Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by HockeyFan12

  1. Fair point about the price. I paid $20 or something for mine. That said, I adore it and prefer it over any shoulder rig I've seen for smaller cameras. (Nothing against a weighted shoulder rig, but building something that large out seems to defeat the purpose of a small camera to me.) But YMMV. Lenses with IS and/or a loupe are good options too.
  2. https://www.cowboystudio.com/product_p/shoulder support.htm
  3. I forget where I found these: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/mrqsresrq5gtt7e/AAD8UC4K2fFJkcW-B_zFtkM0a?dl=0 It looks great, but not sure how much better it is than 6K HEVC on the S1.
  4. You had a P6K at some point, right? How did you like that compared with the S1, fp, Alexa, etc. I'm looking for a smaller camera/Alexa b camera and Black Magic has really consistent color camera-to-camera it seems so it would be easier for my workflow than the S1 and S1Alex (which works, just not as flexible as shooting braw and using ACES would be for me).
  5. I'm more thinking about color rendering. The Venice has enough dynamic range for me as-is. A7S3 is so close but the color is just not quite right and it's annoying. P6K has great color to my eye and internal raw but lacks other things.
  6. I like the 6K image from the S1 a lot. But I have noticed it doesn't have the best color. Back in 2015 or so, the Varicam35 had the best looking color rendering short of Arri. EVA1 is better than the S1H too. GH5 probably is too though. I like the A7S3 but the skin tones are too red. However it matches the Venice better than the S1H matches the Varicam. But the Venice is incredible. The image is too sharp for my taste but the color rendering, tonality, rolling shutter, etc. is Alexa-level or better. You lose a tiny bit of highlight detail but the Venice is an incredible camera overall. And I DID NOT like the F55. (But I did like the F35....) What's going on? There must be a big difference between cameras on the sensor level. Why does Black Magic have great color on both the P4K and P6K? Maybe they picked the right sensors? These are all small complains. The S1 and A7S3 are EXCELLENT. All of these options are incredible. But it feel like Sony and Black Magic could make a $4k cinema camera that's as good as the Alexa LF or Venice. Understandably, they probably don't really want to.
  7. I don't think it's intentional. Even the P4K and P6K and Venice and A7S3III don't match perfectly.
  8. The HEVC codec is pretty good. Take a look at ProRes raw footage from the S5/S1(H) and compare it with HEVC. It's got less texture (less noise), but it's not really a world apart. But then compare with clips from the P4K and P6K. Black Magic has color in a better starting place. Maybe it's because Black Magic has the luxury of making Resolve. Maybe it is the codec after all. But the P6K is the first camera where I can take a braw clip, bring it into Nuke, run it through ACES, render and not know if it was shot on an Alexa or P6K. (And with highlight recovery, the dynamic range is even pretty comparable.) ProRes should be a big step up on the S5IIX. But I don't need it. HEVC is pretty good. The bigger problem I have is I'm just not in love with the S1's color. I also don't HATE the S1's color. And I don't LOVE the A7SIII's color (too much red in the skin) or even Canon's (too much magenta in the skin). Of course everyone is biased toward what they're used to. But the Alexa, Venice, and P6K look great. (And have greener skin tones.) The A9II looks great to me too? Starting to get the impression that sensors have an inherent look. The Varicam35 had great color, too. So did the C300 Mk1 for that matter. 😕
  9. You can download a camera original here in HEVC I think. Adobe has had issues with HEVC and macro blocking in the past; OSX had different issues with gamma shifting. This is old firmware, too, so color might have changed: The S1's color does not match the Varicam or EVA1 very well. Then again, the A7S3 does not quite match the Venice either as skin tones are quite red. Imo the HEVC codec is actually pretty good. Panasonic has always had impressive internal processing. First to 4K I think with the GH series, first to 6K downscaled to 4K in a prosumer camera that actually looked good with the EVA1. And the S1 doing 6K is impressive to me too. It's an amazing camera. BUT it's also the only camera I've ever worked with where a white surface can look magenta on one side and cyan in the other? There is just this "thin" quality to the color and high contrast look to the mid tones at times. The color and tonality tend to feel a little thin, and it's hard to describe, and probably possible to fix in post.
