Leaderboard

This is great fun! Does anybody's friends / family / wives / boyfriends tell them they're probably a little bit crazy for getting the popcorn out while eagerly awaiting the next instalment in the GH5 autofocus YouTube saga. So, PhotoJoseph is maybe going to visit Max and possibly stay over. And Peter Gregg''s dog is called Jingles and he doesn't like cleaning the kitchen but he really likes Christmas. I mean, I didn't even know who these people were yesterday!

Disclaimer: I dont have the camera, Im not saying its good or bad. I haven't watched Max, Kens or any other AF test. Personally I would never use AF anyway. Its to slow and imprecise for my way of doing things. So this comment is not about the AF in the GH5, its about AF in general. But, If it really comes down to "learning" how to use the AF its at least safe to say its not great. Ive said the same thing about WB in Sony Slog. Some say it requires practice and testing. Bullshit imo. A $3K camera that needs special treatment for something so fundamental and simple as WB... thats just a bad WB. An AF in a $2K camera that needs more fiddling than MF just to get it going... sounds like a pretty mediocre AF imo. Again, not saying the camera is bad, so take a deep breath before defending. All AF is mediocre at best imo. I dont use AF on any camera. I hardly ever use it for stills (to slow) so I couldn't care less. I was just thinking out loud about what Ive read in this thread. There are far more important things to factor when deciding on a camera imo. AF in video isnt at the top of the list. In fact, its not even on the list.

He does. We should get Dave Dugdale to referee it, who gets along nicely with both.

I tend to like more muted colors, but for the people who prefer some saturation, here is one of my first versions of the video with more saturation. On my computer and phone this looks decent, but on my TV it is nuclear... so YMMV...

+1 @Emanuel you seem like a smart fellow, but 50% of the time I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, although you do seem to be talking about something. And I'm a smart fellow as well. Of course, if I were to try posting in Portuguese you'd have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about... 100% of the time!

"But that's not fair! He shot it in a 'cinematic fashion'! It shouldn't count! I want a camera that looks cinematic when I just point it at stuff without taking any forethought about lighting, composition, camera movement, dof, color, etc." Sorry, but I just found your comment too funny to leave alone. I hope you don't mind me teasing you just a bit for it. It's all in good fun I promise. You're totally on the right track, but just haven't quite connected all the dots possibly. Everything you mentioned and more is what MAKES something look cinematic. How much worse would it have looked if he made poor decisions in regards to all of the things you mentioned? I think it would look much worse. He obviously is talented and has good taste. Now let's pretend that he actually shot it on an Alexa with cinema glass and ask how much worse would it look if he instead shot it on a GH5 with ok glass. I'd argue that it would take a fairly small hit to the overall look and feel. Worse? sure, but compared to shooting the same thing with mediocre light, compositions, camera movement, dof, and motion it wouldn't even compare. And what if he used the Alexa to shoot a mediocre version of this with bad light, composition, etc? Would it all of a sudden look "cinematic"? Not a chance! We'd be commenting that it looks too video-ish. So what's the common factor here? I'd say it's not really the camera (maybe a very small percentage to the overall look) and that it's everything you so easily identified and dismissed about his footage. FYI, an Arri Alexa is simply a digital video camera. It's a very nice digital video camera, but that's what it is. The world seems full of nice digital video cameras these days. It's probably best to choose one that works for you and treat it as if it's the best digital video camera in the world. Relatively speaking, as far as the history of digital video cameras goes, your choice will probably be in the top 2-3 percent.

Re-bought the Canon nFD 24mm 2.8 and 35-105mm 3.5 Zoom. I forgot how much I loved these lenses.

Big boy toy!! Damn the 4k is usable. And it shoots in Raw also!! And the wide angle stuff IS Wide Angle! Interesting. I can see a few firmware updates and wow, a real player in the Video field. https://***URL not allowed***/hasselblad-h6d-100c-review-shooting-medium-format-video/

Max knows a lot more about Panasonic cameras than the so-called luminary, who spent most of his time justifying himself with defensive body language and filling the airwaves with repetitive waffle. Max 2-0 up with another video to come...

