Skip77

On 7/20/2019 at 11:39 AM, fuzzynormal said:

I'm a manual lenses guy.  I despise auto focus for my filming.  Even when it works I find it more of a curse than a blessing.  Weirdly, I like it when subjects move out of focus and someone on the other side of the lens makes an organic correction to maintain it.  And I love a slightly sloppy but creative rack focus.  It's a neat trick of the craft.

I'd rather have imperfections created by humans than perfection created by programming. 

Am I simply justifying my anachronistic (read: old fart) attitudes or do I really have a legitimate point?   Am I alone?  Is anyone else attracted to this?

Af or Manual focus doesn't matter if you get the shot you need. 

Do you ever look at footage someone filmed and say "that's AF and that sucks?" 

It's all a choice. 

AF is a useful tool and to dismiss it is more of an old school no-sense that has to do with old cine views that don't embrace technology. 

12 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

I am pretty sure Mattias, even at his age, is about 10 times smarter than you at this stuff, and a hell of a lot better at what he is doing. You can come on here and act like some smart ass, but what you are coming across as, is a dumb ass. The people you are knocking are some of the best we have on here. Sometimes it is just better to keep your mouth shut, and not show what little you Do know. I have not seen you say one F ing intelligent thing since you have been on here.

Why is everything you don't understand, you come off and attack with insults?

I said AF tracking should work and you can get great results if you use it. What issue do you have with that comment?  If Mattias isn't confident about AF then he's not using It. Cameras have gotten better with AF and all these comments were based on the S1.

You haven't seen my work brother so leave it alone. I never knocked anyones work and I don't do that.  You on the other hand have made countless comments about my work, that you haven't seen, and others work. You seem to be on a high horse that think it's ok to put others down.

30 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

True but in terms of auto focus is pretty amazing as is the A6400. 

Yes the A6400 AF is amazing. Sony is leading in AF tech right now and good for them.  If people knew how good AF has gotten they wouldn't let Panasonic off with the S1 AF performance. No work around with the AF pulsing the S1 does. 

13 hours ago, mercer said:

Sony and Nikon’s AF looks electronic anyway. So who cares if they have it? If you want organic focus, pull it manually or use a Canon.

I knew what you were talking about but AF compared to focus pulling is another topic. You don't throw out AF technology based on that. 

4 hours ago, Justforfun said:

Lol have you tried MFing with these cameras?  I'm sure whatever camera you own has good MF assist so you def should try. Even with fly by wire lenses it's actually pretty easy and I dont use any fancy focus systems.  It's much more reliable to go in and out of focus smoothly with MF and peaking as opposed to AF. In run and gun situation there's just too many things coming in and out of the frame especially in street.  That's why I favour the really good IBIS because I can comfortably hold the camera with my right hand and adjust focus with my left and still have stable footage with smooth focus pulls.

I'm not Making excuses by the way, but I had the A7iii and XT3 and frankly even with the AF I would still MF when I need reliable focus pulls. 

Yes I use manual focus when I need it. I started with film and manual focus lens back in the 80's so I'm very used to manual focus. 

I use the Z6 that has good IBIS and I use AF tracking when I hand hold the camera and need a little added moment or a lot of movement with the camera. I use the touch screen to lock on the subject and the use the back screen to compose and baby-sit the shot. Good AF tracking and IBIS is a must. 

10 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

IMO, It's not as accurate as MF, doesn't understand when you want to track something else, can't change speed without digging into the menu, doesn't work on manual lenses, messes up your grip, the list goes on.

Again, no excuses, just don't care about it working or not. My workhorse is equiped with the best video AF there is. Never use it.

I haven't seen anybody make such excuses.

I know perfectly well how it works thank you. Btw, you don't get to dictate why others reason the way they do. No one said you weren't allowed to wish for good AF in the Panasonic. You can wish it to give you a golden shower for all I care. We just have our opinion on it.

I gave 100% accurate reasons why AF tracking is better in certain situations that can't be duplicated by manual focus.  

Do us a favor and post 1 sample were AF tracking isn't laced on a working perfect ( not from a Lumix camera). Post one example that shows the AF system "thought" is had focus but didn't. 

You comments are not true. 

Don't use AF tracking if you have a camera were it works. AF tracking is like anything else on the camera and you have to watch it and make sure it's working and then adjust as you go.

I shoot everything else in manual settings and you have to watch those settings the same way.

