Subforums
17,066 topics in this forum
-
- 5.7k replies
- 1.4m views
-
- 514 replies
- 158.7k views
-
- 18 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 1 reply
- 9.9k views
-
- 595 replies
- 33k views
-
- 55 replies
- 5.8k views
-
- 68 replies
- 4.1k views
-
- 142 replies
- 4.6k views
-
- 20 replies
- 4.1k views
-
Anyone with a Panasonic S5 II or S9 interested in testing my in-cam ARRI compatible LOG C3 profile? 1 2
- 24 replies
- 4.4k views
-
- 0 replies
- 72 views
-
- 19 replies
- 916 views
-
- 45 replies
- 2.9k views
-
- 4 replies
- 303 views
-
- 19 replies
- 1.9k views
-
- 2 replies
- 817 views
-
- 85 replies
- 3.7k views
-
- 13 replies
- 353 views
-
- 62 replies
- 12.7k views
-
- 20 replies
- 1k views
-
- 226 replies
- 82.8k views
-
- 14 replies
- 7.1k views
-
- 60 replies
- 6.4k views
-
- 21 replies
- 1.4k views
-
Ursa Cine 12K now available as camera body only with option for recording to dual CF Express for only $7,000 1 2
- 31 replies
- 2.4k views
-
- 15 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 20 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 34 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 0 replies
- 434 views
-
- 3 replies
- 553 views
-
- 0 replies
- 410 views
-
- 17 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 7 replies
- 818 views
-
- 12 replies
- 692 views
-
- 17 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 79 replies
- 21.6k views
-
- 6 replies
- 834 views
-
- 27 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 6 replies
- 677 views
-
- 0 replies
- 439 views
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics17.1k
-
Total Posts347k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
By eatstoomuchjam · Posted
Were there reports of it overheating beyond some reviewers finding that in the most taxing mode (6k open gate IIRC), it would overheat after more than an hour of continuous recording? -
By Ilkka Nissila · Posted
For (stills) photography, I actually calibrate my editing display so that its range is 0.4 to 90 nit. This matches approximately the contrast range of light reflecting from photographic prints. The display is capable of greater brightness and deeper blacks but I don't normally use that. If I use that display to view streamed video content, the limitation in dynamic range doesn't bother me (I'm not sure if the streaming actually follows the calibrated settings or go outside of it). The display has a "hood" which blocks stray light from the window and other parts of the room, so that avoids most of the reflections that might bother the viewing experience otherwise. I also have a TV which has an OLED screen and a very high contrast ratio (Sony xr-48a90k) and it gives a very high quality viewing experience. It takes into account ambient light brightness and adjusts the brightness and contrast to give an optimal experience in those conditions, so it works better than a projector when viewing during the day. The resolution is also very high, and the streaming applications adjust the TV settings to be optimal for the content they present. I think it's an amazing experience. I don't know what the actual contrast range of the display is (Sony says only that it's near infinite, marketing speak). Apple makes phone and computer screens with what they call Super Retina XDR where they claim the contrast range is 1000000:1 or something like that, but I don't know how accurate the claims are. That would be like 19 stops of dynamic range, if it is true. However, I suspect that kind of content dynamic range cannot be accurately seen in practice because of reflections from the display and also the viewing space. But, what these displays seem to give is a good viewing experience in varying ambient conditions. For stills photography, Adobe has some support for HDR images (I don't mean the usual way the HDR term is used in photography, where multiple exposures are tone-mapped to a result which displays well on SDR displays but actual support of HDR displays without tone mapping). However, the problem with this is that browser support is limited, and if you view a HDR image on an SDR display, you might get a distorted image that doesn't look correct. The Retina XDR display is amazing when viewing high scene contrast ratio photographs converted from RAW images for HDR viewing, it almost feels like a photo of a sunlit scene looks like you were viewing it in the location yourself. However, somehow software support needs to be developed so that both HDR and SDR versions of images can be distributed online and viewed according to the display that you have, since it's unlikely that all displays would be "real" HDR in the near future (increased power consumption etc.) I personally think the technology is amazing, but it's largely unnecessary and somewhat impractical (due to limiting the viewers that can see the images correctly). It seems HDR on the video side is more established and most TVs have some HDR capabilities, and the applications have some ability to adjust to the screen and ambient conditions for optimal experience (at least on my TV). So I would disagree that the displays don't exist, they do. But high dynamic range in cameras has uses also when producing content for SDR displays. On the stills side, people often make masks and dodge and burn the images to be able to get a more human-viewer-like experience within the limitations of SDR media such as SDR displays and prints. In video often there is the situation that you can't set up your own lights and the windows bring in bright daylight and you still have to be able to take video of people doing their activities indoors, hopefully without blowing out the windows. You can deal with this in post-processing somehow (I often reduce highlight contrast and lift the main subject up), or use in-camera tone-mapping techniques (such as Nikon D-Lighting). All of these approaches require a good dynamic range in the capture device to result in a low-noise image in the final result. In dimmer, artificial, lighting conditions when the daylight is gone, ideally one would not blow out the lights when the subject is correctly exposed, for a pleasing final result, again, log video here can help. If the purpose is just to make a video where the subject can be seen clearly and the functional purpose of the photography or video is satisfied, then most cameras made within the 15 years can easily suffice. However, often there are aesthetic objectives that go beyond just the functional information-transfer main goal, and these can be satisfied better with the newer tools. -
Funnily enough, (not for the new owner, but it is/was MPB’s job to check any kit I sold them), I sent them a Fuji XH1 with the same damage. I was doing a shoot for a band in Spain and they had a laser set up and when I came back, the footage got increasingly bad with this weird blue and pink ‘bubblegum’ like blobs on every single piece of footage. It was a disaster 😱 -
I’m somewhat surprised about that as other than a faulty fan on a used S5ii (still didn’t overheat on a job!), I have not had a single issue in this regard with a Lumix camera in 3 years of pro use and often have units running in direct Summer sun with temps over 35 degrees C in the shade, so ‘god’ knows how hot in direct. I have melted long before any Lumix 🥵
-
There are better mirrorless video cameras for sure. I’d pick my S5ii’s without thinking about it. There are better hybrids; S1Rii, Z6iii, Z8, R5ii come to mind. But for stills, other than the Leica SL3 which beats it for design, build and badge, this side of medium format, I don’t think there is a better camera available today and at used prices… It’s hardly lacking in the video department and can shoot 8k but video is not its real strength. With a single prime or a small set (such as the Sigma contemporary line) in a small bag or a single or set of compact zoom lenses such as the Tamron’s, or even a lens such as Sony’s own 24-50 f2.8, it’s a bonkers good piece of kit. Compact but chunky, well built and with the best rear LCD in the business, for me and my needs, it’s that no-brainer they talk about. For most of this forum, maybe not. For the same money, I’d take the SL3 over it and maybe still if I could find one (doesn’t exist) at £3000, but beyond that, nope. I’ve flirted with the notion of medium format but Fuji does not have the lenses and Hasselblad is so far beyond my means, it might as well be one of those cameras on the moon. I’ve had quite a few Sony cameras over the years and admired a few, but none of them quite hit the spot. The A7RV is the first to do so and it’s only real fault for me is it doesn’t have a Lumix badge on it. (I like stuff to match).
-
