Leaderboard

I was messing around with some B&W yesterday using the L-Monochrome profile.

Thanks, I really like the L-Monochrome profile. I used it with everything dialed down and the orange filter. I underexposed most of the shots by about a stop, which was probably a mistake, but it turned out okay. More tests.

Off-topic, but the service being advertised fits in with a description I recently heard of today's web service industry - guys in the Valley coming up with apps to do the stuff their mums no longer do for them.

I really miss the expert opinion of ES

Rapid fire response off the top of my head just because it is fun: I'm only considering large sensor ILC here, thus I'm ignoring quite large markets and notable cameras such as GoPro or a Sony PXW-X70 or Panasonic FZ1000 or Panasonic LX100, which are all great cameras themselves and worth considering for many people. And now onto the answers: • Up to $500 Panasonic G7 • $500 - $1000 Panasonic G80 or BMPCC • $1000 - $1500 Sony a6500 or Nikon D500 or Nikon D750 or BMMCC or secondhand Sony F3 • $1500 - $2000 Hold off and wait for the Panasonic GH5 • $2000 - $3000 Sony a7S mk2 or a7R mk2 or secondhand Sony FS700 • $3000 - $5000 Sony FS5 or Kinefinity Terra 5K or BMD URSA Mini 4.6K • $5000 - $10,000 Sony FS7 mk1 or FS7 mk2 or Kinefinity Terra 6K or secondhand Sony F5 if you're lucky • $10,000 and above... This is a very very broad category as the sky is the limit! Thus it covers anything from a Canon C300 mk2 to Panasonic Varicam LT to an Arri Alexa Mini to a Sony F65, and lots more between those listed, and lots more both above and below!

I manually exposed. I pretty much always used the ND, ISO 500, tried to between f2.8 and f8. The stuff shot at F11, like I said, is pretty much unusable. Something looks weird at that f stop. All C-LOG. These are excellent.

• Up to $500 nikon 5200 - Sony a6000 • $500 - $1000 BMPCC - BMMCC • $1000 - $1500 GH4 - FZ2000 (to be proven) - Samsung NX1 • $1500 - $2000 Fuji XT2 • $2000 - $3000 Digital Bolex (not built anymore) • $3000 - $5000 Panasonic HX1, Sony A7S II • $5000 - $10,000 Red Raven, 1DX MK II, • $10,000 and above... Panasonic Varicam LT - Arri Alexa - Red Scarlet W - Epic - ...

:-) Max Yuryev did a comparison between camera's that differ a factor 8 in price, but for sure don't differ as much when it comes to 4k quality/useability Now I'm extra excited to go find a deal on the G80 haha

I would go with the Nikon D750 instead of a Canon, unless you are shooting Raw, or using a 70D or 80D for the DPAF.

Looks nice! I've been meaning to test that profile too, but haven't gotten around to it yet.

I expect it would work in Picture Profiles but how about the custom white balance settings? Do you want to beta test it on your X70 for free? Davey - no it is not just about SLOG, it is also a REC 709 fix for colour straight out of the camera. Much more Canon like and it solves lots of other stuff as well like the blue highlights freaking out, clipping and the horrible yellow cast to night shots. Examples coming soon... difference is big!!

That sucks, @Pvandall. We had all previously thought that the XC15 was free of ghosting and for the price it's just a joke. For the XC10 I sent Canon samples from lots of different XC10s that I gathered here. They said the camera was within spec, that it's a side-effect of noise reduction and that there's no point in sending the camera in. Can you post a sample that shows the problem? If the XC15 is similar, you might find my recent posts in the big XC10 thread of interest to help combat ghosting. In short, shooting EOS Standard with contrast, saturation and sharpness turned down and with ISO at 1.66 stops lower than C-Log or WideDR will give you similar results in terms of dynamic range but with much less ghosting. If you can then keep your exposure under 2000 by increasing shutter speed or shooting wider you might find that you can just about live with it. Detailed info here: and here:

I received my xc15 this week, and I'm experiencing the same problem. The edges of objects ghost terribly. It almost looks like dripping smoke. Has Canon evaluated any units that folks have sent in? With the expense of cfast 2 cards, it makes this camera really expensive. And with an issue like this, it doesn't seem worth the cost if this can't be fixed.

