Leaderboard

Some quick and initial tests with my new system: 5D III (ML RAW) - Bolex 16/32/1.5x - Rectilux Hardcore DNA

Hi, Since the drones are becoming trendy I just put a few clips together showing the difference between all the different DJI Mavic "color mode" https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7MbHg2isoWXVlhqVUw1UERHeVU/view?usp=sharing The files are straight from the memory card without any encoding. The Mavic was updated with the latest firmware as of February 14. Each clips is 50 seconds, switching color modes every 10 sec in that order: D-Cinelike D-Log None TrueColor Art >>> Settings: - WB: Sunny - AF: set manually - Style: Standard (+0,+0,+0) - Exposure: Manual Exposure (0 EV) - Resolution and Frame rate: 3840x2160 (UHD) at 29.97fps Feel free to download and try your own grading. Obviously the light (clear bright sunny day) won't fit all scenario but it will give you an idea.

Don't know how/if the camera's noise reduction settings affect the raw stills, but the problem doesn't appear in the raw files. By the way, there are raw files with two different noise settings (NR1 and NR6) available for download, and there is no noise reduction smudging in either. The problem is reduced on the jpegs with noise reduction set to "1." If the noise reduction is working in raw mode, I am not seeing any smudging, so perhaps this problem is just limited to jpeg processing. Wonder how the noise reduction in the GH5's 4:2:2 video will compare with that of the jpegs.

Yeah, no question, but when I was watching films at run-down grindhouses during the 1dollar matinees, the print and projection was not all that great. So the quality perception is skewed regarding "film" if all one is used to is watching a pristine transfer on blu-ray. My movie going experience as a kid growing up was decidedly less refined. Memories of sloppy screenings of "Corvette Summer" or "Fort Apache The Bronx" or "Phantasm" are more my recollection. ...this doesn't even touch on the reality of VHS home viewing of movies. So yeah, film is great! But by the time copies of movies filtered into my rust belt neighborhood, the IQ reality had taken a beating.

I totally agree, Kisaha, I didn't mean to undercut Luca's awesome work. He is actually a great fan and supporter of NX system and with his speedbooster he gave new life to NX1 for those not needing AF. It's actually because I trust his work, that I made that "bulleted list". I'm sure he can accomplish most of those points. The size, TO ME, is a big plus. I actually went mirrorless for the size in the first place. Now, if you tell me that the size of metabones is impossible to achieve, I could buy the adapter anyway, if it does all the rest, but it hasn't to be too big (the Canon that you mention is actually on the big side, IMO). As to ttbek, I also think he should set some marks for his "reward", and the questions fired by Luca are very interesting. I mean...perhaps, with those funds Luca at his disposal NOW, he could do the real thing, while he couldn't do it without them.

To be honest guys, @lucabutera has done (hardware wise) the most any other have since the beggining of the system, even Metabones LIED, telling us that it is not possible, and then had to re-phrase talking about business models and the such. @Marco Tecno, your list is quite big! Even though I agree with most of your list, I am not anxious to see something same size as the Metabones (why? it can be bigger, if it does the job). Have you seen the piezo electric thingy for Canon lenses? Even Canon had to build a whole box under the lens, to accommodate their pz adaptor, why not Luca, just one person on a mission? I mean, everything is general and we have to support Luca, and eventually he is going there, the guy has some serious engineering skills! @ttbek is a great NX user, no question about it, but where money are involved, there is always opportunity for misunderstandings, it would be wise to just declare what he wants to see for his 10.000 (or 5 or 2 or 1 or whatever), so people understand and maybe try to that direction. TechartPro is an interesting concept, but it is something different than an active EF(-S) adapter. You did the speedbooster, that works, and people using it right now, now it is better for an active EF adapter, with AF, OIS and aperture control, and then, why not, a legacy lenses AF adapter, I have more than a couple of dozen lenses I could use.

I think that it's important to look less at the specific aspect ratio of the sensor than at the height of the sensor, especially when it comes to using professional anamorphic lenses. When shooting for a 2.40 aspect ratio, having a taller sensor means using more of the field of view of the lens. And this comes into play when using older lenses that may not have the wide angle options, or have wide angle lenses that are unusually large or oddly shaped. At my job, I have compared Lomo anamorphics on the Alexa (18x24mm sensor) and the Red Dragon (15x30mm sensor). On the Alexa, you can more or less get way with using the 50mm as your widest lens. On the Red, the 50mm is more like a 60mm, and you're gonna be relying more on the 35mm Lomo, which is a big heavy lens with a giant front diameter, and a lot more barrel distortion and softer edges. It's just more practical to have a sensor that matches the full height of the 35mm academy format, regardless of whether it is 4:3 or not. And with how high resolution have gotten lately, there's no need to fear cropping. No use crying over spilled pixels.

