Leaderboard

My good friend Elena Diaz was in Furious 7 and we got to meet the cast & crew at Tyrese's house- truly down to earth people who are grateful for the opportunity to make these fun films. We watched The Fate of the Furious at the Arclight in Santa Monica in 'Widescreen' with Dolby Atmos audio (killer 3D sound). Most of the time a bigscreen and surround sound at home is good enough, however this kind of movie is totally worth it in this kind of theater. When you meet people in person you get a sense of their energy, and it comes across on the screen. They had a blast making this movie and it translates in their performances. I have to say this is the most ridiculous, over-the-top silly video-game-like-movie I have seen to date: something like the ending of ConAir or Armageddon, except for almost the entire movie. At the same time they sneak in good messages and the jokes are many and well done. The camera work, special effects (tons of practicals!), and fight scenes rival the best that have ever been done. They used the ARRI Alexa XT Plus, Sony F55, Red Weapon Dragon, Black Magic Micro Cinema, along with Zeiss Ultra Prime / Compact Prime, Fujinon Premier Cabrio and Angenieux Optimo Lenses , and it looked f@cking amazing! Go watch it- leave your brain at home and bring your friends and a smile!

I might pick up a GH5, but definitely waiting for NAB to see what camera bodies are announced. A new A7s or something killer from Fuji would be intriguing. And I'd love to see more compact designs from Blackmagic. A Pocket-Micro revision or an Ursa Micro with a 2.3K slice of the 4.6K sensor would be kinda dope. I'd scoop that up in a heartbeat.

Spec-wise, that means on paper, the GH5 crossed every t and dotted every i, but yet, in direct image comparison to the smaller and cheaper A6500 (my choice eventually, no Sony fanboy at all) there is no clear winner - see proof on Youtube. Both have their issues. The GH5's unique feature, 10bit in V-log, apparently doesn't win over simple 8-bit S-log2 as far as DR is concerned. The biggest downside of the alpha 6... series is the display. Too dark, too low resolution, not fully articulated. If they just improved that and added 4k60p. Poor battery life is no dealbreaker because cheap powerbanks exist.

Pricetag 5k Terms & condition shoot only in Antarctica as it may overheat ?

I was trying to impress a girl, Kinda wish I had become a stock broker instead.

Yes - everybody looks like the living dead. Easily corrected in-camera but watch out for the fifteen pages of people moaning about the red channel whilst ignoring that little slider thingy in their editing suite.

When I have some spare time, I'm planning to do a little shoot with my Kowa B&H, Kowa inflight 1.75x (both with Core DNA) and iscorama pre 36 (with 3.5ft close focus mod) on full frame with recent 3-4K magic lantern crop resolutions. I will probably throw in some iscomorphot s8 2x shots in there (because it's ridiculously underrated for portrait/closeup compositions). Think the Bolex 16/32 is the only lens I'd actually be interested in trying out...the recent Bolex+ML footage from @SigurdW looks great.

I love FD lenses and they adapt well to both E mount and M4/3. I do prefer them on my A7s (which is not stabilized but doesn't need it for stills) to my GX7 (which is stabilized for stills though not the greatest version) but they work on both. The L lenses are mostly very nice and while they can be expensive, some of the more common ones have come down a fair bit sometimes due to a few similar new manual focus third party lenses being released in the last few years (plus more and more really good lenses for systems that can adapt FD's). Lenses I have been happy with include FD 24 1.4 L for in close wide angle shots (FF) wide open and is ok for landscapes stopped down, the FD 85 1.2 L, the FD 50 1.2L (all of those can still be expensive but have come down a lot lately if you look). The FD 80-200 f4 L this can be found for a couple of hundred dollars and is quite good and better than the non L. The 24 f2 and 24 2.8 lenses have quite a following too (I have not tried those). Be careful with them though, the mount can be a pain sometimes (I keep an adapter on each lens usually) and especially, some FD's can have issues with dissolving bearings. My 85 1.2 L has this problem and the focus ring is now very loose (still works and I still intend getting it fixed as I love the lens). Pretty sure this was with the 24 1.4 L (probably now my favourite FD along with the 85) on the A7s.

No.

Also Dave Dougdale which have even more subscribers acknowledged that there is something "wrong" with the AF and he is waiting on a firmware fix of the issue. From what I've seen I must agree. Something isn't how its supposed to be. The tracker follows a face perfectly and still its not in focus... The tracker should stay with the focus.

It's a very social medium - people watch it together - and it is easy to share ones "product". I once carved a wooden rocking horse. Looked rather good. But I could only give it to one person which I felt was an inadequate reward for not inconsiderable effort.

