Super8

14 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

I didn't name or mention you, but your direct response to me made it about you and you exclusively, you very special and more than a bit paranoid internet entity.

At least I can be honest with my comments and stand by them.  Did you really use the "I wasn't talking about you card"?   This is how you lose credibility.

Please go read my past post.  I never posted my work or attacked anyone else's work. 

@IronFilm sorry for calling you the audio guy.  I know you've put in time and are out making some good work.

8 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

Another private (photographers) forum did this and virtually overnight all the shitkickers and keyboard warriors were gone...and the place was better for it.

Still not perfect. No one is ever going to get on 100% with everyone else in any community and there's nothing wrong with discussion or disagreement. It's not called a 'forum' for nothing!

Facebook however is the devils work.

Tell you what if I posted with my real name and info I would post the same way.  I try to make honest post and not attack people. 

Because of this I don't trust people like you that have alternative motives. 

6 hours ago, MrSMW said:

Well this topic went sideways... I thought it was about Olympus and their imminent demise?

The problem which exists on a lot of forums etc always seems to come from 'hidden' members who all seem to share the same traits:

Weird profile name.

No avatar.

No profile info.

No links to any work, website, social media.

Nothing.

Folks like you, I don't take seriously.

In fact I don't place any merit on anything you say because you could be a school child in your mothers basement, - there is no way of knowing.

What is it this type of folks have to hide except perhaps everything?

So go spit your dummies out by all means but you are only kidding yourselves if you think you have any credibility on-line.

PS: MrSMW = my actual real world name abbreviated.

The majority of the EOS is anonymous in nature.  This comes out of the mob mentality that base their opinion based on inner circle of influence. 

Sorry but your post is weird and creepy just for the fact that you think you need to know who I am and what I look like. People downvote my comments, get confrontational, say I live in my mom's basement and then ask for my real name, company website and link to films/tv I've worked on. You don't see an issue with that?

I could very well be working on Stranger Things (before lockdown).  If so what would that prove about my comments?  or what would you do with that information?  I have no doubt someone would make a call to people they know to affect my standing on said show.

55 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

Not exactly, not everyone.

Just like most of us on here. 

8 hours ago, sanveer said:

Is there any proof you've done any manner of filmmaking, professional or otherwise? 

As much as anyone else on here.

I'll also take the DoF refrence from this film:  You can have UpStream Color

@IronFilm

Thanks for the great info. 

29 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

So? For film sets that's true for *ALL CAMERAS*. (unless you're a small minority who want to surrender to the machine and let Canon's DPAF do its guesswork, or something similar. And no, DPAF is not the same as having a professional 1st AC pulling focus)

 

My comment that was taken out of the original reply was about run and gun with the P4K and keeping the camera footprint small.  MFT was mention as being great for run and gun.  

When did I ever say DPAF was the equivalent to having professional 1st AC pulling focus. 

DPAF or AF tracking with the new FF cameras lets true run and gun shooters get shots that would take hours to get with a professional 1st AC pulling focus.  DPAF and AF tracking is not letting the camera do the guess work.  It's also not a small minority that use DPAF or AF tracking.   The GH5's and other cameras have faulty AF so defenders say things like "unless you're a small minority " and "let Canon's DPAF do its guesswork". And at the same time exucses for the GH5's color, bad codec and outdated image quality gets over looked. 

Now you moved the conversation to "professional 1st AC pulling focus" and "This is why you've got a 1st AC on all but the most micro of micro budget film sets."

C'mon man this whole thread is talking about the most micro of micro budgets with GH5 users creating great feature films on low budgets.  Do you really think we're suppose think the GH5 has a 1st AC attached to it?  This will get us into the "lets save money by using the GH5 and rig it out because we can't afford the C300 II"

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

2008 was a totally different world for cameras back then, it looked like, and they thought they were still in a growth phase. 

And if Olympus exits the game, so that the consequence is that demand for MFT sensors goes way down, then yes, the per cost of MFT sensors (relative to APS-C sensors for instance or FF, if perhaps not their absolute cost. Remember, it is all about competitive advantage! That matters far more than absolute cost) will go up. 

Lower production volume = higher cost per unit. 

This is a universal rule of thumb across manufacturing in almost all industries. 

  

When a sale of one half of the major players in MFT is discussed, then it is very natural to also touch upon discussing the most successful MFT camera there is. (who knows, maybe if Olympus had made their own "Olympus GH5" then they wouldn't be in the state right now?? I doubt it, but it would have helped)

Cost per unit changes with each new camera.  The word NEW means a lot in the camera world. 

Cost per unit is not always passed onto consumers like I said before.   Olympus financial numbers show they weren't selling that many cameras.  No ripple effect will cross over to any other company. 

Even if it was FF the result of a poorly selling company calling it quits on helps the others.   When Seag and Dreamcast got out of computer hardware did Sony increase the price of it's console?

