Leaderboard

Hey all, I work at DPReview, so figured I chime in and perhaps dispel a few myths. sponsored content and the end of the world as we know it... Yes, we do sponsored content. Most for-profit publishers do now, as banner ads do not work, and marketers are realizing this and switching gears. But it is not some clandestine operation, a complex web of ethical quagmires. DPReview hires scientists, PHDs, literally, to design our camera tests. We then perform those tests and write about real world usability to create a review, which is a combination of facts and opinions. Whether our camera testers get everything right (with their real world usage opinions) is up for debate, but we strive to ensure our reviews align with the science in such a way that questions about editorial integrity (very common well before we started sponsored content) do not hold weight. Go back to any review we've done and look at the data. You will bore yourself to death looking at test charts before you discover any bias towards a brand. Taking a step back, I can speak personally to how the advertising campaigns (including sponsored content) come to fruition because I manage them (I am the product manager). The reality is that camera manufacturers, if they are smart, realize they cannot put lipstick on a pig, no matter how hard they try. So they are resorting to finding ways to actually engage people. It's the early days, so a lot of the sponsored content is still shit. But the vision is that publishers influence brands to actually make content worth looking at, with the goal that the quality of their product, the soul of their brand (if there is one), actually resonates in an honest way. But it will always be, in some way, advertising. Maybe one day they will turn the corner and actually make content people want to watch/read on the regular, but only time will tell. So when we decided to go down this road, we asked a few basic Qs. What could we make that would be worthwhile? How could we do it in a way that we were able to make videos we wanted to make, but could not afford to do so. And one of the first roads we went down was having pro photographers use cameras in the real world, and make little short films showcasing their experiences. On the whole, I think those videos have worked out well, we have been able to showcase photographer workflows, tell stories about real people and places, have cameras used in real world shooting situations, and on the whole, do all of this with almost zero manufacturer interaction. There is a ton of room for improvement, and I talk with visitors all the time about what else we could try. But alas, the topic at hand, we also decided to do "Native Advertising", where we have no role in creation of the content, and simply provide real estate for a brand to promote content they have created. As I mentioned above, the vision is that this type of content will get better over time, but the camera industry is a few years behind the broader CE industry. I remember a good 4-5 years ago Intel sponsored a series of short films telling the story of a handful of creatives that were excellent, beautifully shot, and overall just worthwhile to watch. There is no reason the Camera industry cannot get there, but as I said above, time will tell. DPReview staff are photographers, no really, I swear. We are not winning any World Press Photo awards by any means, that's for sure, but we are enthusiasts just like our visitors for the most part. It's an important point because I think when the topic of editorial integrity, advertising, relationships with the brands, and all of these themes come up, it gets lost. Maybe I'm an optimist, but I like to think that generally people are "good", and difficult to corrupt, and that set of assumption definitely applies to my coworkers at DPReview. Our guys are using cameras every day, shooting photos, and spending a ridiculous # of hours every year thinking about cameras. The last thing they would ever want is to feel like everything they were doing was compromised, without purpose. It would be soul crushing, demotivating, and completely unsustainable. So yeah, I understand the need to be skeptical, critical, and diligent in pushing for transparency in journalism, and we are no different. But aside from the more potent reasons I just mentioned, there are also the legal realities of sponsored content; we are legally required to disclose when a brand is involved with something that goes on our site, and we follow it to a T because, quite frankly, the world of hurt we'd face if we didn't would be far worse than a 3% increase in advertising revenue. DPReview hates EOSHD, and had a bitter falling out with Andrew Reid. Simply put, this is just not the case. We obviously respected EOSHD and Andrew as we tapped him to be involved in our efforts to begin talking more seriously about video capture. The reality of our publishing process is that it involves several layers of editing, and Andrew is not the first writer we've worked with that experienced this process as frustrating, and wont be the last. Hell, I even tried to write a few articles when I first joined DPR and definitely pulled out a few hairs when my words and voice were changed to be in line with DPR's style. But editing is a necessary step in the publishing process, and in the end, even if DPR and Andrew didn't align on how to do this, none of us here view the situation as anything other than a freelancer not working out, it happens ALL THE TIME. There doesn't need to be a villain. Blogging is a much less rigid workflow and half of the writers we work with are much happier in that context. It makes sense. No hard feelings are needed.

So here's a thing - I can't justify an Adobe CC subscription just for Photoshop (I use FCPX and/or Resolve for video) as I wouldn't use it enough, but thought there was no other software that would allow me to utilise my large-ish LUTs collection for stills. Just discovered that Affinity Photo (https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/photo/) - that's not too shabby as an editor - allows just this - for just GBP29.99! Very happy and looking forward to a lot of processing over Christmas.

