Jump to content

A_Urquhart

Members
  • Posts

    302
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by A_Urquhart

  1. A_Urquhart

    Fuji X-H2S

    It's a Fly by wire lens isn't it? If so, then no matter if it's in AF or MF motors 'could' make the adjustment even if it's in MF. Either way, this looks like a great lens for video. Well done Fuji.
  2. The Alexa 35 should build up quite a bit smaller than the Mini for general shooting. The problem with the Mini is that it wasn't designed to be operated on the shoulder or even on sticks. It was a small body for Steadicam, Gimbal or Drone shots. Thus, to make it work, you needed to add a cage and battery plate but due to the design of the body, the battery plate is always quite far away from the back of the camera. The new Alexa 35 doesn't have this issue so should be a much better form factor despite the possible weight increase in batteries. Battery plate directly mounts to new Alexa 35 Alexa Mini solution: (Not so Mini any more)
  3. It's easy to clean that cable up with some clever cable management (unlike the photo). A good 1st AC will sort that out quick smart. Having a cable means it can be adjusted and placed anywhere on the camera quickly and easily. The current Alexa Mini is pretty easy to solo operate really. Such a great menu system and most of what you need is accesible by the buttons on the EVF/screen This may have been mentioned already but I genuinely am curious about the following..... Why isn't anyone here seriously complaining about the lack of IBIS, Auto focus or the fact that it isn't Full Frame? Is it because the camera is so far out of reach price wise that you just don't care? So, when other companies make cameras that are not too far away from this image wise such as Z-Cam, Blackmagic etc (I know the Alexa trumps them image wise, but I have used Pocket Cameras as B_Cams to Alexa Minis in the past without too much issue), do people complain that those camera don't have IBIS, AF and FF just because they are priced in reach of people who need those features without really realising who those cameras are aimed at? Is the Problem with other manufacturers the fact that they price their cameras too cheap? We seem willing to accept the lack of features in a $75,000 camera but when someone comes along and gives us 70% of that camera in a much cheaper package, we wine about it not having feature XY&Z. Not wanting to stir the pot, just genuinely interested as to how people think.
  4. Sounds like most of your gear is sitting unused. It doesn't really matter what you shoot nothing on, it will all look like nothing. 😜
  5. Some nice images does not make a cinematographer (or DP). Nice videography.....sure.
  6. Agreed. The lines are further blurred because 95% of people out there who call themselves ‘cinematographers’ really aren’t. They are videographers. There is so much more to cinematography than just pointing a camera…..just because you own a Red doesn’t make you a ‘cinematographer’ but that’s a discussion for another post.
  7. Only took half a dozen posts to get on to AF......or lack thereof 🤦‍♂️ High end cinema cameras don't really need AF. For a start, there aren't many lenses out there used in cinema that have internal focus motors. Secondly, there is a thing called a 1st AC or 'Focus Puller' that is usually on set when a camera of this calibre is used. Thirdly, there are plenty of manufacturers such as Arri, CineRT, Teradek RT, Preston etc etc that are working on and already provide AF in their lens control systems that CAN be used with manual cine lenses. Pulling focus is part of the narrative, until a lens or AF System can read a script, I don't thing AF will be common in Cinema. Lastly, Imagine watching a film on the big screen.......I would MUCH prefer to see the organic way a Focus puller finds focus to how many AF systems occasionally hunt and snap into focus. It would look awful on the big screen and extremely distracting. I'm not against AF all together.....it has a time and a place but in a camera like this? I don't think so. An autofocus system on a true cinema camera can be used to complement the Focus Puller and used in certain cases. It is part of the focus pullers tool kit and therefore I believe, that it should be incorporated into the lens control system rather than the camera itself.
  8. There is a huge market that sits between high end cinema and DSLRs on RS2 Gimbals. The 4D will be perfect for that market. It’s not niche. Again, the Lidar waveform is the feature I’m most excited about. I do a mix of operating and Focus Pulling probably around 30/70 respectively and this Lidar waveform is what I have asked other companies for. DJI’s implementation looks amazing so I’d love for them to release a professional follow focus system based on this technology but with a hand unit that is more in line with ones from Arri, Preston or TeradekRT rather than the dinky systems dji has released in the past.
