Leaderboard

I tested the c300 mark ii with noise reduction and odyssey 7q raw recording vs the alexa. The results may shock you! Testing the Alexa Alexa Mini vs Canon C300 Mark II in terms of sharpness via the Odyssey RAW to Pro Res, with desharpen in post as well as in camera codec with noise reduction set to minus 1. This is a new feature in a firmware update. You have to go into other settings and turn on and to minus 1 - you can't just leave off. Graded with my chart2 lut - link to that and stills here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/u3qmjg7iysvxlsf/AABk1BLbSY1Yy9JoDSYjo1Qva?dl=0 also stills are there to see better please email me any questions or if you want the source files - I can get them to you on a sd card if you want.

Good news for Windows users: https://theblog.adobe.com/adobe-pro-video-apps-now-support-prores-export-on-windows/

A bit off topic again, but matches the previous conversation. "The camera is only a small part of any production, and any camera, even an α7S II, can produce good results in controlled conditions in the right hands. To me, it looks like they just ended up making more work for themselves by having to build out enormous rigs to make the a7SII usable and functional on a movie set. It’s slightly ironic that the production said they were interested in shooting with a very lightweight camera, yet they built it out to a size that makes it no smaller than what an ARRI ALEXA MINI or RED package would end up being. There is no doubt that the camera is capable of producing good results in the right hands, but this whole thing feels a little like it’s a publicity stunt to attract attention to a movie that hasn’t exactly received great reviews from film critics. It’s a bit of a pity that all the publicity surrounding this film is based on what camera they used and not that making a movie is a collaborative effort that depends on so many people and departments." From the newshooter article about that A7Sii film, which by the way had an - almost - 10.000.000$ budget and is a Sony made and distributed film. The article and comments are very interesting. https://www.newsshooter.com/2018/12/05/the-possession-of-hannah-grace-a-feature-film-shot-entirely-on-the-sony-a7sii/

Engineer on the FB group said they are talking to a 3rd party company about a monitor that can control the camera, then today they sent a link to buy the PortKeys LH5 HDR (which does have that ability) $279 5 inch 1500NITS 1080p Pinch to Zoom 3D LUTS, focus assist, false colors... 360 degree swivel arm available Jan. 1st Those two together would be a really great little package. I might buy both today. If the camera turns out to be a dud I can return it to B&H for 30 days. If it turns out to be incredible, then I'll sell my GH5 and get a 2nd for interview set ups.

I don’t understand. Are you saying you get more noise at 1/50, f4 iso4000 than at 1/50, f1.8 iso 4000? You’re giving the sensor over two stops less light. Why wouldn’t it be noisier? Have you tried taking photographs exposing at 1/50, f1.8 iso 4000 and 1/15, f4, iso 4000? Different lenses and apertures but somewhat equivalent light. what does it look like if you set the 35 prime to f4? Does it look different from the zoom f4?

I am mainly a lurker here - mainly - but I'll decloak and will say "yes, please" for that one. It'd be much more interesting, and useful, than the gear debates. But I also know that those topics cost a lot of time, and might go up in flames easily - so I'd be thankful, but also understanding if it doesn't happen :).

Wtf? Do people on this forum even work in production? EVERYTHING with a budget I work on is Alexa with fast lenses close to wide open, big soft LED sources, and practicals that play as real scene lighting. Low light levels are the current flavor, not only for speed (HUGE on paid work where producers are trying to save pennies anywhere they can), but because at those intensities, lighting looks about the same to the eye as it will to camera, as opposed to high levels where you'll often have no idea of your ratios until you pull out a meter or a monitor. This also means controlling your sources, blocking light, and choosing visually conducive locations becomes more important than ever, as your keys aren't nearly bright enough to knock errant light down. Maybe we need to make a topic detailing current industry visual and sound techniques, just so we're all on the same page with how things are done now and what matters.

Still not following you I'm afraid. Are you saying that the image is noisier at ISO 4000 1/50 F4 than ISO 4000 1/50 F1.8? In that case your exposure is brighter by nearly 2 stops due to F1.8 vs F4 so you cannot be exposing both shots the same with both the 50mm and 24-70. A brighter exposure always shows less noise at high ISOs, no matter what the camera.