The camera market has survived the last 20 years and will keep on going just fine.   It's not my fault you don't understand set MSRP that Sony and Canon and others set each year with each product release. 

Do we have any indication that the A7SIII will be $4,500 and that that's the entry price where the A7III used to be?   If the A7SIII is priced as a flagship price it's because that's what it is. 

The next BMP7K will not be $3,500 and the next Fuji camera will not be $1,000 more than the previous model. 

5 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

This is getting ridiculous, any very minor difference is of course due to practical realities of manufacturing / testing / measurement. And has nothing to do with the inherent properties of the sensor itself. You're displaying once again your basic lack of knowledge of optical physics, and while I studied that throughout my science degree, you don't need any thing but basic high school level of physics to understand this.

What with the "right side doesn't match up that well" don't you get?   It is what it is.

What does it have to do with audio man?

2 hours ago, Towd said:

Whenever I read a long thread regarding the merits or shortcomings of the MFT format I'm reminded of a conversation I had with a  DP quite a few years ago about Super 35 vs Academy ratio framing.

For historical context every VFX heavy movie that was shot on film was typically shot Super 35 with spherical lenses even if its final projected format would be widescreen 2.39.  Of the twenty or so films I've worked on that originated from scanned film, only one was shot with Anamorphic lenses even though the vast majority were slated for widescreen delivery.

Anyway, the big concern back then was minimizing film grain and had less to do with the depth of field and blurry backgrounds, so you'd typically want to use as much of the negative as possible to reduce the film grain before scanning it.  However, in talking with a DP one day, he told me that when a feature wasn't slated for a lot of VFX, they would often just frame the project in Academy Ratio with room on the negative for where the sound strip would go. In this way you would go Negative -> Interpositive -> Internegative -> Print without mixing in an optical pass to reduce the super 35 image into the Academy framing for the projector.

The reason for this according to the DP was that the optical pass would introduce additional grain, so shooting S35 was kind of a wash in that you were trading the larger film area of S35 for framing directly for the Academy area on a projector and skipping the optical reduction that introduced more grain than just the steps in making a print.

Of course now with cheap film scanning, Digital Intermediates, and of course digital cameras, everyone just shoots using the S35 area.  My understanding from the conversation is that if you were shooting something like "Star Wars" that would have a bunch of opticals anyway, you'd shoot S35 even before the days of digital film scanning, but if you were shooting some standard film it was common for the DP to just frame inside the Academy ratio area of the film strip and skip the optical reduction.

Is there anyone with more experience than myself with shooting old films that can confirm this?  It really has me curious.  The reason being is that the Academy Ratio on a projector is defined at 21mm across.  While a multi aspect MFT sensor on something like the GH5s is 19.25mm across if you shoot DCI.  When you consider projector slop  or the overscan on an old TV for the action safe area, the difference in the exposed film or sensor area seen by an audience seems negligible-- and thus the perceived DOF or lack there of between the two formats.

Anyway, just wanted to share this, since I have never seen it discussed anywhere.  And maybe its just me, but I'm really curious as to whether the vast bulk of films shot from the 1930s and into the 90s were actually using the Academy Ratio area of the negative for framing.

Also, hope I'm not derailing the conversation regarding Olympus too much, but as we're discussing the MFT format of Olympus cameras as a possible reason for it's lack of sales, this seemed apropos.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_ratio

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_35

Continue on please.

5 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

It's because you completely 100% missed @noone's point, and tried to argue against him instead (even when you didn't even have an argument against him....  and you were kinda making his point instead).

Smaller scales of economy = higher costs. 

It's a very simple rule. 

Cost per unit will not go up in the near future.    We will get more specs and more camera for that $4,500 and that $2,000 price point.  The camera industry has given us numbers for the last 20 years to look at. 

The market had a big drop in camera sales 7 years ago.  Smaller scales of economy = higher costs isn't something that hits the camera industry like you think it does.  Remember we are talking about the camera industry.

10 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

Man the level of disappointment is going to be at an all-time high when the mythical a7s3 is released. A vague comment about things being new and unspecific stuff about raw to stoke the flames. Looks like 4k60p 10-bit internal with raw through HDMI like the Z6/S1h. It'll have Sony's new AF system, hopefully a flippy screen and a competent touchscreen like Canon's, and maybe dual UHS-II cards, but with Sony's recent track record I wouldn't bet on it. Sony fanboys keep calling the R5 a "paper camera" to try and downplay how they've done what Sony claims is coming - completely exceed expectations. Now something with no actual information gets people excited for something that's vaporware at this point. SMH.

My expectations are low based on the last few years of Sony's 8-bit releases, shitty LCD's, UHS-1 slots in 42mp cameras that shoot 10fps, and more - so the new camera really doesn't have to offer much improvement in order to exceed expectations. 

