Yurolov

1 hour ago, ntblowz said:

matt already shared it on the last page

my bad didn't see.

review of 1080p

1 hour ago, Django said:

ok take this information with a grain of salt, it's late and I've only had minutes of test time here & there today and am reviewing random test shots, but it would appear to my eyes that the FHD (EF-S) cropped mode (using EF glass) appears better than the regular FF FHD. Could be placebo effect, no real ways to measure atm, but could it be that Canon has implemented something similar to the 1DC FHD S35 mode, which is known to be superior to FF FHD? I can confirm that external FHD recording when in 4K crop mode renders superior (4K downsampled?) IQ just like the 1DC/1DX2/5D4. 

FHD FF external to ProRes is also great (to be expected).. Internal FF FHD...meh. 

Still need to do quite bit testing (haven't even touched 4k yet). So far loving the ergonomics/shooting. DPAF does seem a little laggy/quirky, but haven't messed with all the AF settings.

Overall kinda mixed feelings, it's no full replacement to a Canon DSLR/Cxxx.. but does seem to combine many features (& quirks) of the recent Canon line.. TBC

what about 10 bit 4:2:2 out? restricted to 4k?

1 hour ago, docmoore said:

Texas is guaranteed to give us some sun ... and I will post what I find. Not really into tests per se ... rather looking for a workflow that is

reproducible and realistic. Never been into jumping through hoops of fire to exaggerate the evanescent beauty of the moment. 

But yes ... when I get this dialed in I will look at how it responds to extremes of dynamic range. However, I tend to protect highlights and 

raise shadows ... so may not apply to others workflow.

Thanks,

Bob

Thanks. Just cause no one really has any experience with the nlog so it will be nice to see how the highlight rolloff is when you are exposing for the shade. 

The much maligned auteur, Terrance Malick, did a short film for the introduction of the new pixel, showing off the phones motion autofocus abilities.

Some interesting features for taking photos I gotta say. They are really pushing computational photography. 

16 minutes ago, docmoore said:

I looked at a FS5 M ii ... old sensor pretty noisy at higher ISOs ... add an external Raw recorder and might work until the new M III shows up.

Have had the Z 7 for a couple of days ... was able to get a bit of time with it this afternoon. 

Nothing special ... just looking at color from the N Log. The following is shot at 3200 ISO ... very dark rainy day ... no noise reduction ... 

I will take the haptics, size, color and weather sealing over the Sny any day. Not as robust as my Leica SL but I look forward to adapting my

R and L lenses to this camera.

https://vimeo.com/294245506

Password : daysend

Yes I love blacks to be black ... and colors to match what I see in nature ... so not cinematic ... no teal and brown.

So it may not be awesome ... but I have seen much worse.

Looks very nice actually. Can you please do some tests when the sun is out - I want to see the highlight response with 10 bit nlog. 

4 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Oh don't get me wrong I have always been a big Canon buyer. But not in this Video age other than this C100 I am trying to get. I am not buying Anything new they got. DPAF and Magic Lantern is pretty much all that has kept them going to me on the video side on any affordable camera.

It's interesting because Magic Lantern is able to get so much out of these canon cameras that we can't really say what the full capabilities of the sensor are. I mean they already have the sensor tech in the c200 - it exists (albeit in at a different size and form factor). They chose to give us an old sensor in the eos r. Let's see what the full capabilities of that sensor are once magic lantern does its thing with the 5d iv. 

For me the fuji looks the best out of the remaining crop of mirroless cameras and unfortunately this means there is no clear advantage that the gh5s has, apart from its pro video features, to recommend it. I have talked to panasonic people in the past and got the impression that the color deficiencies in the gh models are intentional. That is, the same people that did the color for the varicams also did the Eva. I don't think, but could be wrong, that the expertise was passed down. 

5 hours ago, noone said:

I think the background blur is not so obviously the GH5s JUST because it has greater DOF as we don't know the lenses used or aperture ETC.

Yes, D is the GH5s but it is using a seemingly wider lens and the DSLR seems to be using a longer lens as well so while it was more likely to be the smaller sensor camera, that doesn't necessarily follow.

I actually prefer the GH5s to the Fuji there as the Fuji Blue colours where quite different to the other three.

I guess if I looked at it on a few different screens I could get different preferences too.

Bottom line they all looked good to me.

The logical way of thinking about it is what would he have had to have done to the s35 and FF images to make them have more DOF than a MFT sensor (and why would he have done it to one and not the other two s35 & FF cameras). Unless he was willfully trying to trick us the chances are minute. So ye, you can be pretty confident about it.

