Leaderboard

Hello everyone, let me tell you the story of how I got the cheapest single focus solution. And how it compares to the Rectilux HCDNA (results a the end of the post) Last month, I found this anamorphic adapter on ebay : It was cheap, and looked like a weird anamorphic projection lens using prisms. So I bought it (Gear Acquisition Syndrome :D). Then I took it apart to clean it, and noticed it consisted of two prisms (for the anamorphic part) and some kind of focussing solution in the front. So I 3D printed an adapter for it (around 5GBP printed at a local shop) and tried it. And of course it confirmed to be a single focus solution ! So I had to test it ! Here are the results compared to the hardcore DNA : Taking lens : Super Takumar MC 105mm f/2.8 Camera : Canon 50D Anamorphic lens : Schneider Cinelux Single Focus Solution : Rectilux HCDNA vs GB-Kalee Small Anamorphic (front part) (Same grade applied to all shots) Here is a picture of the setup : Of course, the GB-Kalee is less convenient : - Minimum focus distance around 1.8m - Smaller element diameter (would work better with smaller anamorphic) - More difficult to focus (as my copy of this adapter is quite beaten up) - Needs a mounting solution for both back and front as there is no filters. (But the HCDNA is similar here are the threads are not standard size) So, What do you think ? I personally think this GB-Kalee needs a rehousing !

I shoot with GH5's every day at work while all of my personal and side projects are shot on the NX1 and NX500. Obviously the 4k 60p on the GH5 is fantastic. And I quite like V-Log as well, it's far easier to grade than Sony's log profiles, and nicely preserves the dynamic range without destroying colors. I haven't really shot/graded 10-bit footage that much, as it is just overkill for the kind of work I have been doing, and the 8-bit is fine. I like how big the EVF is, and how you can switch between viewfinder and LCD screen easily while recording. There are lots of great and easily re-mappable function buttons, and you can program and save shooting modes in the custom profiles dial much easier and more effectively than you can on the NX cameras, which don't even save the video data at all. Of course, you can also move the zoomed-in focus checking area, unlike NX, and the tilty/flippy screen is preferable to the tilt-only screen. And you can't forget about the IBIS, which is just fantastic for handheld shooting, truly a game-changer for my kind of work, I need a monopod for my NX1 at all times. That being said... I far prefer the NX cameras' photo/video implementation; it is still the simplest, best camera I have ever used for switching quickly between stills and video. No specific mode dials needed. Tap the shutter button to take a picture, hit the record button to record. The NX1 seems to have quite a bit better battery life than the GH5 in my experience as well. It is also lighter and feels better in the hands- the NX1 is an insanely comfortable camera, in the fact still the best I have ever used ergonomically, while the GH5 is surprisingly heavy and a bit bulky. The GH5 also has this very annoying tendency to hesitate for just a split-second or two when you hit the record button, which doesn't sound like a big deal, but it hesitates just long enough that I have double-pumped many, many times, while the NX seems immediately responsive. I do prefer the the menu system on the NX cameras as well. As far as out-and-out IQ comparison, I have one of Luca's speedboosters on my NX1 pretty much all the time, so I have actually gotten quite used to the full frame look, especially DOF-wise, so it almost feels limiting sometimes to only have a super-35 equivalent with a Speedbooster on the GH5. Color-science wise, I can't say I prefer the one over the other - - in good light, I think both cameras look fantastic, with great skin tones and malleable colors -- basically you'll be able to get the look you're going for in post with either camera. The autofocus on the NX cameras is far, far better than the GH5, if that's important to you. And the NX1's internal 6.5k to 4k downscale is still unbeaten, detail-wise. The image is always just unbelievably sharp and detailed. The GH5 doesn't quite match that. And while the low-light and noise on the GH5 is probably preferable (clean at 1600, useable at 3200) I rarely, if ever, need these ISOs anyway, especially with the speedbooster and some fast glass to boot. Of course, I'm not mentioning stills quality at all, I haven't shot many stills on the GH5, but obviously the NX is going to win that competition hands-down, it is still, even several years later, one of the best APS-C sensors ever made, with insanely good dynamic range, especially when pulling shadows. So, bottom line, should you switch? I think that depends. If you're pure run-and-gun, then yes, the IBIS (and the 4k 60p, if you need high-res slo-mo, with the benefit of a good log profile) is a pretty unbeatable combo for video right now. Throw in the 10-bit, and it's future-proofed for quite some time. The low-light IQ is more than enough. I think the GH5 is easily the best bang-for-the-buck camera around right now, and will remain so for quite some time. But if you're already invested in the NX system, which has its own fantastic native lenses (16-50S, wow), IQ wise I really don't think you're gaining that much. Not enough to go through the hassle of trying to sell and offload all my Samsung gear. I quite enjoy the GH5. But I still love shooting with my NX cameras, and don't feel like I'm losing out of for most of the kind of work that I do. So take that as you will.

