Leaderboard

Glad you got the FS7.   The more people keep buying the old 1080p stuff from Canon the more they are going to keep the 4K stuff in the vault and coast along. They can sell us a $5k 1080p camera and then also a $8k 4K camera at some point in 2015. Such profit. Please people stop buying dated equipment and reward the innovators like Sony...

I actually have on my desk right now - the FS7. I've not even turned it on yet but this thing is incredible. It's built like a rock and the grip is the best thing about it. Shooting a music video with a RAAAR RAAAR band on FS7 + a GH4 on a drone in a mental asylum with no roof tomorrow. What was Shane on about again? :P

It's news to me that the C100 Mark II's image competes with the full frame A7S 4K output, or the 10bit 4K GH4 output or the NX1's 4K output oversampled from a 6.5K sensor output.   "DSLR killer" it isn't.

I only shoot "manual." Being a good editor is what sets you apart. Knowing how to work with clients, solve their problems, and answer their questions gets you hired again and again. In my (admittedly low-end) world gear doesn't matter so much anymore. All IQ from modern cameras is good enough now. EDIT: It's just as important to know which clients you should stay away from. Hard to explain that one. You just kinda figure that out through wisdom.

Ebrahim, I would very much like to see something that you think of as largely "your" work (rather than your contribution to a larger project). So perhaps small scale stuff like wedding or beauty shots?

It's really hard to take him seriously after what he said about 5D Mark II trashing GH4.

>Sponsored by Canon

Ebrahim- there are lots of 5D3 RAW (5D3R) vs. <insert camera here> tests out there. Here's a pretty good one comparing 5D3R to Kodak film and Red Dragon: 5D3R has fantastic skintones and a very filmic look. Skintones look better than Red Dragon (at the time of the test- Red is constantly improving their color science: skintones look better now). Keep in mind ARRI and Canon colors aren't necessarily chart accurate (though ARRI is both more accurate and produces nicer skintones). Part of the secret to good looking people/skintones results in making other scene colors off a bit. Here Shane Hurlbut prefer's Canon's C500 'golden color bias' over Alexa's color (to my eye Alexa is more accurate and could easily be made to have the 'golden' look of the C500 if desired):

One chapter at a time, I'm translating to english my graduation work which is 90% focused on anamorphics. I hope it brings some light onto common questions as well as works as a good follow-up read after the original EOSHD Anamorphic's Shooter Guide. I'll keep updating the links to each chapter on this post, please feel free to comment and correct me along the way. There are 22 chapters/topics and roughly a hundred pages. WHO AM I AND WHAT IS THIS ABOUT? http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7166 INTRODUCTIONhttp://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7174 LENS RESEARCHhttp://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7195 a ) FOCUS THROUGH (1.33x)http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7204b ) ISCORAMAS (1.5x)http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7225c ) DOUBLE FOCUS (2x)http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7235d ) CINE LENSES (2x)http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7260e ) DAMAGE AND SERVICINGhttp://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7278f ) DIOPTERS AND CLOSE UPShttp://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7282g ) LENS-YCLOPEDIAhttp://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7280h ) FAKING THE LOOKhttp://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7283 MAGICLANTERN RAWhttp://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7304 a ) CUSTOM CROPMARKShttp://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7305 ZONA SSPhttp://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7310 a ) LOMO: EPISODE 01http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7311b ) ISCORAMAS: EPISODE 02http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7317 THE PROCESShttp://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7318 a ) CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7319b ) ON SET PREVIEW http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=7320c ) WORKFLOW CONCLUSIONBIBLIOGRAPHY

I own both the A7S and the A77II (which just received XAVC-S in the 2.0 firmware update last week) so I shot a quick comparison today. Download the master in ProRes LT to really pixel peep. To make the playing field as level as possible I used the same A-Mount lens on both cameras and also set the A7S to APS-C mode, which I use quite frequently in the real world. Picture profiles and other details are listed at the end of the video. I didn't have a lot of spare time today, so excuse the less-than-awesome slider shots. Shouldn't detract from the results.