His skin looked pretty sickly with the panasonic footage. Good to see fuji mathcing it with the c200 though. Both good images. 

There is a Korean auteur called Hong Sang-soo. His most recent cinematic releases were done on the F3. I had the pleasure of seeing them on the big screen and the images were very good. I personally don't think the two compare if you are talking about cinematic imagery. 

35 minutes ago, Chrad said:

I would think the GH5 would be the way to go for S16 lenses. Turn on Ex Tele mode and you've got an almost exactly S16 sized image circle shooting 10 bit UHD, with IBIS included as well.

What do you lose IQ wise with the Ex tele mode?

1 hour ago, androidlad said:

My take:

A - GH5S, because of the yellow skin tone.

B - 1DX II, because of the harsh highlight clipping.

C - C200, because of the smooth tonal gradation and wide DR.

D - X-T3, because the low contrast and slight colour tint scream ETERNA!!

The gh5s should be obvious not only by skin tone but by background blur. U way off. 

28 minutes ago, DBounce said:

Here is a quick shootout of the Fuji X-T3, Canon 1DXMk2, Canon C200 and Panasonic GH5S. Granted FCPX refused to not blowout some of the footage of camera B. It's displayed correctly in some of the head to head comparisons. I think it might have been caused by a software bug in FCPX. In any case all four cameras were filming in base ISO in controlled lighting. Opinions welcomed.

 

C200 is the best, then the fuji, then the 1dx, then the gh5s (skin tones look quite bad). The 1dx is a different angle and different lighting so it is hard to tell how it compares. But i picked the gh5s instantly and knew A was the c200. 

7 hours ago, Leica50mm said:

I got the camera a couple days ago after reading Andrews post. I wanted something to replace my Black Magic pocket camera for these old Zeiss s16s super speeds set I have . To put it bluntly, I’m not getting the results . The first two shots on his video sold me on it. Didn’t even watch the rest.  

  I’m used to shooting with a red dragon so maybe I don’t know what I’m doing . But, I can’t get the stabization to work very well .

Thinking of returning it on Monday . Sad, because I really love these lenses and would really like a viable s16 camera. I also have a Zeiss

s16 10-120 which is awesome to shoot with . Small,  light weight and s35 its a 20 240 f2.0 . I also like the s16 look. 

I had just watched The Wrestler the night before and that was shot on s16 so, that probably influenced my purchase as well. 

I'm in the same boat I want a nice cam to put my superspeeds that is light, has ibis and good color. Shame that you aren't getting the results. Personally, I'm waiting for a new cam from Olympus, probably in January. 

Not the best of reviews. Video looks soft and noisy. The 10 bit looks to be the way to go. 

6 hours ago, Django said:

Yeah the beefier ALL-I codec surely helps.. a bit.. but i think the RF lenses with the optical in cam optimizations and overall tack-sharp performance are probably the bigger assets.. the 50 F1.2 is just really something else, even wide open. Kind of blown away by it tbh. In 4K the detail is insane. And in FHD it is daaamn good too. Does it equate the C100's downsampled from 4K FHD IQ? With EF lenses on both, probably not. But with the RF's.. imo it's a close call. I don't own the camera yet, but i will try and set-up some comparison shots with my C100 since some of you seem interested. I do have an atomos, so it will also be interesting to compare without codecs in the equation.. in any case i'm pretty sure already EOS R will be a great B-cam to a C100/200/300!

Yes I'd be interested in seeing 1080p with EF lenses on both cameras (same one). Also if the 1080 does 10 bit 4:2:2 out. The rolling shutter makes it difficult to use in 4k. 

11 hours ago, Leica50mm said:

Sounded so good, i got one . Pocket Rocket . 

 

 

 

Can you post some footage? How is the setup going?

Will s16 zeiss superspeeds work with the 4x crop in 2x-extender mode? 

The video I posted is very soft. But to be fair much of it is shot in 720p so I wouldn't take too much out of it unless you need 120 fps.

The first two shots look to be in 4k and are crisp and sharp, but they seemed to have missed focus a few times. In the hands of a better operator these issues are nonexistent. What I like is that the colors are fantastic with the clog and the image has a nice organic feel to it. In that sense, the image looks like what you would get from a c100 but in a portable form factor and with great still capabilities. I think people that disregard this camera are more interested in specs than what the image looks like.    

Image speaks for itself. 

47 minutes ago, wolf33d said:

Just one thing for me, 4K60p 

You are 1000% right in today’s market, but in 2019 it’s safe to assume that at least 2 FF will be 4K60 (Panasonic and Sony) and it’s also safe to assume that the Z6/Z7 won’t be updated in 2019. 

