Leaderboard

Just put my preorder down for the G85 kit at B&H. Something to hold me over until the GH5. I got it primarily for the stabilization. I don't mind carrying my gimbal, but it doesn't work when you don't want to bring attention to yourself such as a wedding when you're a guest, not the hired videographer. I understand it's not going to provide the same level of stabilization but I think people are getting used to the jerky movements in vlogs where a lot of camera shake during walking has become the norm. I think I can sell the 12-60mm (unused) lens and the G85 (US import) body separately after 6 months of use and get pretty much all of my money back. As much excitement there is for this camera, if the GH5 comes out with the same IBIS, this camera will be barely mentioned in this forum after the GH5 is released. Whereas the GH5 will be talked about for many years after it's release.

Thank you! I honestly cant remember, its been quite a while, but it wasnt too hard, Ill try have a look and try to get something for you Im currently testing some new settings, heres a few examples, these are all separate projects, so they all have a slightly dif. look. These are all videoframes, and not pictures, as soon as im done testing these settings, ill share with you guys! Im considering creating a specific lutpackage that could be sold at a very affordable price, what do you guys think?

Ehhh... SLR Magic creates some magic stuff! It's perfect. Yeah, not wide open, then again, don't start claiming Samyang lenses are. Atleast the SLR Magic is nice 'n dreamy wide open, whereas imho Samyang just shows a lack of quality. I went with the 25mm T0.95 because it seemed to outshine the competition in just about every single way. Sharper stopped down. Creamier bokeh. Work of art really. Got nothing to do with imperfections or a vintage feel? I found 'em pretty modern with a twist. Voigtländers seem a great alternative if you were looking at all manual solid lenses, but I'm digging the SLR Magic CINE approach personally. Also the Veydras are a superb option. Just... you can't squeeze out more light and it has a fairly tame character. But it means you get results after results everytime. If you want to get the most out of 4K, like resolving wise, that's probably where it's at. The Lumix lenses (the older ones especially) tend to be very poppy and modern. Saturated colors, contrasty, sharp. The 14-140mm was nice combined with the softish 1080p GH2, but I probably haven't used it since. It's very videoey because of its characteristics and I'm someone who likes the possibility of shooting at f/4 or faster as well. Especially on this crop sensor format, you've got to let the light in, so I've turned to f/2.8 or faster zooms and sometimes even brighter primes. Added bonus is the ability to increase the subject isolation and really pull your subject from the background. And primes really excel at their focal length, a zoom is always kind of a consession between convenience and performance. If you forget about the Lumix glass and leave the pricey Leica glass alone, you'll find the Olympus glass is a little more classy and more middleground. You can't really fault most of their lenses. And the outstanding PRO zooms could be everything you'd ever need. 7-14mm, 12-40mm and 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO with 1.4x teleconverter option. Wowzahs. Non-PRO primes have been solid too. Think everyone here must have or have had the 45mm f/1.8 at some point. The 60mm f/2.8 is probably the best macro in the system line-up and the 75mm f/1.8 is like the holy grail portrait lens. Heard great things about the 17 and 25mm too. But... these really shine on Olympus bodies, on Panasonic, especially the non-sensor-stabilized GH4, less ideal. Sigma had some EX DN lenses dirt cheap back in the day. 19mm and 30mm f/2.8, optically brilliant (built wise maybe not so great), cool for shooting 4K on the GH4. Earlier editions had a grippy ring. The 60mm and the newer ones had a gripless finish for some dumb reason. In the end though, it all depends. You need the 4K for its crispness and resolving power? Do you need it for flexibility? What do you need the lenses to do? To be flexible as well? To be compact? Be close to perfection without any quirks? To nail focus? To give you a nice base image? To give you moody looks? You pick a certain camera for a reason, you pick certain glass for a reason. Needs and wants. And then there's just personal taste and preference. But atleast we live in a day and age where we get to have all these options! There isn't one lens to rule them all. That's why many of us have vast collections of different lenses, even with same focal length, just because they handle or render so differently. That's not just between modern and vintage, but as well between Panasonic Leica VS Olympus PRO and Canon FD VS Nikon AI for example.

Just saw that this afternoon on AV Watch Japan http://stkb.co.jp/info/?p=4356 That really cool... I wish Metabones could do something similar for M43.

