Yurolov

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Sounds like the Panasonic G80/G85 is the camera for you, and you could pair it with a couple of lenses such as say a Panasonic 25mm f1.7 & Panasonic 42.5mm f/1.7 

On second thought I agree with this. But I'd be more inclined to wait for the canons because of color science. 

Wait for next iteration of canon or get a a7iii or xh1 or gh5 as none of the cameras you listed meet your requirements. 

2 hours ago, KitaCam said:

Ok, rapid backtracking (apologies AR), autofocus performance seems to have deteriorated on X-H1 vs X-T2, worryingly so in fact. There's me pre-purchase thinking it couldn't have been worse than the X-T2 implementation. Hmm. This is based on hands-on initial testing (out of box settings as well as with some tweaking) by myself with three recent/modern (linear motor) fuji lenses as well as the 35mm 1.4 which is expected to be a poor performer comparatively. Oh dear, though I still have faith in FW updates to solve, though I am certainly currently disappointed.

I told you; it is laughable that their tech got worse when it was marketed as 4k face detect lol. Even if they do fix it it is a massive cock up. I don't trust companies like that because it is pretty much misleading and wouldn't be accepted in other markets, but for some reason fuji gets away with it (probably cause the image is so good). 

1 hour ago, Mattias Burling said:

He honestly doesn't know much about still photography either.

Why? I'm not a photographer btw. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcU9L-lwqjI

Say what you want about the person who shot it but that's what I've seen on several other shots, excluding the one referenced above. 

1 hour ago, Inazuma said:

@Yurolov where have you seen the IBIS being super jittery?

Pretty much every video out there if there is some forward or backward motion you will see sudden jerks of the image to the left and right. It is all but unusable. 

It is laughable that they made the autofocus worse using the same sensor. Even if they can improve it in a firmware update it just goes to show their own incompetency. I would not have said anything but for the fact that they advertised 4k face detect autofocus as a feature 

Not to mention the ibis is super jittery in video mode and all but unusable compared to the GH5.

For what it is, a stills camera, it is very good. But I would be loath to use it for anything but that. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OskvGAj9p1Q

some more. looks very nice.

Let's be clear here, though. The inconvenience you get from switching from stills to video may be an issue for some. But it is only a x1.6 crop from the aps-c. You aren't suddenly zoomed in x2.4. x1.6 ought be manageable for the price point. If you are shooting video only, it shouldn't be an issue at all. You just need a wider lens. I shoot with a s16 cam and use a 9mm lens. No issues.

I am not getting it cause there is no dpaf in 4k and the battery isn't very good, both of which are understandable owing to the price and size of the camera. The higher end models should be closer to the mark.

What's funny to me is that the colors should compare favorably to the much touted $2500 GH5s. 

8 hours ago, Alpicat said:

There is a PL mount to EOS M adapter, but it's from MTF so it's expensive: https://www.srb-photographic.co.uk/pl-mount-to-canon-eos-m-mtf-camera-adaptor-9290-p.asp  I don't know if there are cheaper alternatives. 

Do you know how would I go with the image circle on s16 lenses? 

11 minutes ago, anonim said:

Actually, I think that Yurolov's (actual target of quoted saltiness not @Deadcode) thread of argumentation was very nice, as your also - and that both could be simply united. When now conclusion-claim "And the GH5 is not good because it has 10 bit" is precised, I, for myself, am very glad to read his, as also your, before these-saltiness-intrusion argumentation.

Contrary, Deadcode's comment is obviously very "salty" and include direct personal attack from the lines - he wished it to be so. Sadly, you, obviously, personally irritate him here or irritate in general him - as I irritate someone else or many here. And as every single person here and everywhere whose first act toward others is (explicitly or hypocritic hide) from the position of I-know-better-and-more-than-you - irritate me, equally when someone use words as Bullshit or other Shit-x variants as powerful sound argument. Comment "Those people who mostly complain about 8 bit limitations are usually backyard flower shooters" could be seen as opinion - I don't like formulation, and I'm think that "usually" is a bit of exaggerating.

Do your argumentation in this thread deserved to be seen as irritating in this thread? - I think not at all, and I strongly agree with its conclusion theory side wise - as with @Yurolov's practical side wise.

Thank you. I am always willing to talk with people who treat each other and the argument with respect, with a view to reaching the truth. Test it and we will know! 

Does the ibis do that weird jerky thing I seen in the videos?

How is the video af with face detect?

Thanks.

Is there any way I can use my pl mount s16 super speeds on the cam? Any recommendations?

1 hour ago, anonim said:

This, I think, summarize topic very nicely - with other lovely compose thread of argumentation.

