All Activity

I think an intermediate range like this would be good for portraits, where a 70-200 might not always be short enough and is a bit too head shot focused, while the 24-70 is a bit short for narrow head shots but otherwise is good. 50-150 mm sounds good, though because of the f/2 aperture, this lens is quite big and heavy. It has no in-lens stabilization so the stabilization is only in the body. I personally understand why manufacturers don't pre-fit their lens feet or cameras with quick-release dovetails as these can be uncomfortable to hold in the hand and there are so many different, incompatible systems. I would prefer something like a 40 mm to 135 mm range with f/2.8 aperture as the images from the f/2 zooms don't appeal to my sense of aesthetics and the focal range would be easier to get a full-body image if needed in a pinch. It would also be smaller and lighter than the 50-150/2.0.

I just borrowed the X4 from a friend and somehow it is so much fun to work with it. Especially the post process when you just tweak some settings and get a super different picture - add some keyframes and the whole thing becomes super dynamic. That being said its strange that you somehow get accustomed to the effect pretty fast. Size and battery life are nice too. For the X5 i am really wondering how it will perform as "normal" camera. 1,26" is bigger than Super 16mm isn't it?

I think I ‘need’ it… More (exclusively actually for me) for stills than video. 2 years ago, I was running around with an S1R + battery grip + Leica 24-90 as my ‘one & done’ stills unit. It had 3 principal faults. 1. Weight; it was 2.8kg in the hands. 2. Using an APSC crop on the 47mp sensor, I could extend the focal length to 135mm with something like an 18mp file but that was not quite long enough for my needs ideally needing something within the 150-200mm range. 3. F4 at the longer ends which is a bit slow for a 90mm lens. Roll forward to 2024 and swapped that rig out for a trio of f2.8 zooms on the Sony A7R5 with the heaviest combo being approx 1.75kg with the 70-180mm, but that lens being a tad long for more general use. Sigma offer their 28-45mm f1.8 which primarily for indoor use would be PERFECT for my needs, but lacks a longer companion such as a 45-90mm f1.8, but even this would not give me the reach I need. Step forward Sony with this constant aperture f2 50-150mm. Does it cover all my focal range needs? No because it starts at 50mm, but covers everything beyond and then some because with the 61mp sensor on my A7R5 and APSC cropping, I can reach 225mm with a 26mp file. Is it big? Yes, but not ridiculously so and it is internal zoom and unless it’s a short extension, I can’t abide long zooming lenses. Is it heavy? Yes, kinda…and more than the 1kg self-imposed limit I would prefer but it covers 50-‘225’mm. At f2. Without extending. Or lens swaps. It would be approx 2.5kg in the hand as a combo with the baseplate I have on the A7R5. Three criticisms: 1. Why white only? Some of us would prefer to be more discrete and maybe they will follow up with a black one or someone like Alphgvard will have a skin soon? 2. No Arca Swiss built into the detachable tripod foot. That’s a bit of an oversight IMO. 3. Price. Despite US trade tarrifs, it’s still more in the UK and EU than the US… At least according to launch prices. So will I be getting one? I think yes, though it may have to wait until next year when they are beginning to appear on the used market, for financial reasons but I don’t think I am going to see a better option than this in my working lifetime. One & Done? Nope, but I have my Nikon Zf with 20-40mm f2.8 for the wider stuff and 40mm f2 for candid when I don’t want to be poking a white canon in peoples faces, plus if I ever decided to hop over fully to Nikon bodies, this new lens will work adapted on say a Z8 no problem.

Picked up a Contax Zeiss 85mm 1.4, my first 85mm, and I cannot believe I have neglected this focal length for so long. Absolutely loving it so far.