I just picked up an XC-10 on ebay used for $1200. The guy was very nice and threw in two 256GB CFast 2.0 cards and two CFAST readers. Pretty much the best deal I've scored on ebay for years. My 1dx pukes yesterday but I have this little camera to keep me happy for a couple of weeks. I called the guy after the sale and asked why he was so generous - he said he bought a C500 and just didn't need the cards and figured I could use them. There is hope for civilization yet folks. Digging the XC-10 so far. Downloading the Canon XF software was a waste though unless you want to read EXIF info. Camera is plenty sharp when you grade the C-LOG footage and looks really Super 16'ish. It is what it is - a good light deep DOF camera with IS, ND, 4k, no time limit and C-Log. It is not a replacement for the larger sensor Cx00 cameras, but should match nicely in post. Loving it!

Have you seen how many YT views explosive Note7s get? I bet an explosive Note7 on an Edlkrone slide would raise enough money for 2 Pixels ;). P.S. If Samsung hadn't fucked up (or I didn't care about 3rd degree burns) Note7 would be in my pocket instead of the Pixel.

Thanks JP. I too got much less ghosting with everything off but it is there. Personally I think the XC10 is still an awesome camera and although this ghosting issue should be acknowledged by Canon it's not keeping me awake at night. The camera uses a lot of digital fandangledness we really know little about to create a very sturdy and overall great image in most situations (esp. for the sensor size). I can live with this ghosting, because in motion it is only very noticeable in quite extreme circumstances. I'd guess that whatever is causing it is doing a job that is contributing a lot to the image quality so as with any camera I'll pay the price of compromise. The XC10 is really aimed at VJ's and other run+gun filmmakers who require versatility, speed and generally clean-out-of-camera images over "image perfection" (whereas a narrative filmmaker in contrast may prioritise the latter). I'll contact CPS too but I'm not going to send the camera to them. Personally I'm more than happy using it as-is.

Here are my thoughts after playing with the Pixel that I received just yesterday. As many have already said, quality is very similar with most top end phones. It is not a replacement for a large sensor camera, it is just useful to have when the large sensor camera is not with you (c'mon you all know that happens ). Add some skill, and you can get some useful footage out of any of these phones, that you would otherwise not have at all. Shoot a movie? Fuck no. I am not convinced by EIS yet. EIS artifacts seem worse in low light. It might have to do with the shutter speed I am not sure yet. Not that OIS is much better. If you want stabilization then you are better off with that $300 Osmo mobile gimbal. I mean miles better. But really who is going to carry that osmo thingy around? Colors are better on the Pixel than the S7. In video makes more of a difference. Bad flares. You can also notice them on the sample videos posted in this thread. I would say photos are better on the Pixel as well, but Samsung has the best camera app. I doubt the average phone user would notice, but if you take photography seriously and you want to have full manual control then you are better off with the S7. Or download another app . As a side note: I wasn't planning on using google assistant, but damn this thing just works.

I just ran a series of test with the XC10. First set I was getting slight ghosting. Not as clean as tomsemiterrific's footage. I then went into the camera and turned off everything...all image stabilization features, all auto focus features, including on the body of the camera, flicker reduction off, shockless WB off, rolling shutter reduction off and with those setting I was able to greatly eliminate ghosting affects in my footage. EDIT I also tried with with rolling shutter reduction turned back on and had similar results. Could someone else try with these setting off and see if that helps. I'll try to post some of my footage.

This little badboy has been available on the Chinese part of the Zheyun website for some time. And my guess is that it will most likely show up on the english site very soon. Ive had it for a while but was asked to wait until yesterday (at the earliest). Just like the predecessor it is very nicely built and super easy to setup. Unlike last time I actually balanced it before testing. But that was very painless and no need for tools. This is my first setup and test around the house (yes, with the dog ). What separates the ”Crane-M” from the larger ”Crane” is first and foremost the maximum payload. 650g on the M and 1200 on the bigger brother. Other than that Zheyun has been very consistent imo. For me that almost never use such devices it makes more sense to have a smaller version and use it with a speciality camera like the rx100iv. I will do some additional testing and report back after trying the remote, app, etc. My thoughts so far: + Just as good quality as the Crane Works nicely, I mean at 02:50 I floor it down a bumpy hill. Very easy to use Nice and small Can carry a bmpcc - Can obstruct itself Not as powerful Controls could be more featured out of the box Wished the batteries sat side by side

Okay, I should have it to you tomorrow or Friday.