You say you like manual better because it's like the transition in a car ( not) but you've never use AF tracking that works right.  That's ok keep on commenting about a system you haven't use correctly.

3 hours ago, Walter H said:

@Skip77 You are not trying to help. You are jerking your ego with an argument, soapboxing, being disparaging to others, and dragging all of us thru it. That's my experience of your presence and intention anyway.

So how about F*CK OFF this thread and give users who either own or are genuinely interested in the camera the opportunity to share and work with one another to get the most out of the tool. 

Minimally, I will ignore you and I suggest others not reply or quote you unless you are posting something constructive. 

 

Sorry Walter H but this is a free board and bullies like you don't control it.

I am trying to help and my comments reflect that. If Mattias Burling only used Lumix cameras for video AF tracking then I can see why he uses MANUAL FOCUS and defends it to the ends of the earth. 

AF tracking is a tool on the hybrid cameras that should works as advertised. That's it. From those comments we got comments that "manual focus is only what pros use, manual focus is used while hand held through the view finder and AF is not accurate."

This wasn't a AF vs Manual focus but that AF tracking should works on a camera. The additional comments I made were in response to the excuses abut how manual focus is the best way to go even during handheld thru the viewfinder. Any videographer knows you're limited using the EVF only and are limited in the shots you can get going all manual. Sorry but that's the 100% truth. In the hybrid word this is 100% accurate. 

So you can take the "I'm trying to help" comment how you want. I was in the same boat as Mattias Burling when I had my Lumix camera and only used manual focus.

27 minutes ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

The Red Gemini, Alexa Mini, Varicam LT, and Ursa Mini Pro have pretty bad tracking AF, too. Maybe I should disqualify them from my future projects in favor of an A7III.

Those cameras are not in the same discussion. Mirrorless and the fact that Nikon, Canon and Sony have great AF tracking. 

The Red Gemini, Alexa Mini, Varicam LT, and Ursa Mini Pro are NOT hybrid stills / video cameras are they?

6 minutes ago, mercer said:

Sony and Nikon’s AF looks electronic anyway. So who cares if they have it? If you want organic focus, pull it manually or use a Canon.

Electronic in what way? Oh you mean once they lock on they lock on?  You haven't used AF tracking have you?

24 minutes ago, Towd said:

Sony, Nikon, and Canon don't shoot 10 bit internally until you step up to their pro cinema line.  The rest is irrelevant.

Is your comment a deflection to take us away from poor AF tracking on the S1? 

Canon and Nikon are relevant because the 10 bit image quality stands up and they can record 10 bit external. Any pro will have an external monitor on set and using the Atomos Ninja IS A CINE monitor and recorder with all the bells and whistles that you need or could ask for. 

I would compare image quality on the S1 to Canon and Nikon before you throw out cine comments.

7 minutes ago, Towd said:

Every camera has trade offs.  Why is it so hard to believe that some people value the autofocus ability of a camera at near the bottom of the list of their priorities if they are comfortable with manual focusing?

Maybe some day we'll have an A.I. living in our cameras that takes natural language instructions from a director and always pulls focus correctly and smoothly and can follow the play of a scene in real time better than a any human focus puller.  Until that day comes, for many of us the camera's acquisition format and image quality will matter much more.

In addition for many of us, it is just fun and satisfying to pull focus manually and capture a scene the way we intend without relying on whatever the camera decides to do.  I have a feeling even if some magical A.I. does come along one day, many people will still enjoy using manual focus for the spontaneous creative control it provides.

This is the same GH5 Lumix argument about AF tracking since the camera was released. 

Have the choice of AF tracking or using manual is just that. Use what works for you. But on the S1, GH5, GH5s and S1R the AF tracking is not very good. 

It's the NOT VERY GOOD part is the issues here. It should be as good as Canon, Sony or Nikon.  

Another Lumix AF excuse "many people will still enjoy using manual focus for the spontaneous creative control it provides."  How is using AF tracking with the touch screen any less spontaneous then using manual focus?  

Next you will say "manual focus is more organic then AF".

On 7/21/2019 at 1:09 AM, Mattias Burling said:

Many of us never use AF in video. So it's not "excuses". More like "not caring".

If you're on a S1 or GH5 thread and making excuses for AF tracking for video then that is an excuse for the camera not working the way AF tracking works. 

