kye

Fark me is that funny.... every second shot you're thinking "OMG they've used <household item> for that.... hahahah.... actually, it's not that far from the real movie" This thread could also be serious, and be called "The importance of production design in your movie" or "Buy production design not a new camera" ???

I think 8K will be worth the tradeoff... oh, hang on.

The rig is nice. what I liked best is that he made a video that had great editing, showing the important things but not wasting any more time on long-winded tangents like most reviewers

I video my kids sports games, and have figured out a few things but have questions too. I figure we can share our experiences and learn some stuff? Here's the rig I have developed so far: It is GH5, Rode Video Mic Pro+, Gorillapod 5K, Minolta 135mm f2.8, QR plate with wrist-strap attached to it. I also use the Minolta 200mm f4 lens for extra reach as our football fields are quite large. I sit beside the field on a chair, and I film highlights of my kid, not the whole match or anything. Things that work well: Bending Gorillapod to have single leg as support allows smooth rotations while resting on my lap, and other leg bent to form a handle that I can use to steady the rig and also still manually focus Viewfinder is great in bright conditions 135mm and 200mm on crop sensor IBIS on those focal lengths is just great, it's not perfect, but you're moving the camera around so much tracking the action that small hand-shake doesn't really show that much Manual focus + focus peaking works pretty good Rig is light, very portable, and pretty cheap Things that don't work well or I'd appreciate advice on: 135mm and 200mm are good but it's not fast to change lenses so I'm tempted by a zoom, something like a 70-200 would be great. However, I don't want to sacrifice IQ in the ways that vintage zooms were never as good as vintage primes, and I can't afford a modern fully manual zoom lens. Unless there's a lens I'm unaware of? I spend the whole game with the audio jack from the Rode mic sticking into my forehead trying to use the viewfinder. Help? It's not quite tall enough on my lap - is there some easy way to extend it up maybe 10-20cm (4-8in) that anyone can think of? Or should I just put the mic on a flash bracket or something off to the side? I'd rather not get a cage for it, as I use the GH5 handheld quite a bit for non-sports situations and want to keep the weight and bulk down. Or maybe for football I just use the Rode Video Micro that I have that isn't as large. The 200mm gives nice profile shots as people run on or off or as things get closer, but is still reasonably good at the far end of the field. Here's a random and relatively non-identifying pic from the 200mm with the kids at the other end of the field: Do you shoot sports? What is your setup? What have you learned?

I am a bit confused about these Dell monitors. I have a Dell UP3216Q - is it the same line as the one you reference? With mine I can calibrate it fine with sRGB but haven't been able to get it to calibrate with any wider colour space. I'm using a Datacolour Spyder 4 Pro and a MBP and it just won't finish the calibration, so I abandoned using it as a HDR display. I did a bunch of googling and apart from buying another calibration device I couldn't find any useful information on it. Models of monitors and calibration devices cycle so fast that no real amount of knowledge is actually available online about anything besides the manufacturers claims. It might be a mis-match, it might be a scam, we'd never know because the tech moves on too fast.

Interesting. I'm on that plan and haven't seen any emails from them about a change in pricing, although if they're changing the price for new subscribers then it's probably not too far away. I can see the logic of doing them with a gap in-between. Step one: change pricing for new customers, existing customers don't get a price change and so don't care. Step two: existing customers get the price hike, but because there's been a delay, it seems like less of a big deal, and new customers have been paying that for some time and they didn't raise it because of "the loyalty to existing customers" blah blah blah.. Crabs don't scream if you put them in cold water and gradually heat it until they boil alive! Additionally: I posted a few things in the Feature requests for Resolve v17 thread on BM forums and there were people in there asking for ability to process RAW stills and have a gallery with ratings and metadata like Lightroom....

