Video Hummus

On 6/27/2019 at 7:46 AM, Mmmbeats said:

What's your cine-d tweak recipe, if you don't mind sharing? 

Contrast -1
Sharpness -5
Noise Reduction -1
Saturation -1
Hue 0

You can turn noise reduction to -5 too if you want to handle that in post or you don't want the camera to do it.

I’m getting an itchy trigger finger. Hopefully the 3.0 update is a sign of things to come with Olympus. Having more video specs can’t hurt. Crossing my fingers Olympus will add better codecs and more framerate and resolution options to the EM1X or a forthcoming EM1.3

5 hours ago, Simon Young said:

V-LOG colors looking good. Youtube-compression makes it hard to judge the codec though.

I think it looks pretty good. Almost any video viewed via the web is going to get compressed because its the dominate distribution format today. The output in this video looks good to me.

Overlooking the fake anamorphic flares or whatever that is...

On 6/24/2019 at 5:41 PM, Papiskokuji said:

It’s a shame because it’s the first time he takes some risks to express his artistic/technical skills and I appreciate the effort.

Or clearly the camera sucks if he couldn’t capture what he saw that day?

Or maybe we shouldn’t post anything we make unless it’s as good as [insert your favorite cinematographer] (because we don’t all agree on that either).

Not defending his work (I’ve posted as shitty stuff as well) just kinda disappointed in the attitudes.

22 minutes ago, Adam Kuźniar said:

cyberpunk is coming 

Wonder if any of the current camera brands will be around in 2077? Canon EOS 5DX eyeEnhance implant.

Sorry I hijacked the thread.

I find with a gorillapod and cage with a monitor attached my GH5S handheld footage is acceptable. Still wishing I had a gimbal In certain situations with telephoto lens.

1 hour ago, Adam Kuźniar said:

Why not both? 

Why not a robotic arm?

I agree. Full time YouTube is much harder these days. You need production quality and consistent engaging videos and multiple diverse revenue streams with affiliate links, ads, and sponsorships.

But there is now harm in making big dog videos for a few extra bucks in your pocket and month that adds up overtime.

5 minutes ago, kye said:

IIRC Levi Allen doesn't even have ads turned on because he feels they will hurt his channel more than they'd help his income.

Yeah, Levi is a great. Love his channel. He is an example of the later in my post above. He runs a production company and uses his YouTube for exposure and to sell workshops.

Also, I’ve watch my nieces and nephews click on ads in the video just because they are using a touchpad and like interaction. It’s a treat that they earn to use. It’s amazing. Why wonder how much $ they cost advertisers with their frantic fingers. 

The short answer is it depends.

I have a sleeper channel that is all private at the moment that I want to expand in the future. Life right now is really busy, so I’m not ready to commit. But here are my two cents (worth probably 1.4 cents adjust for inflation).

Animal videos can get a lot of views if they are super cute and you target your videos to kids. Eventually a few will go viral and you’ll get the views. Your subscriber count will most likely be way lower than your views. For example your videos might have 100K views but your channel only has 5K subscribers. I have a niece and twin nephews and the crap they watch on YouTube is astounding. Weird shit. Silly shit. Lots of cute animals doing human things. They shouldn’t be watching but that’s a whole other topic.

The other type of channel is you invest in building subscribers. It takes longer, usually, but this is where brand deals and sponsors come in to play. The stronger more loyal your subscribers the more leverage you have with making deals or being noticed. These are the Peter McKinnons, that kid that reviews toys, etc...

The ad revenue is now modest to weak. You either have to really rack up monthly views (I’m talking millions) or use the channel as a way to market stuff to your audience (buy that merch).

Good luck. Having big dogs is always a draw to people. They are either researching the breed and want to see real life examples or they are kids that want to see animals so silly things.

On 6/26/2019 at 10:45 PM, DaveAltizer said:

I will certainly include that in my review... with maybe a full comparison video as well..

Dave,

Can you actually do some real world tests instead of those walking towards the camera and ducking? Maybe mount both cameras on a rod and get the angle of view as close as possible and vlog with it and shoot some scenes. Interested to compare the whole package: AF, IBIS, color, codec etc...

I would be more interested in how it compares to A7iii, EOS R or XT3.

Thanks for taking the time to even look at it. I’m sure not a lot of people will.

I have a few T5s well. They have never let me down ? 

