Leaderboard

Speaking of which.... I did tests at f1.4 and at f5.6 The top row is the Samyang 85mm at f1.4 and f5.6 and the bottom row is the Contax Zeiss 85mm at f1.4 and f5.6 I deliberately underexposed slightly as I would do normally with the SL but have added no corrections hence the slightly darker image. First up, the chart stuff. The Contax Zeiss has a glow at f1.4 but its a tiny focus error on my part being a blind buffoon. I could have stopped at this point as its pretty obvious that the difference between them is marginal but I like to give value for money so I did a bit more of a contextual test. It might not seem an obvious test (it looks more like a cry for help with all that booze) but its quite informative to illustrate the out of focus rendering, handling of colour and tonality, detail etc etc. Same lineup, so the top row is the Samyang 85mm at f1.4 and f5.6 and the bottom row is the Contax Zeiss 85mm at f1.4 and f5.6 and focus is set on the Cointreau bottle. Just to add a bit more context to what you are getting separation wise for your f1.4 dollar, I brought a couple of slower manual lenses of a similar focal length to do the same test with with both being shot at their maximum aperture. The top row is the Contax Zeiss 28-85mm at 85mm f3.4 and f5.6 and the bottom row is the Leica 90mm Summicron M at f2 and f5.6 CONCLUSION ? My own view is its not really worth pixel peeping between the Samyang 85mm f1.4 and Contax Zeiss 85mm f1.4 when they are as close as this. The Samyang though.....bargain.

Back to vanilla glass with a couple of stills from the Pocket 4K with cheapish second hand utilitarian EF lenses that have IS. Colour is the Canon 10-18mm f4.5/5.6 and the B&W from the Tamron 16-300mm (yes 300mm) F/3.5-6.3. Both of them benefit light gathering and sharpness wise from being put on a speed booster as they are here.

You should do "Procrastination - The Movie" You've already wrote most of the script.

You should shoot with your distribution frame rate in mind. If you are shooting for PAL televisions, then you should shoot in 25 fps for normal motion. If you want 2x slow motion, shoot in 50 and conform to 25. If you want 2.3976x slow motion, shoot in 59.94 and conform to 25, etc. (I know you aren't talking about slow motion, I just mention it to be clearer) Essentially, at the beginning of an edit you will pick a timeline framerate to edit in, based on artistic choice or the distribution requirements. Any file that is NOT at the timeline framerate will need to be interpolated to some extent to play back at normal speed. Mixing any two frame rates that are not exact multiples of each other will result in artifacts, though there are ways to mitigate those problems with advanced interpolation algorithms. So you shouldn't mix 23.976 and 59.94. If you have a 23.976 timeline, the 59.94 footage will need to be modified to show 2.5 video frames per timeline frame. You can't show .5 frames, so yoy have to do some sort of frame blending or interpolation, which introduces artifacts. Depending on the image content, the artifacts might not be a problem at all. The same would apply for putting 23.976 footage on a 29.97 timeline, or any other combination of formats. The only way to avoid all artifacts completely is to shoot at exactly the frame rate you will use on the timeline and in the final deliverable, or conform the footage for slow/fast motion.

This is like 1000 times better than what the Osmo Pocket does. Is this a better camera than the Insta X? or just a different product? I want to buy one to play a little, and I am buying a Rode NT-SF1 mic soon, so I want to match those.

That lens is often mentioned in reviews of other 28mm f/2 lenses. It seems the general consensus is it’s a pretty decent lens but for only a little more you can get the Nikkor ai-s which is phenomenal. Either way, it’s a great option for a budget lens. I have the ZF version and not the traditional Contax “Hollywood.” I got it for a good price but it wasn’t cheap by any means. And the only reason I bought it was because it was a Duclos mod. By just using it for a few minutes in the house, I couldn’t say it was leaps and bounds better than the Nikkor 28 or the Zeiss QBM 25mm. But I have a feeling that the Hollywood is a lens that requires a little more than a couple minutes around the house test. Comment of the day! Thanks for proving my suspicions that I am wasting time and money worrying about lenses.

New S35 or full frame camera coming from Z cam (ef mount most probably). Pre-order soon and delivery in september / october.

::sigh::

I'd be tempted if they did a MK2 with a GH5S type sensor. Especially if its got 4k 120p 10 bit like the E2. Something in that form factor with built in ND's would be a killer. Plus their color science seems pretty pleasing.

oh cool! hey, why dont i just write it for you?? edit:

Yup, I believe in the pamphlet, it specifically states these cameras are for children and male hobbyists with cats on their back.

We will introduce a 0.7” 1080p #oled EVF#, portkeys OEYE-3G in NAB, with 4KHDMI in and out, 3GSDi in and out, brightness waveform, 3DLUT..., all-aluminum body, diopter. NAB also publishes price . ?

Damn, I was hoping you were going to say it was awful so I could save some money

i have done a similar thing except i'm cheap and i don't drink (alcohol) i bought a bunch of different coloured bottles from some $2 shops. waiting for a nice offcut of black granite from work to make up a bench top for the man cave interesting story by the way.

