thebrothersthre3

8 hours ago, androidlad said:

As we expected, due to the significantly increased diameter of Z mount, the IBIS performance of Z7 looks on par with GH5:

 

Impressive! Hopefully we'll see this in newer full frame cameras. 

Hard to go wrong with GH5 IBIS. No you can't really casually walk with it or run. But for some slower controlled movements and doing tripod like shots without a tripod, its pretty darn good. 

4 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Really other than the new PK4, none of the new FF cameras, and the Fuji have added Anything to talk about over what a GH5 has had 2 years ago. And most of them have a Hell of a lot less features. And now you can buy a used GH5 cheaper than any of the new cameras, even the PF4. Interesting. We really haven't gained crap other than some pretty nice options on the PK4, Raw in particular, the the C port, and the mini XLR is nice also. Oh and the menus are damn nice also on the screen.

Other than the Fuji X-T3 for photos I don't see hardly Any edge for film making on the Canon, or Nikon, Fuji offerings over the GH5, GH5s.

Usable continuous auto focus is a big feature IMHO. For me people tend to forget that the XT3 is APSC. Yes Panasonic was the first SLR to include 10 bit (well the GH4 had it externally), but Fuji is the first to include 10 bit on an APSC sensor up to 60p 4k.

I've always liked Panasonic, but to be fair they've really held back with auto focus development for no apparent reason. Sony and Panasonic are both really innovative for video, just in different ways. For me Fuji has taken the best parts of Panasonic and Sony and put them in one camera, only with better color science.

But yeah for the traditional video makers who don't need the new age auto focus, the GH5 and S are still great. The waveform monitoring and timecode are certainly one of a kind in this format of camera.

Very good video. 10 bit makes quite the difference.

1 hour ago, androidlad said:

Latest A7S III news from Weibo:

Production sample does not have IBIS.

Quad base ISO.

4K 120P confirmed.

Very nice. Biggest question for me is will it have 10 bit internal? If it does it will be a revolutionary camera for video.

48 minutes ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

You can dream can't you?! I personally think they'll do another half price sale at some point & you'll have to jump quick. The Micro was a waste of time & energy - a drone cam at best & they got it totally wrong. My guess is that they stopped production & just sold back stock, so no point of a sale.

I'm happy with my OG Pocket & that comparison video just shows why - it's still can hold it's own against most things. This little camera isn't a pain to use & is stunning - they got it right & just not sure it'll happen like this for a while.

The only reason I won't jump on the 4K bandwagon is that it really isn't as widely adopted as a delivery format as people seem to make out. TBH there isn't much you can watch on a 4K TV - Amazon/Netflix own brand product & YouTube/Vimeo, but the rest is HD. It took ages for HD to take off, not only as a delivery format but also a recording one too. I'm happy to no longer invest, just rent.

I personally don't care about 4k much either, other then some potential jobs wanting it. I had considered getting an original Pocket camera, but it doesn't do 60fps. Most cameras that have the features I am looking for happen to shoot 4k.

If they Canon D50 and this latest EOS R had pushed the boundaries a bit it would actually give me some temptation to go with Canon. I was just looking at getting an EOS M50, just to be able to use with Canon glass. Really a bummer they didn't put IBIS in it, and 2.5 crop 4k with terrible rolling shutter ?

1 hour ago, DBounce said:

They would have been off by a reasonable margin. 

What might be more telling would be using an ugly light or mixed lighting. 

Yeah in decent light all of these cameras can capture good skintones

4 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Oh hell the C200 has a beautiful output in the Raw. @DBounce has proved that on here. But no broadcast middle codec, still a weak standard one.7500 bucks. You have to have a real Need for it, or being doing damn well money wise. Sure who wouldn't want it. But it is just not as rounded as it Could have been. Shame.

True, though I quite like the 8 bit codec even though it is way behind the times. 

I only wish the Fuji had a H264 10 bit option for quicker editing. Very small complaints though, at this point things are looking really good.

I'd love to have the Canon C200. It is a bit better in low light then the XT3 and there are more lens options( some great OIS options). 

That said the XT3 is way way cheaper, which is why I am getting it. Of course it also does amazing stills. 

