Jump to content

thebrothersthre3

Members
  • Posts

    2,945
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by thebrothersthre3

  1. 4 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

    How is it a bad sensor???

    I've been using my a6300 / a6500 professionally for two years now (95% stills, 5% video) and the sensor is certainly very capable. For stills it was 90% of the quality of my D750, which has a sensor that people rave about. It was good enough that I was fine with selling my D750 and all my Nikon gear.

    And I have never had a client complain about the quality of an image I have taken with my a6300 / a6500 cameras, so either I am a BRILLIANT photographer or the sensor is not quite the heap of fecal matter you claim it to be. (I did have one client ask me to reshoot some video footage but that was due to operator error as opposed to a "shit sensor.")

    Sure, there are 714 other horrible things about the a6300 / a6500 camera lines which are well documented and have been discussed, but the sensor was hardly one of them (unless you are specifically focusing on something like Rolling Shutter, which is indeed quite bad).

     

    Its a great stills camera if you don't mind the color. I am talking video.

    Apparently over the course of three cameras they haven't improved at all. Not sure if its the sensor or Sony just doesn't care but either way its shitty. You have a choice between soft moire filled 1080p or Jello 4k. The 4k is great quality super detailed image good dynamic range. However the jello is really terrible. Plus I like to use 60p a lot and the HD is just bad.

    If the sensor cripples 4k at 39ms RS, why even bother. Then keeping it on over three cameras just makes it ever more irritating. The XT2 seemed to have a similar sensor, ignoring color the detail and low light performance was very similar, yet the rolling shutter and 1080p was quite good. Why couldn't Sony do it right?

    Anyways I am not saying you can't make good content with it. I am just hating on the camera, because it pisses me off. The A7III, A7S, and A7RIII were fantastic though.

     

  2. 9 hours ago, IronFilm said:

    I suspect another factor is how badly set up modern TVs are by default. 

    Every time I go over to one of the chick's I'm seeing to watch Netflix with her, I'm struck by just how awful her brand new TV looks! And I feel compelled to tweak with her settings...  which she kinda hates and often turns it back to the defaults after I leave ??

     

    My lord, I was watching TV at my friend's house and was horrified at how bad an HD tv looked. Turns out he had sharpening all the way up. I turned it all the way down and he comments how it doesn't look sharp anymore. I can't fathom how anyone could think that image looked good before I corrected the sharpening lol. Plus he that no motion blur setting turned on. ?

  3. 1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

    It probably will be APSC just like the Fuji is. If Nikon makes a 1200 FF camera who would ever buy the Z6? It ain't happening. I would guess the new A7000 will be 1500 dollars or less to compete with the Fuji X-T3.

    I think it will be more than the Fuji. I'm speculating it'll have IBIS and other features making it "higher end" The Fuji will then release the XH2 as a response I'd suppose. I am guessing it'll be closer to the $1800 mark. It'll have advantages over the A7III with higher photo and video frame rates and faster processor which means better auto focus, faster readout etc... I also assume it'll have 4k 60p and 10 bit.

  4. 3 hours ago, Snowbro said:

    That screen was at the base log ISO of 400. I tried over exposing to the point where my highlights clipped, there was still a ton of bg noise. I think I mentioned it, but I did manually grade and still had the same issue. I just never remember having this issue on the c200 I used. Obviously there is a massive price difference, I just don't think I can achieve the look I wanted (little drama) with this camera. I hate using neat video, it can take forever sometimes, so that's not an option for quick turnaround. Then the color banding, which is easy to see in motion and at full resolution in PP, makes this frustrating. Everytime I just talk myself into finding a purpose for this camera, ignoring the downfalls, it finds a new way to irritate me. I posted a detailed thing in one of the eos r threads of other issues; freezing, banding, soft 60p etc. I am just going to send this one back and pray that canon does it right on their pro body. I will just plan ahead better and rent for now when I need a second or third angle. 

    Yeah I'd not be happy with what you are getting.

  5. 1 hour ago, kye said:

    As a GH5 owner, I'm winning all the time.

    I see people all bitching about newer cameras and I just sit back and relax, I see newer features on cameras that I think might be cool and then I remember how it feels to look at your footage and be reminded of film, to see people grading UMP / RED / Alexa footage and then grade the 10-bit HLG and have it feel the same.  To read about 8K and think about how that will be true 4K footage and not feel like somehow your equipment isn't good enough any more.

    When someone develops a LUT pack to match with the Alexa and have the best colourist on YT (Juan Melara) comment "This is actually really impressive. Top work!" and I know that I can get the Alexa look with any of my footage if I want to.

