Leaderboard

I understand why a lot of people may be upset about websites and sponsored content... I don't really care because it is listed as such. The next argument seems to be about a filmmaker's ethics for using the 80D and overly selling the camera. Maybe he just really likes it? And the truth of the matter is this... if you can't make a good movie with the 80D, then you really can't make a good movie. People have made features with iPhones. With that being said, obviously this short promo movie is geared towards young filmmakers and the parents who will buy them their first camera. It is geared towards vloggers who need an acceptable image with good in camera features. I mean, Casey Neistat still, proudly, uses a 70D. But... if Canon really wanted to show the world what can be done with a Canon camera, they should have hired Kendy Ty. In fact, if Canon gave Kendy Ty an 80D and a 35mm f2 lens, I bet this thread would have evolved differently.

Thanks for using Pro Color on the video JazzBox. I see you had contrast -5 It would have looked better with the optimal settings in the guide, which have contrast at 0. When you set contrast to -5 it doesn't give you more dynamic range. It reduces the amount of tones between one colour and another = Less colour information in the end result even when you add contrast in post. This is EOSHD Pro Color for Panasonic with Contrast at 0 (optimal, as in guide): And this is at contrast -5 (see how the tones on the face are mashed together?):

Computer's binary ways can be confusing -- for a moment there I almost started to doubt myself I also hope for a bitrate of 200-250mbps if it's x264 as well, should cover all the extra data and still be a decent increase in overall detail and motion smoothness over the GH4.

Maybe I am wrong in absolute data increase cause I don't really know what exactly goes into describing each pixel but certainly 10 bit value doesn't take four times as much storage as 8 bit value. Computer memory is measured in bytes, each consisting of 8 bits. You can read the whole value as well as specific bits, so to store a 10 bit value, you'd use a byte plus 2 bits of another byte, still having 6 bits of that byte available for the next value (of course, you have to keep track of where your bits are as there is no address in the computer memory for separate bits, only bytes). At most, if you just leave a full byte for the extra 2 bits, it will still take only the double of amount.

????? 10 bit require 2 bit more storage space then 8 bit and it can encode a value range that is 4 times the size.

No young filmmaker is going to spend 4,600 dollars on a 35mm T1.5 Canon Cinema lens, as I noted above. At least they had the decency to leave a shot in the video showing the lens and the whole rig used in the video, which when summed costs far, FAR, more than the 80D with a kit lens. If Canon places clear and readable texts of the lenses used on the videos used to promote other cameras, why did they not do it here? Seems a bit too deceptive, no?

Sharing a small clip that I shot in Aug. on a trip to the US with a fellow NX1 user, that is also a user here on the forum, Mr. Adam Bradley :D

Thank you very much! I used the strap only on the first couple of shots. For the one at 0:10 I tried to use the straps to simulate the Wing ( https://www.edelkrone.com/eu/p/187/wing ). The Olympus 12-40 was on 40mm. For the shot at 0:13 I started very high with the camera and I went down on my knees, the lens was set to 12mm, in order to have more parallax. Of course I had to try 4 or 5 times in order to have a decent shot that during the editing I had to stabilize (and crop) a little. Some shots were with tripod: the voodoo-witch indoor (but not the OTS shot indoor, that were handheld), the dancing, the curly girl when in close up and some wide shots. On some shots I just put the camera down to the ground. All the rest was totally handheld with no strap, especially the playback that was shot very quickly and very shaky on purpose. For the playback I took the camera in my hands, the right hand on the G7 grip, the left hand on the lens (the Olympus 12-40, on 25mm for the wide shot, on 40mm for the close up) for pulling focus. The other lens were the CY Zeiss 80-200 f/4 (for the curly girl's close up, for a couple of guy's walking and for the dancing), the CY Zeiss 35 f/2.8 for the medium shot of the voodoo-witch, the CY Zeiss 50 f/1.7 for the indoor close up and OTS, all always at the widest aperture possible. All the rest (playback, walking etc...) was the Olympus 12-40 f/2.8, mostly at 25mm and 40mm. For the playback I used an HOYA Pro ND 16. The video was shot very quickly, so I had no time to setup follow focus, cages, stabilizer etc.. (I had a mini-gimbal some months ago, it was quite good but 99% of the time I had no time to balance it so I sold it. After some research I tried an Ikan Beholder DS-1 which I did not like at all, a super nice Zhiyun Crane - great, but no assistance in Italy, so I did not buy it - and now I've bought a FlyCam HD300 with vest, but it arrived las week). Anyway for music video with super low budget like this one I prefer to work with some technical limitations (no follow focus, no external monitor, no rigs), mostly handheld to be as mobile and as quick as possible, in order to spend all the time trying to achieve a nice framing and lighting. The cuts in editing are quite fast, so the handheld look it is not too disturbing to me For any questions just ask, I'm here

