Jump to content
DBounce

First Footage From EVA1

Recommended Posts

EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
2 hours ago, Matt Kieley said:

Who is this camera for then? Wedding videographers shooting in terrible dim/mixed lighting? Who would be able to afford the EVA1 + lenses, but not a few Lowel lights? I just recently picked up a second Lowel DP (1K) light, used, complete with barndoors, protective screen, and bulb for $60 from Adorama. The first one I bought used for a similar price. There are also good, bright LED lights that are portable and affordable, so "not having access to power" is no longer an excuse. Lighting should be something all filmmakers (not videographers, but filmmakers) use creatively, to express a feeling, not something that comes last, after camera, drones, gimbals, etc. 

If low light is a concern, why not buy an A7SII for a fraction of the cost of the EVA1?

I have lights a plenty, but there is something to be said for traveling light😀 Travel friendly lights often do not put out many lumens. And for run and gun it can be awkward setting up lights. On a controlled set, no worries. Are you making the case for wanting poor low-light performance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Radio88 on Vimeo looks amazing to me (don't view it in Chrome to judge colors though, they're seriously messed up there...).

Basically like a GH5 on steroids, or Varicam.
I don't see any overprocessing like sharpening or noise reduction either. The C200 looks like crap compared to that (in MP4 at least), RAW is ok, but doesn't show that incredible amount of detail.

4 hours ago, AaronChicago said:

I have to say, I'm not feelin' it. Definitely waiting till more examples are out as well as raw footage but this doesn't look like the Varicam 35 to me.

It looks better to me than anything shot on the original Varicam to me.
The amount of detail is insane. No visible sharpening either.
Colors look great as well.

If there wasn't the 4k60p 8 bit flaw, this would have been an instant buy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, AaronChicago said:

I have to say, I'm not feelin' it. Definitely waiting till more examples are out as well as raw footage but this doesn't look like the Varicam 35 to me.

I agree, it's not the Varicam...but neither is the GH5, and I would use the 3 together without hesitation...for me it's a problem with the EVA mount...but reading between the lines, the good out of the camera IQ, more than does it for me, and for my use, the good is what I would be interested in. My biggest problem with the camera really is, if I needed better ergonomics than the GH5, it would be the LT...with the GH5 used as BCam....so for my use this camera does not fit a slot...and I think this camera was definately designed for narrative work, not run & gun or weddings....there are much cheaper and more forgiving cameras for that purpose!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vimeo release of the "Near to superstition":

Still noisy but much better than the youtube. It looks like youtube sucks most of the quality out of the videos, especially when they have noise, making it the shittiest delivery method. 

Vimeo:

59c54dbfd54e9_ScreenShot2017-09-22at12_50_19PM.thumb.png.c85ac9a40da4a19e504e501a86626a3e.png

 

Youtube:

59c54dd5cebea_ScreenShot2017-09-22at12_48_40PM.thumb.png.cf6322e8708463fac0c2eefc48a93a47.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Don Kotlos said:

Vimeo release of the "Near to superstition":

Still noisy but much better than the youtube. It looks like youtube sucks most of the quality out of the videos, especially when they have noise, making it the shittiest delivery method. 

Vimeo:

59c54dbfd54e9_ScreenShot2017-09-22at12_50_19PM.thumb.png.c85ac9a40da4a19e504e501a86626a3e.png

 

Youtube:

59c54dd5cebea_ScreenShot2017-09-22at12_48_40PM.thumb.png.cf6322e8708463fac0c2eefc48a93a47.png

Crazy how weak YouTube still is in terms of compression... 

I love how much detail many of these shots have. Way better than the original Varicam in that regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, deezid said:

Crazy how weak YouTube still is in terms of compression... 

I love how much detail many of these shots have. Way better than the original Varicam in that regard.

The Vimeo effort is better, and much more detailed... not as soft. But right at about 7.46, there is some weirdness visible on the main characters face. Not what I would really call organic. It clearly shows digital noise. While I will give you the EVA1 is far more detailed than the Canon offerings, I will also point out that it seems to handle noise worst. 

 

Stranger still, some of the people here were actually pleased with the youtube rendition of this movie. I just can't see that being acceptable. For daylight, this camera is great. But that does limit its applications. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Liam said:

still better on vimeo, but... ? - I'm sure it would look better too if I wasn't on a 720 screen

 

It was on a near 4K (3440) screen... Uploading here,  changed the resolution. Here is another (near) 4K capture: 

59c5734dd0464_ScreenShot2017-09-22at3_28_39PM.thumb.png.714f5971446b7032310636ad0ca45e47.png

Apparently the main character is about to die from pixel eating bacteria :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Don Kotlos said:

Apparently the main character is about to die from pixel eating bacteria :) 

but is your computer dying of something?

maybe my screen's res is basically denoising it? I feel like something's wrong here

ab.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Don Kotlos said:

Youtube is wrong.

