TheBoogieKnight

2 hours ago, kye said:

One challenge would be how to fill the frame.

If you straighten the lines (from this //////// to this ||||||||) then the problem is that you have to crop off the sides a bit (see diagram #2)

Then you'll either get black bars on the sides, or you'd have to crop in, but if it just cropped in and out based on horizontal movement then that would be very strange.  If you were doing it in post with accelerometer data then you could make good decisions about cropping and other things, so maybe that's the better approach - to save the accelerometer data in the footage then process it afterwards.

Hmm interesting. Even with pretty fast pans it doesn't seem like you'd need much of a crop so maybe a fixed crop would work. Saving the movement data definitely sounds like a potential avenue although maybe AI based solutions could calculate it from the image without even needing this data (warp stabilisers already do something similar). I've been using Denoise AI recently and it's pretty incredible how far we've come in terms of image processing.

We've got a lot of cameras now that allow you to crop in to improve (or give) IBIS so I wondered if any companies have used the same idea in-camera to combat rolling shutter. The cameras have accelerometers and gyros built in so presumably this could be implemented fairly easily although it obviously wouldn't work on moving subjects!

17 minutes ago, sanveer said:

Whoa. That's over 4k resolution on a tiny EVF. I wonder what the refresh rate would be?

Edit: I saw that its dots, not pixels. 4 dors pake for a single pixel. So yeah, much lesser but still almost double of what's presently in the best ILC EVFs available right now. 

I think Sony EVFs are using RGB now. The 5.76 million dot EVF on the S1 (which I love) works this way so this new one is maybe 2160x1440. Either way it's pretty impressive! The current 5.76 one has a refresh up to 240fps but the only (I think!?!?!) cameras that use it (S1 and A7rIV) go up to 120.

10 hours ago, Stab said:

So, what happened exactly?

Is it soft because of the autofocus? Or did the lens actually become less sharp when you  manually focus at stuff? And how is that even possible? Is there dirt or damage on the elements? Did elements became misaligned?

Hi Stab

I think the optics must have become misaligned somehow but I've got no idea how. I ended up getting a halo around high-contrast areas. I don't know if it happened suddenly or was a gradual thing. As I said I noticed during lockdown after taking a few pics. I didn't need to pixel peep, it was pretty easy to see.

I did initially think it might be the AF but I did some tests and it definitely wasn't; something had happened inside the lens. This is probably just a one-off but as I said I've read a few people having problems with the AF/MF clutch and aperture ring on these lenses and (as far as I know), they had to get replacements as even those parts weren't serviceable.

26 minutes ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

Are we talking about the $2,300 L Mount 50mm f/1.4 panasonic lens???

Hi Mark, yes. To be fair I can't fault the return process.

1 hour ago, homestar_kevin said:

I think this is definitely true and has been for awhile.

It seems with current production methods/ideas, the more electronics and software go into lenses the less serviceable they will be.

I remember with the Samsung NX glass they did the same thing. You could go on Samsung parts website and buy 'Parts' lenses, which were just brown box replacement lenses for a much cheaper price. This was because they rarely or didn't service lenses, they just replaced them.

Now the other side of this is that everything seems to be getting to this point. 

There are pretty nice 2x1 flexible bi-color LED panels like the 3060a that are like ~$150-200 bucks. That's what I'd call cheap enough to be almost disposable, or at least if I'm on a shoot and it goes down I wouldn't be as concerned as I would've been 8-10 years ago with a $2000 Kinoflo Diva or something.

 

 

 

Yeah it's where you draw the line with pricing I guess. Like you if a 100-200 item breaks after a year it's fair enough and I've probably got my money's worth. A 2.5k lens is something else entirely though. What happens to the faulty ones, they're get torn apart and the salvageable parts used to make new ones I presume!? I did see the official repair price of the lens (well replacement obviously) which was half standard retail. That's at least something I guess but no idea if Nikon/Canon/Sony etc. etc. offer the same?

8 minutes ago, hoodlum said:

I remember seeing a number of complaints related to Panasonic lenses not being repairable with the 100-400 getting mentioned a few times with more recently the 10-25 f1.7.   These are expensive lenses and I don't believe Olympus lenses having the same issues.  That is interesting regarding the RF lens issue but the only reference I could find at Lensrental was the reference to the linear focus system but that would be an issue with all mirrorless lenses.

Yeah I've seen a few people had problems with the Panny 50 too; usually the clutch but sometimes other things. I realise anything can fail but I can't think of many things that are a complete write-off if basically anything goes wrong. Certainly not at these kind of prices anyway. 

So over lockdown I've been trying to keep myself busy with the odd photography job and I noticed that my Panasonic 50mm didn't seem as sharp as it was when I got it. I did a few tests and surely enough it had become pretty soft (for whatever reason).

