Mokara
-
Posts
744 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by Mokara
-
-
10 hours ago, Django said:
True, but the fact they are dedicated video cams also means the sensor & processor are fully tuned towards video IQ. For C100 all the magic happens pre-codec:
Canon Super 35mm CMOS Sensor
The EOS C100 Mark II Digital HD Camera employs the same single Super 35mm Canon CMOS image sensor as the rest of the Cinema EOS camera family and includes the same innovative strategies that have established the outstanding image performance of these cameras. This 8.3 megapixel sensor maximizes the size of the individual photosites each of which deploys two photodiodes to ensure high speed removal of accumulated charge, which in turn helps elevate the effective sensor dynamic range. Allied with innovative Canon signal extraction strategies that enhance the sensor signal to noise performance allows unprecedented elevation of the ISO setting in this professional Super 35mm camera, while always protecting its dynamic range.
Canon DIGIC DV 4 Image Processor
The four 1920 x 1080 HD R Gr Gb B video components from the image sensor are pre-processed and then sent to the DIGIC DV 4 processor for advanced video processing. This includes separate interpolation of the sparsely sampled R and B HD components to form full frame 4K for each. The two green HD components are also interpolated to form a single full frame 4K Green component. These three 4K RGB components are then down-sampled to create a set of YCC 422 HD components that have high MTF, improved edge transitions, low false color moiré, and enhanced overall color reproduction. These components are further processed preparatory to sending them to the AVCHD and MP4 codecs.
perhaps lower RS. that's the 4Ks biggest downfall imo.
Well, stills cameras do the same thing. The image to be encoded does not just magically appear.
-
7 hours ago, webrunner5 said:
Why does a C100 look so good with a on paper total crap Codec? They always seem behind, but are sort of ahead. Doesn't make much sense to be honest. ?
Not all encoders are created equal. Some are better optimized than others, even if they are spitting out the same codec.
Even Canon cameras produce vastly different results with what on paper is the same encoder. Their dedicated video cameras have far more robust cooling than stills cameras, which means that the processors inside can run faster and hotter. That increased computational power that results is what allows cameras like the Cxxx series to use the same encoder found in their stills cameras, but without all of the compromises that otherwise might be made to keep the thermal envelope in check. That translates into a better image.
You will see that with many cameras from different manufacturers as well. Some can produce great results with what seems like a limited bit rate, while others generate relatively poor output with a high bit rate, even though all are H.264.
-
15 hours ago, tonysss said:
My tip ... A)old BMPCC B)BMPC4K C)GH5s sharp is setting + maybe up +5 ?
Resolution is pretty terrible, it looks like the image has been blurred out on purpose or shot at 720p. You can tell since the leaves are a blurry mess and most of the signs are barely legible. If it had been shot at 4K you should be able to read all of the signage, and you can barely read any of it, there is no detail at all.
20 minutes ago, Anaconda_ said:In there is says : ‘set the camera project frame rate to 25p, but set the off speed frame rate to 60p.’
don’t do that.
Why? They are doing to produce slow motion footage. It is shot at one frame rate but stored as another, so when it is played back it would appear slowed down.
-
17 hours ago, webrunner5 said:
This video I posted before is shot at ISO 800 and 1250. I see Very little noise in it. Granted the guy actually Knows what he is doing so that helps LoL. You are going to see a ton of total shit tests from people that have no clue how a Cine camera works. So I would take a lot of it with a grain of salt until some true legitimate tests are out. And yeah just about Every Cine camera has noise in it. You are Supposed to be skilled enough to overcome it shooting, or in post, or both. There are very few automatic anythings in a Cine camera. You have to sort of know what the hell you are doing.
I could swear that I remember from one of the early BMD video interviews that they said the areas inside where the sensor was was covered in plastic to protect it from water, dust getting into it. Now how does it protect the fan I don't know. I am sure you are not going to stand under a waterfall with it, but I doubt it will be as terrible as it seems like it might be.
I am sure some crazy person on You Tube will take one in the shower to see if it goes up in smoke or not LoL.
If it is done properly the heatsinks would be the only thing exposed, so if that was the case it would not matter where the vents were
-
8 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:
I think it would be against UK and US law as well not to mark it as sponsored content.
If these posters / companies own up now and come out of the closet, I'll consider the matter closed. If not, there will be hell to pay.
I don't think it would be illegal for employees/agents to be voicing their opinion, provided that they were not being paid or directed to do so, at least in the US. Any attempt to legislate against that would be a violation of 1st amendment rights. I don't know about the UK or Germany, they might not protect free speech there, I am not familiar with their laws.
