thebrothersthre3

A C300 mk2 then

If you are doing something for Netflix I don't know why in the world you want to use a Nikon Z6 in the first place. Renting a C200 isn't really a big cost. 

51 minutes ago, PrometheusDM said:

What can Sony do that's beyond S1/Z6? 

Great AF, 4K60 10 bit internal and/or global shutter along with 5.76 million dot EVF is the only way they can beat S1. I doubt it will be $2500 when it's debut. By then Panasonic S1 might be closer to $2000 with better ergonomic and built quality.

I think they are caught off card by Panasonic. I don't think Sony can do 4K60 w/o crop and 10 bit internal without heat issues unless they design bigger body like S1. They might severely limit the recording time as well.

I agree with you that quality wise is where A7SIII has to land, but people are more concern about specs than compromises Sony made to reach a price point with the A7III (2.4 million dot EVF, 900K lcd, poor build quality). I suspect A7SIII is the same - 4K60 10 bit for 10-15 minutes 

 

 

 

Having all its internal log and HLG profiles with internal 10 bit 422 at decent data rate will probably happen. Of course you get that with Panasonic just after a paid upgrade. The Sony will probably cost more off the bat so there is that as well. 

On 4/25/2019 at 8:38 PM, Zach Goodwin2 said:

Another picture I took with the FD 35-105 F/3.5 on the Canon Rebel T2i.

 

I like that image, nice grain. Funny I didn't even notice in on my phone. 

1 hour ago, dbp said:

I'm way late to the party, but just ordered the GH5! 

I have no illusions that it'll be some supremely groundbreaking image, but I do think it'll be the funnest and easiest camera I've ever used to just pick up and shoot stuff with.

It has a great image btw. Pretty much no moire or aliasing which can't be said for a lot of more expensive cameras. Also internal 10 bit 422 

On ‎4‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 4:53 AM, ade towell said:

I don't know, unless Sony start putting their Venice colour science into their mirrorless cameras, the S1 and the Nikon have a much nicer image to my eyes. From what I see the S1 has beautiful colours straight out of the camera and can't wait to see what it's like with full v-log. The Nikon needs some work but can get nice colours too. Sony really needs to address their colours or regardless of specs they will lose a  lot of potential customers. They have shown they can create lovely image - the F35 and new Venice prove that, they just need to start putting it into their lower end

I don't consider color part of image quality usually. But yeah, if you factor that in Pana is nice, though I don't think particularly better than Nikon. 

The Z cam E2, no internal ND's though. 

The FS5, is a pretty good choice if you can throw on an external recorder. 

The URSA mini 4.6k G2 is pretty darn good. 

8 minutes ago, A_Urquhart said:

 

This!

I have now told three friends with Pocket4K's to buy a monopod after they switched from VDSLR's with IBIS to the Pocket4K.

These friends had never used monopods before and all three came back to me after a day of shooting saying how amazed they were with how easy it was to shoot with and that they far preferred the subtle look of motion when using the monopod compared to when they shot with VDSL's that had IBIS. Monopods are great for quick shots and super versatile.

Get one with the three feet at the end like the Surui 204 series. 

Yeah I used a $25 monopod with a 250mm lens, lots of shots at the long end and got great shots. The lens had stabilization though. Still, was great for run and gun at a wedding. 

Monopods work pretty well or a shoulder rig.

If you are just getting quick shots, which is pretty much what IBIS is useful for, stabilized lenses pretty much accomplish the same thing. 

2 minutes ago, stefanocps said:

Ok you talk about low light and sensor and those are obvious bemefit. I talk about image quality. Footage i see from s1 look wonderful. Don t have same sensation with xt3 and expecially with gh5 footage.

What you think about?

Its gonna yield similar image quality to a A73 and Nikon Z7. Full frame frame 6k downsampled 

I don't really think its necessary. 1.4 is very fast on full frame especially since you can crank the iso up pretty high. 

I like my Fuji XT3 a lot and will be sticking to it. When I spend $2500 on a camera it'll be for a used Ursa Mini or something. 

That said its a nice piece of gear, especially when it gets the Vlog and 10 bit update.

10 hours ago, ulrikjepsen said:

Camera A is actually the FS700. I think the colors are not bad, but their cine-cams are a lot better with than the mirrorless sonys. I read someone saying, that the colors are more natural, and thats what we view as bad? I think the sony colors are great for products, landscapes and so on. But for people, canon and blackmagic are great. But then again, with the raw to prores on the sony, you can grade the colors to be awesome on the sony also 

Lots of people complain about the GH5 and GH5S colors as well though?

The FS5 is really tempting to me. With the atomos recorders it can do 12 bit prores RAW now up to 120fps. The FS700 is really nice too although I like the FS5 form factor. 

I didn't quite realize how small Prores RAW files can be. I think being able to do 12bit 4k on a full frame camera is really amazing. 

