Leaderboard

Just for @BTM_Pix, there are now pics floating around of a banner showing the new Atomos Ninja V - a 5", 1000nit, recorder/monitor that does 4k60p and Prores raw. I've held off on a external recorder because I want it to be somewhat future proof and do 60p, and the 7" screens are too big for my shooting style, but this might just fit the bill.

Here's my full review. I also wrote a more detailed post at No Film School.

The 5 things that would make the update WELL worth it. 4K Slow Mo Canon Batteries Full sized HDMI Flip out screen

Only HDMI, "for DSLR & Mirrorless Cameras" but ProRes RAW? Whatever that means. GH5(s)? Sony? 5" HDR 1000 Nits is amazing as well. And how would - if at all - 4K RAW work from higher resolution sensor? Maybe the Pixel count on the A7SIII will stay the same and it will still slightly crop. The GH5s would work beautifully as well with its 10MP sensor. The GH5 though. Idk...

Let's put all this on rest, OK? Let's focus strictly on the topics please. This is Andrew's house. His good efforts simply don't deserve it. Nor your past contributions and fellowship, Jon! I'd still appreciate to follow your posts and juicy insights over these boards (your readers need you! : ) so refrain yourself to write any personal attacks addressed to others, I guess we all beg you. We are all human beings. Opposite POVs can be written without offending the other side. No one likes to be publicly attacked, isn't it? As much as it is really unpleasant to see you or anyone else to be attacked here too. Only goodwill may able to be considered welcome. Regards to everyone, E :-)

Another image leaked, looks more and more like a collaborative effort together with Sony on this puppy: And yes! A headphone port confirmed!

Looks like a Canon release....

FYI, there is no reason to ever use any of the "maximized" variants in raw2cdng. 10-bit raw can be all you need, if it isn't linear. ML raw is linear though, and 10-bit is noticeably worse than 12- and 14-bit even though it is better than, for example, 10-bit raw from DJI cameras. 12-bit is actually quite good.

In my experience, PC v Mac threads never really die until people end up debating the benefits of Linux

Hypothetically speaking, would something that did the following be of any interest to Panasonic (both GH5 and non-GH5) owners ? 8 focus points (pulled from current lens position so can be either using touch AF or manual etc) 4 auto transition speeds between points Manual transition between points Manual focus adjustment All driven from dedicated hardware switches. And wirelessly. From a handheld device. Hypothetically speaking obviously......

The JVC LS300 was great, a lot were sold to wedding and event shooters, we even use one for a documentary series (the cable station cut our preferred C100mkII because of the codec, by the way) and it brought a lot of innovation to the table. If any of the big players had such a camera (sold a little bit less than a A7Sii, at the time) it would have been a huge hit. EVF unusable, monitor close to unusable (using external one at all times and Zaccuto EVF). Some people still use one together with their GH5 cameras. The main issue we have(had) was the severe crop in slow motion (I used my NX1 cameras exclusively for 100/120frames), the not so great J-log, and the sensor was quite noisy above 800ISO, or we were spoiled by the C100. Definitely reluctant to use on 1600ISO (which I believe is a sane expectation to have in the end of the century). All the rest were amazing. Seriously waiting to something above LS300, what we lack are cameras near 5.000euros. C200/FS5ii are (will be) expensive for my use. EVA/UrsaMP also. Panasonic fit everything one needs on a (huge) hybrid body, why not have similar features and specs on a slightly bigger cine/video form? Very excited about the Atomos 5", but for people wanting only monitoring, I doubt a recorder will ever bring the same portability and ease of use. I used the BlackMagic 5" once and it was nothing like the Focus. For everyone else, it will be an instant hit. Especially for a price close to SmallHD Focus monitor.

Apples reasons for developing their own solutions for the entire chain has a lot to do with reliability. Their reliability comes from controlling all the bits and making sure they work together. The sum is a system that is greater than the sum of its parts because there is coherent intention throughout. I think it’s a bit cynical to presume it’s all about “locking in” it’s users.

Where/when can I send my money?

Fantastic news!! This makes a FS700 much more attractive, as I too didn't want to use a 7" monitor with it. It was BMD's first ever MFT camera. I don't imagine they will do an inactive mount again, not now they have the experience of building active MFT mount cameras.

