thebrothersthre3

2 minutes ago, omega1978 said:

Ok, thanks.That's disappointing, so the second slot is waste to have a backup

Yes for video it is

Natural or HLG. Not a fan of CineD skintones, though I guess its the best way to get max dynamic range in 8 bit.

Skintones will have more to do with your exposure than any profile though.

4 hours ago, IronFilm said:

A million dollars doesn't take you quite as far as you might think. Not over your entire lifetime. 
 

Just hiring someone to do that one task would quickly eat into a lot of that million dollars over your lifetime. 

 

I wouldn't live off of it, although I could especially in certain places. I wouldn't use social media unless I needed it for business and then it would be paying for itself.

In the comparison's I've seen with Red vs Alexa, the red clipped the highlights faster. Wasn't their latest sensors though. 

Dynamic range is just very subjective. For example comparing my XT3 to my BM pocket(og not 4k) they both have pretty similar dynamic range, the XT3 being cleaner. The Pocket shadows look nicer though once recovered, there is just more color you can get back into them even though its noisier. My experience at least. 

41 minutes ago, Laurier said:

I have a a7iii + ninja V as my main video camera setup (and a a7rii for photo )

i got the a7rii when I still had my blackmagic ursa mini 4.6k .

the a7rii in slog 2 had a bit more DR thank the ursa mini in pro res , so I sold the ursa ( mostly because of the form factor and the video autofocus)

The a7iii is a killer camera , I shoot HLG with it because I found Slog 2 to be unusable ( too much chroma noise , even externally) , but in resolve I do a color space transform back to slog3 and use the Venice rec 709 Lut , so you get great colors.

Dynamic range is really not an issue anymore on modern camera , I don t believe that the Alexa is that much better anymore , but it still have a nicer roll off in the highlights when it clip .

 

The roll off is more important than the dynamics range at that point , also realistically Film only have 11 stop , so it s hard to blame mordern cameras over analog for DR.

Have you ever compared it to an Alexa? I am guessing the Sony probably has cleaner shadows but I doubt you get much highlight information. 

Also I've never heard filming only have 11 stops. I've heard people say Film has similar dynamic range to an Alexa. 

What is the appeal of Leica in general?

I could probably give up the internet for a million dollars. I could get someone else to manage social media for business. 

The one thing up in the air right now is how the Nikon auto focus will perform with Prores RAW. Its not reliable with external 10 bit 422 in log at least. Maybe you can record in 10 bit 422 with the flat profile?

14 hours ago, Django said:

very impressive RS numbers on the G2 thanks to about double readout speed :

4.6k - 7.59ms
4k crop - 6.32ms
2k crop - 3.16ms

insane!

The choice between the Nikon Z6 and XT-3 is a tough one. 

I would say the XT3 is superior in every way except low light performance. Of course the Z6 has the 12 bit prores RAW capability with an external recorder. 

If you want the full frame look (or even medium format) that is another point for the Nikon. IBIS is also another factor, if its something you need. 

I went with Fuji for the color. However the auto focus and high speed options were a big plus (10 bit 4k 60p, HD 120p 10 bit). I also don't like using external recorders. 

Yeah I usually shoot with a very low SS, like 4. If there is nothing moving other than clouds though there is not much need. 

The latitude on the XT3 in RAW. I imagine I could do a midday to night without adjusting exposure and just bringing shadows and highlights up and down in post. Would have to get the best compromise exposure though. I usually just do sunset time lapses though. Its been too cold to sit outside for hours. I need to get my drone working! OliKMIA has inspired me. 

8 minutes ago, Flogbox said:

Filmed 4k @ 60p and edited in Resolve 4k @ 24p timeline.

Aaaaaand now i realise why i am the Mayor of Noobtown.... I slowed to 50% instead of slowing to 40% hence the stutter. Human error to the rescue!

 

Lovely footage!!

7 minutes ago, AlexTrinder96 said:

4.6k 120fps is the biggest upgrade imo....

Oh wait I thought the original had 4k 120fps, my bad. That is a good upgrade then. Maybe the OG ursa mini 4.6k will get down to $2500 used

3 minutes ago, zerocool22 said:

It was vastly improved on the ursa mini pro with firmware updates. John Brawley says the g2 is iso wise the same as g1, only difference is the +300fps. 

