newfoundmass

On 7/21/2023 at 7:41 AM, Andrew Reid said:

Someone has made a very large strategic error, and it ain't Netflix.

I think that right now was the ideal time to strike, honestly. Most studios are not in a position to go very long without new content in the current environment. The transition to streaming has been incredibly costly. Streaming growth has slowed down and people are ditching cable at record levels. Without new content or new episodes of people's favorite shows growth will slow even further and the decline in cable will accelerate even more.

Between 2016 and 2023 television and satellite subscribers have declined from 100 million to a projected 61 million. That number declined 12.3% in the last year alone. Streaming has yet to make up for the loss of carriage fees and advertising revenue, but sure hastened the decline in traditional pay TV subscriptions. It's just one of the reasons why WBD is in the position it is in today and why live sports rights fees have exploded, as it's one of the few things slowing the decline.

The changing landscape has impacted Netflix, too. Netflix revenue saw its first decline last year, and though it has rebounded this year, that is because of they have started charging people for sharing accounts and have tightened up their content budget. They aren't really in a position to go without new content as they attempt to increase subscription and revenue growth.

Maybe the strike will be their line in the sand, but these studios and media companies aren't in nearly as strong of a position as they were even a year ago.

Aren't most SAG-AFTRA members making less than $50,000 a year?

I think the anger should be directed at the studios, not the folks that are acting in solidarity with the writers.

As Michael said, it's the unfortunate side effect of being a freelancer. It sucks, but none of this would be happening if the studios weren't so greedy. 

I think we'll continue to see more third parties join up now that the S5 II has been a success, though Tamron likely won't be one of them given Sony's ownership stake in them. That's a shame because Tamron is among the most intriguing lens companies out there for me, given their cost to quality ratio. 

6 hours ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

Good news - but saw some reviews of their Af lenses, and specially the zooms do not look stellar.

I think it will get better with time. I wonder if they'll be able to improve the AF on L-mount bodies as an official member of the alliance, as in theory they might be able to get more cooperation from the other companies in the alliance vs. Sony, who just let's them reverse engineer their mount but doesn't seem to cooperate with them. 

Either way, it's a good sign that they're making lenses for the mount. 

🤦‍♂️

12 hours ago, JurijTurnsek said:

Overheating is a big issue because you might be doing a set of 120p short takes (let say up to 30 seconds or so) and that heat won't dissipate quick enough. Same goes for 60p. You might be doing 5 minutes per clip only, but you might do them in quick succession and the heat isn't going anywhere.

This camera is a very disappointing release. Makes me wonder if Sony is truly unable to come up with something better or are they just trying to protect their FF and Cine lines.

Agreed. Reliability, regardless of whether or not it's a pro camera, should be the top priority of every camera company.

9 hours ago, barefoot_dp said:

Why do you assume it's intentional crippling? If it's such an easy barrier to overcome, why has no other company done it yet?

Because not everyone is trying to undercut the competition at the expense of releasing a functional, stable camera. There is literally nothing stopping them from putting in a recording limit so it performs consistently, which they used to do it with their cameras before recording limits were removed. 

The Lumix S5 had a recording limit for 10-bit 4K 60p. They made that clear from the get go. They could've let it go until it overheated, but their intention was to provide a stable, predictable experience. They shouldn't be applauded for this though, because it SHOULD be what every company does.

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

’m not really sure about some folks expectations here with this or many other camera releases.

It’s an ‘enthusiast’ camera with a few ‘pro’ bits but is not intended to be, priced as, or sold as a pro level or cine camera. So what’s the issue?!

Asking for a camera not to overheat shouldn't be a pro feature. A Dad deciding to buy this camera to take family pictures and maybe film their kid's play or recital should probably be given the simple courtesy of knowing it's limitations right on the box or in the product description, like they used to when recording limits were enforced, so he's not surprised mid-play to find the camera shut down because of overheating. They shouldn't have to watch a YouTube video where influencers briefly mention it in-between shilling it so you'll click on their affiliate link to find out that, hey, this camera might shut down after 20 minutes.

I find myself less passionate about the camera industry more and more every day, because while people's expectations re: specs are higher than ever, people's expectations for functionality and truth in advertising have never been lower. Like it's insane to me that I even have to explain to people why it's unacceptable to release a camera that overheats without explicitly informing the consumer (and no, burying it in the documentation doesn't count. Companies know most people don't read that stuff).

There's always an excuse. It's why companies will keep pumping out crippled cameras. If they had any ethics they'd set a recording limit and make it clear so people knew what to expect. But that's not good marketing, so the only way you know about the recording limitations is if you bought it yourself and found them or you watched YouTubers briefly go over them in their usually glowing reviews.