Imo, grain asaide. Digital just cant compete image wise. It cant reproduce the DR, colors and tonality of film. But when trying to do so, raw definitely helps. I just have to watch an old movie from the 90s, 80s, 70s or even 60s. Today's digital just cant touch it. I wish every day that it will be the day when it can.

When you watch ICE by Griffin Hammond, it must be fair to assume that they don't have a clue at DP when it comes to actually filming anything on both a technical and artistic level. Good job I am not a conspiracy theorist because I would swear that their effort was sabotage on behalf of other camera companies they have a good relationship with.

I rather have true camera to lens connection than having to remote control this, its pretty safe to say that a good majority of us actually uses the autofocus in video quite a lot, because its superb and hits the target more often than not. If this was translated to a Canon mount, imao it be gold worth, its too much work going around with a steady cam and a remote controller just to get focus all the time, good for big video production but not so much for us who just have the camera with nothing else, run and gun style.

Actually when I read this across various sites, I realized, that there may be many reasons for this: 1. Nikon isn't really stellar at video, and the 1" camera market does have an interesting emphasis on video. 2. Sony is literally monopolizing the newer 1" sensors, and using them for its newer RX100 models. Everyone else gets a generation or 2 older version, of the 1" sensor. 3. Panasonic's FZ2500 and the LX15 seem to have captured the Market of two of the Nikon DL models. This apart from Sony's own RX10 iii. Nikon announced the 3 cameras exactly 1 year ago, and then their R&D Department sat over them all this while, with almost no noticeable movement on that front (no product reviews, or cameras given to photographers, like the way Sony and Panasonic do for models before launch). In the meantime Panasonic and Sony were in a race to bring out new 1" sensor models, making the Nikons effectively obsolete. The Nikons would have had a price advantage, but, they spent way to long in the R&D, and that probably jacked up the final costs, thereby completely ruining a very interesting series of camera.

Doesn't look all THAT bad to me. Sure the other cameras look better and I wouldn't want to use the GH5 at ISO 6400 anyway unless I had to. I think for the A6500 I wouldn't want to use at ISO 12800 unless I had to but any of these cameras is not going to be at its best over ISO 3200 anyway. GH5 seems like it will be a wonderful camera for video (regardless of sensor size) as long as you can control the light or keep it at lower ISOs. It will also be a nice M4/3 stills camera with all the normal pluses and minuses the sensor size gives. Maybe in a couple of generations, M4/3 will have the low light/high ISO that some want but just seems beyond M4/3s for now.

Use Tito's calculator :-) http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=13386

@Emanuel it is ironic that you try to convince anyone that a6300/a6500 are belonging "..in the professional camp." As a professional, that I earn my family's bread with my cameras, I would take the shitty GH5 iso quality anytime, to the "Sony-only-on-the-spec-sheet champ". Actually I choose to stay with NX, a dead system, instead of the latest APS-C Sonys, because it is more reliable, have exactly the lenses I need in my line of work in APS-C, better ergonomics, lower battery consumption, no overheating etc etc, and I have worked a few times with the a6300 at 2016, and never had to go to 6400 by the way. It is good as a 3rd camera, and one of my business partners can give it to me whenever I ask, but he seriously thinking to go full m4/3, as his primary camera STILL is the GH4.

I'd say both, it's great to have more vertical resolution, but having to crop less is more "storage efficient" to me. (with magic lantern being limited by the card write speeds, it's easier to achieve more vertical resolution in 3:2 or 4:3 than in 16:9 ) I actually shoot more in 3:2 with magic lantern as it allows slight movement in the shot in post if wanted, but 16:9 is just too much cropping to me.

Maybe on a 4:3 crop you feel less guilty of the crop, when reviewing your footage the 3.56:1 composition sometimes looks so great that you don't want to adhere to the cinema "standard", if the camera is doing it for you is as we say in México "eyes that don't see, heart that doesn't feel " (ojos que no ven, corazón que no siente) :D

Knowing IR, you're comparing JPEG engines.

