Leaderboard

Ah gotcha. I'm not really directing this at you but just to anyone in general who isn't aware or wants to learn more, and I'm probably being a 'stickler for accuracy' here but obviously a sensor/camera has no inherent highlight rolloff as the sensor is linear (as close as practically possible with calibration) so highlight rolloff is mostly down to the dynamic range of the sensor, how the image is exposed and how the colourist chooses to roll off the highlights. All typical CMOS sensors will have "hard clipping" though, being linear capture devices. I only say this because I see a few people mention 'highlight rolloff' as part of a log curve or colour science or something when in that respect it is just a by-product of the log curve optimising the dynamic range of the sensor in the container its being stored in. It's still assumed the user will create their own highlight rolloff in grading (I'm speaking just of RAW and log captures, not "profiles" or looks applied in camera intended for display on Rec.709 devices). ARRI for example have a lot of stops above where they recommend middle grey be exposed for - due partly to their very large pixels and the large dynamic range they have - and when a log curve is calculated for mapping that dynamic range from middle grey to 940 (video white in 10bit where they map sensor saturation to in their log curves) you get a very flat curve at the top as it maps that range. When you flatten contrast that much it also appears to desaturate. I've seen some mention they believe ARRI purposely desaturate their highlights, but if they did that in processing before creating RAW files or LogC ProRes clips you wouldn't be able to inverse it correctly into linear for ACES workflows etc because processing like that is non-linear. They possibly do something like that for their LogC to Rec709 LUTs etc but people seem to attribute it to their LogC/RAW files too. For our cameras we map sensor saturation at our "native ISO" to 940 also, but for ISO curve's above we go into "super whites" to make better use of the bit depth available especially since we deal so much with SDI output (10bit) and ProRes 422HQ is common for our customers (10bit also). ARRI says ProRes 444 (12bit) is the minimum for LogC because they don't use the full range available. We may change that in the future but the caveat would also be you would need to use 12bit for best results. In theory you could expose a 10 stop camera/sensor so that you place middle grey at the second bottom stop, giving you 8 stops to create a very gentle highlight rolloff. You would just have VERY little range for the shadows. ? So long story short, the question I would suggest people ask is 'what is the dynamic range like compared to other cameras' as that will really tell you what kind of highlight roll off YOU (the user) can create for your preference with how you like to expose given the amount of shadow information you like to retain, tolerance for noise, etc.

Can't pass that. ?

This whole discussion is absurd. Why do we need Netflix to determine the value of a camera based on some unknown and abstruse criteria. The whole thing is speculation. Make up your OWN MIND by looking and testing the images. 10 bit is still 10 bit though. The traditional Japanese companies won't give you internal raw, and that's why most people will pick the blackmagic at half the price. If you pick a camera based on what Netflix says, you are in a dream land, and to suggest it is some arbiter of quality is even more fanciful - cause no one here can say what the criteria is. Not to mention that some of the best cameras ever made aren't on the list.

I think I'm on a "screw buying new lenses I'm spending money on filters and light modifiers" phase. Layering diffusion, colored lighting and practicals, haze, actually caring about incidental bounce enough to use negative fill... aaaand FINALLY got a black pro mist! Should get to use it out for a talking head shoot on Friday, but so far I'm really liking even just boring test shots.

Yeah, I think this shows how committed this man was to innovate no matter the consequences. The idea that why he is a billionaire, he has to be focus on earnings exclusively from a material aim viewpoint doesn't seem to my eyes in touch with reality at all. Without mention no money in the world would bring him happier at his stage of his life and age. His need to care of his health was already known among his private circle, just not public yet. Who closer has been in personal touch with RED family ; ) already had information about. And not exactly from supposed 'online friendships' : D as free guesswork can try to yet fulfill the cup ; -) The most funny is to see how some personal dislike to not mention hate can put people to enter in denial about something out of their control or knowledge. It is quite possible health issues had put him away of Hydrogen project. Other than to complain, why not Hydrogen 2 backers, if any, don't enter in contact with the company to try resolving their business matters? Jim's announcement has just a few days... In any case, I understand the disappointment of Hydrogen adopters. For some reason, I passed that one. I'd rather wait for any product when mature enough to prevent me from buyer's remorse. Unless you realize strictly under a business strategy you'll able to have a solid no brainer advantage in your hands as certain chances can be.

