Davide DB

Just on this forum, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of comments about this brand or that camera having terrible colors, awful skin tones, colorw impossible to match, and now everything depend on the user? What did I misunderstand about your comments? Here's a simple search for you. https://www.eoshd.com/comments/search/?&q=Colors&type=forums_topic&search_and_or=or

I've just watched Train Dreams and it's 1,46:1 🙂

Train Dreams on Netflix I don't know how many of you have already seen it, but I still wanted to recommend a film that I watched a few nights ago on Netflix that hit me right in the heart. It was presented at the last Sundance Film Festival but then went directly to Netflix without going through movie theaters. And it's a real shame because the cinematography is stunning. Shot in 3:2 in the Idaho forests with an almost documentarian feel. The story is infinitely sad and very slow. The reviews are almost all enthusiastic, and it has become one of the most viewed films on the platform in recent weeks. The negative reviews accuse it of being truly slow, but in my opinion and that of others, the beauty lies precisely in the film's slowness. If you manage to get into the mood, it hits you right in the heart. I don't want to spoil too much about the story, but the ending truly moved me. The DoP says that the film was shot almost entirely using natural light (à la Lubezky), and many scenes are set at dawn, sunset, and nighttime using real candlelight. The chiaroscuro is a delight for the eyes. https://filmmakermagazine.com/129137-interview-cinematographer-adolpho-veloso-train-dreams-sundance-2025/

finally something different

Or you have pre-recording 😙

Yes, long story short. the right tool for the job. I am a wildlife enthusiast and despite being an amateur, I find myself facing "on a small scale" the challenges I see in blue-chip productions, and there I realize how truly fundamental the equipment is in these situations. A true watershed between getting the shot and not getting it. For a project on the marine fauna of the sand, I spent hours filming various types of mollusks burying themselves. I have a rebreather and therefore no time limit underwater. But the camera in an underwater housing does not have a V-mount battery (unless you have a RED with a 30K euro housing) and therefore you have battery limits. A clam took an hour and a half before burying itself, and I had to film the initial moment. It took me 3 hours and two dives before succeeding. Dives in which I filmed and every minute I stopped and started again. A couple of times that damn clam buried itself while I was stopping and restarting the recording. The same thing happened while waiting for a crab to eat a fish. I cursed because my GH5M2 does not have the pre-recording function (the GH6 has it and the GH7 does not). I thus discovered that the pre-recording function is one of the most useful functions for those who do wildlife. A practically mandatory choice if you shoot in RAW and fill memory cards in a few minutes.

And a lot of small improvements too

Maybe with the next camera, he will retire, thank God.

Well, if you talk about eras, I absolutely agree, but if we consider a single "historical period", the camera doesn't make a difference, except in extreme cases. We have seen many examples over the years. Your works with the mighty GH2, Independent films shot with the GH2. Blind tests where the GH2 was mistaken for a cinema camera. We have the shorts shot by Filippo Chiesa with a GH5S which has a better look than this film with the GH7. We have the blockbuster shot with the FX3. The reality is that in common use cases, the camera doesn't make a difference. The difference is made by the lights, the set, the lenses, and the skill of the DOP. Certainly, with a more limited camera, the DOP is forced to work harder with the other tools. In this forum, everyone is still nostalgic for the 5D MKII with Magic Lantern, which scientific tests have shown does not have more than 9 stops of DR, and yet here, we are declaring the death of a camera over 13 or 14 stops of DR. Run&gun is different of course. Other extreme cases that come to mind are wildlife documentaries where you don't have the possibility to set up cinematic sets (up to a certain point), and therefore the camera and lenses make the difference between having or not having the result. Here, in fact, RED cameras and their crazy mix of resolution and frame rate (and pre-recording) still reign almost supreme. Yet, as the article I posted wrote, action cameras are also used out of necessity simply because it is the only way to film certain situations, and then it is up to the colorist and editor to manage to prevent you from seeing the difference. Returning to the film with the GH7, I personally don't like it at all. The look is banal, heavily color graded, and with heavy grain added in post. But I believe it was a personal taste of the authors and that it was not something done to cover the limitations of the camera. Perhaps more the limitations of the production budget. I repeat, this is a very personal opinion.

Read this: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/oceanfootagemastery_underwatercinematography-myoctopusteacher-activity-7396815155616989184-C-CD

If Panasonic would wake up, they could be the ones to get their hands on Arri. They already have a collaboration for the color profile, and Panasonic no longer has the professional division. But, as you say, the old Japanese guys have completely lost their minds. Could it be a Chinese company that pulls off the big coup?

Same here. We are all excited for seeing a small package with all these features at that price. I like seeing these young "creators" publishing all these nice video handheld. But seriously, for travel or vacation do I need a RAW camera and a countless TB of storage with me? Despite the character, I mostly appreciated the honest Philip Bloom review of this camera.

Does anyone know if the body and the button layout are identical to the Mark II? Have any shilltubers said anything about it?

Yes, Now you understand my frustration and my initial rant? And that table is for one camera. Imagine you upgrade camera and your HHXXYY lens doesn't work as expected anymore. Hey, and they are an alliance!