    The GH6 could be $1 and have 8K 16-bit RAW with integrated drone and I wouldn't feel bad about my GH5 at all.  My only stress now is buying lenses - there are so many and I want to have all of them!

    That is very true. For a lot of work the GH5 is perfect and will be for a long time.

     

  6. 55 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

    The A6300 sensor was very good, though the overall package I thought wasn't great. It had the same flaws most of those Sony cams had / have. But it had very good 4K from what I recall after using it once or twice when it came out. 

    It'd have done better if the A6500 hadn't come right out almost immediately. It was kinda comical how many used A6300s hit the used market so quickly.

    The 4k image was fantastic but it has the worst rolling shutter of any camera I can think of, by a decent margin too. Its weird that a full frame camera would have considerably better RS performance. And then the HD went from stellar on the A6000, to terrible. Then they keep it in the A6500 and now the A6400. Yes I am a hater.

  7. 4 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

    Just because Casey Neistat quit doing doesn't mean everyone quit doing it. There is tons of 4K content on YouTube. And if you are using a normal Canon camera you really need to shoot in 4K and downsample. Other than the C series, most canon 1080p is really soft. Not a bad thing for what we like, but not what VLoggers want. I am on You Tube all day. Sure older stuff is 1080p, most new stuff is 4K. You really think people use 1080p on their Smartphones? Or going to use it on a Osmo Pocket, I really doubt that.

    Yeah maybe people directing uploading videos from their phone. Most of the videos I watch are 1080p. Using 4k and editing and rendering in 4k are two different things. 
    Canon 1080p is soft but so is Sony. 

  8. 6 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

    Why, the M50 has Shit AF in 4K. The lenses are few and far between, and expensive. Tons of used lenses around for the A6400. And VLoggers prefer the flip up screen. I'd say it is more of a toss up. And actually Sony has way better upward mobility if you want to get serious about video. They even have a XLR thingy for the A6400 out.

    The guy's whole point is nobody needs 4k for youtube vlogging. Most youtubers don't upload in 4k either. 

  9. 1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

    I really have Never liked the Panny style flippy screen. For one reason I am nearly blind in my left eye, and guess which way almost Every flip out screen goes, even on Cine camera, not counting I am left handed! Plus you have to move your face away from the back of the camera. But no I won't buy one because I, at my age, Need to have a EVF to look into. My arms aren't long enough as they say to use a LCD.  ? I think they made the right decision for Vloggers with the flip up screen.

    I wonder if the 1080p is worth a crap. Because the A6300 was Terrible @1080p, now the 4K was pretty good. I never wanted a A6000 series camera because my hands are Way too big to use a body that little. But the A6000 was a damn good camera back in the day.

    For vlogging though pana style is ideal. I mean the 4k on the 6300 looks great, but its ruined by terrible rolling shutter. 

     

    1 hour ago, Mokara said:

    List price is $780, with current discounts that Canon periodically has to move older products that are not selling. If you are shooting in 4K you definitely would use the Sony camera over the Canon one. 1080p footage is fairly similar I think.

    You can get them on ebay new for $500 or $550 with a lens. The A6300 was honestly the worst 1080p I've ever used.

  10. Just now, webrunner5 said:

    The A6400 is a killer camera for the price. Christ the people buying them are not going to be making 3 hour Feature films with them. Just about any new camera now is better than any older camera made 5 years ago. Even old Cine cameras. Great AF, touchscreen, face, eye detection, WiFi, Bluetooth, GPS , on and on. Heck you can have a Arri Alexa, doesn't mean you can use it worth a crap. More money has nothing to do with it. You can buy an old BMPCC for 350 bucks that knocks your socks off. People want it because of the flip up touch screen.

    Couldn't they at least have done a pana style flippy screen so people could use mics. 

    I don't mind them using an old sensor, like you said a lot of old sensors are awesome. However the A6300 sensor was shit when it came out and its still shit now. 

    I agree though it will sell and thats all companies really care about. Still its a POS, I hate the A6300??

  11. 1 minute ago, @yan_berthemy_photography said:

    Ok but is there difference between both colour profile in 8 bit ? V log and cine-d ? Will some image look better with one of these colour profile? 

    Yes Cine-D looks better if shooting in 8 bit as there will be no color artifacts.

  12. 3 hours ago, wolf33d said:

    For someone who owns a C200 and 1DXII and films his face then yeah, the EOS R makes a lot of sense. You can use the same lens, easy to match in post, the colors right out of the box need less grading than let's say a Sony. You don't need wide angle and you have little to no movement and you do not use slowmo (on the EOSR, you have the 1DX for that). So yeah that's a lot of sense. 