Hi anamorphic friends, I'm working a lot these past months so I post less than usual ;) Here is a teaser of the new album of Arthur H, a famous french singer. It was done before last summer, shot on GH3 + my baby Hypergonar 1.75x on my Qioptiq 35mm f1.6 MeVis-C C-mount lens. Badfully I didn't have the GH4 yet ;) My actual work is a 26mn Making Of a long feature movie, shot by me in 4K anamorphic in Ethiopia last november. Stay tune. Thanks

At least some sense on this resolution and spec upset forum. I have been saying more or less the same thing for the last few weeks. This green/magenta bias on skin tone is really bad. If I would rank camera I would put Nikon higher than Canon and add the blackmagic cinema camera up there in the list of very good looking skin tone/colour science. When I say Nikon higher, I mean it is very close with a more golden/orange look to the Nikon but still the Canon is very very nice and would be easy to grade them very close. Now what I have seen of the Sony is perhaps the worst about skin tone. Even with the kholi settings on dvxuser his first example with the girl has still a lot of the green magenta colour. What is strange is what I would call solarisation effect like on her cheek where you have the magenta that makes a brutal change as if sunburn. If it was not the a7s I would say bad makeup but I have seen the same thing in the little girl video shot in slog. People are saying this is because the person did not shoot XYZ setting but until now I did not see one nice video with some natural skin tone and not graded like orange and teal. What is funny is that people are dismissing the C100 mark2 on another threat, because it does not have XYZ spec, but that is the same camera that shot film like Adele blue is the warmest colour that won the Cannes film festival and that looks very very good with a naturalistic colours. When people will understand that colour is by far more important, more so when shooting people, than 4k for example, it will be a big advancement for shooters here. We human beings are much more prone to colour than for example resolution. How many time when you are discussing about an image be it video or photo with somebody will he be saying how crisp it was... or will you hear most of the time how the colours were beautiful. A last thing about grading. I just made the experience lately shooting with some tiffen ND. Guest what with the green bias it becoming really tedious to correct all those shot. Even if I was able to get the green cast out in post the hassle is too much. I am going to buy some 82 mm Hoya pro ND filters. The cost in this case will far outweigh the time spend correcting every shot in the sun.

Skin tones are definitely something people notice perhaps more than all other aspects of a camera (rez, DR, etc). When the skin tones are off (magenta, green, etc), it cheapens the look. When I screened an ABC blind test on a 20 foot screen to my producers and director, they all chose the Alexa (over RED and F55) primarily because they like the way the skin looked. If the color of a tree or building are off it's of little consequence but the face is a different story. It's why when we do tests to judge the parameters of a camera it's always with a face and a color chart.

I think the most important thing coming out of this test is that if you have good actors in front of the camera it really helps draw attention away from any technical inconsistencies. Also if someone decided to make a Philip Bloom biopic - the male actor would have to get cast as the lead. :D

The best tests are minimally 'single blind' when you don't know which camera is which: Alexa and 5D3R cut very well together and a typical audience member won't notice any differences. Again, no one is saying 5D3R matches Alexa. We're saying it comes amazingly close, and most people love the colors. Case in point: if Canon is the most popular stills camera due to their color science, it makes sense that RAW stills captured at 24fps are also very popular with audiences. Regarding getting out and shooting, we've posted quite a few example videos of our work, do you have any examples of your work that could help us understand your idea of filmic? Again, no one is attempting to prove the 5D is as good as Alexa- we're saying it comes amazingly close. I was recently in Atlanta and spoke with John Sharaf about cameras and filmmaking (his facility is very cool: http://www.sharaf.net/). I have been considering purchasing an ARRI Amira however after talking to him, it doesn't make business sense. He's in the rental business and most productions are renting cameras and lenses. Purchasing a single Amira for shooting and then making available for rental doesn't work. After spending money on advertising and once the camera is out for rental, additional clients call looking to rent the camera. Frequently not having cameras available isn't good business, so the investment then becomes purchasing more and more cameras (he has over 20 Alexas and Amiras and all the high-end lenses). After showing him our work on an iPad, the takeaway for indie productions was that for HD delivery, the A7S, GH4, and 5D3R are all more than sufficient. Even if we wanted to purchase an Amira, they're not generally available (perhaps John Sharaf was able to acquire them due to his relationship with ARRI).

The new CMOS correction is very impressive. It corrects rolling shutter wobbling and vibration better than anything earlier. It is though very slow process.

