Leaderboard

Ok here are some grabs from the scene. In some cases the banding I would honestly say is "acceptable" though not ideal.. and maybe thats just me being a little generous. The grade contains about 60% of neat video denoising, which is more aggressive than what I really ever use. I was hoping it would help mitigate some of the banding problems.. and it does to some limited extent. Jpegs: Tiffs for better viewing: NX1_Color_Test_Close.tif NX1_Color_Test_Close_Graded.tif NX1_Color_Test_SideL.tif NX1_Color_Test_SideL_Graded.tif NX1_Color_Test_Wide.tif NX1_Color_Test_Wide_Graded.tif Camera settings as follows: Gamma DR, Contrast -10, Sharpness -10, Saturation -4, MBL +10, range is 16-235 Shogun set to capture in ProRes HQ Now I'm definitely a noob to this camera (thus the testing) so I must ask, is there some other setting somewhere that I need to make sure is adjusted properly? Like a picture profile or something? HDMI is set to 3840x2160 (24) clean out. Tomorrow I'm going to try the test again. I'll shoot/edit quickly to test different settings. What values of above should I change? I am planning on dropping contrast to 0 (I actually did drop it to -5 to test one shot, and the banding was still prevalent) and adjust MBL closer to 0, which seems a shame because in my earlier tests (as posted in this thread) I was able to get a TON of usable detail out of the shadows... but the banding just might not be worth it. Also maybe you can edit the tiffs to have less banding, if so, how? Please share your thoughts.

I'd prefer if Blackmagic didn't have us hanging around for 12 months in anticipation, each time they announce a camera. They should avoid announcing at NAB and just announce it when it's ready I think. Otherwise, they get a reputation for delays and that's a bit unnecessary. NAB creates a buzz I suppose.

I just wish some footage from the illusive camera would show its face! It seems to be a figment of the black magic marketing teams imagination - it's almost a year since they announced it and nothing to be seen! I want to see the impact on dr and sensitivity when switched to global shutter mode before i think about putting down a pre order!

I see comments like this a lot and it always reminds me of the revenge of the great camera shootout 2011 where they compared among other cameras an Iphone and G2 to an Alexa. They had an identical scene set up and the DP could modify it as needed by adding lights or adjusting intensity of the lights that were already there. Yes the G2 and even the Iphone to a degree where made to look pretty good and it showed that a good DP could make them look great. Some took away from that video that even the much cheaper DSLR's could be made to look almost as good as the Alexa, the camera tech doesn't matter it comes down to the talent of the DP. While true I took a different lesson from it. If you watch the video the Alexa team says that they only adjusted the intensity of the lights that were there to add some contrast to the shot since the camera could handle the scene as it was just fine. The G2 team due to the limitations of the camera went through a long list of like 15-20 changes they made - adding lights, etc... Not to mention the extra time it takes in post as well. Now take that scene and multiply it by 100, all that extra time you spend dealing with the limitations or quirks of the camera. Yes you can make the image look great but it can take a lot of extra effort to do so. The big players use cameras like the Alexa because they are rock solid reliable with a flexible and fantastic image. They can spend their time being creative, not trying to over come the limitations of a camera. When you have millions of dollars on the line why risk it only to save some rental money on a quirky or unknown camera when you can use a tried and true proven work horse that you know will get the job done smoothly?

For those who might be interested in such things: http://www.yedlin.net/DisplayPrepDemo/ The download version is recommended!

finally admitting to myself that GammaDR, Sat-4,Contrast-10,MBL+10,16-235 is just too flat for 95% of stuff that's shot with this camera (with just so much banding)... So...just shot the same scene with a bunch of different settings including various gammas, contrast/saturation/mbl amounts, and changed up between 16-235 and 0-255. Shot proress hq to the shogun for all of it. I was planning on uploading still tiffs which should contain all the editable info needed, but would anyone prefer to have the whole prores file to mess with? post coming shortly. It's not every conceivable setting, but it should give us generally a good idea of where to go from here, especially with the luminence discussion. I maybe could have shot some internal stuff, but honestly I think h265 is actually a pretty good codec (for 8 bit stuff) and i dont think outputting over hdmi is going to give a significant amount of help even with 422... at least on this camera (i found it quite helpful shooting externally on the a7s though). should show off highlights, a little bit of shadow (back chair with figures on it) and banding on the back wall.

