea of what camera and light makers have to deal with: https://www.provideocoalition.com/doestlcireallywork/ . CRI and even TLCI aren't great predictors of light quality. I can say I agree- only testing the lights has shown whether they work well for skintones/color accuracy. I recently replaced LED bulbs in my studio office to help make shooting video from my desk look better. The new Hypericon LED bulbs rated at CRI 95 were purchased to improve the light/color over these Crees which IIRC were 80-85 CRI. To the light meter, both bulbs have a magenta bias, but to the eye (and cameras) the bias is green. The CRI 95 Hypericons looked no better on camera than the older ~80-85 CRI Crees. At least they use 2W less power, 16W vs 18W.
What's the deal with red and skintones? http://www.leapfroglighting.com/why-the-led-r9-value-isnt-important/  (read the article- they are actually saying the LED R9 (red) is the most important for skintones).
If you are having trouble getting great skintones indoors, take a closer look at your lights, especially if using LED or fluorescent lights (my first lights used fluorescent bulbs designed for photography/film and they still had a green bias: skintones didn't look that great). If on an ultra low budget, tungsten with china balls is still perhaps the best bang-for-buck (provided all the lights in scene are tungsten).

120D/T is much higher output than Fiilex P360EX. Decent lists: https://***URL not allowed***/7-awesome-led-soft-lights/, https://***URL not allowed***/?s=led+fresnel

I haven't tried them- best bet buy some that you can try and easily return if they don't work out. You really can't trust the CRI or marketing spiel. I always buy daylight (5000k or so), so all the lights match somewhat closely, even if sun is coming through window etc. (it's never perfect but you're better off with close color vs. all over the spectrum (unless you're going for an artistic/emotional effect). To see how well good light should look on your camera, shoot with just tungsten bulbs (and no other sources) with WB set correctly. Tungsten is a black body emitter which is continuous spectrum and more or less a perfect light source. Then when you test your LEDs (regardless of color temp), compare to the tungsten shots. You can also shoot outside in the shade using the sun as a reference black body source. Outside is a bit trickier since you'll get lots of bounced light from your surroundings (ideally with black, gray, or white bounce surfaces only).
Same suggestion- perhaps purchase both lights and test them, keep the winner (and let us know how it turned out). Dracast has upgraded their panels, so I wouldn't count them out without testing. LED tech is constantly improving and manufacturers are upgrading the LEDs in their panels. We need more LED spot/Fresnels (have 3, but only use the Fiilex P360EX (others have bad color and noisy fans)). IMO variable spot/Fresnels + light boxes / umbrellas + barn doors (and all the other available shapers) are a lot more useful than panels, and can pack pretty small. I would check out the Aputure daylight Fresnels too (120d and new 300d when available). Like the reviews have said, the Fiilex P360EX isn't super powerful (it is also variable color temp), however it's a tiny versatile light (Fresnel and soft dome options) and color and build quality are excellent.

Thanks @hyalinejim
I finally think about considering the GH5 again. These don't look terrible and oversharpened and some further colorgrading and filtering leads to really nice results (with good skintones actually).
 
 

@hyalinejim Great job with making the Panasonic reds less orange and ACTUAL red. Here is a shot where the tubes were solid red, the poker table was red, and the guy's shirt was red/black. It was looking a bit orange naturally till I added your LUT.
 

Yes, the GH5 is second.
 
For sure, the 5D files have much more malleability than 10bit VLog. You can really go to town on Magic Lantern RAW - it's a much thicker file. It's almost pristine (except for ugly shadow noise).
 
But I think that it is actually a testament to the GH5 that I can do that. And what I've presented here is only the realisation of my preferences. The point that I want to make is that the 10bit 422 files are robust enough to undergo a fair bit of colour correction / grading. To me, the VLog coming from the camera is a "raw" material with massive potential, as the (properly) RAW footage from the 5D3 is a beginning, and not an end in itself. In the main GH5 thread you mentioned that there was a range of quality in the posted videos for the GH5, from video-ish to something more satisfactory. Believe me, if Magic Lantern RAW was accessible to the same kinds of users - and in the same numbers - as the GH5, you'd see a hell of a lot of bad 5D3 ML videos.
 
Exactly. You need 12 nodes or 20 minutes work to match this with that. But when the groundwork is done, you're in business. Today I made a nice lut that combines the Canon-like colour with a Lightroom film emulation preset. I loaded this into the camera as a monitoring lut and exposed until it looked good in the viewfinder. Came back and slapped the lut on and each shot was perfect. It took as long as it does to Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V.... with maybe a small WB and curves adjustment beforehand This is the look that I'm into at the moment. In a year's time I might be into something different.










 

Big time!