A question (if it could be asked in this thread): Does the P4K absolutely need Resolve 15, or earlier Resolve 12.5 could grade a bit (in a very basic way) its shots and then export / edit all in FCPX for example? I have an old Mac Mini, good for Resolve 12.5, but weak for version 15. My P4K should come soon. PS: In searching the net about the option to make a Linux station with Resolve 15, this exchange between and Unknown and an Anonymous enlightened me not to go in that direction: ?

you guys know its nearly 2019 right ? time to upgrade, get a drone i say ?

I imagine that will depend on whether you are shooting all-I or not.

Hmm speaking of mp4 on a GH5 , interesting article about the GH5 firmware. And no I don't think there is a big difference between mp4 to ProRes 422 editing speed wise. They are both pretty simple Codecs. http://www.capetowntours.photography/panasonic-gh5-all-intra-firmware-update-10bit-400mbps-hdr/

And this guy sure as hell isn't going to be able to afford two wireless Lav mikes and receivers, or even a setup with both plugged into a recorder. And I doubt he is going to carry around a boom mike and stand either. That is why the average persons audio sort of sucks, but hey it is what it is. Use a shotgun mike on a adapter like @IronFilm suggested.

@thephoenix I don't really get your point. You are looking at the Fuji because you like Autofocus? But then you think about a bmpcc4k which is practically the opposite. There are adapters for EF to X, there is a speedbooster and there might be a metabones in the future. But most important, there will be a X-H2 for those who need IBIS. Personally I think the X-T3 is incredible value and part of that is, that they left the IBIS out. And can't complain about their lenses, I love their primes and they probably have two of the greatest zooms you can get for any system.

It is a dual gain camera.

Wow! That does make the camera even more interesting Looked up the link for the curious: https://suikui.myshopify.com/collections/monitor-on-camera-field/products/lh5-hdr-5-1500nit-4k-signal-support-touch-screen-1920-x-1080-hdmi-on-camera-monitor-with-hdr Supports 3D LUTs, ones you can upload yourself? If so I'll be tempted to buy this monitor myself.

I missed this earlier, but yes its far from ideal - although I have done it myself of the rare occasion and the results have been more than just passable. Remember, he's not discussing the meaning of existence with the subjects. It's talking to a lot of people while on the go, grabbing them for a couple soundbites. With this setup though, you could hand the mic to the subject and ask them to hold it waist level and point it up at their chin and you'd get easily usable results. Of course that also adds other risks, more time, etc. etc. Another option I just thought of is the Tascam DR10SG - it's a shotgun/recorder and comes with a handy extension arm (aka micro boom?). You could mount this on the camera, get a widish lens and when you're filming the mic could be pretty close to the source. I'd imagine if he's using an MFT sensor, 18mm would get close enough, perhaps even too close.

I actually do mean a shotgun I regularly see reporters using shotguns in a shock mount for quick interviews. Granted they're not also using the camera, so can physically stand between the lens and the subject, but still be out of frame (over the shoulder shot). They hold the mic kind of chest height and get great sound, with the mic being out of shot. My idea was to try to replicate that with a 1 man crew. The suggestion was based on not wanting a mic on screen, not wanting a lav and being a one man crew - this really is the only other option and will be much better than a camera mounted mic. Here's the only image I can find, and they're not using a shock mount, but to give you an idea - the camera is probably between the two mics we can see. The black one though, is more than likely in shot, so there's no need to use the shotgun, but you get the idea. Personally, we always use a reporters mic, because there's no problem in having the mic in the shot in an noisey envornment. However I've heard many snarkey reporters complain to me and my reporter that the only reason to use one of those is to watermark the footage with your logo on the flag. I disagree.

Holding a shotgun out at full arms length is a quick way to get tired arms! And I think you're perhaps meaning something like a Senal ENG-18RL, or other reporter's mic. But he doesn't want anything in frame... which I believe is a bad idea. There is a reason why reporters have it in frame! As when you're doing quick interviews, on ultra low budgets, in bad environments, then this is by far the best way to get passable audio. And yes, if he has a wiiide lens then that will allow him (and the mic) to get a lot closer while shooting which is beneficial for the audio.

Like Z Cam who this thread is about! And also Kinefinity. And DJI too (who are a chinese company, and their X5R & X7 cameras are impressive).

Since you don't tell us your other exposure settings it's hard for us to tell what is going on. What exposure mode are you in? Manual at 1/50? Aperture priority? Why would you need to go to ISO 4000 at F1.8 in a well lit bar? And of course any sensor underexposed has more noise. That's how CMOS works. It's not just a Z6 thing. You give it more light, move the lows into the mids, less noise.

