Mark Romero 2

6 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

In that test I made a mistake, had the noise reduction turned off on the D850, and it turns out the Sony noise reduction is pretty darn good. They have similar sensors, similar megapixel and both BSI designs, so you'd expect them to perform similarly in low light when both are operating with NR turned on. D850 has a nice fine noise grain at ISO 3200-6400. I wouldn't say the low light is awful at 12,800, this was a torture test and under-exposed a bit. Will re-do it.

Nikon 105mm F1.8 AI/S seems like a nice characterful lens. Any experience of it?

Also the 120fps is very detailed on this camera... Super 35 only but still impressive.

Thanks for the clarification / update. That does make sense.

Off Topic: Do we know yet that the D850 sensor was made by Sony??? I know people were claiming it was made by TowerJazz, but as Thom Hogan pointed out, that is doubtful. 

Not familiar with the 105 AI-S lens myself. Probably great for video, less so for stills. Even the D750 with its lowly 24mp full frame sensor and with an AA filter could out-resolve some of the vintage lenses and AF-D lenses for stills.

4 hours ago, mercer said:

Can’t you get your focus in HD, then change a custom setting back to 4K for record?

Focus peaking with the NX500 required a few steps as well, but in the end it forced me to think about the frame more. 

If the D850 screen is anything at all like the screen on my D750, you might not need focus peaking.

My D750 screen is very sharp, and when you press the center button, it will automatically punch in. Much easier to manual focus my D750 than it is to manual focus my Sony a6000, a6300, a6500, a5100, even though the sony bodies have focus peaking and can punch in as well. In fact, I often turn OFF focus peaking when using my a6500 and just rely on punching in, because, Sony.

The drawback for the D750 is if you want to move the AF focus point (which is the punch in point when using MF), it is slower to move around than the Sony bodies (at least it is for me). Plus the focus point is one size. I don't know if on Canon bodies, for instance, the focus box can be different sizes when you are moving it around or not. On the D750, the focus box is small, which may or may not be good depending on your needs.

Oh... forgot; focus ring on Nikon turns backwards compared to Canon, so there is that...

16 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Something I have noticed...

Nobody talks about this cam! Panasonic, Fuji, Sony... tons of topics on forums everywhere. Nikon? tumbleweeds.

I suppose everyone interested in video went out and bought a A7R III or GH5 instead!?

Thing is, D850's 4K and stills are better than both of them, and so is the lens line-up.

Yes it lacks IBIS and good video AF.

But so does the Canon 1D C.

The D850 shoots a comparable image, yet without a crop and without MJPEG file sizes.

I can really see myself picking the D850 above the A7R III if it carries on performing like it does... Such a clean codec, so little moire in full frame 4k by comparison to the Sony, and way better colour.

Maybe I am going blind, but after watching your comparison, I don't know if I would use the word "better" to describe the D850 4K video... at least at higher ISOs:

It looks sharper than the A7R II and III models but looks pretty noisy to me. Am I missing something?

But for me, the real reason I don't own one is because I don't think it would work so well on a single hand gimbal, which is something I use most of the time for my filming. I imagine I would need at least a Ronin M, which I can afford, but would not find that convenient. And Nikon LiveView autofocus...

As much as I hate my a6500 for the ergonomic / UI issues it has, it works pretty darn well on a one-hand gimbal.

Sounds like it would be a nice camera, and I am sure whomever buys one will be delighted with it.

But it also sounds kind of like it is a day late and a dollar short...

For that price, I think people might look at a GH5, or a G9, or an a6500, or a used a7R II, or...

Don't get me wrong; I wish them much success.

11 hours ago, IronFilm said:

X-H1 isn't pushing forward the whole industry, but it is however pushing forward Fuji! For that I am pleased to see.

Yes. Agree with this 110%

23 minutes ago, Charlie said:

I buy all my stuff from the UK. Electronics are expensive in Spain. I paid £450 for the A6000 with the kit lens. I'll definitely buy a fast prime too but I'm not sure which just yet.

If you want to record in XAVC S 50Mbs codec then you are going to need a 64GB card in xFAT. For some stupid reason, a 32GB card won't work (even if formatted in xFAT). Has to be a 64GB card (I am 99% sure of this but always pays to double check).

No picture profiles on the a6000, but I have been happy using the portrait creative style and reducing saturation and contrast by -2 and detail by -1, then doing minor grading. Definitely reducing contrast in the creative style of your choice will help increase dynamic range a bit (one stop???)

