webrunner5

5 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

In my experience, at least for video the low light is definitely not significantly better than the Panasonic G85!

Yeah from what I have seen it is not even a full stop better than the GH4. Half a stop maybe. Which is better than none.

Man hard to believe the low light sensitivity sports thingy is nearly twice as good as the next MFT camera???

5 hours ago, tugela said:

Yes. For Sony the big products are their a7 cameras and the RX 10/100 cameras. Those are the lines that will move their numbers, the a6xxx cameras are filler products.

Yeah ASP-C cameras seem to be the redheaded stepchildren of camera company's as of late.

I am pretty sure the smaller the sensor the less mass you have to move, ergo better stabilization. Same goes for the lens associated with it and focus.

Plus they have been building them a Lot of years.

But every full size ENG camera that I ever operated never had stabilization, or auto focus, yet they did the job. But I guess since they weighed 20+ pounds helped a lot. One reason I am not too big on DSLR'S or Smaller Cameras, no pun.

Well sad to say video bits is the new MP race. Not that many people are savoy on Video Speak. But it is now, it is in the forefront on all the web with the GH5 ads. Canon has stayed with 8 bit even on the newer C100 series cameras also. So I see your point, but there has been a lot of bad press on slog 3 falling apart on the A7s because it is Only 8bit.

2 minutes ago, aldolega said:

I can't see Sony giving the A7xIII's 10-bit internal. They didn't even give the II's 10-bit HDMI, after the GH4 had been out for quite a while with it. I think 10-bit HDMI is the most they'll do, and even that is a stretch. They have pro cams to protect, and still being the only FF mirrorless is still more than enough of a headline feature to sell on.

Personally I would rather see the III's stay 8-bit but fix all the dumb nitpicks, than go 10-bit but still overheat, have awful battery life, dim non-touchscreens, etc.

Well they will probably make the body a bit bigger, the GH5 is quite a bit bigger than the GH4 is. Yeah hard to say what Sony is thinking but they sell one hell of a lot more A7's  than they do high end stuff. All these Bigger Video camera makers are going to have to decide do they sell 5,000 high end ones, or 200,000 low end ones. I would take the latter route!

11 minutes ago, Axel said:

XAVC is such a good codec, it doesn't need 10-bit desperately. Do you really think that the 10-bit of the GH5 is automatically better? I don't see any evidence for this so far. What I expect is a camera that just has so many good features that it will be a joy to shoot video with it.

Well maybe it is not that much better, but Sony will up the game, and that means more than just one little item. Sony tends to go for the throat as of late.

For battery problems if you are on a Tripod there is a ton of solutions for longer battery usage. Even the Battery grip goes for a pretty good while. 2 hours on average record time in 4k.

Well you and I know the next Sony A7s, A7r will Have to have 10 bit and a few more items that the GH5 has to stay competitive. So maybe for a little more money over the GH5 the A7's will be the thing to have. The low light, better DR, and even the ability for better DoF is hard to pass up for a few more dollars.

This thing is not going to be cheap after you add the battery grip, the Microphone thingy, and a MB Speed booster. That is like $3500.00 at least.

But it has some serious specs for sure. Interesting how they compared it to their own camera, the GH4.

Interesting, that ought help with a little DR I hope. It is a good app already. http://www.4kshooters.net/2017/01/17/filmic-pro-app-is-about-to-add-a-log-profile-to-the-iphone-77-plus/

You will pay as much a recorder that does 4k 60P Than a GH5 cost sad to say. Convergent7 is the only one I know that I would recommend. It is and has

been a top pro item for years now. They do a lot of updates on their stuff which helps a lot. Not that Atomos does not. Convergent7 has a serious proven

track record behind it. But it is on the thick side for sure, and 7" Looks pretty stupid on a BMPCC I can tell you.

Do you have the processing power and storage capacity to edit Raw?? And to give up doing 4K to boot. Not counting a softer 1080p output. Hmmm, interesting.

Not knocking the Canon, I am looking at a C100 soon to buy myself speaking of 1080p output. I agree with maybe doing the MKII and keeping the A7s. Easy to spend your money though. 

Well even if their testing is flawed to some people, it is flawed for all cameras tested, so it is a fair comparison to each one, they all use the same technique applied to them.

So maybe the outcome is maybe not true reality, the order they come out is probably what real life output will be compared to each other camera tested.

Red and Arri have always have crazy high DR compared to others brands. And it has proven to be true.

6 hours ago, BenEricson said:

This is another case where a c100 in a lot of situations is just going to look better. It will be just as sharp in 1080 and render better skin tones and overall scene colors. 

 

Yeah I feel the same. Like I have said before, I just like the C100 Camcorder style body way more than a DSLR style one. Going to pass on a GH5 I think. Just keep my Pana G7 if I want 4k stuff and buy a C100..

