A_Urquhart

14 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

No 32bit float although it maybe implemented in the future or maybe not.

https://www.rode.com/blog/all/Wireless-GO-II-On-Board-Recording-and-Audio-Export-Modes-Explained

32 bit float export is useless at the moment imo is there just to confuse or marketing

I would love for Rode to add 32bit Float if possible in a firmware update. 32bit float would make the system pretty much perfect. The catch is, that due to the non expandable internal memory, the record times would be impacted.

Deity are releasing/ have released body pack transceivers that have internal recording and Timecode support so for semi pro use, these might be a far better option and the price seems great. 

I bought the Wireless Go on a whim as I have a job in a few days that requires me to solo shoot and record interviews. I really didn't want to buy G3's or G4's as I've never really liked them and don't like the form factor of having two G3 receivers mounted to the camera. Saw the wireless Go was released with internal recording and though 'perfect!' My quick test left me pleasantly surprised.

They will do just fine for this job recording interviews and I like the idea of being able to use the internal mic without lav attached and just place them near my talent when shooting B-Roll to get much better audio than a top mic. So much easier to hide than a G3 and much less clunky than trying to do the same by wrapping the lav mic cord around the pack.

1 hour ago, KnightsFan said:

 my guess is these aren't intended for anything other than interviews speaking at conversational levels.

And that's all I bought them for. Haven't tried shouting into them too hard but then I've never shot interviews where people have shouted. Curtis Judd did a review of the v1 Wireless Go and said he had a hard time getting it to distort, if at all. Ill do a test.

To be fair, these are not professional tools although I will use them professionally and the content I am shooting will be broadcast on major networks here. I know their limitations and will work within them but the flexibility they open up is pretty extraordinary especially for the price. 

A pro version of these is long over due and you would think that Rode would have to have something in the works....surely. 

On 2/26/2021 at 6:48 AM, KnightsFan said:

 

Maybe it can autocombine the safety track? That would get the same results, but offloading processing from realtime into post, since that's what any 32 bit recorder does already.

The safety track is NOT recorded by the transmitter (that would be great if it did!). The transmitter only records one track. 

The safety track feature is only available when the Receiver is working in single channel mode either only receiving one signal or combining the two TX signals into a mixed mono track. It then uses the other available track output to send a signal to the camera that is 20dB lower on track two. 

Just a guess, but maybe Zaxcom's patent is for recording to removable media and Rode got around this by recording to internal memory? No idea if this is correct though.

I received my Wireless Go II yesterday and had a quick play. The system is fantastic and the range more than adequate for my use. I mounted both TX's on my belt (hips) and walked (outside) about 20meters without issues. When turning around, the TX that was blocked by my body lost signal, I did the same test at around 15 meters and even with my body between TX and RX the signal was solid. I then walked about 10meters and had two solid brick walls between the TX's and RX's and the signal was solid.  I've had range anxiety with 2.4Ghz systems so never used one until now but the internal recording on each transmitter absolutely cures this. I'll be using this for interviews in a documentary I am working on (it's a solo shooter gig so no sound recordist). I've mainly used Senny G3's and G4's and to be honest, never been all that impressed with their UHF performance (yes, I know how to set them up). The size, and single receiver for two transmitters is a game changer for me as I can easily leave the receiver on the camera. I'm shooting this job on the Pocket4K and there is no way I wanted to have two G4 receivers mounted to the camera.

After the test, I plugged one of the TX's into my laptop and the recordings come up and flags show where signal was dropped. Selected my in and out points and exporting the 3minute WAV file took around 10-15 seconds. 

So far, body mounted recorders like the Zoom F2 and even the new tentacle sync fail in that you can't monitor the sound live so if clothing or wind noise develops or a hidden lav comes unstuck during an interview , you won't know until you listen back to the files and by then it's usually too late. UHF systems on the other hand are bulky for a solo shooter with smaller camera and you can get RF hits and need to be more careful with channel selection.  

For me, I see this system as two in one.