This guy is shooting some really nice stuff with his A7S (not many skin tones though!): Check out his other videos. I haven't seen any A7S footage I've liked as much as his ...

Sure and while you're at it, drop some videos from a GH2 here as well. Remember this post earlier this year? http://www.eoshd.com/2014/05/kendy-ty-t2i-one-guy-amazing-things-5-year-old-dslr/ Nobody says last generation cameras immediately suck as soon as something newer comes out. They've been used to great extent for a reason. But does it really make sense to put your money down and get that kind of camera, when there's so much else out there that's affordable and has 2014-tech? Not so sure...

Yeah, they achieved it in the 1940's. How's that for antiquated?

Get a Panikonan :)

Maybe a Sony A5100 and an E-mount to Nikon F speedbooster? The camera is really cheap, with a great 24MP APS-C sensor, XAVC-S codec for video, and the speedbooster would allow you to use those lovely legacy Nikkor lenses and get the full frame look. There is also a cheap but supposedly very good Commlite adpater for EOS glass in case you need to use stabilized lenses, and even some decent and affordable native Sony glass. Add a kinotehnik or zacuto loupe and you have quite a versatile camera for about 1000$.

It looks nothing like film. It looks to my eye like a C100. If someone showed me the footage, I would assume it had been shot on a C100 or C300. I tried posting some images, but the forum won't let me? :/ Anyway, there's a roll of with Alexa highlights, it's not straight clip - on the 5D, even the highlights that are close to clipping are not rolled off in that way, and you end up with slabs of pure white, or near pure white. Plus, I find the Alexas colours to be more filmic - maybe I wouldn't say 'more accurate' but they're more accurate to how some film stocks would see the colours in the shot. The skin tones on Alexa are 100x better than skin tones on the 5D. I find skin tones (and colour in general) on 5D to be way too warm, and often at the expense of the other colours in the scene. That wildlife footage is quite nice, but in general, I've never seen colours from a 5D that I've absolutely loved.. They're better in raw than H.264, but not that much better Plus, I would say the Alexa has more colour gradation - it might not have the same bit-depth, but there's more colour information there, and there seems to be more shades (comparing, for example, hair). To my eye, the Alexa just looks much, much better. That's not to say the 5D isn't useable, or that it doesn't create good looking images. There are a number of issues in the 5D footage that would not be present Just that in general, the Alexa is a better camera with a better image... which is to be expected as it costs a lot more. In your video above where the 5D is compared to what I assume is 5213 and the RED Dragon, the 5D easily comes off as third best. Keep in mind, that the test is lit to within those cameras' dynamic ranges. If you remember back to the Zacuto shootout, where a whole bunch of cameras were compared, you can see that if you light to a cameras dynamic range, you can get similar looking images out of any camera. That doesn't mean a 5D is the same as an Alexa. Yes - but that is not the same as dynamic range. In practice, it's all about useable DR, and it's theoretically possible that a camera with less DR but more information captured can have the same useable DR as a camera with more DR but less information captured. I'd be interested to see someone compare useable DR on both cameras. That sunset is beautiful. But man are the colours off here. Not sure if that's a result of grading or not.. Why would we? I certainly don't want to use all available DR! I want to light my scenes to optimise them for the dynamic range of the camera - which is part of why I do camera tests. I don't necessarily want something exposed in every step of the DR! It depends on the scene - perhaps you mean that we want to keep the lighting contained within the available DR of the camera, but doing so is not always possible..? See, I don't personally think they do cut all that well and don't believe they ever have - though there are many who can't pick the difference even when comparing H.264 5D footage in big movies. I think the most important point to make is that any camera will give you a pretty good image these days if you know how to work it.. So get out there and shoot, rather than sitting talking about specs all day on the internet ;) Use what you like, what you have, what you can afford. The less time you spend attempting to justify your choice and attempting to prove that a 5D is as good as an Alexa, the more time you have to actually shoot :)