Not caring is because YOU NEVER had or understood how AF tracking works. Some think AF is not used by pro's because manual is the only way to go. That's correct from a pro's stand point but they NEVER had AF tracking in a pro cine camera. 

AF tracking tracks the subject you lock onto. And if you're really shooting weddings or non locked down shots YOU will simple get beat by good AF tracking every time if you go manual.

I 100% guarantee you don't try certain shots because you can't pull them off with handheld, manual focus thru the EVF.  Don't like the messenger all you want but I'm speaking the truth and trying to help. 

5 hours ago, ade towell said:

As I said I like to use the viewfinder especially when going handheld, always have done - how do I tell it what to focus on then?

I don't really use a gimbal, I generally prefer handheld aesthetic and feel they are way overused.

I trust my manual focus skills more than I do the cameras AF

6 hours ago, ade towell said:

I prefer to focus manually but can't make a lens magically stabilise itself. Make sense?

When handheld I like to use the EVF - how do you tell the camera which part you want to focus on when using AF? I don't trust it to read my mind

It's easy. With AF tracking for video on the Z6 you can touch the spot on the back of the screen on the subject or area you want it to focus. After that it stays focused and tracks a person or spot. This is exactly why you use and have AF tracking for video. This is why you need it to work and be reliable.

How are you manually focusing with the gimble? That's not how gambles work. They need AF tracking. 

You should use the touch screen and touch to focus and track your subjects.  It works better then manually focusing on a moving subject. 

On 7/18/2019 at 10:36 AM, Justforfun said:

Waiting for my VLOG key to be ordered from the store!

I just started playing around with it, and the touch to focus in S-AF is much better for most situations anyway. For normal tracking to / from the camera, as long as your subject is moving normally then the C-AF is fine. These tests on youtube where they run around zig zagging, in and out of the frame, to try and prove a certain brand's superior AF is not practical in real use. I'd much rather take a great IBIS and "bad" AF, over a great AF but unsuable IBIS for my run&gun situation. And yes I do own a Ronin S and no IBIS can replace a gimbal, but mixing street photography and videography is hard to do with a ronin S in your backpack.

This makes no sense at all. You want great IBIS but can live with bad AF to do run n gun video.  And only if your subject is moving slow and to / from camera. Really? 

Some one said it was AF compromise......?? What? AF just needs to work well. Sony, Nikon and Canon have very good AF and maybe the S1 does with the new firmware.  Until then it's not good to make excuses for the S1. 

Hopefully it's not GH5 level bad were people make excuses for it.

18 hours ago, Geoff_L said:

Hey all !

I'm super happy, because Panasonic gave me a special gift with my 1day old S1 ! I don't know how, but it seems they had access to my camera gear history and found I was a Nikon D600 user. Thus, they thought I would be happy to dive again in a dusty adventure with a camera.

Whoa, look at that ! They couldn't make me happier ! Plus, they may have reinforced static electricity, because 5 or 6 rocket blower sessions + 50 automatic sensor cleanings did nothing. Great, I do mostly landscape photography, so that will be easy to handle ?

...

 

 

Did you dump the Z6?  How do you like the S1 compared to the Z6?

2 hours ago, Levi said:

Dude of course you have to be a better photographer. That's a given. It's a bad argument though. The A7RIV has better AF, Better Dynamic Range (advertised, still needs tested), Dual Card Slots, Better EVF, higher FPS burst, much higher resolution, along with more native lenses. Those are quite a few areas of superiority, which for some will make it a better stills tool. 

Your argument is the equivalent of saying there's no point buying a BMW over a Subaru because you need a good driver to get it around the track. That's true, but a good driver might choose a BMW for it's better onroad-track specs and be faster because of it. 

A better photographer will be able to use a more capable tool more effectively or efficiently, and for some the A7RIV will be a better tool. 

We all know this. Sure it's not competitive for video, but for stills it's a pretty nice piece of gear.

But in this case the BMW is the Nikon and Sony is the Subaru. And I'm not LOL on this one. 

So how does "Card Slots, Better EVF, higher FPS burst, much higher resolution, along with more native lenses" make you a better photographer or help you take better photographs? 

None of those items I quoted from you do that.

Nikon has F-mount lenses that work just as good as native Nikons. 

Image quality and color science should be priority. 

(Sony has two card slots so it's a better camera then the Nikon) That sounds ridiculous to me.