No mic jack, but sony makes shotgun mics that plug into the hotshoe. Don't know if that matters to you or not.

The kit lens is useable for 1080p. Sony e mount lenses are pretty expensive (compared to their older A Mount lenses). It MIGHT be worthwhile to look for an LA-EA1 adapter (Sony A mount to Sony E mount) so that you can mount older / cheaper A mount lenses (although they will technically autofocus, the autofocus won't be that good). At least you will be able to mount some minolta MF lenses as well with an LA-EA1. I bought my adapter for $50 US and use it on my a6500 with the very capable and very inexpensive Sony A Mount 85mm f/2.8 SAM.

Sony A mount lenses DON'T have built in stabilization, so using them on an LA-EA1 adapter won't help keep things less shakey. On the other hand, there are a few sigma and tamron lenses for Sony A Mount that DO have stabilization built in, so that might be helpful.

1 minute ago, fuzzynormal said:

Yeah, that's pretty much it.  Those guys used to offer really interesting and cool day shoot/edits.  Some of the stuff I did for them was legit and wherein you could make $1.5K+ on fun little gigs, but that was a long time ago.  That's the democratization of low-end production --and supply and demand in action.  They went where the market lead them.

Happened in music and it happened in video. 

Thanks for the input.

Yeah, I think in general that is the way things are headed. I mean, an iPhone is pretty capable now...

Trying to keep ahead of the curve wherever possible. Hence, I have a drone and pilot's license as well.

1 hour ago, fuzzynormal said:

FWIW, I'm aware of the company you're doing this for.

Although I'm sure they appreciate the shooters they "hire" going the extra mile to do the best they can, you're over thinking it. 

However, if your using their platform to cut your teeth and develop a skill set for future career work, then by all means, go at it with that ulterior motive. 

...but don't think that they're all that concerned about quality at their price point...and they'd admit as much. 

And, even though it's tempting because you're doing something to get paid, never consider that level of pay  "professional."

Thanks for the note.

Actually, I work for several different companies... as well as individual agents who have a "preferred vendor" but choose to work with me. I hope they work with me because of the quality I provide, but maybe they just look at how I dress and it makes them feel good about the way THEY dress...

But you are right; a lot of it is run and gun and at those prices ($200 to $300 per gig), it doesn't make much sense to spend a whole lot of time and money on it. And quite simply, some agents couldn't tell the difference between a video shot on an Alexa and one shot on an Osmo 

But since I aspire to work with those agents / companies that DO appreciate good work and who ARE willing to pay for it, I would like to make my work as good as I can in the meantime (within reason).

9 hours ago, Deadcode said:

No, you have to select the clips in the edit tab, right click, clip attributes, and switch range from "auto" to "full". After this you are able to pull back those highlights with curves or with gain

THANK YOU!!!

Almost everything I have shot has been in Cine 1 or Cine 4 so I am going to go back and re-visit some footage and adjust the clip attributes. I really appreciate you pointing this out to me.

7 minutes ago, Deadcode said:

And if you are shooting Cine1/Cine4 dont forget to recover super whites from the 109 IRE area, otherwise you get very hars clipping... instead of smooth rolloff with the cine4

Thanks for the suggestion. The best way to do that is just turning down the gain during post processing, right? (Using resolve.) Or are you saying while actually shooting?

7 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

the sony a6500 has 13.7 stops of DR vs. the Canon 5d 11 stops at 100 iso. You are not going to gain any more DR than the sensor is capable of with ML raw. Please keep in mind though rec709 if im not mistaken doesn't exceed 7 stops so you are fine. I underexpose by up to a stop with the a6500 and -0.5 with the 5d to maximize my DR. 11+ stops is plenty. I think Kodak Vision film was rated at 11 usable stops if im not mistaken

Thanks so much for the info. Yes, I try to underexpose to preserve the highlights and avoid the ghastly rolloff, but it is kind of walking a tightrope to avoid the noise penalty.

Since I find SLOG to be a bear to shoot in, I have a picture profile set up based on Cine 1 (by Dom Blond???) to handle scenes with lots of highlights, and based on Cine 4 for scenes with lots of detail in the shadows. Still not there yet.

6 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

Unless you have chroma clipping or are inept at setting white balance or dealing with a camera with poor white balance inherently (looking at Sonys, here) mixed lighting is difficult to work with in general. The Alexa handles it best, even in ProRes, so it's not necessarily about RAW. (Fwiw I agree about dynamic range, the 5D Mark III has less than the Sonys, but better tonality.)

