Mark Romero 2

Ok, so this thread reminds me of when I was young and we were going through all of my dad's old slides and we came across one where, well... it wasn't so much a selfie as it was really him just not sure which end of the camera to look through when taking a photo. 

Really great work!!! As a fellow S1 owner, I find it really inspiring, too.

For what it is worth... to anyone interested, Cine D on the S1 is the OLD Cine D, while on the S1H there is a new version of Cine D called Cine D2. Not sure what difference it makes.

On 3/13/2020 at 9:49 AM, FranciscoB said:

Looks great. How's the s1 in shooting vlog in low light? I'm still on the a7s ii and shoot slog2 in low light but i always overexpose to get a clean image. Is that necessary on the s1 or you can expose how you want for the final image?

From what I have read... Cine D is supposed to be better for low light than VLOG. I actually tried to do some tests comparing nighttime vlog with HLG and Cine D (I think) but then I had to get a new graphics card, and new power supply, and my computer has been crashing, so I haven't had as much chance to work with it as I would have liked. Maybe by this weekend I can FINALLY get around to making a comparison of the low light footage. Fingers crossed.

Does This count as a selfie??? 

I was on a job (real estate photography) and I had climbed to the top of the backyard to photograph the view. Unfortunately, it had rained earlier in the morning and when coming back down I slipped and fell on my keister. My new(ish) Panasonic S1 - which I was holding - fired off a shot at the moment of impact with the ground. I do NOT recommend doing this.

Not a single shot, but any of the single shots from this scene could be one of my favorites.

From Days of Being Wild, an early wong kar wai classic.

Or maybe the ending scene, which left me and everyone else in the theater (RIP, World Theater, San Francisco) both spellbound and baffled at the same time.

Reminded me of how much I love Vertigo (although it's a pretty creepy movie when you think about it).

15 hours ago, Geoff CB said:

I own the camera, yes it can be turned off under the profile settings. If he used the FLAT setting with sharpening turned to 0 it would be a very different result.

So if you turn the sharpening down / off, does the Z6 have more or less the same acutance as an a7 III???

"Maybe you should just buy a new lens and see if that helps you take better photos..."

Sooooo... the recording time limits are the same as the X-T3???

2 hours ago, barefoot_dp said:

Well despite telling myself I'm saving for UMP G2 and have to save money, I accidentally just went out and bought an a6400 as a b-cam. It should be here next week along with a couple of accessories.

I know it has horrible rolling shutter in 4K but it'll be a tripod mounted b-cam most of the time. I also got it to use in a water housing as it's one of the few models that has an inexpensive pre-made surf housing (as opposed to dive housing) available. For that purpose it will mostly be used in 1080p slow mo, or sometimes for photos.

I also kind of wanted something small that I can pick up and shoot family stuff with or just carry with me. My current FS700/Inferno rig is made for proper shoots and takes a day to charge up all the batteries, so I wanted a little setup that I could just grab and go if I need to. Gonna use it with a Sigma 18-35 and will use a Tilta Mini Matte Box for ND filters. I've ordered the Titla MB but it's going to take at least 4 weeks to arrive due to Coronavirus delays.

As a Sony owner and shooter, I can tell you that indeed, the rolling shutter is real bad, as you noted.

You'll love the autofocus (if you use AF when shooting video... some people don't). 

It's not the greatest focal length on aps-c, but the crop sensor version of the 50mm f/1.8 OSS lens is quite a gem. inexpensive (I bought mine used for about $125.), Sharp, fast, great AF, pretty decent bokeh, has lens stabilization. The full frame version is a dog though. If you want an interview lens with AF it would be a pretty good choice, IMHO.

1 hour ago, kye said:

Justin Odisho - https://www.youtube.com/user/Justthisgood

His channel is a bit of a mixture of stuff, but if you go back through his back catalog then you'll see videos where he re-creates various effects from music videos using PP / AE.  I think he might have named those ones "music video breakdown" or something so searching might be useful.

Thanks. I'll check it out.

On 2/20/2020 at 5:16 AM, kye said:

I used to watch a YT channel from a guy that edits music videos and he was always breaking down music video effects and re-creating them,

Which YT channel is that???

2 hours ago, Hayk said:

I wanna hear you're suggestions which is the best options for video/photo light between 700-1200$  or with less price? These lights i am gonna use mostly 80% taking videos, the rest 20% it would be some photo shoots.