Idk, this was a pretty big story last year and I don't think we ever found out the whole truth and I would not be surprised in the least if he still lurks around here... maybe it's you Jon... lol jk, but it was a great drama for the dog days of summer.

I can't bring myself to watch his version of events. I've seen and heard enough from him to last me a lifetime. Your report doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

As a young journalist/producer I almost immediately after school drifted into Radio- and TV-production of entertainment, sports or news. I was a decent writer but didn't have the patience. Im more of an creative director that don't want to spend time doing stuff that I can tell/hire someone else to do. I want full control over projects Any aspirations of fiction and "movies" I had started to fade since I preferred a faster and more "real" medium. Within a few years I had drifted more and stopped making short films all together. My personal video work became documentary and my work left the journalistic side and went into communication, public relations and advertising in a governmental agency. Currently switching jobs again after almost eight years to work public relations, communication and marketing for one single company in the private sector (its a huge company). There I will get to spend enough time making videos that I don't think I will keep it up as a hobby much longer. Other than some youtube and family stuff. But during this whole time my interest for still photography has really grown. Now its almost all I think about. I think the reason is the challenge. To take a situation that you would normally capture with 3-5min of video, audio, grading, angles, movement, slow-motion, effects, music, dialog, and so on. To capture all that in one single frame. Click! I see photographers telling the longest and most engaging stories, really moving me, with just one frame. I still see myself as just a beginner in still photography after some 20 years, 3 of which Ive taken it more seriously. I don't think most of my images tell much of a story at all. And thats why I like it. There is so much to explore and learn. I guess Ive found the ultimate medium for my type of person who wants a quick fix but still have endless possibilities.

dude sweet~!!! i cant wait to see it!!! bottom line is: its as good as you make it. you could make a webcomic that BLOWS PEOPLE THE F AWAY. and at the end of the day, no one really cares what your content is, its about ideas that being said ive spent a lot of time learning about filmmaking because i determined (after doing damn near everything else in the arts) that it is the ultimate art form – one that combines all others: and more importantly there is no better delivery method for your ideas, no more resonant, moving form of impregnation to the human mind ppl love comics dude. do it up. and dont feel like youre "not" filmmaking. all the shit ive ever done in my life has gotten me to where i am now. every part of your art practice informs every other part of it – much like life itself ----- /ykno i just reread that post and i was so tempted to add a bunch of random spacing to make it like one of ed's 'poetry' posts but then i was like Nah these guys put up with enough already

There is no hope for E - YT, Comments section: https://youtu.be/XCYlTNHNXiI Btw, did the police find his stolen EOS-1D C?

imported a7r ii price dropped to $2199. In Seoul, the regular version is only slightly more expensive than a gh5, around $300 difference now. It was close to 4 grand a few months ago. Maybe they'll give them away after an announcement?

I'm still dreaming of a pocket 2 (pocket pro?)

This guy is doing a series comparing NX1, 5D4, GH5 only two so far he says more are coming slow mo+ rolling shutter= Auto focus+lowlight

I consider the condition to be very good, though I'm no optical engineer. There are no serious blemishes, haze, marks on the glass - aside from a few tiny specs that you’d expect with a vintage lens (none of which affect the image as far as I can tell). It's sharp, the focus is smooth and flares a gorgeous orange flare with good light source. Used with the Tokina achromat, it’s WOW. Here’s everything: - Iscorama Pre 36 anamorphic lens - Iscorama taking lens with Nikon mount - Tokina 72mm +0.4 achromat with original box and leather case. Ex+ condition - Variable ND filter 77mm with 72-77 step up ring AND 1.2 ND filter - Large custom built step up ring 52-55mm for mounting on other lenses, that aren’t the Iscorama taking lens. - Original lens cap (for collection) 72mm - but it doesn't really stay on - OPTIONAL: 55mm 1.8 SMC Takuma (the maximum focal distance for full frame). - New, better lens cap for use 72mm and rear Nikon lens cap for Iscorama taking lens - A nice sturdy Pelican Case! Well taken care of by photographer / filmmaker in L.A. Stored in pelican case most of the time. I’ll put into up on Ebay for 3000 later, but on here for 2800 USD. L.A. pickup would be great. For now US only. I can also throw in a nice SMC Takumar 55mm (M42) lens which is really nice for full frame cameras, if you like. IMAGES OF PACKAGE: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/okvsr4bansktc4d/AABCTfxwEz2syFr9KM57FJO5a?dl=0 IMAGES TAKEN WITH LENS (Note, these are actual photographs, not video stills. Can provide un graded / un stretched if desired. Various taking lenses used): https://www.dropbox.com/sh/t6e5jhhot87cg9v/AAArfIe9R3FArcTzkDdDUbCSa?dl=0 Good luck!

