anonim
-
Posts
1,138 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by anonim
-
-
2 minutes ago, Matthew Hartman said:
Am I off in saying I really don't care about a camera's particular color cast?
I am forced to care once upon a time when I had to match Leica R and Zeiss Contax footage. Let's say I had an average skills and enough time... I know someone maybe doesn't pay attention to end of my effort, but I knew that I didn't manage to make these footages completely identical. I don't no why - but milky yellow cast of Leica was never the same as pale yellow of Zeiss, even if the waveform monitor or RGB parade showed they I near the same...
9 minutes ago, Matthew Hartman said:I'm ready for my gold star now.
Two for you! From the moment I became aware of myself - akka 3 years old - I immediately begun to suspect that I'm not prone to Fuji vibrancy siren's call because I came to the earth from atmosphere... No I know it is true... Thanks man!
-
Maybe the best clip for argument of manufacturer mastery - from Fuji corp. itself.
But, for me at least, also and best exmple for my judge: translating result of photo-optimized color science to serious movie area is not 1=1 solution. While every shot looks noticable beautiful to the hyperrealistic level - after a while for me it becomes distracting, or even disturbing. It keeps to much attention to itself, to shine colors, and drain attention from the flow of the fable... Sorry for pathetic formulation, but I think we don't see world as vibrant as Fuji tries to suggest.... For fast shots, for any sort of presentation tending to fascinate - it works without doubt and it is very nice achievement. But for involving spectator into the world - not: this type of color strategy cries "Look how nice it looks!" - and keep you maybe mesmerized, but - outside.
-
7 minutes ago, jonpais said:
@anonim My color correction and grading abilities are nil, so there's that. But the shots might be of interest to those considering purchasing the X-H1, as there is no footage whatsoever available online shot with the Veydras on a Fuji camera. The clips were all shot using the 50mm T2.2 Mini Prime.
For me your clips are/were extremely useful - putting them such, out of camera, I can make my own conclusion about base color strategy of manufacturer, such as I wrote above. So, please, keep going with them you and every other precious testing contributor.
About your last concrete examples - for my taste, as starting point of base skin tones, I prefer look of GH5 as the most neutral between other offers in prosumer market. (But I'd like to have Fuji or Son products, which I also tried and respect...not because I'm especially polite pussy, but really
-
1 minute ago, Matthew Hartman said:
I'm going to be honest, I actually can't explain it in technical terms. I just know it when I see it.
Take a face for example. With my NX1, every freaking clogged pore, wrinkle and hair stubble is very detailed and pronounced along with of course the eye area. (Which is excellent)
But when I see footage from an Alexa, RED, BMD, Canon (cinema) only the eyes are in crisp detail, everything else is somehow smoother or more "weighted". Skin looks thicker and there's generally a sense of more dimension in what the camera resolves. I also notice edges don't suffer from chromatic aberration, or edge fringing.
Now, I'm not saying this isn't possible with a $3,000 camera. It is. I already know that through my own experiences. And obviously certain lens' have different characteristics, I just personally see more footage in this bracket [$3,000] where it looks "too sharp" or what some here have been calling "thin", 'video-y" "digital", etc.
One of these days I'll be able to put it in better technical terms. Maybe someone here can help with that?
Hmmm... I think, or even I'm sure from my experience - Alexa's or Red's footages that we seen are simply better and more accurate postproduced. I do it always - as I wrote above about TheCameraStore footage, and I'm sure you know it - one of the main task in PP is to protect and differently manipulate most important areas with secondary color correction tools. I do it always. From my experience, most of the best cameras in the market are seriously capable and very very close pure out-picture wise (i. e. without distracting spectator with bad results) to highends - but manipulation capability is their main power.
I know everybody know it - but, please, lets remember again that Upstream color - little bit an work of genius - is shoot with GH2 and Voigtlanders.