I have tested now the auto batch setting and few own settings. It is time consuming to tweak so that my bad lens OIS (Pana 14-140mm v2) vibration goes away but it still crops as little as possible. I have used something like 35/35& pan and roll and 100% best stabilation but it is not very good still yet. Auto works fine but crops a bit too much. Advanced CMOS settings are so slow that I have not used those yet. Own settings with batch are slow because I must first let the Mercalli analyze all the clips and then assign the own setting to all clips. So there is two long waiting time. Very frustrating to mess with stab programs. I just watched my friends Nikon V1 handheld videos and those were very stable and no need for post stab. The new Mercalli v4 still stabilizes GH4 videos nicely and without converting levels from 0-255 to 16-235 like the previous version v3. I found when I watched my same Gh4 0-255 nature videos stabilized by v3 and v4 the difference is quite big. When 255 levels are converted to 220 levels there seems to be some leveling and compressing of subtle color tones. The V4 0-255 stabilized result is more "photo like" quality and the fine color nyances of nature (greens in grass or reds of autumn) are preserved better. I think the case is the same when shooting 0-255 vs 16-235. If the end product is 16-235 we loose the benefit.

I'll look forward to seeing it SbF!

Very interesting article.. "Also, ecologically, when you're more oxygenated, you're in better shape." Maybe I should start hyperventilating when I'm around someone I'm trying to impress?

jcs- Inazuma makes a valid point, color is also not the only or primary difference between those examples. You can alter de-bayered Alexa footage in post quite a bit because of the image quality and film-like sensor noise: it grades quite nicely. Also, because of the log-c profile, it's analogous to working with film, I'm sure that was one of Arri's goals when designing the Alexa. Realistic or idealized skin tones are also rarely the goal in developing the look for a show. I'll post some archived uncompressed Alexa examples to illustrate as soon as I get a chance, just finished doing some crap for Sons of Anarchy, which coincidentally was shot on an Alexa (with other cameras mixed in, even a GoPro this season) and very not-glam. Our eyes evolved to sense color for health and emotion in skin tones what??? Please continue.

maxotics, here's a an early test with 5D3 RAW shooting very high contrast in bright sunlight (inside shooting outside to the street): At the time of the test I didn't have all the tools to preserve skintones at the same time as taming the background (via masking, etc.)). Even so, as a beginning user of RAW we liked how filmic it turned out. For the interior, natural lighting was used and no makeup was applied to the manager. Skintones for both turned out well for the conditions. For the inside to outside shot, the A7S would likely do better (more DR). I'm curious how much as 14-bit RAW with ACR has a lot of gradations for shadow/highlight manipulation (16384 vs 256): as long as highlights and shadows aren't clipped, it would be able to match or exceed what is possible with the A7S. I purchased a Sony FS700 right after the SpeedBooster came out and have been grading Sony footage for a while now. Whereas I can match cameras and color fairly well in tests with the 5D3, skintones were a whole different matter. With careful exposure and WB, the FS700 can do decent color, however it's fragile for skintones: typically magenta/green 'instability'. In some lighting conditions, the FS700 is quite a challenge for skintones (in the shade at sunset is one example). Here's an example with 5D3 RAW at sunset/golden hour, then the rest is FS700 (interior). While the FS700 skintones aren't bad, the 5D3 RAW skintones are much better (golden hour light also helped). Reviewing this old footage while studying movies shot on film reminds me how much more filmic 5D3 footage looks compared to newer cameras (including the Canon Cx00 series). It makes sense why the 5D was used on so many feature films. When using the A7S or GH4, having the 5D3 around to take shots for color reference is also helpful. Models and clients always love how the 5D3 makes them look: it's helpful to understand how to make other cameras look similar.

I have to agree with this. For the most part, give a middle-range client shallow depth of field and they're happy. But there's a reason I stopped doing those sorts of gigs. For the most part, people do appreciate the quality difference even if they can't tell why they like it more. It's important in as much as you should know that you can shoot on a GH3, GH4, A7s, 5D3 et al and shoot stuff that clients are going to be happy with. But that does not mean you should not strive for better quality work in everything you do! I'd personally rather move my way up through clients than stall at a certain level because I'm happy just giving them 'good enough' images. I didn't get to shoot commercials and films from delivering images that were simply 'good enough.' Never. There are so many different ways you can light a scene, compose a shot, tell a story through the camera, - I'd go as far to say that there is no right way. Just 'ways' that are more visually pleasing to many than others. The right way is the way the Director wants/is happy with. That way may be completely at odds with what you're thinking or what you want (hopefully it isn't, but sometimes it is), but at the end of the day you're working for the Director. My tip is that there's always more to learn - it's impossible to learn it all, so embrace everything (even the terrible shoots) as a good learning experience.