True. Although... those are now hard to come by I imagine. I did managed to cop me like two swappable E-mounts for my MFT-standard lenses when I thought I was going APS-C when the Sony A6300 was rumored and just around the corner. But I was rather disappointed with that one and stayed true to MFT. Fujifilm hasn't really been floating my boat either yet, maybe an X-H2 could change that, but I doubt it. If you look at the jumps from GH2 - GH4 - GH5 and now the GH5S/BMPCC4K, there's no doubt in my mind that the GH6-series will be a very special and capable camera. I don't even want to go and switch to APS-C or FF-mount ecosystems.

Meanwhile bm fan get so offended by this Netflix approval of S1H

Does it have cinelike? Log seems a bit useless on a tiny sensor like that. No manual controls is stupid though. Kind of a killer. I just got the Mavic Air and I think I'll be happy with it for now. Tech is not a limitation with drones, its just market segmentation. All DJI's drones should have 200mbps 10 bit imho. That said I am not as worried about color with drones, usually not dealing with skintones so you can get away with a lot more.

Not bad at all? Phone do 4K60p for years. 2.7K is unacceptable. And no RAW picture. Only JPG. Clearly they do cripple their models like everybody now. Such a let down. Raw and 4K30P and it was an instand buy for me, even for $100 more. And no flat profile. F*** DJI.

Let me know if you have any questions. Lack of manual video controls sucks. 2.7K is fine. No log sucks. No raw photos sucks.

I’m invested in MFT at the moment. I think the yelling and screaming about the death of MFT is partisan format bullshit. I like the trade offs of the system. Newer technology is making sensor size less of a “compromise” so I look forward to seeing what’s next in this format and I reckon the GH6 will push the envelope yet again. Fujifilm is also doing great stuff with their medium format and APS-C stuff. It’s a great time to be a camera nerd.

Is it under the weight limits for the (increasingly heavy-handed) drone laws in most western countries? I'd imagine so, but confirming that would be useful. No point anyone buying one if they have to study and register to become a commercial pilot in every country they visit! ???

and at the end of the day, you can always take these two images: and with a few quick adjustments in Resolve, adjust the left one to look like this: not the same, but you could certainly cut them together in the same edit and not shatter the illusion.

Dunno, never needed lens support, aside from a physical rod system lens support. ? A good lens is a good lens period. Same goes for anything vintage. They don't have to be manufactured actively to be worth getting. Besides... all indications have it that Meike has taken over production plans, putting out just about identical lenses (CM (with intellectual property loss for commisioning party; waiving exclusive rights) turned ODM). No R&D from Meike's side means way lower prices. Of course... who knows if they changed materials to lesser quality ones... if QC is compromised, etc.

I'm contemplating other lenses to 'match' the Voigt but I'm not so certain that matching is the issue as the Voigt doesn't actually match with itself over its aperture range. It has significantly different colour at f0.95, 1.4, and 2+ (it's quite purple wide open), and it has perceptibly different resolution at 0.95, 1.4, 2.0, and 2.8+. I'm beginning to think that the Voigt is the MFT equivalent of Zeiss Super Speeds, in the sense that it has two (or more) fundamentally different 'looks', but that each of them is great. I'll post more in my lens rabbit-hole thread when I've gathered more thoughts, but in this sense, they're Dr Jekkyl and Mr Hyde, or the 17.5mm is at least. In this sense the Veyrda, Meike, and Laowa are likely to be much more consistent.