Yup, I'm definitely with you on that as well. I'm just not eager to stretch my ISO that much. I mean 800, a fast lens, and slower shutter will easily expose a face lit by a small campfire. That's pretty dim. And any camera made in the last two years will more or less give you that ability. Scenarios that are darker absolutely exist, but if you have a choice, best to try to avoid such settings. Running 6400 ISO simply because you want to stay at a relatively slow f4 seems silly and wholly counter-productive to me. If you know you're consistently going into the dark, I'd certainly suggest making other gear decisions. Such as just getting a low-light-high-performance camera like an A7s.

"Pulsing" in AF mode is an old Pana problem, facing FZ1000 and new models too (as the FZ2000). The only way to sail around this AF flaw (continuous AF) is to lock and use the area mode (I told this @jonpais in this forum some times though...). When using a Pana in area mode (subject within a fixed AF area), there is no much pulsing/micro-hunting forth and back (microadjustments of the faulty AF). Take a look at the "successful" AF video of PhotoJoseph...Full of visible and abyssmal pulsing forth and back in the background. Look at the video of Peter Gregg...Again the pulsing when focusing on the remote of his TV...Hehe, this is a "P&P"-camera - permanently pulsing and pumping... It's simply a shame to blame users by saying, they can not handle it. Same users do well with Canons DPAF and with Sony's standard settings. No need to go to a university to use AF. It's simply a barefaced claim of fanboys & paid henchmen, who simply don't want to accept the truth. BTW: I use more Pana cameras, but AF on them is simply BS...far away from current standards...By "tweaking" you can get it to work in some situations...Continuous AF for professional use has to be reliable, that's why many DOPs rent the C300 mII... The AF ist not a great strength of the GH5...But as many Pana fanboys claim, AF is only for pussies...

I've just done a small test if anyone is looking at options in the 28-35mm prime area. I've got a Sigma 35mm ART 1.4 in Nikon mount (with a Zhongyi Lens Turbo II booster), Fuji's own 35mm 1.4 and for a bit of an older school alternative the Contax Zeiss Distagon T* 28mm F2.8 All collages have the images in the following order : Top Left - Sigma 35mm ART 1.4 with Lens Turbo Top Right - Sigma 35mm ART 1.4 Bottom Left - Fujifilm 35mm 1.4 Bottom Right - Contax Zeiss Distagon T* 28mm F2.8 All shots are OOC jpeg with the simulation set to ProNeg STD -2 -2 with the lenses wide open and shutter speed of the exposure used to compensate. The first collage shows the full field of view each lens produces. The second collage is an adjusted matched crop which makes it a bit easier to see OOF rendering etc. The third collage is an adjusted matched crop of the focus chart to compare sharpness and DOF differences. For me, if I had to choose one to put in the bag now, then the Sigma and the Lens Turbo combo offers the greatest flexibility. Yes, there is some degradation in IQ with the booster but its by no means near enough to not use it considering the advantages it brings. However, its bigger, its manual focus and the weight of it unbalances the camera completely. Plus, I'd have to carry the dumb adapter with it too. The Zeiss is small, slightly wider to give a nice 40mm-ish equivalent FOV which I prefer to 50mm-ish from the 35mms and with the extra bit of crop of the X-T2 in 4K its even more important and is sharp enough without having the razor edge that the other two have. I also have the 50mm,135mm and 28-85mm from this range and I'm on the hunt for an 18mm so I'll write something up about them as a set at some point if anyone is interested. That leaves us with the Fujfilm lens which, to be honest, is probably the one I'd go for if I had to put one in my bag and go out and shoot right now. It's far lighter than the other two, performs as well as the much vaunted Sigma (albeit without the ability to do the extra tricks with the speed booster) and has the massive advantage of AF. As you can see on the closeups of the charts, even with relatively short focal lengths like these and even on a crop sensor, you are still looking at a depth of field of around 6cm when you are shooting wide open. The X-T2 has brilliant focusing aids like the split view and really good peaking but when you're dealing with such low tolerances its still nice to have something quick when you need it. EDIT>>>>> Mmm.....hosting them on tiny pic has bollocksed the resolution. Forum was having a lot of problems uploading anything so it was the only way of getting them but I'll try again if anyone feels the need to see a bit more detail