With the Canon 5D3 you can shoot Magic Lantern RAW and blow all the Sonys away You can also shoot serviceable H.264

That's a good question, why?

A PDAF equipped, stacked BSI version of the 12mp sensor with the new processor to cut rolling shutter and speed things up would be sweet. I've always thought a rez bump to allow 4k in crop mode would be a possibility, but that would push things to almost 20mp if my math is correct (which may not be the case) if the crop mode allowed for full readout. A bump in mp would impact low light, but it would be a worthy tradeoff IMO since anything above about 51200 is strictly for night doc or ENG type stuff.

This is stuff I struggle with myself; my guess is someone will correct me if I'm wrong. The problem with "stream" CODECs like H.264, HEVC, XAVC, etc., is most frames are calculated from an I-frame (essentially) and the more compression tricks they use, the smaller the size of the visual data for streaming forward. However, that makes it harder for the computer to go backwards. So every time you want to land on a frame that isn't an I-frame, the computer must go backwards a certain number of frames, and do a lot of backwards analysis to reconstruct it. The more work, the greater the chance of crashing. Handbrake should be fine, or any software that uses FFMPEG as an engine. With Prores or Cineform, you can do a quality where there are less tricks used to make a forward-read stream so it's easier for the computer to reconstruct a video at any frame. At a certain quality, you should not lose any color information. There are some comparisons out there of DNxHD and ProRes, etc., but my take-away is you'd really have to pixel peep to see any difference between them. The weird problem with ProRes or Cineform or DNxHD is that if you choose very high quality the files get big and THEN YOUR hard drive can't keep up and you're back to square one with crashing your computer! FAIK,GoPro has just put Cineform in the public domain. So I'm hopeful there will be some good/free encoding tools for it in the future, maybe the camera manufacturers may offer it as a CODEC! In any case, my main point is that I doubt there is a significant difference between Nikon and Sony video files. You should do some tests because chances are you just happened to have an easy Nikon file/project and it was a coincidence that it seemed better. Yes, very DERPY HA HA! Think you should do some tests for that too. I believe Sony video is much better than Nikon, or you can get the A6300 to look like the D750, but not the other way around. I have an A6300. I love that I can power it forever using USB. I love that it has the 4K option. And it has a mic jack. It's small. Maybe what you like more about the D750 is how the body feels (solid). The larger/heavier body make it easier to get steady video. Maybe you just need a rig to beef up the A6300? Odd idea I know. Sounds like you have all the basic equipment. Based on this new information I think you should ditch the D750 and maybe get a Sony 1-inch camera, like an RX10, RX100 or even the RX0? I truly love Nikons, but I can only keep one menu system in my head. So I'm Sony all the way now. Anyway, I had an X70 and RX10 II and I couldn't tell the difference in video quality. The RX10s are quite underestimated, though if I remember correctly Andrew always falls in love with them every time he tries one again. Yes, for real-estate video I can definitely see LOG being VERY useful! No argument there! For still, however, bracketing would be far superior. link to my video about LOG

I'll wait for Photo Joseph to tell us how brilliant it is before not getting one.