  10. Here's the lite version again: https://www.dropbox.com/s/bvq3mw4lnek50ps/5DtoRGB Lite.app.zip?dl=0
  11. I'll take a look, I should have it backed up somewhere.
  12. I was trying to shoot something under moonlight. I think I should get almost enough coverage for 2.35:1 and an equivalent of f0.90 based on some photos I saw (and can no longer find) on Flickr of someone with a 85mm f1.2 and speedbooster on an A7. But there are f0.95 lenses that cover full frame fully with modern coatings. Anyway, this was a failed experiment lol.
  13. Thanks, it's no problem getting the lens off the adapter. The adapter just won't mount on the body. I noticed the set screws on the mount seem to be a bit stripped. Starting to think someone returned it because they had the same problem I have. 😕 This was probably kind of a misguided plan in the first place probably when there are f0.95 lenses available for rent that actually do cover full frame.... but I saw this for 40% off and had to try it.
  14. It just arrived today but the speedbooster won't mount on my camera. The mount is an L mount for sure. Any idea how to make this work? There's an "on off" ring around it but I'm not sure what rotating that does. I doubt it'll work out anyway (doubt there will be enough coverage) but I'm really curious to give it a try and it was on sale (open box) so I had to give it a go!
  15. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1682916-REG/metabones_mbspfd_l_bm1_canon_fd_fl_lens_to.html Someone on Flickr was doing this with an A7 and I think an off-brand speed booster. But I should probably just get (rent) a 50mm f0.95 of some sort.
  16. I've read that some Canon FD L lenses (85mm f1.2, I think), for instance, cover nearly 645. Metabones has recently released an FD to L mount speed booster, which got me thinking.... I was wondering if these (or any other f1.2 lenses: EF mount or adapted to EF or FD mount so Nikon, Rokinon, Olympus, etc. would be options) can be used full frame in 2.35:1 crop as f0.9 lenses. A little bit of vignetting is fine. Or does the speed booster limit you to crop via the contacts on the adapter somehow? Is there a way to overrule that? Would be using an S1. I was thinking 50mm f1.2 FD L, 85mm f1.2 FD L, 50mm f1.2 Olympus OM, 50mm f1.2 Nikon AI would be options. Full moon on Wednesday....
  17. Right, the over/under charts Arri publishes support this. Early Red cameras were the same way. I talked with an engineer about this and didn't totally understand what he wrote. But why are all these cameras base 800 ISO and don't go any lower than that? I think it's because that is where the minimum gain is applied and then the gamma curve redistributes the dynamic range. As I mentioned, 640 ISO on the S1H V LOG is really (probably) 100 ISO with a gamma curve. Can you just apply less gain and have a sensor be like 5 ISO and start from there? If so, why not do that now that sensors are closer to ISO invariant and just have tons of highlight detail? Why is there a minimum ISO with most cameras and it's usually 100 for dSLRs and 800 for cinema cameras? And, in my experience based on dynamic range distribution, 100 ISO on dSLRs clips at the same point as 800 for cinema cameras? I always figured the issue was full well capacity? Why do the higher res Red cameras seem to clip sooner than the lower res ones? Why did the F3 with its 2.8K sensor have more dynamic range above 18% gray at 800 ISO than the F5 had above 18% gray at 2000 ISO? Anyway this is all over my head but I trust Arri's over/under numbers. But is "full well capacity" dependent on voltage and you can achieve infinite highlight detail with a lower gain? Or is it also a factor? The physical capacity of the photo site before it saturates? I've spoken with engineers and they imply that full well capacity is a factor. http://photonstophotos.net For instance has a maximum dynamic range for an ideal system (oddly, Arri seems to surpass it).
  18. Thanks for the insight, but I'd read that with ISO invariant cameras the limitation was no longer from the noisy A/D converter and instead from full well capacity and photon clipping. (At least for the most part.) It sounds like there is more to this story though. I actually don't know much about this and am curious how they achieved it. Regardless, what Arri has achieved here seems nearly as unique in today's market as the Classic was ten years ago.
