Shell64

1 hour ago, Mako Sports said:

no other 35mm MILC, or DSLR has 16 bit yet.

just add the Sony FX9 S.cinetone color science and 180fps and I will pre order it.

Just add 21 stops DR and 500,000 clean ISO and I will preorder it

Sony won’t put anything special in it. 

Yes except now gimbals are what is overused. People don’t use sliders or steadicams as much which is why they add a bit of a unique perspective to your videos. 

21 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

Gimbals are annoying but there are some shots that are hard to do without them. Especially with longer focal lengths.

The new Weebill S looks interesting to me but I would prefer to not have one at all! I would prefer to just grab a future GH6 or EM1.3 or an S1H2 or a EOS R mk2 and shoot the same shots with near the stability of a gimbal in 90% of circumstances.

The hand held look is great and can make a scene appear more frantic or intimate but I think it’s harder to pull off well. I like somewhere in between; a smooth organic feel but not slider smooth for everything. 

True. Although there is something about a slider shot that I like better than handheld, or tripod pans sometimes. It looks...unique. A subtle but locked down movement with parallax. Handheld looks nice too. I just don’t like how gimbals look anymore. 

Download Davinci resolve lite and drag your files into the media viewer section to preview. Resolve can decode ProRes, just not encode to it. So your files can be viewed in the software. It should work well. You can also look at the waveform in the color section to help analyze your videos. Hope this helps!

Wow kye, you nailed to replicate that film convert grade. Nice job!  That’s way better than what I can do in resolve, but I’m still learning lol. 

1 hour ago, fuzzynormal said:

A big reason I liked the Oly EM5II when it came out is because I could do quick slider shots handheld.  You basically just adjust your body do a Tai Chi shift/drift and you can move the camera easily for an emulation of a slider.

I also do this with my GH5, but Oly is still better at IBIS.

But honestly, it's not so much the difference in IBIS as it is considered shot selection and disciplined technique.

Yeah I have tried that technique. I have had varied success, and some shots look just like a slider, while some did not turn out great. It may be that my camera has no ibis. And you can’t pull off the same thing as a slow movement with a real slider. 

I also love the look of a steady cam. It looks much more organic than a gimbal. 

I love slider shots. And it feels like today there is an obsession with gimbals. Honestly the shots most people do with gimbals looks boring now a days, and even when trying to keep the gimbal steady, the camera obviously looks like it’s floating.  I like the look of a slider. It looks like a gimbal moving, but without the “floating in the air thing.”  They aren’t used too much, and one can make beautiful camera movements with one. There is something about the camera being locked down and moving compared to a gimbal where the camera is “floating and moving.”

True. I’m just saying if your camera doesn’t have feature X, use that to make you better. 

It seems that people are all too reliant on creature comforts. IBIS, DPAF, color science, etc. If your camera doesn’t have these features, it forces you to improve your skills versus letting he camera do the hard work. No IBIS? You get to learn how to handhold a camera rock steady. No autofocus? You get to learn how to be a focus puller. Bad color science? You get to learn how to become better at color correction and grading. No high dynamic range? You get to learn how to nail exposure. My point is that limitations in your gear force you to improve your skills. My g7 has terrible AF and no IBIS, but that forces me to improve on my manual focusing and handholding skills. Sometimes limitations are a good thing. If your camera has limitations like these, don’t upgrade. Force yourself to improve on those skills instead of letting the camera do it for you. You will become a better filmmaker this way.

I haven’t been shooting in slow motion for my projects because it’s overused. Also it feels kind of lazy because it makes it easier to get b-roll, stabilize shots, etc. I have to work harder to get smooth shots in 24fps, but that just helps make me a better filmmaker. 

Shooting without IBIS, slow motion, things like that just help to improve your craft. My g7 has useles AF and no IBIS, but I just think of it as two skills I can learn so that I don’t need these features or become lazy, and can become a better filmmaker. Also not having amazing color science forces you to dive deeper into color grading, which also improves your skills. Use limitations to your advantage. Use them to hone your craft. 

Slightly off topic, but I really believe this. 

39 minutes ago, Cinegain said:

Whatabout the 007 aspect ratio? Cinematic no matter what you're shooting:

Interesting. I’ve tried this aspect ratio and found that it makes my footage so cinematic on my Canon Kiss M!  Better than Peter McKinnon!  And yes, I shoot in 30p because I luv it and not because canon removed 24fps

I personally use the hexagon aspect ratio. It allows up to 6X better footage because it has 6X the amount of black bars. 

It can apparently simultaneously record both cameras, meaning you could switch in post 

5 hours ago, Mokara said:

I suspect that Canon's next processor, the Digic 9, may change that, based on what it's brother, the Digic DV7, can do. Sony needs to update their processor to current standards badly. It used to be cutting edge, but we are a long way from 2013 now.

Year but canon won’t allow the new processor to benefit us. They’ll keep making their cameras unusable for filmmaking. 

