Jump to content

MdB

Members
  • Posts

    173
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MdB

  1. Dismiss C300 on spec if you want, but it still creates great images. IMO better than an FS700. C500 does that plus RAW and yes it does HFR with 7Q. Downside of the C500 is that it doesn't do much wtb the Shogun. Handling and image wise? Better than FS700 hands down. Noisy? Better than FS700, FS5, FS7 etc. FS700 was technically ahead at the time. It still technically ahead. Luckily that's not the only thing to consider. As for $2k + $1k that's still basically 2x Pockets. Plus here $2k only gets you a non-RAW FS700. $1k will get you a Shogun or Shogun Flame though, but $1500 for an Inferno for 50/60p and ProRes RAW. I think the FS700 is a great cam and offers a shedload for not much. But the Pocket is about to kill that market. I nearly bought both C500 and FS700 multiple times and the BM pulls me back each time.
  2. I don't know if the RAW stream can just be converted from SDI to HDMI, so yes will need to wait for a Samurai V. FS700 was pretty good at the time, but was behind the Canons and by modern standards is well behind. DR might be a different story though. Still I can't justify $2.5k + $1.5k AUD for a used FS700 setup over $1.6k for a 'better' camera with everything integrated. A C500 as a proper 'cinema' camera might be a better choice for those users where the extra syncing and monitor outs etc are really useful. Also if you need an ENG setup half the time and cinema the rest then the FS700 might be a better option with the optional 18-110mm f/4 G.
  3. I keep nearly buying an FS700, but by the time add the raw upgrade (or buy one with) and a Shogun (preferably latest to get ProRes RAW and 50/60p) I keep deferring to the Pocket Cinema 4K that is coming out. Smaller, better form factor, does RAW and 4K in camera and has that 5" monitor built in. It's basically a Ninja V with a camera bolted on front. These are the same or less than a FS700 alone is. Plus it will likely have better low light than the FS700 and better colour etc. To me this camera outdoes the FS700 / C500 as good cheap 4K RAW options simply with the much smaller forn factor (plus don't have to deal with powering multiple devices etc).
  4. That's what I hear about the 1DC and why I've been nearly pulling the trigger. The C100 already has excellent 1080p so improved over that is very appealing, going to say a BM video assist (or Ninja V when they roll out). Shooting (and packing) crop lenses for a C100/300/500 though and then having APS-H instead of S35 crop is slightly annoying though. Plus it lacks DPAF in the 5D IV. So if the latter had the same great 1080p out in 4K crop mode I think would make it the winner for me. This downsampled 1080p only works in the cropped 4K modes, not in full frame where the output is typical Canon DSLR. But That is exactly why I want it. High quality 1080p is all I need. The crop matches quite well with C100/200/300/500 anyway. 4K MJPEG is fine for some tasks, but this would overcome most of the limitations of that camera if true.
  5. Thank you, I had seen this video some time ago but had forgotten about it. I will have to rewatch carefully to make sure, but I believe the 1080p versions are all captured in full frame 1080p mode. Rather than capturing 1080p externally whilst in the 4K mode as per the 1DC and 1DX II. It is in this way it is doing full 1:1 4K and downsampling on the way out to lovely 1080p (just like the C100/300 series do) that I'm particularly interested in, rather than the pixel binned 1080p off the full sensor. Yeah I see. To me it's potentially a better compliment to a C500 than a 1DX II or 1DC is (or really anything else).