Its to commemorate the spot from where Oskar Barnack took the very first picture with a Leica camera. And this is it I'm a lightweight drinker so I'd have taken a shot of booze every time I took a shot of the booze I'd have been on my back before we got to the third lens.

I once worked with a really good compositor at a large VFX house who admitted to me once that he was totally colorblind. His trick was that he just matched everything by reading the code values from his color picker tool and matching the parts of his composite purely from the values he sampled. I've always remembered that when I feel I can't trust my eyes, or something is not working for me. You can color grade just by making sure everything is neutral and balanced. Later, as you become more comfortable with the process and gain more experience you can start creating looks or an affected grade. Generally to start you want to get your white balance correct. Find something in your shot that you know should be neutral or white. A wall, a t-shirt, a piece of paper, or anything else that should be white or gray. After that, check your blacks and make sure they are neutral, then double check your whites. Finally, check your skin tones and make sure they are correct. You can do this by using the vectorscope and just getting them on the skin tone line. Somewhere in this process you'll want to set your exposure. I generally just make a rough exposure adjustment at the beginning so I can see everything, then dial it in once my balance is set. One thing I do a lot when studying how a film I like is graded is to take screen captures from a Netflix stream or other source and pull them into a project to compare the color values on it. Then you'll have a roadmap for for what you are trying to match.

sorry i am not a photographer i am a computer scientist, my job is to write algorithms were "1" are always visually 1 and "0" are always visually 0 no matter the angle you look at it

don't want to split hairs but "lossy compression" can be "visually lossless" or "visually lossy" , "lossless compression" is unambiguous because it means compression which does not change a single bit from the uncompressed data so it is visually indistinguishable because it is identical

Youtube will play anything. If you shot 23.976, then stick with that. I don't know for certain, but i bet vimeo will also play anything. The only time you really have to be careful when deciding which format to use is with television broadcast or specific festivals, since modern computers can play anything. For slow motion, you can shoot anything higher than your timeline frame rate and conform it. If your NLE has the option, you should conform footage instead of manually slowing it down. That way you will avoid any frame artifacts in case your math wasnt correct. But to directly answer the question, slowing 59.94 to 23.976 is a great way to get slow motion.

Great stuff @BTM_Pix love both the 85 and 135 from Samyang! So underrated!

@BTM_Pix Thanks for the test! I'm kind of shocked the difference isn't more obvious either, especially since in recent months I have switched from Rokinon cine primes to exclusively contax zeiss glass ?

@BTM_Pix great test, thank you. Hmm... I am at a loss for words. I think it’s safe to say that the Zeiss is better especially with the color tonality of the whites in the shot. But overall, the Zeiss isn’t an obvious, hands down winner. Damn, maybe I need to test the Rokinon/Samyang 50mm. Do you happen to have the 24mm?

there is none. You can switch between 25 and 30fps as you wish. No need to change any ntsc/pal settings

It does need a modification but its perfectly easy to do. Here is a full tutorial on how to do it for this specific lens (but can be applied to other similarly tricky EF-S lenses) although this is a far higher precision route to doing it than I did. I took the "hacking" part of the title of this tutorial a little bit more literally !

If you want 10 bits internal, you need to record H265.

PS -- To make it pretty clear: I meant both lossy formats, that is, the visually lossless : D .braw 3:1 (and Q0 too, why not?) vs CinemaDNG 3.1 (and 4.1). To compare CinemaDNG lossless is pointless.

I knew it! Well a Quattro is more likely than a Leica but since I’ve never, intentionally, shot a still since I bought my first DSLR, both probably aren’t the smartest of purchases. Regarding Samyang vs Zeiss... I assume only a sophisticated eye would notice the difference and only a nerd would care one way or the other. Which leads me to a bigger point... I am probably overthinking this stuff. That 28-70 is such a cool lens. I briefly had one last year but bought it for such a great price, I decided to make a little extra cash on it. Part of me thinks I would probably be better off selling a bunch of things and getting a Canon 24-70mm and the 50mm 1.2 L for a two lens set and be done with it. But... There are just so many lenses that are mechanical and optical works of art... the Nikkor 35mm 1.4... or the Zeiss 28mm f/2 “The Hollywood” to resign myself to just two lenses. But on the other hand, I’ve always subscribed to the notion that story is king so all of these lenses are truly just to tickle my fancy and could have a minor effect in the end.

Thats what I do with the 28-70 2.6 and the helios 58mm on a speed booster XL, although I do find myself wanting something wider sometimes

Yeah, I think this is where they are approaching it from but in a VR goggles free viewer. They certainly seem excited in this video and the lack of movement of the phone suggests its for over capture for crop approach rather than being something the viewer is going to pan around themselves.

Not wishing to be picky, but occasional use of the SHIFT key can aid readability. Ahem...