Fuji has promised to add HLG to the XT3 at some point. This could be an interesting update, could mean a stop or more increase in dynamic range in HLG.

4 hours ago, TurboRat said:

Nothing yet vs other competition like the Sony A7III but I've found these vs GH5s:

http://tide.film/blackmagic-pocket-cinema-camera-4k-first-impressions-and-comparison-against-the-panasonic-gh5s/

 

vs GH5:

 

So basically image quality wise, the new Pocket 4k is near the GH5

In regards to ISO performance? The GH5 falls apart at 6400 iso. The BM looks good even at 12,800 iso to me. Its not just noise but also color. 

The GH5S and BMP4K have the same sensor its just about noise reduction. Its one of the advantages of the GH5S you won't need NR in post. 

The color looks more pleasing overall on the F3. 

I am terrible at judging color though. I was shooting on the A7III yesterday. The menus are terrible but otherwise its quite a remarkable piece of equipment. 

I just sold my Sony F3 to fund a Fuji XT3. They really seem to not be selling as much vs when I got it this spring. 

15 minutes ago, Chrad said:

I would think the GH5 would be the way to go for S16 lenses. Turn on Ex Tele mode and you've got an almost exactly S16 sized image circle shooting 10 bit UHD, with IBIS included as well.

For sure, its just pricey compared to this bad boy. 

2 hours ago, Thomas Hill said:

I had been planning to get a gx85 to use on a specific project but with this article @Andrew Reid convinced me to check out the e-m10iii first. It arrived today and, without actually shooting with it yet, I really like the feel of it and the menus, etc.

But continuous AF does not seem to work. I have it set to C-AF in both video and photo mode but the focus doesn't change unless I half-press the shutter button. Same goes for C-AF with tracking. The green box follows the object around the screen really well but the focus doesn't change. Same with selecting the focus point on the touchscreen, the green box pops up but it doesn't focus until the shutter is pressed. I also tried full-auto mode...same thing.  

The focus is very snappy when pressing the shutter button.

I have the Panasonic 25/1.7 on it.

Am I missing something?

[EDIT}

C-AF DOES work but it is incredibly slow. I'm talking 8 slow Mississippis for it to adjust from one point to another. That's why I didn't think it was working at all. And I can't find a focus speed setting.

Yeah only some Olympus cameras have PDAF, it sucks on this one.

23 minutes ago, androidlad said:

It looks on par with A7III 120p, minimal aliasing. Just wish it's available in 17:9 DCI mode as well.

Its 10 bit though so it gives it an edge over the A7III. I'll just be happy to have the option to do 120fps again. I sold my GH5 and got an XT20 so its been only 60p for me.  

The Fuji definitely has the edge for Dynamic range when going against vlog. HLG is a different beast though. Really need to see some HLG tests. 

One thing I have heard is 6400 on Fuji is like 3200 on other systems, they just measure their ISO differently. I can't confirm if thats true or not? 

Another huge plus on this camera. Probably the best 120fps out there outside of an FS700, that isn't including cinema cameras like RED.

Here is the deal man, whats more important Low light performance or auto focus?

The XT3 has state of the art auto focus. However the low light performance isn't that great. The GH5 gives a clean image up to 6400 iso, where as the XT3 is more like 3200. Even at 12,000 iso the GH5S is nice, where as the XT3 is really noisy and soft in comparison. The XT3 isn't much better then a GH5 in regards to ISO performance. Of course I always used the GH5 with a speedbooster, so that gave it that extra stop of light.

To me Fuji color is much nicer and it also has a bit more dynamic range (half a stop maybe). Fuji has better high speed options (4k 60p in 10 bit where the GH5S is 8bit) Shooting over 60p is pretty crippled on the GH5S due to weird banding issues. The Fuji 120fps 10bit is much nicer then the GH5S's 120p in 8 bit.

If you have a GH5 is makes sense to get the GH5S as the colors will match pretty well.

The only thing holding me back from this camera is auto focus, but that's why I got rid of my Panasonics as well.

Make sure you are changing the stabilization settings when you change the focal length.

5 hours ago, tosvus said:

..and Sony!