Hi Jon. I know in theory the top LCD plate doesn't sound that useful but since the camera is usually strapped and hanging around your chest, its useful to be able to see your settings from that level before lifting the camera up to your eye. Also since the LCD lights up you can see your settings in the dark. The purple flaring and sensor grid pattern happens more at higher apertures (f5.6 and above). Recomposing is an option but not when you actually intentionally want to capture flares, which I often do

Here is the vimeo preview

Seems...? : ) They DO produce them: ...such a pity, if they don't fix this bogus. May happen to be acceptable in the consumer realm; crappy for serious usage. BTW @Kisaha, that grainy a6500 sample's outcome doesn't bother me at all. The more I see from that Sony device, the more I like.

I agree, it is just too aggressive. I have seen similar levels of NR in the high iso video samples, with an additional temporal component that sometimes seems to create artifacts. I just hope they allow us to turn it all the way down, cause what they claim as an "extra stop" just makes the image unusable.

Well this is a video using a Canon 50 1.4 on a GH4 with a MB XL speed booster. Looks fine using that. But that ends up really s35mm not FF though. I don't see why it would not work.

I am really starting to worry about you lately LoL. It's those damn Fuji cameras isn't it??

@sanveerI can upload it on vimeo but I think the point is to have the original file and try grading it. Looking at compressed video on vimeo won't help much to assess the grading latitude. What do you think ?

It is imo. But that has nothing to do with sales or gear. Totally different subject for another thread.

now THIS is more like the arguments I was looking for. When it comes to the GH4 (and 5 - as well as any Canon shooting ML RAW) I know they have increased sensor height when shooting 4:3, but most people requesting the feature just seem to neglect that. I didn't mention before, but this thread is a case study for an upcoming episode. I want to make people realize that "just" a 4:3 crop is no big deal. :P

Not sure if anyone saw any of my GO videos, but here is how I graded them.

Cool. I've been playing with this sort of thing too - trying to create a digital tobacco filter. Hadn't tried blending with 'Soften' mode, though, so that's this evening's activities planned for me! Thanks.

Probably the best advice and the most missing thing in time. I'll try to consider in the future, and i'll think less in gears, upgrades and "in post fixing"

to get the "film look" over video, try to use less grading and more in camera capturing of the light and color, so as your footage can look beautiful without hours of grading. Never say ill fix it in post...as for all these luts and things i think they tend to look all the same, you should try to create your own coloring look, and i think less is more, if the end footage looks ungraded for me its a win

I have a steadicam solo. There are times my footage looks to have been taken from a yacht. I find the secret is not to plan the shot too much. If I do then I invariably struggle to get it right. But if I "go with the flow" then I get some decent useable footage. I realise that this approach wouldn't necessarily work in a scripted context but for making fun films it's an ideal technique. I find that with practice it's possible to read what it's about to do next. If it starts to rotate then go with it - react dynamically to what it does. It often works and, for an amateur like me, it's much better than trying to make it do something.

It sounds as though you should check out some tutorials on achieving dynamic balance, which will generally involve adjusting the sled weights non-symmetrically..

I only have access to another copy of the same exact amp I have, so I'll try that out when I can. I will open it up ASAP and check if anything is loose! I'm very good with working with soldering, hopefully it doesn't come to that, but if it does at least I found the issue to fix it. Idk where to even begin to find a sound professional and figure it out. I'll try doing everything but that first, and yeah hopefully register it online if I can't figure it out! I just need it fixed the same day I begin investigating the problem.

Its really sad to hear this. Especially when Panasonic now have Global Warranties on their products. And, even 3 year warranties in certain jurisdictions. I would buy locally, but the GX85 was NOT available locally in Mid of Last Year (August 2016), in India. Even now, it is solely available with Amazon, as an Import, and there appears to be no mention of the warranty anywhere. I am suspecting even the GH5 won't be introduced here. Or if it is, it will be priced around the professional Canon and Nikon camera price range, and thus be avoided by a lot of Indie Filmmakers. Panasonic in many countries in the world needs a serious makeover. Like they need to retrench entire departments, or completely shut shot and start again. Like someone mentioned in another thread, they are surviving purely on washing machines and ACs. They really don't have the professionalism or standard of service that they have in Japan or the United States. In many other countries they are like sweat shops. This applies to their after sales, as well as their marketing department. It is extremely unfortunate, because their products are extremely good for the price.

