Jump to content

webrunner5

Members
  • Posts

    6,707
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by webrunner5

  1. I have never been a big fan of DPR's Sample Gallery, but this is the Sony phone I have, and I think if you didn't know what they were shot on I think they hold up pretty well. Photos and video out of it is pretty plain jane compared to most phones as it doesn't use AI and Computational math like others do. It is more normal camera looking. Is it a Fuji MF killer well no, but it is more impressive than you might think. The OOF areas to me look pretty realistic, as does low light. Sure it is not a A7s, but neither is a GH5. My EM1 MK II has the same sensor. https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/1876772280/sony-xperia-pro-i-sample-gallery/5822001978
  2. Tip here, Sony Phones are Not, I repeat, Not good at working with Motion Pro. I have no clue why, I guess sensor architecture??, but it does work at times and at times it doesn't. So not the best phone for DNG Raw video. They do work great for DNG Raw Photos.. When you open the app a warning comes up stating Sony phones are not really compatible.
  3. I have a Sony Xperia Pro-I and this new phone is pretty much the same except it has a real zoom lens instead of the 1" type mine has. So yeah I bought it because as a phone you always have it with you. But sure a Panasonic hybrid is going to be better at most things over the phone, but how often do you have it with you. And don't think these new phones aren't pretty good at low light, because no MFT camera is really very good at low light either. I have a Olympus EM1 mk II and 1600 ISO is about as low as you dare go on it. That is not a lot to write home to mother about either. But in decent to good light it has magic in it both photo and video. I bought it years ago for birding, they have great AF compared to a Panasonic camera. I have had nothing that is really better at doing wildlife since. Well maybe my 1DC but it is heavy as heck to carry.
  4. What he is trying in a polite way to tell you is that equipment doesn't make much difference, skill and desire do. Marty is one of the best people on here producing videos with equipment most people would toss in their bottom drawer. Mattias Burling is another one of here that is great with not-so-great stuff. Talent not tools make it happen.
  5. So, you think that DNG photo Andrew posted looks like the out-of-focus areas look like they've been drawn onto the video with the blur tool by a toddler? Yeah, I guess it looks like total shit.
  6. You are just making this stuff up. A GH5, low light beast, impossible to shot low light with a phone, yeah, I believe in the tooth fairy also. What don't you think phones have fast primes in them, night modes?
  7. Like I have said someone can give you a Red body, and it still cost a ton to equip them, but they are are pretty killer camera system. For a small company they keep coming up with cool stuff.
  8. But I respect your opinions on here, I know you go to a lot of work on sensors for our information. We are probably, maybe each half right. That way it makes us even. Heck, I don't know, but we are lucky to have what we have. All I know is what I have experienced over a lot of years and a lot of research myself. But I am no engineer.
  9. I think you are ass backwards. Normal cameras are in the dark ages and Smartphones are far into the future compared to a normal camera. Hell you can buy a 10 year old Canon and can't tell it from a new one. I bet your wife gets overall better footage and quicker with her cell phone than you do with your GH5. If spending 2 hours in a NLE is worth it to you versus her having it in an instant well don't know what to tell you. This is 2022 not 2012. All the newest phones have moved the needle way up. If you are comparing the Phones to a Red Komodo well sure, to a GH5 come on. That is not some amazing camera output wise.
  10. Not counting owning a Sony A7s and a A7s mk II, and a A7 mk II, and a A7r, and a A7r mk II. I think I might have a little insight on how all of them worked. YMMV.
  11. That article is pure bullshit. I would not trust DPR to tell me how to change a battery in a camera. If you base your knowledge on that article well I don't know what to say. I base it on being in this business for over 40 years and having done a lot of things in it and with it.
  12. First Digital camera I ever owned was a Sony Mavica and I think they were a 1/2mp. It was pretty damn good believe it or not. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Mavica#/media/File:Sony_Mavica_FD5_4040.jpg
  13. Most 1080p Cine cameras, the Sony F3, Canon C100, Panny Af100, etc. only had sensors of say 3.5mp or less. It is pretty amazing how little you need for video.
  14. I say you are wrong. Lower resolution cameras have less cumulative read noise due to fewer pixels. If there are fewer pixels they are collecting more light than a equal sized high pixel one. If not true you would never have the same light gathering, so no equal ISO or aperture to say a A7r. They would have completely widely different base ISOs. And read noise is created in the Amp also. So it is not a sensor only problem, main reason the higher the ISO, ergo the more you turn up the Amp, the more read noise.
  15. https://www.dxomark.com/sony-a7s-preview-a-low-resolution-marvel-for-low-light-video/#:~:text=With less pixels on the,more light than traditional cameras”. I think you are thinking the photo side that the DPR article stated not the video side. The A7s Does have less pixels that are bigger. Your math is all wrong. The less the MP count the bigger the pixels have to be to fill the space.
  16. I think AI and computational math are sort of changing our idea of Physics. Smartphones are punching way above their size in this day and age. If they get really good zoom lenses to work on smartphones I think it might really even the playing field. To me that is the limitation as of now. Sure, it can apply to a FF camera also but I bet the gains would be less.
  17. Yeah, I had a A7s and a A7s mk II. I liked them a lot. The ability to be able to shoot in low light, night scenes opening up opportunities that other cameras can't accomplish. It adds a whole new area your abilities, you are not just limited to daylight stuff. The original A7s color output is a bit wonky compared to today, but it does have a unique character to it. I li ked it. And now with the Enhance thingy in Lightroom, Photoshop you can make smaller 12mp files pretty huge. Even BM Resolve has an enhance thing for video in it that works well also. And the original A7s camera is just tiny for a FF camera with a small lens on it. I had an original A7r and it was damn near impossible to get a sharp image without using a tripod. But also was a neat camera.
  18. Or have larger pixels for light gathering such as the Sony A7s series.
  19. Andrew your tweet is sort of going against what you are defending. That is what I don't like about the patent, it stifles people's choices. I think it is Way too broad. https://twitter.com/EOSHD/status/1533123090552594433/photo/1
  20. You can't make a blanket statement about MP. If you are shooting wildlife you need all the MP you can get. If you are shooting for social media you need very little MP. There is no one camera that does it all. Ergo you are not going to buy a Smartphone to shoot wildlife, and not going to buy a 100mp Fuji MF to shoot social media stuff. And 12mp is really not enough for photography in this day and age.
  21. I am retired so I have more time than sense, but what about people that aren't retired? 😬
  22. Eh, spend half our life on here maybe?
  23. What you start harming all of mankind I think the patent system needs overhauled. Sure, maybe when tech moved at a snail's pace it wasn't so invasive, now that stuff is moving at light speed, bottlenecks effect one heck of a lot of people and ideals. I think Red's patents were more of a heck, lets screw everyone more than just helping out themselves to some advantage for several years down the road. Ergo I think it was more of a malicious thing, carefully thought out than a protection of an original idea. Corporations are un feeling beings, but they are also run by some pretty uncaring bastards also. Making huge amounts of money is rarely run by grandmothers with babies bouncing on their knee. The pursuit of money is a pretty god damn ruthless business.
  24. Do you have any real idea how few people are stupid enough to do what we do lol. Probably less than 1% of of a 1/0th of a percent, or like 800 people maybe, probably more but who is counting.. Most people have a real life.
  25. Right now, for 99% of the people in the world Apple already makes a better camera than camera manufacturers do.
×
×
  • Create New...