A wireless system for recording interviews up to 10 meters away where the in camera audio received by the Wireless Go will be perfectly usable.

A body pack recorder where I can monitor the sound most of the time (within range)

Thing's I wish the Wireless Go had are: 

- Be able to start and stop recording on each TX by pressing a button on the RX

- A locking connector would be nice but I remedy this by using a right angle mini jack adaptor at the TX 3.5mm port and then add a small black rubber band around the unit and top of the jack so it can't come out. it's heat shrink'd on where the lav and right angle female port interconnect so no chance of failing at that point.

- Native 32bit float recording. You can output your recordings as 32bit float but I fail to see the point of this. I'm no audio guru but isn't that similar to recording video at 8bit 4:2:0 and then saving the files as ProRes4444? Do you really gain anything?

- an input gain setting on the TX's but the Wireless Go TX's really do a pretty good job at not distorting with higher sound levels.

- A micro SD card slot on the TX's instead of internal memory. 

The above wishes along with timecode input would make a great Semi Pro system Rode...... your RodeLink systems are really long in the tooth now and due an upgrade...;-)

7 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

As with the calibration response above, you can place the AFX in different positions provided you respect the relationship between its position when you calibrated it and the focus points.

There will be more example videos in the coming weeks, particularly with motors.

Bear in mind that the transition journey between the current focus point with both electronic and motor driven lenses is user definable between four different levels of gradation as well as a setting called Natural which automatically bases it on the distance between the two points.

This will also be described more fully in upcoming example videos.

With electronic lenses, the Canon 50mm f1.4 being an example, the available focus steps are not always particularly helpful so a lens like that is far less capable of attaining the smoothness of something like the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 which has not far off ten times more discrete points.

Thanks BTM, personally I can't see myself using this for focus pulls between static objects. Im more interested in seeing how the unit and focus motor deals with moving objects or when the camera is moving like on a gimbal. I look forward to seeing more examples with the Tilta motors soon as that's is the only think keeping me from ordering.

Keep up the great work. 

Are there any videos that show what the focus pulls look like when using manual lenses and the nucleus motor. My problem with AF on almost all cameras is normally down to the steppy nature of the motors used in AF lenses and even with this product, I am seeing the same 'steppy-ness' when the lens is racking focus. Id really like to see what the performance is like when bypassing electronic lenses all together. Just a manual lens and the nucleus motor. having someone walk toward and away from the camera should show this quite well.

Cheers

7 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

So....

It's obviously no secret that alongside developing the AFX add on, we've also been busy creating a version of it with an interesting additional feature.

 

Looking good!

I know this is just a little teaser but I'd love to see how this version tracks a person moving around the frame, toward and away from the camera. Focusing manually between two fixed points is easy and still produces a more organic focus pull but I can see this being more useful to track a person moving in frame or when on a moving gimbal.

Do you have any geared manual only lenses to try this on?

9 hours ago, Mustafa Dogan said:

Just watch Gerald's S5 review video after 23:00 and you will understand why I feel punked as an S1 owner. He says at the end "(S5) has basically rendered the S1 obsolote because the S1's advantages aren't worth $700" and that is exactly how I feel.

At least they gave S1 owners a firmware upgrade with the improved AF but this doesn't change how I feel.

It even has quite a few extras borrowed from S1H which S1's don't possess.

Gerald Undone's S5 review:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hepPjpE0C8&feature=emb_title

Gerald said that? I have lost a lot of respect for him then. How is the S1 "Obsolete"? Is it no longer usable?

50 minutes ago, Mustafa Dogan said:

As an S1 owner, I feel punked because of this S5. I mean even the V-log L upgrade which S1 buyers had to pay, is now included for free. S5 has practically every feature of S1 in a lighter and smaller body plus a better full articulation. Only the EVF and LCD is substantially better in S1. Honestly, if I had known that just after a year this S5 was to be announced, I wouldn't have bought my S1.

For me, the bigger and way more important announcement is that the 1.8 compact primes are finally coming. I hope they will be smaller than Sony's FE primes. At least not larger.