I've shot heaps of weddings and I'd never go in with only one camera. Thus I recommend the GH5 (or G80) as your A cam, with a couple of G7 cameras on tripods for your B cam coverage a6500 lacks this choice of excellent 4K cameras at dirt low prices which you can match easily to your A cam While Panasonic has the G7

I was being sarcastic.......

Fd lenses are ideal for the Sony A7 series although you have to choose your glass carefully as some are better than others. All of the fixed lenses are good whenstopped well down and have very good frame evenness I.e sharp right out to the frame corners unlike a lot of similar vintage and even contemporary lenses. Wide open they are mostly low contrast and ' dreamy' but this can be attractive but Bokeh can be harsh and so they make good ' landscape lenses' Outright resolution is not exceptional so I would caution their use on high density aps-c and M43 sensors? Most of the zooms are mediocre by modern standards ( as are any of that era) Any L glass is good but they are command high prices and are not such bargains. They are plentiful and cheap on the used market due to their non compatibility with the EOS mount.

Funny to see a 100 pages discussion from which is 80% about Autofocus. At the same time, hundreds of video's are posted but none of them contain any production value. 90% is just baby- / cat- / house- / foreground flowers in focus / neighberhood video's. Also telling is that nowadays many vloggers buying a GH5 for their work. It's funny and weird to see how the video market has changed from a majority of professional camera users, to 90% hobbyists, vloggers and rich people buying this cam to play with for a while before never touching it again. Sorry, but i can't help the feeling of feeling slightly bad for all these spoiled little brats. If you can't or won't produce anything of visual value with this camera, then please don't judge it for it's AF capabilities. I have never used AF for video nor while I ever, and I'm not saying nobody may not or shouldn't, I am just pointing out what a bunch of whiners film makers have become. We used to use gear which was highly impractical and inefficient and made the best out of it to satisfy our clients. Now we're shooting 4k in slow motion footage of our cat which moves away from us all the time or towards us, and complain that this stupid 2000 euro camera can't even hold the damn cat in focus. This is not a complaint about EOSHD, where the percentage of sensible professionals is still pretty high, but about all the stuff I've seen lately on Youtube, Facebook and forums about this AF-talk combined with their cat- and garden video's. As soon as I will finish some professional shoots with the GH5, I will report back here. Until then, I'm gonna leave the discussions up to you. Happy shooting.

Yeah I have to admit why would you HAVE to use just one setting when it has many settings, to get AF to work sort of well? I am not buying a GH5 also. But I didn't buy the GH4 either.

So you say its broken but its still his fault...? Im sorry but I don't get it. Why dont you want all of it to work? If you are happy with it, why not just stay happy but let others try to push Panasonic to make it even better? I just dont see what you gain from constantly ripping on people who wants an improvement of something. Personally I never use AF, ever. Hardly ever for stills. I dont even have the camera (neither does Dougdale, he turned it down until its fixed). Im 99% I will never buy it and I still hope Panasonic fixes it. Because everyone gains from it, including you Ken. It sets a standard and pushes the entire industry.

I emailed Edmika and got his conversion mounts for them. I really like them, the lenses end up a bit smaller and lighter than they once were and the material he uses is super nice, they mount perfectly with no play or stiffness. Highly recommended.

Yup, if it was me, I'd totally ditch the custom AF settings. Simply not needed and does nothing but add to the complexity and give the AF a reputation it doesn't have to have. These custom settings seem to attract some like there's no tomorrow. They grab on to them and won't let go, despite failure after failure. It's just amazing to watch. God forbid they try something as simple as turning the damn thing off and going with 1-area. Nooo, wouldn't want to do that. Can't wait for the next 2 hour Max & Joe video to go over these again. No, it ends when people understand that you can use AF with the 1-area setting. It works just fine, thank you. I'm not saying that Panasonic shouldn't refine the other areas of AF if they insist on keeping things like 'custom', but it works fine today if you use the right setting.

You and me, Ken, I think you all know it... : ) On his newest test, the same here. Where are the different lenses? External recording tests? The whole range of settings? What the hell Joseph was going to do there? To be focus subject to the Max's GH5?

