Leaderboard

Nothing some noise reduction in post can't handle:

Yes but for shoots where IBIS and AF are not required, manual focus & tripod still gain a more cinematic result if we're talking traditional movie-making vs new fangled IBIS / AF movie-making. I prefer a fully locked down shot to a handheld shot pretending to be locked down, if you know what I mean. Handheld is a different style. AF is a different style. It's a great shot getter though and very convenient. I am thinking of getting a 24-120mm F4 VR II for the D850, when I need stabilisation. Nikon's VR is very effective in video mode. Close to Sony's 5 axis IBIS performance, but 3 axis not 5. This is true (and somewhat crazy) Anyway, talking just image quality... This thing has it. D850 over A7R III and GH5 any time. Yeah, it's only 8bit, but it has mojo by the bucketload. Full frame FX is virtually identical in quality to the oversampled Super 35 mode. A7R III still has a lot of shimmering and false detail going on. The D850 is higher bitrate too. Really is like having a 1D C Mark II.

Nope, still not impressed with F-LOG. A bunch of mashed oranges and blues. None of this early footage has any punch to it.

Yeah I doubt it is TowerJazz. Seems like Sony's upgrade to their 42MP BSI CMOS to me. Has all the hallmarks of one. The real puzzle is why Sony keep giving their main rival the absolute top spec sensor, whilst putting older tech in their own. The 46MP sensor seems to have more dynamic range, lower minimum ISOs, more resolution, faster readout, possibly even onboard moire reduction in pixel binned 4K mode from 46MP and then the D850 uses XQD cards as well - another Sony tech, which they can't be bothered to put on their own cameras! You don't need it. Live-view feed is crystal clear, super sharp and detailed, big screen and very high res panel. It's better than D750 and that was already good to start with. I believe the Sigma ART lenses for Nikon mount focus the same way as the Canon versions... so there's a solution! Definitely the new tech should filter down to a D5700 or D6000 of some sort. No crop. No moire. Just clean 4K with flat profile and super clean codec, Nikon colours, etc. It would be very popular under $800. It's easier... Enable peaking in stills mode, focus, then flick the switch to movie mode to record. The flick to movie mode has zero lag or black out. No mirror flipping, or refocussing. Peaking looks lovely in stills live-view...pro-video quality.

Does all this pixel peeping over camera nuances really matter on set if you know your camera sensor as a DP? Check out some screenshots from my latest commercial and see if you can guess the camera it was shot on. How good is your camera knowledge? :-) (All these images are just with a 10 second grade, so don't be too hard on them)

LOL What have you written, Dennis?! Don't dare to say a Fuji camera is better than any of the usual suspects when people already left their pennies for, especially in such sensitive case... Don't you see is soooo videoy here too? hehe Fuji can't be more cinematic than any other because it is not! :X As simple as that :D when people simply don't let it be so... *cough cough* Remember, it is 8-bit! Don't dare to say highlights rolloff are sweet and look like smoother than GH5 either. Even if you and me, we have been two of the best supporters Panasonic may afford... without demanding payback points to redeem whatsoever ;-)

I bought the majority of the NX gear AFTER the non-announcement. I knew the camera division was shut down, and still through down and have bought pretty much every NX lens, the nx1 battery grip, the varavon NX1 armor cage, etc. The initial frenzy over the shut down allowed me to get all this gear at a greatly reduced cost. Yes, the resale value will eventually take a hit, but honestly that only matters if you're going to sell everything, which I really have no intention of doing at this current time. I've gotten so much out of this system, and I think my grand total investment is still less than a new nikon d850 body, or a new sony a7s or a7r. I've made my money many times over using the nx1 and nx gear and honestly haven't felt a huge call to upgrade since buying into the system in may 2015. Honestly, I'd like to wait a bit longer and pick up another nx1 or a nx500 body, or both, but the current going rate is still pretty damn high.

F-Log out of the box is not that pleasing (not to everyone at least), it has a green tint when compared to the in-camera profiles. I used the X-T2 + BM Video Assist 4K to create LUTs for F-Log that emulate the film simulations of the camera (at -2 shadows, -2 highlights, -4 color). I don't know how my LUTs will work with the X-H1, but I've found one of the sources that was used in the Slashcam test, and applied my LUTs to it. Although I can't tell you how accurate they are, I can see that we'll have some room to grade before the footage breaks. Original F-Log frame F-Log + Provia LUT F-Log + Velvia LUT F-Log + Astia LUT F-Log + Classic Chrome LUT F-Log + Pro Neg Hi LUT F-Log + Pro Neg Std LUT Since I emulate the flattest in-camera settings, you need to apply some contrast and maybe saturation.