I have been using the videomicro since it came out. Its a great directional mic for its compact size that performs better than the internal mic. For example here is my run & gun setup that fits in a bag without having to take the mic off. It really depends how much you value portability vs quality. If you were comparing it to the rodeo mic pro I would say maybe give it a try, but if NTG4 is your baseline you might be disappointed. It doesn't really approach the quality of NTG4 at the same subject distance but at least the closer you get the smaller the differences are since a major part of the noise comes from the internal amps. I would say for its price is worth it, but don't expect miracles.

Just a bit of fun for Christmas. I shot this a while back but have only just got around to the edit, if you enjoy it please pass it on!

You can actually count to 10 bits (or much higher, even) with just your 10 fingers ! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finger_binary

Wait hold on folks, I apologize I am totally wrong on the bit size increase! I just cleared up my brain fog! Of course, while the information quadrupled the required space is only 10/8 more, a factor of 1.25!

I beg to differ. If we take a standard 8 bit 4:2:0 video and discard for the sake of simplicity video levels, transparencies and gamut constraints we have: 3 x 2^8 bits of information per pixel subsampled to 4:2:0 which is: 384 values per pixel For 10 bit video this becomes: 3 x 2^10 bits of information per pixel subsampled to 4:2:2 which is: 2048 values per pixel That's an effective factor of 5! I would not call that fractional, it is twice as much as 4:2:0 in an absolute sense and it is 25% more with respect to the 4:4:4 baseline. You seem to grossly underestimate the sparsity of 4:2:0 Your document talks about saving bandwidth when the destination is going to be 8 bit. Now do encoders need 5 times as much bandwidth for 10 bit 4:2:2? Of course not, the more data the more effective the compression (one would hope) but I think it should be somewhere between 250 to 300 Mbps for H.264 and about half of that if it is H.265.

I've long read The Guardian online as my primary news source and they have sunk an absolute fortune into their web/app presence and have never had a paywall. As a consequence, of course, they're deep in the doo-doo financially as web ads don't pay the bills like print ads in the physical paper used to. I remember those days - successful sales guys on national papers' jobs were more about picking the advertiser who would demand the least discount rather than actually having to go out and sell to clients - everyone got respectably rich (well, a lot of them didn't, actually, as they spent it all on drink, drugs and hookers at the weekend and came back hungry for more cash on a Monday - but that's another story for when I see you all in the pub!). Not any more. The Guardian have resorted to hawking 'memberships' at £49 a year to those who wish to pay - you get access to some dedicated content and they send you a nice bag. I've bought one because I have a need for good professional content - I'd be happy to do the same here if @Andrew Reid were to offer something similar.

Just testing my new camera. Glidecam DGS works great with it as well as samsung 500GB evo850 SSDs.

It better be! 10 bit 4:2:2 is 8 times as much information that needs to be encoded!

Same here Will test in a couple of days with the Sigma.

4k 60P and 18Mpixel 30P video will rock my world. Time to get a new computer...

Just made a quick comparison with my D5200 (using Flaat11). Wanted to see how the X-T2's DR compares with the flattest settings possible without F-log. Everything is in the description. Unfortunately it was an overcast day, but I tried to find high contrast scenes. This test is not about color.

