Leaderboard

Here is a quick test with some heavy grading on the internal 8 bit footage. Lens cap test at about half way through. I didn’t have time to hook up the Ninja V, will do that test tomorrow. Enjoy!

I'd say you could buy one without HDR support, Though most cameras can already do HDR. The thing with HDR is that the industry is still trying to catch up a bit I'm finding. If you edit in Premiere, you can't really even grade for HDR unless you export it to Resolve (Premiere viewports only support up to 120IRE and apparently doesn't add the HDR Flag in the metadata), then there's the fact that barely anyone has HDR monitors to grade with. On top of that, there's a lot of youtube tutorials of people who think they are doing HDR and teaching how to do it when in reality they have no idea of what they are talking about. Camera body's come and go, and if you're going to buy a new camera within three years, you don't really need HDR. If you're going to keep the camera body for a long time, then it'll be worth it, But SDR won't be phased out for a long long time. Master SDR Rec 709, and then you'll have a much better-starting ground for HDR when it becomes more standardized.

The protocol is the same so its a cautionary yes but I would need to test it on one. Yes to focus control (and zoom if the lens supports it) on the analog stick.

Hey all! I just got my V2 Aivascope baby 1.75X lens and really excited to put it through its paces. I know there are some excellent posts recently from JSD about this lens but just wanted to start a dedicated thread for anyone new looking, or if anyone wanted something specifically tested. I'll be mainly using it on a BMPCC4K but will also be using on my A7S2, and possibly my BMPCC. I'm still waiting for my Rapido FVD and presently without diopters so there's not much to test yet but hopefully everything arrives soon - in the meantime will try and collect everything I need to get shooting some sample footage

Almost everyone is completely outclassed by all their equipment, at least from an artistic point of view (those guys who film walls and then blog about it are safe) so it seems to me that either you didn't like the aesthetic, or you're just aware of something that other people aren't. I could be wrong of course and it might be something else I haven't come across.. I'm shooting home videos with a GH5, Voitlander 17.5mm f0.95 and Rode video mic pro plus. Talk to me about equipment that is too good for the operator, I might be at the epicentre of that scenario!

Zoom in and hit play. There is the difference. I created a sample myself from my old 5D2 RAW footage. Real codec killer due to the heavy moire and aliasing all over the image. If you zoom in and hit play you can see the ProRes holds up much better. But actually the h265 smoothens out some of the smearing and moire, so it's actually better looking ? h265 100Mbps vs ProRes 422HQ

Seems like most 8 bit camera footage would look fine on an HDR TV.

These results are shocking for me ? h265 > ProRes ?! Insane. I think i will redo this test with my own RAW footage.

Bit of an update about new functionality to drive the app from a joystick. As the joystick is also bluetooth, you can essentially just use the app as a bridge to control the camera from the joystick as well as use it in the way shown here as a single RC style integrated unit. Other small thumbstick type joysticks will be supported for mounting on a gimbal arm.

No problem. I don't have it with me at the moment, which must say something about the portability haha. But basically, I use the velcro strap to tie it onto this arm: It balances perfect and you can slide it up and down for any micro adjustments needed. For example the weight needs to go move up or down the arm depending on the weight of the lens to offset the balance on the pivot at the back.

Ah, interesting. I remember ProRes fondly from back in the day, but maybe I'll do a comparison with CineForm before making a decision. Thanks for the heads-up.

I'm getting a bunch of people frothing on the nikon z facebook page for querying why nikon set the min shutter speed in auto modes to 1/25th, AND forced autoISO in the auto modes. You cant switch it off! I phoned nikon today, I'm hoping there's something I'm missing somewhere. Frothy facebook people are wondering why anyone would want to use an auto mode, but for what I do it is essential. Auto iso in manual mode doesn't cut the mustard. I've used this on canons, a couple of GH's and 2 DSLR nikons. It's baffling that the z implemation is so limited. (and why didn't they just set the min shutter to 2xfps, or at least let you specify max shutter angle). I'm in that weird period with a camera where you're getting to know it, and finding out all its quirks and foibles. (Controlling the IBIS via the lens. No peaking in autofocus mode, despite the fact you can change focus manually. No zebras and peaking, no level and histogram on screen at same time... and i have much to learn about autofocus.)

I use the Weebill with the Pocket, it's fine for my needs. The only limitation I've found is the hyper cool, use it every day VORTEX twisty function doesn't work with this camera just because the motors can't quite handle it. I think the Ronin can balance out the box, but for the Weebill, you do need to add some kind of a counterweight, but that's very simple and I've not found it hindering my movements. In fact, I've recently been using this battery converter, which has a velcro strap. It's both my counterweight and power solution. With this I can balance the P4K, Viltrox and 24-105, so that should give you some idea of what the gimbal can handle. https://www.aliexpress.com/item/DC-12V-NP-F-Battery-Power-Supply-System-Mount-Adapter-Plate-Holder-for-BMCC-BMPCC-4K/32955311989.html Here's my first test with the Weebill. This first 2 min is slow mo shot at 50fps, then the last part of the clip is the same edit played back at 2x speed, to hopefully show any wobbles/jitters.