Here is the AF test in video: PS He will be doing some video tests as well so if anyone wants to ask him for something specific here is the original thread: https://***URL removed***/forums/thread/4222635

It depends on what you need to do with the camera. If you want to shoot a video with standard colors and sunlight, the advantage is minimal. If you want to use the DR profile to get a better workflow in post production then the hack is highly recommended because it drastically reduces compression issues. h265 200Mbps it's like a 400Mbps on h264 codec, my opinion it's that the h265 hack it's better, similar to 10bit ProRes.

I've always enjoyed Matt's work and he's always come across as a genuine guy who loves what he does. I find it hard to think of another person who's shared so much usable information about cameras, lighting and techniques with downloadable files for FREE. He doesn't need to do that. It sounds like a genuine mistake on his behalf. It's just a shame that there are so many people/creatives out there who are ready to be Judge & Executioner at a drop of a hat. Maybe they should concentrate on working on their own issues rather than projecting it onto someone like Matt. - B.

I've had the EVA1 for almost a week now, but sickness and rain has prevented me from using it too much. However I've had a couple days of shooting and thought I'd share some random samples from some documentary footage . Only the sunrise shot has been graded (lifted shadows). A lot of the shots are handheld. Lenses used are the sigma 18-35 and canon 70-200 f2.8. I Don't have any proper IR footage but I'll get some eventually. I used ACEScct V35 to Rec 709 in Davinci to correct the Vlog. Only ISO 2500 or 800. Exposed to +0EV in cam. No NR in cam or in post Just a bunch of random shots in a random order! Things I've noticed about the EVA1 though: At base ISO and in VLOG the ceiling for the waveform monitor is at 92%. When you stop the ISO down (2500 base, ISO 1000) the ceiling drops about 10% (to 83 or something like that). A pretty big drop in DR! I'd only go higher than base on the ISO if needed. Battery indicator is only in bars, no percentage LCD is very reflective, hard to tell if things are in focus! I'm planning on picking up a camera monitor for it later. Ergonomics feel great, no complaints! However the side grip can unlock itself if put under too much weight (to adjust the rotation, it doesn't fall off). Might be just my unit though. Underexposure can get noisy (who would have thought) - however it looks more like film grain than digital noise most of the times. I haven't tested this with the built in NR function. Honestly a really awesome camera and can't wait for the 400mbps & raw update. I can export the original V-Log footage and post it here for download if anyone wants later. EDIT: I exported for youtube H264 at 68mbps, is there a better way to get less compression on YT?

Hard call. Loved the video on the D750 (use a A7rII now) but always go back and forth on buying a D750 for cheap. The 1080p isn't the same as 4K, but it has great DR, highlight rolloff, and the best Full Frame rolling shutter performance you can buy, making the motion cadence great. But my A7r II has an image stabilizer, 4K, and most importantly, an EVF. I want to rent a D850, but I'm afraid I'll sell by Sony gear if I do.

But can't be used with the OP's existing Canon lenses

Yeah, personally I'd go for a cage and further set-up in a kind of 'studio' environment, where you use the cage handle for low angles and stuff but also just throw it on a tripod, which is probably the main thing I'd use a full set-up for (talking heads/interviews). Not the hugest fan of any sort of mounting for shots that need mobility especially now that we've got 5-axis in-body stabilization. I'd be more inclined to strip things down to just the camera and perhaps the hot-/coldshoes (on camera/cage (for audio/external monitor/recorder)) and just shoot classic handheld. Depending on the lens you don't really need rails with follow focus and a matte box looks neat, but as long as you're not shooting something critical, something you can do a re-take on, I'd gladly risk some issues with focus and flares perhaps in favor of the light and simple set-up when moving around. Of course, when you need to, a top support with good body load distribution is a very worth while consideration.

D750 is an incredible stills camera.

