webrunner5

37mm ND filter, senior moment. 😨

I think what you are looking for just doesn't exist. You have to either look like a production studio with a Cine camera and rig from hell or buy an Osmo Pocket II and Velcro it to your chest.  I don't think there really is a middle ground. Even the GH5 is a pretty weak camera compared to a Red Komodo. The old, "go big or stay home" saying sort of applies I am afraid.

My Phone and my GH2 in B&W with the 12-32mm with my 32mm screw on ND are looking better every day!

Easiest fix is to buy a camera that doesn't need an external recorder lol. It is sort of what Kye said, build the ugliest heavy ass rig or go for what I am doing as of late, just the least you can get by with. 😜

Yeah, the clients are the ones paying the bill, so even if it is a harder road to travel with the Komodo looks like it might be the right path to take. It is Reds best effort so far for overall use. 

There are people from Congress that go there all the time, good or bad idea I don't know. Not something new.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/six-us-lawmakers-arrive-taiwan-unannounced-trip-2022-04-14/

1 hour ago, kye said:

Definitely agree that RAW video from these things looks absolutely lovely.  Are there any smartphones that shoot RAW and Prores?  

From my limited experience with cameras that shoot both codecs (P2K / BMMCC) and downloading footage in both formats from various RED, ARRI, etc cinema cameras, the Prores files were basically as nice to work with and grade as the RAW files.  My theory was that Prores isn't better as a codec per-se but it's just that on cameras that shoot RAW the manufacturers know how to dial in the codec to look good.  

If it is in the ballpark of RAW image quality then the file-size differences can be a useful benefit.  The fact that many movies screened in theatres were shot on 1080p Prores HQ was a pretty big call as far as I was concerned - if it's good enough to project that big then I figure it's better than most of us need!

I don't think there is any phone that does Prores and Raw. The Apple iPhone 13 Pro does Prores at these rates.

All iPhone 13 Pro’s ProRes are 10-bitt with 4:2:2 chroma subsampling. These are maximum bitrates tested by FilMiC Pro at 4K 30fps.

iPhone 13 Pro’s ProRes variants:

ProRes Proxy: 170Mbps = 21MB/s = 1.3GB/m

ProRes LT: 360Mbps = 45MB/s = 2.7GB/m

ProRes 422: 540Mbps = 67.5MB/s = 4GB/m

ProRes 422 HQ: 735Mbps = 92MB/s = 5.5GB/m

Yeah, but MotionCam does really not work very well at all on Sony phones and not great using Samsung phones either. So, like the video says other apps work out better. And if you have a really old phone probably none of the apps work. It takes a lot of horsepower for some of the apps to work.

But this video with 3 different cameras show maybe Filmic Pro might be a better option than MotionCam on different phones.

I would be afraid of Nikon long term and heck even Panasonic. Somebody is going to go out of business down the road. Smartphones are putting more and more pressure on them. You sort of need a phone but not a camera in this day and age. I don't see how any of these companies can last just selling upscale items. I would think Canon, Sony will be the last two standing. 

Well I bought a used OnePlus Pro 9. Got a really good deal on one from a Pawnshop, like 350 bucks used. And a friend of mine wanted to buy my Xperia Pro-1 for nearly what I paid for it so why not. He has several Sony FF cameras, and they sort of work together well. So, a win for him and well me also.

I have been a fan of the OnePlus cameras, never had one but like an underdog. And this video helped push me over to the Pro 9. I have not got it yet, mid next week they say. So, something else to learn but hey sort of like doing that stuff. They have had some nice updates on the phone as of late. Good looking B&W and the XPan thing is interesting. We shall see soon enough.

Interesting that the picture they use of the camera is not a OnePlus Pro 9 it is the cheaper model OnePlus 9, hmm. But footage is using the Pro 9 in the video, odd. Oh well.

When you are retired even 150 is a ball buster. I paid 109 dollars for my GH2, I had to eat dog turds and tree bark for 2 weeks to make it up. The yard is clean now, but the trees look like crap 😜

Yeah, if you want it on a 1080p timeline sure it is 13 stops. I can see that. In reality we need to buy a PK4 and be done with it on the video side. Not only does it really have 13 stops it can shoot in Raw, and it has Way better color science than anything else we could afford, and hey it has a m4/3 mount, hot damn.

