Leaderboard

Photography has got to move forward. We have been using the same shit for decades. Mirrorless is a step in the right direction of course. Samsung tried a very brave thing with a huge touch screen on the Galaxy NX, the only Android based Super 35mm interchangeable lens camera on the planet and customers didn't buy it. So perhaps Canon's customers are to blame for Canon. If all they want in 10 years of technological innovation is the addition of a swivel screen, then so be it.

Shot on the GH5 in 3 days. A concept trailer done having a zero budget for our upcoming first feature film. I really like what I can squeeze out of the internal 10 bit V-Log footage. DR, lowlight and colors are really good. Everything was shot with sharpening and nr set to -5 and a Tiffen Black Pro Mist filter applied in front of the lens (12-35mm 2.8 V1, 20mm 1.7, 42.5mm 1.7) to make it smoother. Colorgrading done in Davinci Resolve. Drone shots by the DJI Mavic (the internal sharpening is hideous tbh...).

I've always been a little unsure about this never-ending desire to see detail in shadows. I mean - sometimes, if there's something in those shadows that you particularly want or need to see then - yeah - I get it. On those occasions you need to expose (or light if you're able) to reveal it. But most of the time I just can't se the point. Film, video, photography - even used journalistically they're not reality, where you can see into shadows with your human eyes; they're a stylised representation of reality where you, as the artist, get to use light and dark to convey a 3d scene into 2d, to model and sculpt, to draw attention and imply emotion. Seeing into a shadow is important for a sensor demo but for art - especially narrative art - it seems a particularly silly aspect of the whole to get uptight about. FWIW I think the OP's teaser is a compelling and beautiful piece of art. His placement of black tones on the response curve is immaterial to that.

When the BMPCC was new and I posted test footage I often got asked about the look I got. They used the same lens, same film convert but didn't get as "nice", "sharp" or "filmic" results. The reason was that I always used the levels tools to slightly crush the shadows and blow some highlights. People, and Im talking about real non nerd people, still like contrast.

I attended an event in downtown LA on Saturday, June 17 called DisclosureFest 2017. It was about meditation, healthy products etc. While it was called DisclosureFest, I didn't see any booths or promos for UFOs/aliens etc. During Robot Nature's performance (pretty cool new band), people began pointing at the sky and everyone with a camera started pointing up and taking pictures. I looked up and saw a tiny spec of white, with bright flashes. I said out loud that looks like a drone, and everyone said, no, that's a real UFO! I put the 70-200 F2.8L II on the 1DX II and looked at the object through the optical viewfinder at 200mm. It looked very strange, kind of like a human-like form, all white floating in the sky. There where kites and some balloons floated by- windy enough to move balloons. This object didn't move- a balloon would float up and with the wind. I took a few stills then switched to 4K video. It was super sunny and I couldn't see anything on the LCD. So I just pointed the best I could... I learned a few things for this kind of shooting: A viewfinder is absolutely necessary! Go to manual focus and set for infinity with a high f-stop DPAF couldn't hold focus on a small object, however I did get a few seconds of decent footage. The RAW stills showed so much more detail vs. 4K video. That's when I realized I should have looked through the optical viewfinder and shot a few rapid bursts of RAW stills at 14fps! I found a decent VF for $110: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00D3551NU/ (on the topic of Amazon- need to start supporting other vendors. Low prices are great but killing all competition is not): I shot this pic using a little product box I picked up at Samy's a while ago. It works pretty well. The only issue with the VF is base plate needs to be adjusted/shimmed to get a better fit to the LCD and VF. Even as is, it works great because when you put up to your eye it pushes forward and blocks all light (no leaks). I'm pretty sure at least one of the objects was man-made, some of the others it's hard to tell. I'm editing all the shots into a short video and will post when done.

Hi, Just thought I would share that Avid have just released a free editor for Mac and Windows, Avid Media Composer : First. According to the website you get 4K editing, 4 video tracks and 8 audio tracks. Enjoy

I'm surprised at how defensive some people are about the blacks. At first we were wondering if it was on purpose or a camera trait. Turns out it's the former, no biggie. Not like everyone's going to agree on creative factors. No different than music, art direction, editing style or anything else. I also don't understand why it's weird to analyze the image qualities of the GH5 in this instance, given the thread title. If it was, "hey what do you think of my movie", that's one thing. But the thread title specifically mentions the cinematic qualities of the GH5. Of course that's what we're gonna discuss! But we get the too cool for school crowd who scoff at paying attention to the very details the thread invites us to talk about. Forums are strange sometimes.