No probs if you're too busy, mercer. I just think that Canon will like to see the original file so they know it's happening in camera and the XML file as well so they know what settings were used.

I have a really busy week. Can you download mine from my Vimeo page? I hope to get out tomorrow and do a more thorough run through, if I have the time.

Here's a quick frame grab and video from my XC10. I don't remember the setting on this one just found it with some random footage. I think it shows the ghosting pretty clearly though.

Heartbreaking?! I find it heartwarming knowing that those equipment helped capturing the most breathtaking images from an once-in-a-lifetime perspective. It's a beautiful and fruitful one way trip. It's not the astronauts' decision. Those gears are just tools that had fulfilled their purposes. The return vehicle carried payload of paramount scientific value. That's something a few CMOS sensors, circuit boards or optics can never compare.

Ttbek: We are all expecting your review, as soon as you receive them!

Btw, sliding V2 clamp with anamorphic lens on a rail is possible, so changing taking lens can be quickly done. People asked about how solid is the V2 clmap. I tried HIFI-2 (3.48lb), Bauch & Lomb attachment I (3.68lb), Bell & Hewell (6.49lb), See picture of holding them with the clamp on the rail. My tripod mount start titling when mounting the Bell & Hewell, but the clamp is still showing no sign of deflecting. When playing with this clamp, I realize it could be also used as a handheld arm for holding the anamorphic lens & the camera together, just like the director view finder, see the picture below of KOWA 35mm anamorphic lens, Rokinon 85mm and GH4 held together by the V2 clamp. It is coming, it will be a dedicated variable diopter, which is optimized for the modded lens, but it has standard thread size, not 75mm for sure, you can reuse it for other anamorphic lens, but result is not guaranteed.

I don't think it's RS because this image shows RS and ghosting together: Also, if it was RS why would it change with ISO? It's surely noise reduction. @kidzrevil Your Canon rep is very responsive. Mine is much more terse: thanks for the video, send it in. STOP THE PRESS, this just in:

From flicking back and forth between ISO and (fine) gain in a non-Log picture style, ISO 400 = 7.5db and ISO 500 = 10.5db. Going down from 10.5db to 8.5 using fine gain controls is -2db, so that's a 1/3 of a stop. It seems to only make a difference in WideDR and CLog. Could be useful for another little bit of exposure latitude when shooting outdoors.

I think this is a very sensible point of view - you can great footage from the cam as is. Nevertheless, if it is a NR issue I'd prefer to have the option of using Canon's NR processing in camera, or using my own in post if I could avoid ghosting. Or having it fixed somehow. Sometimes people talk about motion cadence and its importance and even if you can't point out ghosting with normally exposed footage at base ISO without looking at individual frame grabs, it nevertheless is there and is performing a streaking of motion that affects our perception of movement. And, for me, the premise of this camera is that it is a camera that moves - small, light, handheld, image stabilisation, on the run, on a gimbal. So its rendering of movement should be good. And that is compromised at the moment.

Try Arri Alexa lut from adobe premiere cc

How would it be normal when they never done that before? The XA20/25, XA30/35, XF100/105 and XF200/205 have all been available together as the exact same models with only one connection separating them. For Canon to all of a sudden abandon this practice and starting to promote an XX5-Sibling over another would be a first.

I would avoid that one. It brings out some crazy cyan blocking. I"ll PM you.

I'd wait to sell it until we confirm that Tom is having the same results with ALL of the same parameters. Honestly, I'm not too concerned about it because I will rarely shoot over ISO 500, I know it can still rear it's ugly head, but I never noticed it any of my footage until I bumped it up to ISO 20,000. If Tom's XC15 footage showed it, I would have chalked it to... Don't use any camera at 20,000 ISO. Lol.