Sharpness test of 35NAP 2-2, similar to 2-3, 2-3M, 2-4. low light / original / ana

Hey Scott. This sums up quite well what I loved about DPReview's editorial and why I was so proud to be contributor for those years. I looked upon DPR as something of a leading light, the most respected review site for digital cameras, one of the first, and that's why I hold it to a higher standard than others. I care passionately enough about it to get upset and to shout about it when it goes wrong and I think it's in danger. DPR did go in-depth, especially on the technical side and still does. If the new advertising in the form of sponsored content also did this to the same standard, then the quality would remain and not hurt the brand as much but even then there's a problem, because it would only work as long as it was impartial, which advertising never is and never can be. Flick through an old fashion magazine from the 1970's and it is almost ALL advertising yet readers still bought it in droves.... you'll see a lot of high quality advertising, fantastic photos (David Bailey, Helmut Newton) and minimal words, minimal editorial pieces! I am not against advertising culture entirely or with zero tolerance of ads and I'm not a communist although I do live in Berlin The problem I have is that more and more the manufacturers seem to be the boss, the paymaster and the editors, if not directly then certainly in subliminally controlling ways like with the PR organised events and it is wrong that this appears to be our only choice as reviewers if we want to get our hands on new gear at the earliest opportunity. We join the hype train by doing this and we trade our credibility, or at least it looks that way for the readers. I am open for a civilised debate on what we can do in the industry to recover some integrity in what we do. There needs to be some collective action. So the PR companies and manufacturers are after our jobs Scott. And we are going to just let them take over on the content side? But their purpose, if sponsored, is to sell a camera. For me that is not the purpose of what we do. I hate this insidious influence. If we for example are to put out educational content for instance and it is paid for by Canon, then whichever manufacturer sponsors us the most or pays the most, the more content on that particular brand there will be, and there's yet another form of bias. Even if the content itself had zero bias, the money still control the agenda. It's our job to create excellent content that's worth watching, not Intel's. By taking their money, you are trading your position as a content creator with them and one day you will be without a job. Of course! I understand that and always have. That's because it's being traded in bit by bit. Your voice replaced by somebody else's. If it's only a 3% increase in ad revenue and you're owned by Amazon, why do it at all? Why take such a big risk with the brand for the sake of bowing to the manufacturers and 0.001% of their overall ad spend budget? Tell them to fuck off! Thanks for the message on here Scott, I do appreciate it. If I can ever mend my relationship with DPReview I would. I have friends there and the only bad words exchanged were with Barney and Simon Joinson. In the end the buck stops with them. If they are going to take the site in this direction, they know my opinion on how wrong this is and why it won't turn out the way they hoped. They have a responsibility as the senior figures to change tac. Their responsibility to the readers should come before their financial obligations to advertisers anyway, because without any readers there won't be any advertisers!

I made a small tutorial on how to handle out of range video levels in Premiere Pro. Some cameras record out of range video levels, one of them is the Panasonic Lumix GX85 / GX80 on which this tutorial is based. Hope this helps and please go easy on me, as this is my first tutorial. The UHD should be available shortly as YouTube is still processing it.

I recently bought the a6300 and as nice as the image is, I don't really think it's any better than the NX500. However, I sold my NX500 last year, for a profit. The most impressive aspect of the a6300 is the image quality mixed with the Super 35mm. With the hack opening up the 2.5K with the NX500, I'm curious to learn how the IQ is compared to the 4K? Unfortunately, I have not found many examples on YouTube or Vimeo... any thoughts or examples from the regulars?

You can't buy a house if you can't afford it in your market. But otherwise, I fully agree. Luckily I have very low rent for where I live but still about what you're paying for a mortgage. The network thing is real... within a year of moving to a large market, my resume has completely transformed. Unfortunately, quality of life even at twice the pay is not different and it's not even that rates are better, just that there's more work. I think the only advantage of a big city is networking and that's pretty meaningless unless you're out doing it. The more successful people I know run their own production companies in smaller cities and enjoy a higher quality of life. Their networking options are limited, however.

here a video I shot entirely with eoshd pro color, custom wb 2 (4300k) color phase 0 - I am very pleased with the result

I live in a city with bad traffic. As in... the worst in the world. :/ Even far outside city limits a small two bedroom house is $600k. I suppose if there's anything to take away from this discussion it's that the one advantage of a big city is the network.

Get a C100 and a XC10/15 for B cam (or low profile A cam if need to pack light) -very versatile set-up with minimal hassle and nice/easy colour match in post.

This is a very good way to approach things if you can make it work. I wonder sometimes if freelancing in the big city is a bad idea. Maybe it makes more sense to try to get in with the biggest agency possible full time in a big city despite the lower wages, work locally with a low standard of living, network to the top, then quit, move to a small town, and freelance from there. Sounds like you skipped a few steps, but arguably there's no need to take them.