Laughing out loud! Shit. Yeah I think Panny has some big troubles on their hand here with AF. They better fix this quick or this could get ugly. This thing reminds me of my Canon 1D mk III. It was so god damn complex you could never duplicate anything you did in the field. It had WAY too many options on AF, and that was the reason it sucked and it ended up like the GH5 is looking like. Too damn complex with all the settings it has. The 1dn mkII I had before it could AF on ANYTHING in a heartbeat. It had a very simple AF menu. 95% of the focusing problems with the 1D mkIII were user errors. But why make a camera that you can screw up AF so easy to accomplish LoL.

LOL. I don't know who Ken Stone is either, but I guess he's a nice guy. I scrubbed through the Max & Joe video quickly and lo & behold, Max came to the conclusion that leaving off the custom settings they got good results. Whod'a thunk. Unfortunately the damage has already been done from Max's first video where nothing was in focus almost ever. It's very hard for a piece of equipment to overcome that kind of bad publicity. That's why I wasn't as kind toward Max as some of you guys, despite his good intentions. I found it very frustrating to watch that first test knowing he was wrong and knowing the damage it was doing.

Wait, Ken Stone?

More a horror film when all said and done.

I'm sorry, I gave up after 10 minutes to see yet another round of testing to see if the camera transitions from a face to a lens 6" from the camera lens. I honestly don't know how often actual shooters face, in real life, the kind of scenarios that Max seems to love. I did the test in my house and never had an issue. And Max needs to revise his thinking about 225 point being the most horsepower, now that Panasonic is saying use 1-area. So yeah, I'm just crazy, I go out and shoot with this thing, 1-area AF, screw the custom settings, and have no AF issues whatsoever. Did that almost immediately after getting the camera and haven't seen any reason to change. This stuff just never ends nor does the misinformation. I also found it fascinating that no matter what settings they used, Max & Joe were getting better results than Max did in his initial testing when his brother would never come into focus? At least here, his brother always seemed to be in focus. I wonder why? Interesting stuff.

Not sure who you're talking to. I think there are cameras with better afc but this is quite usable and consistent. This thread is not for opinions and discussions about such things. There are, however, many many threads that would greatly benefit from such input.

@jcs 1. May I ask you, why you've sold your FS700? 2. I've seen some FS700 RAW footage and it was really great IQ. Are you experienced with the FS700 (4K RAW) and the 7Q+? As I will buy 2 identical cameras (+ recorders) this summer for "dual use" (1. 4.2.0 8bit for ENG & quick shooting AND 2. RAW option with an external recording device for great IQ) I was just considering, it would be a great option for me. 2 x FS700 + 2 x 7Q+ fit my budget and it seems to be the only camera at the moment fitting my "dual use" requirements and budget. Thank you! (I believe, @Tim Sewell owned a FS700 too...)

Ah, that Sigma is really epic, photography and video-wise. I enjoyed it.

Oh you don't EVEN want to bring up XC10 stuff on here LoL. There are lots of people that lost their ass on that lovely, little, bastard, piece of crap, what the hell, stupid, why the hell, video camera that could have been pretty damn good, if Canon was not Doing what Canon does best. Gimp the living shit out everything they make, on purpose, to sell you a better one next year. Well that is their plan, but sometimes the Newer one is no better or worse. Canon has a hell of a different mindset than Panasonic, who I think really does try to make everything they make as good as it can be made, at the time, for the price point. I think they really do care about the end user. Canon, they just want your damn money. If you own a Canon, they have some great stuff, you are basically their sort of life long piggy bank. I think in reality Canon is TOO Damn big of a company. They are not hungry, and that makes it bad for customers. Why the hell don't they have a FF Mirrorless camera. Why? Why doesn't Nikon either, who is about to go Belly up! Nightly Rant over LoL.

No mention of the NX1 Camera justice Warriors?

I don't think Panasonic anticipated all this fuss about AF, so the settings and the manual aren't that well thought out. Frankly, neither did I. Can't believe the % of attention this camera is getting that's going into this. Personally, I don't give a rat's ass about AF even if it could be a nice extra. I rarely use gimbal and can live with deep DOF or keeping appropriate distance and just tapping on my phone attached to my arm when I need to refocus. Now, with IBIS (which is truly amazing) I'll use gimbal even less as I don't mind slight handheld look most of the time. FWIW, I think the Panasonic's excuse for not implementing PD focus because it degrades IQ is bullshit though. I reckon it was a commercial decision they had to make as clearly there is a limit of R&D that can go into a camera at this price.