Yes, you're right. Like I said, the Nikon 1 (which the DLs are based on) have some strengths, but Nikon never did anything to market its strengths. I mean, look at this: I can tell you straight off, the FZ2500 and RX 10 III will not come close to the operational speed of the DL 24-500 ever. For a big zoom camera this is a great advantage to have, but Nikon just doesn't seem to know how to (or worse, want to) market it, so it leads to people thinking that they're all very similar cameras. They're not. The DL 24-500 had a chance of capturing that segment, along with the 18-50 owning a special place, but Nikon just... well, they're just useless at the moment.

It's not a "big" problem you are right, and the reframing across the 16:9 to 3.56:1 is helpful indeed. But take my personal camera the a6300 as an example for clear benefits of a 4:3 read: it's the worst rolling shutter of any camera out there, if sony made a paid app to do 4:3 video and still keep everything else the same (codec, bitrate, picture profiles, log, zebras, etc,.) I would be the first to buy it, if you have ever played with the clear zoom of a recent sony and compare it with the regular recording, the most obvious change is less rolling shutter, a bit more noise and an almost invisible less resolution, so imagine the 4:3 crop again, being a crop of the 16:9 frame but with faster readout in the same 100mbps and you have the advantages of the clear image zoom without the disadvantages. Even possibly less chance of banding if the bitrate is properly used. Now take the ursa minis or the kinefinity terras as examples, it is a lot less data (either raw or prores) in the anamorphic mode. Enough to impact your workflow because you can have 10 minutes more recording on the same 128gb card and trust me, 10 minutes per card is a big deal in a shooting day for a short or long fiction film.

Yeah, so in FF terms... it has the field of view of a 42mm? Polanski would only shoot with a 50mm because it was believed that a 50mm represented the FOV and angle of the human eye. More recent eye tests have determined it's actually closer to a 45mm lens... so that 28mm in Super 35mm is just about the same. Make it a fast lens and you have a great focal length for either shallow or wide depth... a very versatile lens. I guess that's one of the reasons that people refer to the Contax Zeiss 28mm f/2 as "The Hollywood?"

Oh B&W film or even Raw digital well done is a thing of beauty to behold. Heck even B&W Photo prints by say Ansel Adams takes your breath away. A lot of the old B&W movies done in the 40's 50's are breath taking. It is hard as hell to shoot and get that look, but when you figure it out Wow, you got something for sure. I have read a few things lately that 27mm, 28mm is the magic focal length on the old film movies, and the old timers are even doing that length in Digital. I guess that FoV has a special look?

Yeah, with every passing day of looking at footage I shot, I am constantly disappointed. And the only footage I've shot where I am surprised by how good it looks, is from my 50D with ML Raw, or old BMMCC or BMPCC footage. I am a horrible colorist so I think B&W Raw may be in my future.

I would imagine the original B&W version of Gunsmoke was Film like you said, it is beautiful, I was watching some episodes when I was in Florida last month. The color version probably video. Not sure. I am too old to remember LoL. As to the film look on m4/3 BM can make it happen because of Raw on the BMPCC, BMCC, it is beautiful also, not pure film look beautiful, but close. Without Raw I don't think a Oly, Pana camera can look like film. YMMV. But look how good a ML Raw on a Canon 5DIII looks. Raw makes it happen.

Moral of the story is buy locally? Panasonic and Olympus service in NZ is not bad, (I sent gh4 in for ripped micro hdmi connector and got it back in reasonable time), I have a send a few Olympus cameras and got back in a week, sure they are more expensive but you get peace of mind and quick turnaround compare to sending to overseas.

Since both card slots are UHS-II U3 I would only assume you can record at max on both at the same time. If the GH5 does gain at the least a 1/2 stop DR, and a 1/2 stop low light ability, and focus is better, it has to be the bargain of the year for Video shooters. But that is a lot to hope for. And that is what it will take for me to buy it. But damn it sure does have some nice specs! Panasonic has really not held anything back on this thing. It is probably the very best they can do for a m4/3 camera with present technology.