X-H1 F-Log test:

My girlfriend doesn't think it is a lot. The benefits of top LCDs are: 1) they can use a different screen tech (such as e-ink), which can bring other benefits such as conserving battery power and better outdoor visibility. 2) can squeeze on yet more info (leaving off info from the main screen, freeing up space for other things or just simply to see the scene more clearly without clutter), and viewable from other angles (for instance a top LCD is handy for street shooters who shoot from the hip).

Sorry, I was flying and just caught up with this. It's a GH5 with V-Log with a Canon 24-105 1st generation lens. I am falling in love with this camera more and more every shoot; I don't quite see what so many people have against it. With a speedbooster you get super 35 4K 10 bit log with a robust, yet not bloated, codec. Plus, a really tough body and battery that will get through some of the hardest shoots without overheating or dying:-) And the image is just beautiful! 12 stops of dynamic range are definitely enough for most normal shooting, I rarely end up blowing anything out, even when exposing on the bright side. The V log is a bit noisy, but the noise looks a lot like film grain, I think it adds a nice texture. Also, all the screenshots are taken from footage shot in 1080P 10 bit, not 4K.

I fully expect it will one day. At least, manufacturers seem to pour a lot of resources into trying. I always knew the NX1 was a slut. ?

This is just a little something I shot on the subway, absolutely nothing special. But it made me think. I used to shoot a lot of casual video on the streets. But ever since I became passionate about stills, more specifically street photography I never do it. Mostly because when recording video I feel like Im just missing out on great stills. An this was no exception. In fact its 1.5 years since I shot casual video out and about if we don't count "test shots" around the house. The irony is that I started shooting street photography to become a better videographer. I used to love shooting video. The best part for me was composition and grading. So I started taking Raw stills in order to get to practice bigger quantities of grading. The plan was to eventually make a video about it and recommend all aspiring videographers to shoot a lot of stills. Just like the DP's in the Zacuto shoot out says (forgot which). But along the way it completely switched on me. I started liking stills more. Specially the challenge. To capture a whole scene, the entire atmosphere, all the feelings in one single frame. Compressing an entire story into one single moment. 
Im not in anyway implying that Im good at it. But I love trying. Now when I watch vlogging street shooters on youtube, you know the type, Gopro in the hot shoe and a montage to hip-hop beats, I just get annoyed. In the video montages they miss out on so many great images. 
Same thing for me today. In this short video montage of nothingness I see at least 4 potentially great images. So, thats it. I still recommend all here that are aspiring DP's to shoot more stills. With something like a GRii you can always have it ready. Look for light, composition and story.
 Just be aware that you might switch to the dark side like I have. Don’t underestimate its power. What about you guys? Who shoots stills, why, why not? (btw, really soft lens in action here. It looked awesome with gorilla grain on my computer but I removed it since youtube always messes it up imo. And therefor its pretty darn soft. A couple of focus misses doesn't help either.)

BMPCC + Sigma 30mm (mft). Color grade based on my BozBMDFilm to Rec709 LUT. Download Here: https://bulentozdemirfilms.wordpress.com/downloads/bmcc-bmpcc-bozbmdfilm-to-rec709-lut/