The high end $100k stills camera guys I know use strobes and heavily light their real estate work. For video it's not so easy but I think (I could be totally off base here) the ultimate solution to get great quality is to bring color correct fixtures and gels with you to swap out with what's there. Lots of LEDs or kinoflo bulbs to swap, maybe. Really really cheap to buy, but not always possible of course. 

Thanks for the info. I noticed that the Alexa footage on  youtube does seem to do well with mixed lighting. Good to know that ProRes is good with mixed lighting as well (as when shooting RAW).

True, the ultimate solution would be lighting, whether it is changing interior lamps or bringing LEDs, but the problem for us real estate shooters is (mostly) time. Even though I am in an affluent area (the CHEAPEST house I photographed this last week was a 3 bed, 2 bath home selling for $975K), agent's are willing to spend a lot of money and they want things done QUICKLY.

6 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

@mercer yeah and it works waaayyy better than in raw than any camera I shot compressed h.264 or h.265 with. It does such a better job of creating a pleasing noise profile and you don’t have to worry about compression artifacts. In adobe premiere I edit the source dng file exposure and color temperature then I apply neat video and start my grade from there. Works wonders for that chroma noise

@Mark Romero 2 I forgot to mention to you better than dynamic range you get better tonality like @HockeyFan12 mentioned AND you can create your own highlight rolloff with a curve. Unlike compressed footage where your adding a curve to a baked in curve raw you have better control over that. I underexpose by -1 to -0.5 of a stop and in the highlight curve I model it so it smoothly rises and rolls off from black to the clipping point. I think if you expose the front of a house in raw at 100iso you have so much room to adjust how dark the darker tones get + you have all your highlight information. idk that’s how I would do it ! 

Can you elaborate a bit on what you mean by better tonality? I am used to using the term "tonality" as it relates to, say, the subtlety in skin tones, but not sure if you are using it like that in this instance.

5 hours ago, Deadcode said:

 

I don't know why this isn't quoting you Deadcode, but I thank you for your response above and will try as you suggested. Thanks again.

1 hour ago, EthanAlexander said:

@Mark Romero 2 5D3 raw is best used for passion projects with long turn-arounds. The workflow is time consuming and the storage requirements are super high. You also won't get much more dynamic range over h.264. On a sensor level we're talking 11.7 stops max vs 14.5 on your D750.

If you're shooting at ISO 1600 or more though they're all similar in dynamic range:

Thank you for the chart. Interesting, hadn't seen that exact chart before. I am often shooting in the 1600 to 3200 range when shooting interiors.

15 hours ago, mercer said:

Yeah, I honestly think for the kind of work you do, you would be better off with a D850. You’ll get great DR and color with clean shadows. I love my 5D3 and ML Raw but it’s not really the right tool for lowlight interiors.

Cantsin also made an excellent suggestion with the XC10. Great color and clean 4K in an all in one solution. 

Thanks for the input. I always appreciate your thoughts when it comes to Canon and RAW, so I am happy you chimed in here.

I was thinking of the D850 and the a7R III (still am).

The other appeal of RAW is the ability to fix color casts, because often I have to deal with daylight, tungsten, and three different kinds of fluorescent light in the same shot. I figure it would be able to deal with color correction better than 8-bit 4:2:0

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

As you own a D750, and if you're shooting non-professionally (as if you're doing it professionally then the maths is different), then I'd stick with the D750 for at least another year or two? You've got a good camera there!

But seems perhaps you do shoot professionally it seems?

What kind of interiors / architecture, high end stuff? Or high volume real estate? 
As if it is the latter, then I'd avoid any form of ML raw like the plague!

Thank you for your thoughts.

Shooting professionally, but it is mostly run and gun real estate. However, I will be doing real estate agent commercials (where the agent talks about what a great real estate agent they are and why you should hire them), and also going to do some small business commercials as well. The pay is not great though ($200 to $300 for a video up to about 1:30 in length).

Also, I want to do MORE high end real estate, and dynamic range is pretty much key here because we have some stunning views here in the SF Bay Area. But that is down the road a bit I think.

So right now high-volume real estate work, but with an eye toward higher end stuff.

I like the D750 for a LOT of reasons but the image is so soft... I know that sharpness isn't everything, but sometimes when editing D750 footage I sit there and say, "Was I shooting out of focus???"

