SRV1981

On 10/19/2024 at 2:05 AM, ND64 said:

Considering Apple obsession with thinness, I'm not sure they ever use 1 inch sensor. 

Great point, I don’t have the technical knowledge to know how to do it but I’d imagine there would be a creative way to do it

Looks great! Making the fx30 shine 

Immature reasoning 

So you run a forum and can just change the content of a thread because you dislike the source? What an odd culture 

On 10/15/2024 at 2:25 AM, ND64 said:

Imagine this hardware with iOS

 

Give the 2-3 cameras to iPhone and a single 1” sensor for the iPhone pro 

21 hours ago, KnightsFan said:

The s9 would be nice for me if it had an evf. I could use a smaller photo camera for backpacking.

Ricoh GrIIIx

*as my sole 

This is why I love using my

iphone with log and sole my mirrorless 😜 

15 hours ago, John Matthews said:

I've been printing recently. It's so hard to see differences these days between sensor formats. Granted, I don't print much about A4, but I don't have the wall space or budget for much bigger. I think many people buy Leica because they're tired of getting "lost" in GAS- there is something enticing to that concept. Just put all the money you have for gear into ONE camera with a fixed lens. Now, you can ONLY create with that. There's something liberating in that.

Give me all your money for bad decisions and I’ll do a lot to help you liberate 🙂

17 hours ago, MrSMW said:

Really?

I had the same sensor X100V in the XT3 and the S5ii/Z6ii beats it.

I have the same sensor as the Q3 in my A7RV and that beats both of those.

Nah. Those APSC sensor cameras put out good quality for sure, but few would say comparable even with 24mp full frame when it comes to outright image quality.

60mp A7RV is on another level.

I’ve been through the sensor/image quality improvement process over the last few years and it’s definitely a real thing.

There’s a noticeable difference moving up, but the difference is even more apparent if you go back after any time.

Just my experience anyway…

I’d love to see a side by side supporting this argument. I don’t see much of a difference. Also, where are you displaying your photos? Psychology is pushing people to spend nearly $10k on a photo only camera. What’s the return on investment? What’s one’s annual income. 

Who needs shallow DOF?

10 hours ago, maxJ4380 said:

Did you watch the sequel at the cinema or at home ?  I haven't seen either of them and i'm unlikely to watch either of them as well.  I'm  a noob, no training either. Personally, i go to the movies to be entertained, if i start to question the story or the science behind it, the movie is failing to do its job and i don't enjoy it nearly as much. 

For those that work in the industry i can understand how one might take issue with the lighting or any number of other factors that are involved. Perhaps in my ignorance its easier (for me at least to suspend belief) if i was a professional i guess i'd be more inclined to have a stronger opinion. 

i did enjoy the latest axel f sequel at the movies.  I'd call it nostalgic in some ways, i don't think it brought any new to the series. However i liked the fact that they brought back all the old cast, or most of them anyway. Most sequels have the original cast all dead or gone (probably for financial reasons) But it was good to see all the old gang together, more sequels should do that.

The sequel sucked. Plot armor galore. I saw it in the theaters. That said this thread is about the beauty of film from the 1980s/90s. And now I truly get what cinematic means again. 

8 hours ago, MrSMW said:

I wouldn’t go that far…

If it was €£$3500, it would be as cool as f*ck.

A modern tilt screen, IBIS, large sensor, relatively compact camera, is highly desirable to a lot of folks, me included!

From the OG X100 (my favourite camera of all time relative to it’s time) to it’s latest iteration, plus the Sony RX1R, the Q2/Q3 and even the little Ricoh’s, it suits a lot of folks!

My only issue has been the lack of longer lenses with these things and Fuji got around it with a wide angle and tele adapters and the 60mp jobs with cropping and multiple models a la Ricoh are an option, but probably a bit pricey for most having 2x Q3’s!

It has got me thinking though that a pair of the latest X100’s, one with the wide and the other with the tele, would make a really great combo, especially now that they have; IBIS, tilt and a decent amount of megapixels for some further cropping…

I don’t see an image improvement over a Ricoh or x100v 

What a joke 

So, I’m an amateur with zero training, but I saw the sequel and it was abysmal. Michael Keaton kept it alive for the duration but man the writing and PC culture behind it was bad. 
 

anyway, I’m watching the original and I’m BLOWN AWAY. The rich pastel colors, the detail combined with soft images etc, make the original so much more appealing than the sequel visually! Cinematic and filmic are real terms worth using daily. I can’t think of any digital image that rivals what I am seeing from the original Eastman film stock of Beetlejuice. 
 

id love to Get this pastel softness with deep colors and image on my log footage (iPhone and dlogm)

8 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

iPhone filmmaking has made DOF adapters a thing again!  I was just curious about this the other day and looked into it - Beastgrip seems to be the only company currently making them and they are sold out now.  It's sort of a weird niche - use the phone as a super portable recording device...  but then lose that portability by throwing on big cinema glass.