Canon makes (and I own and use ALL the time) a 24-105 STM F/3.5 - F/5.6. It's cheap (you can find them around $350) is light, dead silent AF, and works beautifully with the 1dx II. As a testament to how good this lens is - in Ohio today it warmed up to around 60 degrees - my daughter just learned to ride a bicycle on her own without training wheels. I grabbed the 1dxII and this lens and shot it in 4k and it turned out wonderfully - just stopped down to F/5.6 and was able to zoom in/out without issues (IE no aperture flicker). HIGHLY recommend the STM 24-105. Did I mention it is a EF lens? IE made for full frame? A hidden gem...

Isn't it funny how a top spec'ed Razer blade pro that costs $4499 and has a 17.3" screen, mechanical keyboard, 32GB ram, RAID 0, all the ports that you will ever need, the best desktop graphics card out there (that costs $600 just by itself), in a relatively thin package, appears much more overpriced than a top spec'ed MacBook "Pro" that costs just $200 less . Anyways, the XPS 15 9560 with the 1050GTX that comes out in January will be yet another very attractive mobile solution. I was very happy with mine.

Wasn't that the same guy that asked to get banned and went to write paid articles somewhere himself? Guess there's a tiny bit of irony there. Though, in his defence, after having cooled off for a bit he came back with a proper attitude (forgiven but apparently not forgotten quite yet, sorry bro). Ebrahim has been given a lot of chances, but I guess a soab once is a soab for life.

It is just for marginally better scratch audio.

Very ironic clicking on these old threads and seeing posts like this pop up at the top to read first.

My first 'experiment' with the Samsung and Bolex. I find it razor sharp but what a job to focus...The pancake lens is superb, but very thin. I have to practise to find the focus rings faster. Perhaps I will try an NX 45mm f1.8 lens. Question; how can you ad warp stabilizer? I do get failure, I do have to 'nest' warp stabilizer?

Of course not since cameras have their own calibration, but if you want to adjust the how bright/dark a scene is in Resolve you have to use gain. The point of this post is about changes in hues that occur even with no clipping in Premiere Lumetri color panel when adjusting either the exposure/contrast/curves.

Yep, Canon STM lenses are preferable for situations that mic is close to the camera. You can also hear the noise from one of PB AF tests (11m20s):

Tito, this is great work! Have you thought about putting all your blogs in a book form for instance on Blurb?

I completely disagree and I am sure many others with me.

Now how did I know you are going to say this? I offer a subtle grade and you close your eyes, I make it extreme just so you can see and you don't like it because it does not agree with what you are claiming. If you actually look at the picture that I posted at the top you are going to see that Resolve does not change hue whereas Premiere with Lumetri color does. But its fine if you don't like the comparison (or the result), I am not going to argue with you any more. Maybe this thread is not for you, but for people that are (too) sensitive to differences in skin tones.

I've been testing a few cameras over the past month, with my last test being with the FZ2500... which I am definitely keeping... I love the 200mbps 1080p... even though most people don't recommend shooting with it. I never owned a GH4, but it seems like a mini GH4. Overall, I think the XC10 image was thicker with that 4:22 codec, but for the price I paid for the FZ2500, I like it better. In about a month I am going to get a BMPCC. Anyway, I look forward to seeing what you do with the G85... if the IBIS is anything like the GX85, you should be a happy guy.

When I can finally buy the perfect ink pen, I'll compose my masterpiece. It's going to be awesome. Just you wait and see.

Ciao! This is a music video I shot with GH4 and G7 (both with Natural profile, saturation -5, contrast -5). I shot it very quickly: two afternoon and an evening, one week between the 2 days of shooting and in that time I sold the GH4, so the second day of shooting was with the G7. I shot all handheld without shoulder rig except for a part of the indoor shot with the voodoo witch, where I used a tripod while she mix the potion. The drone scenes are shot on DJI Phantom 3 Professional (not mine, we called a pilot), which is a little too "digital" for my taste. I used Andrew's EOSHD Pro Color for Panasonic and I'm really happy about the skin tones and the overall colors. I also used FilmConvert's Kodak Vision3 5207 with grain 20%. Thank you Andrew p.s.: can you spot which is the GH4 and which is the G7?

May the 4th be with you, Luke!