4 hours ago, cantsin said:

RAW gives you the most flexibility, but actually, the RAW from many Blackmagic cameras (Pocket, Cinema 2.5K and Ursa 4.6K) offers more dynamic range/better highlight roll-off than 5D MK III raw (because BM uses dual-gain sensors with bigger sensels). On the other hand, BM cameras do not have optical low-pass filters and therefore produce significantly more moiré than the 5D MK III.

For good DR and highlight roll-off in standard picture profiles, I'd take a Canon XC10/15, C100 and above or a Fuji XT2 - basically any camera that has near-perfect color rendering out of the box.

Thanks for the input. Mattias did a comparison between the d750 shooting in flat profile and some blackmagic cameras and he concluded that the DR was pretty similar, so I guess that means the DR of my D750 would be pretty close to the DR from Canon RAW.

1 hour ago, seku said:

i hope i am not too harsh, but there is no 4k ML raw. closest you can get is 3.5k wide, but that's considerably more squeezed than 21:9. Also, you'll get a few seconds at that resolution at best. Also, consider that ML RAW has no highlight rolloff. it clips quite harshly. because it's raw the highlight rolloff you saw in the videos was probably handed quite handsomly by a gifted colorist who recorded ML RAW with enough leeway to let it roll off nicely in post.

Flexibility in grading? oh yes. ML RAW is awesome for that. but you need to learn to shoot with grading in mind.

For your bonus question: the 5Dmk3 is meh for DR. chroma noise creeps up quickly. you don't need any white balance, as this is RAW. i personally would not go above ISO 3200 with the 5dmk3.

Thank you for the input. I much appreciate it.

I saw some beautiful looking 4K ML RAW footage from a 5D MK III and it looked like it had great dynamic range and great highlight rolloff (compared to my Sony a6500).

Are there any SLR cameras that compare with that as of Feb 2018 shooting h.264 or other similar (non-RAW) codecs? Preferably something that ISN'T SLOG.

I like the detail of the a6500, but the DR and  Highlight Rolloff are still disappointing (even with EOSHD Pro Color and when shooting in the various Cine gammas). And to be honest, I can't get a decent image when using SLOG to save my life, so I avoid SLOG.

Bonus Question: Is ML RAW going to give the most flexibility in terms of color correction (and grading, I suppose) when compared to non-RAW codecs? Because I shoot architecture / interiors without being able to light it, the two most difficult issues for me are dynamic range, multiple white balance, and high ISO. Would moving to RAW be the best to tackle those issues?

38 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

@hyalinejim im going to try out MLVFS I’ve already started to try and teach myself resolve. These files give you an incredible amount of options in post ! Is MLVFS the only one you recommend ? Im not sure it works as well on windows as it does mac 

Goat's Eye has a comprehensive series of tutorials on resolve 12.5 on youtube, and there are a lot of similarities in Resolve 14.

On 2/7/2018 at 1:20 PM, mercer said:

Thanks Deadcode. Here’s a Resolve question that I was wondering about. In FCPX, the timeline will regroup clips after a cut, is there a way to do that in Resolve?

Can you clarify what you mean by "regroup clips"?

In resolve, you have ripple delete where you cut a clip, click on the empty space AFTER the cut, right click ripple delete, and ALL the following clips on that track will move forward an euqal amount.

Is that what you mean? sorry I am not familiar with FCXP.

On 2/7/2018 at 1:15 PM, Deadcode said:

The rendering times with Neat video NR applied is very long, especially if you use it on 4K footage. With the built in NR function in Davinci Resolve studio you can have  almost same results, but with much much faster then Neat. Everything else is possible with Resolve Lite.

@Mattias Burling will you do a 2018 edition video about the 5D Raw with 4K? I loved your last one about the 5D

 

Edit: currently im testing the built in NR on underexposed a6300 iso12800 SLOG2, and the results are insane...

Is it insane in a good or bad way??? Would love to see any footage. I am using the free version of resolve so no built in noise reduction, but would certainly upgrade to the paid version in order to get awesome noise reduction.

5 hours ago, Kisaha said:

I can only find the SLB60 version in my country, it goes for 420euros. Does it worth it, or should I look elsewhere?

I could spend a couple of thousands of euros later on (end of 2018 or early 2019) for a few lights (maybe a couple of Lightstorms, Lupo?) but I would like just 1 key light, before, or at, Eastern.

What do you thing?

The dedicated battery without the need for V ones is a plus though..