But than "And the GH5 is not good because it has 10 bit" - I don't understand? From my experience, its strong side is that it has 10bit, not just 8bit - not because its 10bit is better than 8bit from some other cameras (especially those with better DR - and it is difference between EVA1 and GH5), but simple because GH5's 10bit is better than GH5's 8bit.

I think that just there's no any reason to think of quality of 10bit or 8bit in general - of course, we can, but than it is theoretic question.

I think you misunderstood friend. I said that the 10 bit of the GH5 is not as good as the EVA1. I linked that video above that compares the 10 bit of both cameras. Go check it out; it is done by a professional colorist. I never said the GH5 is a bad camera. I like it, in fact. It produces a nice image.  

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

No, @anonim, @Yurolov is right - no one in their right mind would use the GH5 for paid work. But why does he keep bringing up the GH5? I thought we were talking about bit depth, not Panasonic. And since he gets his authority from Dave Dugdale and Max Yuryev, I’m inclined to believe he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

Nice strawman argument. GH5 is a good camera. (see above) That wasn't my argument. To dismiss people without even viewing the videos makes me think you are just trolling and don't want to engage me in the topic. I put them as an example, not as an authority. Nor does Dave Dugdale do the comparison, which you would know if you cared to watch. So if you can explain to me why they are wrong then please let me know. I am happy to be proven wrong. We are all learning, even the most senior of us.

But it is clear your curiosity is limited so there is no point for me to further engage with you.  

The main video is the dave dugdale matty scott video - unless you are doing high paid client work, in which case you will be using an alexa/red - it really doesn't mean anything. Lighting, talent, sensor, etc will be a lot more important. 10 bit gh4 is no better for it. And the GH5 is not good because it has 10 bit.  

29 minutes ago, jonpais said:

@Yurolov Not sure if that’s a logical, well-thought-out argument in favor of 8-bit. But heh, we’re all just talking shit here, right? Care to share files of your tests? Care to elaborate on who’s fixated with what? And compression is something that can be and is marketed. Also, I think you’re missing the point entirely: I’m not comparing the GH5 to Canon’s C300 or Alexa. Have you done chroma keying? Are you a professional colorist? Have you delivered HDR for clients? If not, how can you profess to be an authority? You’ve already confessed to having a bias toward Canon, which kind of negates any objectivity on your part.

To be honest I wasn't replying directly to you - it was just my musings on the topic.

I will surmise my argument and then you can tell me which points you take issue with. Full disclosure - I do have a bias towards the look of canons as against consumer dslrs. 

My argument is a simple one. 8 bit and 10 bit are not equal among cameras, which makes it difficult to determine the actual perceived difference 10 bit has over 8 bit. I believe the camera's compression has more to do with the overall image/gradeability. I believe this because if all things are equal than 10 bit should perform equally among cameras, but it doesn't. 

So for instance 10 bit on a EVA1 is better than 10bit on a GH5.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAUEuw0PEPI

Just as 8 bit on a Sony camera may be better for grading purposes than 8 bit on another manufacturers, and perhaps it is better than 10 bit on another manufacturers, or maybe it is equivalent. So that the difference between 8 and 10 bit doesn't even matter. 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AekKwgvS5K0

The difference between raw and 10 bit that I have seen has to do not with color quality but with compression. 

So that Max Yurev believes that the 8 bit image on the canon c200 looks similar to the raw image:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-fW6vlHnYY 

This is my opinion; I never professed to be an expert, but I am certainly not illogical.  

The question is vexed because not all 8 bit and 10 bit images are equal, which may have more to do with the manner in which the image is compressed than the bit depth. 

For instance if I shoot 10bit and raw on the same camera, the colors are the same. The only difference I notice is that the 4:2:2 10 bit compression degrades the image. The raw is also more malleable. But then again canons 8bit cinema line is pushable too.  

If anyone watched max yurevs review of the c200 you will know that his opinion is that there isn't much difference between the 8bit and raw files in terms of image or dr. 

This may be so. I haven't done the tests. But I think it is near to the truth in which case we should really be asking how effective is the compression rather than what's the bit depth. Obviously that's not something that can be marketed. That's why the term 10 bit is so ambiguous when it comes to image quality. 

For me you have to do your homework on one particular camera and then compare it with others and see for yourself if 10 bit actually makes a difference. It won't be the same across the board. For instance pit the c300 8bit vs the gh5 10 bit. 

C300 still comes out on top imo. End of the day it is which image you prefer. And 10 bit matters little if you get great colors soc which if you know what you are doing is easy enough. It only becomes a problem if you do client work and clients want to change shit. In that case only raw will do. So not sure about people's obsession with 10 bit.