Sent it off to be looked at/repaired and was immediately told they aren't reparable. Fortunately the lens was under warranty (runs out in November) and I was quickly sent a new one which is perfect. I have to say it's kind of scared me a little though and I've seen a few reviews on Lens Rentals where they basically said the same about the Canon RF glass. If the same thing happens in four months time I've got a hunk of glass worth nothing.

I'm seriously interested in an R5 but the thought of paying (for example) 2.5k for the 85mm lens only to find it develops a minor fault and is worth nothing a year later just seems insane to me. Unlike many here I'm firmly at the semi-pro level and while I can just about justify prices like this for a 5 year investment (or at least the ability to sell it on), one year is totally nonviable. Are all lenses built this way now? What do you lot all do, invest in extended warranties? Are they worth the paper they're written on?

1 minute ago, Cliff Totten said:

With all its cripples....this camera is truly a bizare marketing decision. It's actually scary to think that Panasonic management asked engineers to design it and then green lit it to go into manufacturing production.

Huh?...who was in charge of this project at Panasonic? Who actually believed it would sell enough to justify its R&D cost?

We can forgive weak DfD auto focus because the GH5 and GH5S gives us so much more besides AF. But this little thing gives us weak DfD AF with no other great (or even good) features to back that up and compensate us for it.

Its just a little hunk of junk that is badly crippled to protect higher Lumix cameras.

With all the camera choices today....i can't see anybody saying "Oh WOW....THAT!!!...is the camera I really want"

Panasonic management is starting to scare me. What is going on up there?

Take out everything that Vloggers want in a camera and advertise it as a camera for Vloggers.

18 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

 

Why line skipping / binning would you loose light? You may get a less sharper picture, aliasing  but you don't lose light. 5.5k 24 fps exposed at 1/250 iso 400 f 2.8 will have the exact same exposure as 1080 120fps line skipping or binning at the same SS, aperture and iso.

Of course you need faster ss so instead of 1/60 for 30 fps you would need to go 1/250 for 120 but this is normal and nothing to do with the sensor type and for sure R5 that apparently will be FF 120 will not be any less usable than any other 120 fps camera. 

The point that crop is better in low light is normally the inverse as any Canon camera so far are more noisier at 1-1 pixel crop than scaled down or pixel binned or line skipping.
Just look at the C500 II as an example, the 1Dx III 120 is less sharp but way less noisy (2x crop vs FF).

If you want deeper DOF FF is not the camera for you, I want shallower DOF so I can have a look that is different than iPhone. Why do I mention iPhone because is a fairly capable HFR camera (btw I hate filming with phones and iPhone in particular as the workflow is just terrible. Why they don't offer a microSD just to sell you super expensive storage... yes I have an iPhone)

So personally I would prefer to shoot 4k 120fps FF with a 50 1.2 at 1.4 than 4k 2x crop at 24mm 1.4..... (ca same framing same exposure different DoF)

 

 

 

Hmm maybe I'm confused. As far as I saw it, if it's 2X skipped and binned, 1/4 of the light is reaching the same sensor area (fewer photo sites are used) compared to oversampling from the full sensor. I realise that each individual pixel is getting the same amount of light with skipping/binning, but you're losing the oversampling which would be taking 4 pixels and combining them into one, effectively giving two stops lower noise.

I can get that exact same lower noise benefit by shooting with a 2 stop wider aperture. If I do this with skipping/binning, I'd reduce my DOF 2 stops. If I do this with a crop, I have to step back (or use a wider focal length) which means I get that DOF back to where it was.

Of course oversampling has other advantages, but you're going to lose them with both binning/skipping and a crop.

6 minutes ago, Mokara said:

No one will be shooting at 120 unless they are doing slow motion, and if that is the case you don't have a choice.

Why would adding a crop mode increase the amount of light? 

Well with a Quad Bayer you'd only be losing 2 stops so definitely more usable.

As to the crop, it means you can reduce focal length to equivalent framing before the crop, then reduce ISO and open the aperture to get equivalent depth of field/light gathering. Like how using a 50mm F2.8 lens on a 1.5 crop APS-C sensor is equivalent to 75mm F4 on a FF sensor.

So it doesn't increase the amount of light, it just allows you to keep it the same with equivalent framing, something impossible to do with a system using binning/skipping where you can only get more light in by reducing your DOF.

2 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I can confirm Canon did not give me one

In my opinion they are hiding something and probably the usual shills will gloss over the shortcomings.

Rolling shutter, pixel binning, over heating, the lot probably.

I'm sure it's on the way and just got held up in the post... 😄

I'm more worried about how useful the 120 is going to be given (unless it's a Quad Bayer sensor) you're probably gonna lose 4 stops of light over the 8k/30 with the skipping/binning and faster shutter speed. If this thing has a usable ceiling of 8,000 ISO (for example), you're down to 500 at 120p. Same as the S1 in 1080/120 I guess which needs lots of light and is often unusable indoors. I hope they add a crop mode. At least then you can get the same DOF without losing a ton of light.