Well, I have turned off pre AF, as I know it drains battery. But all my tests were in movie mode with auto focus, so the camera overrides this setting and focus constantly. It still shouldn't be a problem. (A undesirable work around, would be to switch from photo to movie mode between takes) And I had no time to mess with HFR. I know the end trigger is also supposed to drain battery faster as it fills up the buffer until you hit record. I also turned on "airplane mode". Anyway, I had more time to play with it. I find operations not much faster than with the mk IV. It is definitely less stable than its predecessor, but once again the autofocus is so impressive. That feature alone might make me keep it I think, despite all these troubles. And I had an answer from Sony France support. Not quite the one I expected : "contact your seller and try another one". Which I did before sony so kindly advised me and it's more or less the same experience. Can't wait to hear other rx100 v owners take on this one !

Nice piece of work! Excellent color, framing & editing. I will agree with bunk though regarding audio. I have a pair of near field studio monitors in front of me & can't hear what she is saying. Music is too loud and her voice needs more aggresive compression and volume to cut through. Cheers!

Color looks fine to me ...the balance of the sound on the other hand not so. No idea what the girll was talking about, the music is way to loud to my ears.

Oh, that's easy, he would say: no money? No problem! You must find some creative way to afford a 1DC.

So, I just did a quick test of ISO 200 (various combinations on Standard profile). I looked at green, blue, and red channels. My conclusions are: There's no additional information in highlights. Shadows in iDynamic are simply lifted, no more detail. Noise in shadows is much more prevalent in general with iDynamic. It seems the red channel suffers the most from iDynamic. My test were in high-contrast situations... so I could be wrong about outside, lower contrast, high-key situations, but I'm fairly certain anything low-key or with many dark colors one would be "better" with iDynamic off and graded in post. If you would like the midtones to be darker (which happens to me regularly), just lower them.

This post is a bit dense, as I've been figuring out ghosting in relation to picture styles, ISO and 4K v HD so skip this if it's not of interest to you. If you are interested, don't take this as gospel - find what works for you! I went and checked and it looks to me like EOS Standard has the least ghosting. Here's a motion test at ISO 4000, f5/6, 1/50s in 4K. I balanced the contrast between each of them and desaturated so that ghosting becomes more clearly visible and comparable. The area of grey in the middle would be completely clear of horizontal stripes if there were no ghosting in this camera. I'm counting (roughly) the number of times I see the white band repeating before it becomes so indistinguishable as to be unproblematic. EOS STANDARD ghosts = 4 CINEMA EOS ghosts = 5 or 6 WIDE DR = 6 or 7 C-LOG = 8 Now, whether or not you see the same number of ghosts as me doesn't really matter. The general trend is clear and it looks like EOS Standard has the least ghosting. This was at 4K and I tried the same test in HD at the same ISO of 4000. All four profiles were equally rubbish here but at lower ISOs the same trend emerged with EOS Standard having the least ghosting. Interestingly, in 50fps 1/50s the ghosting appeared to be a little better than in 25fps 1/50s because the ghosts were smaller. So you might get better results by switching to 50 or 60fps, as long as you can live with the effectively decreased bitrate. Also interestingly, in the EBU paper the guy talks about the resolution drop in HD at higher ISOs. I think Canon chose to address this in their last firmware update because now HD looks as if it might have more resolution than 4K at ISO 6400 - even when the 4K is downsized to match it!!! Check it out: HD on left, downsized 4K on right: In an individual frame, the HD looks much cleaner. But if I press play on this static scene it's pretty obvious that there is major noise suppression going on in the HD which feels a bit plasticky without added grain - and if there's movement in the scene then noise reduction and compression artifacts are everywhere. Still though, I'm very surprised that HD does so well - I can read the text much more easily than in the 4K. Perhaps the XC10 is now optimised for shooting charts from a tripod OK, back to ghosting and low light. Since it was the best, I did some more tests using EOS Standard and for me around 1600 to 2000 is a good cut off point in both HD and 4k. Ghosting is beginning to appear at this stage but if you weren't consciously looking for it you probably wouldn't see it. Any higher than that in HD and ghosting gets progressively worse, while the noise stays constant and the image gets smeared. In 4K, on the other hand, ghosting seems to stay about the same as ISO increases, but noise kicks in so much that HD is actually better. So if I ever do need to go 3200 plus - to film the ghost of Elvis or something (as long as he doesn't move too much) - I think I'd use HD rather than 4K as there's less noise and the same or more detail. I was surprised to see today in my HD ISO5000 clip of the girls and skeletons how usable it looked. In 4K it would be a mess of colour noise at that high ISO. So all in all, I'm fairly happy with EOS Standard as a workaround to mitigate ghosting. I can now utilise the ISO range from 160 to 1600 to help with exposure without worrying about messing up image quality too much. This captures a similar tonal range that you would get in C-Log at 500 - 5000... and that's a hell of a lot higher than I would ever have gone before. If I think back to the first video camera I ever owned, the Canon XM2, that had 3 stops of gain. Part of the reason that I like the XC10 so much is that it reminds me of that camera, shooting handheld when I was first discovering video. And I'm glad that I can now confidently use it in moderately low light.