35 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

If you ever for some weird and unforseen reason should want to sell it, let me know... so jealous.

I know people in the community who are interested in selling if you are genuinely interested, but the question is always price haha. I was lucky to find an eager seller and a good price. It really is a one of a kind camera, so unfortunately I would never part with it. 

2 hours ago, mercer said:

What kind of cinema camera do you have?

I was really into 90s indie and mumblecore and the freedom that s16 gave the community so I settled on an Ikonoskop A-cam which is as best a replication I can find out there. I picked it over some expensive newer cameras so it was a risky investment to say the least .I love the camera dearly for all its foibles because image to me is only second to content. In all great artwork the two are married inseparably. I miss my c100 though because it was simply a beast and gave me a good image for the price point, and certainly the most cinematic. 

I am an independent filmmaker so of necessity I like slow long takes, which luckily adheres to my viewing preferences. But if I am going out into a crowd shooting something I would like to have a small and compact camera to shoot quickly that has autofocus. I actually love the look of the raw files out of the canon eos m - they are so creamy and do remind me of s8 film. It would cut well with my a cam.

But I really think we all want something from canon to fill that void that still needs to be filled. Hopefully, it will be coming shortly.      

I think there is a common thread from people that have used canon and tried other companies. A camera is much more than its specs, and that's why I will never purchase a sony again. I used to own a C100 and not only could no other camera at that price point compete with the ergonomics but I would argue that still to this day no dslr comes close to getting as good an image, including the GH5. Canons are just much more cinematic and easy to use. Look at all the films shot on the c300 and the documentaries of the time. They are all still beautiful till this day, and that is with minimal post-processing. That's from a 8 bit camera. In fact, you look at some of the movies shot on the 5d Mark II and damn do they look cinematic. 

I have a cinema camera but I want a nice portable camera to do quick run and gun type work for which a dslr or mirroless is perfect. Canon is the only company that has the ability to provide something that could cater to all my needs - it doesn't need to be 10 bit. Sony is all specs and no substance. Their cameras aren't intuitive nor do they create a pleasing image imo. 

Eventually there will be a 4k aps-c dpaf canon camera with a decent codec, and that will be the end of this conversation I hope. Cause if I am honest nothing comes close to competing.     

2 minutes ago, salim said:

Thanks! That's all I needed to know...I guess, Sony A7iii is a much better practical option. 

Yeah me 2. It is a shame as the images are really nice, but for a portable camera autofocus would be nice to have for quick run and gun type work. I am waiting on canon as I know only they can get it right from both an ergonomics and image standpoint. I think we just have to pray the ff mirrorless will give us what we have been asking for.   

I read somewhere on canonrumours I think where one of their execs basically said this was their first push into what will be a renewed plan to enter into the mirrorless market. So I am expecting more to come, and when the later iterations do come, I think most people will be pleased. They have to cripple this one to distinguish it from their higher end models (if it isnt simply a matter of hardware limitations in a small body). Once canon get it right, they will be leaders yet again - not because they have the best specs like sony, but because they are able to execute a camera correctly. 

Ask yourself this question: which camera would you more readily recommend to a soccer mom - Canon M50 or a Sony a6300? I think any rational person would pick the canon. The a6300 is too complicated a camera for the average person to use between the menus and the ergonomics. I've heard it multiple times from people in museums complaining about how they don't know how to use the camera. If they don't know how to use it they will put it down.    

1 hour ago, Alt Shoo said:

The same reason why creators and broadcasters prefer 10 bit is the reason why I won’t purchase this and yes I’m genuinely interested with this camera. This “shit posting” is an opinion of mine that I’m expressing. The camera is impressive but that’s my perspective of things. 

Yes and what is that reason? Genuine question.  The canon 1dc does 8 bit after all. I see the other thread everyone ranting and raving about its image quality. 

7 minutes ago, Alt Shoo said:

The xh1 is the first time I’ve ever considered buying a Fuji, but because it’s only 8bit I won’t get it. Everything for video is pretty awesome, especially the Eterna film simulation, however that 8 bit codec is just not persuasive. 

What do you think the extra 2 bits will give you that you won't get out of the camera already? 

1 hour ago, anonim said:

Thanks for comment. Well, I don't know, I've just exploring examples and forwarded it. Obviously, mr Hüseyin Taskin love its look of, I'd say, muted gamma and less contrasty image without any loss of greatly resolve details. Maybe somebody else also find it interesting and make some more conclusion...

I appreciate the videso. Thank you. Good to see some log footage out there. 

6 minutes ago, anonim said:

 

 

I dont like the luts pasted onto the log footage. Looks amateurish.