FHDcrew

Agreed about the GH2. Special image. A YouTuber named OWLBOT, who used a c100 mark ii for a long time, has an interesting video which touches on the unique look these older cams provide. He filmed it on an AF100 to prove his point.

Real, natural grain, which trumps digital sharpening any day of the week, usually is only captured in a legit uncompressed raw codec like CDNG (probably not the “fake BRAW). It is just stupid pleasing when you are in a well lit scenario with low ISO, and the RAW codec captures all the fine, discrete noise in the image. You won’t see that in a PeterMcKinnon video lol. Glad ARRI is embracing this.

Maybe Megadap or Fringer can make a smart AF adapter with a drop in VND. They do impressive work at reverse engineering lens mounts. I’ve heard really good things about the fringer ef-fuji Z and EF- Z mount adapters

Very true…though that’s with a bulky external recorder. And C300 ii gives you DPAF as well.

The c300 ii seems like a 1080 beast with 12 bit 444!!

I saw the video example you are referring to. That’s all talent and styled grading. Your R6 can look great, just like that. Don’t think it’s just the camera,

If you are struggling to get a good image out of a Canon R6, you sure will struggle to do the same on basically any other modern hybrid. You still have to be good at the same stuff, lighting, grading, composition, things like that. Soak that info like a sponge and stop reading the camera forum debates. It’s a waste of time.

If you are struggling to get a good image out of a Canon R6, you sure will struggle to do the same on basically any other modern hybrid. You still have to be good at the same stuff, lighting, grading, composition, things like that. Soak that info like a sponge and stop reading the camera forum debates. It’s a waste of time.

Honestly, I don’t understand why you even feel limited by the Canon R6. The image is beautiful and the camera is extremely convenient. Don’t fall into the trap of “more buy = more gooder vidyos”. The stuff I shoot on my Nikon Z6 looks much better than the Panasonic G7 I started with, but a big part of that is that I’ve gotten much more real world experience and practice than when I first started out. Yes the camera helped, but what helps even more and is NECESSARY to truly benefit from a camera upgrade is to have enough knowledge and experience to be able to bend and twist the tools to your use. And 1-2 years from now, if I am still using my Z6 my footage will look even better. It’s so easy to get into the trap of needing that next “thing” to get a cinematic image. It’s really all down to you. Can you light well? I bought a large parabolic softbox thinking it would instantly improve my videos. Well I really underestimated the fact that I had to really PRACTICE with the softbox. It didn’t inherently make my videos better, it’s been me trying to figure out how to use it. I’m just now getting close to an “okay” result with my lighting setup. And there are people online that get better results than me, even though they are using even smaller parabolic softboxes that are technically less flattering. the point is, stop worrying about your gear not being good enough. Learn and practice as much as you can. Be patient. It’s taken me over a full year just to get decent color grading results from my log profile. Nothing wrong with the camera, it’s just i lacked experience and still have much to learn.

Might come down to talent honestly.

Yep, I’m pretty sure we hit the baseline for a great image several years ago. Pretty much now as long as the camera meets a certain threshold than all these modern cameras have comparable images; their differences that people fuss over are very minor. Here is an example. My nearly 4 year old Nikon Z6 (I know I spam the forum about that camera) puts out a nice log image with good dynamic range. Basically a lot of what is good about a modern full frame image. Something like a Panasonic S1 or a Sony FX3 will have a “better” image, though the difference is small enough to not be extremely important in the grand scheme. Any modern camera can look amazing.

Agreed. I think a C100 II would have been perfect for me, since downrezzed FHD is plenty for what I do. I was a little concerned I wouldn’t be able to push the 8 bit low nitrate c-log around much.

It definitely wasn’t for 99% of canon cameras. For years their h264 compression was so trash, people thought the line skipping was what made everything in the canon rebel/5d cameras look out of focus. Then magic lantern raw came and proved us wrong. They simply had awful codec compression. Who knows…it might’ve been deliberate!

I completely agree with everything you mention. And so many things are much more noticeable than the resolution. Your choice of lens, the dynamic range, color, lighting conditions, etc. I think are much more noticeable. That’s why any day of the week I prefer the oversampled 1080p footage from my Z6 recorded to the Atomos Ninja Star. It to me looks much better than the internal 8 bit 4k files; the extra dynamic range and smooth highlight rolloff are noticeable in nearly any situation, and matter much more than resolution.