Then you are going to downscale it to Rec709 and then put it up on YouTube compression. Sure on your monitor it will look different but, on the web, not so much. A GH5 is ten times the camera for all the video goodies it has compared to an XT3. Not counting lens selection.

27 minutes ago, kye said:

No, I wasn't.  This is from CineD.

Source is: https://www.cined.com/content/uploads/2018/10/recent-results.jpg

What's the article that shows the chart you showed?  I don't recall having seen that before.

https://www.cined.com/fujifilm-x-t3-review/ And you are not even comparing the same test to each other. It would be 12.4 at max not 13. Like you are really going to see 1 to 1.2 stops with you eye.

Neither one but a Dentist can afford! 😁

9 hours ago, kye said:

You're thinking about this wrong - when you shoot LOG you create highlight rolloff in post using the methods I have mentioned.  For all practical purposes, all cameras are just large arrays of linear light measurement - they don't have any highlight rolloff at all.  
The "Look" of each camera is defined almost exclusively by the colour processing that happens after the image is captured (and a tiny bit by the sensor) and when you shoot log you're in control of the vast majority of that processing that occurs.

I couldn't find reliable DR tests for the Z6, but the GH5 doesn't compare well to the XT-3...  GH5 v1 has 10.8 stops, GH5 v2 has 11.5 and XT-3 has 13 stops.  

DR can make more of a difference than many people think when shooting in uncontrolled conditions and when it's not just art but needs to be informational as well.  In shooting the GH5 v1 I am often forced to choose between clipping the whole sky and being able to identify the person sitting in the shade.  A choice between "here's a photo of Susan and the sky is digital white" and "here's a nice photo of ....  someone? who is that?" isn't a choice that I enjoy having to make.

Of course, this choice is actually a factor of how usable the image is in latitude tests rather than just DR as a single digit.  Having a photo of Susan where she's bright purple is better than her not being recognisable, but still leaves a huge amount to be desired.

So you are just going by the DR figures believing the manufacture.

Here is what they Really are on the XT3. Far from 13. Like I said probably not a stop behind. Unless you buy a BM camera you are never going to get high DR unless you spend 5000 dollars.

Oh I don't deny that, but for the average person that can be an expensive endeavor lol, not counting a rare occurrence.

I disagree, I think even a lot of us can be fooled by some Smarthpnone stuff if it doesn't involve long zooms and big DoF. There are some damn good phones out now, and if you use Raw it can be even better if you are skilled at grading.  So I really doubt the average person has a clue what is good or bad filming wise. 

It still boils down to if the footage is interesting to a large audience. When I was young stuff was so terrible quality wise it was ridiculous but hell I didn't know it at the time. I watched stuff in amazement as did everyone else. It is the story that holds you, not the camera shooting it.

Sure, if are shooting weddings you need some good stuff and a lot of skill. But damn some of the best Si Fi movies were shot on crap cameras along with pretty crap actors, and horror movies hell the worse the quality the better.

Talk about DR.

https://www.videomaker.com/article/c10/18236-the-kuleshov-effect-understanding-video-editings-most-powerful-tool/?utm_campaign=VM eNews&utm_medium=email&utm_content=221956617&utm_source=hs_email

And like I have said 100 times on here, DR and the camera you shoot on makes no difference in hell compared to the content the viewer sees. You can have an Arri 35mm and you have a shit story or can't come up with something interesting nobody is going to look at it period. DR is the least of your problems trust me. Hell audio is more important than DR.

It is like people on here poo pawing Smartphones, how many people on here are making anything worth looking at on a better camera.

What you think a GH5 has 9 stops and the XT3 has 15? They are probably not a stop apart. Don't believe ANY of the bullcrap the manufactures tell you about their DR other than Arri. Red is the biggest liar of them all.

Go by this.

https://www.cined.com/lab-tests/

The GH5 with the latest firmware upgrades is not really that bad at AF.