Is rigging up a RED or ARRI not a bit pointless either? To bring up another old argument 'it's not about the size, it's about what you can do with it'. The GH-range lives and breathes production. That's been the whole point since the 5DmkII, T2i/550D, GH2, etc. These are entry level cameras for those who'd love to have some proper cinematography going on, but can't exactly afford to buy/rent a RED/ARRI and/or a whole crew to run it. However, cameras like the GH5 can function like a proper cinema camera, which is also why we see advanced features such as 10-bit, LOG, waveforms/vectorscope overlays, XLR adapter, full HDMI port, etc and lend themselves perfectly to be operated by just a single soul. That it is fairly compact and well-equiped of course allows for this single camera to be used in various ways (e.g. mounting inside of a car, not requiring a steadicam for follow around shots). In the same way you're probably not using ARRI SkyPanels but some Aputure LightStorm lights on your makeshift set and your talents are volunteers/friends etc rather than well-paid actors. But in the end the production value is up there, even on a budget and there's hardly an excuse anymore to not pursue your dreams and scripts because you don't have the budget. Filmmaking is more accessible than ever. It's probably however also harder to set yourself apart or gain traction for the undertakings you're passionate about... then again it also allows you to book well-paid commercial shoots, so atleast you can put some fancy food on the table. And concerning that, of course there's...

For real estate stills the FX sensor of the D750 should be very handy for tilt shift lenses.

I wonder how on earth people managed to shoot with the GH4/GH3/GH2/GH1? How did we manage to shoot a short film last weekend with only a Panasonic GH3?? :-o Why on earth do I still own 2x Panasonic GH1 cameras :-o

It can take a little bit of time for a good short film to planned, shot, and go through post. (thus there can often be a lag before we see plenty shot with a new camera) But I'm certain plenty of short films have been done with the GH5. Heck, just a few weeks back I was 1st AC on a shoot with a GH5.

Actuallu they need to fire Entire team who is behind ' auto focus performance in video' saying Focus tracking in video has been improved[ Version 2.0] other than that its perfect as it was.

Some sort of monodrama, without dialogue but very nicely exploring possibilities If Short include and documentary, this one (look further) is impressive

Thanks, very interesting and deep. One little fact popped to me: " ...the standard for peak luminance in the movie theater has long been only 48 nits..." Even SDR videos/movies looks more vivid and colorful at home with at least 100 nits TV and even brighter. HDR in big TV is many many times more life like than a dim film in theater. I was in IMAX theater last weekend and the image was very dim and low contrast. I think it was about 25 nits but the screen was big. There was no true color and no whites. I also watched earlier The Revenance in big 4k theater and the image was very dim in big screen.

@jonpais regarding Wolfcrow. He doesn’t seem to have fully understood HDR. I like the phrase ‘old wine in a new bottle’ though. Because you can judge wine by it’s vol% of alcohol (~ resolution) OR by more complex parameters. If one day we’ll record the same scene with a contemporary DSLR and with a camera fully covering all rec2020 requirements, we will agree to new wine in new bottles. @Vesku A deeper black actually doesn‘t help to distinguish more shadow nuances, for that you‘d need brighter dark greys and MUCH brighter highlights. On the recording side, you have to avoid true black anyway because right above a hypothetical ‘no signal’ stretches a zone of BAD signals, which you usually don’t record (ETTR). @Kisaha Yes, it’s not affordable for me. Mapping any rec709 or 8-bit LOG video to 2020 shows the limits in the waveform already. And even though I have no HDR monitor yet, I do see how little dynamic then remains for the midtones. The closest are some old raw recordings from my Pocket (12-bit), but also all artifacts (moire, color fringing) are accentuated.

Today's most frequent search on eBay: "Kalee Anamorphic" Awesome stuff, Justin!

ive definitely seen a few but i cant remember names off the top of my head ill post here if i come across them again theyre out there, but do seem few and far between