I may check beastgrip - I’m looking for an ND filter for the iPhone 16 but easy to use. 

I’m an n=1 but I don’t know anyone with a dedicated camera

I found the article silly. There’s no data or stats to support this. 

https://petapixel.com/2024/09/16/nikon-president-says-smartphones-may-drive-future-camera-sales/

1 hour ago, Emanuel said:

Speaking of devil and that 5x miserable tele? In the meantime, Toneh has offered his vision and criticism:

 

Do you really enjoy his Channel and analysis or is it confirmation bias 

26 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

Yes I did watch it, and a studio-controlled example with no info on what he did to the image is for me is not super useful comparison. Btw I tent to not look at YT comparisons anymore... most they never represent my usage and mostly are optimized to make something looks better.
In my usage (never studio or static setup) Osmo is better. I find that has soon as the light is not perfect iPhone footage breaks a part very quickly, I did a rely nice shoot in Alaska and it took me 1h of tweaking to kind of get something usable out:

Is great that on the 16 they improved the wide angle as in my 15 is not really good:



iPhone is impressive for what it is but all this BS that compares it to mirrorless, RED, etc....  in my usage it does not even compare favorably with the Osmo Pocket 3 other than in perfect condition. 

I have R5 II, R5c, Osmo Pocket 3, Insta GO 3s and X4 and the iPhone is the one that I like the least (of course quality is better than the GO3s and the X4), do I use it a lot? Yes, due to connivence and also the 5x tele (even worst quality but great backup solution when mounted on top of my main camera). 

 

 

 

Fair points - I guess I’m liking the iPhone log over osmo in YT videos because that’s where I watch all videos that aren’t TV shows. Are there other platforms you’re posting videos on? If so, send a link and I’ll check it out. 

I love the pocket 3 as well and may invest in one but I have to say I do think comparing these images to a mirrorless body is certainly valuable and closer than what you’re saying in most conditions.  

All cameras sucked in lowlight prior to the a7S line and nobody seemed to think it an issue until then.  I’d never argue, currently, that you folks who do this for a living should be using iPhones and osmos for work - but for your daily driver? Your family camera, your travel camera, your YouTube channel - yes the pocket 3 and iPhone log solutions are very good quality and desirable due to ease of use and ergonomics.  

At some point a 3rd party vendor or manufacturer of these products will be able to use larger sensors in these small products and combine it with attachments and software to rival mirrorless. Physics always wins so maybe it won’t eclipse mirrorless body sensors but man it’s getting so close to the human brain not being able to tell the difference to most observers and if you can be happy with it then that’s what matters most to me. 

7 hours ago, gt3rs said:

I have both and use both a lot at the same time... and the quality of Osmo is noticeable better. The iPhone image breaks a part sooner and is more cocked/fake imo.
Today I did use both as C and D camera and Osmo wins in quality. I use both in their "Log" but no ProRes as is a pita.

I’d be curious for you to watch the clip I shared and have you comment what about the pocket image you liked better.  
 

4 hours ago, Emanuel said:

fact : ) @SRV1981 has a notorious bias in favor of 'iphonegraphy'... LOL ; )

Ha - not sure what you mean exactly but I do think the iPhone log images are good enough for many situations as an A cam (holiday, non paid work) and a B or C cam in other scenarios.  
 

I don’t get paid to record video so it’s an easy solution for me and I’m interested in a pocket 3 but it feels redundant when I have log in my phone - turn on airplane mode if messages annoy you is my take. 
 

the tracking of the pocket makes it a good pairing on the other hand.  We are so close to a point that photo and video will be good enjoying for the vast majority of situations. 

On 9/11/2024 at 4:10 PM, gt3rs said:

Mine overheats in 4k 25 and 50fps 10bit log h265 internal, no attached storage. It is a phone and can do already miracles but quality and usability is still far off a Mirrorless, yet you can use it everywhere and is very convenient. 
Osmo Pocket 3 has imo quite a bit better image quality and dji log can take more post processing.

May 6:30 I believe the iPhone is far superior to a pocket.  Pocket wins with ease and portability while retaining a phone as a phone but image - iPhone