That's an oversight on the Resolve teams part, I alerted it to them last week when a user reported that some options are also missing from the ACES ResolveFX plugin too. We are looking into it. It's not specific to the Pocket 4K, is happens with the G2 and other cameras. Its how gamut mapping is done - I've seen the same artefact on footage shot with ARRI/Red/Sony/etc from test files with saturated red highlights clipping and also seen it on publicly broadcast tv shows and movies with huge budgets shooting Alexa etc where the gamut mapping is not handled by the colourist (its very common on TV series on Netflix, HBO, Amazon, etc). FYI, Arri Wide Gamut is very similar in size and location of primaries as BMD Wide Gamut Gen 4. The issue is its a non-linear transform to address the problem so if you apply that correction to footage it's not easily reversible anymore in standard colour science workflows like ACES. So if you applied it on camera to ProRes footage and then transformed it to another colour space "technically" it would be wrong. Same if it were an option in Blackmagic RAW decode and you took that output to VFX workflow etc that requires linear or some other transform. So the user has to be careful about when to use this. But we are looking into it to make it easier. Otherwise for problem shots people can decode into another space and handle the gamut mapping themselves (I personally think this is preferable when possible so it can be tailored to each shot and target gamut but it does require the user to have a certain amount of knowledge and time to address it in post which is not reasonable to assume).

I've worked with multiple frame rates in Resolve for a while now, so I'll see if I can help. This is my understanding of how it works and how I use it. I start with a Project at the same frame rate that I want the finished video to have, for me this is 25fps. Then I create one (or more) timelines in that project, and they will default to the same frame rate. In v16 (which I am using now) you can also change frame rates on timelines individually through Timeline Settings and there's a button that lets you customise them individually. Then I just drag all the clips onto the timeline. When you do this, Resolve puts them all on the timeline in real-time, ie, if you recorded in 50p and drag it to a 25p timeline the video will play in real-time. If you exported that then the output video would have every second frame of the 50p clip. If you want to slow the 50p down to 25p (and therefore play at 50% speed) then you can do that on the timeline through Clip Speed, as well as the various speed ramp type functions. I believe you can also set the speed in the clip in the Media Pool and then when you add it to the timeline it goes in there at 50% normal speed, but that's not how I work. In terms of sound, when you have a clip on the timeline that isn't at real-time then Resolve does a time-stretch on the audio automatically. The effect is good but has its limits. In terms of syncing sound I've never really tried to do it so can't comment on that part. The way that Resolve displays FPS all through this scenario is rubbish and completely confusing, so I ignore FPS on everything except the Project, Timeline, and Source Clip. If I'm doing anything that involves all three of those not matching then I work in percentages. When exporting you can just set the export settings to your target output frame rate and it should work. I haven't tried to output a different frame rate than my Timeline so there might be issues there that I'm not aware of, but that's what's worked for me. Hope this helps! BTW: why did you film an interview in 50p?

You forgot the Veydra / Meike.... ??? Sold to the gentleman with the very prestigious beard!

Yeah sure, If you already have any of those lenses then your set. But for $150 this is still a very nice manual only starter lens or a affordable lens for a second camera body where you don’t want to buy another Voigt.

So, as some of you may know, I've been "experimenting" with having little chats with different Panasonic cameras over WiFi and after whispering in the GX80s ear last night, I may have come up with something quite interesting. The first image is a grab from a GX80 using its Standard profile. The second image is a grab from a GX80 that is definitely not using the Standard profile.......

https://www.4kshooters.net/2019/10/23/laowa-17mm-f-1-8-mft-is-the-most-affordable-venus-optics-lens-yet/ I thought to myself, do I really need a 17mm fast prime for MFT? Not really, as mostly I shoot my vlogs either with the SLR Magic 8mm when handheld or the Panasonic 25mm when on a tripod. But then I saw the price: HUNDRED & FORTY NINE DOLLARS!! Gee, maybe I should I pick one up? Z-Cam E2 test footage by James Tonkin testing the Laowa 17mm f1.8 MFT lens: Laowa 17mm f1.8 MFT + DJI X5 on DJI Inspire 2 drone footage by Macgver Liu: Panasonic GH5S 4K 50p/60p by Steve Chan of DSI Pictures Entertainment: https://www.venuslens.net/product/laowa-17mm-f18-mft/