My S1 will most probably going to be listed to be sold next week. If the S5 comes out good, the used market value of S1 will drop significantly this fall.

You have had the camera for a year. That's a fairly long time when it comes to tech but, your camera is just as good as when you bought it. It's still a great camera. You have either made your money back on that S1 over the last year and if you haven't......then the S1 is still better than what you really need and will still serve you well. I know a few ACS (Australia) accredited DP's who still shoot on FS7's despite better cameras coming along since it's release many years ago.

Oh, and full articulation screen is only an advantage if you are a Vlogger. Personally, I hate fully articulating screens. If you ARE a Vlogger, don't stress, the S1 is still more than up to the job.

Established DP's don't just run out and always buy the latest and greatest and neither should you. Nor should you feel like you've been conned.

I really don't understand why many are always chasing the latest and greatest when what they have still does the job perfectly. The S1 is still great! 

People making a living from cameras are NOT upgrading or changing systems every year!

Invest in lenses!

10 hours ago, Jeremy Clark said:

Thanks!! Thats what I've done - I swapped the .64 for the .71 because I did pay enough attention when ordering, but also went ahead and ordered a dumb adapter to see what I think of that instead. I know I'll get less light, but will I lose quality by only getting part of what the lens is seeing? 

Generally, the quality of a lens is better in the centre and usually gets softer toward the edges. Using a straight through adaptor with no glass means you are using more of the centre of the lens which, in theory, is a good thing.

Saying that, Metabones claim that using a speed booster actually increases sharpness and clarity but i doubt you will see any difference in reality.

I really wouldn't worry about the image quality. The 18-35 1.8 is a fantastic lens with or without the speed booster. Having the two adaptors is kinda like having two lenses. 

9 hours ago, kye said:

I had the Sigma 18-35 and I found it too heavy for how I work, so I ended up with separate Voitglander MFT primes, which were significantly lighter and also significantly faster.

Of course, being primes they don't zoom...

I wouldn't say the Voigtlander primes are "significantly faster" than the speed boosted Sigma 18-35 1.8 (as it becomes a 1.2 with speed booster in terms of light gathering).... but yes, still faster.

If I was going for native lenses, I would definitely go Voigtlander or SLR Magic Hyper Primes. I owned a GH3 a while back and had the 12-35 2.8 and the 35-100 2.8 and while the images were kinda nice (if not a little boring) I found I hated their focus barrel's fly by wire. Felt very disconnected from what was going on. It was workable, I just didn't like the experience. Maybe the Olympus are better but I've never tried them.

11 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

I think that is just to address BM's v6.9.5 firmware killing the general compatibility with Viltrox rather than adding the focus stuff.

 

Yeah, I assume the same....I'll test it when I get my camera back. I haven't done the latest v6.9.5 camera update either so will do both.

It would seem Viltrox have released a firmware update just a few days ago specifically for P4K!

http://www.viltrox.com/en/index.php?m=index&a=show&cid=149&id=298

Unfortunately my camera is hired out for the next week so I won't be able to test for a while.

37 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

One thing to bear in mind about the Viltrox adapters - unless they have upgraded their firmware recently ? - is that unlike the Metabones ones they don't support electronic focus control on the P4K.

So, touch AF won't work for example and nor will any add on adapters that interface with the camera's focus control functions.

Might not be relevant if you have no intention of using any sort of electronic focus control but worth bearing in mind if you do.

If anyone does know if there have been any firmware updates from Viltrox recently to enable it though then please chime in about which models as I have a vested interest in knowing which ones they are !

 

This is true although I have never needed to use touch AF. 

1 hour ago, Jeremy Clark said:

Hey there, I’m getting a bmpcc 4k, and debating between the .64 speed booster to go with my canon lenses (sigma 18-35, etc) vs a good native MFT lens. Picture quality  is my main concern, but curious to hear other’s thoughts and experiences!

The 18-35 is a fantastic lens! Stick with that and go for a .71x speed booster if you are planning on using APC-C lenses such as the 18-35. 