But hey! It's a bargain! 

57 minutes ago, barefoot_dp said:

Cool story.

What's your alternative?

I suppose when you're unable to make a genuine argument the easiest thing is to deflect.

My alternative? Not buying it.

10 minutes ago, barefoot_dp said:

They already released the version that doesn't.
 

What a poor, but completely unsurprising, excuse.

As frustrating as it was when they still had 30 minute record limits (and in the case of the RX100 series, 5 minute record limits) at least it was honest and people knew exactly what to expect. 

15 minutes ago, ntblowz said:

Yeah, you can easily tell when Canon does everyone and their dogs bark about it, but when Sony does it you see plenty of people try to work around the shortcoming or said who does 30min+ boring videos 🤭 

Some people are so married to their camera brand of choice and overlook/excuse almost anything, it's maddening. There are inevitably going to be limitations with any camera, but it's inexcusable to release cameras that overheat because you refuse to get thermal management under control, whether it's through more efficient software or designing a body that can adequately dissipate heat. 

Find someone that loves you the way Sony loves releasing cameras that overheat.

I'm sure there will be people that defend it (there always are) but it's unacceptable that it still happens, regardless of the price. 

Stills with the S5 for action sports isn't too bad, actually. There are obviously better options and I wouldn't recommend it as a primary camera for that use, but it has a decent enough hit rate that it is okay in a pinch.

2 hours ago, 92F said:

I don't understand ?!
If you use a classic recorder, it will be the same because the modulation is done at the preamp level of the recorder... right?

The 32-bit float records automatically by sub-modulating and is recovered afterwards in post production ... like a log with limits, the limits of the sensor.

Thanks

A recorder only records what the mic feeds it. If the sound source is too loud for the microphone being used to record then the recorder will record that, regardless if it's 32-bit or not. It's not an issue with the recorder, it's an issue with the recorder. There's nothing you can do when the mic itself can't handle the loudness going into it. 

A decent little video covering this and other Atomos related issues

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

Well now here’s a curve ball…

So back whenever it was that the X was officially announced, I preordered a pair.

The wait time for France was long so I cancelled and bought another used S5ii.

But I just received notification that my new X came into stock, they took the funds and arrives tomorrow.

I thought I had cancelled both but what with them being French and all…

Aaaaaaargh…

I could send it straight back, or keep it, order a battery grip (needs it for the 70-200 f4) and sell the S1H with its battery grip.

Financially, it’s little difference, just the cost of the grip really.

The pros are; smaller, lighter, faster, newer camera plus all 3 bodies identical (except aesthetically) and I can bake in my preferred LUT.

Cons; can’t think of any actually other than it would mean saying sayonara to my S1H.

I think the S1H has a slightly nicer image, but I think the benefits of the X and the convenience of having three of the same cameras makes more sense. 

1 hour ago, kye said:

In terms of the quality of the files, it's adequate for my purposes, but I can understand if it doesn't meet the needs of others.  Certainly I would appreciate a few added features if I was given a magic wand, but I'm ok with it how it is, and I certainly wouldn't make it any larger to accommodate any of the additional things I'd ask for.

If it had a mic input I wouldn't have sold it because then I could've used it in most of my work. I really do miss it, but it was hard to justify keeping for the couple times a year when I needed to be able to have a more discreet set up, whether it was because I was filming somewhere I wasn't supposed to or because I just wanted to keep a low profile. In most cases the GH5 without the cage and stuff was discreet enough.

1 hour ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

I don't think that it is a open mount - in fact, only Panasonic, Leica and Sigma offers AF lenses to L-mount.

Sony have Sony, Sigma, Tamron, Viltrox, Samyang, Yongnuo with AF lenses.

By open mount I meant it's a mount that other camera manufacturers have been able to use on their cameras. The only other company that has let others do that is Canon through whatever deal they've made with RED. 

It would stand to reason that if BMD (or anyone, really) was going to go with a mirrorless mount for their cameras the most logical direction would be the L-mount, since it's the only mount that has been adopted by multiple companies. I suspect DJI will also be using the mount in some way since it joined the alliance.

I don't know of any company that has been allowed to use the e-mount on their cameras. It's also, technically speaking, not the best mount, so outside the lens selection I don't know that it'd hold a ton of appeal for other companies. Hasn't it been speculated that one of the reasons their IBIS is so poor is because of how small the mount is compared to the sensor?