My understanding was that they were pretty good. I have been looking at the 7.5mm F2 and read a bunch of reviews and they seemed ok. I guess do some reading.. Oh, I don't know.. think about those times when you've got the 16mm on and you just want to get in a bit tighter.. but can't take half a step forwards..... and can't crop in post...... and...... yes, makes sense you've got the range pretty well covered. I was just watching a video this morning from DSLR Video Shooter and was reminded that he loves the Sigma 16/1.4. I'm looking at the 7.5mm F2 as a replacement for my 8mm F4 SLR Magic drone lens which works fine but the ergonomics are rubbish as it's a drone lens. The extra couple of stops of exposure wouldn't go astray either for night-time city-scapes.

I'm more likely to give them the benefit of the doubt than others, given the goal was obviously to release a drone that went under the limits that would require licenses, e.t.c. When that is your goal some compromises must be made. The lack of 4K, RAW images, custom options, e.t.c is unfortunate. If you need that stuff then this isn't the drone for you. I feel like people are increasingly spoiled and unable to grasp that last part: not every product released by these companies is for you, stop whining every time they release something that doesn't completely measure up to your specific needs. If you need 4K the Mavic Air can easily be had for about $100-150 more used, or about $200 more refurbished/open box. But sure, fuck DJI, the company that has allowed people like us to actually afford drones. ? As an addendum: $399 for a drone that weighs less than an iPhone, is pocketable, gives you the ability to fly pretty much anywhere without a license, with 30 minutes of flying time per battery, and in 2.7K seems like a pretty good deal to me. That's a pretty big technological leap forward, even if it lacks features I'd want out of a drone.

Just a quick thought on this. I think you may find that shooting in 4k in Braw 5Q for 1080 delivery is the sweetspot. It's an optimum workflow in that the files sizes are very small for both acquisition and working in post/Resolve. Downresing to 1080 in Resolve will give you the best HD image and you don't have to worry about iso because all of that can be adjusted in post shooting Braw. It's really liberating to focus on the creative knowing that you have the control to optimize everything from iso and exposure to white balance after the fact. Just shoot with a viewing LUT so you know you're getting what you want in real time and it comes together really quickly in color and edit.

Since Comica got a mention there... at IBC they had something in the works that was on display that seemed a 3D printed prototype. Not sure if that was the WD01, might've been, but that's been around on Amazon since July already apparently. $139 bucks. Probably not very high-end tho.

When looking at the V-Log file in waveforms, sure the blue channel is very high but not clipping? I'm trying out the "Agressive 709"-LUT from the varicam LUT-library, and it seems like the results are somewhat better, especially when lowering the saturation in the blue channel and fiddeling with some curves.. Not so much blue left though.. =D Maybe they can release a LUT that handles the problem better? Wasn't there a similar problem in the ACES workflow that was fixed in post..? V-Log-curvesetc0.tif

Thanks for that link. Haven't been up-to-date with drone legislation for the last year or 2. Used to be a nice grey area... and people (and even police) were interested with what the hell you were flying. Now... it's an nuisance to people or worse... instils fear in them. Of course there were the ones that didn't act responsible... and as usual, the few spoil it for the many.

You forgot to mention Z Cam E2 / E2C / S6!

He said sub $200, that's over $200 And I can see it has some basic flaws, like using nonlocking connectors.