The situation is worse than I thought, and this information is hard to find. The last column is hidden at the bottom of this table. The table is different for every camera body. This is for GH5MII https://av.jpn.support.panasonic.com/support/global/cs/dsc/connect/gh5m2.html Regarding the Summilux 25mm F1.4. The first version (H-X025 - 300USD used) doesn't support Focus ring control (ufficial Panasonic name for this basic operation) Only the second version support it (HA-X025) .

But that way they would have to redesign all the cameras. There is no space for PANASONIC on the front 😜

Look, I was on a beach with rough seas and I wanted to do a very simple thing: a focus transition between the sand in the foreground and the breaking waves, all at F2.0 with the ND filter. At that moment, I had the old Lumix 20mm F1.7 mounted, which I really like for its rendering and colors. But it was simply impossible, partly because the focus ring (like many Lumix M43 lenses) is not smooth and absolutely not pleasant, and also because it's impossible to "feel on your wrist" the two focus points and move between them. Damn it, it's not rocket science. It's a trivial thing that anyone can do after five minutes of practice. In the end, swearing, I remounted the vintage Yashica 28mm and voila! I truly don't understand who the hell even had the thought that a "non-proportional" focus (that's the correct term IMHO) could be useful for anything. So, the old 20mm F1.7 pancake is absolutely useless: the firmware doesn't support proportional focus, the motors are of a very old design, and apparently, it's not brilliant for video even with the GH7. Panasonic thinks that everyone who shoots video with the GH7 is willing to spend 3600 Euros for the 10-25mm and the 25-50mm lenses. They are crazy. It seems to be a blanket that is too short. All the technological effort has been concentrated toward continuous AF with A.I. algorithms and specialized sensors, and now that we have almost succeeded, we are no longer able to do what we have done for a century: manual focus. Unbelievable.

It's been a while since I had to film on land, and I'm using many lenses that I had almost forgotten about. For my rare terrestrial shooting, I always used old Yashica ML lenses in manual mode, and then I got an opportunity where an entire Panasonic kit came almost for free. - Panasonic Leica DG Macro 45mm f/2.8 - Panasonic Leica DG 12-35mm f/2.8 - Panasonic Leica 35-100mm f/2.8 - Panasonic Lumix G 100-300mm f/4-5.6 But I only used the 45mm macro a lot, which is superb underwater. After two days of shooting (I have a GH5 and a GH5MII, and my buddy has a GH5S), I wanted to throw them all down the toilet. Actually, the image quality of the Panaleica lenses is stellar for my taste (maybe even too clinic), but what really gets on my nerves is the impossibility of using manual focus creatively. They all have focus-by-wire, which means it is not linear, and the focus changes with the speed you turn the ring. I know, I'm stating the obvious. But let me vent, and then I'll get to the point. I rummaged through the GH5MII menus and discovered that since it has a similar firmware to the GH6 and GH7, in theory, it would be possible to choose whether to have linear focus and also set the focus throw. But—and here's the fun part—only on some types of Panasonic lenses. Finding the list is like looking for a unicorn, and when you finally get it, you discover that few of the listed lenses (which would almost be a basic kit) have this capability. It's crazy. Basically, it doesn't matter how many new camera bodies Panasonic makes (personally, I think the GH7 is the last of its kind) if you then have crappy lenses that haven't been updated for 15 years. Playing with continuous AF, I discovered that the 45mm Panaleica macro can't even keep the focus in AFC in basic scenarios. And it should be the king of macro in the M43 line and it doesn't support linear focus. In the end, I had to do some relaxing therapy by mounting the Yashica ML 50mm f1.4 and enjoying turning the manual focus ring. Out of curiosity, what is the situation with Panasonic FF lenses? Is it the same situation there too?

Where I can download S1II raw files to play with?

I don't think photographic RAW can be compared to video, or maybe I didn't understand your point. With a 4TB hard drive, you can store infinite RAW photographs. I dive almost every week and usually bring home about 10 minutes of good footage, which I'd ideally like to archive. For special projects, I might get up to 20 minutes. This means between 100 and 300 GB per session. That's not a small amount. Now, it's clear that shooting in RAW is not a medical prescription, but I was wondering if it's a practical solution for everyone, considering that's all anyone talks about now.

It's easy but archive storage it's not cheap. I mean, for my use case during the years I've building an underwater footage archive. nevertheless i understand that who works on events does not archives footage forever.

The simultaneous release of the Zr and C50, along with Resolve's ability to import ProRes RAW, was truly like throwing a stone into a pond. Now the shilltubers and others are going crazy over RAW. I wonder if this is just a moment or if it will last. I have played with the Zr RAW files you linked me to. Gorgeous. So far, there is no news of C50 files. If any of you have representative ProRes RAW files from the S1II, S1R, and GH7 to share, you would be doing me a big favor. What I wonder is, do we really need RAW? As far as I know, even in cinema it is used sparingly. Of course, knowing you can shoot in RAW if you need to is nice, but has the cost of storage dropped, or did I miss something? Where the hell do I save an archive of RAW files? I would prefer H.265 or similar files that are lightweight and pleasant to work with. I have seen files from the FX3/FX6 that were spectacular and graded like butter in the Color page.

Tanksssss

Actually from what I see Resolve 20.2 support prores raw already. I could find S1II files to download actually.

So, everyone is talking about quality and analysis on the videos shared on YouTube, but no one has had the chance to download a raw file? Did the shilltubers sign NDAs that don't allow them to share the original files? Will we have to wait for the camera to get into the hands of common users?