Yeah, agreed @kye Do you think the same holds true when viewing an uncompressed, high quality local export from an NLE? Comparing 4k and downrezzed 1080?

How is the 1080p? I hear somewhere in normal frame rates it does 8k>4k, and even 8k>1080p internal downsampling. Would be amazing.

I know, it’s just insanely convenient. And scales right up to 4k looking great.

Exactly, and you also lose any slow motion with the ninja star. But with the correct settings the camera can send a 6k>1080p oversampled image, instead of the stock pixel binned 1080p readout. So the 1080p is nice and detailed, like a C100. I shoot in this mode so often, it’s perfect especially for online use. Even looks good on a 4k monitor. So I don’t think the lack of 4k is a huge issue. The difference is there, but since the 1080 is oversampled, it’s only a small difference. Now why does this setup work for me? I always deliver to 1080p, I’m not one to fuss over detail, and this 1080p mode already has very nice detail. I rarely use slow motion as well, so the ninja star “solved” my problem with the camera. The problem was the heavy weight with the Ninja V, along with the poor battery life. Ninja Star is light and lasts forever off a small NPF550 battery. Ninja V needs multiple larger NPF750 batteries to have good battery life, and so the weight really adds up. I think a big reason many say 4k looks so much better than 1080 is because most cameras just don’t do a good job actually resolving 1080p. Most cameras just line skip or pixel bin in the 1080 mode, so you aren’t getting true 1080p. Recording Oversampled 1080 directly is a severely underrated workflow in my opinion.

I will play devils advocate here and suggest what no one suggests. Buy a used Nikon Z6. Then buy a Ninja V. If you only need 1080p get an older, cheap Atomos recorder. Atomos Ninja Star is quite cheap and tiny, and you could also go with a ninja 2. These all go less than $300 on the used market. Bam. No overheating, stabilized, excellent codec, great DR, very respectable video autofocus. Downfall is to get the nice, high dynamic range you have to use an external recorder at all times. So MAKE SURE you either like working with external recorders, or, as is my case, am begrudgingly willing to put up with them for the sake of the better image. It’s not under $1000, though can be quite cheap https://www.adorama.com/us1543931.html https://www.adorama.com/us1549069.html

I wish I had this camera in my hands to test the AF for my scenario. Seems like it might honestly work for what I need. Basically would be using native Panasonic lenses, probably a combo of the 50mm 1.8 and the 20-60 kit, with the 20-60 being an acting duty 20mm prime for me. I would need basic AF to stick on to a face with some basic handheld motion, would need it to be stable enough to do basic gimbal tracking shots, and would need it to be able to keep a person in-focus, in a controlled, properly lit scene. I’d even be willing to accept a bit of background pulsing, as long as the subject isn’t going crazy out of focus. I would want to shoot 4k 24fps in full-frame mode. But might be willing to go super 35 and use a lens like a sigma 18-35 instead. Only reason I got a Z6/Ninja V combo instead was the superior AF Edit: Has anyone tried shooting 4k 50 or 60p in the super 35 mode, then using optical flow in post to confirm it to 24p without changing speed?

Wait, so the original sigma fp autofocus isn’t unusable? Could I trust it to keep a face in focus for an interview, shooting wide open at 1.8? Could I do a basic tracking shot on a gimbal and not have any crazy pulsating?

Certainly preferable over the GH6. We get internal Prores PLUS PDAF.

Well there is our GH6 killer!!

Yeah, that’s unfortunate. If it’s PDAF has matured enough to compare well to say my Nikon Z6 AF, it will be perfect. I even feel “ethically” inclined to it. It sits well with me that the camera just gives us the plain, simple uncompressed raw readout. All cameras are capable of doing this to some extent, the manufacturers simply don’t do it. I’d be willing to sacrifice storage to have such a tiny camera with that level of image, assuming the AF is decent. Please run some tests if you get it!

Resolve makes a lot more sense for independent video producers. Unless the client requires premiere. I use resolve for everything but fear I will lose jobs because I don’t use premiere. But premiere feels outdated, and lumetri color is much worse than resolve’s color.