And wait till the guys from ML bring RAW 10 and 12 bit to the 80d and 5d mk4.

Same problem in Britain with Boris. A blithering idiot who one week says the UK should leave the EU because it's bad for our country, then on a visit to Turkey the next week campaigns for the Turkish to join the EU because it would be good for them to do so. So if it is good for Turkey, why is it not good for the UK? And does he realise that when he campaigned for Brexit and won, most of the advocates for leaving simply ran away from the situation, leaving the remain politicians to step up and deliver on their impossibly complicated campaign promises such as remaining in a customs union with the EU whilst being outside the free market and freedom of movement. It's fucking ridiculous and it's time people learned to recognise a con when they see one, recognise what is a feel-good conspiracy and what is a difficult fact to swallow, get acquainted with reality and vote based on facts not feelings.

Second hand 5d3 with ML plus cards and hard drives is probably do-able for below 2000. The pliability in grading the image is amazing and will knock any 8 bit image into a hat in that regard. And I think this is important for narrative work, to be able to create a stylised look that suits your film. A C series camera will be sharper and less noisy, but a well exposed 5D3 image is a dream to work with in post and, as this guy says, 1920 x 1080 is enough for a 2k DCP. http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=18286.0

No, I am not saying I don't believe him. I know and respect Simon as a friend and regular on the EOSHD forums. But not everybody's experience in Syria is representative of what is happening to the country as a whole. You have to look at the larger, geopolitical picture and try to save as many people as possible. If the mistake the US and UK made was to arm the opposition on the ground to the regime in Syria, causing a civil war, and Putin's airstrikes attempted to strengthen the regime, it's still fighting, it's still bombing, it's still an escalation of war and civilian death tolls. The US and Obama armed the opposition forces and civilians because they didn't want US troops on the ground. That's a strategy I can appreciate because US boots on the ground was a disaster for Iraq and Afghanistan. Really, what choice did Obama have this time? Indeed. I read the NYTimes interview. Very interesting stuff. Trump can say one thing one week, say the opposite the next week, and none of his supporters are worried by this. In fact they're so used to liars in government by now that they're probably completely de-sensitised to it and think it's just plain-speaking. It isn't even the outright lying that bothers me, it's Trump's inconsistency of beliefs... I think it stems from Trump believing whatever is good for him. He doesn't consider a broader picture. He does what is good for Trump, facts be damned. It's why he repeats sentences so often. If you repeat it, it feels true.