If you make most of your money shooting stills I predict you would super regret selling the Nikon. However, if you shoot real estate, the 10-18 is a MONSTER lens and I'd rather use the A6500 and that and call it a day (but only for real estate photography, not other stuff). What really affects the ability of a computer to handle video is the type of CODEC you use. Transcode any footage you have, D750 or A6500 into Prores, Cineform or Motion JPEG and there will be no difference between cameras. I have a pretty nice computer and it still chokes on H.264 once I apply any sort of effect. The Sony is better than the D750 in video, for all the reasons you mention (Sorry, I disagree about the Nikon having better video color than the Sony). However, it has the same shortcomings as the Nikon when it comes to what you'd need to do professional video which is 1.) mics (shotgun and lav), 2.) lights 3.) gimbal, fluid-head tripod, rails, etc. In other words, if you do get real video work which camera you have will be the least of your struggles. As everyone here knows, I believe LOG is mostly bullshit. Unless you know EXACTLY WHY you must shoot LOG, it is the inferior profile in 95% of all situations (just my opinion). In short, it trades true mid-tone color for a noisey increase in DR. I've even done a video about why Nikon doesn't provide LOG to its users to hang themselves with The big question for me is what other equipment do you have in terms of strobes, video lights, mics, etc. My guess is that is where you need to spin your wheels a bit

In crop mode the a7r2 would be almost identical to the a6500. If FF mode the fact that the 10-18 is not a FF lens will show as the corners and edges are absolutely terrible. It is somewhat useable in a narrow range - about 13-16mm, but even then its at the cost of IQ because the outer part of the frame is complete mush. Outside that narrow range its complete garbage on FF because of the vignette and smearing. If you're shooting real estate, get a FF UWA like the 16-35 or even better the new 12-24, and your clients will thank you.

super cool edit and shot design! now we are looking forward how you´re utilizing more of the S16 sensor size!

A7R2 + canon ts-e 17mm. Badass

Ben likes the hand grip ergonomics, the ibis, the evf. Only 8 bit with 10min limit on 50p.

@PannySVHS wouldn’t be my first S16 film!

Well if that something you need then it is. I almost never do post zooms. Hate them. And I can do it with HD. No one can tell. I have yet to ever "need" 4k. Webb, TV-commercials, you name it. I could honesly use 720p and it would be fine. Have a look at the d500 if you like Nikon and need 4K. And no, the crop isn't a big deal imo (I would almost go as far as calling it a bonus).

Well... can't sell both because I have lots of stills photography gigs coming up soon. G9 I am sure is a great camera. But since (for video) I think that dynamic range and high ISO performance would be more important than even 4K for me, I think that an a7s original shooting at 1080p might be a better video camera for the type of work I am LIKELY to do in the near future. Unless I can line up other types of video work...

Sell both and for some time be happy with saved money and - more important - with peace in mind. Seriously. Than look around. New tools principally and in most cases are - although we all try to neglect admitting - indeed more complete and better. Maybe Panasonic G9 will be the best balanced answer - it seems that you'll have enough money for it and some sort of speedbooster. Maybe Sony technician will experience technical illumination and provide marvel in form of undimming screen in a7000 incarnation. Maybe Nikon mirrorless will knock in the door after New Year and show you how to magically make 4k without 2.3x crop in APS and full frame.

Why don't you want to just keep the A6500 again? Do you really have that much of a problem with overheating, the dim LCD or the small buttons, that you are willing to give up all the previous things you really like?

Reading your posts is like listening to Yoda speak...

@jonpais Don't worry, at the same moment when mr Caldwell's new mastery product steps into BHphoto, its chinese clone type of Zhongyi will be on the road from the Guangdong for 5x lower price - and I bet that one of the first ceremonial/inaugurational piece will be sent to one famous address in Vietnam

G9 instead GH5 for video work? For me - new best medical symptom-detection test of unbearable GASyndrom Also, have to admit, and sign of special sort of imagination - GAS one: even if something clearly is not meant to be equal (in respective field of products) competitive video tool, we will made and forced it to be! I think that even engineers in Panasonic are openmouthed by such development of reception-events (Guys from western economies, SLR Magic base anamorphot adapter is just 400$ new - with such wonderfull posibilities to play and gain serious aesthetic results about which Andrey Tarkovski could only dream shiped into Solaris station.)

