Leaderboard

Hi Chaps. I decided to take my FORBES70 camera out to play last weekend. I'm happy with the results but wanted to ask for some honest critique. I'd love to hear opinions on the image quality - resolution, perceived dynamic range / highlight/shadow rolloff, colour, and general 'look' of the images. Please bear in mind that the current maximum res is full hd, but in terms of full hd res, how is the image looking? I'd also love to hear some views on the large format aesthetic the camera exhibits. Maybe in comparison with the recent trailers for Hateful Eight and The Revenant. Is the added expense over say a full frame camera and fast lenses justifiable? is the current resolution cap of full hd a real issue? curious for your thoughts! - ps. larger file available for download (and detailed info about the system) on the vimeo page

Have you read the EULA for facebook or twitter or your iphone or android phone? Or just every time you use google or amazon. It's crazy. And the NSA collecting everything - none of us have privacy.

good 1080p is better than mediocre 4k. Grab an A7S and shoot internal 1080p with a cheap 50mm prime like a contax 50/1.7. nothing will come close for the money. full frame for most stuff, aps-c crop for close punch ins.

there are aspects of a camera that might get left in the dust because everyone's chasing after 4k, so I get the question from that standpoint. also I personally cannot handle 4k video editing on my crappy pc, so

Looks good for sure, although I don't like the smudged corners in the wide shots. Also, I'd love to see it compared versus full frame with bright lenses. Sony A7S + Nikon / Sigma 20mmm f/1.8, Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2, or any 50mm f/0.95 / f/1.2 will give some crazy shallow dof. Different aesthetics than big format lenses, but It would be interesting to see what's the actual difference.

If you're used to Nikon then get the D750, and don't forget the lenses are as important as the camera. What do you use with the D200? If D750 is out of your price range get the D5300 or D5500.

Cine 2 is really not much worse than CINE4 for dynamic range - I would recommend CINE2 then.

I dumped my macbook pro 17" years ago, god I hate macosx.

And here is V-Log > AlexaLOGtoREC709 > Osiris M31 LUT

Suddenly clipped highlights, over sharpened, moire and aliasing, 60i and high compression. That is the video look Video look is not: deep depth of field, small sensor (super 16mm is a film look after all), though a crap DP can certainly make anything look like video if they try

What if there were no 4K available in cameras today? Would you still recommend an A7something, GH4, NX-1, based on their other features? I like some of the high FPS slow motion coming out on new cameras, but not enough to be the sole buying point. I need to record video for work - A few talking heads, how-to steps, finished product, QA testing, etc. It will never be at a theatre near you. I do not need 4K, just clear quality and pleasant colors. Used models are also fine. Staying at 1080, what camera system would you recommend based on quality, features, workflow, codecs, etc. ?

24p wasn't solely chosen for practical reasons... It was a combination of the least amount of frames that still had an aesthetically pleasing motion cadence. But I get your point.

Because they're touted as a feature, so manufacturers want them activated on store displays by default. It's the same reason most TVs' default color balance is insanely blue to make it look brighter, and why plasma never took off. It doesn't do well on a shop floor. Hell, that's the only reason 4K is selling; people stand way closer in the store than they do at home, so the set looks way more detailed than what they'll actually see in their living room.

I noticed it during my Looks test a couple of posts ago. I remember it as several cranks on the aperture. Will retest.

Not really. Yes. This is the typical FUD scenario -- early adopter of Red Hat, then got disinterested. I've never used Red Hat. That's fine. I would rather have open source and free software. Disagree wholeheartedly. With open source and free software, I can do almost anything that can be done with proprietary software. Furthermore, open source software often can do more than proprietary software, as a lot of the innovation occurs in open-source code. I would rather use software from a coder who is enthusiastic than from one who is merely drawing a paycheck.

A Linux beta of Resolve 12 is available as a free download.

Well, just a heads up: The P50 has a starting price of $1599 and will get much more expensive when you select the highest CPU/RAM/Storage configuration. But at least that will be a professional grade computer and not an art piece that acts like a mirror, throttles every time you try to render a 2min video, cannot upgrade the storage past 1TB or limited to 16gb of ram.