That goes for Sony too. Not much progress on APS-C cameras lately. All the manufacturers except Panasonic/Olympus (m43, not aps-c of course) - seem to favor giving decent functionality and upgrades only in FF. (Panasonic/Olympus might not do much better either IF they currently had FF - yeah I know Panasonic is working on it, but not out yet!)

The Fuji XT3 was pretty significant and Sony is apparently matching with a A7000 that has 10 bit 60p and 240fps 1080

3 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Well hell who wouldn't want a Arri Alexa over it. But is it on here going to look 5 times better. Twice as better? Your telling me you can't make a nice short with Gunpowder with a Smartphone in 4K? You surely have the skill and imagination to make that happen. I think I would be pretty proud to take a "inferior" device and make it sing as they say. I don't think the expensive cameras make shit for difference much anymore. The BMPCC proved that. You can buy them for 350 bucks today, even with some accessories. I doubt the Oly EM mk III will out do it. And it has a wimpy ass little sensor crop area in it even compared to m4/3. I doubt Any of these new cameras FF, APSC out will out do it, even maybe the PK4 can't. That is to be seen.

I am just stating we have all, including me, have went off the deep edge on all these, I have to have a better camera thing. Sure a few, very few on here make a living doing it, most don't even own them, the company they work for does. And most of the rest left Ain't buying a Arri no matter how old it is. So for shits and giggles, what probably the vast majority on here do, a Smartphone, a BMPCC works. And that is how it is plain and simple. Skill trumps any damn better camera. We are in a no excuses world for video. Anyone with skill can make it happen, even with a Smartphone if that is all they have.

I agree with you to an extent. But part of the reason the BMPCC is so nice is because of dynamic range and of course color science and bit depth. I don't think smart phones are known for having remotely any of those traits. 

I do acknowledge what great choices we have in cameras these days for such low prices, but the new tech is also really helpful. 

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

And you move all of it down to Rec.709 with 5 stops of DR. Big deal.

They have 50mm lenses in them also, and like has been said you can do it in post. Hell you can do Anything in post these days. Oh so you are going to carry the Oly EM mk III in your pocket? And you think a iPhone 8, or X is huge, what you have one of those flip phones from the 80's? How big is the sensor in a BMPCC? Oh I guess they are shit because it is small? Your just being silly.

The pocket has a M43 sensor. Why would I need to carry something in my pocket btw? 
You can do a shallow DOF in post for video? Not easily. I can create dragons flying of my mouth in post to, technically. 

The whole well rec 709 is only 5 stops argument is kind of silly. With wide dynamic range you can manipulate the image easily in post and decide where you want that dynamic range to go. 

More power to you if you can deal with poor iso performance, no dof, small sensors and be happy with it. 

If you don't like these discussions just start your own thread on what you want to talk about. Who is forcing you to talk about camera specs? You are the one going on about how you think cell phones are better then micro four thirds cameras. If you genuinely don't care about specs why argue about it. 

I do care about specs. I love cameras, playing with cameras, reading about cameras, buying cameras. Its what interests me.

Also I do shoot stuff, was up until 2am filming a short film last night. I don't usually post on here because who wants to watch my shorts? Usually no one. Easier for people to read a 10 second comment and reply on their phone while doing something else. Videos require attention. 

28 minutes ago, lucabutera said:

I do not agree. I have a Samsung S9 plus 250gb F1.5 diaphragm, 4k 60fps, h265 codec with Filmic Pro. Reading reviews, right now is the top of smartphones, but I would never dream of saying it is better than this camera.
I do not even see a good reason to use my phone instead of this camera, maybe to want to be good, the restaurant is more discreet to use a smartphone to take a picture of food ?
This is a great professional pocket camera, the Olympus is famous for never losing a single shot, and for this price, there is no comparison with a smartphone.
At least, until we see what Red Hydrogen will do ...

Yeah, 10 stops of dynamic range is like 2 stops more then phones can do. At least. 

3 minutes ago, ntblowz said:

I have to disagree with you on that, no way in hell it is sharp as c100mkii based on my m50 with the bloody same digic8 codec

key word is almost