Now this looks interesting...

The Camdiox versions are the best cheap options. leaf springs on the ef side. most cheaper units don't have this. i'd urge you to go a7m2 - the image stabilisation is very good for old lenses. the image below was shot handheld at 1/8th sec. i'd have to have been at iso 25600 to get this without the Image stabiliation

If I underexpose slightly I get horrific artifact in the blacks at a certain point while grading. If you expose perfectly yes, but you won't have any leeway. Personal preference here, trying to find a flexible image without introducing to many artifacts. The perfect middle ground KarimNassar Have you been using my settings on these recent tests? If so awesome! Also great thing I discovered, while Speedgrade doesn't have native H265 support currently, you can force it by using this method posted by Sekhar Ravinutala on the adobe forums: It works perfectly, and I'm getting some incredible results from it. It's extremely processor intensive though, cannot run playback in realtime in 4K even with quality at minimum. It plays back in real time in Premiere when I switch back with the grade on the clips.

IMO 1980's Olympus, Canon and Nikon lenses are up the the standard of the Zeiss Contax's. A Olympus 24mm/2, 35mm/2 and 50mm/1.8 can be had for the same price as a single zeiss 28mm/2 and perform just was well. IMO. the 35mm/2 is a very very good value lens. i think adapted to EOS mount with cheap adaptors and with a speed booster 0.64x these will be a wonderful lens set for gh4

I just tested and 16-235 appears to have more banding than the full range. I've read some people say it captures the same amount of shades than the full range and is just a read information for premiere or your editing software but it appears it is not accurate or there is some other issue. Anyways don't see the point of using 16-235 in first place? Nothing wrong with the full range to begin with. save file and open in Photoshop, some color shift with internet browsers.

This is half the reason why I got a C100 instead of the 4K options in that price bracket (think GH4 or A7S II). I can make it look the way I want it in camera. I don't need labor-intensive color correction beyond basic gamma and RGB tweaks. I certainly don't need to fool around with LUTs. I grew up shooting on film. I'm comfortable working this way. And needless to say, I find HD perfectly usable for my needs. The other half is form factor. So nice to have a proper camera with proper XLRs and an ND filter. I actually just came home from watching The Revenant. Most of it was shot in 2.8K Arriraw on the Alexa M. Some of it was shot in 6K on the new Alexa 65. I couldn't tell which shots were which camera. And that's a massive gap in resolution. In the right hands, resolution is practically irrelevant. That said, I'd rather see what Emmanuel Lubezki could do with a VHS camcorder than what 99% of other DPs can do with a Red Dragon and Master Primes. He's a true wizard.

there isn't any. we're talking about the micro cinema camera. not the micro studio camera. different animal. that being said, I expect it will look identical to the pocket. same sensor, just supercharged.

Personally I don't think that's a good plan, they are good lenses but the ones you already have aren't bad either and having a single one of those on the gh4 crop is totally pointless.

I don't care if they notice. I notice!!

Hey everyone, I have been experimenting with the GH4's 4k anamorphic mode as a sort of 16mm mode. The GH4 can record 4k footage in a 4:3 aspect ratio (designed for an anamorphic de-squeeze in post)... 16mm film is also a 4:3 aspect ratio. I have an old Angenieux 12-120mm cine-zoom in c mount. I love the lens, it has an interesting look to it and has an amazing zoom range for doc work. The only problem to shooting with it was the heavy vignette requiring a significant crop to remove. However, when I switch the GH4 to the 4:3 anamorphic mode, the vignette is much smaller as it opens up the vertical part of the sensor and captures more of the lenses image circle. Here is the view at 12mm. As you can see, heavy vignette but not nearly as bad as it is in 16:9 mode. Here is the same view with the lens set to 120mm. Somewhere around 70mm the vignette mostly disappears, and at 120 its more or a light falloff and not the tunnel vision effect you see at 12mm. Taking the first 12mm view and applying just a 16x9 center crop to elimnate the vignette gives you this image. It works quite well! I am not sure how to determine the final resolution but FCPX tells me that this 4k footage is scaled by 143% (all of this is being done in a 1080p timeline). I could also crop even less if I keep the final aspect ratio at 4:3. This weekend I will be filming a rallycross race in upstate NY and I plan on only using this lens. I will share the results here after filming. Very excited to see how this works. Has anyone else tried this with old 16mm glass? Also, these shots are ungraded but one nice thing about this old lens is that it shoots very flat. Not much contrast, however it leaves a lot of room for grading.