  6. Surely someone owns the 5D IV and can chime in?
  7. Well yes, that is why they have a crop mode in 4K, Canon aren't yet capable of downsampling on the fly 5K-8K in camera to 4K. So they run a windowed (crop) mode of the pixels needed from the centre of the sensor for 1:1 pixel readout. However the sensor can't do a 1:1 readout AND a pixel binned readout (for the 1080p HDMI) at the same time. So the camera has to downsample the 4K to go through the HDMI. Obviously when the camera is set (and therefore the sensor readout) for full frame 1080p the sensor pixel binning still applies. The C100 and C300 did the same thing (sort of) from their native 4K sensors (but only 1080p cameras), so Canon have been doing this downsampling for some time. This produces absolutely stunningly good 1080p without having to futz around capturing overstuffed 4K in camera and then downsampling in post, but should produce far better 1080p than the in camera options. But as you say, seems to be stuff-all info on the topic. Cinema 5D says in their 'review': "In-camera realtime down convert from 4K to full HD." Newsshooter says: "The other big bit of news is that external recording is limited to HD in uncompressed YCbCr 4:2:2 8-bit. In essence, this is the same system as the flagship 1DX mkII (but recording to CF, not CFast 2.0 cards). But because of the 5D mkIV’s higher pixel count sensor, the crop factor is much greater (1.74x compared to approximately 1.3x)." But I have yet to find anyone talk about this actual output, what does it look like? The 5D IV is the only model of the three that offers both C-Log and DPAF. Yes it has a bigger crop, that I can deal with. Sony started doing full sensor readout and downsampling to 4K in the RX100 and A6300, now A9 and A73. The A7S did it from the start, but like the cinema cameras was specifically designed to do so (1:1 pixel readout for the format).
  8. Thanks for that, but that ended up being a false rumour and talks about different features than what I'm asking about. Specifically that 3K full sensor readout is kind of bunk, I'm talking about the way Canon downsampled to 1080p through the HDMI when it is reading full 4K off the crop sensor. Because they can't output 4K but can't subsample the sensor, you get a really nice downsampled 1080p that is not something they really like to advertise. Thanks for your time though. I suspect it does the same as those other two models (due to the way Canon do things), but haven't seen anyone specifically mention it.
  9. I've been contemplating a 1DC a lot recently and nearly about to pull the trigger. One of the main things that interests me is the high quality 1080p output when in APS-H 4K mode. I don't want nor care about 4K. 4K has only ever meant that cheaper cameras (or ones with limited processing) can produce much better 2K, but in a long winded way. What I understand is that the 1DC offers 4K downsampled to 1080p in camera (somewhat) like the C100/300 and offers some of the nicest 1080p around in this way. Ive been reading around and apparently the 1DX II does a similar thing. To me this gets rid of the codec issues, top quality ProRes 1080p is a-ok with me. Then I read that the 5D IV uses the same 'system' for its 1080p HDMI output, but haven't read any comments on its quality in this regard. The 5D IV would seem to offer the C-Log of the 1DC and the DPAF of the 1DXII. Obviously it has that bigger crop, but that's ok with me working with S35 mostly anyway and having the lenses I want to support that, less so 1.2-ish APS-H (still have FF lenses also) Can anyone comment on the HDMI output on the 5D IV with downsampling that 4K feed to a sweet clean 1080p out? Might sway me towards the 5D IV and take advantage of the DPAF.
  10. AF is excellent in crop mode. I haven't tried that specific lens though don't see any issue. Have you considered the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 which is a full frame lens and a stop faster (plus absolutely fantastic)? I believe in the US they are $799 vs $599 for the 18-105? Can always use that in crop mode if need be and get a bit more reach. A7 III doesn't lose much in S35 crop at all. Does also gain better rolling shutter control which is a plus. Ive been using the Tamron on mine and just love that combo. I also have the 28-135mm f/4 G PZ which I think is a fantastic lens as well that the A7 III breathes new life into (R2/3 were always better in crop and A7S never had the AF the make it worth it, FS are all crop and the 18-110mm makes more sense in those so the 28-135 has been a bit neglected. Suits A73 perfectly IMO.