JVC has quite a large stand at NAB I too am hopefully JVC will release another MFT cinema camera. I believe this was a mistake by both BMD and Panasonic not to release a locking MFT mount with their cinema cameras. (Like Sony has done with their E mount, with the FS7mk2 and the new VENICE). Yup, the MFT mount was a *strength* of that camera, while its biggest negative was perhaps its name. Exactly why it was a mistake of Panasonic not to have an EVA1 MFT camera. As the EVA1 left nowhere to go for Panasonic's **own customers**!! Way to go Panasonic in neglecting your faithful followers. Meanwhile with Sony you could buy a lenses for your a5100 and keep on using it all the way up to the VENICE!!

In fact Don : ) And that's the million dollars question this weekend, really Dennis :-)

I see this from a slightly different point of view. The main "pro" that I see is that it has the potential to improve workflows for those who are already using the compatible equipment (FCPX and external recorders) or are willing to change their workflow to do so. The main "con" that I see is that this is quite a deliberate move on Apples behalf to further separate themselves and their ecosystem from being globally compatible. As someone who is now an Apple user (MBP, iPhone, iPads) but didn't used to be (PC, Android) I became acutely aware of how Apple will deliberately do things to restrict global compatibility and drive people to an all-Apple ecosystem. My distain for Apple is significant, and perhaps only surpassed by my distain for Microsoft, who are also masters of playing this game, which is one of the main reasons I changed platforms. It's not the creation of a new codec that is the risk here, it's that it places a greater likelihood that other more open codecs will not receive as much attention or support. We have all suffered as the innocent bystanders in 'format wars' from Blu-ray v HD DVD to VHS v Beta and before that with Quad etc. Some of us have also suffered at the hands of a feature that promised interoperability but was unusable due to some kind of bug, but unfortunately the manufacturer never fixed it and we lost months or years waiting and hoping that it would be rectified. Manufacturers are out for themselves and will shaft the customer as much as is possible to get away with while still gaining sales by being the 'least worst'. Take Canon and ML as an example of what was possible vs what was delivered.

Very interested in the ninja v

Oh, that I can answer no problem (pretty sure I did earlier.) No - FCPX cannot work with DNG RAW files. Shooting RAW requires Resolve (for most of us) to debayer and utilize the purpose and power of shooting in RAW. But do keep in mind that most producers (even shooting ARRI, BM etc.) don't shoot in RAW specifically because of the workflow requirements. They DO shoot in ProRes specifically because of the ease of the workflow. Because we now know (little sparrows...not formally because NDAs exist everywhere - sorry if that upsets you) that it will provide the power/post capabilities of true RAW - it is better than Cinema DNG because of everything I just wrote. Relax a little. Stop shouting hype and zero content. Life is complex and doesn't always happen the way you want it to. Just wait a few days and you'll know everything you need to.

Very nice. I love your delivery as well.

I actually commend Sony for this. Their color science in the original fs5 was beyond terrible. The skin tones in this video, however, look fantastic. I know it is early yet but the skin tones appear to be superior to the EVA1 and the c200 and I am a Canon apologist. Externally, you have all the framerates you require, so if you don't mind removing the top handle and running an atomos, I think this thing could surpass most cameras in this price point in terms of IQ. The skin tones really do look gorgeous. I am surprised by Sony because they usually cater to the specs crowd, but this targets those of us who care about the image quality more than anything, which is a nice change of pace.

@IronFilm I'll send you the outtake where I say I'm working on doing better audio because of you

To my eyes it looks like the camera is the same shape as before but has been placed in front of some other unit? Perhaps like the Panasonic YAGH or another camera?

After a weird winter of weather, some family health issues and some financial issues, I am finally ready to resume production on my film. The financial issues forced me to sell off the two lenses I was using. After a few months of digging through my closet and testing almost every lens I had, I finally settled on two lenses I didn't have but cost me a fraction of what my original lenses cost. Here are a couple examples from a final lens test I did the other day with my lead actor. The first two are from the Canon EF USM 28mm f/1.8... And the next two are from the Canon 50mm f/1.4... Both are great lenses that cost me a lot less than one of the lenses I was using before.

