newfoundmass

On 6/21/2022 at 9:49 PM, IronFilm said:

Even the old Canon 5Dmk2 (let alone a much more capable camera such as the Nikon D750, which is still a very old camera itself!) is so capable I can understand if photographers are not necessarily upgrading (or perhaps only upgrading their main camera, but not their backup camera). As they're running a business and can't just waste money unnecessarily.

Honestly for stills you really don't need the latest and greatest. The exception might be for sports and wildlife. Most photographers I know still use older DSLRs, especially older photographers who have the mentality of using their equipment until it doesn't work anymore. I've tried to use that same mentality when it comes to video because at this point anything that has come out in the last 5 or 6 years is still very good. Had I not gotten such a great deal on the S5 I'd still be using the GH5, G85, and GX85 set up. 

18 hours ago, MrSMW said:

When I started out it was about 90% craft, 10% marketing/advertising.

Today it’s more like 90% marketing and 10% craft.

You still need the craft of course but if you are not being found in the first place…

 

I'd also add that the proliferation of people doing weddings has made that aspect of getting booked more stressful than the actual work itself. I took last year off due to COVID and being immunocompromised, and it screwed me quite a bit because it allowed others to slide into my place. I'm not mad, I'd do it again if I had to, but it has made getting back to pre-COVID levels pretty difficult. 

On 6/21/2022 at 12:40 PM, MrSMW said:

I need AF for the video side for a total of around less than 1 minute in 12-15 hours.

Any S camera with a native zoom such as the 25-105 f4 with the right type of AF selected and with the tracking tweaked, plus f8, will track even a pretty fast confetti run.

Leave that on a tripod and hit record with a centre weighted focus. It’ll work. 

I've had very good results shooting wide open with the kit lens on the S5, too. I really do wish people would actually try using and learning these cameras before repeating how bad the AF is. It sucks that you need to learn to work with its strengths like that but it's very doable. Back button focus is also very helpful. 

The XT3 doesn't have IBIS but the A7III's IBIS isn't very good anyway. The Sony has better AF, but the Fuji blows Sony away as far as image is concerned. I think Fuji is the way to go. 

The Panasonic S5 with the kit lens is even better if you want to spend a little extra. 

Eh, 8-bit 4K having a 15 minute record limit definitely is a deal killer for me. 

1 hour ago, herein2020 said:

I get that 10-bit 422 will offer some miniscule amount of quality improvement, but I thought the image out of the S5 was perfect and it shot in VLOG with 420. Canon has to have seen the feedback that 422 cannot be edited on older Macs and most if not all Intel/NVIDIA/AMD GPUs. I have an RTX2080Ti in my editing workstation and it cannot accelerate 422 H265. So all I am saying is that it would be great if Canon offered a 4K H.265 4:2:0 option as well; I would rather be able to easily edit the footage vs a miniscule increase in quality which would be impossible to even see on YouTube or cell phones.

That's the thing that I kinda hate about camera companies focusing on 10-bit 422. That was absolutely one of the things that got me to go with the GH5, but I don't need it for EVERY project. 420 is fine for a lot of my work. Heck, I don't mind 8-bit for the jobs where I don't need to do much, if any, color grading.

The more options the better, IMO.

Yeah, I'm having trouble even finding solid info on recording limits. The early reviews said it had a 15-minute recording limit in all 4K? Even in 8-bit 4K 30p? Does it let you set it to shutter angle? What about other video focused features? Good luck getting an answer in any videos!

But they're going for under $2k used, so it's tempting, especially if I decide to expand on photography.

I've been looking at the S1R because of how cheap they are. I've been thinking at getting into photography, but would also use it for video too. Gonna need to watch some videos to see if it would be okay for video use. 

5 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

There's a really 'funny' video ad on YouTube right now where the guy suddenly stops speaking (visually) but continues to talk...because of course it's an AI voice.

Claims 98% of people wouldn't notice.

Officially then, 98% of the planet are a bit stoopid.

This. Is. An. Artificially. Generated. Voice. It. Is. Impossible. To. Tell. Though. As. It. Is. Exactly. The. Same. As. How. I. Speak. In. Real. Life.

I think that kind of stuff is done to make dumb people feel smart. Like those memes on Facebook that say something like "99% of you won't be able to find the hidden word", or whatever, even though it's fairly obvious. Your racist aunt will share it, with the text "found it!" regardless. 