And no they are not saving on codec license fees!

https://9to5mac.com/2019/09/10/iphone-pro-11-pro-max-triple-camera/

It turns out that the iPhone 11 can record on multiple cameras at once in filmic pro. For example you could shoot with both a telephoto and ultra wide and switch between them in post easily. 

Sadly there still isn’t any utilization of the multiple cameras to achieve a shallow depth of field in video. Cool nonetheless. 

I like watchtower in turkey

I shoot corporate, interviews, etc. for those curious. Good suggestions guys. 

I currently have $200 to invest in extra gear for my kit. I already have a g7, lenses, Tripods, etc. I do not have any lights, stabilizers, or cages though, and only have a cheap lav mic. What are some things you would buy if you were in my situation?  (total of everything must be under 200)

2 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

 

Dear friends,

I hope you enjoy this forum like I have been. I got in touch with awesome people, making friends on this community. Had the opportunity to read and watch involving and exiting things about lens treasures and lowfi camera tech, about the love for no and low budget filmmaking. I will take a little break off of this forum and will create more, being without the interwebs. So, create and enjoy, my friends! Stay well and happy filming! Marty

You’ve brought a ton of valuable info to the community and will be missed!  

13 hours ago, Yurolov said:

Nah you're wrong. 

On the c100 and c100 II only the center is used for DPAF.  For cameras like the c200, entire sensor is used for DPAF. 

44 minutes ago, Eugenia said:

My husband's GFX100 arrived yesterday for his studio. In a very short test I did, I found it to be sharper than my BMPCC 4k (its native Fuji lenses are very sharp, they resolve a lot of detail). I honestly don't think I need even sharper or whatever "better" Fuji thinks it can give us (better color/midtone detail sure, but even sharper details heck no). I had to soften the image in post by a lot to make it look anywhere near cinematic. There was a reason why Alexa was sitting at 2.8k resolution for the longest time before Netflix forced them to make a 4k camera. For true traditional cine stuff, 4k is enough. I personally have no plans on updating on 6k/8k any time soon, not even when 8k TVs might be commonplace. I end up softening my 4k clips in post by either Panasonic or BMD, but the GFX100 required a lot more (f-log). If you're after super crisp, commercial style look, that's your camera.

I’m curios. How do you soften the clips in post?

I hope this is true. I’m sick and tired of manufacturers flipping a switch to block us from raw video and instead forcing us to pay $500 for a bulky raw recorder. Magic lantern proves at easy to record internal raw. 

2 hours ago, Mokara said:

Because people who use those products don't use 24p in any significant numbers. Canon would have done their market research, they will know what their customers are doing. If the cost of implementing 24p exceeds whatever additional money they might make by including it, why would they bother? It literally loses them money. Back when camera sales were good then the small loss was unimportant in the grand scheme of things, but now the market is contracting and every dollar saved counts.

The fact that you personally want 24p is irrelevant to the calculation. You look at the market as a market of one, yourself. Canon however sees it as a market of many, and in that market of many, 24p probably loses them money according to their numbers. So it is no longer there. It is as simple as that. No conspiracy. Just the bottom line.

As you well know (or should know) hardware encoding is done by the processor, not the sensor. The 4K done by cameras such as the 1D X and 5DIV was software encoding. It could only by done by high bandwidth codecs due to the inefficiency of the process, which imposed other resource costs on the camera so that alone was not practical in consumer cameras. High end cameras had the supporting hardware to deal with that, consumer models did not. Also, you forget that the 1D and 5D series have an additional processor besides their primary processors (two in the case of 1D and one in the case of 5D) to handle focussing and exposure control. Consumer cameras do NOT have this additional processor, the primary processor has to handle focussing/exposure AS WELL as any image processing. The additional load on the processor makes implementations such as those used in the more expensive cameras impractical. Just because the pro and prosumer cameras had the processing power by virtue of multiple processors to implement 4K in this way does not mean that consumer cameras did as well, even though they are using the same primary processor.

The difference between Canon's full frame cameras? The 1D series have three processors, the 5D series have two processors, the 6D series has one processor. You might think that the sensors are not all that different, but it is the processing power inside the camera that is the distinction between the cameras and it is that processing power that determines their capabilities. This has an impact even now. Ever wonder why consumer cameras had a problem with using DPAF with 4K while the expensive models don't? It was that extra processor handling the focusing/exposure that made the difference. Not crippling to protect product lines. Just simply less supporting hardware to reduce costs in the low end models.

Let me ask you something...

who even are you?  Where did you seemingly get all of this information when all of the evidence for YEARS has been the opposite of what you are arguing? It baffles me that you still are arguing this argument. 

Seriously, how did you get all of this information that goes against ABUNDANT evidence that we have had for years?

2 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

The 0:0 aspect ratio with the Mckinnon LUT pack is the clear winner here. 

Also always shoot at 60fps. Canon proves that you don’t need 24fps to make cinematic video, at least that’s what Potato Jet told me when I watched his canon 90d review

My biggest question is can you change the frame rate while outputting to an external recorder?