  9. Yep! I don’t think the price would be considered expensive for what you get. let’s compare : - full frame camera body that records in ProRes or 6K RAW . Shall we compare it to Z Cam E2 F6? That’s $4000USD - Ronin 2 gimbal $900 - Tilta float system (for stabilizing 4th axis) $1800 -5” 1000nit monitor (Shinobi) $300 - Lidar system (the one for RS2 is $200 but this looks much better) $200 So around $7200 for the above which is a much clumsier, bulkier setup. And you would need to spend much more than that to get everything to interface so I’m going lean on this setup by not including things like ND filters as the 4D has internal) The D4 6k is 7199 and it’s a much more complete and easy to use package. The biggest issue really is because it’s an all in one design, if you have an issue with the gimbal that means your camera is unusable as well and vice versa. Also, cameras date quicker than gimbals but it looks as you can replace the camera and gimbal assembly on these pretty easily so hopefully when dji release a new 12k (😝) sensor you can update just it and the gimbal assembly.
  10. It can and will be used for ‘Pro’ projects. I have a second camera body permanently rigged to a Gimbal 90% of the time that gets used just for gimbal shots. It has a second monitor, wireless transmitter and remote FF system all mounted to it in a rather clunky (but by far cleaner that most I see out there) way. The Ronin form factor just isn’t great but this, by having two grips to spread the load more evenly looks much better in every way. Sure, I don’t think if have it as my one and only camera but as a second camera this replaces lots of different bits of kit. Full frame body, gimbal, wireless FF, Wireless image transmitter….
  11. I’ve been asking a few range finder manufacturers for this very feature and DJI have implemented it very well! Camera/Gimbal looks kinda weird but DJI have done an amazing job. Without using it, I can’t think of a single thing DJI have left out of it that I need. I do a lot of B Camera gimbal work and if that 4th axis works as well as advertised, then the biggest issues with gimbals have been solved with this . Firstly, rigging and balancing them up with different bodies and lens combos can be tedious and getting them as smooth as a Steadicam on the 4th axis still requires some kind of vest/Steadicam type setup. This looks to have solved these issues for the most part. Interchangeable lens mounts, internal ND, great codecs, and a clean menu system that looks to rival Blackmagics……this thing has it all! ….now if it can make me an espresso on set l…..
  12. The biggest advantage for me of the Ursa Mini 12k is the in sensor scaling. In theory, being able to shoot full sensor 4k BRAW or 8K BRAW with no crop is a big advantage. The Pocket6K Pro for example can only shoot 6K in BRAW. My clients usually want 4K or 1080p so for full sensor 4K or 1080p I have to deliver in ProRes.....which is fine TBH 90% of the time. I haven't seen any tests of this 'in sensor scaling' for BRAW but if it works well, I'm looking forward to this sensor tech in an 8K or even 6K version coming to the Pocket Pro or even a new more modular designed camera in the not too distant future...please BMD!
  13. Yep, the small receiver is super handy on a gimbal. Still, they could have hidden the mics a little better or used lav’s…..even in shot a lav would have looked much better
  14. The BBC using Rode Wireless Go's for an interview with Prince Charles. What on earth were they thinking having them mounted in that way??!! Saying that, the sound is not too bad but why oh why would you not hide some lavs?
  15. Sliders are definitely not underrated on professional shoots. Most grips have a Dana Dolly in the van and it gets used most shoots. Obviously movement is more limited than a gimbal but the results are far better.
  16. I rarely go over 800 but have done quite a few times on the 6K pro quite a few times without issue. With the dual gain iso, you just need to know which isos to stay away from
  17. Get the Pocket 6K Pro. It’s well worth the $500 extra over the 6K and I think a better/ more versatile camera than the UMP G1. Plus, but it new and you have a warranty. I’ve used my 6K Pro on commercials as a B Cam to Alexa Mini and post houses say it’s easy enough to match so not sure if the G1 is any more ‘Alexa like’ as you say. in regards to the UMP 4.6K G1, is that camera still limited to a max iso of 1600?
  18. If you have picked these systems because you have a very tight budget, of these I'd recommend the Wireless Go II due to the in transmitter recording. I may (🤫) have shot some broadcast interview content using just the Wireless Go II with COS11D lav plugged into it and my clients were very happy with the sound. The in transmitter recording is great although the Rode Central app for getting the recordings off the device is clunky and extremely limited. This system has is quirks though (non removable media or battery...always on recording) and is not as good as the other UHF systems mentioned above for range and reliability of signal. If you know it's limitations and can work within these, For a no/low budget short film I think it will be ok as long as you are happy using the in transmitter recordings if signal drops to the receiver. If your budget does stretch to the Sony UWP's, go with that.