I'm a Nikon shooter, they focus the right way round! ;-)

Mortgage the house and you can get 16 bit raw photos ;-)

For your needs I'd very strongly recommend ignoring the D500 as you do not fit into any of these categories: a) wildlife / photo journalist / sports photographer b) rich amateur who must have THE BEST NOW c) MUST HAVE NIKON 4K *NOW* filmmaker (patience.... it is just Nikon's first go at 4K. I trust/hope they'll bring out 4K to cheaper models soon. Hopefully without the additional crop over FHD!!) d) a very successfully working pro photography (they're rarer than you think...) who wants a pro body DX camera and who the extra cost of a D500 over D7200/D7100/D7000 is so small and inconsequential when spread over all their jobs. And who might even just be getting it as their back up / B body. Your big choices are instead between these three categories of options: A) D5x00 series camera, this is by far the most cost effective option and from reading your replies seems like the best option for you. B) D7100/D7200 good if you want to take your professional photography further and get a semi pro body. And it will allow you to AF with AF-D series Nikkors (this is the biggest reason why to get one in my books) C) a D750 for all the reasons I just said in B) plus you get the small (debatable, some will claim the benefit is greater) gain of moving up to the larger FX sensor. But at a much much greater, not just for the body but also greater cost for the lenses too. (And is why I wouldn't recommend option C for you, even though still now in 2016 the D750 is *the* best general purpose DSLR you can buy anywhere) My view is get yourself a D5x00 series camera (or maaaybe a D7100/D7200). Then a year or two down the track pick uo the amazing 4K shooting (probably? Maybe??) D5600/D7300 or instead a D750 on the ultra cheap. Then your purchase now will become your B cam body later on. As every pro shooter should have at least two cameras (and especially if you shoot events in the future, then it can become ESSENTIAL to use two or more bodies). Nope, sorry to be so very blunt but that is 100% crazy talk. Don't think Nikon has *EVER* made a DSLR which can't use a flash on its hotshoe, the mere thought of it is rediculous lol :-)

I'd say battery life is a big one. Connectivity, interference and range another. Quality of the stream. Possible lag. It all adds up. You could do it, but you'd risk running out of juice, dropping connection, suddenly pairing with your phone or another source, hearing different levels than being recorded etc. And that's not something you want to have when you need to monitor a live recording. A cable is so simple 'n stupid that you can hardly go wrong. What you hear is what you get. If there was like a solid aptX DSP signal without issues and it could last for ages on a charge, then sure, but I wouldn't really use my Jabra REVO or Sennheiser HD 25-SP II w/ Bluedio i6 with a BT TX hooked up to the recorder for example right now. BT range isn't everything either, so for mobility I don't find it too tricky to use a corded set-up.

I'm sure one will be announced at NAB 2016, with a ship date of July.

just a quick little opinon, you can get an nikon to sony tilt shift adapter. It means that any nikon lens you have can be a tiltshift. It is much cheaper and work really well. I had one before but sold it because it didn't fit my shooting style.

Love me some OM lenses. I have the 24mm/2.8, 35mm/2, 50mm/1.4 and 1.8, and 135mm/2.8. I've probably spent under $700 for the whole set so far.

This is no contest. Chivo is going to win his 3rd straight.

I have the FE mount 35mm 1.4 Zeiss Distagon, and can tell you it is a truly awesome lens. But at $1600, it should be.

Blackmagic strategy is ridiculous. They keep selling vaporware, when they could perfectly sell their products, which are very nice. They could have come with a Pocket 2.0 or mkII with a better LCD and little else and keep it at $1000 or stay with the first version and put the price at $750. Nobody would have complained. Instead they announce something that never gets out.

They're both fine, but the D750 is a really exciting camera if you ask me and surely fullframe and a higher end body comes with certain advantages. The 5300 for example doesn't drive old AF lenses as it lacks AF motor. And as Matthias showed, the D750 really does things right. Both aren't mirrorless, have fancy 4K or anything, but they're both solid choices. The D5300 would have that vari-angle display which could be nice, should you care.