When I got my P4K I had a job coming up soon after. I couldn't get a Metabones adapter here in time so ended up buying a Viltrox as an interim adapter for the job. That job was a car commercial and we used the P4K as a car mounted B Cam and for gimbal shot's.

The images looked great, I never bothered getting an actual Metabones adaptor, the Viltrox adaptor has not left the camera body and the camera continues to get used as a B-Cam to FX9, Alexa Mini, UMP etc etc.  The Viltrox is about one fifth the price of the Metabones.

If you are going to only use full frame lenses, get the .64x Metabones and if you are going to use super heavy lenses, get the Metabones with the locking EF mount although I have put cine lenses weighing up to  1.6kg on my P4K with no issues. 

If  you want/need a super light and small rig, maybe consider native lenses but i'd recommend trying the lens you already have (18-35) with a Viltrox first. It's a killer combo! A slightly heavier camera is less susceptible to micro shakes when hand held.

39 minutes ago, MicahMahaffey said:

The pocket 4k produces an AMAZING image. Honestly stuff from that camera rivals actual cinema cameras IMO. I almost did buy one but decided to go for the S1 with vlog as my personal camera simply because of the full frame and overall ease of use. Plus I actually like the varicam look quite a bit, but my second choice was easily the pocket 4k. Which says a lot about how good I think it looks that I still considered it despite my dislike of MFT sensors. I was about to pull the trigger on a pocket 4k and a rig to help it be production ready which included a speedbooster. But after calculating the cost it just ended up making more sense to just get an s1. Which cost me $1600, came with V log and doesn't need a battery solution or speed booster. Not to mention Its Ibis and smaller file sizes.  Overall it ended up being much more affordable. But yeah, Its definitely a compromise as I'm losing RAW and the amazing BM image. But the S1 varicam colors in Vlog with 10bit 422 is sort of amazing too.   

Yep, both good choices.

All the work I do with the P4K is recorded ProRes anyway. I can't think of one paying job I've done with the P4K that has requested RAW so I don't think it's a huge loss IMO. 

If I'm shooting a personal project, I'll switch it to BRAW and it's nice having that flexibility in post but otherwise.....

The P4K does take some rigging to make it usable on longer form work. I was lucky that I had most of the required parts already so mine is either powered via V-Lock batteries, or NP-F if the job requires a smaller camera build or gimbal work.

Nothing wrong with your choice of the S1, it's definitely a better 'all rounder' and more usable out of the box.

23 hours ago, MicahMahaffey said:

For me m/43 is just too small, More often than not when doing narrative work we usually end up in really tight spaces due to budget limitations and having a full frame FOV is necessary for capturing the whole frame. At least for the work I do. 

I switched from my A cam being a sony to now being a panasonic. Ive already been using manual focus on canon glass for years so the switch to pany was pretty easy.  especially with their IBIS. 

Get a Speedbooster?

I'm using the Pocket4k (also M43 sensor) on jobs as a B Camera next to FX9's, Alexa Mini's, C300's, UMP G2's etc and haven't heard any complaints either on set or from post.

DP's have often commented on how nice the P4K image looks.

There are so many great lens choices from native anamorphic's to easily adapted full frame and cine lenses and everything in between.

I actually really like the M43 format for video capture, it's extremely versatile although if stills was my main game, i probably would go larger.

Maybe Tilta can join the legal fight. After all, they spent time and money developing a cage and cooling system for the R5 that will never work as the overheating doesn't exist!

https://tilta.com/2020/07/tiltaing-camera-cage-for-canon-r5/

Just goes to show that companies these days don't do ANY product testing before releasing products. If they did, the R5 wouldn't be on the market and Tilta wouldn't be offering a solution to a problem that will never work. 

