kye

That is a very interesting look, and definitely usable. It would be quite a cheap exercise to make a 'set' with some having less passes through the paint, and perhaps trying a variation with a clear varnish instead of black paint or perhaps other types of spray products.

I suspect this would be the case. Probably the larger issue would be that in many countries you now need to be certified and lodge flight plans etc before flying the drones above some small weight size (is it 250g?) so all drones except things like Spark have very steep learning curve and initial investment.

I highly recommend for anyone watching this for the first time that you actually write down your impressions before the cameras are revealed, and do it properly, because once they're revealed it's very difficult to remember what you really thought, rather than what you think you thought after all your biases are plastered all over your blind impressions. Somewhat contrary to prevailing currents, I thought the cameras were in three tiers - best / middle / worst - and I put the GH2 in the worst tier. I didn't like the colours or the noticeable compression issues. Interestingly my three tiers were basically in price order, which surprised me as I had my doubts that I would be able to pick that out. From memory, the comments from the audience members who preferred the lower-budget cameras were around the colours and contrast, which is a creative choice. One reason I prefer cameras with higher DR is that you can take a scene and create either a high-contrast or a low-contrast grade from it, but in a high-DR situation you can't create a low-contrast grade from a low-DR camera, so it's a matter of flexibility for me. Plus I shoot primarily outdoors in available light, so flexibility is more valuable to me than getting the look I want straight out of camera, and I do also prefer a less contrasty more natural look, which also matters.

I agree with @heart0less that sales is sales, but also with @hk908 that content is content, and Waqas certainly puts the content in the videos. Every time I see a YouTuber flogging some brand or other I do recoil slightly, but then I remember that TV was full of ads for things I had no interest in whatsoever that went on for whole minutes at a time and did so every few minutes of content. I'd rather see a content creator promoting their own materials, or having one ad in their video than having to watch clusters of ads where everything about it was turned up to 11 to try and get me to hear it from the next room when I went to get a drink!

Just watched this grading video and found it really useful. There's a few things in here that I hadn't seen before, and I think the look (nice bright and colourful) has more practical application than emulating some particular movie or other..

My first computer had 8kB of RAM. Luckily I had the VHS-sized expansion module that increased that by 16kB! It took a long time to type in 24kB of basic code, and even a considerable amount of time to load it from tape once you'd typed it in for the first time..... and fixed the typos

Not true - one thing that cannot be done in real-time is predicting the future. External software can (and does) analyse the entire length of the clip and take that into account. You probably get most of the same benefits in-camera with a 2-3 second buffer on the stabilisation mechanism, but it's not the same. I also find that external software gives you the option to try different ways to stabilise and to optimise parameters, so that's something you get without it being baked-into the footage. Of course, the footage with stabilisation baked-in makes better use of the codec and bitrate as it's not having to compress an image that's jumping around all over the place, so that's a win for in-camera processing. I've also considered there to be three time-scales to stabilisation: movement that occurs during an exposure this is blur or RS that can only be prevented with OIS / IBIS or having a huge camera rig - EIS might be able to help a bit with RS but can't help with blur during normal shutter times (ie, 1/50 not 1/4000) movement that occurs due to hand shakiness etc this is what light camera rigs have and heavier ones do not have - EIS can help a little with this movement that occurs slowly this is where the 'floaty' look can come from with gimbals and forms the aesthetic part of the equation My experience is that stabilisation of the first two is desirable and management of the third should be done to taste. Stabilisation is a topic that is almost always oversimplified - please resist the temptation.....

640kB of RAM should be enough for anyone.

On UMP the 20mm should be equivalent to a 28mm on FF? If so then that's a more useful wide. I prefer to have 15mm and 35mm equivalents as I love the 'wow' look of the 15mm but it's really what you're shooting that dictates what you need. Plus I'm a bit over the 28mm FOV after shooting and watching a lot of stuff from smartphones over the years, but that's probably just me. How long are you expecting the shipping to take? I haven't bought anything since covid so have no idea what shipping is like.. Which ones didn't you like and why? I'm not aware of other lenses that are 37mm other than the Mir, but there are multiple brands of 58 and 85mm available all with differences in coatings and sometimes optical recipe, so it matters which ones you have.

@noone where would you say that Tamron are compared to other lenses? I know that most lens companies started off optically worse than todays offerings, although there are notable exceptions, but were they more flawed? more vintage? more modern? more neutral? Things like takumars have a real look to them, known for being sharp but not too sharp, and contrasty but not too contrasty, etc. Russian lenses are known for being soft wide open then very sharp when stopped down, etc etc.. I'm wondering how the Tamrons fit.

I thought the Mir was an interesting lens. Being apochromatic it has some of the optical qualities of vintage lenses but not all, so it's an interesting mix. The 25, 37, and 58 are a good lineup, but with S35 you might consider a wider lens? Or are you using a SB?