For me M43 will always be the ideal system, it just got caught up in the specs race. And for a while, it was leading, but slowly the advantages that made it attractive to me started to dwindle because the wanted to appeal to a customer base that wasn't going to buy into M43 no matter what, which resulted in larger bodies and phasing out smaller ones.

Tiny bodies with exceptional photo and video capabilities interest me more than a GH6 or a future GH7, but they've seemingly abandoned that market completely. If they'd released a GH5 (or GH6) in the body of a GX camera I honestly would've held out and kept one foot in the M43 system, because that kind of setup, with the right lenses, is something that full frame will never, ever be able to achieve. Full frame will never be able to match the compactness of a GX body and the 12-35 or 35-100. Those lenses with the GX85 were probably my favorite set up I've ever used, especially for concerts and getting into venues that didn't allow "professional" video gear. No one ever looked twice when I'd bring that set up with me! As much as I loved it though, the limitations made me sell it last year. 

The problem is, I don't know if there is even a big enough market for cameras like that anymore. I assume if there was Panasonic would've continued it? It's hard to imagine that heading into full frame didn't impact the R&D that went into M43 though, which feels like the bigger culprit. But it seems to be paying dividends as the S5 II and S5 II X are being well received, so I guess it's hard to fault them with seeing the writing on the wall? I don't know. I just think it's a shame that we will probably never see what M43 is truly capable of, because I think we COULD see even smaller bodies and lenses without significant compromises if the resources were allocated to do so. 

I don't think people should rush to offload their M43 gear because there are still some years left in it, and there absolutely are benefits over full frame. I'm sure I'll miss my trusty GH5 once I do my first shoot without it, I was prepared to keep it for a couple more years and didn't have much reason to want to upgrade. But I was just given an off ramp that I kind of had to take. Selling the GH5 and the 12-35mm paid for the S5 and (excellent) kit lens, not to mention what i got for the others, so I ended up ahead financially. Plus having three of the same cameras will make things easier for me. But there's still a lot to love about M43.

3 hours ago, gt3rs said:

Yeah right S1 video AF for sports…. maybe instead of complaining about the thread you could post some of yours sports frame grabs 😉 

I film professional wrestling using two (now three) S5 bodies. The AF is more than adequate. The biggest obstacle to getting good stills from the footage isn't the AF but the shutter speed. I film using a 180 degree shutter angle, but I'm sure I could get good results by adjusting it if I didn't care about the impact it'd have on the footage. 

When there isn't a ton of movement I'll take a still to use for social media, but the motion blur during heavy action just isn't flattering. Here are some ones I've taken for social media/YouTube thumbnails. These are downloaded from Facebook since I'm on my phone but it gives you a general idea. I can post higher resolution versions tomorrow if anyone wants them. 

Out of all the mirrorless mounts it makes the most sense that they'd go with the L-mount due to its open nature. There aren't really many alternatives. 

Just now, SRV1981 said:

Seems like breaking 180 rule may help to grab photos from action on video?

Yes, at the expense of possibly making your video look weird. If you don't mind your video having a Saving Private Right effect then go for it!

It should be noted that shutter speed and shutter angle are different. A higher shutter angle would increase blur. A higher shutter speed would decrease blur. If you're filming on a Sony you'll want to focus on shutter degree since it doesn't have shutter angle.

18 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

Are you familiar if any videos showing comparisons between shutter speeds for video above the 180 rule?

1 hour ago, SRV1981 said:

Is there a downside bumping the shutter speed up? 

It can cause unnatural looking motion to your video. 

1 hour ago, SRV1981 said:

Could you shoot 4k60p in high frame rate for action sports?

It's not so much the frame rate that is the issue, it's the shutter speed. If you don't mind video that has motion that is a little off you can shoot at a higher shutter speed and get better results. But if you're trying to stick to the 180 degree shutter rule for video you're going to get motion blur during action shots. There's not a ton you can do to get around that. 

2 minutes ago, MurtlandPhoto said:

You just can't pass up a deal like that at this stage in the game. I also look so fondly on my m43 days. I was with the Panny GH cameras since the very beginning until switching to full frame about 18 months ago. There will never be a better setup than a GH5(5s,6) and 35-100mm f/2.8. No other brand or system can match that compact setup.

You really can't. For me, I never cared about the sensor size, it was the compact set ups that really appealed to me. I never felt like I was compromising much at all shooting with M43 and with Lumix cameras. I could work around their limitations (and continue to do so with my S5s) because what I was getting out of them was so good, especially for the time. My favorite combo of all time might genuinely be the GX85 and 35-100mm. So small, and the footage you'd get out of it was soooo good.

I was given an exit ramp that made too much sense.