Jump to content

Dan Sherman

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Dan Sherman

  1. 13 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

    Sounds like you need a Atomos Ninja V. I think it has just about everything under the sun except SDI's.

    It's to small for my tastes, I prefer a 7 inch model.


    Unless feelworld releases their rumoured lut supporting monitor soon, I'm probably going to go with an Ikan dh7-v2(has Lut support), now that my wife is back to work after the birth of our son.

  2. 33 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

    Yeah M43 gets expensive as they have to make those extremely fast lenses to compensate for the sensor. I am more of a fan of APSC. 

    Nikon & Canon treat APSC like an unwanted stepchild!

  3. 1 hour ago, BrunoLandMedia said:

    How would a GH5 + 12-35 f/2.8 & 35-100 f/2.8 compare to Canon with 24-70 and 70-200?

    Is low light really that bad on GH5?

    Will it match Canon 80d and 6d2 footage?


    What are you wanting to compare about the lenses,  and what cannons are you talking about the f/2.8s or f/4s?

    First you need to define low light, as that's a concept that's not the same for everyone.

    matching footage will require grading.




  4. 1 hour ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

    Auto focus becomes relevant when it can replace manual focus and be cheaper and easier. Its how technology works. Why walk when you can drive. 

    but you know what it's shocking how many people can't walk or drive properly! Technology is great, but regardless of what anyone says it's not the answer to everything.

  5. 55 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

    Right. Reason why people here want a hybrid tool to focus on video rather than the opposite. Still hybrid. It's all about that. Seems they are simply neglecting that. Jannard's DSMC, after all, but for affordable range and indies friendly without breaking the bank. No more no less.

    AF in video is more demanding, so it will always lag behind stills. encoding/processing video takes up a lot of cpu power leaving less for the AF engine.


    32 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

    Then why would a company that prides itself on the video side utilize a focusing system that sucks in video then? It is pretty obvious that Panasonic is pretty terrible at making a camera that can AF worth a crap in video mode.

    I would't say its bad, its just not what a lot of people want. I mean some of the tests people do are retarded, jumping completely in and out of frame, or moving towards or away from the  camera quickly. Then in real world use, they just sit in front of it vlog style yet still complain because their extreme tests didn't work.



  6. 1 hour ago, jonpais said:

    DFD sucks and Panasonic’s got cutting edge processors. Fail.

    get up on the wrong side of the bed today did we.

    DFD has the potential to be better than anything on the market given enough processing power. The issue is all the cry babies wanting other new features that eat up the processing power.  Since DFD involves knowing the lenses characteristics, given the processing power, it can actually be used to predict movement, and preempt the lost of focus. everything else can only react to a loss of focus. 

    Hence the reason why DFD works amazingly well for stills, but less so for video. The video processing eats a crap ton of processing time.

  7. 27 minutes ago, OzNimbus said:

    No articulating screen?  PASS!

    Specs are meaningless if the body isn't practical.   I've had enough of dicking around with "solutions" that just add complexity.   If I can't flip the screen around the camera is useless.

    I do over a million views a month on Youtube and need to get shit done.


    Based on the videos on your channel, you don't need a flippy screen! Since your footage is so static, you would be much better served by an HDMI cable, and the cheapest monitor you can get your hands on.


  8. 8 minutes ago, Trek of Joy said:

    DFD. SMH. A 47mp 4k60p body with a AF system from 2005. Not sure what photographers they're focusing on, perhaps film shooters looking for their first digicam?

    As a video body it could be something, we'll have to wait until next year to see. But I'm sure we see another FF 4k60p body before this is actually released. I do like the big body with lots of controls and space between the grip and lens mount. Sony are you listening?

    The best thing about this L-mount alliance is that Sigma may finally start designing lenses for short registry mounts instead of just rehousing their gargantuan DSLR lenses.



    You must not shoot much huh? 

    The only people who really bitc* about DFD are video people!




  9. 13 minutes ago, fuzzynormal said:

    In my experience, true and serious artistic types don't get caught up too much in the technical.

    I think we're more craftfolk here, so lots of public fretting about tools instead of creation. 

    IMO, if your into photography or videography as a hobby or a profession, you have an artistic leaning. Regardless, the amount of fretting shown show far based on still next to no information is ridiculous. 