So the D500 is always an option... then I wouldn't need new lenses. Maybe get a d5300/5500 then buy the d500 in a little while? I am really disappointed. Its a crazy issue but upon some other research last night it isn't unheard of for the autofocus to just stop working reliably. And in my case I need it to work for photos. On the other hand the d5500 has flat video. That would be a nice bonus. But at that point I'm not far away from the upcoming d500.. decisions decisions.. Good Point. Maybe d5300/5500 is the way to go. Would be much better on the budget. The question then is do I buy the 5500 from BH or try to find a better deal on ebay. I feel like I already know the answer to this question. On one hand I bought my Tamron 17-50 on ebay for WAY less than BH and it works/functions great. Any deals right now on a 5500 for less than 800? Also I just read that the d5500 doesn't have external flash control. I use a yungnuo (?) external flash and this is a must use. Looks like the 5500 is out...

But it can with a plugin. Here is a quick tutorial using Adobe Camera Raw in After Effects. Do like the post above, switch to BMDfilm and it will look exactly like prores. Its not an issue, its supposed to be like that

Great video and I think he really has nailed down a very close match. Arri just got it so right with the Alexa. No chasing crazy specs, just a pure image that can be matched to film... in a body that would be familiar to film shooters, but very easy to use for digital shooters. They fully deserve their place at the top.

I watched a drama shot in 4k and displayed on a Samsung 4K OLED TV last week. It wasn't an enjoyable and involving experience because you could see imperfections in the make up and see the actors sweating under the lights. Instead of being immersed in the story, I was distracted by these production issues ruthlessly revealed by too much resolution.

Decided to keep this beauty. Don't know what I was thinking about.

If it's for the Canon 70D, then why not get the EF-S 10-18mm IS STM? You need wide with f/2.8 for shallow depth or lowlight? Otherwise, it works fine with a mechanical or electronic stabilizer. If your handheld skills are any good, you can digitally stabilize it in post quite a bit. Just cropping in on 1080p video isn't ideal.

For the test shots I did are untouched CineD - meaning all contrast, sharpness, nr, saturation are at 0. I may try out a bit of a -2 or -5 for constrast, and maybe a -2 for saturation in regards to post/color correcting. I try to go a little bit by bit as I don't want anything happening to the shoots I made (and been reading up the possibilities via indep. filmmaking sites); so I may dab at said settings if I can learn to do custom settings. I been using a luminance level at 0-255, I think my levels are only at 0-255 and 16-235 (I don't know, I'll check again), but without a doubt, I love it. Here are some shots after correcting them via Resolve 12. I managed to get some corrections made, and sometimes it gets pooped out which means I have to re-boot my system, so... Corrected and applied Oleg's Kodak Kodachrome 200 lut.

SPOLIERS Which is my favorite changes all the time but KB1 has had the spot the most times and the longest. So that its nr1 now can be mostly because its the newest and "freshest". As time moves on it may or may not slip down. But the reasons its competing in the top: Message Compared to many of his films its not a "saga" with a series of events that are entertaining. In this I felt a strong message. It made me think a lot about the current situation in the US and why it is like it is. That leads me to think about the goods and bads of my country and finding the historical events, situations, and times that formed my society. For me it was a movie about racism, life and death, justice, death penalty, gun control, value of a life, police brutality, etc. All big topics right now. Maybe more in the US than other places but its definitely on the agenda here as well. Feelings Also I like movies that provoke all kinds of feelings. Not just laughter, sadness and scariness. But also disgust, rage and anxiety. It was weird to route for some of them when they are all total murdering and hateful basterds that all deserves to get locked up. And also in the absolute final scene, to feel that she didn't deserve it, even though she certainly deserved it more than the other two.. or did she? I need to see it more times before I will ever be able to make that call. Mystery Im a sucker for a good old fashioned murder mystery. "The killer is in this very room", love that sort of stuff. My copy of "Murder on the Orient Express" is one of my most watched films. I watch Midsumer Murders etc. Its fun afterwards to finally connect dots and think, yeah that's what I suspected (Mexican guy and the chicken was enough to know he was lying) but not really getting the jelly bean (I thought it meant someone else was there, which was kinda true but not in the way I thought). Cinematic Ad to that, nice dialog, strong characters, awesome cinematography, great music, phasing etc and you have a movie at the top of my list. Some might say story is everything, I say no. A good story will not help a movie if you can barley pick up what they are saying and the DP left the lens cap on. A great film has both. Now that doesn't mean that a great movie needs 65mm and a huge budget. Imo The Hurt Locker has the best look of all films, Ingmar Bergmans Seventh Seal is looking awesome and don't get me started on Noir