Pay your $4000 to be Canon's guinea pig. That'll show em!! 🤭

2 hours ago, Mustafa Ali said:

Have you actually used the R5 bro ? I am shooting video in normal 4k 24p through out the day with appx 50-100 photos (2-4 hours in total but not non-stop) and I still am able to shoot 4k 60 in small bursts when I need it. Your case might be different. But until now, what were you shooting 4k 50p Full frame on that now all of a sudden you find it absolutely necessary ?  Like I said, you are paying $400 more for all the video features (some useful, some not) compared to what someone would pay for an A7r1v when it first came out. Or you can wait till the price drops and firmware fixes. 

"OH and BTW, and here in Australia the broadcasters I often work for still prefer 1080p files out of camera so there is nothing wrong with 1080p. TVC's, Music Video's etc are a different story but then most hybrid cameras do over 1080p anyway so......it's a moot point." -- Thanks for proving my point. You can still shoot 1080 60p on the R5 if 4k 60 is not available and no one will give a shit or know unless you crop a lot in post. 

Plenty of options ? -- Really ? Which Full frame high megapixel camera is an option again ? -- that has nearly the same usable video features as the R5 and amazing Auto Focus ? NONE. If there was one, I'd be drooling over it. 

(usable = Full frame 4k 24 10 bit 422 internally , Unlimited 4k 24p 5.1 oversampled in super 35 mode, Unlimited 4k 24p HQ and 4k 60 over the atomos Ninja )

I also hope Canon fixes this to be honest. Not that I can't make amazing stuff with the camera in it's current state and limitations, but not having the limitations would be great nonetheless. It's more about ethical business practices for me than mere specs that I don't care too much about (8k, 4k 120p). And that's the reason I am in support of Andrew because at the end of the day that's what he is trying to push for - Businesses shouldn't get away for malpractices. 

 

Before I can suggest some cameras to you, what do you shoot? Specifically, what type of stills, what type of video, pro or hobby? 

What scenario do you shoot that requires a Full Frame 10bit camera but the same scenario allows the camera to be out of action for up to 3hrs at a time to "cool down" as is being reported? You saying that a camera that isn't Full frame, 10bit and has Canon's AF isn't usable? Maybe the camera isn't the issue then? And what have you been using until now that all of a sudden, the R5 is the only 'usable' option?

Yes, I can still shoot 1080p50 on the R5 but then I can also do that on cameras that cost far less and require less babying and hassle.

I'll happily backflip on my earlier comment's saying too much time is being wasted on this camera. Good on Andrew for taking the time to rip the heart out of Canon. I wish him well. If you are waisting your time to make this camera usable for your own work, then it's your time I suppose but it's a waste because no specs matter on the R5 if you can't use it. Create with another camera that allows you to shoot when and how you like, not a camera that dictates to you how you must work.

3 hours ago, Mustafa Ali said:

Here is another way to look at it:

How much was the A7R1V when it came out ?  - $3499 (has basic 8 bit 420 4k 24p, 1080 24/60/120 fps)

How much was the 5d MK1V when it came out ? - $3499 (Cropped 4k 24p, 1080P 24/60 fps)

How much is the R5 currently ? $3899 - So for the extra $400, the R5 does almost everything of what the cameras above do, PLUS you are getting - 4k 10 bit 422 internally , Unlimited 4k 24p 5.1 oversampled in super 35 mode, Unlimited normal 4k 24p which looks amazing once sharpened,  Unlimited 4k 24p HQ over the atomos, minimum, restricted and somewhat useless -  8k, 4k HQ, 4k60/120Fps once the camera overheats. Decide if extra $400 is worth it. But as it is, it is still the only High MP camera that can do all of this and has no real competition. 

Before you compare it to the A7siii, that is a video camera and not a photo camera. Yes 12 mp is fine for photos and online content, but so is 1080p video.... 🤷🏽‍♂️

I agree the marketing of this camera was a total FAIL. And some of the conspiracy theories pointing to canons practices are surely questionable.  I appreciate what Andrew is doing because at the end of the day it is still a win win for us if Canon does something about the overheating. 

So, in reality i'd be spending nearly $4000USD ($6500AUD here in Australia) for a camera limited to 4k 24-30p?