I wouldn't call that filmic. It looks nice, but filmic? No. Nice video, to my eyes which is great. Now I been seeing some of the 3k footage of the hacked 5d iii and to me that looks filmic. It doesn't look soft and messy like the hd hack. Now it's sharp plus nice and thick with character like the bm, red and alexa cameras and some canon. But hey, that's just like my opinion man. Still, I would like a gh5 to play with.

I guess its because Im old fashioned and started out in TV a long time ago before the DSLR boom. So Im used to professional gear where setting a custom white balance is an easy thing that an ENG-shooter does ten times a day. Same with focus. I need it to work, so use manual. I guess thats why I shoot so much film and prefer cameras like Leica. Less fiddle faddle and instead focus on the craft and cteating. We all like different things and work in different ways. You said once you liked to use tele for street shooting while many if not most of us like to get in close to the subject. Nothing wrong with either approach. Just different tastes.

ahhhhh thats so great im so happy for you mercer!!! i hope you love your camera!!!!!

Thank Marty! I shot all of that with no crop, wide open, with ND, except for the last shot. I closed the lens down to 5.6 but still used the ND. That Tokina lens seriously is one of my favorite lenses, but it is perfect on aps-c not as perfect on FF. I don't really have any 5D3 shots with that lens on my phone but I'll send you a link of that lens on my old NX500. I may have a couple shots of it on my D5500. I'll check. I love Panasonic cameras but this was probably my favorite camera purchase. I just love that thick, Raw look. But I am still looking for a pocket camera, so I may end up buying an LX100 this summer. That little camera definitely has some mojo. Thanks hijodeibn. After only a couple days with the 5D3 I couldn't be happier. From a new user standpoint, I can only imagine what 4K Raw will look like. And as soon as I am done these couple shorts I have in the works, I am hell bent on finding out.

Auto focus killed my sister and ruined my marriage!

For a company trying to lasso prosumer videographers why are all their lenses fly-by-wire with shoddy af? Shouldn't they come out with fast zooms and primes that you can use manually and on a follow focus system?

Oh by my goodness, what did I write you had disliked? (I've just done a little edit up there) That's non sense. We need to be able to stand any discussion when polite. I won't second you, though. I'll still be able to follow and like your posts when you make it happen. I'll miss your usual likes anyway. Pity you're unable to be reciprocal for such matter ;-) YT mediocrity rules over our heads.

Fritz, superb idea!!! This is done on other forums to keep the trolls out. I like it! Orangenz, it's amazing isn't? I watch these guys adjusting speed to +5 and responsiveness to -5 and then 20 settings in-between to achieve the 'perfect balance', and all I did was use central area focusing at the default settings. Done. I think some guys are making this more complicated than it needs to be in many instances. Sure, it might not be perfect for every situation, but hell, I've used it in a variety of environments and it's worked every time.

Well the big problem about using flash and lights, is that it changes the look of what you are trying to shoot. There is hardly any bar or concert in the world that has the band all lit up when you go see them. Bars are the worse hands down. But if you light it, it looks unnatural as heck. Hey I am not against lights, and lighting. It does add drama, a scary effect, and compliment people, especially women's faces. But we now live in a new era, where we have cameras that Are good at shooting on low light. We don't always have to do the same stuff people did 50 years ago. They would not have done it always either if they had a Sony A7s then. Think outside of the box. Plus we can't afford tons of lighting equipment, or the people skilled at using them. Now if you are doing a sit down interview, well yeah, you Need lighting.