After watching some of the reviews on youtube i find that these are really good lights for use, if you are agree or disagree please tell me.

1. Aputure 300D II or wait until they will start selling Aputure LS 300X Bi-Color  

2  Fotodiox Pro FACTOR Prizmo 150 RGB

3. Intellytech LiteCloth LC-160RGBW 

and in cheapest segment

4. Falcon Eyes RX-24TDX 150W

5. Falcon Eyes RX-818 RGB 100W

6. Menik CB-102A 102W 

 

Do you really need RGB lighting? Would gelling not be an option?

Maybe it is just FUD, but watching this video really made me a sad camper when it comes to RGB lighting.

Looks good.

Did you use a gimbal? Or were you shooting handheld?

Because considering the energy in the song, the footage might be a bit too smooth.

Also, I would have maybe thought about giving most of the footage a cross-processing grade (but I grew up on 80's music videos, so that's probably why I think EVERYTHING benefits from a cross-processing grade).

Either way, good job working with the limited budget.

16 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

I've done it on other lights. I plan on doing it on my Godox 200 tho

12 hours ago, EphraimP said:

Let us know how that turns out. Better yet, make a demo video.

 

Yes!!! do let us know and do make a demo video if possible!!!

5 minutes ago, FreshGiant said:

Am I wrong, but didn't the XT3 have record limits?

You are NOT wrong.

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Look around at secondhand deals, especially if you don't mind an older light (lots of people dumping them and moving to LEDs) then incredible deals are to be found. Last weekend I got a Kino Diva 400 4 Bank for sub US$200

Thanks for the tip.

Are they quiet?

Do fluorescent lights interfere with audio or wireless mics? I am used to fluorescent lights with a heavy and loud ballast.

2 hours ago, Kangaroo said:

Thanks to everyone! 

Do you think that there's something for less than 1000€ that has significantly better DR? I was considering having a single camera to do everything and for 900€ you could find an a7r II or and eos RP

In terms of DR, are you talking about stills? Video? Both?

A used D750 would still be a great STILLS camera with excellent dynamic range in stills and very good if not excellent dynamic range in video. It also has excellent low-light stills ability. I didn't really use mine for low-light video so I can't say anything about it for that. 

Of course, there is no 4K, no IBIS, and video AF is a raging dumpster fire. But it was (and still is) a camera that wedding stills photographers love.

And the lack of 4K means that you are basically losing a stop or so of noise "reduction" that you would get if you shot at 4K and then down-res to 1080p.

I don't know about an a7R II. Comparing it to my Sony a6500, the ergonomics would be better, the 1080p video would be about the same (i.e., bad), and the 4K footage would probably be worse. I would have to double check but I think the R II cameras have a better LCD and EVF than the Sony aps-c cameras like the 6500 / 6300 / 6100 / 6600 / 6400, and possibly have a headphone jack. The IBIS on the R II is probably SLIGHTLY better than that of the aps-c bodies.

The IBIS isn't great, but if you combine Sony IBIS with a Sony lens that has stabilization (OSS) then it is OK. 

Does the EOS RP have IBIS? I thought it had some funky digital stabilization. 

I guess I should also mention now that I have no idea if the Canon R lenses out there have stabilization and if they do, how good they are.

By the way: Some tamron lenses have really, REALLY good stabilization (Vibration Control, in Tamron speak, designated with a VC in the lens name). At least when shooting stills. I haven't shot video with a Tamron lens that has VC though, so don't know how good it is when shooting video. If I remember correctly, they kind of make a feint but noticeable humming / whirring sound when you activate VC. No one is going to hear it during a wedding, but your onboard mic will hear it.

So MAYBE a possibility would be something like an EOS RP and a Tamron lens that has really good VC??????? 

3 hours ago, Cinegain said:

Recent vid from a fellow Dutchie:

That's a lot of focus breathing in them lenses.

9 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Good job Mark in covering some of the many negatives of the a6500!

However there are so many negatives with the a6500, no wonder you missed some of them:
1) a6500 is risky it will overheat, the G85 never will
2) a6500 lacks a flip out screen for if you wish to film yourself
3) a6500 lacks a mic input

In my opinion the Panasonic G85 still reigns supreme as best bang for buck at its price point, like all Panasonic cameras it is a well rounded camera with few if any hidden "gotchas".