Hahaha oh my... I don't think deezid's choice on shadow levels is equivalent to "misspelled words and poor grammar". That's a bit much.

PRAISE BE!! They were forced to.... They had to put Dual Pixel AF on board, because even the $500 SL2 has that now. No UHS II. No USB 3 USB 2? Let's party like it's 2004. Exactly. Why bother putting this on, so great for video, when you are "not targeting video users" It's so mediocre in this regard, but it's one of their biggest selling points in all the literature I've seen. Weather sealed and swivel screen... See impossible!! $2000 is a lot for this, when you can get a 5D Mark III used for less. You're off topic. The moire is from YouTube's downsampling for your browser / non 4K-screen, most likely. But at least moan about it in the right thread Kubrickhead.

The DVX100 is a classic. It's only a 1/3" sensor, but I could easily get shallow depth of field with it (NDs + Wide open aperture) just don't expect 5D SDOF since most (all) handycams/camcorders had tiny sensors. Here's a teaser to my feature film shot with the DVX (just showing this one because it has some shallow DOF shots):

How relevant will this camera be by 2014?...Oh...wait....

I could go on about how Canon base their decisions on what actually sells, what makes money and what still shooters actually want, what the 6Di was all about in the first place... but there is no point. I might go bash a Sony thread about not being a DSLR or Instant film camera instead. Makes about as much sense

Great....

I guess, sensor doesn't really effect the images as much as other features in a camera for me. I rather have a 5mp picture of Elvis than a 50mp of the door he went into.

I think you need to reread my post without a pair of defensive glasses on. I have not pigeon-holed anybody nor anything else that makes me look silly. I just added a couple of thoughts to what could be a meaningful discussion about the problem all people that hang out here, including nerds like myself, face. We risk the chance to be "home blind" and forget about the real people out there, you know the audience, the non nerds... They are at the end of the day our bosses. What they like goes. But to answer your questions, yes they do, its starting to drift a little. But that's normal with any trend. If we look at the last 20 years so what you call "heavy-handed grading, blurry images, harsh lighting and distracting out of focus backgrounds" have been considered "professional" looking. That's merely because the real non nerd people haven't been able to get those looks with their own equipment. Its been unobtainable and different = professional an likable. When they hire someone to shoot video they want something different than what they can get them self. Before it was easy. Just use a tripod and good audio and you kicked their ass. Today the world is different. Everyone and their cat has a tripod or stabilized lens. A large sensor and a decent mic. So today we must once again look at what we can offer to our clients and audience. But there are of course a few things that never go out of style. Story, good music, great acting, good exposure and to some degree contrast. People seem to enjoy contrast. But please note that I haven't even commented on the video at hand nor the response to it. I just commented that contrast isn't always a bad thing and shadows can be both crushed or not and still look good. Why do you think every new camera that's ever been mentioned on this forum gets a dedicated thread with people bashing the crushed shadows. Just to a make a new thread a few weeks later celebrating the shadow detail? Its not because Panasony doesn't know that "nerds" like raised shadows. Its because they know that the big chunk of non nerds out their like it their way. And they are more important.

As mainly a stills guy so far, I've found this too...

Remember when the trend was to leave Alexa footage all milky/washed out - it was like they used LOG, couldn't make a grading decision & so just left it (or that's how it seemed). And here we have someone who has actually put some contrast/colour into his images & people call foul - it's a real shame & a very boring position to take. Would hate to see the comments if these people ever watched an old Film Noir.... Yes, the OP is correct - this piece doesn't look like video. Really thought you'd nailed it with the shot when the woman is moving in front of the shops. The only comment would be that there is a slight colouring inconsistency between the wide & the close up shots with the opening dancing sequence (the close ups are slightly less contrasty, but not much).

10/10

Bit of a surprise but its all over for Lexar. https://***URL removed***/news/3111535898/lexar-discontinued-micron-announces-the-end-of-lexar-memory-cards Meanwhile, over at Sandisk

Ok I liked the vid and as a fairly uninformed viewer the video effects (grading/noise/digital artifacts/etc) gave me a nostalgic feeling that fit the theme. But I really don't know anything about cameras and would be interested to hear a more informed opinion. What camera(s) do you think were used? Does the end result do it for you or is it distracting? etc

I'm sure this is up there with some of the most impressive single take drone shots I've seen for a while, carried out by a very talented pilot using a micro FPV drone and great use of Reelsteady software. Use of reverse playback and sound design makes it even more impressive... making of...