I'm not sure what the end goal is, there has to be one, but it seems similar. 

These are weird because I have a hard time thinking they're successful in converting viewers into buyers that use the affiliate links. 

3 hours ago, FoxAdriano said:

Hey friends, I recently bought the GH6 with Leica 12-60mm. Do you take away a curiosity? I make videos in 4K, 50p, 10bit, 4: 2: 2 only in V-Log and I thought not to buy a VND but an ND filter with only one lens, for example a Hoya PROND 3 stop. With the variable ND filter of 100-200 euros I fear the video image quality degrades too much. I like the good image quality. I only make quick documentaries, always outside on days with bright sun or lightly clouded skies. I shoot the daily life of the peoples. Does anyone use fixed ND or ..... do you absolutely recommend the VND? Thank you

ND is ALMOST always superior to VND, though I wouldn't go as far as to say even the worst ND is better than the best VND like webrunner5 would. VND are popular for their convenience, not their quality. That's not to say a good VND filter can't be good quality though. For the kind of work you describe I'd probably go with a VND so that you aren't having to switch filters all the time, which is a good way to miss shots. 

Depending on your budget there are a lot of options. NiSi has probably the best sub-$200 USD VND. The really cheap ones tend to have more color casting, though that can be fixed relatively easily. 

5 hours ago, kye said:

In fact, maybe a variable digital zoom might be possible?  Everyone knows that one of the best uses for high resolution cameras is cropping into the image, which was always deemed as cropping in post, but why not be cropping in-camera?  Sony has ClearImage Zoom, which is quite impressive, a competitor would be great

The JVC LS300 did it first and is/was one of my favorite things about it. You can put a prime lens on it and use the zoom rocker to turn it into a zoom lens. 

I think I get what they were going for (showing how flexible the footage is in post) but what a strange, extreme way of showing it. I guess they just thought subtly wouldn't get the point across? I felt like the greens were going to leap off the screen and slap me across the face! 

Every camera in my price range has a limitation that I wish wasn't there. It just so happens that the S5's limitations are the ones I can live with the most. Same with the GH5. 

I don't think getting rid of your Lumix cameras and going with a Canon set up makes you a Canon fanboy. I think it just means you're making the best choice based on your situation and needs. 

The funny thing for me is that out of everyone it might be Olympus that checks the most boxes for me right now. I'm just in no position to purchase 2 (or 3) OM-1 bodies even if they weren't backordered. Strange times, though! 

Honestly I don't care what camera you get. Get the FX3. Or don't. 

What you NEED to do, no matter what camera you end up with, is stick with it. Learn that camera until you can operate it with your eyes closed and I promise you'll be able to squeeze pretty much anything you could want out of it (within reason, of course!)

Learning your camera's strengths and weaknesses allows you to lean into and adapt to each one. Until very recently my main camera was a GH5, a 5 year old camera that is very flawed but also incredibly capable in the right hands. Out of necessity, because the GH5 isn't great in low light, I had to really learn lighting techniques. It was something I should've been doing all along, but the GH5 forced my hand. By being weak in low light the GH5 made me a better videographer. Those skills will stay with me no matter what camera I'm using 10 years from now. 

That's part of the journey. Embrace it. Even if there were a camera out there that could create the images you want with minimal effort, where's the fun in that? Where's the artistry? What sense of accomplishment would you feel? It's cliché, I know, but the camera is just a tool. You're the artist, so learn how to express your art with the tool you have! 

3 hours ago, tupp said:

Gunpowder!

She is missed 😞

18 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Not sure what the exact set of pro/cons of Canon trying to shoehorn a FF sensor into their EOS-M mount was, but clearly they didn't think it was going to be long term worth it. 

My guess is, given how few lenses there were to begin with, they probably figured it was better to just start from scratch.

7 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

Don't forget there's also Active stabilization with the recent Sony's like the a7sIII and a7IV, which adds to IBIS with a slight crop, no catalyst browse needed. It's really, really good in most cases and easily as good as any other FF option and many times looks as good as the m43 standouts. If Sony is at the physical limits of stabilization because of the mount diameter, then digital options are the only options. 

I've used the A7Siii and I don't think it's as good as the S5's stabilization, but I'd have to do a side by side comparison to be sure. 