Just realized the Prores RAW also works with the old FS5, which are going for like $2000ish on ebay. Those can do up to 4k 120 in Prores RAW?

Is camera A the GH5? The Sony cinema cameras are really interesting for the price some can be had at. Everyone always complains about Sony color so its a hard sell for me. 

 

4 minutes ago, Skip77 said:

My comment is based on footage test comparing Gh5 footage 10 bit 400Mbps and other cameras such as the C200, A7SIII, etc, that show very little upgrade in quality, if any. More compression and sharpening in the Gh5 footage and people questioning if 400Mbps from the Gh5 is anywhere close to the same as 150Mbps  from the C200. Theories have been that the GH5 400Mbps is highly compressed to begin with, sharpened and noise reduction added and not a clean source as the C200. 

 

Is the GH5S any better? 

I didn't quite understand it but it made sense without thinking about it. If that makes any sense? 

Really good piece, going to share with some friends. 

I haven't used the Pocket 4k only the OG pocket. With Highlight recovery in resolve it gets more dynamic range. 

5 minutes ago, jpfilmz said:

I dont sell wedding trailers with music.  I sell full docu cuts of full wedding days that are to big to put online.

Ah ok, well nothing wrong with that. Also sorry to accuse you of that, didn't really have the info to say that. 

If you don't need auto focus, a speedbooster is a cheap easy fix to the crop issue. Although I am not sure why a 1.8 crop is a big issue in the first place. I'd imagine its noisy if you come from the DSLR full frame world. If you are used to shooting with cinema cameras or M43 I doubt it though.

The big dynamic range advantage seems to be when shooting in RAW, especially CDNG. There seems to be a lot of highlight information that something like the GH5 doesn't have.

32 minutes ago, jpfilmz said:

I could just as easily had uploaded to youtube and let youtube give the credit to the artist with no issue and the video is demonetized either way.   

The issue is you sold that video to a client and used music that isn't your own. Which I am sure probably breaks some law.

30 minutes ago, TheRealOG said:

ok dude. I am glad you are making money off of someone else's intellectual property. lol

I'll use copyrighted songs that were playing during the reception as I think its part of the documenting and capturing the feel of the event. Wouldn't use it to promote what I do though.

1 hour ago, thephoenix said:

https://www.fujirumors.com/stc-optics-clip-in-filters-for-fujifilm-x-series/

pretty cool, though impractical for run and gun if you need to change it out. 

1 hour ago, sanveer said:

Just VLog (No L Rubbish) with almost 13 stops, even better colour science, usable lowlight upto ISO12800, slightly larger screen (just 1/2-2/3 inch larger) and better photography capabilities (14Bit RAW?). The GH5 does almost everything else pretty well.

And release that f1.7 zoom, at Sigma Prices, since neither Panasonic nor Leica are probably designing nor making it. 

The GH5S sensor was nice tbh, I have no need of 8k. Its capable of 4k 120p at least according to what Z cam did with it. But I guess higher res is the future.

16 minutes ago, Trek of Joy said:

This camera ticks almost every box for me, great ergos, IBIS, 4k60p, 10-bit, weather sealing, etc. except possibly the most crucial one - AF - but it does give me hope the a7s3 or the next Nikon will get it all right. While its a step up from the a73/a7r3 in some respects, its not enough to push me out of Sony-land. Nikon came close with the Zed 6/7, but that single card thing and its battery life are not something I'm going back to, plus the Zed's AF is still way behind Sony's. The a73/a7r3 has served me well since I shoot tons of stills for paid work and I've moved from a mostly handheld video shooter to an everyday gimbal user. I don't think I'll ever own a Panasonic until they admit DFD-defeat and add PDAF, its just so much more efficient for run-and-gun shooters. The next gen Sony sensors Andriodlad keep posting spec sheets show the new Sony sensors will leapfrog everything currently available in a big way, combine that with a new processor and an updated version of the a9/a6400 AF and you'll have the ultimate hybrid.

But I'm happy to see this and the S1r - and the Nikons for that matter doing raw externally - this should push Sony to finally go 10-bit internal and up the bitrate. 

Chris

There excuse was that its a stills camera, even though that doesn't even completely convince me.

They should have no excuse with the GH line. I think the GH6 will have to be something really incredible. (6k 24 fps and 4k up to 120fps) with IBIS, and hopefully a new auto focus system, though I somehow doubt it. Maybe they'll put in a non handicapped Vlog as well.

8 minutes ago, dbp said:

I've definitely seen that more with corporate work than with wedding work. I've had a few moderately tech savvy couples, but most don't care at all and just trust your portfolio. If anything, they appreciate a smaller profile. 

 

Definitely depends. I know a company that hires like 4-5 shooters for weddings just to look more "big scale". Decided not to work with them as I think they are full of BS lol