I noticed: DR differences (on the lights mainly) Skin tones on the Alexa slightly more natural distribution in the hues between yellow and pink Saturation on the red hat was a bit more strained on the P4K and a little loss of hue variation However, those are tiny differences and I have seen a lot of Alexa vs GH5 + GHa LUT comparisons (I own the LUT) so I am a bit familiar with how the Alexa does those things. However, the skin tones can be adjusted in post, and the P4K should be fine as it has excellent bit-depth and lacks significant compression artefacts which are both big enemies of great skin-tones.

Both look pretty good to me. I mean, the Alexa has the edge in a few different aspects, but at their relative price-points the fact that the P4K wasn't seriously embarrassed is really the only thing you need to know. Anyone who resorts to drama and hyperbole about "unusable" or "terrible" or whatever has no clue. The LUTs were pretty close and some secondary adjustments would close that gap pretty well. Great stuff.

+1 for what @UncleBobsPhotography said. There are differences between the cameras for sure, and each has strengths and weaknesses. For example the a73 has great low-light, is FF (which some care about), but Sony is 8-bit in-camera and lenses are quite expensive and although there aren't that many third party lenses, there are fast zooms available (24-70/2.8 etc). The GH5 isn't as good in low-light, and doesn't have fast zooms available (the 12-35/2.8 is equivalent to a 24-70/5.6 lens on FF so it's not a fast zoom), but it has 10-bit internal, a 5K h265 anamorphic mode that can de-squeeze in-camera, and there are is a large array of native and third party lenses. I don't know as much about the XT3 but it also has an excellent reputation, having great colour IIRC, so you are right to consider it. People saying a camera is 'unusable' or 'terrible' have lost any rational perspective, or never had any in the first place. My advice is to work out what features you are looking for in a camera, and then rank them into features your camera Must Have, Should Have, and Could Have. Then watch a bunch of reviews and rate each camera against the features you identified, then have a look at which one has more Must Have features, and take price into account and see where that lands you. Don't forget to consider the entire rig as well: lenses, media, spare batteries, battery grips, chargers, computer to edit footage (h265 from GH5 is very difficult to edit), bitrate and therefore file sizes and the HDD space to store the footage, etc...

Could you use a HDR TV? You'd have to calibrate it obviously, but if the push is for HLG acquisition and distribution, the TV price wars should be working in your favour?

@Video Hummus damn, now I want one!

@androidlad good answer. Does that mean that the lower parts of the frame on a global reset camera are brighter, due to the slightly longer exposure time? It could be compensated for in processing, but that would shift the DR slightly. Although, come to think of it, skies are normally brighter than land, and are normally on top of the land (if you have the camera the right way up) so in a sense it's almost like a soft-edge ND filter

My 2016 13in MBP gets absolutely smashed by the 5K 10-bit h265 footage from the GH5. I haven't worked out what I'm going to do about it yet, because I don't want to have to render proxies for every time I shoot anything, but it's something like 1-2fps playback, so.... ?

This is an interesting product designed for wirelessly sending video to your phone. There doesn't seem to be huge interest in wireless transmitters on this board, but people go nuts about anything that lets you use your phone as a display, and this might be a slightly bulky way to achieve this outcome. The video was posted a week or so ago and I expected it to show up but no-one mentioned it. Maybe it's of interest to someone? Specs: 140ms delay (3 frames if you're at 24p) 100m/328ft range 1080p60 signal with variable bitrate depending on distance can send to 4 devices simultaneously 3.5 hour battery life automatically finds the best wifi channel before sending the app(?) has various display functions, focus assist, false colour, histogram, zebras, monitor LUTs, markers, zoom, etc

I only do film-making as a hobby and work full-time in other industries. My sister went to film-school and I helped her out a bit here and there, so I have a bit of experience with how things happen, but.....