  10. Jesus,what a bunch of whiny baby some of you are! It's a camera announcement six months before release, and you're crying, complaining, and passing judgement because they didn't give you all the specs in intimate detail. They probably don't even know what the full specs are yet, as a lot of development will happen over the next 6 months!

    every time a new cameras is released, I'm reminded of why I can't stand most artistic types, you all seem to be perpetually malcontent!

  11. 30 minutes ago, funkyou86 said:

    So, if the rumors are correct:

    Panasonic is about to price the new camera in the 4000 USD range. Almost the same as the URSA which does raw.

    New mount, for pricey L-mount lenses. Sure you can adapt old glass, but than say goodbye to the "new AF technology".

    Sure, on the other hand it will give us a nice image, but these things just make it a lot less attractive.

    It's designed for hybrid use, not just video!

  12. Comparing the diameter of the mount is mealiness by itself, as you don't know where the sensor sits in relation to it. You need to remember we aren't talking about a cylinder of light hitting the sensor, but a cone of light, so depending on the position of the sensor the, the diameter of the circle projected on it can have different diameters. Not to mention the aspect ratio of the sensor will play a big part in the equation as well.

  13. 2 hours ago, mercer said:

    I’m confused. I understand that Rec709 (for instance) only has so many visible stops but if you display one of those dynamic range charts in a Rec 709 space, you can clearly see more than 5 stops of DR.

    And there’s also the effect of DR on color tonality, highlight rolloff, etc. So it seems it is a little more complex than just to say you can only display so many stops in any specific space?

    I'm probably not the best person to explain this type of thing. This is a good starting point!



    Before you can display an image you need to record it from the sensor. As explained above, the sensor sees light completely linearly, it measures every photon of light in bands of the 4096 steps that exist on a 12-bit sensor. When it comes to recording we need to match what can be displayed on monitors. The 12+ stops of dynamic range capable with modern day sensors are hamstrung by the 5-6 stop limit1 of television standards still currently used (Rec709). Log curves solve this problem be “bending” the brightness curve to fit 12 or 14 stops of dynamic range into an 8 or 10-bit signal, but at the expense of no longer matching human perception so the image looks flat or washed out and is difficult to expose correctly. AtomHDR solves this.




  14. 18 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

    I think it should give you more room in grading though to decide where those stops are going.

    That's correct, You get more leeway when you start with more dynamic range, because most nles work outside the constraints of a given profile. However, once you render out you are bound by the constraints of the color space you are rendering in. 

    It might not sound important, but it is!




  15. 6 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

    More DR in = more DR out.

    15 stops capured shows more DR than 8 stops captured on a 5 stop screen.

    That's purely perception!

    If you are using  a screen that follows the rec 709 spec you are not going to see more than 5 stops. Technically you have about another stop in the over exposed highlights and underexposed shadows, but the display wont show them. 

    The only way you are getting more than 5 stops is if you are using a custom gamma, like REDGamma, but then again your display has to know what to do with it.



  16. 12 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

    Try it and tell me what you think compared to vlog. 

    I don't use/own vlog, as i don't need it.

    However, it doesn't need to be tested, as this is a math/science thing not an artistic perception thing.


    when you do a color space transform, your dynamic range is constrained by the final color space. If you have footage with 15 stops of range, and you want to shove it into a color space with 5 stops, it is compressed down to fit into the 5 stop range, or it's clipped.

  17. 2 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

    To really test dynamic range thoroughly wouldn't you also need to see how much info you can pull from the shadows?

    You might want to add HLG to the test. There is a claim out there that you'll get 1-2 more stops of dynamic range then in vlog.

    This is the method I've heard gets one more dynamic range in HLG.

    "So in FCPX for instance you just make all your libraries 2020 and bring in all your footage and pull your HLG highlights down to 50IRE and export to 709. You don’t need an HDR monitor or anything else. Your 709 output will have the 14.6 stops of DR if you remap it this way. "


    I find that hard to believe considering rec 709 only has 5 stops of dynamic range. You might have started with more, but you're not going to end up with more.




  18. 9 hours ago, buggz said:

    You don't use the Fairlight audio tools in Resolve?

    I haven't as yet, it used to crash on me, but I see now it doesn't, I'll have to try it.

    I really like Reaper, I paid for mine, and have been using for a long time, many plugins, I love the iZotope ones.

    I use them pretty extensively, and don't have any issues. My biggest gripe is that while they gave us normalization, it's peak normalization, and that's all but useless for modern video. Thus, I have to use a plugin, and since you can't offline plugins it takes way to damn long! 

  • Create New...