-
Enthusiasts might want FF cameras, but most people who buy cameras are not enthusiasts and are driven by things such as appearance and size. You can't make a small reasonably complete camera with a FF body. It has to have a smaller sensor to meet those requirements. Most people are going to find an M5 far more appealing than 5D.
-
1 hour ago, eyesuncloudedphoto said:
Do you have reason to believe that the Sony version will have lower specs, esp. concerning video features?
Depends on how they have designed theirs. What I do know is that the Sony subsidiary that manufactures sensors is not the same company as the one that makes cameras. They do manufacture generic sensors for off the shelf use, but those are used in dedicated applications such as security cameras and similar applications, or no-name brands making generic gear. Major clients design their own sensors and contract the manufacturing out to the Sony sensor subsidiary (which operates at arms length from the camera business). Included in those agreements will be an NDA and an exclusivity clause whereby the sensor manufactured can only be supplied to the client and no one else. Not even information about those sensors will be shared with third parties. Every tech company that outsources manufacturing does this, they DO NOT want their R&D dollars to subsidize a competitors products.
-
5 hours ago, eyesuncloudedphoto said:
According to Sonyalpharumors:
Simple solutions: use the a7/a9 body, put in the same sensor found in the Fujifilm X-T3, but with a proper battery (and same a7 grip) and IBIS.
Who else thinks this will be the real GH5 challenger?
The Fuji sensor was designed by Fuji, it is not off the shelf, there is no way that they would allow their contract manufacturer to sell the sensor to a different client. Sony might use a sensor with a similar resolution, but the design would be different and match the specs that Sony Camera set.
-
1 minute ago, Jonesy Jones said:
Really? Man I think it's gorgeous. It's like an Otus became a camera. To each his own.
Perfect companion for the newer MacBook Pro's.
This camera is far from being a great filmmaking tool at this point but I hope this is just the first of more to come.
Random thought, what if they put an L mount on a newer version. Imagine Leica glass on a Zeiss camera....... hmmm.
Pretty much all of the Zeiss cameras look hideous IMO. They all look like someone slapped a few dials and buttons on a rectangular black box and that is it. Not a whole lot of thought went into the aesthetics.
-
1 hour ago, ntblowz said:
Unless you are actually in the Sony senior management role in the camera division you are just spectators like me, no hard proof but just speculating from some whispers.
Looks like SAR's A7SIII gonna release anytime is wrong?
If they run the company like every other company out there they are not going to be making deals that undermine their flagship products. I don't need to be in senior management to know that. No company does that.
The A7SIII will release when it was always going to be released. In other words, as soon as it is ready. They are not going to redesign the camera from scratch just because someone else came out with some other product.
-
-
18 minutes ago, ntblowz said:
Looks like A7SIII wont be coming this year. I think could be due to agreement with Panasonic on first FF Mirrorless 4K60P.
The Sony subsidiary that makes cameras has no connection with Panasonic at all, so why the hell would they reach an agreement to allow Panasonic to gain market share at their expense? No business works like that, at least no business that is still in business. And before you go on about Sony making Panasonic sensors, might I remind you that the sensor manufacturing company is independent of the camera subsidiary, it was set up like that specifically to avoid conflicts of interest. Sony might manufacture sensors for Panasonic, but it would be a Panasonic designed sensor they would be making. Just like Sony were manufacturing Samsung designed sensors to fill up the supply chain for the rollout of the S8. Same sensor, designed by Samsung, using some technology licensed in from Canon, some of which were made by Samsung and some of which were made by Sony under contract.
Sony cameras would be using sensors designed by the Sony camera business. Both sensors would use proprietary manufacturing technology developed by the Sony sensor business, but beyond that the two sensors are not the same unless they were off the shelf designs, and I doubt either Sony Camera or Panasonic would be doing that. Neither company is a generic when it comes to their flagship products.
So put your tin foil hat back on, there is NO agreement.
-
1 hour ago, Jordan Lee said:
I have the Sony 55mm f/1.8 with my A7III, which is an awesome lens except for the fact that its manual focus uses focus-by-wire. As you know, it's very hard to achieve repeatable focus pulls and the like with these kinds of lenses. I understand that some of Sony's GM lenses have linear manual focusing, which, while not as nice as a mechanical focus system, is much preferred to the variable speeds of their other lenses. So my question is, do you think it'll ever be possible to update the firmware of a lens or the camera body to switch a lens' manual focus to linear? Or is it impossible because of the construction of those lenses?