 

1) True.

2) Well, the LCD screen is so bad, it's probably a good thing that the LCD screen doesn't flip out. Helps prevent you from being blinded by the sun reflecting off the mirror-like LCD screen surface of the a6500.

3) Actually, a6500 has a mic input (but no headphone jack) and the preamps are pretty good. Not spectacular, but pretty good. And the a6500 also has the multi-interface shoe so you can use a Sony mic in the hotshoe and connect directly that way, since you know as well as anybody that the BEST mic placement for good audio is on the top of the camera

I can only really talk about the a6500 since that is the one I have experience with, and since used they might fall in to your price range.

And I am basically going to try and talk you out of contemplating an a6500.

The ibis on the a6500 is thoroughly mediocre. You get a slight improvement using IBIS in conjunction with a liens that has stabilization (called OIS in Sony parlance). But nothing compared to Panasonic or Olympus IBIS.

The a6500 has a metric tonne of rolling shutter (even with IBIS enabled). 

The 1080p of the a6500 is really bad. Not sharp, tonne of aliasing  and moire.

The LCD screen is dim and highly reflective. It is VERY difficult to use when shooting 4K or when shooting 1080p in higher frame rates.

If you are willing to shoot in SLOG 2 you will get better dynamic range than the M43 cameras by about a stop and a half or so, and I am pretty sure that the low-light capability of the a6500 is significantly better than the capabilities of ANY M43 camera (except possibly for the GH5S, which is way out of your budget). 

Also, the AF on the a6500 is VERY good. Even though it can't match the third generation of Sony aps-c cameras (a6400, a6600), it is still quite good and far better than my Panasonic S1 (faster, works better in low light, no "pulsing" in af-c).

And the 4K is very detailed, despite the drawbacks.

In short, the a6500 is an EXCELLENT stills camera, a capable but not overly pleasant 4K video camera  that performs admirably (for aps-c) in low light or scenes with a lot of contrast.

If you need a camera that will AF well and is light enough to use on an inexpensive gimbal (like the original Crane gimbal), the the a6500 might fit that bill, despite the numerous drawbacks.

The a6300 is pretty much the same as the a6500 but the a6300 lacks IBIS and lacks a touch screen.

2 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

Maybe you'll find this interesting:  My wife volunteered to make a modest video roll-in for a local festival thing in our hometown.  Just for kicks I used the organization's old 5dII to shoot it for them.  I have a 50mm nikkor prime with an EOS adapter, so I used that.

It's a modest clip, but here you go:  12 year old IQ tech:

https://www.dropbox.com/home/BSL?preview=PERFECT_PICTURE.mp4

For some reason, I can't view the clip.

To get back on the topic of lighting...

Assuming you are new at this, and assuming you have more creativity than budget, you can learn a LOT from master stills photographer the late Dean Collins.

Many, MANY people use relatively inexpensive plastic piping and reflectors / ripstop nylon to create beautiful lighting.

P.S. Man, Dean had some mad flow. My hair is totally jealous of his.

SOMEWHAT OFF TOPIC QUESTION:

Is there an HDMI recorder ONLY (no monitor) that is small(ish), lightweight and significantly less expensive than a Ninja V???

As others said before, Lighting.

Also, figure out what type of stabilization you want to use. Handheld? Shoulder Rig? Steadicam? Gimbal? Tripod?

All of them have different "looks" when you use them. Depending on the song, you might prefer one style over another, and you might want to use more than stabilization method in the same video.

I believe it is possible to use affordable manual lenses on your T3I. ften people associate a shallow depth of field with a cinematic look. (Often, but not always.) Older manual focus lenses with a fast aperture (shallow depth of field) are a LOT less expensive than current autofocus lenses with a fat aperture (shallow depth of field).

https://youtu.be/WJmMM6OhASc

4 minutes ago, EphraimP said:

I've been keeping my task manager on while I edit, and when things get laggy (lots of effects, h.265 files, rendering) typically the processor will be maxing out while the GPU is not overly taxed.

My understanding is that Resolve uses the GPU more effectively than Premiere does, so that Resolve will take more of the load off of the CPU (if your GPU is up to it).

You can download the free version of Resolve and test out whether there is much of a difference with your current setup.