Super8

I just used the A7III for a quick photo shoot outside. I was asked to tag along and be the photographer and didn't have my gear.

My take:

- The viewfinder display is lacking compared to Nikon and Canon.  It had a lag and I couldn't tell if I was nailing shots or not.  I was shocked by this because of all the reviews and positive feedback.

- Burst rate was fast.

- Color? No as bad as I thought it would be. It has a look it wants to give you, not sure I dig that. 

I'm trying to get my hands on a Z6 and Canon EOS R to do a shoot out with the A7III

Great looking film.

That was great!

3 hours ago, Mako Sports said:

His response to me was "Bad skin tone from a Professional Sony photographer.  Let me in and I'll nail the shot and skin color with a Canon." "His photo's are bad. No anticipation, very bad composition , bad color, nothing dynamic, missed focus."

I'm giving him the chance to prove himself. ?

 

If Kevin can get me access to the Falcons or large sporting event I'll be glad top stand by my word.

I honestly didn't mean to disrespect Kevin at all but out of all his Atlanta Falcons shots I saw one that was good.  I crew up with Sports Illustrated and NFL films and unlimited access and behind the scenes with a NFL team is almost unprecedented.  His photo's are his own.  It comes down to finding the shot.

Again, I'm sorry that I offended anyone with my comments.  I respect the photographer but I don't like the picture he takes.  I could say I don't prefer or his photo's don't do it for me but it means the same-thing.   Kevin is blessed with access to big events that other don't have and I'm sure he paid his dues, I respect that. 

The great thing about photography is it's one picture at a time, one. Photographs can be amazing and can capture the moment in so many ways. Let's not forget that.

12 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

And you consider that a good skintones test?

HAHAHAHAHA.  Sorry couldn't resist.

Bad skin tone from a Professional Sony photographer.  Let me in and I'll nail the shot and skin color with a Canon. 

16 hours ago, Mako Sports said:

@Super8

Latest Sports Illustrated cover was shot with a Sony A9 with a 400 2.8 GM.

But serious pros don't use Sony right?

?

 

Sometimes its better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt 

- Abe Lincoln 

To be honest I am impressed with the access Kevin has to big events.  I like a few of the photo's he's taken regardless of the camera. 

Update comment: For all the access Kevin has to the Falcons, how come those pictures are so boring? I don't mean to disrespect him but I don't get it.  His photo's are bad. No anticipation, very bad composition , bad color, nothing dynamic, missed focus. 

I'm new to all things Fuji.

This footage looks great.

Is the X-H1 a relavent camera in 2020?  How does it compare to the newer Fuji cameras for video?

I noticed the Z-H1 can do 200mbps at 4K.  Can the newer Fuji cameras do this?

As a first time Fuji shooting what would everyone recommend? 

On 1/15/2020 at 7:54 AM, kye said:

That works

From what I'm seeing, there are still a lot of shows that seem to have smaller budgets.  I'm not certain, but I wouldn't be surprised if lots of shows are made and then bought by Netflix, rather than being made for Netflix and having that kind of budget.

Mind you, I don't only watch the big shows, I'm watching a bunch of stuff, some quite niche.

I think the budgets on Netflix shows determine what cameras are used, if Netflix is involved pre-production or post.  Netflix won't approve or touch a production without approved cameras. If you already have something in the can then everything is fair game.

1 hour ago, Falk Lumo said:

This video, at the very beginning, shows aliasing color artifacts. It is claimed to be ProRes RAW. But the aliasing color artifacts could be from debayering color moiré due a lack of AA filter, of from pixel skipping in the RAW codec. It is hard to tell if not also the same footage was captured in N-Log.

BTW ... and to avoid any misunderstanding ...

I do NOT say "aliasing is an issue". I say Nikon aplies pixel skipping in their RAW data pipeline. As with debayering color moiré, I expect plenty of footage where its effects can't be noticed. I even remember the early days of the D800E (stills photography) where people claimed debayering color moiré would never be seen. It took a while. But today, it is pretty well understood when to expect, and not to expect, color moiré. Mostly in very fine farbrics of fashion at a single critical distance actually.

The footage you commented on has added sharpening.

 <Please break down this footage>

I'm still waiting on a an answer about benchmark and professional test charts.  I provided a link.

13 minutes ago, nickname said:

there´s a video up now on youtube that has a brick wall.

 

 

 

before this i also hadn´t seen any aliasing...

Because it's not in Raw Pro RES footage.

There's another You Tube video and the Z6 user did this to the footage: " i set in fcpx noise reduction _ Sharpness _ medium".

Apparently from the comments people think "noise reduction and sharpness" is part of the work flow because it's RAW footage.

If aliasing was an issue it would be apparent in this video:

It would be a great thing.  It's not happening because it'll cheapen the brand.

Why would Arri go after the lower priced market? 

For every $40,000 camera they sold they have to sell 10 x $4,000 NEW cheap ARRI.  It makes no sense for one because unless sales are down you don't cheapen the brand by coming out with a cheaply priced ARRI.

Take a look at their catalog and products they're trying to sell.  They are not a humble cinema camera company. They are all about the money.