    Now someone like me who is not into one ecosystem, who needs wide angle (mountain/extreme sports/landscape shooting) 80% of the time, who needs slowmo, and who needs decent RS due to action well, the EOS-R is garbage, even for $500 I would not get one. 
    And while I am a specific case, I think most video oriented people do want decent RS, use their lenses without 1.7 crop and a lot do want slowmo too. So overall objectively this camera is an epic fail. 

    It's very good that it cant fit the need of a minority of people and specific use for sure. Hopefully they will release something with 4K60P and no crop. I love Canon bodies and ergonomics. My first ever DSLR was a Canon. I then owned the 5D2 and 5D3, at which point the competition started to be much much better. 

    Yeah seems like its a good b cam, vlog camera, or camera for someone that does mostly photography. 

  13. 8 minutes ago, currensheldon said:

    I think Panasonic will keep their MFT GH-line to push out awesome video specs before anyone else (like they did with GH5's 10-bit 4K, and 60fps 4K). Then they'll trickle up to their full-frame cameras a couple of years later.

    I wouldn't be surprised to see a late 2019 GH6 with 12-bit 4K internal raw (perhaps BM Raw, since it is open), 120 fps 4K, and maybe even a higher resolution like 6k or 8k at 30p.

    Also, they may just go all in on the video front and throw in the one thing I'm waiting for: an internal variable ND. Please? someone? 

    How about going all in with PDAF ?

  14. 14 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

    Sony will sell them as fast as they can make them. For the money what else you going to buy? And the average person has no clue what RS even is. It is no worse RS wise than the Sony A7s. People seemed to be able to make that camera work. It's a 800 dollar camera. You aren't going to get a Arri Alexa for that money

    Its almost twice as bad as the A7S if you can believe it. Its the reason I sold the A6300, just embarrassingly bad. But yeah I agree, most people buying it don't know what RS is. 

    The unlimited recording will be pretty funny if it still overheats as bad as the 6300 did. 

    Its just a cash grab and a more annoying one then the 5100 as it actually had good video. The A6400, 500, 300 you have the choice between Jello 4k or terrible HD. I'd rather buy an A5100 for vlogging, though no mic jack. 

    But it doesn't really matter, save an extra $1000 and spend it on the A7000 in a few months. 

  15. 3 hours ago, Gianluca said:

    Xt3 it's a wonderfull videocamera but it doesn't have ibis like this (but there's no 35 oss or 50 oss like Sony) and autofocus is limited to af-s vs a6400 incedibile af-c in video... 

     

    I have 35 oss and 50 oss... If I switch to fuji with xt3 I'll lose stabilization with prime and autofocus af-c in video. 

     

     

    XT3 is limited to auto focus single? what?

    There are definitely reasons for one to get this camera. Though if I wanted to invest Sony I'd wait until the A7000. That said if you make money doing videos and this fits the bill, why not. 

  16. 15 minutes ago, JurijTurnsek said:

    <start rant>

    I feel that selfie vlogging is the lowest kind of film-making and for the most part completely unnecessary. What was once written in short comprehensive (blog) texts now takes dozens of minutes of incoherent blabber banking on the vloggers charisma. This is en even bigger problem when reviewing gear, since most of the testing is not comparable to anything, so it is all extremely subjective.

    I know that Sony needs a model to cover these users, but it is so frustrating when vlog reviewers (and manufacturers even?) push there (few) features they need as be all end all. I would like to think that most amateur customers still point their cameras away from their faces.

    </end rant>

    A6400 seems like a good upgrade to the A6000, which debuted at $800 I think? However, adding even more AF processing on top of 6K downscaled 4K cannot be good for overheating.

    Hopefully the new processor is more heat efficient. 

  17. 1 hour ago, newfoundmass said:

    I think they're going to get a lot of flack for positioning their first full frame cameras as being directed towards photographers. Though I think this will change with time, I do wonder if there are tech limitations preventing them from focusing more on video. 

    I'm quite happy with the GH5 and think Panasonic will continue to innovate as they have for the last couple of years. I think the sensor size is what has made that possible. The problem Panasonic will have is if / when the competitors can close the gap with their full frame capabilities. Take away Panasonic's advantage there and they're in a very bad position. Those 2 year old GH5 specs would've looked a lot less incredible if Sony or someone had been able to match them within a year. Instead though what we have is an inedible camera that's 2 years old and is still able to do a lot their competitors haven't been able to do and is arguably still the best camera on the market for its price range. 

    Yeah the XT3 through a wrench in the Panasonic gear I think. Though IBIS is still a huge feature on the GH5. IBIS with 10bit 422 is not something found anywhere else, well I guess on the Nikon Z6 and Ninja.

×
×
  • Create New...