thebrothersthre3

Kind of useless in HD. 
 

32 minutes ago, Super8 said:

We don't know what ISO performance this has do we?   Global shutter is rather new to most of you but you can tell the difference right away. 

I've seen a clip at 12,800 iso it had bad fixed noise pattern. Kinda like what I see from the URSA 4.6K. Need to see more reasonable tests at 3200 and 6400. But its not a good sign. 

Will need to see some actual dynamic range tests but at $6000 it better give more than say the Pocket 6k at $2000. 

That's just me though. I use to obsess over rolling shutter but as long as its reasonable I don't really notice unless for very specific shots. 

If the AF is really good that will be a big deal. 

Global shutter is cool but as long as the RS isn't too bad I'd rather have high ISO performance and dynamic range. 

You'll have a tough time finding an S1 for $1500 used. Maybe $1650 at the cheapest. 

The Pocket 4k is swag, but no IBIS. Might as well get a Fuji at that point and save $400. 

You can find GH5's cheap if you look around. Good camera but falls apart after 3200 iso. 

The Nikon Z6 is probably the best camera with IBIS at the $1500 mark.

Looks like an external recorder is a good solution for the NR issue, plus you get 12 bit color etc.. Guessing no 120p 12 bit prores RAW though. 

I am not seeing much noise difference in that comparison shot.

Does prores RAW not have noise reduction?

Appeal to vloggers and avoid competing with the FX9. Plus for the people who will use it as a hybrid. 

If the S5 is around the $1300 price point and can do internal 10 bit 30p that would be killer. 

28 minutes ago, Danyyyel said:

Did you use it or did you just listen to bias reviews. From the start video AF has been around the best, secondly when it came out people where comparing it (Z7) to the D850 which has the D5 style AF. We are talking AF only the likes Sony A9 can keep with. Since then they have released firmware after firmware to put more and more features from eye AF to prorez RAW.  Tell me is this AF bad, or you will listen to some youtuber who use the camera 15 minutes

 

I've used the Z6 before. Isn't that updated firmware though? My point was upon release not firmware updates. Camera companies release unfinished cameras and then people complain about bad reviews. 

Nikon is definitely on my radar, just not atm when its lacking internal 10 bit. They did fuck up pretty bad IMO saying the camera would do RAW and then discovering you have to send in the body to them to get it installed. 

1 hour ago, Super8 said:

You are 100% correct.  The Z6 is much better than what's portrayed on YouTube.  People on the EOS don't know what they're missing.  It's all marketing.  This is what I hate about Sony marketing.  It's to the point that it's false and hyped up.  It's great for the Sony side but it takes down a company like Nikon.  That's the dishonest part.  Have people lie about the Z6 camera so it has a poor reputation.

Nikon pushed the limits of video quality that we expected, no reason they won't do it again.

Kind of Nikon's fault though. It had some AF issues up front which got it a bad rep from the start. I am not sure why companies release stuff that isn't finished yet. If it had Prores RAW from the start that would have been huge. 

2 hours ago, gingercat said:

Why don't you post something you've created that shows us how qualified you are to dismiss others efforts.

bruh he literally has "who am I" followed by an IMDB page in his sig

10 minutes ago, scotchtape said:

The more I see the more I like in terms of features.  Chinese video nailed it for the most part, the S1H screen design is better, everything else is decent.  The one thing I "feel" when watching all these A7SIII videos is that it does not have the biting sharpness of oversampled sensors, and I'm constantly thinking, what is actually in focus here.  A lot of it looks oddly "soft". Most people here will probably enjoy it as it's more "cinematic" (I hate myself for using that word), but I actually like the option to have uber sharp footage. A small price to pay I suppose, but I really enjoy having the option to have that in your face detail.  You can always blur footage a bit, but it's you can't get the detail back if it's not there to begin with.

Full sensor 4K shouldn't really lack in detail. Unless you are blowing it up on a big screen maybe or cropping heavily in post, I find it hard to believe you'd see a difference between it and downsampled 6k. I was just talking to a producer on a feature I shot last year, he said they were adding diffusion and blur in post as the image was too detailed for many shots. That was all shot on the Pocket 4k. 

I feel like soft looking shots are more likely due to very shallow depth of field where almost nothing is in focus or a truly out of focus shot. Youtube compression also ruins everything. I remember watching a comparison to the P4K and P6K and half the shots were out of focus making the comparison useless haha. I guess that is where Sony's auto focus comes in, what good is detail if your shot isn't even in focus. Alas I just bought a Panasonic S1, guess I'll be stopping down more. 

31 minutes ago, Ashit Tandon said:

Can someone explain to me how the extended ISO range works for Slog3.

I used to shoot Cine4 with my a7iii. I think SLOG3 had a base ISO of 1600. And we had to over expose 2 stops over. So that implied an even higher ISO.

With the a7siii, the base ISO is 640. Do we still need to over expose? Also, I see folks saying that an extended ISO range is available (can go down as low as 160 I think). But wouldn't that mean we are under exposing SLOG3 (which has a base ISO of 640). So confused how this works

Extended ISO on other cameras results in loss of dynamic range, guessing its the same here. I would assume SLOG works the same exposure wise as before. The difference now is you'll get more usable shadows with 10 bit and not have to worry as much about underexposing. 