Contains:
1x Godox SLB60W 5500K Led Video light
1x Reflector
1x Remote control
1x Lamp cover
1x Power cord
1x Battery charger

From the videos I have seen online, The fans sound pretty loud (to me) so I would definitely look at some of the demonstration videos.

I was going to buy one of the SLB 100 but I don't know, woulld have to do the fan modification that is linked to earlier in this thread.

2 hours ago, hmcindie said:

Looks way better than in your first clip where even the jutter was juttery. That looks like normal 30fps.

Thanks for the observation. That helps give me a direction to figure out what I am doing wrong.

22 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

MAke sure to turn the detail all the way to -7. Sometimes the judder is from in camera sharpening.

I will try that. Thanks for the suggestion.

Actually, probably NOT a mis-match of timeline and footage frame rate because the footage itself looks jittery, too. Look at the corner joint of the two walls (between the tv and the large white closets).

18 hours ago, hmcindie said:

You have a mismatch with your framerate and the framerate of your editing timeline. That's what the causes the jumps between frames as the edit software drops frames.

Or not as the rest of the shots are smooth. Check your settings anyway.

Hmmm...

Could be... I might have to retry this.

I usually drop my 4K clips on to a 1080p timeline in resolve... I wonder if I should just use resolves feature to automatically adjust the timeline to match with the clip?

On 2/5/2018 at 12:15 AM, ntblowz said:

Its the OIS messing around, I had that same problem with Canon 10-18mm STM on 200D on gimbal, best is turn IS off and stabilize in post if needed. some of the shot I feel like OIS is fighting against the gimbal

Thanks for the suggestion.

I will have to do some tests when i have a free afternoon. Too busy this week with photo shoots (which is good, just need to get some filming done too).

On 2/3/2018 at 7:48 AM, Arikhan said:

@Mark Romero 2 - here are my thoughts for shooting architecture / interiors, etc. with the A6500/NX1 (!).  My claims base on own experience with some famous (and extremely picky about detail and resolution)  architecture's offices and luxury real estate dealers, possessed by by "Gigapixel mania". These guys seem to have invented the pixel peeping...

I own and use the A6500 and the NX1. As you know, these two cameras are exceptional in 4K when talking detail and sharpness - much "sharper" than even much more expensive dedicated video/production cameras. But...there is a price to pay for this sharpness - and the "micro-jitter" or "stroboscope effect" is one of the disadvantages.

Sometimes, when shooting 4K even on tripod and panning with A6500/NX1 and stopping down the lens to f5.6-f11 for a maximum of sharpness and resolution, you will encounter the stroboscoping (jitter) effect.

Let's take a look a the different use cases:

1. Panning

When panning, try to pan smoothly, personally I pan with these two cameras a 90 degree angle in 12+ seconds - not faster. I do it this way when shooting with gibmal, but also when using the cameras on tripod

2. Using a motorized gimbal

Today's gimbals are phantastic. But still, even people who claim to be "very experienced" do often a superficial balancing and calibration. Spend a lot of time on precise balance and (micro) calibration of your gimbal, you will see a huge difference when done right.

As you might know, the Zhiyun or Moza DO NOT counterbalance vertical shake. Therefore, please put a piece of mousepad (cut in the shape you need) between camera and gimbal plate. My piece of mousepad is about 2mm thick and it helps a lot avoiding jitter - because it seems to be quite efficient when buffering vertical shake (when runnung, stepping, or running stairs)

3. Practice running with gimbal

You might say now, this is a trivial advice. It's not! Most guys believe they do it the right way. They don't. Two months ago I payed 600,- EUR for an 10 hours seminar / course with a gimbal and steadyshot pro. It was great, because there I learned I was a nob. It could take even years to some users to learn to use a gimbal / staedypod properly.

You have to move and walk like a ninja, to use your hands and arms independently from your body, etc. it's not as easy as it might sound.

4. Frame rate / Shutter speed

This is essential. You are based in a NTSC country. As you shoot interiors / property, you don't need to shoot 24fps.

Shoot 30fps. As seen in your video, you usually use 3-6 seconds takes for your video. When shooting 30fps in NTSC, you can even slow this a little bit down in post, by putting your shot in a little bit faster timeline than initially shot....

So, when you shoot 30fps, try to keep shutter speed at 1/50. This will make each frame more "blurry" then when shooting at 1/60 - and will diminish the "stroboscoping effect" / jitter substantially.

Put a ND filter on your lenses, don't try to reduce the amount of light by increasing your shutter speed. Increasing the shutter speed and panning will accentuate the stroboscoping effect.