I don't know, I think with your discovery, the GX85 is the camera to get, but the little extra features are worth it for the G85. I'm so bored with most new cameras I've tried since going the 5D3 route that I am looking to the past for my future cameras. I think I see a 1DC in my future. But that's neither here nor there for this thread. For the money, the Panny GX85 or G85 is great for 4K and other features. If you don't need 4K, I still love the HD image out of the D5500/D5600. I would love to see more talented people than myself have a stab at it. But for the money, I think the a6500 has the best 4K around and respectable 5-axis.

Well, it happens so fast you can't even possibly notice. It is a good thing the whole film wasn't shot on a 5D. I think I need to buy a 1DC. So damn cheap and seems so capable.

Cinelike D being able to be switched on in their £250 travel compacts might have opened a few people's eyes to Panasonic playing a very similar game

Just earn more money so you can buy all the gears you want, seriously, more action less whiny lol can't wait for the C200 to be released.. looking forward to it

C'mon Glenn... *Phew* You and we all know this is not true. Give a RED to a rookie and you'll see the damage. Your claim is totally BS to lightheartedly be posted in a forum among friends oh yeah, but don't hit the fan with, sorry mate :-)

Sounds good! I noticed just by looking at the pictures from the press release that the design is different, and yes you can see that the placement of the screws are further down and it seems that rear section is wider / thicker. I'll upload some pictures once I receive my unit.

This was one of the worst offenders:

Hi. So many noobs videos from gh5... this one is good looking, thanks:) You know what? Gh5 is a really cool professional camera, but its cheap... anyone can buy it and upload the video to youtube or vimeo and as a result we have so much videonish , iphonelike footages. RED looks like RED not because it is a good camera, but because it always in a good hands. In the hands of people who know how to light scene, how to framing etc. i really wayt when someone of this pro guys will take this little piece of magic (gh5) and shoot something Hollywood looking:) Sorry for my english

Haha, I was thinking about buying an A7ii. I am so yesterday with this stuff. I am holding out for the Canon FF mirrorless but may buy a D7500 in the fall for the right price as an interim. If the FF Canon mirrorless doesn't occur or isn't up to spec, I will probably sell the D7500 and put that money go back in time again and buy a 1DC. By next spring, they should be selling for around $2500 on the used market. And to be honest, 4 years later I don't think there's a better 4K image in that price range.

So there is one thread bashing pro video cameras and celebrating David Lynch. And one where we bash the use of a 5D because of moire... Im confused. And to be honest, I love cheap cameras and being creative with lowend gear. For sure.. ..But every time Michael Mann cuts from the film camera to some DV-cam in Public Enemies it totally rips me out of the story and makes me very aware that Im watching something fake. He loved it and said it made the movie better.. imo it made it suck ass. There are times when the creativity of a DSLR can help you. And times when you should go all in. A good story can handle a little moire (Hurt Locker slowmo scenes) and a weak story (Public Enemies) need all the help it can get. Imo.

I have the 58 and 28. They are really nice. The MFT Voigtlanders are even better.

^ I love how this never gets old. As for Canon, sure there will be a rational, clinical, business explanation for their choices. I also believe that the negative vibes people get from them are going to hurt them in the longer run. No fullframe 4k option without crop, no 4k over hdmi on the 5d4, no 4k on the 6d2, no c-log on flagship 1dxii, no basic video functions as peaking, 45 AF points on the 6d2 but all in the center, no middle codec on the c200, only 9 AF points on the 200d... All this considering Canon pricing. And that it is 2017. It just feels like pure calculation and/or cynicism. I don't like that. Now why would you make potential customers feel this way?

AMEN!!

I'm under the impression 10bit raw doesn't really work 100% properly from my tests with Eosm (also 7D). Not to mention the benefits of Raw are much more apparent at a minimum of 12bit on theses cams, if I was going to shoot 10bit I'd just buy a different camera (almost any panasonic 4K cam and down sample to 1080). I've used eosM quite a bit for 14bit raw, but I got really sick of the focus pixels and the extra hassle of getting rid of them. That new app for Mac cuts down the process, but still you're pretty limited with it. For me 7D is truly the cutoff point, any less quality than that and I can't be bothered with it, unless I was doing an 8mm emulation video or something.