-
22 minutes ago, jonpais said:
The GH5 is certainly no slouch when it comes to rendering skin tones either.
For me, as I wrote - color strategy of Panasonic GH is to sugest completely neutral, i. e. human-eyes-seen reality... It is high task, usually belongs to league above. Nothing illegitimate or wrong to have different strategy, especially for prosumer market - I think Fuji tries to be extremely and indeed seriously pleasant, which is maybe a better choice. And I've say Fuji mastered it... I just hope it will not too high mastered it with wow-emulation beautiness.
1 minute ago, Matthew Hartman said:You're entitled to your thoughts and opinions. I'm actually quite enjoying your broken English.
Of course I'm entitled to thoughts... I wanted to say that it is Fuji not Panasonic topic...
About your enjoying in my language
- to say an private secret... maybe the reason is that, in one side of my life, I'm a writer with Collected works and some big echoes But I'm struggling with (especially) fast writing English 
Hough - you may call me Vinetoo!
1 minute ago, Matthew Hartman said:You're entitled to your thoughts and opinions. I'm actually quite enjoying your broken English.
Of course I'm entitled to thoughts... I wanted to say that it is Fuji not Panasonic topic...
About your enjoying in my language
- to say an private secret... maybe the reason is that, in one side of my life, I'm a writer with Collected works and some big echoes But I'm struggling with (especially) fast writing English Hough - you may call me Vinetoo!
-
2 hours ago, Matthew Hartman said:
I hate how these manufacturers make people feel like they MUST have the latest and greatest. If we thought of these cameras in terms of say a cresent wrench, would we "upgrade" so often?
That's the topic where we have to be intelligent and where I find the value of evaluating forums as EOSHD. Simply put, I find that there are major and minor upgrades - task for manufacturer is to hide that minor upgrades are minor and present them as enough big... That's, for example, why I'm not interested in GH5s... I think in-reality-minor upgrade and minor (or even major!) downgrade IBIS wise. GH5 is major step in every field - not at least at finally getting Iso1600 usability that stay rich and cinematic-manipulative... GH5s looks as ISO3200 usable, but under the hood of agressive NR I found it is the same as GH5 with Resolve NR. Everything above is a gimic - type of shown in TheCameraStore lowlight scene above. To conclude this excursion trying to be exemplar about the camera I know - Panasonic don't squeeze everything from new senzor... just little bit of finer color manipulation... so I even expect there will be one more GH camera between now and widely expected 2020 Tokyo version. GH6 or similar with GH5s sensor and back of IBIS integration and even better color-codec usage.
Sorry if I pollute Fuji topic too much with such observations.
-
2 hours ago, Matthew Hartman said:
I have a question for everyone. How do you purchase your gear? Cash?
Cash. But I'm very cautious to sell everything I tried and didn't find best choice for me (and you have to be lucky to accomplished it if you are not in the big market country). Just now I kept only Voigtlanders 17.5 and 42.5 and Olympus 75mm. Reason for Voigts - I found that you have to have every single gout of light for Panasonic GH5 to keep it under 1600Iso. (That's also reason, besides construction, why I preferred V42.5 over Panalaica 42.5 which has T value about 1.6-1.8) Reason for Oly - also light capability and pure optical (not electronical) details discerning power that, in conjunction with ETC mode, made this lens as 3-4steps zoom (because of pure sharpness, it is quite easy to magnified in PP a little and stay quite safe).
-
3 hours ago, Matthew Hartman said:
One property I notice with cinema cameras is they only resolve sharp detail where its needed, giving a nice eq balance to the image.
Please, can you clarify this more - how camera alone could know where sharp detail is needed, where not?
-
1 hour ago, mkabi said:
I'm not disagreeing with you. Just want to make one thing clear.... its just semantics and how you think along the lines of what the words actually mean.... "turn off" is not the same as "turning down." And, in the end, it all comes down to how much did Panasonic think was enough noise to be acceptable by the general user. And, this goes the same with any company and what they are not telling you.... for example, Canon might be adding a filter somewhere along the pipeline to clean up the image slightly before handing it over to the user so the end user can say I applied NR here.