I think we all agree that story and content matters most. On the technical side, color/skintones, and sound are more important, by far, than 4K. However, if you can offer 4K too, why not? As for skin issues (regardless of age), there are amazing plugins which track faces/skintones allowing for smoothing/defect reduction in post, and only on the face/skintones. That way the rest of the scene can maintain full 4K vs. using a diffusion filter which softens everything. Streaming 4K makes sense- VP9 and H.265 cost less than 50% more bandwidth. On 4K displays on my desk the difference between 4K and 1080p is dramatic. Sitting comfortably close to a large HDTV, for the cinema experience, 4K makes a difference there too. I haven't seen it in person, however the new HDR displays shown at CES are getting glowing reviews. 4K HDR is going to be very cool. As for 4K disk space, the C300 II costs 440Mbps for 10-bit 422 4K vs. 225Mbps for 1080p 444 12-bit (160Mbps for 10-bit 422). That's only 1.95x (or 2.75x for lower quality 10-bit 422) for 4K. At these highly efficiently compressed bitrates, that's not a big deal for any serious project. Disk space is incredibly cheap, and CFAST2.0 copies are blazing fast. XFAVC is a much newer and more efficient codec vs. ProRes (basically 10/12-bit 422/444 MJPEG). Even 100Mbps GH4 and A7S/A7R II LGOP H.264 looks great in 4K vs. 1080p. We had issues figuring out how to get fast editing for 4K C300 II files with Premiere Pro CC (FCPX had no issues). Once figured out, editing 4K footage is blazing fast. Anyone with a Retina device looking to go back to fuzzy pixels? Once story/content/color/sound are up to par, 4K (and HDR) and nice bonuses when available!

Yeah it seems that there is a balancing act to be made between Contrast/Black Level/Saturation. Push certain combo's to far and the color info starts falling apart.

From looking at your originals, I think you have your Saturation turned down to far. My personal settings: Gamma DR Saturation - 1 Sharpness - 10 Contrast - 6 Black Level + 5 But I do think banding is an issue when it comes to grade. This is the best settings I have found so far for the camera.

Thank you very much!! For sure I'm going to sell the 25 f/1.4 and the 45 f/1.8 since I barely used them 3 times in 1 year while I use the 12-40 also for personal photo. If the FD are better (or not so worser) then Zeiss ZE I could also remain with those lenses... I could make an effort just in case those Zeiss looks like the CP.2 or if they are at least a lot better then my humble FD... otherwise I could give back all and take the Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 Pro, in order to have 2 zoom and call it a day. It sound a little crazy to me, since I do love to shoot with manual primes, but... do you think it could be a possibility or it is just stupid? (the shop also sell a mint A7s for 1600... but at that point I have to give back all my gear and buy some other lenses... He also sells Samyang video lenses but I had not great experience with a 10mm) Anyway I shot 99% of the "prison" part of this video with the Olympus 12-40 and it does not looks that bad to me, for that reason I don't exclude a priori the 40-150. Thanks richg101! Other then Zeiss, what you would suggest for GH4?

I would get shot of the 12-40mm actually, put the 28mm f2 and 85mm f1.4 on a speed booster instead. Forget the 18,35 and 50, the 28 and 85 are the unique ones. 750 is a 'just ok' price, try and get him down to 700 at most. By the way... I have the modern ZE 28 and 85, plus the old Contax Zeiss equivalents (well... my vintage Zeiss 28 F2 is actually in Pentax housing!!) Although the images are pretty much identical between them, I do find having a native Canon mount handy and build quality is superb on the new ones. My Contax Zeiss 85mm F1.4 is a bit wonky now after a lot of use and ageing! The 28mm is fine wide open... the 85mm is quite soft at F1.4, best at F2.0. Neither are 'perfect', they still look very vintage.