I think @TheRenaissanceMan and @Zak Forsman have a set of LeicaR. I briefly had the 35-70mm f/3.5 but I kinda liked it too much and couldn’t see myself affording many primes to go along with it. @JordanWright

WOW, looks good, great colours. Great spot to film.

Here's a quick little spot I shot for a local restaurant's facebook cover yesterday, very quick turnaround because those Sammy colors are so gorgeous! This is basically right out of camera, only a tiny bit of tweaking on a few shots. Normal gamma, color sliders at 1.99, sharpness -10, contrast -4, saturation -2, on both the NX1 and NX500 (the only difference being the master black level on the NX1 was at 15 and obviously the NX500 doesn't have this setting). While this isn't showcasing of increased dynamic range per say, I do really like the way it came out looking. password is jacks

Premiere has issues with missing metadata. It doesn't care if the values are stretched. What happens is that it can infer missing metadata correctly when the values are shifted and zero padded to 16 bits. Also, there is 14-bit CinemaDNG, but Premiere has trouble with 14-bit uncompressed (not with compressed though!). Now that all ML dng is compressed, it should work fine with Premiere at 14 bits.

Nice demo. It is always a good idea to show foreground and background surfaces/objects when doing any kind of focus test. Your use of the foreground wall superbly shows the rate of the programmed focus pull as well as the precise focus "fall-off."

Here you go

Oh I will not contest that FF cameras doesn't have 16 bits at all. 14 tops, and that is in Photo mode. Heck video we are talking 8 bit other than the GH5, GH5s I could ever afford. And I don't think sensor size has much to do with bits anyways, look at the F65 above. Plus in reality I have no clue the specs of Any newer Nikon. Out of my price range for the nicer ones. But every camera that has Raw output is pretty high Bit rate wise in Raw. But I am not sure what Bit Rate this New ProRes Raw has to be? I have not read the White Paper. I thought I read 10 bit someplace?

Yeah, would've thought the DC in and the TC input would make a new one very relevant for where they want to pitch the GH5s. Maybe Top Gear didn't ask for it

It is a little bit confusing, but what ML does is not equivalent of 12 bit vs 14 bit raw photos. Shades are mapped out differently in "true" 12 bit vs 14 bit raw photos. ML just truncates bottom bits and does not change values in higher stops, AFAIK. Anyway, a theory is just a theory. Check in real life. If you see the difference in grading, that is great, but it would be nice to see those clips/dngs too.

I would not put it past Sony to have the A7s mk III using it. But yeah I think we may see it in quite a few cameras. Surely Apple had to give Companys a heads up it was coming out with ProRes Raw? Obliviously Atomos knew!

I moved to Apple from PC / Android and I did so knowing that I was paying more for a given level of hardware performance. What I am getting, however, is a higher level of personal performance, and this is what I am paying extra for. The amount of time I spent in the PC world struggling to get Microsoft Windows to properly use the BrandA driver for the BrandA chip on the motherboard with the BrandB driver for the BrandB plug-in interface card to connect to the BrandC device I want to use... On Mac I spend time working on my work, not on trying to get my computer to do what I tell it. My dad was in charge of the PCs for a large educational institution and once had the pleasure of ordering a custom-built server (~$10k worth of high-end hardware) and after a month of not being able to make it work he sent it back to the distributor. Luckily the distributor was happy to take it back as the school bought large amounts of equipment from them. The problem was that it wouldn't complete an installation of the OS, and the problem was a known issue and the manufacturer of the RAID controller, the HDD manufacturer and the motherboard manufacturer were all blaming each other as to why the combination didn't work. At Apple, if something doesn't work, someone gets yelled at and told to fix it, which works because they control all the moving pieces. You will notice that Apple vs PC articles that recommend PC over Mac often point out that: the hardware performance (ie, MFLOPS or certain chipsets) are cheaper in PC, that for every good feature a Mac has there's a PC that has a better specification, etc. The flaws to this logic are that CPU speed is not workflow speed, and that Laptop A might have a better screen, and Laptop B might have a better battery life, but you can't buy a Laptop with the screen from A and the battery from B. Articles that recommend Mac over PC often talk about how 'things just work' which unfortunately isn't as true with the last few OSX versions as it used to be, but I sure as hell don't spend time on forums reading about manufacturers blaming each other for why my mouse won't work. In case I sound like an Apple fanboy, I'm really not. Apple are monopolistic corporate criminals who are large enough to exploit the weaknesses in international taxation law to basically shaft every country they do business in, which would justifiably put any of us who did it in jail in a matter of minutes, but they're big enough to get away with it. The reason I buy their stuff is they suck slightly less than the alternatives.