Ah oh well, still a nice camera. There is an Ursa mini 4.6k on ebay right now for just above $3000. If this drives the prices of them down more that would be cool. Though if the only upgrade is 300fps I don't see it being that big of a killer. 

I mean I guess you can get add on longer lenses for phone cameras. Not sure how well they work.

5 minutes ago, mkabi said:

Not everything needs a m4/3 or higher sensor...

Think of it this way... you can have the Sony a7s3 for the sDOF & wide angle shots, and any other stuff that the phone can't handle...

Its a good companion piece if you ask me...

Yeah its fine for certain uses. Not really a fan of ultrawide lenses for images of people. Being able to get a super wide image at 18mm on full frame is wonderful. 

Cool but its got a tiny sensor. Would be cool to have for casual use though.

I never really realized it until using full frame cameras but the lens selection is so much more versatile. Micro 4/3's sensor is pretty large in comparison to cell phone cameras, but even then its a drawback. 

Makes sense that phone tech should advance faster though, everyone uses a phone. 

Higher frame rates is cool, though I am more curious about the new sensor. I wonder if it'll be better in low light. I recall the 120fps on the Ursa mini 4.6k wasn't too great. Maybe its improved on this one. 

Looks like a very interesting camera tho. 

The XT3 Auto focus is better than the A6300. So if that was working for you, the XT3 won't disappoint. Of course you'll also get way better rolling shutter performance, 10 bit, and 4k 60p.

Nothing on the GH2 looks much like cineD as far as I remember. Try shooting both in natural. Shoot a color chart so you can match in post easier.

With a tiny sensor

25 minutes ago, kye said:

Wow.. great stuff!

Can you share your workflow with us, or any tips?

One thing I was going to mention - a very capable and affordable setup would be a DJI Osmo Mobile 2 and an older smartphone.  I have the DJI and you can set it to the time-lapse mode, physically position the gimbal, set a waypoint, physically position the gimbal again, set another one, etc and then just hit go and it will trace the path and take a time-lapse.  Normally older phones have good enough image quality when taking still images for them to be combined into a video file, so the quality doesn't matter so much, and might be good enough for your purposes?  It's worth looking into as it would leave you free to use the gimbal for your video cameras.

Happy to shoot something for you if you can't find anything online or want to see what an uncompressed still from the video file looks like.  I have an iPhone 8, not too old but not the latest either.

Edit: I can't remember but you might be able to record the time-lapse in a different app while the gimbal still moves it around, in which case you can get a sequence of RAW images (assuming the phone shoots RAW) which should give a lot of latitude in post.

Thanks on the offer. The DJI Osmo plus smartphone wouldn't be a bad idea. I just remembered I have two gimbals so it shouldn't be an issue haha. Starting to have so much gear I lose track. 

I know my Beholder DS2 has a timelapse mode, I just don't know how to use it lol. I know you set the start and end position but not sure how you set the time. I got it once but it was only like a 10 second pan haha I need like a 10 minute one or longer. 

Some pretty amazing stuff there. I was a bit floored on how you accomplished some of those shots than it occurred to me maybe a lot of it was shot with a drone maybe? 

kye- nice timelapse, that's a nice view

13 minutes ago, Towd said:

It's a separate piece of software you run along side of After Effects.  It looks like they still offer an evaluation version, so you can try it out.

After effects will load a sequence using your raw settings.  LR timelapse takes care of the exposure variations.  It's been years since I've done it, so I don't remember the exact workflow, but it's something along those lines.  ?

Also, never did it this way, but I imagine, you could run out a clip using a Photoshop timeline.  After Effects is just nice because you get its workflow with things like Lumetri color adjustments you can layer on top of your raw grade if you want to tweak things.

Ah yeah, I've looked at tutorials before. Never took the plunge to figure it out as the wedding footage I shot was just handed off to an editor. The couple I've done for small projects on youtube I just rendered as a video than applied a curve to the entire video. 

3 minutes ago, Towd said:

I used to process a lot of time lapse footage for an old job.  The standard we used was LR Timelapse.  My memory is sketchy, but I think the process involved grading one raw image for the look you wanted and then running the sequence through the LR Timelapse software and it would calculate exposure variations for you and try to correct for them.  You would then export that exposure data into After Effects and run out the sequence using your raw settings.  

Overall, it produced very nice results even if there was a lot of flickering in the original sequence.  It used to offer a trial version for testing if you wanted to give it a try.

Not sure if I have that in my adobe package.