I preferred it. I noticed no difference downscaling before I brought the footage into fcpx, as opposed to editing 4k prores and then rendering out to 1080p. I will say it is faster to do the downscaling before hand, but that may just be due to my hardware limitations.

As an tangent...why are these modes activated in default by the manufacturers? As for Avatar; could care less about the frame rates on that one, the story was a joke and therefore so was the movie.

@Mattias Burling what made you want to switch from the lenovo y50? Screen? Glitches? Bad battery life? http://gizmodo.com/heres-the-box-that-can-turn-your-puny-laptop-into-a-gra-1724958260 Also, here's a prototype of a laptop with tb3 and external graphics.

It was this seller. http://m.ebay.co.uk/itm/171846075915

Can report that the fellow on eBay selling the 64gb Lexar Cfast 2.0 for less than a 32gb costs in Sweden is legit. It's obviously some sort of Grey import since it shows up with a sticker in moon language and no warranty. It was professionally packaged in anti static bags but not in an official Lexar box. No customs or import tax within the EU. Tried it at 305mbps for a couple of minutes without hiccups.

First of all, I'm sure historically, it was smart to charge (much) more from users that needed the OFX version (i.e. people that paid for resolve and presumably even edit hardware). However, with Resolve Lite now being out, and HitFilm Express (and even Pro which is still reasonably priced) apparently increasing in popularity, I was hoping Neat would do something with their OFX pricing. Alas, they have told me they have no plans to lower the OFX pricing (2.5 times higher than other versions in price..). I am trying Resolve and Hitfilm Express now, so spending 250 on noise reduction isn't very tempting. My question is two-fold: 1. Can something almost as good be had for around $100? 2. If I'm forced to spend $200+ anyway, are there other packages around the same price that match or are better than Neat? Thanks!

I think it looks very similar to a7s but better for stills because of extra size of photo sensor I think - but i messed with it so quickly I still think to wait for a7s II if you can samsung nx1 is great - it surprises me more every day- i mostly just use it as a scouting camera. the a7r ii and a7s has more dynamic range but there is a punch in resolution to the image of nx1 - but i still like the color better out of the a7s and a7r ii i look forward to the next round of the samsung camera

Hey, I´m very happy with the G6. Resolution is pretty. Codec doensn´t mind a little bit of color correction and messing with LUTs. Usually shooting all -2 on Natural, color mostly on 0. Kinda sucks for peaking though. Gonna post some examples and my short vid very soon. best regards

Focus travel is only 1 centimeter.

Looks like the Lenovo P50 is the one for me, unless my Macbook Air 2013 4GB i5 can be used with the proxy trick in Premiere Pro for 4k. The Lenovos look like little beasts.

Neat Video is great but I have yet to get it working in Resolve. Crashes on me constantly, v11 or v12beta. I should have just kept my Premiere Pro one only. It's just the rendering speed in Resolve is miles faster. Anyway, save your money if you can. I'd like to know if there's another alternative too.

I'd recommend the Sony PMW-F3 for sure (I have one myself! And I'm using Nikon lenses with it). They're an insanely good deal. Can easily pick one up for roughly two grand ish each on eBay or elsewhere. I even saw one go for a grand and a half earlier this week on eBay (I paid even less for mine!). Only significant drawbacks about this AWESOME camera: weight, max 60fps, and only MF (except for rare FZ exceptions).

Windows 10 is decent. Big improvement on 7 and 8 Resolve 11, I tried in Windows 7. Wasn't impressed with performance vs Mac version! Maybe 12 in 10 is better? Might give it a go.

sorry, old topic. But I was just remembering this surprisingly good B horror movie, Inside. at one point the killer is hidden beautifully in the darkness in the grain in one of the jump moments. Don't think it would have worked with a clean image. pretty sure some of it was on actual film, couldn't find much info - I would wager more grain was added. idk, just felt like it actually helped the film and especially the shot. not just in general style, but to tell the story right, which if you're a real cinematographer should probably be the first thing you look at. Can anyone else think of moments like that? I think it's easy to argue black and white has helped certain films etc. Just thought it was interesting to think of this as an actual tool peace

same ballpark. but has some differences. for one, the front element on the Rectilux Core DNA doesn't rotate so you can use a variable ND, if i'm reading the press release correctly.

Is this the same as the SLR Magic Rangefinder or is this something totally different?