"turn off" is not the same as "turning down." - Of course, it's true.
About the rest - you are probably right, but I'm simply not technically competent to say anything relevant.
Just, from the experience - Panasonic GHx cameras extremely suffer in too demanded low light circumstances, especially trying to make fake-clean image with strong noise reduction calculation. GH5s is, from my angle of view, again wrong step in the same direction. BUT
returning to Fuji topic - I think that Panasonic with its color science evolution (from GH3 onward) bravely looks after to match first Canon, then even Alexa's, i. e. mellow-quite natural profile (look at excellent add-solution of @Sage luts). Contrary, Fuji, as I wrote earlier, to my eyes has different choice - to dazzled with some hyperrealistic, as inner-iluminated skin and other tones. From examples that I saw in this topic, it seems to me that xt2 has better, more balance colors than x-h1. Is that result of next step in to-dazzle-emulation work? I don't knnow, it's just my opinion without experience with Fuji cameras, so probably, or surely, wrong.
-
9 minutes ago, mkabi said:
Given the fact that you have no way of turning off Noise reduction, that that is the character of the camera.,... so those are the images you will get every time and all the time with the GH5.
Well, it not have to be true... You can turn off Noise reduction to -5 - and from my experience I'm quite sure TVstore did not make such choice. Why? Because scene is extremely poor lit (contrary, Fuji scene is extremely good lit) and they choose to killed any shadow and recreate world of Georges de La Tour... As a result, picture is so sublimely clean of noise... and of details. Three guys around computer and Resolve didn't even protect faces, they leveled everything equal... I dare to say, very naive and amaterish job.
Going to adventure with 3200 ISO in the dark with GH5, The must is, first, to have T1.2 option in the sleeve, and second, find a way to minimized effect of noise reduction to a main subject. Choosing such extreme lowlight scene for Vlog presentation of GH5 is very very strange choice...
-
31 minutes ago, mkabi said:
The real question is... can the GH5 and/or GH5S do better?
I have neither Fuji nor Panasonic... no glass... nothing... so I have no real stake in it.... by saying it. I think the Fuji looks better than the GH5. This is purely wooden niccolls to wooden niccolls... here is a GH5 version:
And from watching that... this is very digital and video-y to me. Its my personal opinion, though.
But, I will admit the Gh5 is far more compact and to be somewhat equivalent they had to shoot the Fuji with an external recorder to get 4:2:2.
1000% agree on the T/O grading.... but is that part of the Eterna profile? Or is that separate grading?
Plus, I admit the girl might of swayed me to like it
"I think the Fuji looks better than the GH5" - Agree.
"...this is very digital and video-y to me" - Don't agree... I think that Panasonic footage is completely destroyed by Noise reduction...but, as in the case of Fuji version, maybe it is stylistic decision - here we are returned into atmosphere of flat comics?
"...but is that part of the Eterna profile?" - I don't know, but probably name Eterna has some root in meanings of Eternal, so yes - it must be Bluer than blue...
"I admit the girl might of swayed me to like it" - Mkabi, all of the sudden, I'm filling so sad... she's gone... again... but as always, not at all in my direction...
"I have neither Fuji nor Panasonic... no glass... nothing." - I have Panasonic and glasses. But looking at this footage, I wouldn't buy it again if it is the best GH5 can do
-
-
5 hours ago, Inazuma said:
Most of the videos so far don't really show off Fuji's IQ I must admit. I think it's because most of the footage put out is from that Eterna profile, which is a not a very interesting or impressive profile.
However, having shot with many cameras under the $3000 range (from a Nikon d5200 to a Canon C100 II and many in between) I can attest to Fuji having the most pleasent image of them all.