  19. I have a very limited understanding of sensor design, but highlight dynamic range should be dictated by full well capacity. Each photosite is like a bucket. It can only fill with so many photons before it overflows. The reason most of these current cameras are 500-800 base ISO is because they need to underexpose and dig into the shadows to distribute DR since the photosites are only so big and can only hold so much light before being saturated. I suspect when the S1H shoots 640 ISO in V Log, the sensor is reading out the same signal as 100 ISO in another picture style. It's just digitally redistributing the dynamic range into the highlights. The Alexa has about half as many pixels per square inch as the C200 (4K S35), S1H (4K in S35), Venice (4K in S35), etc. Its photosites are about half as big. (2880X1620 = 4665600 photosites; 4096*2304 = 9437184 photosites) So they should hold twice as much light (one stop) before overflowing. Unsurprisingly, the Alexa has about a stop more highlight dynamic range than its competitors at base ISO. The Alexa35, however, has pixels that are about the same size as the C200, S1H, Venice, etc. But it has 1.5 stops MORE highlight dynamic range than the Alexa Classic. So that's 2.5 stops more than the competition. Maybe the base ISO of the Alexa35 will be 1600 to account for some of that (it underexposes and pushes an additional stop)? And the sensor design has physical improvements that account for the rest? Regardless, this puts the camera on another level from everything else on the market. But if its base ISO is 1600 that might explain it to an extent. Or maybe I misunderstand this and there are other factors like voltage involved? Regardless, this camera has already far surpassed my expectations.
  20. I've compared most of those cameras but not side by side (worked with almost all of them either in post or in person). LOVE the EVA1's image but the LCD and ergonomics are terrible. I put a little loupe on the LCD as I like a minimal set up but it would be a pain to "rig up" traditionally. I much prefer its image to the S1H actually. The colors are just better. It's not a world apart but it just looks better. Noisier though. C200 has a great image but the noise pattern is ugly and there's CMOS smear. It's just not the image I want. P6K I've only worked with in post but it's a pain in some ways from what I can see but the image looks great too. I think it boils down to ergonomics ultimately (and getting the right IRND filters for the P6K – or just getting the pro model) but both the EVA1 and P6K are capable of beautiful images, right on par with (or just a step down from) the Varicam35 and Alexa, which have quite different looking but really beautiful images too.
  21. I believe the digital definition of ISO (depending on whether you place middle gray at 12.5% or 18% saturation) implies 2.5 or 3 stops of highlight detail. It's "highlight boost" effects like Canon had that would underexpose and then push a stop to improve this. But clearly most video modes (as sensors have gotten ISO invariant) take this even further. Why is 640 the base ISO for the S1 in V Log but not in other picture styles? Because it's really exposing at 100 ISO probably. (Underexposing at 80 ISO then pushing three stops for a total of six stops of highlight detail.) https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm The fp looks like it has a great image. I own an S1 and from what I can tell the fp has a better image. Is there a more elegant way to redistribute dynamic range than underexposing three stops, though?
  22. I know it's cheap used since I just sold mine but I still feel the EVA1 has possibly the best image under $10k new (Komodo might be better but feels like a lot more work). It lacks some of the amenities and durability of its competitors and is just a weird product. But the image is amazing.
  23. In Adobe Suite? Adobe's HEVC implementation seems to be broken and there can be banding but I find the 6K HEVC files super robust if I transcode them in OSX (or Resolve should work) instead. Not sure about 4K. How is the fp's 4K center crop mode btw? Feels weird putting a speed booster on a FF camera but that could fix the aliasing issues I've seen (which, to be fair, are limited to fabrics that might cause even the Alexa to have aliasing, except on the fp it can be crazy bad).
  24. I guess to me the S1 is the ultimate in on set convenience and the Alexa is the ultimate in convenience in post. Increasingly I feel like I should have gone for the middle ground for both (P4K and speed booster XL) and left it at that but the last thing I need is to invest more money and time in another camera system. Were I starting over I think I'd go for a P4K, speed booster XL, and a LOT of old Nikkors. But I'm not sure I'm starting over. So I don't really know.
  25. How do you find the fp vs the S1? To me the S1 seems to have better specs and less aliasing, but the fp has nicer color and a richer (better) look overall? To me convenience seems to win every time – mostly because I don't have as much free time as I once had. Ironically, for a project that's heavy in post work, an Alexa equals the most convenience even if it's more work on set because it's so incredibly easy to work with in post. Lower res, ProRes, great color for which Lumetri is automatically calibrated, etc. Or.... just familiarity I guess. The S1 in the field is convenient but I don't love the image as much nor the post workflow. fp and P6K or P4K make me curious, but these days I don't have much time free for anything. I do think we all take for granted how incredible prosumer cameras are today, the S1(H) and fp included.
  • Create New...