The other reason it makes ZERO sense is if they give Academic ARRI's to students (student priced) then the footage and output will look sub par.  Why would ARRI want that?

40 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Am not going to deny the C300mk2 is a nice camera, but also it clearly and obviously hasn't been the success the C300mk1 was!

If I was in the market for a low/mid priced cinema camera and I got offered a FS7mk2 and a C300mk2 at identical price with identical condition (same package too with each, media/accessories/etc) then I'd pick the FS7 every time. 

The reason is because at this price level you're not buying it as casual fun hobby camera, it is a business investment. And the FS7 will surely in the long run get me more work than a C300 would. (I'm just saying what I believe, and what I think is true for most people, of course there will be exceptions. If all your friends own a C300mk2, or if you have a long term gig locked in coming up which needs a C300mk2, then by all means go for the C300mk2!)

Have got a friend who used to own a FS7, which he then sold (because he thought he a full time job at a studio lined up, using their own gear. But then that fell through). And he got offered a C300mk2 at a very good price, comparable to what he sold his FS7 for, so he went for the Canon instead. Well, since then he's found he's got a lot less work with it, and he is often having to borrow/rent a FS7 or use the production company's gear instead. With hindsight, he'd have been much better off buying a FS7 instead. 

Is there that much difference between the FS7 and the C300mk2 ?

On 1/13/2020 at 1:13 PM, currensheldon said:

1917 is brilliant. One of my favorite movies of the year and insanely remarkable how they made the film. The sets, the lighting, the choreography, and the techniques used in this film are all groundbreaking - and it's even a great, emotional, and beautiful film. Right up there with Dunkirk as my favorite war movie of all time.

This video shows a lot of what makes the filming of this movie so special:

 

Awesome.  Does it stay believable that the man character could do what he did physically over a 2 1/2 hour period? Everything looks like he's Jack Bauer, who also had some what of a continues time-line.  24 is one of my all-time favorite cinema shows.

3 hours ago, Falk Lumo said:

I do understand the researvations against using a computer monitor to act as a test chart. Many things can go wrong then. But if done right, it is a superior method actually as it is far easier to control the effect of the printing pattern, or monitor pixel grid, resp. I've done both methods in the past and I can assure that - the way *we* did it - a professional test chart would render identical results. Everybody is free to professionally print the chart (Super A3 would be the minimal size required) and reproduce (or falsify) results - all required information is public and linked in the blog article.

Cameo 40" Resolution Analysis Chart

https://www.abelcine.com/buy/lenses-accessories/optical-evaluation-tools/cameo-40-resolution-analysis-chart

I think this is the reason why you use the monitor instead of a professional test chart.  $1,200 for a test chart.

You might want to consider benchmark testing would also validate what you're doing.  Benchmark a cine camera that's in basic terms "gets it right". 

No other Nikon footage is displaying what you claim that sensor is doing. 

Was it great content?

12 hours ago, IronFilm said:

I wonder how long until he calls me out for posting links as well....  ?

 

 It's different when someone post informative audio/ video gear links as reference in a supportive discussion. 

Andrew posted the OP about Sony color still being sh%$.  

That's the topic being discussed . I've added my 2 cents and and I have experience shooting and color correcting Sony footage.

I know professionals use the FS7 and other cine cameras from Sony. I also know Some professional photographers use the A line up for photography. 

Here's my OC about the A7 series camera, i.e the A7III and A7IV -  "Most of these users are not serious photographers or videographers either.  If they do video then they know how much work goes into fixing Sony color."

Andrew made some very solid statements about Sony WB  "The white balance system Sony is using baffles me.". He clearly doesn't give Sony and out and say Sony's AWB system is off.

Just discuss Sony color in this thread and not so much my opinion about Sony users.

It's Sony fanboy talk to give them a pass and say " I think the main issue is AWB for Sony".  If that was the case then EOS Pro Color wouldn't be needed and Sony AWB would be addressed on endless You Tube channels.

1 hour ago, Falk Lumo said:

@Eno, you are right absolutely. My article says skipping, not binning.

Andrew posted in this thread and I replied already that it is pixel skipping, not binning. And that bit depth has nothing to do with it, as video readouts are all 12 bit. His post and my reply to him got removed, unfortunately.

Andrew's post and your reply back are still in this thread. 

2 hours ago, Eno said:

This is such a same and a lost opportunity for Nikon!

I honestly question the motivation of Falk Lumo and your post.

This footage looks absolutely great.  Where are all the issues you describe? (Line skipping  exhibits huge more, aliasing effects and reduced low light performance) ????

I'm waiting on Andrews review of Nikon's Pro Res RAW.

Not a lost opportunity for Nikon.

3 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

Can one really make an evaluation of a tool, such as a camera, purely on a single video by a user many here don't seem to care for?  I think there is plenty of examples of good images coming from Sony A7 III etc. but can also agree that SOOC of XT2/3 is typically more appealing.  If you don't AB the heck out of it and just watch quality filmmakers with any camera the images look good.  Sometimes its more of a limitation of the user than the tool.

I've used Sony A7 cameras and graded tones of footage.  I know that footage inside and out.  I hope the post about the Sony is directed at defending color produced and not directed at me.

