webrunner5

I would imagine it is an option in every PP, the Gamma setting that you can apply just like Cine, Slog, Movie etc.

Yeah, the E1 is a heck of a buy now.

Yeah there is plus and minus to doing Anything above normal for sure. But yeah there is some real bargains even in A Mount lenses, and they just about give away excellent Minolta glass. The Beer Can is a good example.

And one big drawback I have about the A6300, A600 is it is damn prone to the dreaded Plastic Digital look. It is the Poster Child for that problem. Skin can look like hammered dog shit on them if you push them in post. So really thinking on this thread I am not too sure I would even consider one for Weddings. Weddings are ALL about faces, and well that would be a total disaster if the whole thing, everyone looks like a Barbie Doll. Hmm. Probably one reason the vast amount of weddings are shot on a Canon. Skin tones, paramount on wedding shots. Although Jason Lanier seems to make them work, so maybe look up one of his online lessons?? Something to look into and to think about.

You really need to use the Sony LA-EA4 as it has PDAF AF in it. A lot faster and more accurate focusing. But it is expensive, and cleaning the thing is risky as it is fragile. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FSB7432/ref=as_li_tf_tl?ie=UTF8&amp&camp=1789&amp&creative=9325&amp&creativeASIN=B00FSB7432&amp&linkCode=as2&amp&tag=phillipreeven-20

I would much rather have the option to add a OLPF filter to a camera than have no choice in the matter. Under a lot of circumstances moire is not a problem at all on a lot of shoots. Why loose the sharpness and perceived resolution gain if you don't have too.. I would be nice if they did what Sigma did, does with their cameras with a removable one.

Well if it is just a small upgrade I can agree with you. But Maybe, just Maybe Sony is going to make this thing a camera you just can't pass on. It might make be pretty unbelievable. But It also might cost a ton of money also, Gulp.

This page is interesting also. I would think if you own the camera you can do pretty much anything you want with it. Including modifying it. http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?243166-DVX100-modification-HD-4-4-4-information-request/page3

It Only works with certain lenses, just like the Olympus, Panasonic cameras do. Not every lens will add to make the 5, or on Olympus cameras 6 1/2 stops. And they are unfortunately the newest, most expensive lenses. Yea you can enter them.

I really don't think I would give up APSC, Face Focus, Eye Focus, Clear Zoom, the best 4K out there, SLog 2, SLog 3, on and on for a Panny G85. Not me. But it is cheaper. Easy to spend your money. All you have to do is go to Jason Lanier's web site. He started out with the Sony A6300, A6500 after he quit using Nikon gear. Made him famous. He uses those and the A7 series cameras now. He is probably the most recognized model, wedding photographer in the world now. And probably one of the most highly paid ones. http://www.jasonlanier.com/

This is how you set it up. https://www.slrlounge.com/how-to-use-sony-steadyshot-with-old-manual-and-adapted-lenses/

Hmm good question. I think you might have too? Since there is no communication I don't think the camera knows what is up. I am too poor to afford all these new fan dangled cameras you youngsters have, so I will trust you young people have a clue, Gulp!! ?

Out of Likes. Yikes!

Newestguy on DPR wrote this and I think it holds true. "It works like this a6500 + stabilized lens = 3 axis in body and 2 axis in lens a6500 + lens with electronic communication but unstabilized = 5 axis in body a6500 + lens with no electronic communication = 3 axis in body The camera needs to know the focus distance in order to get the last 2 axis of stabilization. So a unstabilized MF lens with electronic communication with the camera like a Zeiss Loxia will still get 5 axis in body stabilization, but a completely manual lens like a Rokinon will only get 3 axis in body."

So have I. Does it mean in 2018 I am going to go buy a Nikon F and do manual focus, and take the film down to the local drugstore. I really doubt it. I am probably going to buy a Canon 1DX mk II and shoot DPAF till the Cows come home, and charge 5000 bucks to do it. ?

I can agree to that If they get their act together on better output on the E2. And they may be belly up with the 4K BMPCC announced for half the price of the E2. I have no clue how they are going to sell it at even 1000 bucks?

