kye

Do what you can in-camera and then remember you can tweak footage in post using Temperature (yellow/blue) and Tint (green/magenta) adjustments.

Colour comes from many steps along the way, being finalised in post with corrections like saturation etc. Essentially, if footage is shot well enough for the codec being used (better codecs are more flexible) then you can (*almost) make any video have any colour you like by processing it in post. I say "almost" because there are a few limitations: the various filters in front of the sensor (including the RGB one) the processing in the camera itself how well the footage was shot and how good the codec is (10-bit, etc) the level of flexibility you have in your toolset (NLE, and other video processing software) the limitations of your monitoring (colour accuracy of monitors etc) the level of skill you have as a colourist In most situations it's the level of skill of the colourist that dominates how good the final result will be. The rule of thumb is that if you shoot it well by setting exposure and WB on set, shoot in suitable conditions (not crazy DR, no mixed lighting, etc) then you should be able to get good colour in post with only a few simple adjustments. Getting great colour requires everything to be almost perfect and a huge level of skill from the colourist, or just getting lucky. Hope that helps..

If you're talking about my rigs, it's not fashion, it's weight and bag size!! I have to make room in my suitcase for the coffee machine my wife insisted that we bring on the holiday! ???

Great dutch angle @Geoff CB

At the risk of taking the thread in an unexpected direction, here's my two set-ups from earlier today, pictured in their natural habitat, on a beach towel on my lap in a tour bus, with people around me wondering WTF I was doing taking a photo of two cameras with a third camera (my phone). Sony X3000 for crazy wides, gimbal-like stabilisation when walking and handy actions shots like getting in and out of busses, trains, planes, etc for b-roll and establishing shots. GH5 with Rode VMP+ and Konica Hexanon 40mm for a bit of reach for the main shots where I have a bit more time.

If this happens it's more likely to be the SSD than the P6K.. the data volumes we're talking about with this (and the P4K when it was released) are incredible and past the limits of all but the best of current technology. It's also likely to be content-specific as (I would imagine) that Braw and Prores will compress the video stream more if there is less movement. It would be interesting to see a torture test between a SSD and a CFast card, as one of the reasons CFast cards are so expensive is their blistering performance spec.

You have no idea how many times I've almost bought a Jupiter-9... I'm talking put one in my ebay cart and everything. One of those times was yesterday!!

@jonprimo nice lighting - not many go really bold, so good work!

We keep reaching theoretical thresholds and keep finding ways around them, so I'm not worried, Moores Law is safe. And in terms of hard drives not shrinking that's a form factor question. Otherwise we wouldn't have SSD drives (smaller than a 2.5 inch HDD and things like 256GB micro SD cards are ridiculously tiny, so storage is absolutely shrinking. This has some interesting data... https://medium.com/predict/moores-law-is-alive-and-well-adc010ea7a63

Wow, 14-bit RAW 6K would be crazy...

I agree with "not as soon as you think" but if we take my 20MB 3.5inch HDD as an example, a 2TB drive is 100,000 times the capacity and that's not even cherry- picking a better example. That took about 30 years, which is a 47% annual increment, and I don't see any reason that wouldn't continue almost indefinitely. Moores Law says double every 1.5 years for the same cost, which means that in 3 years 8K will be as taxing as 4K is now, and in 6 years 16K will be as taxing as 4K is now. That's not that much time really ???

Now is a difficult time as with S1 and S1H there aren't so many lenses and with MFT the future isn't so clear. If you can possibly hold off then that would be the smart move..

Society will always have things that they're not willing to talk about, and when someone does talk about them there will be controversy. Hollywood is relatively new to this territory, but it's the job of the artist to address the unaddressable, to discuss the undiscussable, and to generally bring these things to light. That's why there's so much dark humour - we laugh partly because we don't know what else to do. "I can't believe you said that". Check out Sarah Silverman, deeply wrong and also hilarious.

My first hard drive was 20Mb. I got a second one that had been physically opened and was now unreliable, so I had to run Spinrite every week (it would read the drive and re-write the same data over the top to refresh it) otherwise it would just stop working and you'd have to format it again. That process took about an hour because it was so much data. At full-IQ my GH5 would fill one of those hard drives every 0.4 seconds. 8K will be mainstream, just wait long enough. and after that it will be vintage, then it will be positively pre-historic.

Will this be solely the IBIS? or is this from trying to stabilise it in post? IIRC these stabilisation artefacts happen from the combination? I wonder if there's a plugin that will be able to un-do these things? It should be relatively easy as it's just parts of the frame stretching without other parts stretching.

We can compare 6k to 1440p, but we should also compare it to 720p, as both were the lower of two standards that got announced together (or at similar times, not sure). And 720p is still being used as a broadcast resolution in the US, so we might be having the "is 12k ever going to be used when there's 20k" conversation and someone will be saying "there's a VR app in the US that's only 6k" ???

All traditional discussion will be put aside when people start talking about VR where you're heavily zooming into the delivery image when viewing it. My phone is 1080p and it looks like YT 360p when I'm using it with the VR adapter goggles (and it becomes a pair of ~1000x1000 eyepieces). For 360 degree VR video you're going to want more resolution for quite a long time - we are a very long way off from retina resolution VR.

I think it will come down to what extra width vs low-light is worth to you. You can also compromise your wallet instead and get the Laowa 7.5mm f2, but it's much more expensive! The SLR Magic isn't a nice lens to use ergonomically, but it puts out a decent image so if you're shooting in slower more deliberate situations then that might not matter. Also worth considering is the Panasonic 14mm f2.5. It's nothing special, but it's similar to what you're talking about so just thought I'd bring it up in case it slipped your mind.

Latest video from Kraig Adams is shot on S1H... very nice.

Why? People have been discussing lenses and posting images and screen grabs from lenses. If this isn't the purpose of a thread about lenses then I'm not sure what is... Just because someone complains doesn't mean we have to go all scorched earth or move to a new country and start again

Absolutely not! Bonus points for interesting and strange choices!! If you're super-keen, there are medium-format lenses available (and even large format lenses too!!) so you could get a medium-format to FF speed-booster or even a medium-format camera Oh, I don't know... put 135mm on a FF and make it part of a 2X anamorphic setup (I have no idea if this can happen, but I'm telling this story so whatever...) and you'll have a widescreen 67.5mm horizontal FOV. Sounds pretty good to me! @leslie might do it!!

lol.. the lens sub-forum should be relatively safe Remember to take crop factor into account, 85mm is pretty long to begin with. Unless the anamorphic adapter will make it wider? I'm not so sure how these things work

I agree that oversampling creates an IQ benefit, no doubt, and of course downscaling to 2K gives 4:4:4 colour whereas a 1080p sensor does not, so it's not a perfect simulation. However, my original point was that you can take a lower resolution and sharpen it a little and it's indistinguishable from a higher resolution with no sharpening. This test is a little different in that there's no processing to try and match them visually - this is just a "here's what they all look like" test, and we see what we see and make our own conclusions. I draw the conclusions that between 4K and 2K there is very little difference, and if we're comparing 8K with 2K there absolutely isn't a 16x difference!! That's my impression - without seeing them side-by-side you wouldn't really look at good quality (or RAW) 2K and be completely disappointed by it.

I don't think I saw this posted here yet... Lens test from Reduser.com Here's the thread on reduser.net with all the details: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?177346-The-Agony-Of-Choice-Vintage-Modern-Lens-Shootout

Ah! Sorry - my brain just caught up