  11. Blackmagic 4K Micro Studio with 3x crop factor, will give 6x cropped to 1080p. 600mm Sigma / Tamron will offer 3600mm equivalent. Pentax Q with 5.6x crop factor will shoot 12MP RAWs with nearly the same. Nikon J5 with 2.7x crop @ 20MP will crop to 5MP for 5.4x crop. J5 shoots at something nuts like 20fps+ in RAW.
  12. Are you serious?! I've been somewhat contemplating a GH5 recently and thought this was fixed... That's a major letdown, pretty much scrubbing it from my list based on that.
  13. I already owned the M 240, the video was an interesting feature that was very overlooked, but ultimately was of poor quality (even at release). With the SL's video capabilities it could have been quite a serious tool if both a little extra though and a little extra marketing of the real benefits. Heck Leica even make M mount cine lenses. I had an M-D, loved it. An M10 based M-D would be amazing, or better yet a Monochrom M-D. It is a misunderstanding that: more stuff = more $$$'s. The fact is in a mass production product it needs to appeal to the widest possible audience within it's already small niche, I mean high(er than a smartphone) end cameras are already a niche. Having 'less' doesn't mean it costs less, invariably it costs more, because less people would be willing to buy it. For example how many people will you alienate by not having a JPEG engine? Or having camera features that low cost smartphones have and are considered 'must haves' by the buying population? NOT having these things limits your audience, so the R&D and tooling and everything else that goes into manufacturing has to be spread over far less units. I understand the sentiment Andrew, which is why I think they could have implemented it but without it affecting users who only want a photographic tool. We already know that that camera has the sensor and processor capable of it in the SL, they just made no way to access it in the M10. However they could have done something like the Multifunction Grip from the M 240 (that added connectivity and GPS in that model) but a video centric one with a clean HDMI or mini SDI output, mic in / out (and heck a record button). When the grip is attached the menus appear for it's features, when there is no grip attached it is exactly as it is now. This way people can also say 'if you want the video features you can pay the extra for it, but I don't have to'. Most 'cine' cameras are just sensors and processors in boxes anyway, so this would be no different really. Oh balderdash. The M10 in it's 'purist' form that 'gets out of the way' has fallen back to only having one metering mode, off the shutter curtains. Where the previous M 240 with all its video trickery (treachery?) had a very useful expansion of metering where it could meter right off the image sensor, even while not doing live view, that gave far more advanced and accurate metering in a variety of lighting. This came from the technology of live view which is basically a video feed off sensor that is not stored. Writing that video feed to a memory card only requires one button. On the converse, there are ZERO optical viewfinders that use usable on 'dedicated' video camera designs. There are zero rangefinders on the same. Rangefinders are extraordinarily useful as they do essentially the job of dual pixel or OSPD AF... But manually controlled, rather than computer controlled. So when you are moving that lens to attain focus, you aren't waiting for things to come into focus and hope you stopped and the most in focus point, you actually see how far you have to go until you achieve focus, whilst your view is clear for composition and seeing 'outside the frame'. So you can pull focus without overstepping and ramp your pull speed to come to a slow stop. Much like blocking and marks allow a focus puller to do, but without the time / planning requirement. There is not one 'dedicated' device that does that.
  14. "You know what? Here’s a crazy suggestion… I would love to shoot video through an optical viewfinder. Motion picture film cameras have optical viewfinders. This would be possible on the X Pro 2 with the hybrid viewfinder assists for frame-lines and focus active during video recording, instead of the main live-view display." This is why I was deeply saddened that Leica didn't include the SL's video capabilities in the M10. Being able to compose using the rangefinder optical VF and being able to pull focus perfectly with the rangefinder would have made it entirely unique in the world of video. Even if they just had a clean HDMI out through an optional grip or something and only turns the 'video' menu on when attached to keep the stills oriented folks happy.