Hello ttbek, given that, Aputure Dec is not a fallback of Metabones, is a different adapter that will appeal to filmmakers, I do not know filmmakers who shoot with autofocus and if it is used with Steadicam or crane is superior because it gives you the ability to remotely control the lens directly from the handle. If you need the electronic contacts to transfer data between the camera and the lens I can do it. I have already designed this. I appreciate the work you're doing, I hope it may be useful to get a smart adapter. As for your offer of 10k, it's always too vague, I can build a "real autofocus system" but I believe that you are using money as the jockey uses the carrot with the horse, although he gallops the carrot is always one step forth from his face ..

It's simply a matter of time before Canon, Sony, Panasonic, as we know them today, will cease to exist. Will take less than a decade, guaranteed. Market for cameras will become extremely niche and majority of consumers will have needs met by next gen smartphones with better optics and sensors. And that's just the tip of the iceberg as changes go. We're living in the twilight of captilism. Enjoy it while it lasts.

I agree about the Aputure solution. As I wrote in older posts, this solution does not solve my issues as well. What I'd need is a real AF (autofocus) for Canon lenses, so that I can use it for the longer tele lenses (missing for NX). Any other solution will be, for me, useless. I'm still confident that Luca can do the "real thing", sooner or later i.e.: an adapter converting the samsung protocol to Canon, and drive Canon lenses as if they were native NX ones. I'm only "afraid" that the required time and cost for this item are too high (making it more convenient to buy a "cheap" canikon body to use just for those lenses). I hope that the (very kind) 10k offer from ttbek could make the price more convenient for future buyers of the intelligent adapter if/when it comes.

Hey IKSLIM, had I needed to buy a new one for this update I probably would have sold you one, but Luca's kind offer is keeping both with me for now. Upon closer inspection the Apurture design version doesn't have the contacts I need camera side, so unfortunately you're out of luck unless I end up acquiring a 3rd one.

I have been working with a digital logic analyzer and an Arduino nano. Via this setup I can set the aperture and move the focus to min and max so far. So the setup is For gathering data: Canon Camera + EF extension tube with AF contacts + lens, I have wired the extension tube to sample the data via a USB digital logic anlyzer. For testing my control: Arduino Nano + EF extension tube with AF contacts + lens (no body for now). So the aperture and focus max and min are working as controlled by the nano. Next step: NX camera + NX extension tube with AF contacts + Arduino Nano and use the digital logic analyzer to find the focus commands from the camera, also spoof the lens data. Here is where ihkim's work will be a big help with the lens initialisation, to hopefully successfully spoof the lens in a way the camera accepts. Final case: NX camera signal to contacts on close end EF -> NX adapter, these wired to the nano, then from the nano to the contacts on the other side of the adapter, then to the lens. Then replace the adapter with wired NX-L for focal reduction. Stabilization seems to work automatically for the lenses I've tried, but I think the EF-M mount lenses don't have physical switches, but these are not among the lenses we're adapting. My 10k offer still stands for anyone that can provide native-like camera driven AF. The Apurture DEC does not do this, as I understand it doesn't listen to the camera half at all, in which case I'm only a few buttons away from doing the same with the nano (add button to repeat change focus command one way, another the other way, same for aperture). Wifi would be a bunch of work though, but while nice it isn't on my own wish list. The nano will allow more programmatic control, 2,3,4, etc... focus locations could be toggled, it's mostly a matter of adding physical inputs and writing logic into the nano code to handle them. As I look back to your image of the upcoming system, the contacts are going to go just from the Apurture to the lens, I also need to get to the camera contacts somehow. What I need is camera -> Apurture and Apurture -> lens (but with my nano instead of the Apurture). With the current NX-L design I'm not sure how to get at the camera contacts, running wires even with a hole drilled through isn't great because of the rotating design, so they can be stressed or break if it rotates too far. Solutions that come to mind would complicate the design quite a bit further (e.g. concentric rings for each contact on that part that rotates). That would be great, can you PM me the address, I didn't keep the packaging they arrived in so I lost the return address.

Here's an awesome 90 second movie shot only with the JVC GY-LS300! This camera is slept on and it's an awesome piece of technology!

Hi everyone, I've opened a new page of free sky images that might come in handy in your projects: http://soundimage.org/txr-skies/ I also added a bunch of new wood images here: http://soundimage.org/txr-wood/ I hope some of them are helpful!

Resolve with the Dongle I have found is very smooth with NX1 footage.