Putin has some interesting things to say about Syria and what he said in this interview in particular strikes very true - The problem is I don't think his intervention has saved lives. It has only furthered the amount of bombs falling, the amount of people dead and the amount of destruction in general.

Why do folks here act like the G85 doesn't exist, or is it too new?

Yeah,since canon has the best colour in the world,why some guys even bother worry there is not log ,not ibis,not FF view 4k, not bsi sensor, even the codec from 90s work out just fine！ Good work canon,sony sucks;)

Since I'm not a US resident I feel quite positive about a Trump presidency. I hope it improves US/Russian relations and the situation in Syria. I'm sure Hilary would have been another four years of war with escaltion, her obsession with a Syrian no-fly zone would have lead to serious escaltion and maybe a new hot war rather than cold one. Perhaps if I lived in the US I'd feel differently, but I don't. If one ignores the hysteria and rhetoric coming from every direction, then from an international perspective it doesn't seem like a bad outcome. It will proabbly be more peaceful than the alternative. That's my two pounds.

Well, the URSA Mini you'd probably equip with the BMD viewfinder and shoulder kit, so you're easily spending twice to really get it up to functional wishes, whereas with the GH5 you might be there with another 500 bucks, although, if you're upgrading from the GH4, chances are you probably have all them extra things that are compatible already. Can't really go and blend in very well in a crowd with the URSA Mini either, it's not that mini, so not really the harmless touristy vibe walking around with one of those. Everything's a matter of perspective, like I said, that's just mine. Well, in short: One thing that pushes Sony and Panasonic with cameras like these is to give people content for the (4K, now HDR) tv's they're trying to sell. Follow the discussion: It does either 4K60p (implied 8-bit) internally, or internal 4K30p but at 10-bit 4:2:2. I could imagine them opening up some extra external push-through... like 4K60p 10-bit and maybe even somehow RAW output... but everything is speculative at this point. But yes, it seems it has become way more useful for internal recording. But yeah, a bigger or off-camera located (rig/gimbal) screen can of course prove very useful. SmallHD make some brilliant little monitors. Of course there's Atomos, Convergent Design Odyssey and Videodevices too that do include more advanced features as pro recorders and monitors, some including anamorphic de-squeeze and LUT preview support, stuff you wouldn't get with your Aputure VS-5 or Lilliput Q5. The GH4 wasn't able to de-squeeze in-camera, according Matt Frazer in the following video because the camera wasn't initially intended to do so. That's why I'm pumped to see what the GH5 can do, because it is from the ground up developped for these kinds of applications now, whereas the features on the GH4, including V-LOG L were more like bonus experimental features. I think you could pick to either push it through HDMI already de-squeezed for monitoring or deliver it untouched to let your monitor/recorder de-squeeze/record the 'pure' signal. Especially check from 33:30:

I haven't touch the iDynamic since the GH3 when it was terrible and useless, but on the GX85, I'm surprised how well I can bring back the image even with iDyamic on high, with a negative S curve, and -5 contrast. This camera is so fun.

Yeah it looks like the XT2 could do with a nice kaizen update for video.. I think what's impressed me the most aside from the tack sharp 4k image was how good the XT2 nails white balance. The camera store i tested it at has the worse artificial lighting, i don't think a single camera i've tested there has had good results regarding that... except for this XT2.. purest whites SOOC! speaking of which found this video illustrating just that: "The room is very low lit and with greenish/yellowish lights. Using the Custom White Balance in the X-T2 nailed the Color Temp. perfectly." I shoot mainly indoors with often harsh ceiling lights so this camera could be a saviour. very close to pulling trigger now.

Here are some frames from a few shots I grabbed on the way to the shop, using EOS Standard > FilmConvert. @kidzrevil I think that Cinema EOS Standard at ISO160 is an even closer match to C-Log at IS0500 than EOS Standard is - it's way less contrasty with lifted shadows like you mentioned before. I think I might use EOS Standard for low contrast scenes and Cinema EOS for high contrast or highlight protection. I've pulled the sky exposure on a few of these, emulating a graduated ND in post. The 422 codec holds up really well.