Inazuma- if it were that easy productions would use the cheapest cameras that get the job done- such as Red Epics, then fix the color in post. When the budget allows, they use ARRI cameras (there are exceptions, though interestingly most Oscar winners from last year were shot on ARRI. Looks like this year too.) as fixing Red (et al) color in post is expensive and time consuming. It turns out that getting great looking color from a camera is hard, perhaps there are patents impeding competition too. If it were as easy as color correcting in post, they could build the tech into cameras. With so many folks studying ARRI's color science, apparently reverse-engineering their technology is hard, as no one has matched ARRI yet. It's clear that both ARRI and Canon do quite a bit of special processing to make skintones look great over clinical accuracy. As an artistic tool, the immediate emotional reaction after reviewing footage can effect the edit moving forward. For those shooting mostly landscapes, plants, animals, and tests, resolution and dynamic range can be more important. When shooting people, color is by far the most important. Human beings naturally detect when skintones are off: we evolved color vision in part to detect health and emotion in skin tones.

I tried these settings from Kholi Hicks for my A7s. Definitely a big improvement for grading accurate skin tone. Restored much hope in my A7s. Black Level: 0 Gamma Slog: 2 Black Gamma > Range: Middle , Level: -3 Knee > Mode: Auto , Auto Set > Max Point: 95 , Sensitivity: Mid Colore Mode: Pro Saturation: +8 Color Phase -2 Color Depth > R+1, G-1, B+2,, C-2, M-1, Y-3 Detail > Level, -5 Adjust > Mode; Manual, V/H Balance: -2, B/W Balance Type3, Limit: 0, Crispening:0, hi_light Detail: 0 White balance > Manual > Grid setting B 1 (one to the left) 3000-3600 = Tungsten 5000 - 5600 = Daylight 6100 - 7000 = late day or shade/shaded interiors in daylight It gives a very juicy and gradeable flesh tone.

I couldn't agree more with what Ebrahim was saying about clients being visually illiterate.. Most my clients prefer the images I've shot with the GH3 than the RED Epic. Some of the work experience guys can't tell the difference. Also, I've lost count the amount of times I've gone round to someone's house only to see they have True Motion or Smooth Motion switched on. Recently one friend was watching The Walking Dead with True Motion on - it looked hideous, cheap and like a substandard soap opera shot interlaced on an old home movie camera. I switched it off, and BANG - it looked superb, cinematic, edgy ang gripping. All he said was "it looks blurry now." Don't you find this interesting? Only thing I don't agree with Ebrahim on is to "use IS lenses. Period." IS lenses are expensive, electronic and clinical. Sure that's great if that's what you want - but when you can pick up a Helios 44 for literally nothing, the non-IS options have much more variation. Just make sure you have a steady shoulder, tripod or stabiliser :)

a personal favourite for dslr's with live view through a built in evf is to use a battery grip and bring the evf to exactly the right eye level when the base of the battery grip rests against my shoulder. it adds a very solid point of contact, and since the shoulder is all bone you get no heartbeat/micro shakes. this technique has 4 points of contact- the eyebrow, the shoulder and both hands. added to this, the elbows can be kept close to the chest forming a very solid shooting position. pans are also easy since you can lock your upper body and just rotate your hips/waist for a smooth 180degree pan.

I do think people get used to the Canon "look" - like someones taste in ketchup - everything else seems bad, but in reality it isnt, just different.

Well I'm on the list, but I have a Kowa 16-H. It was my understanding that they had solutions for all the various projection lenses, because they listed them as compatible. Truth is they don't yet. I asked, and they said I can wait until their Kowa solution is available, and they'll still honor my discount. IMO they also need to sort out the rail mount. 1/4-20 is a crap way to do it, no way to keep the lens parallel with the rails.

I'm sure we'll see a more advanced shim system in the coming weeks. The key here is the lens has to be close enough to 71mm to fit inside the shim that is currently shipping. Like I said, I got REALLY lucky that the Hypergonar just happened to fit the shim well enough to be ghetto rigged inside the FM. I'm incredibly stoked that the Helios works with the A7s full frame with a 1.2 crop (for 2.66 cropping in post [throwing away the edges]). The combo is such a sweet spot between clinical and dreamy.