Yes, and in combination with a Tiffen Low light contrast filter. But Keep in mind my objective here was to challenge the "unacceptable noise" comment that some people hold against this camera, and others in the same class in general. A little Neat Video goes a long way. Also, by the time you add in more contrast or an s-curve to the footage, a lot of those artifacts perceptually go bye-bye. This isn't anything new. It has to be done on a lot of Alexa, RED and certaintly Blackmagic systems as well. Sony set such a high and impractical bar in my opinion. The high ISO capability is literally teaching a generation of how to NOT properly light and expose a dark scene, esstentially stripping away a really good tool that has been succesfully used for many of decade. And now the expectation (bad practice) of using very high ISO gets wrapped up in other systems, like the GH5s. It still comes with other compromises too. Darkness IS information in terms of narrative work, and I feel like I'm going to be evangelizing this more and more, and I'm already blue in the face as it is. ? Yes, this emoji is yellow. The viewer does not need to see every detail in a scene to comphrehend what the scene is relating. That would fall more into line with documentation. A narrative piece is not a document of antiquity, it's a story, therefore an illusion. The human brain is really good at filling in the blank spaces. All you need to give the viewer are hints, the brain parses the rest. It's pretty remarkable, and testimate to how powerful the mind is. Take my profile image of the man sitting in the car. You only see small hints of a car, some seat, some steering wheel, both descending into shadow. But you as the viewer know he's sitting in a car and not a train. Correct? It's what you don't see that's drawling you in. So going back to high ISO, do you really want to see all the details in the scene? I say, shadows are friends, not combatants. I learned this actually in my fine art classess in college some 22 years ago, and it was practiced knowledge long, long, long before that, and has been effective for all kinds of mediums within the arts and sciences.

This is way above my head, but doesn't this have more to do with denoising being able to reduce macroblocking than it does with bit depth? The banding and color problems in all these shots seem to be from color profiles and compression artifacts, not bit depth. None of these image problems are primarily correlated with an 8 bit codec. They're far more to do with macroblocking. Both of the shots of the guy by the stairs, for instance, look awful and riddled with compression artifacts. Admittedly, the sunset does look a lot better, improved by what's a pretty clever trick. Generally, I feel like there's some "10 bit magic" that I don't see. My experience has always been that the strength of the codec and the color space and gamma assigned it is far more important than bit depth. The F5, for instance, still had a lot of banding in 10 bit XAVC or whatever the codec is, because the bit depth is too low and gamma too flat. (This has been improved upon since in future updates.) Denoising is definitely powerful! I've used it before to remove compression artifacts in similar situations. I just don't understand what bit depth has to do with it. It's macroblocking that's a far far bigger issue in all these examples. Unless my eyes deceive me...

For the banding removal mentioned earlier, when you have massive banding, it can be useful to add grain and then apply temporal noise reduction. I applied a very strong grade to one of my X-T2 F-Log clips here, to show some nasty banding (view in full size): Then I created a mask for the sky in Resolve, applied some heavy grain and then some heavy temporal noise reduction in Resolve's denoiser, and voilá. Obviously this will only work if you can mask out the problematic area and if there's no real detail there.

Wouldn't they have fixed that in production models vs. pre-production models. All these videos are from beta-testers some that go back to November 2017

It becomes strange... such a triumphal tone on scene... supported by onomatopeic signs: LOL :D *cough cough*... what's next level Emanuel? Did you sometimes read your lines and conclusions or always acts as baby: People that don't think as you are: "crippled by mother nature", idiots tied for objects thеy "already left their pennies for"... while you are martyr who was "crucified" in this forum, forced to keep "tongue at cheek". Now I'm professionally interested: what do you think, now when you are obviously show all of us your full selfadmiration glory after being crucified... will you resurect with Fuji roll-off traces to us ignorants?

It's not problem to sell GH5 and Voigtlanders. I have long way behind in testing/playing/shooting cameras and lenses, and I somehow managed to always keep minimal and best suited for my needs. So it is not too hard to get also and Fuji - if it's necessary I have many friends and.... well, supporters, abroad. But I like to try, am open to every advance steps, although shooting is my third- or fourth-ish activity. I waited Fuji to get IBIS, playing with friend's XT2. But from what I've seen so far - all in all, as semiprofessional tool, it suits to my needs less than GH5.

Prediction- they'll put even more cool stuff in for a great price, and people who use it to shoot flower videos will still complain about it.