Chris

We will see.  I will go with Sony or Canon depending on which camera is better.  Maybe neither one if they are just spec cameras.  The proof will be in image quality.

Sony will have to jump in the 10bit world and 4K 60p crop is what we might get.  I think release dates will be 2 years apart with lots of firmware updates to keep people from jumping to a new brand. 

Quote

Sorry, your earlier posts on the GH5 sounded like you had used it and had issues with the footage.  

Maybe we should stop talking about the GH5. 

No problem.   Yeah let's stop talking about the GH5 and let it be.

5 hours ago, rawshooter said:

Maybe then you should stop posting on this forum, telling bullshit about stuff you now even admit you don't know.

And you're in no position of shouting.

If it takes 2-3 post without caps and someone repeats that I said something I didn't I'll use caps.

I clearly posted about the MFT, the GH5, it's cropped sensor and what I saw across You Tube.  I clearly posted that I've color graded GH5 footage but never shot it.   It really is clear what I've posted about. 

Color or color issues are obvious for most cameras the GH5 has some. I pointed this out.  The GH5 has a bad codec and is over sharped, I pointed this out. The GH5 does have great specs. YOu can connect the dots or not. 

I know and have done enough research on the GH5, color graded it's footage to know it's not worth the headache and doesn't match the specs people boost about. 

The EOS is clearly about helping people, with out hype or fanboyism, select the best camera that works for them.

4 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

So why do you keep going on about it???

Why do you keep going on about things I never said.................i.e. like using the GH5

19 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

In both cases, with the Pocket 6K issues you recently spoke of, and the GH5, it sounds like you were employing people who didn't really appreciate the weaknesses of the camera before using them on a Professional shoot. 

 

The guys I used are professional and I'll put their work up against anyone's.

Yes they had IR pollution issues with ND filter.   If you haven't seen it first hand then you don't have a clue. 

All you have to do is search BMP6K IR issues and see how many videos you see.  People aren't posting about it but you see a lot of footage with it.

Then look at BMP6K footage and see how much IR pollution you see when you know what to look for.

My comments about the GH5 were a little take on issues I see with crop sensor and work that around. Does it affect MFT future or has it?  I don't know.

12 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

In both cases, with the Pocket 6K issues you recently spoke of, and the GH5, it sounds like you were employing people who didn't really appreciate the weaknesses of the camera before using them on a Professional shoot. 

FOR THE LAST TIME>

I NEVER EVER HAVE USED OR EMPLOYED ANYONE TO USE THE GH5 -

57 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Depends on what is meant by "run and gun", some people think it means running around at a wedding filming like a maniac (and yes, you can use a P4K for that! And people do. Although I'd rather take a GH5) and it could also mean a small crew of just five people going at a fast pace knocking out a dozen pages a day (and yes, the P4K can be great for that too). Or "run and gun" could mean many other things to the user. 

You can't pull focus on the P4K without rigging it up or having a focus puller., no IBIS so more rigging.  After that it's not a run n gun camera.  Yes the GH5 is a great run n gun if you can control focus.

Given the callout for small compact M43 set up I don't think our conversation means anything different.  Grasping for straws.

48 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Some of us went through that fad back during the early 5D HDSLR days many years ago, then left that phase behind when we grew up. 
 

Olympus was kinda a big deal to bring M43 to market.  Olympus just went under and the thread is about that. 

I don't have a GH5, never have and I don't have a P4K.   I did use the P4K and P6K on a few gigs.   People need to be informed about M43 is all.  The GH5 was a good camera 3 years ago. Should it be recommended to buy and invest in? I don't think so but that's MHO.

Hope that clears everything up for you.

48 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

But if you want to obsessively focus on this narrow aspect, then may I introduce to you the right lenses to use wide open with your GH5/P4K:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/Mirrorless-Lenses/ci/17912/phd/4291123839/cp/15293%2B15492%2B17912?filters=fct_lens-mount_3442%3Amicro-four-thirds
 

You're a sound guy.  Not sure you have a dog in this hunt do you?

Quote

Seems you @Super8 have a real obsession with super shallow DoF. 

What is super shallow DoF?   Super35 has been standard for a while.  M43 goes the other way and FF is in transition.  You might want to go back and see if I tried to make the DoF argument with M43 and FF because I haven't.  

15 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Then how come...  they are unable to do something as simple as selecting close to the right lens for a shot, as you said so yourself earlier:

My DP's get the shot I want because I prepare them and I'm the director or I've been my own DP.   My comment wasn't about my DP's or myself. 

Quote

If a DoP doesn't have a basic grasp on sensor size, then they shouldn't really be a professional DoP

Sensor size issue with M43 is. an issue that has to be dealt with.  You might take a look at all the GH5 speed booster debates and why they use them.