@mercer I think we're all in agreement that it exists, if in perception only. It may mean different things to different people. Personally, in the (admittedly unscientific) studies I've done on the subject, it's got to do with things like precise frame timing, proper frame exposure (there was a bug in the original C300 - not sure if it's still there, I haven't shot on that camera in a while - where footage shot as 24p would always have a 1/60 shutter speed, reducing motion blur from the expected 1/48 by enough that was noticeable - it made all the footage feel slightly less "smooth", for instance), and of course ensuring that playback was at a matching frame rate. For others, it's got more to do with colour, for others, bokeh or lack thereof, film grain or noise "feel", and the anamorphic effects, etc. etc. and of course any/all of these in combination. This subject has been beaten to death and we could still talk about it, but I think it really comes down to how you, personally, define it, and whether or not you can, in post, create that effect or if it's purely the result of the in-camera hardware and encoding. That said, I'd argue you could make stuff that very nearly everyone except a small percentage of other filmmakers finds entirely "cinematic" or "filmic" with nearly any decent video-capable camera these days, and that it's not as much of a hardware thing as people think. Can you do it on all cameras, straight off the card, in available light? Not easily, and certainly not with as much success. My personal perspective on the whole thing is that we've failed to carry forward actual cinema production technique and style and values. The importance of lighting and light modifiers. The use of colour for symbolism and message. The practice of motion. The importance of DOF (not low-DOF) and when/how to use it. Traditional framing versus unconventional. The language of editing. The incredible contributions of the art dept. (even if it's just one person) and wardrobe/makeup. Having a good colourist. To me, these contribute FAR FAR more to the feeling of "cinematic" or "filmic" than any of the gear you shoot with or what LUTs you slap on the footage, and my own eyes, in blind viewings, have held that up so far.

Well that's interesting. Not 100% sure on that skin colour? but pretty impressive overall. What an easy one step grade! What to set idynamic and iresolution to Andrew? I had idyn off and ires standard here. Temp -15, Exp +0.4, Shadows 31.9. GH4

Agreed, I'm curious too. The GH4 has always had a very filmic motion cadence in 24p 4K if you ask me, and I've been crew and DIT on productions with Alexas and C300.

How does this LUT handle videos with different levels? The highlight recovery is obviously done by digging super whites 235-255. What if the video is recorded with 16-235 and no super whites. Many Panasonic cameras records 16-255. What if the video file is 0-255? Is there some automatic level conversion?

Yachts: Too expensive! Jets: Too fancy! Jetpack: Too dangerous! Trip to Mars: Too exotic! Panasonic GH5: Just right!

have you guys used the new touchbar? ive spent some time with it and imo it is THE stupidest gimmick. dont get me wrong, a mbp is still a mbp... touchbar doesnt add any functionality... it just makes me want to TOUCH THE SCREEN. The ACTUAL SCREEN. its like appl engineers came up with the laziest possible way to have a 'touch screen computer' lmao

Hey, Merce! Now I am getting exited to check that baby out! Should be in my hands next week. Yes 2 cam set up sounds tempting. On dpreview 1080p looks of much lower resolution than LX100 though. But always good to test ourselves. Wow! What an awesome compliment. Thank you! Not sure if I fit that bill. I enjoy to shoot short pieces with the tech I got at my hands. I uploaded a fun video I did with my great ladyfriend and student collegue. We filmed and acted together, only us two with my G6, with the boosted 28mm FD and a cheapo 60dollar rig- and a cool blue bike. Gotta have a blue bike:) Originally we met for a coffee and then she suggested we should film a bike race. So we did without any planning. Was very happy with Panny colors again after the grade. Think GX85 will allow me more of this kind of spontaneous work.

Shot on the GX85

Not to put too fine a point on it, but but problem with that video is that it's poorly shot, not that the 5axis is introducing some jitter into the motion image. (Which it does) Long fast handheld pans? Sorry, but 5axis isn't going to help in that scenario. So, the solution? Don't do ridiculous long and fast handheld panning shots. Easy enough Look, good shots need a good shooter. I don't care if you're filming with an Alexa and the worlds most expensive gimbal. If you don't know what you're doing within the limits of the gear, you're going to create garbage. The thing that footage is good for is recognizing the patameters of the stabilizing tech. If you suffer from the delusion that 5axis is going to make bad footage good...well, this should disavow you of that notion.