The 105 f1.8 might be a great lens. If you stop it down you will get heptagonal highlights, with only 7 blades. If you want to shoot at f2.5 then the classic 105 f2.5 AI/AIS might be a better, cheaper and lighter option, with the same 52mm filter thread that the 50mm f1.2 has. It has the advantage, as a stills lens, of being usable with the OVF focus screen at full aperture. Anything faster than that and you probably need to switch to live view to be sure of focus as the focus screen is optimised for f2.8 zooms (unless they have improved in current models)

No. Personally, i find tricky shooting log on small 8-bit cameras with 3" displays and no proper exposure tools. Also certain types of jobs (interviews, run & gun etc) just don't warrant the time/budget or even necessity for extensive color grading. Not to mention not everyone has got years of color grading skills/experience despite the tools basically being free today.. This is when great color science, white balance, highlight roll-off and Fuji's film simulations & image settings come in useful for getting deliverable SOOC footage. Do keep in mind people shooting on ARRI, RED, BMDs etc most often have expensive cine glass, lighting and DOP skills than the sub-$3K camera shooters. Then you gotta factor in shooting Raw or ProRes on an optimized Super35 sensor at ideal base range ISOs. Having intra-frame compression vs inter like on most sub-$3K cameras also helps leagues in motion. This is where 1DC,1DX2,5D4 shine imo.

The outdoor shots look great to me. The indoor shots need some grading though. Nice colors, dynamic range and no crazy overprocessing (like my GH5)

Yes, but as I learned from this topic, what you called mashed oranges and blues is highly esteemed image and make huge impression to some masters who are not "crippled by mother nature" - to quote courteous Mr Emanuel. Very interesting experience: trying to express some doubts about Fuji color strategy - judging from these examples - results here as hardest blasphemy!

It's time to sum up my findings on the topic so far and invite you to comment. First of all, I bought an HDR TV, finally. There is no risk in doing that, and it doesn't have to be about 'adopting new technology'. Everyone here should do this. You will watch content in better quality, any content, including your own. Now I can answer my own question I asked a couple times in this thread. Does SDR on an HDR display look better or worse? Better, in most cases. With one exception: LOG footage that has been graded and still is somewhat flat. Some may find it aesthetically pleasing in SDR. On an HDR TV, you'd simply say, lacks contrast. NOT good. HDR does look better. Unfortunately, it's not easy or cheap to monitor and grade it now. This will change. As we discuss this, not a single TV panel for SDR is manufactured anymore. It's the future. Our rec_709 stuff doesn't become unendurable over night, that's the good news. Okay, you may say, it's like the jump from HD to 4k. We kept up with the times, but HD is still okay. Wrong. HDR will change much more. It may prove that your current equipment is not suitable to achieve the level of quality you demand and see elsewhere. That's the bad news.

Fuji X Photographer Jonas Rask's somewhat, er, idiosyncratic X-H1 test vid:

The video looked really good playing in a condensed window. Once I went full screen, it was pretty soft with some considerable macroblocking. I can play other compressed 1080 videos/footage full screen on my 2k/10bit monitor and my 8bit 55" UHD 4K television from other cameras and it still holds up. I'm thinking the h.264/200 Mbit is really crippling the image in this camera. I hope Fuji can address this is a firmware update. 8bit 4:2:0 in h.264 @ 200 Mbits (in 2018 no less) is not going to cut it for larger grades, they should have totally gone with HEVC @ 200 Mbit. Good thing the camera has good color, I would just shoot with the baked in colors. Wow, I'm surprised it looks so muddy in 1080. Reminds me of Canon before they went 4k. But man, those colors though. So rich.

Isn't that because your projecting optically? Can you please site some evidence of this?

I think you've come a lot closer to unpacking it in words than me. Great breakdown, much appreciated. I do some 3D modeling, rendering, animation, etc. There's a parallel to what you just described in rendering as well. When you're going for hyper realism, you employ things like ambient occlusion, global lighting, soft raytraced shadows, etc. These properties give the model a more atmospheric/muted look and feel, smooth gradients, smooth rolloffs, etc. In fact, you often have to crank up your specular highlights for reflective/refractive surfaces with AO. Top render is without AO/ Bottom with:

Yup. The preproduction 200mbit HD that was released is what I always liked the most from the GH4 and it has many times tempted me to buy one. Specially now when they are so cheap. I just wished I could get it in the smaller bodies.