You can control the aperture directly from the plug in receiver so you only need the handle if you want to do remote focus. As the other speedboosters don't allow any sort of focus control on the P4K anyway it would be much of a muchness aside from the extra bulk of the plug in receiver.

Don't shoot wide open on any of them if you want edge to edge sharpness.

I am working right now, what does it say? What does it say?!!!

Speedbooster test.

Any will work ok, but some soften the image. Cheaper ones also have color shifts so you have to manually white balance to get proper color. Here is an article covering some of the better ones. Variable ND's are never the best option, as they can have a bad effect on skintones. However they certainly are convenient and the negatives may not be noticed by most people. https://fstoppers.com/bestfiltertest

Blackmagic already have prores export functioning on the windows version of thier Fusion software...as of yesterday that was how I’d normally export ‘genuine’ Prores from my windows 7 workstation. Now with Adobe being granted prores export for windows (as long as you are on windows 10 that is) it makes life a lot easier. Blackmagic indeed need to implement prores export via Resolve - or at least a simple ‘send to Fusion’ dynamic link feature so as to make that software suite complete for windows users. DNxHD flavours are all well and good, but deliverables often need to be in a recognised prores flavour...mostly when passing video material to die hard Mac-based post people who assume nobody could possibly use PC’s for creative purposes. One can only assume that the only reason Blackmagic have not enabled Resolve prores export on PC yet is because of licence restraints, rather than any technical reasons. I really hope Adobe have not somehow snatched the rights away from Resolve having native Prores export features on a windows platform.

With ridiculous amount of crop there is a difference in texture detail. "B" is ProRes (left) and "A" is h265. (right) Thanks for the test!

"It’s the gain level that introduces noise, not the lack of light." Its exactly the opposite, brother. Gain actually decreases the noise. Lack of light increases that.

@thebrothersthre3 I find them to be equal for all practical purposes, even with extreme grading (by extreme I mean waaay out of the realm of usefulness). There are differences, but neither seems more accurate. I haven't tried green screening, and that would be an interesting test, but I don't have a RAW camera so I'm limited in the scenarios I can test. And naturally it defeats the purpose of the test if I start with anything less than a RAW file. Interestingly, despite having a hard time making any substantive distinction between the two, when comparing the PSNR (peak signal to noise ratio), ProRes is higher than H.265 at this compression level. H.265 needs to get up to around 50% of the bitrate before the average PSNR is the same--and even then, the PSNR on I frames is higher than ProRes, but the PSNR on P and B frames is lower. That's to be expected. I could also push the preset to be even slower, or use two pass encoding for better results on H.265 as well. No, I did RAW -> Uncompressed RGB 444 And then Uncompressed -> H265 -> Uncompressed And also Uncompressed -> ProRes -> Uncompressed I did it this way so that I would not be limited by Resolve's H.265 encoder, and so that I could do PSNR tests from Uncompressed, without having to futz with debayering messing up the PSNR comparison. I did a short clip to keep the file size manageable at only 380 MB each. I originally did 4k, but I figured no one wanted to download that! If there is interest I am happy to do more extensive examples.

I know of another unreleased project shot by an award-winning indie director that also used a bunch of A7S2's for principal photography. They also used a camera per lens approach which allowed to shoot in multicam in order to get more authentic dynamic/energy on scenes & save on budget. A7S2 was chosen as the film was shot only using natural light and contains many night scenes. In that aspect A7S2 is pretty unique with it's still incredible low-light performance. Overall i think they achieved what they wanted but the producer did share with me some horror stories of camera failures (they went through at least a dozen bodies). They eventually had to pickup FS5/7's to complete the film (and FWIW their next project will be shot with 'camera per lens' but on C200's). My feelings towards this topic is that yes, the latest hybrids are technically capable of giving beautiful big screen IQ and can even do tricks big cine cams can't, however the reliability, ergonomics, rigging etc of a lot of these consumer cams is still the biggest risk/limitation, especially for big productions or even pro events where failure isn't an option. The sub-$10K compact cine cams are imo where the real breakthrough has happened for pro video as they give ARRI/REDS/VARICAMS etc a run for their money. The latest mirrorless hybrids can be good B-cam solutions to those though, especially for drone/gimbal shots.

I think you're misunderstanding my point. It is not that they MUST stand far away, of course the guests on the red carpet can come as close as they wish. But I'm sure there are also guests who stand at a sub optimal position an extra foot or two too far off, or just don't stop and only give a throw away comment as they pass by. That is what I was meaning. Yes, I do agree with you under those conditions. But for your average joe they'll get a much better result with a reporter's mic in shot than trying to handheld a shotgun correctly just out of frame. Been there... done that! As I've done this for a laugh one friday night while drinking with a buddy.... we made this: (he did all the directing/editing, and ALL THE ACTING! Both of them! And I did sound/lighting/camera all by myself. And did twice the amount of drinking to make up for the lack of his drinking)