Dpreview posted some initial impressions. https://***URL removed***/reviews/sony-alpha-6500 "I owned an LG Dare cellphone in 2008 and the a6500's touch implementation reminds me of that. It's unresponsive when tapping and laggy when dragging one's finger. Not only that, the touchscreen cannot be used for anything other than moving AF points and flipping through images in playback." "For instance, when shooting 4K video, the screen automatically dims. There is no way to use the 'Sunny Weather' option: it's simply greyed out. This makes the a6500 nearly impossible to use in bright sunlight while shooting 4K video with the LCD. And I'm told the reason is to mitigate overheating, which seems like a thoughtless fix to a known issue, and one that creates a new issue entirely. " "Having just finished testing video IS on both the Panasonic FZ2500 and Panasonic G85, I'm not all the impressed with the Sony's video IS performance. Of course both the cameras mentioned use smaller sensor, which in theory should be easier to move around. But more to the point, those cameras offer something the a6500 does not: an option to combine mechanical IS with electronic (digital) IS. Although digital IS tends to slightly crop (and then upscale) footage and therefore costs some image quality, it can lead to impressively glidecam-esque footage."

I couldn't agree more. The reason why we wring our hands over tech talk, specs, gear porn, etc. is because we are so tantalizingly close (or maybe we're already there) to having tools at our disposal to make the kinds of poetic images that once could only be made with 35mm motion picture cameras and all the support systems they required.

The a6500 will definitely loose 1/3 of it's current price anyway, just as a6300 did. By the time GH5 is out (Feb-March maybe?), Sony will have the a6700 (or something like that) ready for production. This has nothing to do with gh5 or what the average consumer wants. It's just Sony's strategy. When something new pops up from their R&D departments, it's instantly incorporated into the next design in a 6 month cycle, just the opposite from what Canon does. This leads to innovative BUT immature & untested products & brings huge sales after targeted marketing campaigns. This is how Sony choosed to move on, sadly. A side effect to this strategy is the shrinking value of these products, every time the next model is out (which is 6 months from now). Panasonic doesn't do this, nor Canon, nor Fuji, nor Nikon. This is why SONY SUCKS and not because of their skintones which i personally like :).

Personally I think this looks pretty awful. I haven't seen much from my XC10 that looks that bad, but if I did I'd be loathe to use it.

I love Wooden Camera Hot Shoe Camera Handle.

Since there's an example of the 1DX II skin tone in a wedding video, here's one with no Canon cameras. Just Sony and Panasonic.

Damn so close to the end of the article. One day you will bother to read the last 1%. Had you done that, you'd have read that I described Canon as "boring", that they will in future struggle to sell us the next improvements, that their approach to apps and Magic Lantern was complete wrong, and that it "pains me" to see the enthusiast market moving to higher-end longer release cycles as pioneered by Canon with the 5D line. Actually I am spending 90% of my time right now with a Panasonic costing under $800. Alas you were not to realise that, because you just seem to make assumptions without knowing very much and never ask or bother to find out what the person who writes EOSHD is really doing behind the scenes. Geeez. What an idiot and a troll. Carry on and you will be banned. Final warning. **************** Exactly, and good riddence to them. It's GREAT for the people who are actually interested in photography and picking up the skills necessary. No longer do we have the masses convincing the manufacturers that there is money to be made in crappy low-end DSLRs with food and baby modes. Look how much more they have concentrated on enthusiasts since the consumer market shrank. Look how many great enthusiast cameras we've got now and how many mid-range models have stepped up to be better featured. This is also a good illustration of why pros have a bright future. Before, everyone and his cat was shooting photos like the one on the left with their own Rebel DSLRs. Now they are stuck with the crap on the right and have to pay someone to do better. They have all sold their old cameras on eBay!