Man that outfit is prettier than a Speckled Puppy!

Well there are different examples that show just the opposite  http://www.videoconverterfactory.com/tips/h265vsh264.html

Well it still  is not a lot to write home about. The first scene with the Bus is all anyone needs to see. Sony is just going to have to pick the pace up on full readout on the sensor or they are going to be left on the side of the road. It just screws up to many possibilities to shoot scenes that have any movement, ergo about half of a movie you want to make.

You are not going to write a script that eliminates all camera movement. That would be crazy. For the money they cost a little more money and you can have a real cinema camcorder.

21 minutes ago, Liam said:

Think that was the d810, if I'm thinking of the same one

2 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Saadawi is giving his "wisdom" in dpr forums I think, and post in articles and the such. 

Yeah he is a Jackass on DPR also.

Colors and detail both look great, well actually too great in a sense. It defiantly looks like a big improvement. I can always make a highly detail shoot look like 8m film, but sure can't do that the other way around!

2 hours ago, Ishak Sahertian said:

I don't think V-log records less "shades" than the other profiles, probably more like that everything(what the sensor is able to capture) is being compressed between 20 and 80IRE

True, it pulls up the shadows, and pulls down the highlights into a narrower box. Pretty much it in a nutshell.

35 minutes ago, Charlie said:

Hi all,

I am well aware that full frame is a stills standard, not a cinema. I have hear people say that APS-C is the closest to super-35 cinema.

I was watching a video about famous directors lens choices and how many stick with maybe two lenses, sometimes just one for an entire shoot.

Lets say a director like Fincher likes 27mm (on The Game he used 27mm & 75mm).

If you wanted to match approximately the same "look", would 27mm on APSC be the way to go????

Thanks!!

 

It is pretty close to the Nikon crop factor which is 1.5 to S35 of between 1.4 to 1.45. So just think Nikon ASPC lens and you will be close enough.

Yes 27mm seems to be a lens that a lot of Hollywood directors want to shoot a film with. I like to go even wider, say 21mm, but that is me.

4 hours ago, martinmcgreal said:

I did say subconsciously .. It's not something they'd distinguish consciously until it was suddenly changed - i.e The Hobbit, which even laymen flagged up immediately. Yes, this was more down to the drastic shift in frame rate, but it stills ties into the whole concept of motion, and viewers noticing the motion feeling different to what their subconsciously accustomed too within cinema. I feel the importance of motion candence only ever comes to the forefront once you shoot with a system that delivers it cinematically. If you never shoot with such systems, you'll likely never miss it, as it can be subtle to the everyday eye, but once you do, and you jump back to a system that delivers more 'video-like' motion, you then realise the importance of it, in delivering images that feel truly cinematic.

It can become a petty debate though, so I'll leave it there. 

 

 

Heck of a good deal on a Red One MX. https://www.facebook.com/groups/35666868707/permalink/10154598779953708/?sale_post_id=10154598779953708

I can really see your point. But it takes a lot of money to not Have that happen. Something we sort of lack LoL.

I think you are giving the audience way to much credit to be able to distinguish motion cadence. I can surely see why you don't like lesser quality, but the cost equipment wise is  pretty steep to benefit you and a handful that might notice it..

I don't consider the Bolex s16 as much of a offering. Now that they don't even make it anymore even more of a negative to me. Glorified BMPCC with less options. Form factor just sucks ass. Sure output nice, but at what price.

Red is your to go only real way for you it seems, but man the add ones for one is just crazy expensive, and low light is bad, as well as storage options. A Red kit is not for mere mortals LoL.Not counting a computer worthy of editing it. Way out of my price range. Maybe you will get a big pay raise this year!!

4 hours ago, martinmcgreal said:

Hate to bump this thread this again, but - couple of questions .. 

Is there any free resources online where I can download uncompressed footage from both RED systems (ideally the One/Scarlet MX), and also the D16? Besides shooting with the systems, this is probably the second best route for conclusive judgement. I've tried the Bolex website but the download links keep re-directing me to an ad page .. As for RED, I assume there's a ton on reduser, but I've yet to search that deeply - will do in the coming weeks .. Just asking here in the meantime .. 

Second question - does the D16 shoot 4:3? I can't see it anywhere on the spec sheets, but a quick google search directs me to a thread on this forum discussing 4:3 on the D16, so I'm curious? I assume it doesn't .. It's so difficult finding any anamorphic footage with the D16 too .. There's bits and pieces on Youtube/Vimeo but nothing more serious than quick unconsidered tests that look relatively poor due to user error. 

Well I think if you want to do Anamorphic you would be crazy not to do it with say a GH4 as cheap as you can buy one now. 4.3 is so cheap to do compared to other sensor sizes.

As to the Red footage I am surprised Vimeo would not have what you want.