I believe that in most European countries you are allowed to fly anything up to 250gr without much fuss... provided you stay below 30m... don't run risk of hurting life or property and adhere to privacy guidelines. That is... until you start rolling the camera... then suddenly you're no longer flying for the flight itself (rc model flying) but to capture footage. Then you still need to adhere to all the UAV rules and legislation regardless of the fact it's 249gr only. And to have the videos straight in here:

I read a hack about changing a timeline frame rate even after it's had clips added to it and has locked. (save your project before doing this, and duplicate the timeline as a double-backup, but this is how I remember it going...) Highlight everything on the timeline, edit->cut, go to the timeline setting for framerate (which should have now unlocked) and change it, then paste everything back in. I've tried it with very simple projects (like, when you add a few clips and then remember) and it worked, but not sure for anything more complicated. and yes, I understand about other people choosing settings... life is full of compromises sometimes!

If you want to change the world, start off by making your bed. “Make Your Bed” by Admiral William H. McRaven

Ok, here's a theory... I think the Voigtlanders might be the MFT equivalent of the Zeiss Super Speeds. This is why: Both have very wide apertures and are amongst the fastest lenses available for the sensor size Both are known to be very soft wide open but when stopped down become very sharp, giving both of them a real split personality reputation Both are known for their soft rendering when wide-open and are prized for low-light work and bokeh at night, and also for how sharp they can be when closed down, giving aesthetic options depending on the project Both have very poor performance at the outer edges of their image circle, even when stopped down considerably (*) Both have CA problems at larger apertures, but are improved when stopping-down Both are configured for fully manual cinema use with de-clicked apertures and long focus throws Both are very solidly built, heavy, with very smooth controls making them a joy to use They are both very expensive compared to their more moderately priced competitors (acknowledging that cine glass prices can be stratospheric / catastrophic) (* On the Voigtlanders this isn't because of field curvature. I have no idea what causes it on the SS) I've read that Voigtlander essentially build their lenses so that they can't be repaired, which is contrary to the Zeiss approach with the SS which are regularly serviced and maintained by lens houses. Of course, on the plus side, a set of Voigtlanders costs about 2% of what a set of SS costs, plus MFT is meant to be dead so who cares, right...? Reference materials and supporting evidence..... This article includes the 17.5mm and 25mm Voigtlanders, which go from being in the last two places wide open, to 4th and 5th places at f2.8, to a very close 2nd and 4th at f4. This is all centre sharpness measurements, as their outer performance isn't great, but most people don't put the subject of a shot at the edge, so it's less relevant. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/05/wide-angle-micro-43-imatest-results/ Aperture tests....... Voigtlanders: Zeiss SS: I'm not sure I'm convinced by this argument, but there are a lot of similarities. Even if it's true, not everyone is a fan of the Super Speeds, and once again it's about taste. Some prefer the Master Anamorphics or the Cooke glass as they're more consistent, being sharper than these wide open and softer when stopped down, so not being so schizophrenic in temperament. I think I'm gradually talking myself into buying the 42.5mm Voigt.

Seems a 'now shipping' update rather than an announcement. Already saw some videos on it (actually... saw it in person @ IBC).

What do you mean by Magic Lanterns highlight rolloff then sorry? I think I missed something.

I think using right angle HDMI and USB-C connectors and channeling them upwards would alleviate any concerns I'd have about it but its early days yet anyway so no doubt cages with clamps will be along before long. Also, if you are only recording internally, then as the live streaming video above shows, the FP is a UVC compliant device so you will be able to plug it into your phone and use that as a monitor with any number of UVC apps.

Bought it. Looks pretty sweet and for the price of a sandwich, I'd say it's worth having around. Thanks for letting us know!

This seems to sum up a lot of the variables in this whole topic.

I understand and even concur on the fairness of such point. Our viewpoint and interest as users : ) Someone on these boards joked with the case of the vanilla ice cream by Nestlé. Go figure if you're on the other side though... ; -) Pretty honest here: I think we should all struggle for our interests and perspectives but don't call me to subscribe character's assassination. Let's talk about ethics and morals? Very well. Along this thread some serious reputation attacks against some individual were produced based on supposed claims which evidences no one here had access if any. Is he here to defend himself? Any law student would be able to confirm this can't be accepted under any standard at any rate. I just can't speak about something I am not able to. Silence is also to consent anyway. For both sides. I realize some people have their scope on topic. No one is blaming anyone for that. It is even informative and healthy but when certain parameters are under our control, it can actually testify how accurate and fair our standpoint is. E : -)

The Olympus Pro is a $1000 lens. Its 1.8 little brother $350. This lens is a complete steal for $150 and it’s tiny size.