If you follow Andrew's comments you'll find he addresses auto WB and WB and calls out Sony for getting it wrong.  Without any proof you guys are saying Sony users aren't WB before they shoot or are using AWB and that's why Sony color is off.

So you mean Tony and Chelsea don't know how to operate the Sony cameras they're using? That doesn't seem to be the case.  I do think Tony has switched back to Canon. 

I've actually liked Tony and Chelsea's video in the past.  They became hard to validate once they switched over to Sony because what they were saying and claiming didn't match what I was seeing.

38 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

oh God, that was a (friendly) joke with another fellow user!

I check now how dangerous is to make jokes over here... LOL You @Super8 also put me in your list, I see ; ) Very well, thanks for your attention! LOL : )

No, as written above there and endlessly before, I have no connection at all with these products. It happened with that gimbal because I was looking for some light setup for the Blackmagic Pocket. Once committed I immediately put any business contact outside the boards and if you follow up that thread, you'll see I didn't refrain to post some other links to alternative products. I'd be in very bad shape if I'd need to "make some bucks" over such business. That's what I'm trying to tell you. But you asked before that phrase of mine, only written now in my last post (the devil is in the details), not to follow it.

If some product is still to be launched it is natural the only videos about the product that you'll find, they are promotional ones yet. The "aggressive manner" is either of the marketing material which leads you to infer to be connected with me. Or then, sorry to be so persuasive on my enthusiasm expressed in my words! LOL

We are not all the same kind!

I think people can praise the times we're all living in, anyway... Twenty years ago still in the film school, I was trying to convince my colleagues to enter in a buyer group to invest $103,000.00 only for a digital camera unit.

I notice the difference when you can buy now a 4K 60p H.265 200Mbps bit rate capture device for less than 200 bucks... That's where your beef against my posting started, isn't it? What's the trouble? Prices are going lower and your P6K looks like expensive all of a sudden?! : D I disagree that the Snoppa Vmate is a knock off product as you call it. Have you seen the differences with the Osmo Pocket posted in that thread BTW?

My man I was just going by what you posted to a fellow EOS user.  "great 2020 sales" can only be taken one way when you're pushing an unknown off brand product. 

My apologies.  It just seemed a little off coming from you.

You can direct the later comments to me and not Andrew if you like since I wrote that.

I was a little harsh about correcting stills in RAW with the Sony but I stand by the photo's and video that I've seen.

Just look at Tony and Chelsea's videos record on Sony A7 series that they post.  I believe since they switched to Sony, all content they create in studio is shot with Sony.  Skin tones and color depth is so off on that footage that I'm surprised you and Mako don't notice or acknowledge how they look.

26 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

Again @Super8 ? Hard to follow me, humm? ; )

I've already been answering you, I guess this is the third one in a row now! *sigh*

 

Do you have any clue what an affiliate link is, by any chance? And no, I didn't follow Barry Green career either, even though my total respect by his professionalism. You and everyone would know if or when I'd be committed with any of these products. Didn't you quote that thread where occurred to have work with some gimbal manufacturer? Didn't I mention it as disclaimer refraining myself to sell the product, forwarding any eventual business to outside far away from there? Didn't you read me announcing despite that, I just bought two units from another brand as end-user I also am?

The world happens to be colourful ; ) As much as a medical doctor who ends to be patient one day as everyone, I am final customer too. Geek or enthusiast or yet, a fellow member of this community to share with all of you certain findings to cross my daily life I believe to have merit of interest or mere curiosity to other people as well. Yeah, I am a provider but supplier of discussion! LOL

The fact I receive many information from everywhere or I am a good researcher -- pardon for my lack of modesty here, this doesn't mean I post to make a few bucks. I am not even a seller, but a producer of content (not gear), that's it.

I use the term affiliate link in general. You're not using coupon codes or direct affiliate links but any link you post on the EOS can be tracked and credited to you as a sale. Please don't act link origin links from the EOS don't carry value and can be used for kick back purposes.

You've been posting company product videos with prices, pitches and reasons to buy in an aggressive manner, more than anyone on the EOS. 

People post product videos and links all the time from reviewers doing real test.  The link you provide are from low level copy products and the videos hardly have source content from said product.

You posted to one fellow something to the effect of "happy 2020 sales".  So what does that mean?

Are you making a money from posting these secondary knock off products? (I ask because you said: "this doesn't mean I post to make a few bucks" )  You don't post like a producer of content but a sales person.  It seems like you just recently started this, money issues?

As for me I own a Ronin S and never said I've worked or been hired by them in anyway.

Kind Regards -

Should we expect the GH6 in 2020?

I don't think many GH5 owners are jumping to the S1 / S1H line up like Panasonic thought they would.  I think GH5 owners are waiting on the Gh6 or have switch to the BMP4K m4/3 set up.

Great concept.

I don't think the fake drone in those shots help sell this product.  It doesn't look like any footage was filmed by that drone or camera.

Are you affiliated with these companies you keep posting about?  It seems odd that you post promotional footage with prices and you do this inside threads about competing products.  Just curious is you think these products are good or you get a kick back.