3 hours ago, Jonathan Grijalva said:

 I have the S1h and am soooo happy with it, because it has all the functions you need for video.

Except for AF.....lol.

Quote

But no, these companies really just seem to focus on resolution and people eat it up.

But seriously, you jumped on the 6K bandwagon. 

Olympus and most camera companies are missing the "Steve Jobs" visionary that drives creative and innovation. 

Currently Sony seems to have the guts, creative and know survival depends on having innovative ideas.  Sony has been pushing electronic and making great products for decades. 

Can know what people want but has yet to deliver a great product that pushes them to #1 in mirror less sales.

You can always put lipstick on a pig with great marketing. 

Looks like July might be some positive news in a depressing 2020.

8 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I expect the A7S III to handily outperform the EOS R5 and EOS R6 for video.

10K Quad Bayer sensor (60 megapixel, 8K RAW, 4K Quad Bayer readout, no crop, good rolling shutter due to fast sensor architecture and multiple readout channels, a typical Sony strength)

Whereas EOS R5 is traditional bayer, lower megapixel count and likely high rolling shutter.

Also I can see on the codec side the Sony maybe doing something interesting with H.265 compressed RAW.

I think right now if I were to only choose one flagship it would be the Sony.

Doesn't mean I am going to bite the specs hype bullet though.

EOSHD during both these launches will be an ANTI-hype machine

Unless it is warranted and they put out a genuine marvel which is both practical to use not just with some dazzling high numbers on the box.

I can see the A7S III, A7SH or A7H or whatever they will call it being the new flagship for stills above the A7R IV as well.

There was a reason the A7R III and IV were just incremental evolutions.

I agree reluctantly.   I want Canon's R5 to be better.  

If that 10K Quad Bayer sensor can match Sony cine camera cadence then it's game on. 

If this is a new body redesign ("it will be a complete redesign of the whole system, including the image sensor. Everything is new. ") then this means Sony will but the new A9 and lower models off this body.

MY guess is Sony puts the A7S III at $4,500 and then comes out with a $2,000 dumbed down version.  The $2,000 version won't have RAW or RAW out abilities, etc.   This will be like the S1H and S1.

15 minutes ago, heart0less said:

But A9 didn't have any competition at that point and even now it's hard to point any FF mirrorless camera that comes close to it.

As for video department - well, many seats here have already been taken, it's gotten quite busy in this sector.
You can't set your asking price that high, unless you give something that other companies don't.

 

A9 at $4,500 in 2017 had nothing to do with competition.   They built the equivalent model to the top of line Nikon or Canon, i.e. flagship model.

The same is happening right now. 

The S1H was priced at $ 4,000 with additional cost for feature upgrades.  Most people thought this was a reasonable price.

Sony will still have a new camera at $1,999 and at $3,500.   They always do this and people buy which one fits their budget.

As I said over an over, go look at camera price from 20 years ago.   $5,000 for the flagship Nikon DSLR. 

A redesigned A7S III means most likely a bigger body, no heat issues, new sensor (one that's not in the competition yet), 10 bit (finally) and 4k 60p. 

Everyone has asked for more features that are in line with cine cameras.   If they put everything into theses cameras they will be north of $3,500 at release. 

55 minutes ago, heart0less said:

Prices going way, way up is a current trend in electronics, sadly.
Even PS5 according to many analysts will cost more than what PS4 cost at its launch date.

The PS4 Pro is priced at $399 right now.   Spec wise that's what the PS5 has to be better than.

PS5 looks to be $599 and Sony makes very little profit on the PS4 as it is.  

Do you think the PS5 is over priced for the specs it delivers ?  $599 is way under what a PC gaming system would be.

Sounds like the A7SIII might lead the market in ability and image quality.

Prices are not going up from where they've always been. The A9 was priced at $4,500

Nikon was charging $5,000 for a DSLR back in 2001. 

Sony will always have it's $2,000 to $4,500 price range. 

The S1H was priced at $4,000 for it's hybrid camera.  

Has the market and pandemic been going on since 2001? Nope.

52 minutes ago, heart0less said:

Prices going way, way up is a current trend in electronics, sadly.
Even PS5 according to many analysts will cost more than what PS4 cost at its launch date.

Just take a look at all those new smartphones. Every subsequent iteration breaks the price record, yet people still buy them.

It's only natural for ILC cameras, that begin to become a very niche product, to be more and more expensive.

 

Re: Sony and the new A7S

I'm cheering for them, seriously. Time to make a comeback.
Even if they fail to do that, we'll have tons of new videos praising how unbelievably good and useful that new camera is on YouTube, hahahaha.

And it's good that the main players here still feel somehow threatened by others. At least they're trying to stay competitive.

Same prices we had back in 2017 when the market was hot.

Sony A9 was $4,500