Leaderboard

McKinnons video was not a very good demonstration of the 1D-X Mk3

I’m using two Z-Cam E1’s, Sony A6300/NEX7, DJI Osmo Pocket, JVC LS300 & Panasonic Eva1.....sometimes IPhone 8 Plus or X Max, whichever I pull out of my pocket.

That was ARRI's intention, the Mini was going to be a specialist camera to shut out RED from stealing all those niche roles. (car rigs / drones / gimbals / etc) As RED was making a lot of headway into high end production (especially as gimbal / drone / etc usage became popular). I think it even surprised ARRI themselves just how popular the Mini became as a general purpose camera / A Cam. But it is easy to see why: Mini is more affordable for Owner Ops, and is lighter so can be used by smaller crews more easily. In recent years the ARRI Mini and Sony FS7 easily by far take the top two spots as the most popular cameras I've personally worked with on shoots. 3rd place I'd say is AMIRA. Tricky to say what is 4th, we're getting down to a point which is far far less common than the top two spots. I guess the URSA Mini. 5th place is even less common, probably a fight between Panasonic EVA1 / Panasonic Varicam LT / Canon C300mk2 / etc or even perhaps a mirrorless Panasonic GH5 / Sony a7whatever might be here in 5th place. Wouldn't know for sure, they're all far far less common for me to come across than a FS7 or ARRI Mini. Nah, you need EPO for those.

Its not too much a concern; in fact, HLG/Cine-D are more robust from a codec perspective. Speaking Gen.4, the extreme gamut is perhaps where VLog will have the slight edge in directness, but the others might be preferable overall. Attila - It does include perceptual luma weightings of RGB. To revisit the earlier discussion, everything fell into place with the engine rewrite (Pt.2). I've been working on the web side this week, and mostly wrapped that today. Now its back to finishing GHa V4, and last the Pdf (and streamlining it for future cameras).

That's what I heard (although I'm the last person that would know such things, so apply salt here..) but with some of the quality I'm seeing, my current production standards for my family travel videos have exceeded (a small percentage) of the quality of some shows on there. Still, in the end none of that matters and it's about content. TBH I think that with a very modest setup and the right levels of skill content that looks professional can be created with almost no budget at all. An example might be @DaveAltizers video Porcelainia: Shot on a 7D, L-glass, and graded in FilmConvert it's a great example of how, when done well, content shines through. Think about how many people have access to equipment that meets this level of quality - at this point it would be half the people on earth who own an ILC. And this is exactly what I'm seeing - there is heaps of content on YT that people make for fun or as part of a side hustle, and heaps of content on Netflix where people with skill use the same level of equipment and skill but are more ambitious and take on larger projects and larger distribution goals and do distribution deals that way. The best content on Netflix is obviously better than the best content on YT, but the vast majority of Netflix content has less production value than the best examples on YT. The overlap is huge.

I'll be using my OG Pocket for a big (for me) corporate shoot this weekend. It still consistently can deliver the goods.

And you consider that a good skintones test?

Beg to differ on this one ? If you have a high contrast edge and use various scaling algorithms, Lanczon, Sinc, etc,. Often the scale results in negative lobes (like a curve overshoot). It's quite easy to see this. Happens in compositing all the time. It's exacerbated by working Linear as we always do (i suspect because of the dynamic range). So it's a well established trick to cover to log, scale, and convert back to linear. I suspect some apps do this automatically (maybe resolve does, i don't know) https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/ringing-artifact It's a bit geeky but there's a diagram of a square pulse and lobes that extend beyond it. Sony had this issue in camera on the FS700, very bright edges would give black pixels as the scale went negative. My gut tells me in the case of a bayer sensor it could be even worse - partly because of the negative signal but also the tendancy to have stronger edges because of missing bits of image? Kindest Paul Cool. But are they not just taking each RGGB into a separate greyscale image, so you have 4 grey images roughly 3000x1250. Scale those to 1920x1080. Then create bayer data for 3840x2160 by just alternating pixels to build up the RGGB again? So we are maybe seeing artefacts in the scale process based on algorithm used. It might even be nearest neighbour which is what i think you're demonstrating - when you take an existing pixel and alternate to make up the UHD image. But if that scale is done properly - is it not going to improve the image OR is the fact that scaling those 4 layers, which are already missing pixels in-between actually makes it worse? The Ideal is take each RGGB layer then do an interpolation, so that instead of going from 3K (one channel) you interpolate that up to the full 6K by interpolating the missing pixels and *then* scale it down to to 1920 and then the resulting bayer image might actually look really good....? cheers Paul