10 is good. Probably what matters more than how many lenses are in your cupboard is how many lenses you're lugging around when on set. The less decisions on set the better, and the less time spent swapping between 40mm, 50mm, and 58mm lenses completely unnecessarily. And having 10 lenses that are very different is fine too - when I go to film my kids sports game I don't wonder if I should take the 8mm lens, I just take the sports ones and maybe a standard. Even if you had overlapping modern and vintage lenses the choice for a project wouldn't involve in you taking both sets.

So long as the client doesn't think you're playing games with it on the job! ?

meanwhile, Zach, i AM writing! with a busted computer no less!! im like a lil baby bird with a broken wing rn doesnt matter — you dont need final draft to write, or even electricity, just do it the dialogue i cooked up in the last hour and a half is pretty dope ? im sure youre busy writing too, dont mean to keep ya!!

Sounds like you want the Panasonic GH5S Or the Nikon Z6 sounds also like it might be perfect for you. (the Z6 is of course a different camera to the Z7 that you returned!)

Kye I like that B&W look. Here is my take. Wanted to bloom the highlights, make it warm looking, added some film grain in too. No idea what I am doing really ?

I have a film I'm going to self-distribute this year so we'll see what options Apple offers... options are good to have.

thanks that was rather informative. i didn't know that the dof changed as well. maybe i half knew but didn't really connect the dots before now. buying a bmp4k with a different mount is certainly proving to be a learning experience ?

@kye I’ve done/been doing something similar by listing every lens I own and narrowing down my favorites. I then narrowed down the ones I definitely know I want to keep. Now I am in the testing phase by seeing which lenses are just undeniably better than their counterparts. From their I will take my slate of short films I have planned for the next year and decide which lens/lenses/lens sets will fit the tone/theme/story of each short. From their I hope to narrow down my collection from 15-20 to 5-10... it will be closer to 10... let’s be honest here. You do product photography too... what was that shot on? Also, is that Rokinon 85mm, the same lens as the Cine version?

Gh5s is a great choice. Z6 and A7iii too (nothing like the older Sonys, improved in almost everything) Puting the a6500 there, among all those great/workhorse cameras must be a spelling mistake or a joke!

tried Q0. Which basically looks like ProResHQ. Still no comparison to DNG (even 4:1 compression) which is free of any processing when sharpening set to 0 in Resolve while Braw and ProRes show some serious halo, fringing, chroma bleeding, texture loss etc. BMD really has to optimize this codec which means doing less.

All lenses are comparable in focal length, but because different sensors are different sizes then the FOV you get will differ with a given focal length. This might help: https://mmcalc.com

Even more than 2 years after release the best GH5 replacement is... another GH5 There's no other camera that ticks all the boxes of the GH5. Some cameras like the XT-3 come close, but they're all missing something: IBIS or 10 bit or flip screen or EVF or good battery life or XLR adapter, etc. It has it all. Just my take.

Up till BRAW the only consistently present characteristic of raw video from a camera manufacturer claiming "raw" was a Bayer image. There's been lossy compressed raw (Cineform, Red, BM), there's been tonally remapped raw (Arri, BM, Red, Panasonic, Canon), there's been white balanced raw (Canon), there's been baked ISO raw (Canon, Sony), etc. But all "raw" has always been Bayer. In this sense BRAW is a stretch of the term "raw" as we know it: it is not a Bayer image. I wouldn't call it "raw", but obviously there are market reasons for naming it this way. This is similar to how "visually lossless" is being abused as marketing speak for "lossy". "Visually lossless" can only be applied to delivery images viewed in well defined viewing environments (that's how it is used in any scientific paper that takes itself seriously). By definition, it is not applicable to acquisition formats (raw or anything else) meant to be hammered in post: you can't claim "visually lossless", because you have no knowledge about what will be done to the image, nor where it will end up.

All the talk about B&W in the Lenses thread got me curious...

Good stuff. I was just thinking another still might be fun. A bit more of a classic retro look to match the sharpness and grain from the original.. I find this as well as the GH5 to be nicely organic looking

Your grade was already perfect! Here is my grade:

Different colours, the true sign of quality products.

Looks like it's happening. Great review on the other hand.. I will try my best but I haven't shot a cinema camera for a while It will at least be medium format because I can't put the Baveyes down for a minute. Been using it at least a little for each session I've done since getting it.

Portkeys will be announcing an EVF at NAB! Oled 0.7 inch with sdi and hdmi... Hopefully at a reasonable price

Thanks! That was what I was missing I've been playing with it for a while and I've noticed this "black sun" type problem: This is coming from the HSL node, but the strange thing is that even if I go into the RGB mixer in the HSL node and reset everything to defaults, it is still there, and gets turned on and off when I enable or disable the node. This looks like a bug in Resolve to me rather than the RGB mixer in that node doing anything wonky. But that's the only problem I can find. I even cranked the contrast to ridiculous amounts in a node in before the emulation nodes and it seems fine. Original image + emulation nodes: Stupid contrast + emulation nodes: This is my GH5 in 4K 150Mbps 10-bit 25p mode with HLG. Edit: I was using the WDR - Compound power grade for the above. I haven't played with the other ones yet.