Or if one's too lazy for that, you can just live with the look in the A6500 that makes the guy look like he has Jaundice...

While we are waiting for the real fix, this workaround may (or may not) be enough to get GH5 going, assuming you are currently at the latest version (2.6, 2016-12-16). There is a jog lever on most Speed Boosters. Press it inward and hold it down, and while keeping it depressed, either power on the camera (if the SB and lens has already been attached), or attach the SB or the lens (if the camera is already powered on). Do not let go until the camera has fully started up, which may take a second or so. Confirm the workaround is actually running by checking that AFC and AFF are disabled and unavailable. (You will be able to choose from only AFS and MF, if the startup is correct.) Now, you have iris control, some AF (but not AFC, continuous video AF, and AFS itself may not be accurate all the time), OIS if you have an IS lens, IBIS if you have a non-IS lens, and you would be able to zoom. This is a temporary workaround, not thoroughly tested and may have problems. Let me know if this is good enough or not. Good luck.

Salut les copains, Here is my first test of the Focuser 8 from Aivascope Shot on a GH4 in 4k 24p with cineV profile Anamorphic lens is Möller Anamorphot 32 2X Taking lens is Canon FD 50mm 1.4 (f4 and f5.6)

I'm sorry guys for my non-native English! : D Trust me, even in Portuguese, my writing (just trying to go after my thoughts) is not so straightforward, as I'd like and it should be variably assigned. In English, much more labyrinthic, I believe. At times, it is per style such as subliminal speech to be read between-the-lines indeed. This happens especially with people like you I am used to read in a frequent basis. My bad I fail to leave it with you when happens. You are not the first ones nor the last ones to notice, I guess. I love complex stuff, true. I bet that's the reason why GH5 AF system attracts me enough to advocate myself in Panasonic's behalf... LOL Take a look in the messages I left there. Maybe they can help to follow my thinking on topic, I think so :-) BTW, thanks for your care and earlier compliments too! E :-)

Conurus,et al, here's my experience. 1. Update the adapter, connecting the adapter to the computer using a USB connector. There's a place for the connector under the tiny rubber insert on the side of the base of the adapter. 2. Update by downloading the Metabones app found on the Metabones support page. Once the app is downloaded, click on it and it will immediately locate your adapter, analyze it, and tell you what to do next. If you're up to date it will tell you. At that point you can disconnect your adapter from the computer and go on living as normally as you are capable of. No matter how normal you may be you will still have to know how to use the adapter so your Canon/EF mount lenses work----that's next and the point of this whole thing. 3. Once that's done mount the adapter and lens on the camera. Depress the jog wheel on the side of the adapter, and remain holding it down while you turn the camera on. 4. Once the camera is on you should see the image with the LCD screen display. Yea!! But you're not home just yet--at least in my experience. 5. At this point your mileage may vary, but I find everything works except the camera's aperture control wheel. To make it functional I have to depress the jog wheel on the adapter yet again, holding it down while adjusting the aperture wheel. Once the aperture wheel kicks in and the lens' aperture is being controlled in camera you can release the jog wheel. After that the wheel will work fine without having to depress the jog wheel. 6. If you shut the camera down and restart in order for everything to function you have to repeat the steps above as follows; a) hold the jog wheel down while turning the camera on, only releasing it after the cam is fully booted up. b) in order to make the camera's aperture control operative you will have to re-depress the jog wheel and then turn the GH5 aperture control wheel. Once that's done you no longer need the jog wheel until you stop and restart. This has worked fine for me with all Canon lenses and the Sigma 18-35 1.8 as well. Hope it works for you as well as it does for me. And yes, I didn't mention AF, because I don't use AF in shooting video--but basic AF does work pretty well--I tested it to make sure. Hope they actually fix this issue, because doing this every time you stop and re-start is a kind of pain. But, at least it works and you can use your EF lenses.