I retested Pikachu with less light and was able to get alittle more ghosting to appear with Clog. It happens with horizontal movement with hard pans. Vertical only doesn't seem produce it but horizontal + vertical movement does. EOS Standard and Cinema EOS Standard have the least ghosting artifacts. *ISO is set to 6400 in these test. Clog Ghosting Horizontal Clog Ghosting Vertical Cinema EOS Standard Ghosting Horizontal Cinema EOS Standard Ghosting Vertical With this level of lighting I would not be shooting with the XC10 anyway....but if i did i would not use clog. Normal panning with Cinema EOS Standard was usable with very little ghosting. Wide Dynamic range also had better performance than Clog.

On another note, I have been watching some XC10 videos on YouTube and there is some great footage out there. I am amazed how many people are using all auto and getting some incredible results out of this camera. I may be on a a mission to shoot a completely auto, run and gun feature with the XC10.

Personally I think this is an issue you will see in any XC10. We don't have anyone here really looking for the ghosting and saying they can't find any. I think you'd be wasting your time to send your unit in. I'd press them to try it on a random unit (or ten) to confirm/underline that it is a universal issue. Posted these on the other thread ages ago. Granted they're out of focus but I think they show the real world effects of the issue pretty well. Look at the weird banding on the faces, and in the final image the ghost of his profile. It's really very weird.

Luca: Hey man, it's been a few days now since I ordered two NX-L and haven't heard anything since the order confirmation from the site or your email with the project. Did the order somehow not go through? It all seemed like it worked on my end.

Thanks @jpfilmz for your test footage. I can confirm that ghosting exists at ISO500 with everything switched off. Here's a CLog frame grab with contrast expanded: Look at the curved handle on the RHS - there's a ghost image. This is affecting motion cadence at all ISOs. @jpfilmz @Lintelfilm @mercer @HugoS316 and all other XC10 owners: It's time to contact Canon! Send them your ghosting footage and/or links to the threads here and ask them to resolve the issue.

The Helios 44 lens sits back and if far away from the rear anamorphic adapter lens. But still gives best results It depends mainly of what is the "quality" you're looking for. But yeah, pancakes are great with anamorphic adapters

With all due respect, shooting an entire narrative film on a 28mm equiv. is a very... specific... style. I wouldn't exactly suggest it as a catch-all recommendation for new GH4 shooters.

It all depends if you have access to walk up to your subject. So with a 12mm (24mm equiv), you don't need the equivalent 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm if you can get closer. If it's people's faces, you'd have to shoot the subject in the center directly perpendicular to the sensor. But at an arm's length from the camera you can get a beautiful portrait shot. Yes it's a workaround, but I'd rather have the option to shoot wide, and work the shot when shooting closeups. Another benefit is that it's sharp at 1.4. You never have to worry about stopping down for sharpness, and then compromising for sharpness for better low light. It's just always sharp. Since the scenario is one lens, I'm going to guess you won't be carrying lighting equipment either. With a f/1.4, you can work with even a single source of moderately dim light, expose people's faces properly (+2/3 EV), stay at 1/50 shutter with 24p, and go home with usable, virtually noise-free shots. My vote is for the versatility and reliable sharpness of the 12mm f/1.4. You sometimes have to work around with some compromises, but overall, you have more shots available to you than carrying a slower or farther reaching lens. I just preordered a G85 myself to use instead of the GH4 for 5-axis dual stabilization. Not gonna perform well as a gimbal, but depending on your genre, can provide usable footage while panning and even walking. It doesn't have an AA filter unlike the GH4, so moire may be more prevalent, but it should also be sharper for photos. GH4 has amazing battery life. G80/G85 has a smaller battery, smaller body, no earphone jack for audio monitoring. Probably the G85 has better noise performance, but the bitrate and codec is higher and will have less issues with compression on the GH4. GH4 is also log capable with $100 software upgrade. But if you're not planning on getting a GH5 anytime soon, the GH4 is probably a safer bet. I only got the G85 because I'm stopping by the US right around the launch date, and I'll be heading back to Korea where I am sure I can use it for 6 months and sell it used for about what I paid for the kit..

I don't know if you noticed, but it seems there's "official" support of K-mount and one other "unknown" [root@drime5 ~]# st cap capdtm getusr LENSMOUNT UserData is LENSMOUNT_NX_MOUNT (0x590000) UserData is LENSMOUNT_K_MOUNT (0x590001) UserData is LENSMOUNT_UNKNOWN (0x590002)

I just turned everything off and the ghosting is still there. It's much less regular and visible - I think when IS is off because all the motion blur hides it more, but it's definitely still there. @Jpfilmz can you try again to make sure?