Unless the lens controls focus entirely by hardware, there is no particular reason why something like that could not be set as an option in firmware.
-
3 hours ago, wobba said:
Yet in every example/comparison I have ever seen, PDAF has proven to be vastly superior to CDAF, particularly with respect to continuous AF video performance.
It is just a computational problem. Once cameras have sufficient power and lenses are fast and reactive enough, CDAF will be better. Ultimately it is more accurate and does not require calibration.
1 hour ago, kye said:You might be right about CDAF being best for fine-tuning the focus, but PDAF not only knows something is out of focus but which way the focus is to be found.
After watching dozens or hundreds of beautiful moments pass while the focus mechanism has charged off in the wrong direction and the moment concludes and the shot is lost while the camera is still wondering why the entire frame is a complete blur, I will always be deeply deeply skeptical of CDAF-only cameras.
CDAF can determine which way to go to find focus as well, is the processor is powerful enough to process the data. Going forward as processors become faster and more powerful they will be able to handle larger data sets and performance will improve, especially when you have lenses that are designed with this in mind. Panasonic are already leading the field in this regard.
Cameras of the future will not be using the technology of the past. Behavior you saw in old cameras is not where technology is heading. You need to look where things are going, not where they have been. Who cares what old cameras were capable of, what matters is what new cameras are capable of.
-
6 hours ago, wobba said:
WOW ... no PDAF, yet again!
CDAF is barely adequate on a m4/3 size sensor that is aided by a deep depth of field.
On a full frame sensor, with a narrow depth of field, CDAF will be a disaster.
Depends on the processing power and the responsiveness of lenses. There is no inherent reason why PDAF is better than CDAF, actually if you have enough processing power the reverse would be true since you are dealing with what actually appears on the image rather than a parallax difference. Consequently it is more accurate, provided you are gathering enough data.
CDAF works better with a narrow depth of field, so putting it in a FF camera is not a disadvantage. PDAF works better with deeper depth of field, since it is essentially a crude rangefinder independent of what is in the image. This is why you will find both types in most MILCs, PDAF is used to get a rough range so the lens focus point is in about the right place, and then CDAF is used to get it set accurately. If your lens is responsive and fast enough however, you don't really need PDAF as much.
-
11 hours ago, mkabi said:
I'm so interested in the GFX 100S....
I may have to wait till 2021 to get it, but lets see the other specs are too....
The Volvo of cameras.
-
On 9/15/2018 at 2:44 PM, newfoundmass said:
Is there a reason Panasonic is all in on DFD? Given pretty much everyone else has gone with PDAF, it would seem that it's not that difficult to implement. So why stick with DFD? Is there a benefit to it that I'm missing?
I'm not even one of those people that needs amazing AF. It's just really confusing.
What a tech company can and cannot do is dictated largely by it's IP position and the position of competitors. No doubt they are capable of implementing PDAF but they might not be able to because of blocking positions by their competitors.
-
13 hours ago, ntblowz said:
Now if Pana can get DPAF tech from Samsung that would be a winner
They wont get it. Samsung licensed DPAF from Canon for use in their cell phones. That in turn was sublicensed to Sony in order for them to manufacture some sensors for Samsung's Galaxay line of cell phones. Licenses like that don't let you use the technology for anything else other than the agreed to use, so, you are not going to see it in sensors Samsung or Sony make for cameras.
-
This camera probably won't be used by most people here, but it does point at the sorts of capabilities we might expect in the next crop of Cx00 cameras. Most notably is the 160 mbps H.265 encoder.
-
Canon XF705 would probably be perfect, if he can afford it.
-
14 hours ago, Kisaha said:
As I said back then the X-H1 was a lost cause, almost full of disadvantages. I am pretty positive that most X-H1 owners have to sell extremely low to get rid of a much bigger, heavier and a lot worst camera than the X-T3.
These Fuji lenses are great but no AF and no IS, and the size..I want to buy a hybrid camera, not a cine one and I would prefer a 16mm for my workhorse lens. The similar (to the NX S) Fuji is the 16-55 which is not stabilized at all. Maybe they have to bring a newer version to the market, the competition is greater now. I don't care much for IBIS, but a stabilized lens do the job for me.
The great news is that H265 becomes mainstream.
This is a huge release for Fuji, but among huge releases from almost everyone is loosing its shine a bit, the reduction in price is a good move (we have to see if that affected build quality thought) but if the reduction is lesser in some countries they are loosing the advantage, and the A7iii is showing the way for a "cheap" modern (full frame) and true hybrid mirrorless.