I did a bit of reading before my previous reply and I didn't get a straight answer on LUTs vs floating point algorithms. The logic on LUTs was that they have two main problems: a lack of data points, and potential issues in-between the data points. The thread that I read included people saying that even a LUTs with thousands of data points are still the equivalent of a curve with only ten control points on it, so in terms of matching to the foibles of a sensor put through a cameras internal profile transforms, it is potentially going to have a bit of error. The second issue about what happens in-between the points isn't that interpolation isn't possible (with all the variations of linear / quadratic / polynomial / etc functions available) it's that there's no consistency between standards and so although your program might do a good job of interpolation, who knows what the software that the LUT was designed on was doing or if they match. This would become much more important the lower the number of data points in the LUT becomes. What I took from that was that RCM and ACES are ok and LUTs are a question-mark. In the end the proof is in the pudding (as the common saying goes) so it's just if you prefer the final result or not. When I think about this stuff I get enthusiastic about taking some time to try and reverse-engineer what a particular LUT or transform is doing so I can learn from it, but then life happens and my energy fades.. one day I might get around to it. I haven't forgotten my homework.

It's interesting that we've got a city getting run over by camera geeks... and then we get images served up like that.

ProRes RAW to tape

Peace everyone. Let's discuss the exciting BMPCC 4k.

Think that had more to do with the name 'JVC' giving flashbacks to mom & dad DV camcorders. Apparently there were some letdowns like display quality as well. But all who have tried it had seemed positively suprised by what it was able to do... and now many quite significant firmware updates later, it's quite capable. Really like the idea of an APS-C sensor behind a MFT mount leading to new possibilities. Wouldn't mind the new Blackmagic pocket rocket to be capable of such as well.

Put the picture in Photoshop and raise the shadows. You can see something written on the bulge.

short film with settings RGB 1.99 , sat-2, sharpness -10, contrast -2. MB at 10. With anamorphic lens Bolex 16/32/1.5x.

@jonpais Interesting thread. My (little) experience on film sets is more than enough to understand the benefits of being able to prepare a focus pull in advance. In order to add to the completeness of this thread for those lurking out there, in addition to the benefits of cinema lenses already mentioned, IIRC they are also designed so that all the lenses in a set are the same weight (which means not having to re-balance gimbals or adjust steadicam rig counterweights when changing lenses), will also share the same filter size (to enable one set of filters) and will have the same spacing of gears so that remote controllers for focus pulls or zoom lenses don't have to be adjusted. The total hourly rate of a film set is absolutely huge, and these lenses are designed so that they are quick to change and use.

First publishable ML RAW test. 700D, ML RAW, Sigma 18-35. Not a great example of any aspect of film-making, but might still be of interest as an example of lesser film-makers with lesser equipment One thing I found surprising was that the ISO noise from the 700D (not the quietest camera of all time, especially at 800-3200 in this video) was quite organic and natural looking. As the noise changed a lot between shots I had a go at the technique that @kidzrevil has mastered of NR+Grain to make the video more consistent. Enjoy

Guy has 6 posts on here and 5 of them are Totally Retarded! Good way to start off.

What is Panasonic going to be showing? Check out the Kinefinity booth too!

Working ok with no issues at the moment. Really helpfull for match color style of different lumix cameras and fine tunning on the field. Now that you have all my phone contacts, don't forget to call my mom and say her i will be on her house to lunch next saturday... Thanks a lot, you are great!!!

use this with your xc10. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/801131345-USE/redrock_micro_3_006_0001_m3_cinema_lens_adapter.html here's a video showing how it looks with the xc10. you obviously don't have to rig it up big like this example. I know in your other posts switching systems wasn't in the budget, so this might work.