I mean just look at this. Shot with the XT2 with 35mm f1.4 and classic chrome
Perhaps my blue eyes, but I see very strong green cast... so title could be Becoming an Avatar...
4 hours ago, mkabi said:I said it before and I will say it again…. Lets wait for the camera to get into more capable hands.
More than half the footage coming out… I don't know, may its user error, but they don't look right.
Including that Japanese footage.
With that said, this is the only one I saw with the 4K Eterna at 200mbps that looked half decent, and even then I don't think they pushed the image to any degree:
THAT'S called Teal and Orange
... (I have to whisper obvious... woman is beautifull).
-
13 minutes ago, Matthew Hartman said:
Canon (or any other) can't sell you the camera you don't buy.
Thanks for clarification - but as I already confessed, I'm, in fact and sadly, a boiled frog - but I know that there are around also strong human characters with resisting anti-frog capability
-
-
-
5 minutes ago, Matthew Hartman said:
At the end of the day we all have varied take aways. If we didn't wrap up our indentities so tightly into the things we purchase, we'd have more comfortable butts when someone comes along and purchases something else. One does not have to justify their preferences. Sometimes we are attracted to certain things that words can't facillitate.
So nice formulation, at least for me. Great place and always great joy to meet such spirit shining between lines...
-
5 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:
I was surprised today to learn this was a "tech forum".
1. MB to @jonpais Just because you got canned from being a moderator doesn't mean you all of a sudden have to agree with everyone.
2. MB to @kisaha If it is passive aggressiveness, flame baiting or just pour wording, I don't know.1. I think @Jonpais couldn't guess this newer ingenious thought of you without your direction.
2. I think @kisaha is extremely impressed with three options that you so generous offer to him.
Trembling because of your psychologistic omnipotence, I dare to say that you need a simply mirror - or that sometimes you sound too mirrorless.
-
On 2/15/2018 at 3:15 PM, jonpais said:
@Frank5 Remember, the GH5s has ETC mode, so you are effectively getting two focal lengths for the price of one.
This , I suppose, can't be enough stressed. Two 4k focal length possibilities. There's also and third for HD, multiplication is x2.7 and with GH5 we can shoot with All-I amazing 200Mb HD codec - if final delivery format is HD, and if you can go under 800 ISO value, with one fast prime you indeed have some sort of zoom. For example, with Voigtlander 17.5 there are 17.5/25/47.25 = 35/50/95mm full frame equivalent options for HD, or 35/50 full frame eq. in 4k.
As everybody here knows - even in work circumstances, shooting is mostly some sort of loving process. If you love your lens(es), you'll find a way to make the best out of it. So, I dare to quote here Little Prince as shooting guru - “It's the time you spent on your rose that makes your rose so important..."
(Saying that, just to add - shooting with m43 electronically controlled lenses, for getting mellower cine-image it is usually "the-must" usage of some a-la-mist filter for taming oversharply contrast. From my experience - although I didn't try last Oly pro f1.2 primes - just two of them could be left without filter cloth - one of two is Olympus 75mm on Panasonic, and I don't know why. It is not only that its true detail-discerning capability closely match that of, say, Canon's L 1.2, but also and in color rendition and grading flexibility...)
-
-
7 hours ago, Emanuel said:
Yes, this camera is a no brainer. But, this doesn't mean you are accurate when you infer no one will choose the Panasonic model you mention. Only if because there is a GH5S instead ; ) Never mind... Please take a look now in those links in my signature and tell me I am not a serious player ;-)
GH5 is my favorite cinema camera today if I would have the need to choose only one camera FYI. GH5S is a better cinema camera but for some reason I'd pick the standard GH5 at first rate.
Completely agree. But, please, leave apodictic tone behind - "Internet is a comedy at times!!" - I think it's quite enough to have one uber-patriarch here in EOSHD in the incarnation of Mr webrunner and his majestic knowledge/intonation...
