kye

Gives you an excuse to sit around and drink coffee like everyone seems to do in lifestyle advertisements!!

I disagree. In the case of the gyro stabilisation, what you want is for the distinctive pixels in one frame to be as close as possible to their location in the last frame. It's a frame matching problem. In image analysis based stabilisation, the computer looks for distinctive pixels in each frame, works out the movement, then works out how to change frame 2 to better match frame 1, knowing the overall direction of movement from frame 1 to frame 1000. This method is about matching frames by analysing the frames directly. In gyro stabilisation, the computer wants to match frames to other frames, but does so by taking frame 2 and modifying it according to some completely different source of data. That data is very useful and does a good job, but it cannot do a perfect job because it is one step removed. This method is about matching frames by not looking at frames but by looking at something else. I think people are seeing that the GoPro and Osmo Action are better at stabilising than the software and thinking that's because it's a better method. I would suggest that it's not a better method but one that has had far more investment in the technology. The entire action camera industry now hinges on making the footage as stable as possible. It's a stabilisation arms race of sorts, and without going to 8K it's the only thing that is different between GoPro models. Conversely, there is no arms race with post=production stabilisation. The people who specialise in it are specialists, and the people that do serious post-production workflows and invest int them are people that don't record shaky footage in the first place, or if they do then they buy gimbals and IBIS and OIS and tripods etc. The action camera market has taken gyro stabilisation a long way further than the alternative. It's an investment thing, not an image stabilisation thing. Plus, think about how well IBIS works on a 16mm lens - pretty darn well. Think about how well it works on a 400mm lens - less well. Stabilisation in post is just fine at 1000mm Interesting idea. My understanding of OIS is that there are gyros built in, so any camera with IBIS or an OIS connected lens may have the hardware required. It probably wouldn't be setup to analyse that data and record, it might simply be used to move the sensor around. I said "it's only 2 seconds" because I meant that 2 seconds isn't much future visibility for the stabilisation to work. A 2 second delay on the viewfinder would be almost unusable. You quoted me out of context

@Anaconda_ you raise good points. The cameras are looking into the future, but as you say it's only a couple of seconds, but Resolve (for example) can see the whole clip before it decides anything. They do use gyroscopes (gopro bought one of those companies I think?) but that's kind of a cheat because instead of analysing the image they just blindly follow what the gyro tells them to do, but if you have smart enough stabilisation software then it should be able to overcome that. The gyroscope is a hack to reduce CPU required, it's not a fundamentally better method.

Another thing that no one is taking about is that EIS can be done in post production, but OIS can't. Yes it's great to have stabilised footage coming straight from the camera, but stabilisation in post has the advantage because the camera can't predict the future but plugins or Resolve sure can. I think I'll end up with the X3000 and stabilisation in post. The HDR would be great to have thought. I would have thoughts that anyone on this forum would be evaluating a camera with the whole production and post production work flow in mind. When they go 8K they will have 6K MEGA-AWESOME-NOT-MOVING mode and you can de-fish and downscale to a nice 4K imagery from there.

Cool job on the left-hand DIY. I have a much more basic approach in my rig where I'm partly holding the rig but still able to focus.

Or you get one, mount it to the front of your existing setup, set your 14-30 a bit narrower and assuming you can easily match the two in post, then you've got two angles to choose from.

De-warp is the same as Linear mode in GoPro language, which is really de-fishing in normal camera language. I noticed a bit of fisheye distortion on the Osmo, but it was far less than on the Hero7, so that's a good start. The GoPro only has Linear in 2.7k mode, because it will be taking a 4k image and stretching it in software, so IQ will be lost, thus no point in giving us a 4K output file. The Osmo has a much less distorted place to start, so getting a 4K de-fished output file seems more appropriate. IIRC the De-Warp couldn't be used at the same time as RockSteady so you'd have to choose between them. De-Warp is pretty easy to do in post anyway. Like all camera reviews, which are in danger of being glowing due to direct or indirect incentives to please our camera brand gods, you often have to read between the lines to see where the downsides are. iPhonedo does a reasonable job of sharing non-glowing facts when he finds them though. I think that the real challenge here is that these cameras are being released so often that it's really hard for reviewers to justify all the time and effort to do a thorough review. iPhonedo does the best job I think, showing side-by-side DR with waveforms, audio tests with his guitar, finding heavily saturated subjects, and generally stress-testing them. But you're right that no reviewer really gives you a solid list of all the pros and cons - you have to watch a bunch of reviews and kind of compile that information yourself. In terms of these YT reviewers being the marketing arm of brands, this is an example of a relatively open market - if we weren't interested in the products we would watch and no views would mean no success in marketing, so it's opt-in marketing. I've opted in because I plan to buy a camera in the next week and the X3000 was winning over Hero7 for me, and now I have to think seriously about if the Osmo Action is right for me. I suspect not, but it certainly has some excellent features, and none of these are the perfect camera for me so it's about the tradeoffs and prioritising features.

Hmm.. Looking forward to seeing @DaveAltizer review the stabilisation in low light. This is one of the strengths of OIS (and the X3000) and in the iPhonedo Hero 7 review there's a clip of the X3000 absolutely slaughtering the Hero 7 in testing low light stabilisation. Very interesting camera though.