5. Use OSS / IBIS if possible...but test the same takes WITHOUT...there are some cases, when micro jitter disappears with IBIS off...Just test...

6. You have to rethink the term "interior video"

When you shoot interior, (mostly) nothing will move. So, why do you shoot video? Shoot stills!

Let me give you some example out of your video: The takes 0:20s-0:25s / 0:25s-->0:28s / 0:51s-->0:58s / 1:19-->1:24, etc. WHY do you shoot video? Why? Shoot stills and create the pan / zoom in effect IN POST...

Shoot on a tripod. Shoot 3+ exposures (depending on contrast and DR expectations) for each take and RAW at base ISO (100 for the A6500). When shooting like this, you could get a unbelievable amount of DR and great colors within 5 minutes. Blend your shots and apply luminosity masks in post, if necessary...You will get a DR you could never get within the baked in h264 when filming...

Now...Your 10-18mm Sony lens is great...But it's a 15mm on the crop A6500. You have a FOV of 76 degrees vertically, this should be more than sufficient....You have a horizontal angle of view with this lens at 99 degrees. IF you need a wider angle (=more FOV) - my picky customers refuse to accept wider angles (FOV) than about 120 degress, because they find it "unnatural" - take more photos by panning and stiching in post. When talking 120 degrees field of view, we talk about 3 horizontal takes. BUT: use a panoramic tripod head (here in German from 130 - 190 EUROS) for this, you have to get the proper nodal point before stiching...If needed, shoot vertically, but you need more takes to stich in post...There is plenty of cheap or almost free stiching software out there.

Then import your post processed photo (after sing RAW post pro, blending, stitching) in your NLE and create the pan / zoom effect in a spectacular resolution and DR....NOONE will know, it's not film...

BTW: Shooting f11 with the 10-18mm on the A6500 is NOT useful, as for most APSC cameras, f11 is where difraction starts to kick in (in stills quite visible). At this wide angle (10-18mm), f8 should be enough to get maximum of sharpness and resolution.

Have fun!

Thank you for the very detailed list of suggestions. I had about four shoots over the last few days so haven't had a chance to try and implement them. But I wanted to say thank you and will let you know how they work out for me.

Thanks.

7 minutes ago, Arikhan said:

You say, you shot at F11. Which lens did you use?

10-18 f/4.

I didn't have any ND filters for it.

38 minutes ago, Thomas Hill said:

Seems like the pans with the most jitter were also the fastest ones, so you could try slowing down the movements or, like @Mckinise said, bump up the fps.

Thanks, but I hope someone could maybe explain WHY there is that jitter?

I know that may sound like a dumb question, but I would expect to see blur (or rolling shutter).

I've seen people do fast pans with the a6300 / a6500 to demonstrate the rolling shutter, but when they do, I don't see that jittery effect. Just blur and rolling shutter.

I ain't no engineer but it would seem to me that using a faster fps would make for MORE jitter...

Anyway, thanks again. Maybe I am just not seeing the same thing you guys are seeing.

Just now, Mckinise said:

Try 30fps and slower movement if you are shooting UHD.  60fps if you are shooting 1080p.

Thanks for the input.

I can always try 30fps, but I guess I thought I would see more blur and less of the almost "stop and go" motion.

Firstly, sorry if this is supposed to go in the Shooting sub-forum and not here. But since it is (kind of) an equipment question, thought it might belong in the main forum.

I tend to get jittery pans with my Sony cameras (currently have an a6500, formerly had an a6300).

Notice as the camera pans left:

https://youtu.be/YUNFNs9e_E0?t=1m42s

I am using the a6500 on a Zhiyun crane. Because I didn't have an ND filter for this lens, I am stopped down to f/11, shooting at 24fps (23.98), and 1/50th shutter speed.

It doesn't look like rolling shutter to me. It just looks like I am panning in "steps."

There are a couple of other areas in that video where it looks jittery to me as well.

The original footage looks jittery, as does the optimized footage once I upload to resolve.

Any thoughts on what is causing this???

Thanks in advance.

Anyone here ever try any of these:

https://www.adorama.com/fplcl1144r.html

Or at least, do you know who the original manufacture is? (Yongnuo? Godox?)

It looks like it has a hole in the center of the disk for an umbrella shaft. Not perfect, but might be good for my needs.

EDIT: Just realized they only have a CRI of 83

Darn... it looks like the PixaPro would be great but I am looking for something for a shoot next Thursday and don't think it would arrive in time.