Great example of post I don't understand. You might even be trying to add an extra layer to the translation by using sarcasm? I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, I just have no idea what you're saying here.

thanks @BTM_Pix, interesting comparison! I'm surprised by the performance of the Fuji at f1.4. I have the lens too and knew it was sharp but didn't think it'd be as sharp as the Sigma Art. What I also like about the Fuji is the flare it renders.

Nope. With all the equivalence tests that have been done, none have been conclusive. In fact, all of those equivalence tests show a difference in DOF between lenses made for different formats, and some comparisons actually show a dramatic difference in DOF.

I believe in his honest efforts to begin with. But, his perspective is flawed now. To criticize the GH5 manual disclaimer, some other example, doesn't help at all, only can confirm it. He's trying his best only to stay reliable on the picture. Unless he had a malfunctioning unit to test with (which I doubt), your testing shows there's something going wrong with the methodology of his tests. To me, he had to even be more complete than he was. GH5 AF system is complex enough to require the customization of distinct scenarios. Still hoping he will come to understand and stand corrected it.

Update 07-04-17 Sad day in Sweden today (now its ok for you to speak about Sweden Mr Trump, but please don't...) but at least the story of the stolen Leica came to a somewhat happy ending. Yesterday I received a selfie from the original owner with the camera and he seems very happy. He then not only reimbursed me for the shipping but also a pretty healthy percentage of what I lost. Im not gonna talk numbers here but it was a very reasonable finders fee. He is happy, Matt from stolencamerafinder.com is happy, Im happy. In other words a happy ending to a sad story!

Beautiful music, though the camera doesn't seem to match the 3D audio all the time, and sounds more 2D stereo than spatialized 3D? I see in the comments they used a dummy head & torso. When researching the latest & greatest, including the $8000 Neumann dummy head examples, I found Ambisonics provided a means to get more 'spatiality/locality' since dummy heads are baked in filters. Guess I should try an FPV using the Ambeo and camera up to my eye and walking around...

Looks absolutely lovely. Something about the 5D raw gives me the warm fuzzies haha

This video is a great illustration of binaural for music application and illustrates it by starting off in mono and then transitioning into binaural. Without wishing to sound too fanciful, that transition when the sound opens up and envelops you is actually very uplifting and moving.

Well Finially got most of my rigging done on my Af100A except for a 5" or 7" monitor I want to add. So no excuses now I guess sigh! Lens is Panny 14-140mm f3.5-5.5 series II http://donvanpatten5.wix.com/webrunner5#!gallery

This is a gh5 with a pro colorist, looks very filmic

Wouldn't sweat it too much. Customs and snails are known to be in the way causing unannounced delays. Blame bureaucracy. Pretty sure it will appear out of thin air someday...

I had an involvement with Soundfield many years ago and it was one of those products that everybody loved the idea of but couldn't match it to an application that would justify the cost of it. Despite it being reasonable when you considered it was 4 high quality microphones, people couldn't cope with the sticker shock of it being all in one go ! But it looks like its time has now come and with them being bought by Rode, it would hint at a trickle down of the technology at a more favourable price. In a similar if less sophisticated and certainly less expensive vein for more immersive audio capture, I'm interested in these Roland binaural earphone/microphone combo. Although they seem to have gained a cult following with an interesting if niche band of YoutTubers who make videos of themselves whispering and stroking different textures for the aural (and I suspect 'other') pleasures of their viewers, there are also some quite impressive demos of it being used for more mainstream recording. Have you tried them by any chance? https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/687077-REG/Roland_CS_10EM_CS_10EM_Binaural_Microphones_Earphones.html

I literally said your test were a 'little different', since you used a different lens, then you quote me as saying 'very different'. You then ask how I can possibly ignore your test result, after I said your autofocus test were helpful. Do you always try so hard to create conflict or just having a bad day? Nobody is ignoring you. You are important too.