18 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

You mean due to it being full frame? The S1 is full frame but has really good IBIS. Of course the body is bigger but the mount is just as shallow on the S1 or close to it.

It's not the distance between the mount and the sensor, but the circular size of the mount itself. There's not a ton of room for the sensor to move left, right, up and down because the mount is so small. This limits how much the IBIS can work. I think they'd need a pretty substantial crop in order to get comparable results as Panny, Canon, and Nikon. 

I think this is why Sony has moved towards post-stabilization options with Catalyst Browse. 

15 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Sony's E Mount was never ever originally designed to be a FF format. (unlike Nikon Z, or Canon RF)

It was an APS-C design, for APS-C cameras, but they tried to cram a FF sensor into that APS-C lens mount! They 
"did" it, but left very little "wriggle room" for the IBIS to operate in. 

It was simultaneously a very smart and very dumb move to use the same mount for FF. It is more of a positive, but it'll probably be a long time and require a lot of processing power if they're ever going to catch up in the stabilization department. It's nice that they've offered an alternative with Catalyst Browse but it's not ideal.

I wonder if Fuji is having similar problems because of the mount size? I'm also curious why there has been such a drop off in AF performance since the X-T3 and whether the IBIS is responsible? 

4 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

I actually like Sony IBIS. It isn't rocky steady like the Panasonic but it looks natural. Makes the footage look like you are holding a heavier camera.

Everyone has their preferences, but to me Sony IBIS is almost pointless to have. It's one thing if you're just standing still since it'll eliminate most micro jitters but any actual movement looks pretty bad. I do wonder though if that's due to the size of the mount? 

28 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

When you look at their prices of some lenses at launch (when demand is high) vs a few years later, then it does seem they've got a fair bit of profit margin there still for themselves 🙂

That's common for pretty much everything though in the camera industry. They could in all honestly charge an extra $300 for this lense and it'd still be a bargain compared to every other option that isn't Tamron. It just feels like they go beyond trying to undercut others, that they genuinely just want to give their customers the best value. 

Very true, though I was curious if the wider angle might help! 

Sigma feels like a throwback in many ways, at least when it comes to business. I don't even feel like their prices are strictly to undercut the competition, because if that was their sole intention they could easily charge more and still be significantly cheaper than Sony, Canon, Panasonic, etc. I don't generally like to give corporations the benefit of the doubt, in fact I feel like doing so well inevitably result in being proven wrong, but it really doesn't feel like their sole goal is to make as much money as possible, no matter what. 

-

I hate that most of the reviews are on Sony bodies. That doesn't really tell me much about two of the biggest things I want to know when making a purchase: how well does it play with Panasonic's IBIS (are the corner wobbles really bad?) and their AF in video. The only L-mount reviews I've found were people using it on Sigma cameras, unfortunately. 

On 5/31/2022 at 6:50 PM, Dan Wake said:

Hi, I'm still shooting with my old Canon 7D, and I'm looking for a new buy.

Does exist a camera with those features under 1k euros?

feature list: the camera don't overheat; at least "apsc size" sensor; the video is stabilized, zero colored moiré effect; compatible with vintage lenses; having a good codec able to recover darker areas in post producion (good for color grading).

 

which is it the price for such a camera?

thx for your attention 

The thing that stinks is that your specific combination is really only available in M43 in your price range. The R10 lacks stabilization, otherwise it would check most of those boxes if overheating ends up not being an issue (wait for people to get the camera and really put it through the ringer though.)

The Lumix S5 is a little more than you're looking to spend, but it's a huge jump up and is a bargain. It might be worth waiting until you can save up a little extra and get that?

For me this life style is as much about protecting my mental health than anything. There has to be more to life than work, and your work should be something that you enjoy. I tried working at a production company and it devastated my mental health. I just can't do it. 

3 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

I only see LUMIX surviving if they implement PDAF on par with Olympus or better. That is the bottom line. It's 2022 and every camera out there worth a damn is track focusing fairly well (except Fujifilm).

It's survival depends on a lot of things, but I agree that it needs PDAF to grow and thrive. The market spoke long ago, and it demands PDAF. 

Maybe photographers will buy this camera, but it really seems like it's more video centric. I think they think it'll appeal to the hybrid shooter and video focused user mode than photo. I could be wrong though!