Leaderboard

fyi, both have the same processor. NX500 was/is just crippled, however the crop is controlled by the PPUs which were not able to modify. There are specific registers, which control how they process cropping/resampling, etc, however as soon as we touch those in memory, the thing crashes. re the mbps - of course those are "the same", this is just the bitrate for encoding of the file, which already gets the copped/resampled image from the PPU.

IBIS doesn't really make since for a big camera like that. The only things that could improve to make it an excellent camera would be a new menu system, DPAF, and (maybe) higher frame rates at 4K.

Now I can control the iris on Canon lens, this is a short test with canon 50mm F8. The lens with NXL is very sharpness, non used hack, no Dr profile. Videomakers stay tuned, big news coming soon, it is soon to send her into retirement.

Interesting vid from Dave Dugdale and Matt Scott. I have a feeling Matt's comments and conclusions will wind up a few people here

The lut (alpha test version) was designed for the following settings: Color Checker NX1 Settings Luminance Level 0-255, Master Black Level -5 Gamma DR {Color - 1.00Red, 0.95 Green, 1.00 Blue, Saturation: -3, Sharpness: -10, Contrast: -3, Hue: 0} The other settings below came close in accuracy, but didn't work as consistently across color temps (so I would not recommend them unless someone else wanted to do further testing with a Xrite Color Checker). Alt Color Checker Rough Draft (don't use this!) Luminance Level 0-255, Master Black Level -5 Gamma DR {Color - 1.04Red, 0.93 Green, 1.04 Blue, Saturation: -3, Sharpness: -10, Contrast: -3, Hue: 0} If you haven't used the Color Match feature in Davinci Resolve before, it does result in an overall desaturated/neutral image once applied (just an accurate starting point). The intent of these settings is to have as minimal of grading applied from in camera video to a color accurate starting point. This would also help with having more latitude to match other cameras. Most of this is to correct the shift/inaccurate deep red/magenta, deep blue, and aqua/teal colors (which in turn help skin tone and in general). At the moment I do not know how beneficial these settings will be without the use of a color checker. Currently I use the color checker to set a custom white balance and then use color match in resolve(the lut I attached was generated off of the color match feature in resolve). The lut is just a (beta test) file for people who do not have a color checker who want to try these settings. Within Resolve or other programs you can then convert from Rec.709 to Linear or other color spaces after using the settings and lut as a starting point.

I enjoyed the guys delivery and attitude! As nice as the piece and idea is, the title's a bit misleading in a way. It isn't a comparison of 8-bit and 10-bit abstractly, it's just a comparison of two Sonys. Take some 10-bit ProRes out of an Arri Amira for example, I've run that up against 16-bit Red Raw from an MX sensor and the Arri is better and grades far more nicely in real-world situation (IE not purposefully smashing it to get banding). Or indeed 8-bit AVCHD from a C100 vs 8-bit anything else! The C100 has an amazing compression pipeline. But dip-depth is just one piece of the puzzle. There's bitrate and chroma subsampling too. Plus the sensor, AD conversion, gain stages, colour response and profiles, gamuts.... blah blah... I like that he talks about not transcoding 8-bit stuff. I've been saying it a lot, people waste masses of hard disk, thinking that transcoding 8-bit stuff to huge files is worth it. For my two cents, I also I grade things non stop as part of my living, and I hate most Slog and Sony cam colour with a passion. I wish I didn't though, as the cameras are cheap and high-spec.

Your math is wrong. The crop factor has nothing to do with the bitrate. Both cams: 3840x2160! NX1 at 80 Mbps, NX500 at 70 Mbps.

I understand what Kisaha is saying about the 416 but because I'm a one man band and a camera guy first the 600 gives that leeway to be a little less precise. I also honestly prefer the sound too. The 416 always sounds a bit too harsh to me but that's just from listening to online tests, I haven't tried them side by side. regarding the MKE600 vs the NTG3 I looked atand listened to pretty much every test, review and spec sheet I could find online at least twice and I honestly couldn't find anything better or worse between them. They're different obviously but I couldn't say one is better than the other. The 600 is not just Sennheiser's NTG2 it's significantly better and a step up from the ME66 too. Much smaller and better built for one but again it sounds much warmer/ less harsh to me. Im not a sound expert by any means but I'm just saying find a clear reason to go for the NTG3 over the 600. Personally I prefer the Sennheiser sound. The CS1 is more in the ballpark of the 416 in that it might be technically the better mic but not as versatile and forgiving as the 600 and NTG3. I really value well rounded kit for the work I do as it's just me and I just own one shotgun. If you're doing dedicated sound work no doubt the pricier mics are better, but to stick into a camera for factual stuff the 600 is great ...