So it comes down again to me as : when will we get a 4K60 IBIS FF camera with good video AF? Seems like only A7S III but at what price ergonomically speaking...

However probably the safest bet for the futur is Nikon. Canon is always crippling their bodies in video. Sony has tried for years they never get the ergonomics right, Panasonic is dumbly focusing on AFD, Nikon however made massive improvement in video, so massive in fact that their next FF mirrorless is 4K60 for sure. It’s just gonna take a 2nd gen.

In any case this is an exciting time for photo and video. As much as I complain, I enjoyed a lot shooting with the A7III and got some crazy shots from this tiny package. Same with my Mavic, same with the GH5. I am definitely spoiled, it’s so great to have mirrorless compared to years ago...

I'd say nikon is the best option for the future seeing as they have nothing to protect. They are the only ones who are offering a full frame 4k package with a broadcast codec (all be it external). Right off the bat their video af is seemingly as good as canon's. Their lenses also show a commitment toward video with breathless focusing. It certainly seems 4k60 and 10 bit internal will be on the next gen models. Plus for the z6 the entry point is still low if you have nikon glass. If you are getting into sony you are priced out pretty soon.

Say what you want about sony but they have given us the same crappy old codec and the same crappy old color science. I think its clear to anyone they are protecting their cine cameras. Canon ditto, but at least there you can get a good image out of them and the autofocus is nice. 

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

I’m not a nature photographer, but certainly Sony’s animal eye detect AF (coming soon) must count for something. Also, all the Fuji lenses in my collection have superb construction, but their 100-400 is supposed to be plastic fantastic and closest focus distance isn’t all that impressive. Do you own it? Any thoughts on stabilization, AF, build quality?

No, I don't own the lens but I am considering the systems from a cost analysis perspective for someone like me moving from canon who wants video and fast af for sport and wildlife. The Fuji is overpriced considering u can get a Canon 100-400 FF for the same price (not including rebate). I haven't seen the the eye af for Sony in action so can't comment on its usefulness. I'm sure the new Sony will be good but unless u already own the lenses they price themselves out by a fair margin. 

42 minutes ago, Drew Allegre said:

Probably an adapted lens like a Sigma 150-600 or Canon 400/5.6L.  I currently have the 300/4L, but it doesn't play well at all with Sony (I've heard the 400 is decent)  The goal would be to pick up a Sony100-400 at some point. But yes, I would love to see Sony release some quality longer/affordable primes like Canon has.

Part of my reasoning is that I moved over to a A73 from a 5D3, and I liked having both APS-C and FF with Canon.  It would be nice to have that again with Sony.  Fuji doesn't really interest me, because I don't want to get into a dedicated APS-C system.

I personally wouldn't go adapted as the performance isn't there. If you are spending so much on a camera why cripple it. 

But yes the problem with Fuji is that you are tied to that system. 

Sorry, to be clear I wasn't speaking in equivelancy. 400mm on a crop. Point being that if I want 400mm for birding, which most will, it costs me 1k more with Sony than Fuji. Makes it a less attractive proposition for bird/sport photographers. 

Fuji is only 400 bucks more and for me a 400mm is a must for birding/sports. 

2 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

A good budget option for birding on Sony APSC is adapting a Canon 400 5.6 prime. It is very sharp and sells second hand for about US$800. It is relatively cheap because it doesnt have OIS but obviously you can benefit from ibis with the Sony.

This is the problem though if you adapt you lose all the autofocus benefits that the new sony will have imo - especially for birding. People get apsc often for more reach but often also because there is a discount on the full frame sticker price. However, the only lenses available to utilise the full capacity of sony's apsc cameras are extremely expensive full frame lenses. If i get sony's 100-400 for birding I am paying $1k more than I would for fujis variant (which is expensive itself). That means between the xt3 and the new sony, if the body pricing is the same, I would be paying 1k more for the sony. So I would hope to get 1k more worth of camera (ibisi notwithstanding, that aint going to happen). There's no midrange for sony if you want a hybrid video and photo camera.  

21 minutes ago, kye said:

I know the question wasn't directed at me, but I'm getting great results from the kit 55-250mm zoom on my 700D.

With the crop it goes to 400mm equivalent, it's small and light, and the IS is really good. The IS is so good in fact that it is usable even when I record video in crop mode in ML where it's a 1200mm equivalent FOV!

Sorry I meant if he switches to sony what lenses will he use for birding. I know canon have great options for cheap.