With respect, I really wouldn't recommend that approach. With your brain trying to simultaneously balance two objects, and monitor both picture and sound, and meaningfully engage with another human being - trust me - something's gonna give! P.s - I retract 1 or 2 mins. Lav mics often take a little longer than that to get set up right.

If the signal is lower, the same noise will be more apparent. Or perhaps Nikon is doing some automatic corrections as suggested above.

I think it does. But vignette at 35mm shouldn't be much.

You are going to be shooting at 400 iso? I wouldn't think you'd need any noise reduction unless you were shooting higher.

I just bought the fringer ef-fx adapter and it works well with IS lenses and the autofocus works well on recent canon lenses. My Tamron is old I guess so it doesn’t autofocus as fluidly.

Guess what, after a long week-end of reflections, she has finally decided to go for the 300 PF (+ tc1.4), and get rid of her Tamron 150-600 ! The latter has become a real penalty as hiking is often involved when we operate. Now, if money was not an issue, the 500 PF would have been a target. We can find the 300 on the used market for around 1100€, which will be covered by selling both the Tamron and a Nikon D600 (already sold !). This little gem will better suit our needs ! So, now, as we will share the tools, we have to choose one or two complementary lenses : Nikkor 200-500 f5.6, 70-200 f2.8 or even a third party 100-400. As for a 80-200 f2.8, I need to check if it is compatible with my FTZ adapter (edit while writing, as it appears to be : https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/camera-lenses/dslr-lenses/index.page) Oh, that is good to hear ; I really want to add a 17-35 f2.8 and a 28-70 f2.8 to my kit, and the prices are really more interesting at mpb than here in France (c*ap, the 28-70 "Bourne" is not part of the official compatibility list...but it is an AFS and should work 100%). While the catapult launching is an appealing idea, I am not sure and, frankly, quite concerned about the potentially hazardous result ! I was born in Normandy, at the seaside, and, as far as I can remember, the dominant winds came from West, North-West. So, I fear my package from the UK could drift and finally land into Paris, right among the yellow riot ! I now live in the Alps, and it would be a long and perilous journey to reach my package during those dark days... Not counting the fact they block each roundabout, so it would really be looooong ? OK, I'm digressing....

Microphones are not like a telephoto lens such as a 200mm would be. Thus I suspect you're looking in the wrong places here in imagining what you think you want. Is this a seated staged interview? What kind of interviews are these? Indoors? Outdoors? Quite possibly the best way to get acceptable audio here while a solo shooter is (however the best step is to first not be a solo shooter! & have a soundie) to have a C stand with Boom Buddy for the boom pole to position the mic just half an inch above the frame line. (an example of a very low budget recorder and mic to consider if doing these outdoors would be the Zoom F8n + Deity S-Mic 2 Shotgun with a blimp) As the three most important rules of thumb for audio is: Location! Location! Location! (the location of your mic that is) Next most important tip to consider: your location again! (but in the sense of what is your shooting environment? As if you can improve it any form then that will lead to better audio too)

These sensors seem more suited to an A9II, or A9R. Mayybe an A7RIV? They need a higher tier of processing power, and thus will come in at a higher price, and thus a different market, than the A7xxxx series. IMO all the A7SIII really needs to be, to be a huge sales success right now, is just an A7III with a 18-20MPish sensor (so APS-C 4K is 1:1 or slightly oversampled), 4K60p, and the better EVF and screen of the A7RIII. That's it. Everything else about the A7III is good enough right now. Release this cam now and every workaday videographer and sub-Hollywood production house buys it, simple as that. 8K, insane framerates, 10bit, the other nuances we wish for here just aren't as important as we think they are, not to the bulk of this camera's market. The market that really cares about these things will have zero problem paying another $1500 for an A9II.

ykno, not tryin speak truth to power or call out the elephant in the room but... youtube is built on the back of © infringement thats what makes all this so lame its WILDLY hypocritical and they know that

That Bever is ace.

Problem is Vimeo have us by the balls and they know it. A far call from their earlier years, now they have an aggressive new CEO who wants to purge a bunch of users they 'accuse' of copyright infringement, to clear the company of any risk or legality issues in the prelude to being fattened up and sold to an even larger corporation than the one that already owns them. It stinks. I have never held in such low esteem a company that I depend on for so much. We should start our own Vimeo. And keep big business away from the running of it.