On 6/27/2019 at 11:50 AM, currensheldon said:

I really hope Panasonic or Sigma get some native f2 primes out for it fast, because I'm not on board with the giant f1.4 lenses most manufacturers seem to be creating now. I

This is full frame and DOF hype my friend. With the higher resolution sensors the optics need to be able to resolve all those details. The lenses get quite big when they have AF and OIS.

DPAF for sure. Wired they didn’t mention the F stop. I would assume 2.8 for the cine lens. 

The 200Mbps ALL-I @ 1080p codec is quite stellar. It’s only 1/2 the bitrate of the 400 but at 1/4 the resolution of 4K, so the compression ratios are quite good.

23 hours ago, interceptor121 said:

1. intraframe predictive coding on 16x16 blocks that achieves high level of compression than standard discrete cosine transform in ProRes

2. CABAC entropy encoding squeezing additional bits without loss in the clips

And this is why comparing codecs is so hard. I’m not sure if this has been posted before:

https://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/sales_o/p2/concept/img/technology.pdf

But it basically restates what @interceptor121 did above.

Even the AVC-Intra is very efficient when dealing with I-frames due to predictive algorithms in I-frames and near optimal adaptive CABAC encoding. I think it’s here where the 400Mbps is misleading and why I think wolfcrows conclusions are wrong.

Exciting. I don’t NEED one but I want one now! I’ll wait off and see what more people say. 

Now having PDAF and OM-LOG400 in video I’m thinking about picking one up used. Seems pretty decent.

I don’t use any off brand batteries for warranty and performance issues. I think Bruno would agree he looks like a smart pup. 

I acquired a EOS Rebel T3 at a yard sale for $25 with kit lens two months ago. It turns and and the shutter works but I haven’t taken any photos. Lol

6 hours ago, tonysss said:

The color of GH5s is such a sony reddish, therefore, I prefer color GH5.  

Really? I find the skin tones with the S much more accurate on the scopes.

GH5 has a green/yellow tint in skin tones that I don’t like. Horses for courses I guess.

4 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

It's an incredibly fast camera. 60fps raw. Huge buffer. Amazing ergonomics and build quality. It's a little tank, a mini 1D X Mark II for half the price. I've had creative shot after shot with it!

How long does the buffer last shooting 60fps raw? And did you use it to create a raw video? ?

I’m curious to hear your thoughts on it, especially around video since there isn’t a lot of info on it in the wild. It’s appealing to me for its incredible build quality and weather sealing.

I’m really surprised Olympus didn’t try to put a better sensor in it. But I guess they did it for the speed.

It has a lot of horsepower under the hood for firmware improvements. I’m hoping Olympus has something up their sleeve to give it some legs.

8 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

What??? Phones take on average better video than most consumer cameras do.  Better OIS, better colors, 3 lenses in some now, and hell even better DR with Filmic Pro than a lot of them. Low light well maybe, but most average "real" cameras suck in low light also. You must own a 5 year old phone.

Hand your wife or girlfriend a Sony FS5 or a new Smartphone and see which ones takes better video.

Not that old; iPhone 8+. You must have a lot of lens choices for your phone ?. I don’t know about you, but I can spot the average cell phone video 90% of the time. 

4 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

I am sure E-M1X owners are really happy about one of their main reasons for buying it going for free to a cheap $800 used camera body!!

Well to be fair it doesn’t have the “AI” tracking stuff. 

1 hour ago, Mattias Burling said:

I would be super surprised if there was even one single soul out there that bought an E-M1X for the log profile.

If we are talking the GH5 etc, sure its aimed a lot towards videographers. But even that is still a stills camera first and foremost.
Its like complaining about video on the new Hasselblad... Or better yet, going to an auto dealer and complain that the latest Volvo isn't the perfect wedding camera.. because it isnt.. its a car. Not everything made by man is for shooting video

But the potential is there...

I think video performance today is almost as important as photo performance.

Our phones are taking better photographs than DSLRs took 5-8 years ago. They are good enough for most people to capture memories. If you are going to make/buy a DLSM you should make it a half ass decent video capture device as well. The one area phones still currently suck at.

The small color tweaks they gave the GH5S allows great colors SOOC. I usually shoot HLG but if you nail white balance and exposure the 10Bit Cine-D looks really good with some small profile adjustments.