Officially announced. If I had an X4, I'm not sure that the new features would convince me to upgrade, but maybe they're enough to convince people who were on the fence to go for it. The leaked info that Emanual added seems right overall. https://www.insta360.com/product/insta360-x5

I have the Ace L, two of them actually, am very happy with them for the price I paid used. Only change I would wish for is drop-in loading instead of having to slide in from the end. Not sure what the differences are with the mkII but the mkI's were one of the best choices for a "cheap" fluid head.

Question for the members. I'm looking at a Sachtler S2170-0001 Ace XL MK II Fluid Head. I know i know, i said no more buying in another thread. However my tripod and its head is proving to be better at photography and less good for panning and tilting in video. Reading some threads on here, Sachtler seem to be the bees knees and pretty much the same thing is said on youtube. Anyone one using the Ace XL MK II Fluid Head ? Kinda looking for some in house confirmation before i do anything rash... I can get the head at a reasonable price at the moment. How long that lasts is anyone's guess. It should fit my tripod which I'd like to continue using until i can save for a better tripod. Thats my thinking anyway. Visiting some waterfalls tomorrow, so that will be interesting.

«seems that Inst360 plans to install a larger 1/1.28-inch camera sensor with up to 133% better light performance» https://www.notebookcheck.net/Insta360-X5-New-leaks-reveal-pricing-specs-and-early-camera-performance-ahead-of-schedule.1002234.0.html

I have been delivering in 14x9 (1.55:1) for a few years. With my new rig I will be narrowing that up a bit more, even, to 1.5:1 or 1.43:1 or maybe just 1.5:1. I'm liking the way 1.43:1 looks the most so far. Plus, Imax! The Panasonic frame masks are going to be really useful for this, particularly for my fisheye, where I will actually be cropping width and height. I just wish I could use the masks when reviewing footage.

In fact, ProRes stands side by side with Resolve... Horses for courses. As many fields in a same industry or industries of similar craft or technology realm. Their subscription model is not friendly nor up to date when we are in 2025 IMHO...

Same, costed me lots of jobs as well. As often they request the premiere/Ae project files. Or they ask if I can take over an existing premiere edit. Been working in resolve for 10 years now, and stopped using adobe because of their subscription model. All in all I might have made more money, just paying for the subscriptions.. Sorry to get offtopic a bit here.

In my experience, at least in my area, a majority of editors are still using Premiere. I'm one of the few using Resolve.

You are right, I kinda missed that. Honestly, the part I don't understand is that most editors are now on Devinci, Yet no one would entertain using B-Raw, everyone is stuck on ProRes!

Hence my disclaimer up there on those 'clients' and word written in italics... 3rd business parties, co-workers, other professionals who have not adopted it yet, industry standards to require the hassle and yes, time, which and where a new standard can be not handy indeed. My point? That's a format to tend to end as rule of living. And mostly not necessarily part of everyone's life/work. No solution fits everything, pretty on the spot no less :- )

There is nothing wrong with Braw, one bit! however EVERY single edit house we ship footage to only accepts Prores LT or ProRes, so it would have to be a transcode, which if you have time is not an issue (but then why shoot raw and not use any of it's advantages) but in very quick turn around situations when you have to hand off a drive, Braw is not possible! These are challenges where you are part of a much bigger production, but if you are a solo shooter and cut your own work, then it's absolutely not an issue!