The biggest problem is that most young people aren't into computers. And without computers... there's nowhere to put the files that are on an SD card. Hell... most average consumers of any age don't have a good grasp on the idea of files and folders anyway. And that's a big part of dealing with files that a traditional camera generates. Young people are all about the smartphone, SnapChat, Instagram, etc. That's what photography is to them. And it's actually pretty remarkable that the same device you take pictures with (the smartphone) is also the device that stores them, shares them online, and backs them up to the cloud. They don't need to move photos from one device to another. A person who has only ever taken pictures with a smartphone won't like to deal with SD cards and computers for general consumer photography. It's almost like a person who grew up with digital cameras never wanting to deal with film. But like Tony said... there will always be enthusiasts and professional who rely on "real" digital cameras. For the average consumer though... it's done (or it never was) Personally... I'll still lug my DSLR around to take pictures at dance competitions. And shoot RAW and edit in Lightroom. But I rarely see parents with DSLRs or even point-n-shoots anymore. It's a smartphone world for kids and parents. Below is an example at an outdoor dance competition under a tent with terrible lighting. My photo is on the left shot with a DSLR and external flash... and someone's smartphone photo is on the right: I know which one I prefer... but the average consumer doesn't know or care. It's easier for them to just snap a pic with their smartphone than to deal with a separate camera, memory cards, a computer, software, etc.

D-Cinelike @ 800 ISO: another low light sample, but response of same kind... crushed blacks, oh yeah, but virtually noiseless and detail where there's light to expose: more interesting stuff on Mavic potentialities: Not available embedded but it is worthy to watch it on vimeo... take a look:

Well, unless we can call accidental to the tap to focus feature... This feature is unique, not present in any one of the Mavic competitors. Without mention a lens aperture almost one stop faster comparing with the previous offer : ) As written earlier, so far, the jury is still out if it is a QC issue, a design flaw or a feature from its tap to focus design. I'd even dare to bet beyond (and a way more) than faulty units... The tap to focus design + a shitty codec for half-focused areas when the settings on sharpness are dialed down. :-)

Really? I wouldn't be so sure of that... : P Even though the QC explanation route or because there's also a chance for a lens design flaw as much as reported with the Lumia 1020 model; as already written earlier in a previous post of mine along this thread BTW : ) I bet it's much related to the focus system present on Mavic; it's all about tap to focus design, I believe. Remember it's the first time you have it present alongside a drone. I believe that's why you're able to get it 'sharp edge to edge' throughout some other footage samples, as well. But, as you wish, that said, I don't see a single reason why people are used to praise any-lovely-distortion when we simply mention the magic words 'anamorphic glass', despite to easily irritate themselves when a similar feature pops up in a Chinese piece of nouvelle technology designed and made somewhere in the other side of Pacific ; ) Shouldn't it be called cinematic in the same way? ;-)

Link fixed now: Another one:

Indeed. And this is one of the reasons why I like this device. No oversharpened edges. Makes it much more cinematic to my eyes, than the usual stuff I've usually seen from the other toys. As matter of fact, this is the first bird of this category to catch my attention.

On grading & best settings: 1080p vs 4K comparative test: comparison test with Karma: other comparisons: More reviews with footage: Another interesting review and tear down: useful tips:

PM sent :-) There is good and bad footage stuff as happens with all capture devices... :-)

More than the usual...?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_isFL65kaQ&lc=z12hyhcbkompjfjne23hcrsastjjtjvfy.1478213963178233 "Looked good until I pulled it up on the big screen, it seems like you might have a lens issue, the right side is in focus and the left side is very soft. People have been having this issue, I would look into it". ~ Chad Martin "setup the c1 or c2 to center focus is the best way to get really sharp videos, you going to be use to this for sure, set this dials to center focus" ~ Francisco Silva

Yeah, I was looking at standard too, probably with the sharpening dialled down a little. Would you still add any post LUTtage to that, or leave it as is (your work always seems highly stylised to me, so I'm guessing the former)? As an aside, just for fun, I manually 'legalised' some of my C log test shots then played around with some looks LUTS (DeLUTS) designed for Sony Cine4 and they didn't look too bad at all.