I had indoor and outdoor shots needed to be put in sequence... because of hard difference between lights and wb they are too noticable and distractively different... with 10bit HLG footage of GH5 I had more room to get them closer in look... 8bit slow motion futage didn't afford it, colors are quickly destroyed.
Yes, we can shot in 8bit whole movie... but have to be extremely accurate... or to relay to argument that people don't notice imperfections.
And to add heresy thought - although highly pleasent and brilliantly mesmerizing, Fuji's color science for me looks as hyper realistic approach to pictures: excellent for photos, but calling too much attention to itself for the longer time, as in case of movies. Of course, just mine opinion and taste, which probably differ from the most other...
-
Nothing wrong with 8 bit image OOC, but I dare to say that 10 bit footage indeed have at least little bit more, or more+, options in post production treatment.
I like and am very excited with competition, and I can't understand why it is so hard to include 10 bit option as Panasonic did with GH5. But, being faced with pile of footages in pp that have to be matched, I'm very glad if I have 10 bit profile to work with...
It will be so nice if Fuji catch Panasonic from ergonomical and solidity wise side of work.
-
@seku "Imho, the raised shadows from the GH5s and the GH5 seem similar..."
That's exactly the same I'm talking about.
@PannySVHS
Neumann's robot intro film is made with 30k Zeiss lens and I didn't even see really lowlight shots. From the clips of harbour, the best one is with Voigtlander 10.5 at ISO1000, at iso4000 there's noticable degrading in quality.
To sum-up - at the same time I apologize for bothering you - I did noise reduction and slightly color grading with Andrew's clip, and GH5 image is near the same at iso 6400 (!) out of camera. GH5s image has less resolution in all futages that I saw on the internet. Yes, out of camera GH5s looks cleaner than GH5 above iso3200, but it is result primarily of hard software operations inside of camera. I'm not at all technician, but I have to think also about possibility that high processing power for such strong internal manipulation in GH5s is maybe responsible for initial lack of ibis. Saying all of that, I don't thinks GH5s has not some advantages - but price for it is too high, especially considering that shockingly good ibis is one of the breakthrough advantage of GH5... Talks about amateurish side of using of ibis is complete nonsense - GH cameras are production instruments that work marvelously at the place and circumstances where other highend cameras couldn't. Explanation like using in the car-shots are childish caprice. I'm afraid that GH5s will very soon become obsolete. Fuji video oriented camera with ibis is knocking at the door, with lowlight performance probably easy surpasses GH5s offer and quality... As much as GH5 looks as thorougly thought out product, GH5s looks like half baked... IMHO
-
Even Panasonic luminaries have to explain what they already explained... and they are everything but independent. I say again - temporarily usage of GH5s sensor is ultimate example of inner software manipulation, even for Panasonic standard.
Moreover, in he recent Max Yurev test, at about 2:00 where he compares GH5 and GH5s, you can see serious focusing mistake by which he tries to convince that GH5s is cleaner. Even with that - hardly by chance mistake from such serious blogger - face area out of focus are cleaner and with noticable better resolution in GH5! not to speak about area in focus behind . Keep in mind that it is first time tha Yurev is invited by Panasonic team
And all footages of costumed persons in the room for me are totally plasticky - as walking zombies. Every single shot lacks by great margin of "fat" color and subtle color gradation and is out of proper color balance. For me, all current Panasonic campaign it is not just a disaster for a 2500$ price and propagate highend results, but a some sort of shame... maybe firmware update or using extremely highend glasses could help to make image more natural.
Fuji X-H1. IBIS, Phase Detect 4K beast?
In: Cameras
Posted
Well, I think there are some degrees... or it is just my naive faith.
Two for you! From the moment I became aware of myself - akka 3 years old - I immediately begun to suspect that I'm not prone to Fuji vibrancy siren's call because I came to the earth from atmosphere... No I know it is true... Thanks man!