  15. This just goes to prove that so few people understand DXO scores and measurements and therefore go and complain about it. Your ignorance is not other people’s problem. I know you think the GH5 should get top billing on everything, but not understanding the number or how they are presented doesn’t make them wrong, it just makes you look desperate. I don’t know Andrew, after this article do you really want to be making claims now about Nikon’s abilities using DXO as your methodology? http://www.eoshd.com/2017/01/opinion-dxomarks-camera-scoring-makes-zero-sense/ Either be a non believer or a believer, but don’t just do it to suit your needs of the day.
  16. I think Andrew's assessment that an A7S MkI would be a good option. It does lovely 1080p scaled from full 4K readout (and can do 4K to an external recorder if you decide to later). An alternative is the Canon C100 which goes for A7S money, personally I prefer the Canon. At the time(s) of release the A7S was better buying, but for the same cash I would take the C100 hands down. I call things as I see them. The guy admits he's an IT nerd that thinks test charts are the be-all end-all of discussion. There were attempts at 'lively discussion' but they were met with brick wall stupidity. I don't have time for that.
  17. Again you are talking nothing more than sharpness. Screw drive means nice linked MF with hard stops. Screw drive is also very fast and accurate. I rate every screw drive I own over STM, USM, HSM, SSM and fly by wire any day. As for AF, I'm sorry you rely on it so much and are obviously incapable of shooting any other way. Most people don't rely on AF for everything and while on occasion a nice feature to have, it's not make or break. Im sure nobody has ever shot a film with moving subjects with manual focus... ever It's a total deal breaker. As for 'amateurish' how is shooting everything with AF not 'amateurish'? Personally the only time I use the AF is when shooting fast action using 120p. If you would like to point me to a better camera for that feel free. Oh and clearly you're unaware that you can lock your exposure and set your exposure as you need it to be. Try and see beyond your own little world a bit?
  18. Sorry you are right it does dim slightly in 4K mode. And I agree about the 35G lens. I also love the focus assist feature of using the PDAF points. My wish is that they made it so all points were available on wide, so they would light up as you pull focus. The accuracy on them is SO much better than peaking. It's like magnifying without having to. Somewhat like what the Varicams do with their green squares.
  19. I believe you can tape the lever in the wide open position and as the lens is closed, it stays in place. Then remove the tape to go back to normal. Also (and I've checked this again), the display definitely does not 'dim' when in video mode. I've never owned an A6300/6500, but this camera maintains the same brightness.
  20. Agreed That sensor is absolutely amazing whatbit is capable of with the right processing behind it. Yes, but there also seems to be something up. Could just be badly calibrated? R2 has hadna number of fixes and is now very good. SSM is not as silent. They are more like canon USM. [EDIT by EOSHD - even with internal focussing elements?] I don't think so, though the gamma does change espcially going from stills LV to video recording. It's certainly not perfectly awesome, but it does seem improved. I think it zooms too much personally. Yes. There is also a dedicated button for this AND during stills (but video IIRC) it is one push magnification rather than two. YES! Also i think you askednbefore about the ISO, you can set manual ISO and lock the exposure AND if on manual ISO in the program mode with locked exposure using exp comp essentially dials up and down the shutter speed... So apart from being locked at f3.5 (or wide open with hack) you can dial in any exp parameters you want. Yes, the Leitax adapters are supposedly quite good. [EDIT by EOSHD: They are, I used them on my Leica R glass to Nikon] Yeah maybe. My fave 24-35mm f2 isn't available in Sony mount anyway. But 18-35mm can be converted if it goes pear shaped for A-Mount. Yes. It is a very sharp lens, with very soft bokeh. It is also a completely manual lens so nice long manual focus throw. I got mine for about the same money as a Samyang. I don't recall this being the case on either, but maybe I am wrong. Been a couple of years, but they had a clever clutching system, maybe that is only on the 135? Yeah agreed. Plus 200mm on S35 is very nice. A cheap Samyang or the Sony 85mm f2.8 might be abke to fill that void if need be. Yeah, never owned the Mino, but the Tokina was lovely and I really like the non extending barrel design. Ah that is interesting. Even if they decided to stick with a forced f3.5, having manual control over exposure would be plenty for me. It has both. So you can get slow mo straigh OOC or get a normal 100/120p file that you slow down yourself. The latter has a higher bitrate, the S&Q is only 16Mbps vs 100Mbps. Both work with log / PP.