That's how it is :-) - I'm a old little troll :-)

No, I can't tell "with confidence". I only ever made 5-6 test shots with slomos. One was a fast jump to my microphone shock mount on the table from 6 feet distance to close up, AF set to center. With this 5 x slomo, it nailed the focus perfectly in every frame. But then, the motif was black with sharp outlines and lying on bright wood. What this test showed clearly was that the image quality is really poor then. That's why I didn't do more slomo tests. AF is good in general, but it all depends on the mode, if you chose the right one. The most reliable modes are those which involve tracking, for example face detection. They can be called perfect. But there are caveats there as well. See Max Yuryevs and Jason Wongs tips on Youtube. A vlogger's face may be constantly sharp as he/she moves forwards and backwards, but there may be perceptible breathing of the oof background, and this also depends on the AF speed and (here it gets complicated) on the lens used. Fact is, the AF works best if it has little to do. When the lens is stopped down to it's maximum resolution and the focal length allows hyperfocal distance. What's the point then? Here is a real world example from a wedding videographers view. It's a bright day, and you are outside. In 2160p, the display gets so dark, you really can't see your image! In AF mode, there s no peaking to check critical focus. So what I do is either focus manually through the viewfinder (with IBIS and OIS you need only the most basic rig, like a more comfortable *grip*, if at all) or, if I am to use a gimbal, use a bright field monitor (i.e. the smallHD Focus, which has peaking in AF mode). Touch AF doesn't work then, for obvious reasons. I then stop down the aperture to - typically - f7. Yes, I do lose nice DoF effects, but the AF won't fail then. One of the biggest advantages of having a camera with good low light capabilities is to be able to use, say, f5.6 in an available light situation. Also, shooting with 120 fps. You need five times the light for that. Then again, since the HD quality of this camera is nothing to write home about anyway, you'll want to use a lower ISO to get a cleaner image. Lenses: too many aspects to consider. If good and reliable AF is essential, use good Sony lenses. Or perhaps the new Sigma 16mm, the reviews suggest it's the perfect gimbal lens for the A6500. There is no easy answer ...

Thanks for the clarification / update. That does make sense. Off Topic: Do we know yet that the D850 sensor was made by Sony??? I know people were claiming it was made by TowerJazz, but as Thom Hogan pointed out, that is doubtful. Not familiar with the 105 AI-S lens myself. Probably great for video, less so for stills. Even the D750 with its lowly 24mp full frame sensor and with an AA filter could out-resolve some of the vintage lenses and AF-D lenses for stills. If the D850 screen is anything at all like the screen on my D750, you might not need focus peaking. My D750 screen is very sharp, and when you press the center button, it will automatically punch in. Much easier to manual focus my D750 than it is to manual focus my Sony a6000, a6300, a6500, a5100, even though the sony bodies have focus peaking and can punch in as well. In fact, I often turn OFF focus peaking when using my a6500 and just rely on punching in, because, Sony. The drawback for the D750 is if you want to move the AF focus point (which is the punch in point when using MF), it is slower to move around than the Sony bodies (at least it is for me). Plus the focus point is one size. I don't know if on Canon bodies, for instance, the focus box can be different sizes when you are moving it around or not. On the D750, the focus box is small, which may or may not be good depending on your needs. Oh... forgot; focus ring on Nikon turns backwards compared to Canon, so there is that...

I have been considering a similar choice for lens, and I have my sights set on the Panasonic 12-60 f/2.8-4 It's lightweight with Power I.S. image stabilization and the GH5S doesn't need as fast of glass for exposure with the GH5S's much better high ISO performance. I know your looking to pair the lens with a GH5, and I must admit: Every time I shoot a pro job with the GH4/5 I rent the Sigma 18-35 and a Speedbooster!

Can’t you get your focus in HD, then change a custom setting back to 4K for record? Focus peaking with the NX500 required a few steps as well, but in the end it forced me to think about the frame more.

Unless a person has a specific need (perhaps a hardcore landscape photographer) then I just don't see the point in going beyond 24 megapixels. It is like people who film video at greater than 6K resolution. We're just talking total overkill here, and there are downsides when it comes to processing times and storage space.

I’m sure about it, that is precisely what they did. They, Samsung, kept vehemently dening the shut down of the camera line, in fact, making it a circus of rumors that led those into a dead end camera. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a great camera, but it’s still a dead end, especially if you bought into their eco system of lenses. Basically, they never admitted to it, so that they could dump their existing stock on hand. If that isn’t a burn, then it’s clearly, at the very least, deception.

Panasonic’s 1080p really does look nice. It’s a shame they don’t offer the higher bitrate 1080p on their lower tiered cameras.