I have both cameras, I think the NX1 is definitely better though. If I understand it correctly, the NX1 is downscaling a 6.5k full-sensor readout into hyper-detailed 4k, whereas the NX500 is a straight 4k crop of the sensor, hence the huge crop and (I presume) less detail. The NX1 image definitely seems superior, especially when I compare them head to head when using them on the same shoot. With gamma DR, the master black level, and other settings available only on the NX1, you're able to fine tune the image much better, and in my experience with the hack, the NX1 is also able to record with a higher bit rate than the nx500, I get more 'recording stopped' errors with it than with the NX1. That being said, I've been shooting a whole bunch with the NX500 lately on my new Zhiyun crane gimbal and, coupled with the roki 12mm, the results have been stellar.

I love how everyone hated on the c100ii and is now moving to it. The camera really is so nice, I guess the price drop really sealed the deal. The 24-105 is amazing. That would probably be the first lens I would buy for that camera. I would sell the GH4 and buy the 80d or maybe the 5dmkiii. The Canon color/stills is much much better than the GH4. The next lens I would buy would probably the be the 30mm F2 IS or the Sigma 18-35 1.8. If you need something longer, maybe go for the 70-200 somewhere down the line.

I used the 16-50 2/2.8 S lens only (only lens I have for it). I generated a LUT from resolve's Color Match feature (input LUT) if you would like to play with it. Keep in mind this is based of a single example after setting my white balance with the gray card and the listed settings. For a more accurate run and gun setting (when I don't have the color checker with me) I would ideally find the average variation between color temps and in camera white balance. Gamma C was more accurate than Normal (Gamma DR being the best). I tried out all of the picture wizard settings, but they were pretty all over the place (not that I was expecting much out of Forrest or Retro). A second setting that came oddly close to my listed settings from the last post used all of the same settings except for (color 1.04 Red, 0.93 Green, 1.04 Blue). I am going to play around with this setting in some non-clinical uses. I like it so far in tandem with resolve's film looks, as long as they are scaled back a little. I do like Ricardo's Settings with Gamma C and the raised black level for more heavily graded uses. NX1-GammaDR-custom-alpha_1.SAM_0908_1080P_ProRes422_LT.cube

With the Sony RX100 V to be announced in the next 2 weeks I guess it is time to start a topic. What do you guys want to see? For me it would be better AF, 4K60p and 240fps at the quality of the 120fps. And better IBIS.

It seems like an artifact of aggressive temporal NR.

Great minds think alike! ;-) Some of the features of the FS5 (such as its new ND filter, and the slimmer body), and not needing the XDCA (yet still having all its features), would both be nice

Hmm you can get 4 Xeen primes for the price of the Sigma pair.

I watched until the blackmagic part and then stopped out of fear of getting brain cancer. "Hey let's compare 12-bit 1080p to 8-bit 4K, they look the same, therefore 8bit and raw are the same. Don't mind the resolution. Resolve has similar knobs for both, they're the same! Let's shoot this test with optimal light so as not to strain any of the codecs, yay!"

In this review of the BM URSA Mini, cinema5D compares the image quality with the Fujifilm XT-2 and Sony's FS7. Is the Fujifilm X-T2 the new benchmark? Of course, one can speculate about the reasons for this pick, but in the end they came to the conclusion, that it is an interesting comparison. https://***URL not allowed***/blackmagic-ursa-mini-4k-vs-4-6k/ Although, I think that a BM URSA Mini would be a next step for me, when my skills are improved, I kind of feel already close with my current system.

I think Panasonic could/should change the focussing for video. In photo mode a little focus wiggle at the end is fine. But for video I think with the DFD they should skip the focus confirmation rocking. This is so distracting. Without this confirmation focus racking at the end I think with DFD the camera would be most of the time in focus. If it is not in focus the continues DFD AF 's second metering should be bang on because the focus is already close to where it needs to be. This all I think is a matter of software/ firmware, or am I thinking to simply?

For a run around lens I prefer the 18-135mm stm lens to the 24-105 - wider, longer, cheaper, lighter, silent af and better i.s. The 24-105 also is closer to f5 than f4 and loses a lot of light as you zoom in so is only negligibly better in low light

The problem isn't as much 8bit vs 10bit I think but the effort put into compressing the data. Good compression takes a crapload of processing power to do, while bad just breeze through at realtime speed. If you have not, play around with Handbrake and change only the slider for compression efficiency vs encoding speed. It's under optimise video. Even at unlimited bitrade you will notice degradation in quality unless you add some effort to the compression work. Also proper dither made for the compression setting meaning you make the entire chain optimized makes a good difference.

Could you summarize? Started watching but almost 30min...

He was probably busy scattering magic beans from his flying carpet at 30,000ft.

I own the GH4/NX500/NX1 (with S lenses). The NX1 is the better of the lot for 4K, sharpest and cleanest below 800 ISO. The GH4 is very good too, you gain details at high ISO compared to NX1/NX500 but at the cost of grain. The NX500 is cropped, vastly softer than NX1 and the AF is not reliable (this is why lots of videos posted on the net with this camera seem very soft; the problem is the AF, quick but often innacurate).