Personally I'd always go for the contax versions. Made in DE or Japan. The ZE/ZF lenses suffer from modernisation of manufacturing processes - open one up and there aint brass mechanical parts in a ZE. I expect the glass will also not be German / Japanese. IMO the 28mm/2 is one of the most over rated lenses ever. way too expensive for what it actually does. 28mm lenses I find boring in general, and paying premium for an f2 where dof is so deep anyway it'd a waste of big bucks - particularly since at f2 it looks like crap. I'd sooner get a contax 25mm/2.8 and a 35mm/2.8 for the same price as the single 28mm. Or plump for the 35/1.4 for the extra £100. Now THAT IS A LENS On the flip side I think all of the faster zeiss dslr lenses should be avoided. You pay a premium for the bigger apertures but when used wide open or even 2 stops closed they really fringe in a nasty way.

Nice spot Enny I wish the Micro Cinema Camera had a form factor similar, with screen... having to add a big one defies the point really doesn't it?

Not with a speedbooster. That said, you're better off looking at Contax Zeiss than ZE.

I just bought the Contax Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm 1.7. I haven't received it yet but the prices are relatively cheap for that lens. I think the Hollywood runs about $800 for a decent copy. Not sure if the ZE is equivalent, but it probably is close. Hmm, that's a tough call. I probably would do it and then slowly build a nice collection of Zeiss. But, as araucaria said, you do have a decent set of lenses already. Good luck with it.

I'm not giving back the Olympus 12-40 f/2.8 Pro. He also sells the Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 Pro, but I think 12-40 and some primes would serve me better then 2 zoom

It's just bad luck at this point. Here is Rian Johnson on film, director of Starwars Episode VIII. I assume his decision will over throw Yedlin's in that respect. "I mean for me, I’ve shot film, I’ll hopefully shoot the next one on film, because I just feel that film is still the highest-quality capturing format that we have, and it’s just the best looking. I tend to bristle a little bit when film gets put in the realm of nostalgia, where that ends up being assigned as its main merit."

I remember that. Caused quite a stir. The iphone and the 7D were the ones that noticeably stuck out as worse. Not AWFUL by any stretch, just noticeably softer. The GH2 did look good. The third episode, they did reveal the lighting set ups and post time. That's where people came back to reality. It took a lot more tweaking with the lights and tons more post work to make the GH2 look good. Still, it was like 50x cheaper. Remarkable, given the price difference. But that security and speed to get a nice shot is worth a lot. That was years ago though, and I'd argue that the low end is crushing up into the high end more and more with each passing year. The test would be even closer now.

I recently was looking for a new camera, and I, too, re-discovered a forgotten camera. It produces a truly analog, organic look. I got a Sony Handycam Pro Hi8 camera, with CCD sensor! and S-Video output! Just kidding, I got a BMPCC. Disclaimer: I'm not making fun of anyone, I just found that old broken camera buried in a box and couldn't resist the dumb joke.

I think m43 lenses are way to expensive for what they are.

If you sold your a7s because you couldn't use it, it sounds like LOG shouldn't be a feature that really matters to you. I use Sony cameras a lot (a7s, a7sii, FS7), and while I love the possibilities they offer (log, great low-light, tons of features), they can be an absolute pain in the ass to use, whether its due to awful menus, poor ergonomics, short battery life, lack of customization, or whatever other weird Sony thing happens to be getting in the way of shooting. Whenever I use my own gear (GH4 + GX7), I always have a really nice shooting experience. Panasonic cameras and easy and enjoyable to use, and that's a big reason why I haven't invested into any Sony gear. I rent it when I need it. I only own one M43 lens, and that's so I can have a small lens with fast AF when I want to take low-profile stills. Otherwise, with a speedbooster and some moderately fast canon lenses, I'm able to get really good low light performance in most situations. If you use third-party lenses and adapters, then you'll only need to replace the adapters if/when you switch. So yes, I think M43 is definitely worth investing into, but it's certainly not the only option. It sounds like you've already got a grasp on the advantages of other systems. The only way you can learn whats best for you is to try all the options out. Renting is a great way to get a lot of experience with different cameras for relatively cheap.