Have the older Xiaomi 13 Ultra for almost 2 years. Same sensors and lenses except 75mm telephoto one is 62mm in reality. My idea was to use it as a pocket video / cinema camera that is all the time with me. And also as my main and only camera on some trips where I don't want to bring additional photo / video equipment. Still use it from time to time but not as much as thought would be using it. It has many limitations that make getting good footage difficult and ruin as a whole the joy to shoot. Maybe as a photo camera it would be better The good: Picture and video quality from main sensor is really good. Can be treated as BM BRAW video in Resolve. Can easily color grade it and get great results. Really impressive picture quality from a smartphone and tiny camera that is always in my pocket Main 1 inch sensor (23mm) lens is good in low light All 4 sensors/lenses are capable of shooting RAW video at 4K 24fps, 30fps and 60fps As you said, those smartphones have standard case that makes attaching ND filters really easy. I use 67mm magnetic ND filters and they work like a charm. The not so good or the shortcomings and limitations Lens optical IS should be working in MotionCam but in practice I can't get stable handled footage by just using the phone with a simple plastic case for the filters. Gimbal or special metal case with two handles are needed which totally kills the idea of pocket cinema camera for me. This was not the case with iPhone which I could use and get stable handheld footage by simply holding it and even when walking with no additional support. Main sensor is good in low light but the other (three) 1/2'' inch sensors are not. Multiple dot like flares when shooting at night. This is common problem with all smartphones including iPhone. Because of the lenses being so small at night when there are multiple light sources on some occasions you can get multiple small bright dots dancing in your frame. It can completely ruin the footage. Limited lens focal lengths. My preferred focal length for video are 35mm and 50mm. Xiaomi best sensor is on the 23mm lens. MotionCam can't crop the sensor. It can't even properly frame to 35mm or any given focal length other than native one. Can zoom in the screen which is also the viewfinder but there is no indicators to which focal length it corresponds. Video still will be shot at 23mm and I have to crop in post to get 35mm or 28mm eqv. focal length field of view Bad ergonomics. Yes I can get the shots but there is no joy in the process. While picture quality is impressive for a smartphone it can't match a Full Frame sensor or even APS-C sensor. As you said it can't bend the law of physics I need to look from time to time trough a viewfinder. Old habit and addiction that I can't overcome. 🙂 Bottom line: I still prefer a hybrid camera and a lens and I don't use much Xiaomi 13 Ultra as camera. Watched a video about street photography where the author argued that having a tilting screen and shooting from waist level is the best if we want to take stealth photos where people don't stare at the camera. We can even keep interacting and talking with the people while shooting. This would be impossible with a smartphone. Anyway this is my experience, hope it will work better for you.

Fortunately, I am a big Wes fan!

Yeah, every time I think about how you might be composing for both horizontal and vertical I just imagine you turn into Wes Anderson and frame everything centred. There are probably other ways to go about it, but I'm glad it's not something I have to work through!

2025 model is arriving... this April 22. Updated X series version. A few people say it is the last one of this design. Both their teaser and this beta tester hint that we'll have an interchangeable/swappable lens camera this time...

Same here. 16:9 is very device friendly for full screen use but isn’t as *cough* cinematic as 2.35:1, but I find that sometimes too extreme to be standard ‘style’ for all my work. I’m still debating whether to use 2:1 this year or stick with good old 16:9… The advantage of shooting open gate is we have options and with Lumix, multiple frame markers and conscious of my socials, one of those markers is 9:16. Being able to produce 2.35:1 and 9:16 from the same footage is a bit tricky, even with open gate and I will probably just stick with 16:9 + 9:16 as it’s the least extreme option. Well 1:1 is the least extreme, but no thanks as that’s for squares.

The beauty is that you can shoot whatever resolution without crop. I would never shoot above 4k. But the 12k sure does have pretty colors.

In all seriousness though, now that everything is devices and standards don't matter anymore, it's worth taking a few images and cropping them to different aspect ratios and seeing how the images feel. I've become very fond of 2:1 lately. Wider than 16:9 or 17:9, but not so wide that normal-sized screens force the subjects in the frame to be too small, as can happen with 2:35:1

The only video one needs on aspect ratios:

You'd be mad not to wait for the 17K version. I mean, is 12K enough? Really?

Well... oh clients, other professionals in the same business/craft? ; ) @CaptainHook (https://www.eoshd.com/comments/profile/34137-captainhook/) is not here anymore, maybe this helps without such need for a call ;- ) https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?p=620814&sid=6daba22ef40403a68f15e835f55d4556#p620814 Anyway TBH, hard to tell how anyone can be indifferent to Resolve nowadays...