I'd also suggest looking at the new eos m5 as a b cam

Yes, there is a little latch you have to push down as you turn the adapter.

NX500 has a better 4k than NX1 ??? Are you serious ?

As noted, the quad has no lateral sensors ;-) And here's another experiment with and without additional grading, respectively:

I have to say I'm intrigued by the Mavic, I travel a lot and the fact that its less than 2 lbs and so damn small makes it something I can throw in my camera backpack and carry almost anywhere. Small differences in footage between the Phantom or the Karma are less significant than actually getting the shot for me.

Future pilots beware: not lateral sensors...

Indeed. This is the usual when the introduction of a new technology. À la DOF hype when the 35mm adapters or HDSLRs popped up. There are always consequences as far as aesthetics concerns. Media are a reproduction of their age and technology for sure. As same as happens with society. Reason why a good part of oldest viewers don't seem to much appreciate their contemporary younger fellows' work, actually. Some don't even recognize themselves in the society they live. Or language used, as fairly pointed out. Here's another sample shot on Mavic: More stuff related to the DJI Mavic Pro is available here in this YT channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/epicdigitalfilms/videos

@Chris Oh - As of the current version, only the Sigma 50-100/1.8 has an IBIS issue (and pardon me for repeating that this, too, will be fixed in a matter of days). But owing to just this one lens, Andrew was compelled to downgrade to firmware 0.5 from more than 2 years ago. Back then the firmware did not manage OIS/IBIS interaction. In his tests using old firmware, both OIS and IBIS turned on and cancelled out each other. Actually if he had manually turned one of OIS/IBIS off, the old version would still have worked fine. Andrew found our firmware from 2 years ago to be unsatisfactory, which I concur (although back then we could not have anticipated the GX85). I personally would say that except for that one lens, the Sigma 50-100/1.8, the current firmware is working, and it is doing what Panasonic's own Four Thirds to Micro Four Thirds adapter (DMW-MA1) would have done. The next version, 2.5, which will be launched soon, will be great, and will have the flexibility of OIS/IBIS selection by the end-user.

I work for Metabones and let me confirm that this is indeed a firmware bug as well as to apologize to you for the inconvenience. This problem is that IBIS is OFF and you cannot turn it on with the camera's menus. It occurs with only one lens, the Sigma 50-100/1.8 DC HSM Art. A firmware fix will be published in a matter of days. I acknowledged this problem on eoshd at the beginning of the month and promised that a fix was on the way, but I suppose my comment might have been taken out of context. It certainly was NOT a blanket "GX85 IBIS didn't work with Metabones". (Link to my previous comment below.) There is not much else to say, except that the fix will be here soon, and we will have the ability to select between OIS and IBIS (something that even Panasonic's own lenses do not support, for example if you have an old Leica 14-50/2.8-3.5 in SLR Four Thirds mount.)

The scamster never replied. I gave up. Question though, second hand used c100 II can be had in the 2000s....is it worth waiting around for one to be sold in NY or is it worth getting brand new? I do not know much about the pros/cons. Any insight?

That certainly sounds too good to be true... Tell him you'll meet him at his local police station's parking lot.

In this test, I've slowed the video down by 16x so we can see frame by frame what's going on. The settings are: CLog - 1/50s - f4.8 - ISO500 - all image stabilisation OFF - 4K I stuck a lut on it to bring back contrast. Ghosting is clearly visible as vertical traces - sometimes as many as two or three from previous frames. I don't think it's the stabiliser as the footage above shows. Maybe it is certain units or maybe it is firmware. My camera came with the stock firmware and I updated it to 1.0.2.0. I don't know where you might find the original, or if it's even possible to revert to it. Can you do a test similar to above to see if your unit exhibits the same problem? It's most noticeable when a dark area is moving into midtones. In other news Canon sent me this, so if you guys report the same issue to them they might get on the case and actually do something: TLDR: XC10 has ghosting at all ISOs and it has nothing to do with image stabilisation.

Again from my native country, where DJI has invited a few reps of the 'Internet press' to the European presentation in the sunny Portuguese soil. Here's another sample of the Mavic Pro look. But, that plastic cover shouldn't be there to cover the camera lens when the bird is flying for sure...

More for less is exactly what the GX80 is all about. Personally, I got the gx80 because I wanted to start out and be able to get a few primes after. It completely fits my needs. It's offering top-tier IQ with 4k in a small package, truly in the spirit of M43. I have reached my "good enough" camera.

Wow!!! super crazy story!!! The images from this video are really good to my eyes: no moire, no bad artifacts... smooth movements... I like this little drone! Thank you for the advices!