I understand Ed you may have access to some sensitive information which has triggered your alerts. People are not great all the time. I don't ignore that and the fact you've noticed it. You and many other people attentive to many injustices around the world. No idea, I can't testify ; ) The men I am aware, they are smart enough to self-criticism when due. I just don't give so much importance to such case because of my point of view on these two people. I am in touch with Jarred for a decade and a half now. He's a good man, this is something I really praise from a human being. Jim Jannard can look like a bit more distant -- that label of a billionaire doesn't help either : ) but at a certain point I wonder what is real, what is myth. Jarred's best friend can only be as friendly as him. Used to evaluate character of people from my five decades now and almost three since the end of my teens, a quarter of century in this industry. I assisted the bashing of his persona to the limits of nonsense on cinematography forums only because he is R-I-C-H (c'mon!) and he resisted, always polite. I was there. I like him. Really. I'd be dishonest with myself if I'd act as Simon (aka Saint Peter) did : ) I don't see our class of people involved in this business as some ethically above the average. I never stop to remind me Giuseppe Tornatore when he before to come to this playground thought people here can only be good people much earlier to realize only the movies are able to show or tell the truth. Comes to my mind now F for Fake by Orson Welles and out of curiosity made with Gary Graver aka Robert McCallum on many golden age hard core pieces. Of course, it's a 2nd angle on the same subject. No doubts on that. You know as filmmakers, we always tend to believe there are multiple perspectives on the same dimension and different layers there in fact : -) Let alone something so serious as reputation is. Thanks for your care on your words and consideration about myself as individual -- that counts to me : ) I've tried to put RED to not turn the back to Andrew for the contributor but also the human being he is. The same way I don't appreciate to see this brand to be attacked as I do read. They are necessary to this industry. I wish all the best to Jarred now as his friend and admirer of their work and efforts. I'd never arrive to my Blackmagic Pockets if not from their existence among us : -)

Let's look at resolution. Here's a bunch of resolution tests of the Zeiss CP.2, Zeiss CP.2 SuperSpeeds, Zeiss CP.3, and Zeiss Supreme Prime series. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/06/just-the-cinema-mtf-charts-zeiss-cine-lenses/ If you don't know how to read and MTF chart then go read some thorough tutorials and come back - warning: hanging with the brick-wall-photographers that think MTF charts are the scoreboard of their egos will rot your brain, consider yourself warned. My notes from the above article on the Zeiss lenses are that: With the exception of a few lenses (which are mostly wide or long) their centre resolution is typically between ~0.93 and ~0.5 when wide open Edge resolution typically drops off quite significantly and also may go through complex curves on the way (likely due to field curvature, but that wasn't covered in the article) The CP.3 series is typically much better than the CP.2 series, and the Super Speeds, which are a classic, are worse, although they're also at a wider aperture, which is a nice segue to..... This article looks at what happens when you stop down, and includes some other cine lenses too (Canon CN-E, Sigma Cine, Rokinon Xeen) https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/11/testing-lenses-stop-downed-mtf-curves/ From this we learn that: Lenses sharpen up when stopped down... I mean, who knew! Edge resolution is still pretty poor and the Sigma looked completely rubbish (once again, it looks like field curvature) Lots of astigmatisms happening off-axis This article talks about best-MTF curves: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/11/testing-lenses-best-individual-focus-mtf-curves/ This points out that these lenses are capable of very good performance across most of their image circle, so the issues in previous articles are to do with field curvature. So, let's talk about field curvature and taking the average best performance: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/11/testing-lenses-finding-the-best-average-focus-point/ That basically says that if you focus so that the most of the subject is in the best focus then it'll be better than making the centre point completely in focus and not caring about the rest of the image. For a change of pace, let's look at the Fujinon MK 18-55 T2.9 lens: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/02/first-impressions-of-the-new-fujinon-mk-18-55mm-t2-9-cine-lens/ It's only a first impression and the MTF charts only show it wide open, but it looks like the other cine lenses with edge performance dropping off. This article shows that the Veydra Cine Mini Prime lenses are very good lenses with great resolution and very little field curvature, and they absolutely kill the CP.2 for resolution. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/03/veydra-cine-mini-prime-mtf-optical-bench-tests/ Here's one showing the Rokinon / Samyang stills and cine lenses: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/04/just-mtf-charts-rokinon-samyang-lenses/ ....and finally here's an article about testing cine lenses, why they didn't do it in the past and why they started. It's interesting because it speaks to the concerns of cinematographers vs photographers but also brings in the topic of resolution and how when you've got a bunch of lenses that all looked sharp before and you increase the resolution some of them will still look sharp and others won't. Fun stuff. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/07/why-were-going-to-start-testing-cinema-lenses-and-why-we-havent-before/ Something that's worth pointing out is that not all lenses do get significantly worse towards the edges of the frame. While rare, lenses like the Nikkor 85mm f1.4 and f1.9 lenses are almost flat between their centre and their edge: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/04/just-mtf-charts-nikon-prime-lenses/ After all this talk of resolution, I haven't yet talked about if this actually matters. I'll get there, I promise.