The only reason to use a DSLR/Mirrorless is to get close-up shallow DOF, ability to use any crappy (but full of "character") lens and a better low-light image, but I really mean LOW light. Otherwise, if you're shooting video ONLY today's 1-inch camcorders produce wonderfully clean images, with pleasant shallow DOF once your reach beyond effective 70mm or so, and you don't have to worry about the battery, audio, easy of use, etc. They're built only for video production. They're not going away because if I'm a school, public cable company, etc., they allow anyone to shoot a doc or short film with minimum fuss (calls for technical support). Someone want's a photo they can take out their phone. If your camera, no matter what kind, doesn't have XLR inputs, you're going to roll the dice with your audio every time you shoot. @DaveAltizer If shooting content ABOUT cameras is more important to you than fiddling with a DSLR/mirrorless AT THE SAME time you're talking about camera, then you should really give one of these 1-inch camcorders a try. I believe one would allow you to focus on your content which will improve what you're able to say about the DSLR/mirrorless you're talking about. In any case, getting some real experience with one might help you put all the other stuff you do in perspective?

Well, make calculation alone. With Zhongyi you get 1.452 crop factor. It is inside 18-35 safe margin - for Nikon APS crop is 1.5 and 18-35 is designed for it with some comfotable zone more - e. g. 1.45 is OK.

Wow I thought Premiere was a piece of unreliable shit in the last version of Mac OS. It's even worse in High Sierra!! Avoid this upgrade like the plague if you rely on Adobe Premiere.

Thanks Dave, The quality of the Sony is really on another level when compared to the gopro. P.S. Your videos have come a long way since last time I watched one, I really like the flow. That audio though... The lav is clipping quite a bit...

I think Jon looks for different things in a lens than some of us, which is perfectly fine of course. Seems he likes a perfect lens, he has a track record of owning and shooting with some of the best lenses for the system, incl. the Panasonic 12mm f/1.4, 42.5mm f/1.2, Olympus 75mm f/1.8, 25mm f/1.2, Sigma DC DN 30mm f/1.4, Veydra Mini Primes etc, where it's all about resolving power and sharpness, where they are absolutely smashing it, you can't really argue that. It just doesn't seem he 'gets' people that put character first however (which is funny itself because he didn't feel Phil A's footage had any, but okay)... like shooting a 17.5mm f/0.95 wide open or using anything vintage. Takes offence himself when people find a lens to render 'boring', meaning not that he himself has shot something boring, but that the lens has a reliable and clinical look of perfection to it (maybe that is the sort of 'character' he wishes to see, to me that's prefering a vodka over a whiskey, where as well, nothing is wrong to put one over the other, personal preference and all). To that person. Yet you know, it's okay if people aren't on the same page, an opinion is something subjective, there's no one true way... and one should really be accepting of that and letting others do their thing. To me it matters more that someone is having fun shooting and makes great content in terms of mood, composition, 'story telling' however limited applicability perhaps. If you have blinders on and can only tell if someone's work is good by pixelpeeping, then you might be missing the point (but atleast you'd have every pixel). So I personally was able to appreciate said video and post, because it isn't always the main goal to capture something pixel perfect, but to capture something that elicits something beyond that. And Jon's said it before himself... he might've shot and uploaded a video with the white balance, framerate or audiosync off... and never finds anyone in the comments complaining and pointing it out. That's all because they look through the pixel peeping and rather just focus on the essence. If your content is good, it's probably good because of the bigger picture, not just the individual pixel. And even if you don't see it that back with someone else's work the least you could do is give them some constructive feedback... the lowest thing you could do is dismiss what they've done altogether and regard it as someone clowning around (discouraging them to ever post something again). A bit of mutual respect goes a long way.

Dear friends, just coming back to the title of this thread.. I have both, Sony A7s II and Samsung NX1, and I know very well both. Yesterday I have tried for first time the Zeiss Distagon 28 f/2 Zf.2 on NX1, and my friends, in the screen of my laptop I've seen God. Great 3D, amazing colors, incredibly alive images, an interstellar trip. Never seen something like that on my Sony A7s II. And the world still ignores this prodigious camera called NX1. I know, I should get over it, but I cannot.