newfoundmass

I love this forum in no small part because randomly you'll have someone share a video filmed with an old ass bridge camera that makes you think "damn, that looks pretty dang good!"

Looks good! Thank you for sharing!

The thing I keep going back to, even after people talk about the benefits of being able to downscale it to get even better 4K, is that we really aren't even using 4K to its true potential and probably never will before it gets replaced by 8K. Even downscaling to get "better" 4K feels silly, because the difference is so negligible unless you're watching on a big enough screen. It feels weird to argue against higher resolutions, and I don't necessarily view it like that in my head, but this rush to 8K and beyond feels more like a way to charge us more for cameras than a genuine need or necessity. Give me a 4K camera that can film 120fps without any risk of overheating and with all the features we are genuinely asking for before trying to entice us with 8K that 98% of us don't need.

I think there's a need for 8 and 12k, just not in these tiny mirrorless cameras and not for 98% of us. 

4K, in many ways, was overblown. There is a difference but not a significant difference between 1080p and 4K when watching on the most common TV size people own (55 inch), especially when it comes to streaming. The exception for me is when watching 4K Blu-ray discs. 

8K will be much the same. There will be benefits, but will 8K really look significantly better on a 55 inch television than 4K? Probably not. 

I have a client that was obsessed with everything being filmed, edited, and delivered in 4K. I'll upload his stuff for him and he used to marvel at how amazing the 4K was on his 4K TV. I just kinda brushed it off until one day he needed me to help him download an original file to his laptop to put on a thumbdrive for a presentation. Seeing how slow his connection was, I realized there was no way he was watching anything streaming in "4K". I had him play a video on his TV and then showed him that it was playing in 1080p. He had no idea. I told him even if it were playing in 4K he'd notice very little difference given the compression used. He stopped marveling after that, and I kinda felt bad about it for a bit. 

I still film and edit everything in 4K because there's really no reason not to. But I can't really think of any reason why I'd need 8K. I really don't need that much extra resolution to reframe (or really any extra at all... You can get away with it enough in a lot of instances in 4K) or anything. I don't think there's a ton of people really that need it who aren't in the film industry doing fx work or something. I'd much prefer camera companies push 4K to its limits while maintaining reliable functionality over this race for higher resolutions. 

I can't help but feel like we're moving backwards when overheating is an issue that keeps creeping back in.

Stop with the 6 or 8K resolution nonsense and just put out a camera that can do 4K 60p without overheating. It's not rocket science.

One thing Canon does that irks me is how they remove important information once you hit record. What logical reason could there be for this? Surely it's not putting much strain on the processor to keep up the histogram while recording, right?! 

Seems to be essentially what the R6 should've been from the start. Kudos to Canon for keeping the price the same, I guess. 

One thing though that IS annoying me about Sony is that they're becoming more insular. That certain features are becoming dependent on using Sony lenses, Sony software, etc. feels like a move in the wrong direction. You can argue that it's necessary to achieve some of these features but, for example, I don't see a valid reason why they can't work with Sigma or Tamron to ensure their most popular lenses work with things like focus breathing compensation. It wasn't long ago that Sony relied on them to beef up their lens selection and a lot of people bought into it because of them. 

If I had to make a choice right now about what system to go all in on it'd be Sony. But I wouldn't be happy about it. Like @MrSMWit's not that I hate Sony, it's just I'm not inspired by them. I don't ENJOY using their cameras and I've never been a big fan of the images they produce. It's not that they're bad, it's just... They're Sony. 

The FX30 is nothing special, but the price? It's hard to beat. It'd be very easy to buy 2 or 3 of them for my work and be done with it. And the system's long term health is guaranteed. 

I'm thankful though that I'm not in a position where I need to make that choice, and can further see what everyone else does in the next year or two before deciding what direction I go in. I'm probably putting too much faith in Panasonic, but I do think they'll announce something big next year. I think they have to, their long term viability I think depends on it. 

35 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

No, of course not. (heck, even 16bit is overkill for most people! With 10bit being probably the most common bit depth) If someone is regularly messing up their exposure so badly with 16bit files that "it isn't enough", then I think they've got much bigger issues than what bit depth they're recording in!