It doesn't show the number of cameras sold (it shows dollars). It doesnt show brand by brand. It doesn't show compared to APS-C. Lets say Sony sells 10 FF and 5 APS-C cameras. Nikon sells 1 FF and 500 APS-C. Lets say the profit of one FF is $1 and the profit of the APS-C is $100. Reports like these are made for investors and shareholders. The only way to see if they really are a success is in their bank accounts. But again, I wish Sony well, as long as they start addressing their quality control. Imo, The original A7/r/s are awesome cameras. So was the Nex and maybe the a6000. A7ii/rii/sii, a6300/6500 suck. And I really hope they don't get comfortable and stop improving just because their competitors are fading away. The need to push on.

In the wedding processional AF vid, the background is pulsing in the first few clips. In the last one with the same settings (AF speed 5, sens 3) it is pulsing less. I still think A6500 AF-C far superior for video AF. GH5 makes me think 3x about using af-c. It's not the worst thing in the world but it's also not consistent enough for "prime time". I'm not saying it's unusable, but it has a higher chance of not doing what you want it to do vs the competition. IMO you're rolling the dice when you use it. Maybe with firmware tweaks it will improve but there's only so much you can do with CDAF. I really wish they licensed or bought some of the other AF tech, that would have made this camera really great, like almost next level. I don't regret my purchase too much, it's got a lot of great features and the people I work with are really looking forward to the 4K 60p. Just wish the AF-C was better, that would have sealed the deal for them and avoided this whole controversy (although I'm sure we would have found something else to complain about, like someone said the audio is not seamless between long files? still have to test this myself).

My humble setup on the beach:

@tupp every single example where you state there's a difference between the two images is related to optics, not sensor size, or the tester didn't/couldn't set the systems up for equivalence. The differences between the Fujinon lenses is one has the APD filter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apodization) and the other doesn't, which explains the difference in bokeh. Nothing to do with sensor size. Are you familiar with the scientific method? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method. Your conjecture is as sensor size gets larger <insert specific properties which can be tested and characterized here>. Your Null Hypothesis is thus, "Sensor size has no effect by itself on the captured image". Now do your experiments using the scientific method. Do you own a camera and lenses? If not can you rent them? I only ask because you've never posted any of your own work. In your experiments you'll try your hardest to show that sensor size has no effect, eliminating as many variables as possible. Only after rigorous testing to try to eliminate sensor size as having an effect, can you then reject your null hypothesis and form a predictable theory which accurately describes the effects sensor size has on the captured image, and most importantly your new theory will be able to make predictions which can then be tested to further validate that your understanding of the system is correct. And that, brother, is currently the best process human beings have for understanding what's real, or not.

I find the defensiveness of the GH5 crowd very entertaining. Specially since some of the loudest used to rip pretty hard om the gh4 but are now willing to die defending the exact same issues. And I mean this in a very positive way. Its good to be passionate (Edit: I feel I must add that I have never spoken badly nor positive about the gh5. Otherwise I risk getting caught in the crossfire )

I used to read Cinema5D articles quite regularly, previously. But ever since their bluff has been called about their obviously biased reviews, I avoid them like the plague.

There is a cure for the iffy AF--if Panasonic would only take the medicine and incorporate dual pixel AF. Sensor size has nothing to do with it. I have a Canon XC15 I use for presentations and some field shooting. It has a 1 inch sensor--like a Super 16---and the AF on it is FANTASTIC--rock solid, never hunt, not even for a New York Nanosecond. Great for interviews.

Different sensors sizes provide different pixel sizes and resolutions and abilities to use different lens sizes. Smaller sensor cameras tend to be more compact and lower cost. Nothing magical happens with DOF as sensor size increases. I got killer shallow DOF with the Voigtlander F.95 25mm on the GH4. Is the 50mm F1.4 or F1.2 shallower on the FF 5D3- sure, but these shallow DOFs aren't usable very often for video, right? And just being shallower isn't a special, magical property. The Alexa looks killer because of the ALEV III sensor design and associated image processing and color science. They used S35 as that is the standard for filmmaking and for lens compatibility. If a larger sensor size would create a magical image better than a smaller sensor size, ARRI would have made it, right? What about the Alexa 65? That's just their way of using the ALEV III sensor (3 of them rotated 90 degrees) to get higher resolution without changing the sensor, pixel size, image processing, and color science. It's about resolution, and that's it. Nothing magical about the sensor size by itself. If larger sensor sizes produce a better DOF look (vs. just shallower via available lenses), it should be easy to prove. The reason there's no proof is it's a myth.

Here you have... (can we call it now?) bias. From 6:38 on...

Given the shallower DOF and better low light on APS-C you really have to compare an F2.8 lens on µ4/3 with F4 lenses on Sony. The smaller the sensor the easier it is to build f2.8 lenses, so naturally they will be cheaper.