The Sigma is a stunning quality lens for the price but it is that modern look, where there's no character. It depends on what you're shooting and your tastes. I have two Helios 58/2 lenses and couldn't even think about using that as my only option, considering how distracting the background blur is, especially on video where if you move the camera then the whole background blur makes it look like you're filming in a parallel universe where the rules of physics are broken. One trend I found when I binged the lenses forum at reduser.com was that people advocate using a modern set for projects that want a more neutral look and a vintage set for projects that can benefit from a look with more character. Often that meant that the modern set was something like Zeiss CP.2s and the vintage set was the Russians, FD or Takumar glass, with the price difference meaning that they would rent the Zeiss set and own the vintage set so they could use it on personal projects and longer-form content like shooting documentaries over months/years. Depending on your workflow it's pretty easy to make the modern lenses look a lot more vintage, but some don't like doing much in post.

I haven't done that specifically, but the concept is sound. The challenge in your situation would be ensuring that there's enough clearance for the QR plate (both female and male) and the camera to fit under the top part of the camera rig. I've invested a bit into QR plates and mounts to make my equipment interchangeable depending on what I'm doing. I have a tripod, monopod, Gorillapod 5K, Manfrotto Pocket and a Peak Design Capture, which are either designed to receive QR plates or I've added them. Then I have my GH5 and Sony X3000 action camera with QR plates from Peak Design on them, so either camera works with any mount. The QR plates from Peak Design are the best I've found as they're well made and are super-small and low profile. I've even put a wrist strap on the one on my GH5 for when I'm hand-holding it (which is common for me) and the strap doesn't stop it being mounted in a QR mount.

Why not put it on a tripod and shoot a test clip and then take a RAW still image and then compare?

Have you compared the grain retention when uploading to YT in 4K? I did some tests between 4K and 1080 on YT and the difference was huge, but I didn't focus on grain, so not sure how that shakes out.

The phrase that we used to use when I was an IT Support Monkey was "percussive maintenance".

It's unlikely that software will do anything usable in that regard, at least for a long time. The general approach would be to look to frames either side and kind of interpolate what a non-blurred frame would look like, but you'd need to track levels of blur across the whole clip (as it's not a "sharp" vs "blurred" situation) and if the frames either side are blurry then there's less information available to work with. Plus, I don't see the market really demanding this. More likely it's a case of just using it for cameras that expose with the shutter like action cameras and drones where EIS is commonly built-in already (eg, GoPro and Osmo Action). Yes, with short shutter speeds EIS starts to make sense. I'm not sure why the various stabilisers out there can't correct the wobble-vision from IBIS and wide-angle lenses, the information is all there, it's just applying the algorithms to correct warp, which themselves already exist. One thing that caught my eye recently was the idea of using a short SS, stabilising in post, then applying a fake motion blur to emulate a 180-shutter after the stabilisation has been done. I think for my work, which isn't for commercial purposes, that might simplify things quite a bit and might be good enough from a quality perspective. Of course, just holding the camera steady remains the best approach, if at all possible.

OIS and IBIS stabilise the image DURING the exposure, and software solutions stabilise the image AFTER the exposure. If you shake a camera during the exposure (which is likely to be something like 1/50th of a second, which is quite a long time) then the camera shake will show itself in the motion blur. Once it's in the motion blur it's baked into the footage. There is nothing that can be done. OIS and IBIS prevent the problem, EIS does its best to salvage what it can with what it gets.

All those lenses should be good or great optically as they're the classic manufacturers. Interesting that the set has a 36mm and 38mm - I wonder if the owner bought one and then upgraded to the other, although I don't know enough about these lenses to know which way around that might have gone. Keep us updated, and definitely post some stills if you get a chance!

Probably the ultimate resource for BMPCC and BMMCC and C-Mount lenses is this thread here: It's the first result in google if you search for "bmpcc C-mount" and it's easily the best thing I've found online. Lots of lenses mentioned in it, although some of the links and images haven't survived.

The video isn't mine, so I can't comment, although the video description has a bit of detail. It says: In terms of GH5 vs BMMCC, have a look at this thread: I'm only new to the BMMCC, so I haven't used many lenses on it. The only C-mount lens I've used on it is a 12.5mm f1.9 lens, that is a FF equivalent of 35mm, which is my favourite FOV. If you google you can often see forum threads where people take sample images with a lens, and still images are often of higher quality than video (especially when the video is compressed heavily for streaming services) so they're a good way to get an overall impression of how the lens performs.

This was shot on the original pocket camera, essentially hand-held with one lens. It's not essential to rig this up. You need something with pretty decent 4K to get a similar image (I know, I've been matching my GH5 with my BMMCC).

Congratulations!! We are very impressed with your application and are delighted to announce you will henceforth be leading the development of this very exciting product! Please let us know when you anticipate a first prototype for us to trial. I have cleared my schedule for next week in anticipation.