Maybe this thread should now be renamed to "OG BMPCC in 2020!" Here is a brand new post from Noam Kroll: Why I Am Revisiting Blackmagic’s Original (1080p) Pocket Cinema Camera https://noamkroll.com/why-i-am-revisiting-blackmagics-original-1080p-pocket-cinema-camera/

X-T3 unless you can wait for the X-T4. X-T3 Specs 4K, 10-Bit, ALL Intra, 4:2:0, 400Mbps internal recording (Up to 30p) 4K/60p (in H264 mode), up to 200Mbps

I'm perpetually baffled that nobody has release an APS-C lens to rule them all yet. Something to replace the aging ~18-50ish lenses already on the market. I guess the companies all know that APS-C & DSLR's are going to die out so they've pretty much given up on them. I'd love to see a standard cinema zoom made to fill the current gaping hole in the market though. Something like a 19-60 f/2.8 version of Sigma's cine lenses, available in EF or PL. For $3500 that would be an absolute winner for every person who owns an FS5/7, C100/C200/C300, URSA, BMPCC 6K, Raven or EVA1. Everyone I know using those lenses is still holding onto ancient Canon 17-55's or speed-boosted 24-105's and would be happy to upgrade them if something came along. The lenses that have come closest so far are: Fujinon 18-55 T2.9 - but doesn't fit EF/PL Sigma 18-35 T2 - not long enough for "all-purpose" shooting Red 17-50 - PL mount only and no longer in production.

The new Caldwell Chameleon anamorphics also use a similar design with counter-rotating cylinders controlling the squeeze ratio, albeit at a much higher price tag. This design was also used in the series one Todd-AOs way back in the 70s (see Max Max, The Getaway, Logan's Run). This is IMHO, the best design ever developed for anamorphic lenses. Without the anastigmatic group, the breathing and mumping is a bit much. The variable diopter design solves the squeeze issues, but the breathing is still there and it works very poorly for wide angle lenses. I've handled a variety of wide angle anamorphics from Lomo, Hawk, Technovision, Cineovision and JDC and they all had massive front elements, awkward mechanics, and severe barrel distortion. The Gottschalk design allows you to build a lens wider than 40mm while maintaining reasonable size and weight and a standard front diameter. Panavision has a 20mm that's barely larger than a Cooke S4. And the vertical breathing and crisp blue flaring is to die for. I'm really excited for these Xelmus lenses and I hope that they flesh out the rest of the set. 35mm up to 180mm would make these a standard on many sets.

Another thing I have noticed is multi-metering doesn't work during a recording if you shoot movies from a stills mode. So the metering mode changes from the default stills one, when you hit the record button, to something like center or full screen average - usually changing the exposure along with it. Bonkers.

Interesting chart, and you can draw broad conclusions from it: ARRI dominates! (but no surprise there) And film still has a presence, somewhat surprisingly. But be careful about drawing more detailed conclusions about the broader high end market, as 10 films is a very small sample size so your confidence interval would be massive.

This discussion looks similar to Sigma Fp topic regarding their raw DNG having some issues. Problems in downscaling 6K to 4K Raw? Very interesting. Still waiting for my Z6 to come back from Nikon. Will do some testing. Although I don't have a pro resolution chart at hand either.

The mirrorlesscomparison results don't seem to relate to my experience of the X-H1 in real world. I find the IBIS to be Olympus - level locked-down goodness.