Likewise, the amount of dynamic range in 24bit audio files is huuuuuuuge, you've got to be quite incompetent to not find that to be enough. (it isn't like back in the bad days of 16bit, when you had to be very careful to have your levels well above the noise floor while still being low enough not to peak, which meant for a fairly narrow window you had to aim for)

Your perspective comes from a much more controlled environment than what the majority of people out there are working on. That's not to say your perspective isn't welcomed, because it is an interesting one even if most of us on this forum will never work at that level, but sometimes I think you forget that.

@kye's question was whether 32 bit float gives you headroom in the event you need it, not whether 24 bit is sufficient when you're on a set with a dedicated sound guy. (The answer is yes, btw. You're only limited by your microphone, as there isn't anything on earth that is loud enough to distort 32 bit audio. As long as the sound isn't too loud for your microphone you're good to go.)

The Tascam X8 (or other low end 32 bit float recorders) won't give someone audio that's better than a professional sound guy with professional gear can achieve. But for low budget projects or hobbyists, where it's not incompetence but the inability to juggle everything at once that necessitates recording on 32 bit, it's a HUGE deal and gives them a fighting chance. And eventually even sound professionals will embrace it once they let go of their pride. 😉

Me? I'm just happy that I don't have to worry about the 300 pound pro-wrestlers clipping the audio when they're yelling and hollering because I'm nowhere near the recorder and even if I was it'd be a nightmare to adjust the sound while also filming something so chaotic and unpredictable. Now I can get the shot AND get good, clean audio. 😊

3 hours ago, IronFilm said:

oh yes, I definitely disapprove! 

a) 32bit is mostly marketing hot air and spin to sell to the lowly educated (to be fair, that's true for most people, they're not specialized in location audio. So they're marketing to a very large demographic)

b) nobody should be buying non-timecode capable recorders in 2022 if they're in the film industry

Thankfully I'm not in the film industry but in the video production industry. 😉

32 bit float has been liberating as a one (or two) person crew. Setting my levels once (I still choose to), and not having to worry if someone (or something) gets too loud is beautiful because I have the range to still pull it down if they clip. It's not perfect, sounds can still be too loud for the mic itself obviously, but I've yet to experience that. I've just experienced lovely audio so far. 

I've never had enough hands to properly mix or adjust audio live the way I wish I could. Before I'd have to set my levels lower to be safe because I wasn't in a position to adjust them on the fly. Now I'm able to record two wireless handheld mics, the soundboard, and a crowd mic all at once with no clipping and without the noise that comes with adding gain in post. 

Everything gets written off as marketing or a gimmick at first. And for a lot of people it is completely unnecessary. But it's a game changer for a lot of people. 

I just got the Tascam X8 for 32 bit float and have been really happy. I know you might not approve since it's lower end, though! 😉 But I'll be selling my Zoom h6 and keeping this.

16 hours ago, Skropi said:

I am sorry to repeat the question, but is the dcc12 coupler fully compatible with the GH6? I am looking to power the camera with a powerbank, and not have to haul 4-5 batteries. 

The usb-c port is reserved for ssd recording.

It's not a direct answer, but I've heard mixed results from people who've used non OEM batteries and couplers, but haven't used them myself.

I picked up 3 of these when they were on sale for $175 last month and called it a day. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1681499-REG/smallrig_3470_rc120d_cob_light_us.html

I'm very happy with them. They came with the V-mount adapters free, too, though I've yet to use them.

16 hours ago, kye said:

I wonder how many videos it takes for a new camera to pay for itself in extra revenue.  ie, where the YouTubers purchase price (whatever that might be for those with large sub counts) is overtaken by extra clicks that their videos get from having a new camera vs filming with the one they were using before.  

One of the things I've noticed in quite a lot of situations is that they (McKinnon, Matti, etc) often seem to have several of the new camera bodies on their shelves rather than just one that they'd need to buy to make the review videos.  If It's an R5, let's say, and they had three of them, and a few nicer lenses, then that's a serious investment!

I know that a lot of YouTubers have relationships with B & H and Camera Canada to get loaners. I suspect thats one of the reasons it feels like some of these folks have immediate access to every camera. 

I imagine, depending on the YouTuber, they can pay off these cameras via advertising, sponsorship, and affiliate links pretty quickly. At one point Gerald's "studio" was a room in his old apartment that he continued to rent for that purpose even after moving out. He films using an A1 and A7sIII, which is over $10,000 in cameras. So he's probably doing really well. 