41 minutes ago, Dustin said:

And this is my only issue with this lens...F4! A lot of times I wind up filming with available light and while I often stop down to f4 I don’t know how comfy I would be having that at my min, but man that range is what is drawing me towards it.

 

Better lens in what way? I think I’ve actually demoed one of these at Best Buy. Is it sharper than the f4 lens? I don’t think I can deal with a 3.5-5.6 lens but it certainly is quite a range!

 

What cons would there be to swap my setup? Fuji mount is adaptable so vintage and other glass can fit. I’d be gaining 4k 60p, 10 bit video.
 

But I’m also kind of wondering what a6xxx camera might get announced now that the a7siii has come out. I probably will wait until next year to switch systems but it’s always fun to browse eBay and see what else I could get into lol

Yeah hopefully Sony puts out something APSC that matches up or surpasses the XT3. I was really puzzled when they put out all those different APSC cameras that were all pretty much the samething with different firmware. 

Sony autofocus is better that is really the only advantage to sticking with them IMO. But yeah waiting is never a bad idea. 

14 minutes ago, Viscount Omega said:

Color is the obvious difference.  I don't debate that.  But I can grade anything in S-log3.

I just think there's something tricky going on with the amount of info gathered.

Like I said,  600 Mb/s , right?  Same codec? Right?

Doesn't look the same to me.

Well there are different codec options, may depend what any given user posting footage recorded in I guess. All-I vs longGop and all that or H265 vs H264 and which datarate as well. 
 

7 minutes ago, Viscount Omega said:

Well, yeah.  But that has been worked on for years and continues to evolve.

Noise reduction is only part of the equation.

True but I don't think the FX9 is using noise reduction like the A7s3. Also yes I think noise reduction could be it. 

I guess the other two factors are color and motion cadence. I've never noticed motion cadence myself, though its a thing according to many people. I am also color blind haha. 

2 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

EVA1 has better highlight retention. Color is debatable. The 120p from the S1H is not great either. They are very close in all honesty.

Interesting. Yeah the higher frame rates were kind of a bummer from the S1H. I just tested my S1 against my URSA 4.6K and the S1 was very very close in the highlights. It also won out in the shadows. 

44 minutes ago, mkabi said:

 

The only camera that does that right now.... is the XT-4 but is it bringing the absolute best for what the sensor resolution has.... ??

 

I really want them to find a way to crank more dynamic range out of their sensors. Maybe they just need RAW recording. Although I have to say I think the S1/S1H/Z6 type sensor seems to be the way to go. Just compared my S1 to my URSA 4.6k DNG and their dynamic range is about the same, or very very close. Where the S1 definitely came out ahead was the shadows. The noise on the URSA gets really ugly. 

1 hour ago, Viscount Omega said:

Trying to decide between this and the FX9.   Forget the sound.  That's done externally anyway. 

They both shoot at H.264/XAVC S-I 4:2:2 10-Bit UHD 4K (3840 x 2160) at 23.976p/25p/29.97p/50p/59.94p [240 to 600 Mb/s]

600 Mb/s.  So, same as FX-9.

What is the difference between 600 Mb/s on an A7SIII and an FX-9?

So, 7K for Venice color?

Don't care about slow motion.  Not one bit.

Rolling shutter IS an issue.

Image stabilization.  Yeah, that's a factor but not a deal-breaker.

Why do I like the FX-9 footage better in the videos I've seen?

600 Mb/s is 600 Mb/s, am I right?

Or is Sony crippling the cameras so as to not compete with their other products?

Sort of like Intel would cripple Celeron chips vs. Pentium chips.

I would say NR would ruin an organic looking image. 

4 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

Yes, and if you look at the sensor spec sheet it looks like it can do 4K60p 10-bit just as the Zcam E2 M4 offers.

Probably a lack of processing or heat concerns in the GH5S body.

Also, looking at the bit depth and 2K readouts I never go above 120p either as the noise is unacceptable in almost anything that isn’t perfect conditions. So I would recommend shooting max 100p PAL or 96fps NTSC.

Anything higher and you drop into 10-bit sensor output.

 

Yeah understandable probably just disappointing. A downsampled 120p HD rather than lineskipped would have been cool too. 

The 18-105 f4 is a boring lens, kind of cheaply built. But its very versatile. Great all around lens, though obviously not the fastest. Great for running and gunning as its very light. 

The 18-35 1.8 is the best of all time. But its heavy AF. Super sharp wide open. 

I honestly think the Fuji XT3 is one of the best options out there right now.  The 18-55 2.8-4 is great too. The IS is fantastic and of course the Fuji image is great overall. 4k 60p and HD 120p are fantastic. 10 bit and the RAW stills and Jpegs are really amazing. 

I mean it should be one of the best photo cameras with 16 bit color, dynamic range, and noise performance. As long as you don't print large. 

I was disappointed when I found my S1 won't go below 0 with sharpening or NR. Panasonic is good with firmware updates though. 

21 minutes ago, Jeremy Clark said:

Thanks yall! Any opinion on the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 vs the canon 17-55 2.8? Thats the other lens I keep having be recommended to me. 

17-55 is more versatile. IS, more focal range, lighter. 

The sigma is faster, sharper, longer focus throw, honestly its a really high end piece of glass. Kind of a holy grail for APSC. Some don't like that its too perfect to the point of being a bit clinical looking.