You can set it to 16-235 in camera to save yourself the post. If you set it to 0-255 in camera, you need to bring back the shadow and highlight detail in post. This gives a bit better colour, bit better flexibility in post and uses full RGB luma range of the 8bit codec. 16-235 is the 'safe' range. I don't know why Premiere and MacOS cannot just interpret the file correctly in the first place, but that's Apple and Adobe for you.

@Inazuma I do not have the time to write my complete thoughts (good for the people trying to read all the pages I usually write!), these days, because of a couple of deadlines, but you got the point. My perspective is from a "blue collar" film and video technician (with "white collar" education I must say!) standpoint, and the absolute/perfect image is not my holy grail. I want good ergonomics and reliability when I work (heat dissipation/power management) with good image without too much post (with the ability to do a little tweaking later, if I will). That is why I found my sweet spot in NX, and C100mkII cameras. Workhorse cameras! When I work in bigger projects, usually we use rented cameras, there is no shame in renting equipment! I am also a hobbyist photographer, and with the NX, I can even do a couple of photographic jobs per year, and everyone is happy so far. Win win situation. I have said myself millions of times, the ISO performance in video is disappointing, but then again, it doesn't change the way I shoot, or creates any issues. I would gladly take a NX with a couple of stops better ISO performance, but it isn't a deal breaker, because we managed to do our job with worst equipment, not a long time ago (smaller sensors, slower lenses, big/heavy/expensive lighting e.t.c). Now, the only manufacturer that brings new tricks (and abilities) to the table, is certainly Panasonic. Right now there are so many GH5's around me, that I buy equipment with those in mind (Edelkrone GH5 version, SmallHD Focus GH5 version e.t.c), for some personal reasons (disclaimer here!), I won't go m43 right now (even though I have used the LS300 a few times the last couple of years for some small projects), but the truth is, GH5 and GH5s, are pushing the envelope. I would be waiting a little bit longer, to see where the market heads. Until then, I will keep my 2014 cameras, close to the next decade, and that, is a triumph of the system, on its own device.

I would bet if Jon would have said the above pictures were from this new Fuji camera everyone on here would have said Shit, they look great, I am buying that Beautiful color output Fuji Today LoL. These new GH5, GH5s are NOT the old Panasonic colors wise we have known for years.

There's a feature slated to be shot on the NX1 that's going to hit several festivals, with the hope and actual intent to bring some positive attention to the camera. Here's the guy's rig. I wish him well. Feel guilty? Corporations don't have feelings, and I seriously doubt the Samsung family does much emoting.

Please don't tell us it is a Arri Alexa LF with a 30k Cooke Anamorphic lens on it.

But Main and Soft don't perform the transformation from Alexa Wide Gamut to Rec709 primaries. So the hues are "wrong" - the are the colours of an acquisition colour space. GHa LogC to Alexa X 2 gamut gives colour as Arri intended, I'm thinking. But Main and Soft are simply slightly more contrasty and more saturated versions of Log C (with saturation roll-off?). Now, this might be of interest as a look in itself, especially if people are grading Arri LogC directly and leaving the colour space untouched. But I would suggest to you that if Main and Soft are your interpretation of a film-like Rec709 look with saturation roll off and other good things, then you should transform the primaries. The ColorChecker shots above demonstrate just how far out Main is. The hue, saturation and value of colours are significantly skewed as they haven't been transformed to Rec709 primaries. So am I right in saying that if I want to match Alexa colour, GHa LogC plus a LogC to Alexa X 2 gamut lut is the way to go?

Taping up a Samsung logo in a Samsung advert by Samsung PR team. Interesting. They must not want Galaxy users to get any ideas about getting a proper camera

2500 euro? From actual tempo of rising prices, in my purple dream I imagine that at 2020. new GHx will be 3500e

I think that people who want the image Fuji X series cameras give will overlook or work around the ergonomic shortcomings of this new camera, while those who don't will continu to happily shoot with their preferred camera. 'S all good, man.

Over the course of several years that I've been following Kinefinity and owning the KineMini I've found that there is a certain group that has a negative bias towards the company and try to pick apart every little detail that they don't do right. It's like Trump supporters still moaning about Hillary's emails. Yes, I've been critical of many of their choices and many times I considered moving to a different brand. Now I have a Terra 4K being delivered any day. Why? Because it is perfect for ME and MY line of work. But whatever. If you don't want it, don't buy it.