Not to turn this into a GH5 thread, but the reason I've kept my GH5 and why I planned on sticking with it was because it's still a very good camera, and if we're being honest for most of us there's not really anything out there that is so heads and shoulders better that we NEED to drop thousands of dollars on a new camera. The only reason it's not my a-cam right now is because I got a really great deal on an S5. But the GH5 is such a good camera, and I'd planned on using it for at least another 2 or 3 years. At this point I don't know that I'll ever buy a NEW camera again, because there really hasn't been that huge of a jump since the GH5 came out. I think I'll be perfectly content being a couple camera releases behind unless something big happens. If I'm still shooting Panasonic in a couple years I'll probably get a GH6. 

To me the M43 system had/has so much potential. In some ways I feel like it was a mistake to try and compete with larger sensor cameras, even though it resulted in incredible cameras like the GH series. Those cameras are what brought them to the dance, so to speak, but it was only a matter of time before everyone else would catch up, and in that period between when the GH5 was released and when a full frame equivalent that could match its capabilities was finally released, Panasonic had stopped innovating in the M43 space. 

When I got a GX85 I really kinda realized what the true potential for M43 was: small lenses and small bodies. I still take the GX85 and 35-100mm f2.8 into places that I could never bring an APS-C or full frame equivalent into and get beautiful, stable footage every time. It's such a small package that no one even gives it a second thought to. It's such a discreet, compact package. You'd have to use a bridge camera from Sony to get comparable footage, but it'd have a smaller sensor and worse stabilization. 

It's late, I'm rambling, but I do hate seeing people pronounce the death of M43 because I see so much potential in it, but I don't know that it'll ever reach it or if it's even viable to try. 

What's cheap in your opinion? We're seeing some in the $1000 range, from companies like GVM, which is pretty wild. 

I don't know that we'll ever see them get much lower in price. The influx of lower priced LED lights has been because of YouTubers, I think. More powerful lights though, ones in the 600w and up range, don't really have that big of a market and people wanting them typically have bigger budgets to work with and will pay more. 

Gerald does do some stuff that goes beyond just showing what's on a spec sheet, but I agree with a lot of what you said @Andrew Reid.

For me, it's just disappointing to see someone that was so even handed become a Sony apologist. He was a bright spot amongst shills and influencers for a while there. 

Do you have any channels you're enjoying these days? 

1 hour ago, Phil A said:

So here in Switzerland, the GH6 released for 2499 CHF in end of February.

Today I've seen it for 1757 CHF with an additional 200 CHF cash back offer.
So basically price dropped by nearly 38% in just 8 months.

Is it now time to say Micro4/3 is dead? 🤐
I assume the fact that the market is saturated with affordable new/used full frame options and the majority of buyers of dedicated camera systems being into photography is pretty bad for the M43 ecosystem.
BlackmagicDesign has moved on to APS-C sensors, the Sharp 8k M43 camera never materialized. People who want to shoot vintage S16 glass just use a high-res FF/APS-C body with a crop function.

M43 will live on for as long as Panasonic and OMD decide to keep making cameras, and will continue on for years after that because it has a dedicated user base. While I'm in the process of downsizing my M43 gear, I still plan to keep a GH5 and a couple lenses. In a couple of years, if I'm still with Panasonic, I'll probably pick up a used GH6 to replace it. Is the "heyday" over? Probably, but people have been rushing to proclaim the system dead for years. Unless you're looking to invest into the system, I wouldn't worry about it.

3 hours ago, MurtlandPhoto said:

Have you seen the sequel, Out There, yet?? I liked it, but WNUF is definitely my favorite of the two.

BE NICE! I did, I was a backer and got the DVD a little while back! I liked it, though I wish they'd leaned into horror more like he did with the original. But the commitment to creating something like that, I have no choice but to love it. Watch it with the Trader Tony commentary on if you haven't already, it's hilarious!

2 hours ago, homestar_kevin said:

All the WNUF talk making me smile as well. 

I know Chris and will have to tell him the next time I see him, though he's been traveling all month screening the sequel.

That's dope! Both Chris and Jimmy George seem like really cool dudes, though I don't think Jimmy worked on the sequel due to the pandemic. I've really enjoyed all their films!