Welcome to the forums You'll find lots of people on here are quite fond of their P4K, but there are a number of people who would agree with you that the P4K has a more "video" look and prefer the older BM cameras saying they're more "filmic" or "cinematic". I proposed a test where someone shoots some similar footage on old and new and we try and make the new one look like the old one, to see if it can be done, and if so, what adjustments did the trick. Unfortunately the people who have access to the new and old cameras are busy and haven't yet had the time to film the test footage, so we don't yet know. What kind of films are you making?

What is the overall setup you're planning to implement? ie, channel 1 & 2 directional stereo pair into camera 1, etc... I'm curious

Lots of people are asking if Resolve is ready for real pro use - I know some on these forums are using it for such projects, but there's not a lot of talk about using it for entire TV episodes or movies. Just came upon this post on the BM forums (which is a list of bugs) from someone that said they've edited and delivered 6 episodes of their reality TV show with it. https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=91322 Obviously they list a bunch of bugs, but they actually delivered a bunch of episodes, so that's interesting.

Might be interesting - the Osmo Pocket got a good reception and if this is similar or better then it might be a GoPro beater. When is it likely to be available to buy?

These microphones are very interesting to me, not to use practically, but just appreciation of the tech. Do you know what kind of beam width / polar response they can simulate? It looks like the original materials are now gone, but this 2010 technology announcement was very impressive - you could clearly hear what two people were saying to each other in the fullon environment of a basketball game. https://singularityhub.com/2010/10/13/new-super-microphone-can-hear-you-in-a-crowded-stadium-video/

I think there are a couple of scenarios: 2 channels or more. If you're limited to 2 channels, you could do the Y-cable trick but have one directional and one omni to get the crowd. That would mean you can balance the action vs the crowd in post. If you're able to have more than that, perhaps between the two cameras, then one directional pointing at the stage, one under it, and a stereo pair for the audience might be a good setup. In case it's relevant, I've read a lot about how audio engineers record music, and an example is how to record an orchestra. They record using a directional stereo pair seated in the centre in the first few rows, or hung a bit above the orchestra looking slightly down. Then there's a second pair of mics that are omni-directional that are hung way up in the ceiling space of the venue, on the left and right sides of the hall, either about a third of the way back from the stage or even further back. The idea is that the stereo pair give the stereo imaging, and the omni mics give ambience and scale to the recording. They just pan them hard right and left and then adjust the two pairs to give a balance of directional and ambience.

My examples make no sense because neither option fits reality. I haven't answered your question because neither of the options fit my reality. You're assuming that I have any kind of preference or difference of view. I did answer - I gave a history and explanation of manufacturing in the context of economic development.

Trees are: Do not exist Only exist in a parallel universe DBounce: Is a robot Is an alien This thread: Doesn't exist Is invisible Everyone is: A murderer A mass murderer etc...

+1 for DIRECTIONAL stereo. The problem is that with less directional stereo mics you end up recording the things that the camera can't see, which is strange when viewing the footage back because the image and sound are disconnected. Again, directional is what people want. Remember that you can always have a DIY solution with a Y-splitter cable and just have two directional mics that get recorded to left and right because of the Y-cable. The issue with that however is that you can't have dual-level recording so you have to really watch your levels because clipped is clipped.

There is a component of economic development involved with manufacturing, I can't find what it's called (I'm sure it'll have a name) but it goes basically like this: Country decides it needs foreign investment to contribute to economic development It creates a policy (potentially linked to a limited geographic area) that provides incentives for foreign investment, often waiving things like taxes, regulations or minimum wage restrictions, and potentially guaranteeing investments Foreign investment starts and due to the cheap labor force, low cost manufacturing plants are created These plants produce relatively low quality goods, through a combination of low-levels of initial investment in the quality of the machinery, low cost low quality raw materials, low quality workmanship due to a largely uneducated workforce Over time the workforce builds a skill base and quality improves Investment results in economic development and benefits to the host country Over time another country sees this economic development benefit and starts it's own process, special waivers may lapse, workers may unionise, etc Assuming there is profit being made then the level of quality is raised such that they differentiate their products from the new competition If they don't want to raise the quality level of production then they move the operation to the new competitor country and start over again Japan was once the poor-quality cheaper competitor to the US, but caught up, China came after Japan, which is what this thread is about, but has long since caught up, many other asian countries came after that, and over the coming decades you will start to hear about African nations getting in on this act as well. This is an interesting list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_technology_centers In terms of the premise of your original multiple choice question, here's a question of my own: The question is inherently racially biased and there is no way to answer it without accepting the premise and is therefore "a trap" The question is inherently logically skewed and there is no way to answer it without accepting the premise and is therefore "a trap" Pick one.

Nice location and great shots! A little different to the more widely viewed material from the Jersey Shore area!! ???

Anything that has FULL FRAME MONITOING has to be the real deal.

Having a 4K linear mode would put it above the Hero 7 for sure. That's an appealing possibility.

I agree that the P4K can't replace my GH5. I doubt the GH6 will replace the P4K for everyone, maybe some people will, but one of the big appeals of the P4K is RAW and there's a big difference between 400Mbps 10-bit All-I h264 or 200Mbps 6K h265 mode and the higher bit-depth crazy bitrates of RAW or edit-friendly Prores files. The GH6 may well be a beast, but I doubt it'll have full RAW in-camera.

This is why I disagree when people try to compare the GH5 to the P4K - they are different types of cameras. Funnily enough, the GH5 is a video camera, and the P4K is just what the name says - a cinema camera

Hi @Andrew Reid - this is the error message I've been getting intermittently on the site, and @webrunner5 commented he has as well. Feel free to delete this thread once you've seen it, I wasn't sure the easiest way to get this image to you