3 hours ago, liork said:

The A7R IV is better than the Z6 if you shoot mainly stills. This is not a main video camera and aimed at a different category (Z7). It is much better in resolution and focus system (I have compared the A7R III to the Z6 on field). So what is you point exactly?

Do you really think the A7RIV takes better stills then the Z6?

No it doesn't.

Not better color and not better DR either.  The AF is close. You need skill to be a photographer and better AF doesn't help with color or composition or the photographers eye.

The A7R IV video still has warp effect wobble and only 100mpbs is a let down.  Sony must still have overheating issues.

The video in Bloom's video looks good and the detail looks like the Z6 4k video detail that people said was to clear. Lol. 

So can the Sony fan boys tell me why this A7R IV is better then the Z6 in any way besides having ONE more card slot? 

4 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

I don't understand the move towards XQD when it's not necessary from a tech standpoint. If SD cards are sufficient why go XQD, other than to push a new more expensive format on consumers? 

XQD's are future proof and upgrades can push the card beyond SD cards.

2 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Looks to be about the most honest review yet. Not surprising.

https://petapixel.com/2019/07/18/sony-a7r-iv-vs-medium-format-image-quality-and-high-iso-comparison/

 

 

You Have to be 12 years old, really 12 max.

No I just know chroma key green and that sweeter is not magenta grey.  

You also said CS was joke with today's cameras yet you defend Sony.

1 minute ago, Andrew Reid said:

Nikon's big mistake with the Z6 was one XQD card slot. The media is much rarer and much more expensive. And everybody goes batshit over lack of dual slots!!

I think someone showed the A7R IV having issues writing to two high rated media cards.  The camera couldn't keep up.

1 hour ago, liork said:

You dont even know which numbers to look at...

The A7R III is competing the much newer Z7 by price level and MP and is still selling a bit better than the Z7 after 2 years in production...

Z6 is competing the A7III and cannot touch its sale numbers. 

Another chart from the same article has the Z6 on top.

5 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

Yes, sorry. A7r4 photo....

How much you wanna bet those colors are still off? Lol - Laugh my ass off!

4 minutes ago, Robert Collins said:

Look first off camera specs dont have that much influence on market share. Canon has been consistently the market leader overall in ILCs for the last 20 years and their camera specs are years behind their competitors.

Sony is doing fine in FF mirrorless. Look at this data from BCN for April this year...

The a73 is massively outselling say the Z6 in April this year despite being launched at least a year earlier. Sony is at 50% market share of FF mirrorless despite not introducing a new model for 18 months. I dont dispute Sony A7 series is now behind Nikon and Panasonic for 'video' (not convinced they are playing catch up to Canon) but I dont think that video specs have much influence on overall ILC sales. If they did, sure Panasonic would do better....

Didn't Sony have 100% of full frame mirrorless market before July 2018?

8 minutes ago, Robert Collins said:

Look first off camera specs dont have that much influence on market share. Canon has been consistently the market leader overall in ILCs for the last 20 years and their camera specs are years behind their competitors.

Sony is doing fine in FF mirrorless. Look at this data from BCN for April this year...

The a73 is massively outselling say the Z6 in April this year despite being launched at least a year earlier. Sony is at 50% market share of FF mirrorless despite not introducing a new model for 18 months. I dont dispute Sony A7 series is now behind Nikon and Panasonic for 'video' (not convinced they are playing catch up to Canon) but I dont think that video specs have much influence on overall ILC sales. If they did, sure Panasonic would do better....

That chart shows the Z6 outselling the A7RIII and A9.

I think Sony's mistake was not developing the A9 series to be it's base model to build off of. The A9 is awesome and for the price you have room to expand features and spec quality. 

Camera market price don't change much from the last 10-15 years once a price is set. Look at the JVC cine camcorder from 2004 and it was $8K for 720p to tape and the deck to play it back on was $5k.  

Sony will now always have a $1K, $2k, $3.5K and $4k comer model on the market. The A9SII could have been the answer to the S1H but Sony has missed that marketing / model chance.

Think about it: Does Sony release the A7SIII or the A7S IV ?  I would have developed the A8S or A9S model and crushed every other brand. 

1 hour ago, Robert Collins said:

The vast majority of people I know who like high megapixel FF cameras - like them not because you can 'print big' but for the ability to 'crop'. So an apsc sized crop on the A7r4 (1.5x) gives you 26mp (as much as any existing apsc camera) and 15mp if you crop to M43 (2.0x) which is pretty good. That for instance means I can shoot my 100-400 lens at 800mm and still have 15mp.