2 hours ago, kye said:

The major issue with cameras these days is the cripple hammer / technical limitations they put in them which aren't in the marketing.  Sure, a camera might be 8K, 240p, 10-bit, but the fact that it's not all of them at the same time is the information that isn't mentioned, and which combinations are available are hard to find out.  Gerald is useful because he seems to systematically find many of those gotchas whereas other people don't go that deeply.

In terms of Sony and his opinions, to put it bluntly, who gives a crap?  If you're spending thousands of dollars then you should be making your own decisions rather than simply listening to other peoples conclusions.  Gerald is good because his videos are full of facts about the tech details...  just ignore his opinions and you're fine.

Most other camera reviews are ONLY opinions.  That's where we should be getting annoyed..

I've defended Gerald a lot on this forum, but when you do those analyses and then completely downplay the results or say they're not important because you're in the bag for Sony, you do more harm misleading people than the reviewers that just gush about how great every camera that is sent to them is. He built a reputation for his technical, long form reviews that were neutral and even-handed. Now that reputation is used to shill a company. It's dishonest, far more so than those that just give their opinions. And whether we like it or not, these people DO influence a lot of people's purchasing decisions. Whether you're one of those people or not, his move from being objective to significantly less so should be disappointing.

WNUF getting love makes me happy! 

The Z9 is the only camera out there right now that I really wish I could afford. I like everything I see from it. That it's constantly out of stock seems like it's a huge success. 

It wouldn't shock me at all. There will always be a market for monitors and recorders, but cameras are increasingly adding features and codecs that you needed recorders for in the past. The ability to record RAW was important short term, but it's only a matter of time before these companies develop their own flavor of RAW or implement ProRes RAW or BRAW directly, leaving Atomos out in the cold. It's hard to see where the camera industry will be in 5 years, let alone the monitor/recorder industry, but I imagine the former will be in better shape than the latter, especially with so many budget monitor options out there now and in the future.

It looks like a pretty decent camera, and the screen is awesome, but it doesn't seem to be a vast improvement over what Sony offers. Doesn't stop the usual suspects from gushing over it, though.

Watching the Gerald Undone video, and it's really a bummer to see how much of a Sony shill he has become. He will bring up negatives, but then downplays them or just outright dismisses them as not important. Meanwhile, he'll temper his compliments of other cameras. The titles of his reviews from the last year or so really sum it up, honestly.

Sony a7R V Review: A Fantastic Camera!
Sony a7 IV Review: The Best Hybrid Camera for the Money!
Sony Alpha 1: A VERY IMPRESSIVE Camera! (Sony a1 Review)
Sony FX30 Review: Good Camera. Great Value!
SONY ZV-E10 Review: Sony's BEST Budget Camera
The SONY a7S III: A Technical MASTERPIECE!
The SONY a7C: Why THIS Camera Is IMPORTANT!

vs.

Canon R3 Review: 10 Things I Love/Hate
Fujifilm X-H2S: A Very Nerdy Review & Technical Guide
Nikon Z6 II - Video Review & Blackmagic RAW Discussion
The PANASONIC S5: A STRANGE but POWERFUL Camera
Sigma fp L Review: A VERY CONFUSING Camera!
Kinefinity MAVO Edge 6K: An Undone Review

I don't even think he does it on purpose (or maybe he does?) But it feels like we're far ways from what made him appealing to me in the first place, which was a measured analysis of a camera's capabilities.

Lots of initial impressions/reviews getting posted. The video seems to be comparable to the A1 for significantly less money, with the major difference being 10 bit is available in all video modes.

• 60MP BSI CMOS sensor
• Improved AF with subject recognition
• In-body stabilization rated at up to 8.0EV
• Continuous shooting at up to 10fps with flash (JPEG or Lossy compressed Raw)
• 8K/24p or 4K/60p video (both with 1.24x crop)
• Full-width 4K up to 30p
• 10-bit 4:2:2 video options, including S-Log3, S-Cinetone and HLG
• Fully-articulated rear screen on tilt-out cradle
• Focus bracketing mode (with stacking via computer)
• Multi-shot pixel shift high res mode with motion compensation (via computer)
• 2 x 2 MIMO Wi-Fi
• UVC/UAC USB-standard video for use as webcam