Looks good. But in the Eoshd pro color shots, it may just be me, but the boys face looks quite magenta or red. I have been having issues with overly red skintones on my a6500, i shoot with color phase at 0, but still get a lot of red, though other reds in the shot are accurately saturated. Not sure where the issue is. I don't necessarily mind it as having more saturation than less is ideal and works out in my coloring process.

FWIW, I'm undertaking an effort to transition out of doing "work-for-hire" and going into producing and underwriting my own commercial projects. The risk is greater, the pay is less, but the creative reward and personal ownership aspect of that possibility are too intriguing. My wife and I have spent the last decade setting up our finances with modest passive income so we can pursue this ambition. I'm also of the mind that the current democratization of imaging equipment is going to make technical accomplishments very very moot in the immediate future. And the people that rely only on their expertise in using that technology might become moot as well (outside of the upper echelon of production). So, I want to position myself for that assumption. What I offer creatively HAS to be more valuable than the gear I bring to the table. If I don't believe that, then I'm in the wrong biz'ness completely.

Hi! I wouldnt say its the best luts, but have a look at these, they were designed specifically for the NX1, and they are 25% off right now! https://sellfy.com/p/HNAk/-XMAS/

I don't get what you mean Cary, the only thing clipping is the tiny reflection on the top of the marble? Doesn't matter in an ISO test does it? I only posted this so @jonpais could see the difference in exposure between the GH4 and GX85. In my experience skin tones and highlights look a lot better when underexposing with these cameras and that could be why he thinks the image from GX85/G85 look less "filmic". GX85 is nr. 1 and GH4 is nr. 2

Found another Red camera chart comparison that might interest a few people. http://www.alex-stone.com/2016/10/14/which-red-camera/

Thanks! I was, in fact, referring to the shake produced by longer focal length lenses when I said all my handheld shots were on a 12mm lens.

For sure - its my Samsung NX1 with a Samsung 18-55mm kit leans....latest firmware on the camera -had no issuses with the weight on the gimble..... Also believe its the latest Firmware on the gimble too.... For sure - its my Samsung NX1 with a Samsung 18-55mm kit leans....latest firmware on the camera -had no issuses with the weight on the gimble.....

All processing is done internally in 32-bit high resolution colour. You'd do this before you start grading, to tell it how to interpret the footage (e.g. where to map the 8 bit signal into that 32-bit space). After that, until you export, it's in the very large 32-bit colour space.

Sorry bro! Wish it was true tho! Now I'll still be tempted to give the E-M1 Mark II a spin first. (Have both the GH4/E-M1 now anyways, one's excellent for video production style shooting, the other is a photography workhorse; might replace both with their respective successor)

Darn it!

LOL Luke, people are all crazy with your NDA... Can't they allow a time for a break? It's Christmas time, after all! :-)

I made a small tutorial on how to fix this in Premiere Pro for the GX80 / GX85, see the following posting:

That is remarkable... how many hits do you get with these videos? Also, is she your wife?

Ask, they should have standards. Typically it is -6db and I certainly would not go over -3db. Also important is the loudness, you should run a loudness detector to see if you are within broadcast standards.

The G80 is already out for awhile! And no, the GH5 will have a lot more to offer than the G80.

Fredrik, great test but there is a problem with your comparison. You are actually clipping the highlights in the GX85 scenes. The GX85 provides video levels but does use out of range values for overhead. So in your NLE or color grading application you need to bring the out of range values into legal to compare the shots. If you keep out of range values then a lot of setups will clip the highlights because they expand limited to full range. Here is the waveform before and after bringing the highlights into legal range. The 100% values on the left are from the titles but notice there is more highlight information above it. The right side has brought the highlights into legal range and obviously the titles are now too low. For indoor it is not really an issue but if you make a video outside in bright lights the out of range highlights contain valuable information that you should not discard.

I hate the screen dimming even more than the overheating. I'd rather the camera overheat 10% quicker but I can actually see what I shoot.

We have general national guide lines that categorise production jobs into 4 categories. A self shooting assistant, ie someone who handles gear and shoots behind the scenes etc, is around 250 euros for the day. However, you can roll the dice on students and recent grads for less...

I've never encountered any triggered overheating protection ever on any camera I've ever owned (they didn't get that uncomfortably warm either). So... why does Sony have such huge issues with this? How can they expect me to buy a camera I can't rely on? Work arounds with screen dimming, lifting the screen, opening the battery compartment, taking external power, adding a fan... that's all cute 'n stuff. But those are workarounds that should not have to exist. Hope they get their shit together with their next A-release. I did intend to go Sony, but just not like this I'm not.

Please everyone. This is about a third of a stop difference. Really not worth arguing about. It could be explained by all sorts of things. Difference in lens transmission, camera settings, picture profile differences, etc. Either way, a third of a stop shouldn't affect your buying decision.