We really should spread the thread into several thread. Perhaps one dedicated just for software hack discussion and updates, another for hardware add-ons.

Yes. I suspect the autofocus is the main culprit but I could be wrong. ISO in the video below was at 3200.

1389 EUR. I mean, cool focal length & quality, but that's like a whole set of Contax Zeiss primes (25, 28, 35, 50 (f/1.4), 85, 135mm f/2.8) and a focal reducer though (Hollywood f/2). That much for one lens is something you really need to think twice about. But if it's worth it to you, it's worth it. The wide end spectrum doesn't offer that much selection and you make solid arguments behind your purchase. There's some psychological limiter in my head though that doesn't allow me to purchase lenses that are more expensive than the top body in the system, even with the knowledge that what really makes or breaks an image has got more to do with a lens than with the camera body. But... it's just one focal length. If that's all you shoot. Great! But like the Veydras a 12mm, 16mm, 25mm, 35mm, 50mm and maybe 85mm are pretty much must have focal lengths in my book. If you are willing to spend good money on top notch lenses, how are you going to approach that financially? If money is no problem, then no problem! And again, you only shoot one focal length, awesome! But a couple of times 1250+ EUR for a consistent set adds up quite considerably. If you're mixing and matching... won't it be tough matching mix branded lenses or just lenses of such different stature? Dunno, for me personally the Leica would be a tricky option. But it sure is an incredible one. Quoted for truth! The sensor performance itself and the stabilization thereof are quite attractive! Purely on imaging results, those might be the more interesting options to explore. Yet... until the GH5 comes out, the GH4 remains a great production friendly tool with all its bells and whistles of course. If I were to be in a position where I'd have to pick a camera to stick to for the next year (or two, maybe three) and could wait it out... I'd definitely would wait to see what the Olympus E-M1 Mark II and GH5 were going to be all about. If only, because it might cause a drop in price of the GH4 and other cameras and see the 2nd hand market getting flood with camera bodies from people who are upgraden from camera X to that GH5.

More Terra 6K footage was just posted to the Kinefinity Facebook group. I could do without the watermark, but here are the links - viewable in 4K. And more downloadable clips (no watermark):

Yeah the XC15 looks nice, even at 20,000 ISO.

So far the Pixel looks like just another top spec phone to me. I guess film convert, letter boxing and a slider makes it cinematic?

Thanks. I am pretty happy with the settings and plan on sharing some videos soon. I have had some good results at night other than a few underexposed auto white balance with mixed sodium/fluorescent (but even those I believe are really down to it being underexposed and bad lighting). I plan on building a separate corrective lut for night uses after more experimenting/testing. example footage screenshot with custom settings and lut applied (no other correction)

Crazy thing is, there is really only one pumpkin on my table.

Not really, but a studio set-up is way different than what you'd use for actual filmmaking. You'd use specialized studio/broadcast equipment. So, something like this (and that's just one in a multicam studio set-up): For over the shoulder work and on-location type shots some broadcast ready type of camcorder. ENG. A little more in this direction: Guess they use a lot of Sony. Other than that. Google is your friend. It's the easiest to find out about movies and series, though: https://shotonwhat.com/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5778848/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec (e.g. with very limited information)

Just pulled the trigger! Nervous/excited to see how I like the c100 II. I ordered it with the 24-105 f4, I already have a Tamron 17-50 2.8 and figured these two lenses were a good start. I can then decide if I need to sell the zooms for a faster zoom or just add 2-3 primes (24, 50, 85) Are there any videos, blogs, articles I should read to get a head start on how to use this new weapon!?

Yes, this is the XC15. I sold my XC10 to purchase it---I never noticed any issue with the XC10, but perhaps I'm not as skilled or attentive to details as i should be. I do a lot of education videos and the new XLR attachment and audio processing offered on the XC15 is excellent--had to have it, and now the XC15 is complete, at least for my primary purposes. Note, that a firmware update is coming for the XC10 that will give it the Cps and color space of the XC15--and (I hope) the waveform as well. It is very, very helpful, especially shooting in Log. Could it not be possible that Canon knows about this issue, and has silently addressed the issue in the XC15, and plan to do the same for the XC10 in its next firmware update???