As far as matching the S1. Panasonic has effectively been the market leader in mirrorless video specs for the past 10 years and it has seen its market share of the mirrorless market fall from well over 50% to under 10% during that period. And that is why Sony doesnt have to compete in that market.

I don't know where you get you data from or can back it up. 

The P4K and S1 and Z6 pushed Sony to better it's A7 series video specs.  Why Nikon? Because Nikon was the first full frame 10 bit 4K mirrorless camera in the market. Sony still trails Nikon in market share for camera sales. 

Sony is playing catchup to Nikon, Canon and Panasonic and people have posted comments asking where the A7SIII is.  Yeah Sony has to compete in this market. To many options in this market for Sony not to compete.

1 hour ago, Trek of Joy said:

Sony’s market share in FF cameras is growing, until that slows what’s the incentive to push specs too far? Zero. I mean the R4 is essentially the R3 with a new sensor, better EVF and some small control refinements that allow them to milk customers for yet another grip. 

Panasonic is trying to launch a new system with AF that’s not particularly competitive compared to the market leaders - Canon and Sony. So they have to stuff the spec sheet elsewhere. I’m just not going to get psyched for S1 specs in an E-mount body. I’ll believe it when I see it.

chris

Tony and Chelsea's latest review has a lot of issues with the A7R 4 and very minor detail gain.

No Sony's market share has not grown but lost market share because of Canon, Nikon and Panasonic. You can't have 3 major brands enter your market and not lose market share. 

I'm not sure how long you've worked for Sony but in 2019 -20 customers will not settle for out of date new cameras. 

Sony won't match the S1 for all the wrong reason but the biggest one is they don't think they have to match the S1. 

32 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

Sure not, S1 is better featured ; )

And where S1 CS owes anything to Nikons?!

AF is the only disadvantage I see but following your perspective, if "most pros have an external monitor" as you write, go figure if they will invariably need any AF going along such setup... LOL : )

You say S1H street price won't be lower, let's wait and see ; -)

I've never said anything but good things about the S's color science. 

Panasonic chases the $$ like they did with the GH5s so the S1H will not be lower then $4,000.  How is this even your argument ? Is this all you have that in your mind you can tell other that price isn't an issues because the S1H will be lower then the announced price? 

AF tracking is useful and I used it today on a shoot with the Z6. These are small cameras and not built from the cine world so AF tracking is a real feature that people use. The whole purpose of the smaller cameras with AF is to put some of the work on the camera and get the shots you need. So you're going to hire someone to pull focus on the S1H ALL BECAUSE PANASONIC CAN"T GET AF RIGHT? This is the same as Sony not getting color science right. Why even have AF if you can't rely on it.

You seem bent on taking digs at the Z6 for some reason. Have you used the Z6? I didn't think so. 

I have said since day 1 that the S1 and S1H seem like great cameras and are good for the market. You can say same about the Z6. Also the features you talk about now become part of the Z6 when it's paired with the Atomos Ninja. 

2 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

What trolling? There's ZERO of that there.

Z6 has no comparison with S1H to begin with. Not even the Z7. Where's the 4K 60p 8-bit? Let alone 10-bit... ; ) 6K 24p... LOL

I get the S1R for $3500 (without taxes) in Europe BTW. The price is the target announced. I doubt it will be higher, lower for sure in the ratio MSRP vs street price as happens since there are cameras for sale : D

No if they are saying $4,000 for the S1H that's the price they are trying to hit but if they don't hit that price it's not coming down in price. 

The Z6 does compare to the S1 in every way. If I'm wrong then show how it doesn't.

- Z6 has 10 bit 4:22 external, most pros have an external monitor

- The Z6 will have 12 bit RAW Pro Res, so it get's even better

- The Z6 has EYE AF and video AF tracking that works and doesn't pulse 

I don't care about 4K 60p for the Z6 right now so why do you keep bringing that up? You have many more things about a camera that need to be right before you jump on the 4k 60p train. Give me great color and image quality for my video any day of the week over 4K 60p.

5 minutes ago, currensheldon said:

Nope - I meant the S1 is vastly superior compared to the other cameras it goes up against. Granted, it’s a bit more expensive so maybe it really is in a field by itself. 

Ok. I like the S1 for what it offers. It's bit more then the Z6 but I'm watching it to see how the S1's video is compared to the Z6 RAW.