I wonder how well you'll be able to play games on a quadro card. But you could use tb3 to set up an external GPU system!

It seems the op is trying to get us to consider the other qualities of a camera aside from 4k. But this is really a mute point, because there is 4k.

read a book. you don't think you need to make the jump to 4k, or you can't handle 4k? Are you asking if, for instance, shooting 4k on the nx1 has advantages other than the 4k itself since it won't really matter in the final image? (e.g. would you turn down 4k if it really was the best setup considering everything everything else? - but not filming IN the 1080p option of the camera?) Not trying to wrap around to the argument you really do need 4k, just wondering if this is a philosophical question or a practical one . don't know if it's helpful to say 4k is sometimes more easy to grade, punching in advantages, and better image by using more of the sensor.

Hand puppets. High end - Nikon D750 and Sony A7S (D750 is easier to get nice colour out of, the A7S is more feature packed), Sony FS100 (used price quite low now) Mid range - Nikon D5550, Sony A6000, Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera, used 5D Mark II (raw is lovely if you can do the workflow justice) Cheaper end - Panasonic G6, Nikon D5200, GH2 GH4 and NX1 are all about 4K, their 1080p is nothing special

What would you recommend if there were no movies?

Some low light shots.

That's not terrible

Thanks, agreed, but the people helping are very variable skills-wise and sometimes they need set and forget. If I could do it every week myself, it would have been a very good solution! An option could also be to use this as an excuse to buy myself a new camera and donate the gh3. Then they could spend the money on a decent lens instead. Need some agreement from the mrs on this one though..

The U is too weak for encoding, the 4770HQ is much better If you want a heavy duty laptop for fast encoding get the newest Xeon mobile processor that was just announced http://news.lenovo.com/news+releases/lenovo-thinkpad-p50-p70.htm

A GH3 or G6 with a vintage lens or two could do the trick if the operator can manual focus.

Maybe a used D5300 and Tokina 80-200mm f2.8? I got that lens for £250 ($400) on ebay.

So I tried adding ONLY an input LUT to the V-Log footage. AlexaLOGtoREC709, with a tad bit saturation. That is all. Colors are looking great IMO.

get nikon, its the most adaptable mount so you can use it on alomost all cameras

That 20MP sensor has a lot more latitude in the shadows than the highlights, so it actually responds fairly well to underexposing (to avoid blown highlights) and bringing it up in post. This is a lot like the D800e, which also has a lot of dynamic range in the shadows. This can be nice for recovering botched exposures, but it requires a fair bit of tonal work to get it looking natural. Also, all that shadow DR on a small sensor means that once you get to ISO 1600 or so, you're losing a ton of that to noise. The newer M4/3 sensors, on the other hand, have a much more pleasing, well-balanced DR distribution. They do pretty well in the highlights with a very nice roll off, but can also be recovered quite well (at low ISOs). I prefer this, because there's less I need to do to make it look good out of the camera. Plus, in low light, I can crush the blacks a little and still have that nice dynamic range in the highlights to keep things looking realistic. I've been shooting the GH3 and the RX10 side by side for a few months now, so I have a ton of experience trying to get them to match well in post. They require VERY different treatment to look their best. Both are quite capable, but if I had to choose, I'd stick with M4/3 in a heartbeat. EDIT: This is all in regards to stills. For video, my findings are similar, which puts the RX10 (even with the XAVC-S codec update) at a distinct disadvantage, because all that shadow DR is heavily compressed and doesn't always respond well to being raised. Compounding the issue is that the most accurate Sony Picture Profile (Deep) is very contrasty and crushes the blacks. Portrait is probably the second best, but it's so oversaturated you can easily clip a color channel, even at -3 saturation. The GH3 in Natural or Standard blows it out of the water for out of the box color and ease of CC/grading. The only points I'd put in the RX10's favor are that lens (an amazing piece of engineering) and the internal ND.

But all of the things you are describing are inherently organic to film. I don't think anyone is saying video is bad, it's just not yet as good as film. But one thing it does have, which I am grateful for... It's a helluva a lot cheaper and affords me the possibility to make movies... For that, and that alone... Video trumps film.

Linux is only free if you value your time 0$ per hour. You will need a lot of hours to make it work as you want!