Canon's new XF705 has H.265 encoding at 160 mbps for 4K60 4:2:2 10 bit, so expect all new EOS-C cameras to be using H.265 as well. I think a lot of cameras are going to be using it going forward.
-
21 hours ago, Kisaha said:
The price for Greece is 1749euros, that is not close to 1499$ at all, and the camera is manufactured in China. I would expect a lower starting price, this is not 2017!
It probably has the most desired specs for me, but I believe I can squeeze another year from my NX1 cameras.
There is no equal to the 16-50S, which is my main workhorse for some years now.
50-150mm S lens is better IMO.
-
On 9/9/2018 at 5:37 PM, Andrew Reid said:
I reckon a third solution which hasn't really been done yet could be the right way. The mode dial is a bit outdated and have a lot of crap on them. The Fuji film camera dials are a bit style-over-substance.
There is no point having the movie mode on the mode dial. Should be a lever on the back like Canon and Nikon have. Because it should always be ONE simple motion to go between stills and video mode and visa versa, in the blink of an eye. If there is anything between, say, Aperture priority mode and Movie mode on the mode dial, you're going through 2 to 5 rotations, which is much worse than a simple flick of a single toggle.
It seems pretty clear that if you want to shoot in Aperture priority mode then you only want control over the aperture. Having ISO and shutter as manual control dials allows you to set them both to auto and hey, you're now in A mode.
But the problem is, neither tend to have a quick way to set to auto. Auto should not be a position on the dial, one position of say, 30. It should be an instant-toggle on/off switch.
The shutter and ISO dial on Fuji's cameras needs a double finger pinch to rotate, or lift, which is also daft and fiddly compared to a Canon DSLR where you just press a button once then move your finger on the control it's already resting on.
So better dials and a quick auto toggle, plus stills/video mode lever, would consign the mode dial to history. Unless you really needed the Baby and Food modes
People actually use movie mode on cameras?
On 9/6/2018 at 9:04 PM, Marekich said:720p in 2018? Looks horrible by today's standards. (don't confuse content for image quality)
Is there a version of this video in 1080p? I suppose there isn't 4K version because of rolling shutter, and they wanted to show action.
I believe there is, but they revert to lower resolutions on the fast motion parts, presumably because of rolling shutter issues.
-
On 9/5/2018 at 3:56 PM, Andrew Reid said:
Posted before but it needs some kind of sticky!!
If you want a native 50mm - $2299 + TAX or £2350 in UK
WHAT?
The 28-70mm F2 which is useless in video mode... $3K!!
That is $5.3k gone on lenses, before you've even factored in the body.
Are the EOS R fans out there seriously considering investing $7.6K straight off the bat just to get shooting?
I am wondering why so few are talking about this... Surely, you want the native lenses. You don't want to be stuck with adapters. That's something Sony users do, not Canon users! You want the silent autofocus. Dual Pixel AF gets very noisy shooting video with EF lenses.
Whether you love the EOS R or not, don't care about video and only plan to shoot stills...these prices are eye-watering.
So what are people gonna do... stop at a 24-105? I don't think so.
EF lenses are apparently a must-have prerequisite for owning an EOS R! So is the adapter... but the adapter you want - variable ND drop in - is not even available yet.
Why does it take until February to get such a simple thing out of the factory?
And what if you are a Sony, Panasonic, Fuji or Nikon user considering a switch to the EOS R and you have no EF lenses? You will have a 44mm flange on your mirrorless camera and a wobbly adapter, plus a lot of money missing (gone on old Canon DSLR lenses with noisy AF motors).
The lack of affordable prime lenses is a massive mistake.
Meanwhile, this all gives Sony an advantage... i.e. people actually own native E mount lenses and so they can actually shoot with native glass on their cameras, whilst nearly everybody is shooting EF lenses on the R system!!
They seem to like the number 9, lol. $99.99 for the adapter? Why not make it $100? Do they think we are that stupid that we would be swayed by a penny?
YouTube content ID
In: Cameras
Posted
If there is an actual agreement (as opposed to something YouTube just does to avoid liability) then yes, it does work like that. Otherwise, what would be the point of an agreement. The purpose of having one is to spell out the terms by which YouTube acts as a streaming service for the content producer. Producers have an incentive to do something like that since if they did not they would automatically get copyright strikes against their own promotional materials. The power does not lie solely with them, unless they have no interest in the promotional value YouTube provides.
Problem is, you have no way of knowing who YouTube has agreements with.