  19. Do you need HDMI loop through? If so, the Portkeys has it. Atomos and SmallHD do not which is their major downfall for me. The LH5P is a nice monitor and I use it for gimbal work. It’s nowhere near as easy to use as my SmallHD 702 Touch as that has a great menu system compared to the average one on the Portkeys but the image of the LH5P is nice and bright enough for outdoor use. I also like being able to control my Pocket6K pro from the LH5P screen. Means rarely having to touch the camera when on the gimbal. I think the LH5P is the one to get of the monitors you mentioned and you will get used to the clunky menu system after a bit of use.
  20. I have been using the P4K with a speed booster since it's release and when the 6K Pro was released, said here on this forum that I was disappointed it had an EF mount. At the time, I would have preferred a mirrorless mount. Fast forward to six weeks ago and I needed a second camera so bought the 6K Pro. The mount has not been an issue and actually I have enjoyed not needing an adaptor. I work professionally in Film/TV production and both my pockets get used as B Cameras and C Cameras to much bigger A Cameras from Alexa Minis down to FX9's. While the industry standard mount is PL the next most common mount used is EF. There are many cine lenses that are swappable from PL to EF or available in versions of each. While I love the P4K with speedbooster, I also like being able to run lenses natively without an adaptor. EF lenses are everywhere and many lenses that get cine Modded like Leica R's get converted to EF. Sure a mirrorless mount with a PL adaptor would be great but most popular lenses we use have EF equivalents or mounts that can be converted such as Angeniuex zooms, Celere HS Primes etc. For me a speedbooster was a necessity on the MFT sensor to bring it into line with cine standards but with an APS C sensor, this is not the case. I didn't like the form factor of the original Poxket 4K and 6K. The non 'Pro'cameras needed an external monitor and battery solution so the dslr form factor was kind of lost on these models. With the Pro, you really can use the camera as is, with no external accessories so it's ergonomic form factor are more welcome. I do still wish is was in more of a Komodo form factor though as the un centered lens mount makes it harder to rig on a Ronin but once you have mucked around a bit with counter weights, and a offset plate, it's fine. In terms of it being 'disgusting', do you mean visually? I mean, really....does that matter? Does a Carpenter look at his drill and think, ew that looks disgusting? Anyway, mine are usually rigged with cages and other accessories (still waiting on a 6KPro cage) so you can't really see what the camera looks like. There is a reason why Arri/ Red/ Blackmagic and Post production houses world wide still use ProRes and not H264 or even H265! I will say, that I find ProRes a little more redundant on Blackmagic Cameras as BRAW is such great quality and more efficient but apart from that, ProRes is still used more on professional film sets as an acquisition format compared to RAW. Post wise, ProRes is far easier to edit than H264 and H265. Even though the data rates are higher, it's less taxing on the system. In terms of a comment saying that ProRes seems softer, what cameras are we talking about? Many cameras that shoot ProRes also have less internal sharpening applied. Mirrorless cameras that shoot H264/5 usually have a lot of sharpening in camera so may seem sharper,
  21. Yep, fair enough. I can kind of see where you're coming from
  22. I’ll weigh in here from a professional point of view and say that while my P4K and now P6KPro get used constantly on professional shoots, I just couldn’t get away with replacing either of them with the FP, but then I’m sure I’m not really who the FP is aimed at. So not sure I’d agree with the statement that the FP is aimed at the same customer base. Just a few weeks back we used the P4K as an A cam on a large global ad campaign for a fast food chain after a Sony Venice with Rialto wasn’t available. (The camera needed to be small). DP’s love the easy menu system and image, sound recordists love the Timecode input, XLR’s and easy to use audio features, Post production love the codecs available. In the four weeks I have had the P6K Pro, it has pretty much already paid for itself and it’s pretty liberating being able to use it without external storage (internal RAW is killer) , without external power, without an external monitor and without external NDs if need be. Many here might criticise its lack of AF, IBIS or build quality (to which I personally have not had issues with) but the key to all this is that the Pocket Cameras are accepted by the industry and that is one feature that trumps a bigger sensor, AF, IBIS, higher DR, more K’s etc..... Sure, the Pocket cameras suck as stills cameras so I’d say the FP is more aimed at hybrid shooters.....and this is probably what Gerald was comparing it to. I’m a big fan of Sigma (mainly their lenses, camera design and ethos) and glad they are persuing the camera market.
  23. It outputs the -20db safety out of the receiver on one track alongside the normal level output on the other track to the camera. The safety is not recorded by the TX unit, only output by the RX unit.
  24. Thanks for this, the performance looks very good. Does the unit have to be mounted at the sensor plane or is there an option to specify an offset in the menu? Also, can I toggle between manual focus and autofocus from a button on the Nucleus N or Nucleus M hand units or remotely somehow? cheers
×
×
  • Create New...