  21. A couple of things Andrew that haven't had much of a mention because nobody talks about this camera: 1) It does seem to overheat pretty easy, worse than my previous A7R II. Don't know if it's a bad design or some firmware issue. This is probably the extent of the 'bad' 2) The 100/120fps 1080p is phenomenal IMO. You get all the usual capabilities with it, but I can't see an IQ difference to normal 1080p mode, which in itself is vastly improved over the A7R II which was horrid in (from memory) FF mode. You can also do 100/120fps in either FF or S35 with no arbitrary crop. This is one of my favourite things and smashes ANY Sony mirrorless or SLT for slow motion video. 3) The aperture control is vastly improved for video with smooth transitions. Anything with an LA-EA adapter cannot do this and is unique to the A99 II. 4) Silent controller on the front, really useful. 5) Sony SLT articulating screen, vast improvement over the A6 and A7 series. 6) The beefing up of the back end processing in this camera means the live view is improved, the magnification in stills mode is superb and while video takes a drop due to changed readout it's still usable. 7) If you asked me whether I want better AF in these cameras or better manual focus aids, I would hands down say better MF aids. Guess what? The A99 II has a phenomenal one! You can use ANY of the AF points to confirm focus during video recording. So you have brilliant feedback of perfect nailed focus without magnification virtually anywhere on the frame - Why the A7R II and A6500 can't do this I don't understand. 8) AF is actually really good, it's a shame it is limited the way it is. The camera DOES try to err towards appropriate shutter speeds (which is handy) and you can exposure lock (and then control with a variable ND). 9) Battery life is good, can get XLR adapter and grip. Does clean output. Has S-Log3 (R2 doesn't), files for stills are amazing and it does mostly everything it says on the tin. It's a lot of camera for the money that is for sure! AF with third party lenses is however quite lacking IMO. Oh and proxies, love that Sony do them. And dual card slots, don't get that on R2, S2 etc. Speaking of lenses, the two you have will be fantastic. The 35G is IMO underrated, it is small and fast and has lovely rendering. The ZA85 is also small, smaller than the Samsung 85/1.4. They also both have hard stops which is nice. Couple other things: 1) Leica R can easily be adapted 2) Nikon can also be adapted 3) Zeiss ZF can be adapted These allow plenty of options plus there are a raft of other lenses from third parties. Adapting any of these is reversible. Buying Sigma Art lenses can have their mounts swapped if A-Mount takes a dive. Plus there are plenty of lovely and unique lenses for A-Mount. Check out the following: 1) 70-210mm f4 'beercan'. Seriously will cost you $60 and I think is way better than the L equiv. Sharp with lovely bokeh, near parfocal and nice metal build. 2) 135mm STF T4.5. Forget the overpriced new one, this lens is amazing. 3) Zeiss 135mm f1.8. Amazing. Doesn't extend like ZA85 and better image quality. 4) Lenses like Tokina's famous 28-70mm f2.6-2.8 AT-X are readily available for like $200. 5) Plastic fantastic 30mm f2.8 macro, 35mm f1.8 DT, 50mm f1.8 DT, 85mm f2.8 are all fantastic, super cheap, still have hard stops and can collectively cover a lot of S35 ground. Things I don't like about it: 1) I have come to really dislike Sony metering. 2) Image previews still look awful and make you feel bad about the shot before you see them on a computer and are blown away. 3) Overheating and occasionally not that great AF. I think these are only a FW update away. Think that is it for now. If you have any questions about operation just ask. Also I have a weird test I want to do but don't currently have an external recorder for 4K output.
×
×
  • Create New...