1 hour ago, androidlad said:

Oh yeah it's already in the hands of many influencers/industry pros, who are anxiously awaiting the NDA lift.

Oh wow so you think this July 2nd rumour is true then?

6 hours ago, zerocool22 said:

I hope there will be some footage online soon. Surely some youtubers have some pre-release models right now. 

I don't think anyone has even touched one yet. Well maybe the peeps at Canon....

I don't see a reason it can't be great even if skipped/binned and they might offer cropped modes anyway (which I'd far prefer TBH). With the crazy readout speed they might offer something like 4k oversampled from 5.6k at 60p (what current FF 24MP cameras are effectively are offering at 30p).

51 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

The crushed blacks in 10bit H.265 is also an issue with my Fuji footage in Resolve, and it badly needs a solution... Will see if this happens in Windows or if it is an Apple thing.

Are you running the latest version of OsX on your Hack? There were a lot of posts about the crushed black issue a while ago (several months) but it was apparently fixed by Apple in an OsX update.

Mentioned it in the other post but I think there's a good chance they'll offer cropped modes for 4k60 or 120. Nobody likes a crop but it's got several advantages over pixel binning or line skipping. Even if it is skipped/binned though, it's still 4k/120 compared to something like the S1H which also uses binning/skipping but only does it at 1080p. Regarding the 4k/30 RAW, how practical/useful is around 15 minutes of footage on a £700 CF Express card? It's got that USB port so maybe they'll also offer recording that way?

Do we think it's likely we'll also get the option to use a crop rather than line skipping/pixel binning in 4k 60/120? There are a lot of situations where I'd prefer a crop.

There's the video comparing RAW recording.

One thing I don't get (and I've seen it on a few videos recently) is how the S1/S1H render some reds as a vivid orange, but only certain shades (other reds don't get affected at all). It doesn't look like it's sensor related as a recent test with RAW showed the effect vanished! One's the Pocket 6k, the other the S1H.

8 minutes ago, MurtlandPhoto said:

This. When rumors first started swirling about the S-line, I thought for sure Panasonic would design the system to make adapting m43 lenses possible. It would make sense. Have a 24mp full frame camera that acts exactly like a 12mp GH5s when you put a m43 lens on it - 10bit 4K with a 2x crop. Perfect way to ease m43 users into the system. But nope.

Remember sensor area is squared so a M43 lens would only cover roughly 6mp on a 24mp sensor.

8 hours ago, Lux Shots said:

Not particularly. It looks fine at first until you see it side by side with 4k H264. It looks like you may have missed focus the image goes so soft.

Here is the link, again nothing special, but I did get 4K FF H.264 24p, 4K S35 H.265 60p and 5.9K FF H.265 24p, and ProRes variants for eveything but the 5.9K obviously. I'll be out and about getting some ProRes RAW stuff when the firmware drops on Monday. 😀

There should be 5 files, but one of the ProRes files is still uploading.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1FeBzE69sL0SsmGgi8TuuIGPFdYaZY-R7

I've read in a few sources that the S1 adds sharpening (even if these options are turned right down) for the oversampled 4k footage and not for the 5.9k footage so that could go some way to explaining this?

13 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

S1 has some crazy tricks up its sleeves. Shooting at ISO 4000 in super low light and pushing it to 12800 eq. I would rate it four stops above a GH5.

Is this only certain photo styles? Just I tried this last night and the results were identical at every ISO from 4,000 to 51,200.This was on the standard profile.

1 hour ago, Oliver Daniel said:

$4k would be groundbreaking. I really hope they pull this off. 

Also, do you know how well regular EF lenses work with DPAF on RF mount? In particular, Sigma ART? 

RF lenses are super expensive! Think the 70-200 may be worth it but not sure about the rest. 

There's a few tests on YouTube if you go hunting. It looks good but not as good as the RF glass. Here's one testing Eye AF on the R with EF glass:

He also has one with RF glass. The R5 might be improved of course!

I worry about the system succeeding but love the lenses and body. It seems to be much more expensive in the US than other countries which is unusual. The CF Express does show advantages in burst mode (there's pretty much an infinite buffer) but without AF it's obviously got limited use. They must cost an awful lot more to produce than the A7 III; not just the EVF/LCD but pretty much the whole body. I get they could have priced it lower but they'd still have the problem of the poor C-AF and seriously limited range of (expensive) lenses (although you can adapt a huge range of course) so I'm not sure they'd have enough to differentiate. I bought mine as I loved the ergonomics and quality of the body (and it was well priced). I've never regretted buying it but I would consider something like the R5 with FF 4k60/120 and good AF.