Yeah the whole Sony line up is Really hard to pass on. They have really pushed for a lot of great ideas on their cameras. I know people complain about the menus, but it is complex because the cameras have a lot of complex things they can do that a lot of cameras, particularly DSLRs can't do. Other than if you need 10bit, which is nice no doubt, and are into Anamorphic big time, Sony has a camera that is probably not going to be beat by others. The newest A7 mk III has really good colors now right OOC and really good AF from the A9. And the face and eye focus alone is worth it. Not counting Clear Zoom, on and on..

Out of Likes. Yeah that sounds like a great plan.

Yeah I have a woman friend of mine that is a Pro photographer and she still uses a Canon 5D mk III for all her work. And she does any and all that comes by shoots wise. She is not really a Wedding photog, but she has done them. She likes a few weekends off. ☺️

It is a really hard camera to not buy now that the prices have dropped. Just the form factor along is worth it. JVC has always had a pretty output on their cameras. I think you are making a good decision. If you don't like it I doubt you would loose much money on selling it. But I think it will get the job done for you.

Well I have owned a few Cine cameras and I can tell you the benefits of having ND filters built in, and a Ton of buttons that are easy to get to really are a Hugh benefit. Not counting you just look a heck of a lot more Professional. And well, you are. I think you will have No regrets of going with the C200. It will have a better output also. And naturally the Raw will be over the top looks wise in a Good way. Did Canon Ever announce the Middle Codec on one yet??

Jon I don't know if you have seen this video on the A7 mk III or not? But it is a darn good tutorial on getting skin tones right on the camera. But might not totally apply to the skin tones in Vietnam?

Folded optics cellphone. Pretty much what the Light L16 is also. https://***URL removed***/news/6628566824/oppo-announces-5x-optical-zoom-technology-for-smartphone-cameras http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-356042-1.html

You have to be making some good money, or be pretty serious to buy a C200 or a Eva1, FS7 mk II. If you want to make money I think you Have to have one, or rent them a lot. But things are changing so fast I would almost be afraid to get into a system anymore. I think I would buy a used Arri Alexa for 8 grand than a new above camera if you make your money on Sticks. It is such a proven, beautiful output camera. But media cost for it are Yikes kind of money! I think the average person on sticks will be happy enough with this new 4K BMPCC, and a Speedbooster. I guess how good the AF is on it will determine other uses.

Now I will admit I used a Hasselblad with no IBIS and No Touchscreen to do weddings, so I guess it could be done. But I only took like 50 to 70 shots tops back in the day, all pretty much staged, linked to strobes, on and on. They don't do that anymore. No way I am shooting a wedding without lights for the cake cutting, group photos, on and on also. You sound like you would charge 200 bucks for it. I charged probably 2500 bucks or more at times in today's money for my shoots. One year I did 44 of them with my wife helping. And was just Photos. If they had video like they have now it would be 4000 bucks at least for me to do it. Weddings are a Ton of work. And you loose your entire weekend doing them. And you have to have damn good gear and spare gear, up to date gear, to shoot them. A lot of people still use Canon 1DC's to shoot weddings. Just think what a pair, or even 3 of them cost to buy when they were new. I had 5 Hassy bodies and 12 lenses for them.Think what they cost. I always had a body up in New York getting cleaned and oiled, checked for problems. Rotated them to make sure they didn't fail. But they did last longer than the newer digital cameras out now. They didn't get outdated fast. You can't just start off charging 10,000 bucks, but I found the less you charged the less jobs you got. How good is some jackass charging 399 bucks to do my wedding thing! If you charge big money people Assume you are damn good and will pay it. And you better damn well produce, and that takes skill and gear to do it, and a lot of luck on your side. You never get over the jitters doing it, and that is a good thing. Once you relax and think you got it you screw up. It isn't for the meek trust me. It is a hell of a fast paced way to make a buck. You sweat bullets at the wedding and you sweet bullets editing it, and hell the Darkroom stuff was even more scary back in the day. I would Really be afraid to shoot a wedding without a camera that has dual card slots. Man you loose a card your goose is cooked!