What are you shooting? I shoot my kids sports games (on a large field) on the GH5, vintage 135/2.8 and 200/4 lenses, and the largest gorillapod. I bring a chair and use the gorillapod on my lap to hold the weight of the camera. I normally set it up with one leg taking the weight, one leg as a handle scooped up so that I'm gripping that leg but also manually focusing, and the other leg floating horizontally to give a bit more inertia to stabilise panning motion. I also use the viewfinder not the screen, but I'm wearing sunglasses so not really getting that much stabilising from the eyepiece. I have found that 200mm is pretty long and I need to stabilise in post, but the IBIS does a great job all things considering. If you're going longer than 200mm you'll want a very solid tripod. I'd love a 50-200mm zoom, but I think I prefer two primes over the questionable quality of vintage zooms, and I definitely prefer the lenses I already own to the price tag on the Pana-Leica lens!!

The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades... ???

The problem is how fast and how smoothly the focus mechanism in the lens can track focus, which is both: working out if focus is lost, which direction to go to find it, and by how much; and also being able to actually change the focus fast enough. The other method is to analyse the lens ahead of time and store that data, in which case you don't need to assess how focused anything is, you just get a zoom reading from the lens and compensate. The XC10 does this, with its fixed 24-240mm equivalent lens. Unfortunately I found in real life that if you zoomed quickly it wouldn't be able to keep up, and also it wouldn't reacquire it through the lens data, but would require the focus mechanism to do it's thing. If you zoomed slowly then it worked though, so that was nice.

In my reading about cleaning vintage lenses most people recommended not trying to clean zoom lenses because they're too complicated to put back together again. The vacuum method will either work or not, but if it works then there's no assembly issues

$1998? The harder the manufacturers compete and the faster they push out new models the more that analysis paralysis will kick in.

Sounds like you're talking yourself into the Samyangs, with their ease of focus, more flexible look, and greatly reduced cost. Plus, if you get a set of them then cutting shots together will be so much easier. Neither - those damned beaches are haunted! ?‍♀️?‍♂️???

It does. I've found there to be three different types of lenses: Fast ones that are soft wide-open but sharpen up stopped down two stops Slow ones that are sharp wide-open (are probably just the previous ones without the wider aperture adjustment) Fast ones that are sharp wide-open and cost an arm and a leg! I have a set of the first ones (fast/soft wide-open) and in a sense you get two aesthetics in one. You can always apply a slight blur in post to make the narrower aperture settings look soft like the wide-open end, and if you only have an odd shot wide-open here or there you can often sharpen them up so that they don't stand out in a sequence. Yeah, just different. I really like the IBIS for being able to stabilise manual primes, and that's one of the main reasons I bought my GH5 mid-last year. Yes, for $2.5k for a lens, you're almost better off buying two primes and a second GH5 and just carrying two setups

Oh, I don't know. It's not a night and day difference, but it is a blue-hour and midday difference! ??? Seriously though, judging from those frames the FD seems to be a little less sharp giving it a more organic aesthetic, although a small motion blur might be causing this impression. A small blur might do the trick in post if that's the look you're going for though. Both are nice looking images, just slightly different. The 3x price difference is difficult to get past, but there's more to a lens than just the image. If it feels nicer to use it impacts the creative process, if it's faster, more flexible, has different colours, etc.

Ah, yes, vintage lenses are a different aesthetic. It's common for pros to have two sets of lenses, one vintage and one modern, although if you're shooting higher budget cine stuff then you often hire the modern ones (CP.2 etc) and keep the vintage set for yourself for low budget or personal projects (and maybe to hire out). It's about choosing which aesthetic suits the project. There's a new panasonic 10-25mm f1.7 in the works if that helps. But I fully agree with you, FF has the 2.8 holy trinity, APSC has the Sigma 1.8 pair, and MFT has ...... nothing. The holy trinity for MFT would be 8-12/1.4 + 12-35/1.4 + 35-100/1.4 and theres nothing even close. In live event stuff you may be torn between having a zoom with a wider range vs faster aperture.

Yeah @kaylee - just think of it as a trip where everything has separated so the entire world is violent and filthy, and Happy is shiny and new That one is obviously pretty wide Wides often have very close focusing distances so it's an aesthetic we can all emulate at home!