A lot of Youtubers have already found that sponsored content is a better way to earn money than through the Youtube ads anyway. Several channels that I watch are no longer monetised in the traditional sense, but they pause for 30 seconds in the middle of a video to plug something themselves. Film Riot has been doing this for a long time, for instance. It will be interesting to see as time goes on if this becomes more commonplace, and if so, if Youtube will attempt to crack down on it and penalise accounts that run outright advertisements in their videos.

This is so disappointing and disgusting. And all the more reason you must keep EOSHD going Mr. Andrew; last bastion for freedom of expression!

Just to clarify this again, I'm not advocating mixing on phone headphones or speakers but as a reference check against what someone might be listening to the end product on. It doesn't have to be literal either but just a typical representation. No one had Auratone 5Cs in their car or transistor radio and no one had Yamaha NS10s on their hifi (literally, as it was in this original incarnation that it was a monumental massively criticised flop) but both proved themselves a reliable representation of an average. So, whether its an iPhone or a Galaxy or a £30 eBay special, it won't be far off for the same purpose. And it does bring up an interesting point regarding listening for pleasure in that if the goal is to hear it exactly as the artist, producer and engineer intended it then for a period of about 15-20 years, most enthusiasts could have saved themselves a fortune on by buying a pair of £250 NS10s and a similarly priced amp as thats exactly what most of their records were being mixed on as the tail started wagging the dog and it was the big monitors that were being used more as the confidence check.

I am sure there will be myriad of Hi Fi forums discussing what headphones are best for Jazz, Blues, Classical or hip hop, but monitoring and mixing are completely different animals, especially for video. You want them flat, to know what are you doing (like your monitors to be calibrated), using standard equipment helps with what to expect in certain situations (that goes with microphones as well). Depending what is the purpose of my video I listen my projects a) on a TV b) on a Hi Fi system c) on a desktop's cheap Logitech speakers, but you never mix for the worst situation, you just listen in case some frequencies are out of these devices range. Never listen laptop speakers, most of them are too bad for anything, you can't degrade your job that much, and I do not care about other headphones as I do videos that aren't social media friendly, big corporates or paid jobs are usually watched on TVs or big computer screens, so no headphones friendly, and then, every modern mobile phone includes some kind of headphones, and some of them sell millions, which one are you going to compare, and with what?

Which part doesn't make sense mate? That on most decent headphones if you have a knowledge of how a broad range of reference pieces sound comparatively on your headphones then you can make a better fist of mixing on them ? Or about the near field monitors that were used as a check reference of average consumer equipment (the Auratones in AM radio times, the NS10s for FM and home hifi) and how there is now an argument for using the iPhone in that capacity? I didn't mention anything about actually mixing on them to be fair. Either with or without headgear

I'm using the ATH50s at the moment. Like all the others, they're detailed enough for analytic and corrective work and if you've got some reference stuff that you know on a range of systems and you yourself are able to make that averaging compensation then you can make them work very well for mixing on. It then just comes down to practicality and the ATH50s are comfortable enough to wear all day long and isolating enough to use in the field. Years ago when everyone used Auratones and then Yamaha NS-10s in studios it was to approximate what people would be listening on. Nowadays, there is a definite argument to use Apple earbuds and iPhone speakers as your reference as it is more like literal representation than approximation of what it is that the vast majority will consume on.

AKG headphones all the way, once tried you never go back. Amazon have got some really good deals ATM - the K240 are going for about £65, unmissable deal. Also, test on speakers, throught a TV & on crap headphones - not everyone has great listening devices & you need to make sure everyone can experience your sound in the same way.

Videoy? Like camcoder? You should change your glasses! Lets see:

I own 2 GH4's....although they are "video cameras" as is the Alexa and all Reds and the Sony F 35...I have to say I'm completely baffled by your statement that the GH4 & now 5 looks "videoy" and "anemic"...you're kidding, right!....or is this where we're going next, now, that AF is getting exhausting?

Man, I must say, a few years ago I would have never guessed that auto focus of all things would be such a heated debate topic on these forums!

Interesting if you have not seen or used it. https://cameramanben.github.io/LUTCalc/LUTCalc/index.html