Still nailing... The promised CFExpress support is missing too.

A couple of screen-grabs from a recent Sofar Concert I shot. Shot with the 70-200 2.8, all in 4k 10bit HLG, graded with Filmconvert Nitrate in a couple of minutes.

As an end user, if I was in the US, I'd just buy this from another market and then go about using it how it should be used. Next time I went on vacation I'd get one delivered to the hotel or whatever. What a load of bs. EDIT: Doesn't the Tentacle Sync Track E essentially record and transmit at the same time? You can listen live on your phone, so if you plug your phone into the mic socket of your camera you have a (probably low quality but good for syncing and drafting an edit) receiver. Surely the patent doesn't allow for low quality transmission, but puts the stops up for HQ transmission.

Armando, if you have an Android phone, try the Gmonitor app: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.minaxsoft.gmonitor (it is free) With it you can activate the Cinelike D profile easily. After that, save the settings in one of the custom C positions to recall it. (asking for license to help him in Portuguese, probably only @Emanuel will understand it too ) Armando, se você possuir um telefone Android, tente o app Gmonitor (link está acima). Com ele você consegue ativar o perfil Cinelike D com facilidade. Após ativar, salve os ajustes em uma das posições "C" da câmera para recuperar o ajuste sem precisar usar o app toda vez.

Testing outside using the new profile, it's very overcast here at the moment, I found my self switching between negative 1.0 and 1.3, but compared to the same scene with Picture Wizard off there is more dynamic range. Also there is at least 1 stop more to be gained which could prove invaluable in failing light. I hope that you test this and share your results. I have not tried adjusting any other settings which I have left at standard. This may also work for the gamma DR profile as well, more tests are needed. I will be using this profile for the next few weeks just to see if it is reliable.

OK, so I strongly believe that you can gain an extra whole stop in low light by using method 2. Profile settings: color R G B +1.99, contrast -5, Saturation -1, Sharpness -10 (the contrast, saturation & sharpness are to taste but I find the contrast at -5 produces flatter more realistic results). Once you set the profile you can achieve a similar exposure to standard by using negative -1 exposure compensation. Note how the ISO drops as a result of the negative exposure compensation yet when scenes from standard and this custom profile are compared there do not appear to be any disadvantages just lower noise! Obviously you will need to adjust exposure compensation for different scenes to protect the whites as much as you probably would in standard exposure but you will need around an extra stop of negative exposure using this profile.. Next to test externally.