Vimeo looks just fine. Noisy but fine, not a macroblocking hell... 

 

Whatever the issue... there is still definitely and issue. If it cannot play nice on YouTube that's not good for many. I remain largely disappointed in what I have seen so far. I hope it is improved before launch. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to dig this camera but I just can't. To my eyes the image overall looks thin and people look plastic. The motion cadence looks video-ish too. I'm sure you could do a few tricks to make it look more filmic, but with some effort, which is kind of underwhelming for a camera in it's price range.

I feel like it's not a far cry from what you could get out of a modern mirrorless camera. Sorry if this offends anyone. It's just merely my opinion. If you like and use this cam, cheers. Happy filming. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Matthew Hartman said:

I'm trying to dig this camera but I just can't. To my eyes the image overall looks thin and people look plastic. The motion cadence looks video-ish too. I'm sure you could do a few tricks to make it look more filmic, but with some effort, which is kind of underwhelming for a camera in it's price range.

I feel like it's not a far cry from what you could get out of a modern mirrorless camera. Sorry if this offends anyone. It's just merely my opinion. If you like and use this cam, cheers. Happy filming. 

Did you get the Ursa already? It seems that this camera is a direct competitor to the BMUMP, and its total cost is a bit smaller for lower end stuff (all the UMP raw options are great, but for most people and most uses, just 10bit is enough, and a whole EVA rig can be a lot cheaper).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Did you get the Ursa already? It seems that this camera is a direct competitor to the BMUMP, and its total cost is a bit smaller for lower end stuff (all the UMP raw options are great, but for most people and most uses, just 10bit is enough, and a whole EVA rig can be a lot cheaper).

Canceled the order pending this RAW NX1 find. We'll see what it reveals and if it's not a reliable thing I'll order the URSA again. Even with the RAW thing I'm still leaning on the URSA because I feel like it will be more reliable/adaptable, but you never know. I can wait for the reveal next month, and I wouldn't mind saving the $7k if possible.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, IronFilm said:


What about the new Kinefinity announcement? 

The NX1 announcement won't in anyway compete with a full on cine camera. I do not know what wizardry Arikhan will brought in, but it won't be the same as having a dedicated cine camera able to record in multiple formats, ND filters, or the bell and whistles of a proper cine-ergonomics, and all.

Kinefity's sound great, but we don't see enough, here in Europe. UMP and EVA would be safest bets for sure, and especially the EVA has a great price tag and 5.7K raw on a week, or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Panasonic firmware updates:

Additional recording formats
4096×2160(4K)
422Intra 400M 29.97p,24p,25p,23.98p
3840×2160(UHD)
422Intra 400M 29.97p,25p,23.98p
2048×1080(2K)
422Intra 200M 59.94p,50p
422Intra 100M 29.97p,24p,25p,23.98p
1920×1080(FHD)
422Intra 200M 59.94p,50p
422Intra 100M 29.97p,25p,23.98p,59.94i,50i
422LongGOP 50M 59.94i,50i
(Support for VFR)
4K / UHD
422Intra 400M Max 30fps
2K / FHD
422Intra 200M/100M Max 120fps (equivalent to 400M)
Support for Interval REC
Support for RAW Output
5.7K/30p, Crop 4K/60p, Crop 2K/240p
Output of CAMERA metadata (info about sensor, lens, etc.) superimposed on SDI
Output of information displayed on LCD so as to be able to use HDMI output for VF purpose(Focus Assist and HOME Screen)
Improvement in HOME Screen operability
Switching of VFR ON/OFF, SHUTTER ON/OFF and ISO/GAIN
Improvement of WFM
Transmittance of WFM display is lowered for improvement in readability.
WFM can be switched directly from Focus Square.
Compatibility with 3rd-party wired remote controls
Improvement
When SDI OUT menu is at OFF, mounting/dismounting of LCD causes REC S/S button on the Grip to no longer work. This problem is fixed.

Source: 43rumors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2018 at 11:47 PM, Matthew Hartman said:

I'm trying to dig this camera but I just can't. To my eyes the image overall looks thin and people look plastic. The motion cadence looks video-ish too. I'm sure you could do a few tricks to make it look more filmic, but with some effort, which is kind of underwhelming for a camera in it's price range.

I feel like it's not a far cry from what you could get out of a modern mirrorless camera. Sorry if this offends anyone. It's just merely my opinion. If you like and use this cam, cheers. Happy filming. 

Do you think what you're seeing are artifacts from the compression (long GOP) that is in the 1.0  firmware? I'm curious to see some footage shot on the new All-I codec (and RAW). From what I understand long GOP is really best for delivery not capture (maybe that's wrong, but it makes sense). Still curious to see what effect this might have on the issues you highlighted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...