Yes, I have @jonpais (GH2V, GH4), in fact, the moment I can I'll get my hands on the GH5 to make it my main camera. It was a little tongue in cheek as the Sony is not that horribly bad and the Panas do a good job. My method for focusing always had been back button S-AF and then manual adjusting even on the Panas, so I know Contrast is good enough for that. All this fuss about GH5 lack of good C-AF for tracking is understandable but as @jcs said, DPAF fails sometimes. The footage is great and I love the tracking of the parachutists, pity the lack of smoothness of the IBIS. Andrew has been testing the EM1II for a while, maybe he can say how the phase and the IBIS panning works on the Oly vs. the GH5. With all the technology we have now I just hate that nobody has been able to get an UFO with a camera and a 400mm on a tripod and good AF yet.

Nice set. Fuji handles lowlights very well. Even if pushed the noise is pleasing imo. Im getting the Xpro2 today.. cant wait

Anonymous said the NASA was going to say something about alien life. Maybe they're already here! I hope they just have somebody like Charles Dance to do the talking, Morgan Freeman has a too lighthearted voice for that. Jokes apart that's why I think Mirrorless is superior, the EVF, IBIS combination is killer; pity that by the time you'd point the camera to the UFO the batteries would die in the Sony and the focus would be lost in the sea of blue with the Panasonic. Maybe the OMD EM1 MKII is the way to go . EDIT: Waiting for the footage, I kind of secretly enjoy these things.

Thanks @Kubrickian. Your Insta looks cool, I will follow. The x70 is a total gem and the only clear rival to the GRii. But they are very close imo. If the X70 gets a full press snap function or the GR a flip screen, then we imo will have the ultimate street shooter for candids.

Best article I've read here--and painfully honest (is there any other kind of honesty?). How many times have I been captivated by content and only, after the fact, did I think to myself---"What was that shot on? Shrugged my shoulders and realized I didn't care." Small cameras are freeing. They can go where no cinema camera can go, and free your imagination. Thank you for writing this, Andrew.

The footage should be much crispier than the one we saw from low res phone quality shacky video But man don't you wish you have the 150-600 for this kind of thing

+100 for the other most important piece of the puzzle...arguably as important as the actual image itself!...

1. Think about the light before anything else. 2. Change that lens, it may look way better on different glass. 3. When the talent is in thought, or simply just waiting for a direction, roll the camera without their knowledge. You can get some really useful, very natural moments. 4. Don't do the shot once. You may pull off the technique better on repeat. 5. Bring 634 lens cloths to a shoot, because you will lose 633 of them. 6. Never settle on a grade straight away. Look at it again tomorrow. Those skin tones might be green and you had no idea. 7. If you're not sure if it's right, it's definitely not. Trust yourself. It's got to feel right, always. 8. Adjust the light again. It will look better. 9. Eye lights. Make the effort. 10. Buy a RED cam. Send it back. Read EOSHD and get confused. Get a GH5.

@SMGJohn Full ACK...The sovjet directors were artists, completely focusing the core assets of their films to make. No lunatic pixel whores and gear heads out there...The sovjet film is all about content and expression and not about pampered "gadgetized" guys. The sovjet cameras were NOT half-baked, unfinished plastic garbage like contemporary Sony Axyz, they were made to hold up. Not filigree but rugged, to be beaten up some years (or even decades) to death. A kind of "filming russian tanks". Poverty and deficits are sometimes a real catalyst for putting ideas into art. Luxury plastic gadgets destroy fantasy and lead to consumism and GAS... And never forget: At the great era of sovjet film, there were only a few famous and respected sovjet directors - even internationally. Nowadays every guy can call himself a director, but - despite social media and nowadays possibilities and low gear pricing - there are NO MORE famous & respected DOPs, compared to 30 years ago...

However I will agree the blacks are crushed, but I don't mind crushed blacks every once in a while. And I can understand checking different devices and everything looks good but then when you upload it, it seems off. For instance on my computer, this is the best, most cinematic screen grab. The highlight roll off is perfect, just the right amount of contrast to add that beautiful milky sheen. Beautiful actress. And then when I uploaded it here... Seriously though, I wish there was a basic standard that could be set with all devices to obtain a simple, accurate color and image. I know we can calibrate are screens and use color checkers but then we need to hope the end user won't have their saturation bumped up too much or their contrast too high. It really is frustrating, so I can relate. With that being said, I liked the piece and I do think it looks cinematic and I don't care about the crushed blacks because the story seems interesting and the camera movement and composition is beautifully done. And I am surprised this was done with the GH5 because I haven't been that impressed with it. Don't get me wrong, I have seen some nice stuff from it, but most of the stuff I've seen shot with V-Log in 10bit looks like it could have been shot with a GX85 or G85.