I like (and sometimes need) to shoot at 50p every now and again.....I'd have to worry about the camera shutting down after a few minutes (minutes!) and then being inoperable for 30-mins to an hour? Really? You find this OK? What good is 4K 10bit if you can't record it because the camera won't let you?

I have zero care for 8K and the difficult to edit files the Canon produces without transcoding so that feature is a non issue and shouldn't even be marketed by Canon with the camera in it's current crippled state.

The A7SIII is a hybrid camera, NOT a video camera. Unless you are doing quite a bit of cropping in post, it's 12MP files are good enough for most people that don't need to blow up for billboards.  OH and BTW, and here in Australia the broadcasters I often work for still prefer 1080p files out of camera so there is nothing wrong with 1080p. TVC's, Music Video's etc are a different story but then most hybrid cameras do over 1080p anyway so......it's a moot point.

And there are plenty of other options out there too. 

I really do hope Canon fix the issues with the R5, and if they do....I still won't consider it.  I try to avoid companies that are into shoddy practices, and canon have proved that they couldn't care less for their customers.

9 hours ago, Davos said:

Focus instead on being productive? With his R5? Talk about irony.

Don't focus on equipment? Looks like he didn't take his own advice given the vast majority of his videos are about - equipment. Actually he'd rather you didn't focus on the fact he pushed the R5 like a champ with McKinnon then ended up with egg on his face when it turned out it was a total dud.

Instead, he's now saying focus on telling stories, use stock clips and completely coincidentally mentions story blocks - for all your stock footage needs. Use coupon code 'matti' for 10% off - thanks story blocks!

Total shill. Total joke.
 

 

PM also did a video recently stating that 'content is everything' after this whole R5 fiasco blew up. These two are really back-pedalling hard!

The problem with their argument is this....sure content is king, being productive and actually making something with your camera is more important than pixel peeping and agonising over camera specs BUT when the camera you have stops you from being able to create content or stops you from being able to be productive because the camera is NOT WORKING, then it's time to ditch that POS and move on. 

A 4K, 1080p, 720p or even SD camera is better at shooting content than an "overheated" R5. Sure, those R5 specs sound impressive, but when you only get those specs for an hour or two a day (and two hours seems generous here!) and the rest of the time the camera is a brick, ANY camera that allows you to record images regardless of specs has it beat!

For a fleeting moment I was ready to possibly give Canon another look as my personal / family camera but after this, zero chance. My Fuji X-T2 still takes great shots so I'm in no rush but I am intrigued by this new Full Frame Panasonic due to be announced soon. 

10 hours ago, MrSMW said:

Ah, I see what you did there... never buy a Canon ‘DSLR’ again, leaving the mirrorless door ajar 😘

Haha, yeah but nah........

I'm done with Canon's hybrid/mirrorless  line... whatever you want to call them. I just can't support a company like Canon when there are so many other great options out there.

There really is no need to deal with Canon's bullshit.

7 hours ago, no_connection said:

Regardless of what the cause is it's pretty much inexcusable at this point.

Yep, there are so many great cameras out there ...there really is no need to be dealing with Canon's BS. 

But if the 'overheat' issue is nothing more than a timer of such and no actual overheating occurs as Andrews seems to suggest, then why would they need to recall any units?

Surely Canon could save face by putting their hands up saying that there is an issue with the firmware and issue a prompt firmware fix? If they took this approach, most people would forget about this whole saga in a matter of weeks or months. None of this makes any sense but Canon's silence on the whole saga is what most concerns me.

After the lies and silence, I for one, will never buy a Canon DSLR again.  

Great job on this BTM_Pix.

This time of flight sensor with distance readout could come in very handy for focus pullers . Any chance the TOF sensor could be seperate to the display? Ideally I would mount the TOF sensor above the lens and have the display on the side of the camera for the Focus Puller to see. Like a CineTape setup. Or alternatively, you could have it in an all in one box like you have done but have the display on the side?

Also eagerly awaiting the option to use it on manual cine lenses via the motor based option you previously mentioned. 

If these two features were implemented, you'd have my money.

Keep up the amazing work!