4k, 8k, bah. I was watching a Blu-ray rip of the 1983 Scarface tonight allowing my UHD to upscale the *gasp* 720p footage and thought it looked AMAZING for 33 years ago. I guess content is always king of course.

People have definitely found ways to mount other glass on it. Besides, there's plenty of affordable PL lenses these days. It can shoot 48fps iirc, which is half speed, and I've talked to people on DVX User who use the camera completely solo. The F35 gives you a much better image then the RED One--just not better specs. Hollywood films are still being shot on F35, not RED One.

Thanks for the support. If people don't agree with me on this, then I will at some point also cave in and do a run of big advertisements splashed on the site and regular sponsored articles. But if my readers say they're NOT fine with this, I won't. Simple as that. So speak up for the indies... not many advertising-free places left now on the internet. It wasn't supposed to be this way online.

I don't know if I'm still up to the job. I've put on a few pounds.

The amount of money you spend on cameras is peanuts to what you could be spending on super-portable lighting. For your main readers, the "enthusiast", the majority seem to leave lighting as an afterthought, the complain the colour/noise/rendition/clarity in this and that camera isn't good enough (in clips where the shooter really needed to use some lighting). There's the Icelight 2 - very soft and lovely. There's the Scorpion Light Kit. (I have this and it's absolutely fantastic. Clip a light anywhere on small Sony batteries!). Aputure - all their products, like the LS1-C, are marvellous, portable and affordable. Lume Cube - smartphone controlled tiny lights. I've decided to say "fuck it" and go native Sony so I can get the best performance from a single system instead of all this chopping, changing, adapting - and focus on creating 100%. I'll be getting this lens for my FS5 and whatever Sony stills cam I might have anytime soon. That reminds me - the FS5 deserves a mention. After a wobbly start in 2015, this camera has matured into a real workhorse beast this year. Such a versatile camera! Shame the TERRA 5k hasn't made it out yet. Looks brilliant as a concept so far!

Some people have made their own Nikon F mounts I believe?

On a recent project, where I shot interviews in New York, London, Mumbai, and Barcelona, I filmed interviews in the following configurations: - with an additional shooter and sound person (me on the b-camera so I could concentrate on asking questions, and the shooter on the A) - with additional shooter, no sound person (me on b-cam, set-and-forget sound levels with a lav and boom mic feeding into Zoom recorder) - one-man-band: lav mic on the interviewee, and boom mic on a chair or stand feeding into Zoom H4N recorder. Maybe my Westcott Flex light. A-cam was Canon DSLR (or c300 mk1 for a couple interviews), B-cam was Canon DSLR or GX85, Zoom H4N (boom and lav mics), Leica R lenses, and usually one light. There are tradeoffs in every scenario. With a crew of three there are less worries about gear. Everything is taken care of and you can really focus on the questions you're asking, how you respond, and ensuring a strong connection with the subject. This is by far the best. There's nothing worse than being in the middle of a powerful interview where someone may be bursting into tears, or relating the heart of their professional work, and you're sitting there nodding to keep them talking while wondering if your audio levels are too hot. With just one additional shooter, I find that there's a nice balance between finding the perfect shot and covering your bases on the technical level. That said, something goes wrong on the audio side in these types of setups at least 10% of the time. I've had nice results working as a one-man-band and keeping the camera setup minimal (sometimes with the GX85 on a table as a second camera). But again, the stress of someone leaning out of focus, the audio levels not being right, camera drifting, or the dreaded 12-minute limit on the DSLR can be intense. On the one hand these interviews are very intimate - it's just you talking to the subject with maybe one light, so sometimes they may feel more comfortable. The conversation can be very free-flowing. On the other hand, on the technical side there is invariably some nagging issue with exposure, focus, audio, or framing. Picking crew size is like picking the camera, lens, and setup for any shoot. Not every setup is right for every situation. It is important to consider what you'll be shooting and how you'd like to capture it. That is the simplicity you're looking for. The choices about gear and crew size should flow from there.

My buddy does have some good clients. One success story was when he invested a lot of unpaid private time in second-guessing the 'corporate identity' of the firm who made the announcement. He met the woman responsible for public relation with concepts ready to present. But he was wise enough to make her feel it were her ideas. They accepted his offer (reasonable, but not cheap) without batting an eye. The communication worked from the start (what's the right idiom? They were on the same wavelength?). He had thought out everything in advance, he could control the situation. The client came back several times despite cheaper competitors. If the client feels you are just some guy with a camera you will not be treated with respect. A successful professional must be a prostitute sometimes. The good ones make their sugar daddies think they love them.

I honestly wish they would keep cineform in the camera's alongside Prores, I much prefer the Cineform codec.