Probably the studio that shot miniature scenes already own the 1D C and had that motion capture rig made arround it. And they do multi passes to capture lights and other effects. Imagine doing that with the 1D C in raw stills. It is just like those guys did with the BMCC:

Hate to bring the bad news! But Roger said the 1DC was only used for reference shots

It kind of scares me that people can't work stuff like this out for themselves... "Oh no, my hotshoe is blocked, it's impossible to mount a microphone now, better throw it in the bin!".

I have a 2013 iMac 27 with 3TB FD, a 2015 top-spec iMac 27 with 1TB SSD, 2015 and 2016 top-spec MBP 15s and am testing a 12-core nMP with D700s. This is FCPX 4k documentary editing where the primary codecs are some variant of H264. Even though FCPX is very efficient, in general H264 4k requires transcoding to proxy for smooth, fluid editing and skimming -- even on a top-spec 12-core nMP. If you have a top-spec MBP, iMac or Mac Pro, smaller 4k H264 projects can be done using the camera-native codec, but multicam can be laggy and frustrating. The Mac Pro is especially handicapped on H264 since the Xeon CPU does not have Quick Sync. In my tests, transcoding 4k H264 to ProRes proxy on a 12-core Mac Pro is nearly twice as slow as a 2015 top-spec iMac 27. For short projects with lower shooting ratios it's not an issue but for larger projects with high shooting ratios it's a major problem. We've got ProRes HDMI recorders but strapping on a bunch of 4k recorders is expensive and operationally more complex in a field documentary situation. That would eliminate the transcoding and editing performance problems but would exacerbate the data wrangling task by about 8x. This is especially difficult for multi-day field shoots where the data must be offloaded and backed up. However in part the viability of editing camera-native 4k depends on your preferences. If you do mainly single-cam work, and use modest shooting ratios so you don't need to skim and keyword a ton of material, and don't mind a bit of lag during edit, a top-spec iMac 27 is probably OK for H264 4k. Re effects, those can either be CPU-bound or GPU-bound, or a combination of both. Some like Neat Video allow you to configure the split between CPU and GPU. But in general effects use a lot of GPU, and like encode/decode, are slowed down by 4k since it's 4x the data per frame as 1080p. Re Fusion Drive vs SSD, for a while I had both 2013 and 2015 iMac 27s on my desk, one with 3TB FD and the other 1TB SSD. I tested a few small cases with all media on the boot drive, and really couldn't see much FCPX real-world performance difference. You are usually waiting on CPU or GPU. However if you transcode to ProRes, I/O rates skyrocket, making it more likely to hit an I/O constraint. Fusion Drive is pretty good but ideally you don't want media on the boot drive. SSD is fast enough to put media there but it's not big enough. Fusion Drive is big enough but may not be fast enough, thus the dilemma. A 3TB FD is actually a pretty good solution for small scale 1080p video editing, but 4k (even H264) chews through space rapidly. Also, performance will degrade on any spinning drive (even FD) as it fills up. Thus you don't really have 3TB at full performance, but need to maintain considerable slack space. In general we often under-estimate our storage needs, so end up using external storage even for "smaller" projects. If this is your likely destiny, why not use an SSD iMac which is at least a bit faster at a few things like booting? Just don't spend your entire budget on an SSD machine then use a slow, cheap bus-powered USB drive. If I was getting an 2017 iMac 27 for H264 4k editing, it would be a high-spec version, e.g, 4.2Ghz i7, 32GB RAM, 580 GPU, and probably 1TB SSD. Re the iMac Pro, what little we know indicates the base model will be considerably faster than the top-spec iMac 27 -- it has double the cores (albeit at slower clock rate) and roughly double the GPU performance. However unless Apple pulls a miracle out of their hat and upgrades FCPX to use AMD's VCE coding engine, the iMac Pro will not have Quick Sync, so it will be handicapped just like the current Mac Pro for that workflow. Apple is limited by what Intel provides but this is an increasingly critical situation for productions using H264 or H265 acquisition codecs and high shooting ratios.