Unnatural edges simply / always frighten me... ; ) Not colorful shapes ;-)

Take a look on this cinematic outcome... To whom comes from film realm, such called 'softness' (when not missing focus) is a bless :-) PS: Thanks for the compliments on 'I Cento Passi' (dal cuore : ) Speaking of missing links... our memory is, though, full of team work worries, past today. Such as two weeks of shooting to be repeated only because of a DAT tape lost and recording sound irremediably missing, respectively; missing parts to still be credited; €300 to remain as credit card limit in the main method of payment for (shooting) expenses such as mere flight tickets (main cast); the female lead character to be completely erased from the script made with so much love fulfilled by many only a few months before in order to cut off the budget and tighten up efforts or there wouldn't be feature film to show up in the end + the whole participation of a co-production team and checks to sign at one time and follow accordingly, go figure... Finally, all this became multiple awarded in Venice since a decade and a half ago, oh well, crazy craft this industry is *Phew*

Sharpness: digitally applied Resolution: number of megapixels on the sensor Final image: a combination of sensor readout, image processing, compression, noise and all sorts of things - and yes digital sharpening in-camera or in-post People need to start noticing when an image has been sharpened so they don't mistake this for better resolution. Because it is preferable NOT to have it done in-camera.

While I was also rather skeptical about the XC10, I ordered it and I am definitely going to keep it. While it is definitely true that the lens performance in regards to shifting aperture is annoying, there are enough positives about this little camera that make it a keeper for me. • Image quality: Absolutely stunning and in all regards a "baby C300". At 1080p, I don't like the 35 mbps 25p too much, but the 50 mbps / 50p looks absolutely gorgeous. I own a 4K-upgraded F5 and a GH4 (speedbooster / Canon glass and the inevitable 12-35). Looks definitely much nicer "out of the box" than my GH4. • Lens: Only wide open gives you f2.8, the higher the focal length the less the f-stop up to f5.6. That is a bummer, but else the optical performance of the lens is excellent. No focus breathing and it's parfocal. Other than most the Canon L-glass I use, the T-stop is also the same at any focal length. Also worth mentioning: The lens will maintain the (higher) aperture if you set it, meaning if you set it to f5.6 it will also stay on the same f-stop at wider zoom stages. The camera electronics maintain this constant f-stop in a pretty quickly, only a full crash-zoom will shortly lead to a slightly brighter image (nothing like the flashy Panasonic 12-35). Manual focus is fly-by-wire, the camera offers three different modes for that (slow / normal / fast). The lens only closes to f11, but a built-in ND filters makes up for that. • IS: Optical & digital (only at HD recording) image stabilization is pretty effective and makes handheld shooting without adding additional weight a breeze. • Sensor crop: In case you're still fine with recording HD, sensor crop mode can also be activated in 2 different ways: First off, you can select a 2x crop mode that is not quite as sharp as the downsampled, but hey, you at least get 50mm focal length @ f2.8. Second way to crop in is to use the dynamic digital image stabilization which crops into the image by about 13,5%. • Body, controls and loupe: The design of the body with the rotating hand-grip is very smart and well-balanced, much easier for handheld operation in comparison to a regular still image camera. Only three user-assignable buttons mean that a number of functions (like ISO, audio gain etc.) have to be assigned from the menu via the (very precise) joystick, but at least for me it was easy to get used to this. Imho still better than the tight layout of the C300 (where you can accidentally touch a couple of buttons by just picking up the body). The included loupe solution that you just stick on the viewfinder is a very good idea. It distorts a little bit, but I prefer this solution any day when shooting outside on the GH4 (without an additional EVF unit). It tilts really easily and is very comfortable. Personal Usage: Working with heavier camera setups (PDW700 ENG, F5/55 etc.) makes me often wish for something lightweight and versatile, especially for news / report / documentary B-roll shots. That's what I got the GH4 for, but I never really liked the image (and I experimented a lot with different settings). Now that I bought the XC10, the GH4 will stay in the storage more often. Even though it has some drawbacks and might not appeal to some users, the form factor, zoom range, image quality etc. is ideal for my applications. I could even imagine shooting documentaries and reports purely on the XC10. Price: Here in Europe the XC10 sells for a little bit less than 2K €. What you get for the money is an interesting design of a "DSLR-like" fixed-lens camera. If you don't need 4K and want to use expensive Cfast media, choose the cheap SD alternative and work in HD. The 1" sensor still gives you sufficient bokeh even at f5.6. While the XC10 might not be the best solution for many users, it does not deserve the bashing it gets on the web. And just a reminder: One of the most practical lenses in the "affordable" range for DSLRs is the Canon L 24-105, which has a constant f4 (definitely not a constant T), is not parfocal, has focus breathing, much inferior IS, is less sharp and still costs about 860 €. The XC10 stays on f4 until about 70mm.