This video, at the very beginning, shows aliasing color artifacts. It is claimed to be ProRes RAW. But the aliasing color artifacts could be from debayering color moiré due a lack of AA filter, of from pixel skipping in the RAW codec. It is hard to tell if not also the same footage was captured in N-Log. BTW ... and to avoid any misunderstanding ... I do NOT say "aliasing is an issue". I say Nikon aplies pixel skipping in their RAW data pipeline. As with debayering color moiré, I expect plenty of footage where its effects can't be noticed. I even remember the early days of the D800E (stills photography) where people claimed debayering color moiré would never be seen. It took a while. But today, it is pretty well understood when to expect, and not to expect, color moiré. Mostly in very fine farbrics of fashion at a single critical distance actually.

This is exactly why I think Panasonic with stay with MFT at least through the GH6. They have a massive group of users that want a full featured video camera for ~$2000. MFT lets them do that. It's impossible in FF at least in 2020.

this lens is a beast, shame that nx system die and u there no exist options to adapt to others mounts with diaf control or ibis.

No way would a Panasonic L Mount FF mirrorless camera priced substantially under the S1 have all of the features that would be in a GH6.

So I just did that - but I had no resolution chart at hand, but used a fine-pattern silver synthetic fabric to provoke moiré in the camera. With the Sigma 45mm/2.8, I did two shots, both at f8 and 11 degree shutter: - one UltraHD CinemaDNG shot; - one 24MP still DNG shot. I processed both in RawTherapee (but without False Color suppression filter): 6K (24MP) still DNG 4K (12MP) CinemaDNG The difference becomes already visible here, but for 1:1 comparison, I opened the 24MP still in The Gimp, scaled it to 3840 horizontal pixel (using cubic scale) and cropped it from 3:2 to 16:9 aspect ratio: still DNG, scaled & cropped to 4K 3840x2160 Now let's compare the 4K still DNG and the 4K CinemaDNG in a 1:1 center crop: CinemaDNG still DNG, downsampled to 4K While there's visible moiré also on the still DNG, the result in 4K CinemaDNG is much worse, very obviously because of a problematic scaling method. (Scaling an undebayered 6K/24MP Bayer matrix into an undebayerd 4K/12MP Bayer matrix, and probably not using the best algorithm for that.) The result is both an excessive pronunciation of moiré and (compared to the downscaled 6K) a blurry image - much like in the good' old Canon video DSLR times... One more test: center crop from the still DNG, this time downscaled in the Gimp from 6K to 4K without any pixel downsampling, but with line skipping ("Interpolation off") - still DNG, line-skipped from 6K to 4K Moiré is more pronounced than in the downsampled still, but still not as bad as in the CinemaDNG. So I really suspect the culprit in the transformation of the undebayered 6K to undebayered 4K, probably through crude line skipping/heuristics.

Your nightmare is my reality.

He did something really unique during the release presentation of The Baldlands, he composed the score and interpreted it in a live concert during the movie screening, go figure, as you can watch in these two clips: No idea yet, it can happen : ) My ultimate goal is always the movies. I produced with Spike Lee as Executive Producer a short doc in Indonesia, no regrets ; ) But for now, there are only funds to be managed : -)

A better question is why don't people for car shots (or any other tight/tricky shots, like from inside a fridge, or in a toilet stall, or whatever) use a BMD Micro Cinema Camera, or a Z Cam E1, or E2, or RX0mk2, or GH5S, or etc... People are too comfortable in taking the easy non-controversial choice "this is a GoPro shot" ("Nobody got Fired for Buying IBM") Still will take some more time before the concept of "this is a GoPro shot" will die off from being inside people's minds. For "GoPro vlogging" I'd suggest instead a DJI OSMO Pocket, in fact I was just yesterday talking with my Partner about that as she is wanting one. It's shameful how little my GoPro Hero 3 Black is worth now (NOTHING!), vs how much I used. That is why I'm keeping my Sony PMW-F3 ? Except it isn't the most convenient camera to vlog with....

I don't think he meant to be condescending. Action cameras have their uses but outside of their incredible stabilization GoPro has done little to move forward. Honestly if I needed an action camera for anything I'd just get one of the cheaper knock offs before paying the GoPro premium. That's assuming I couldn't just use one of my Panasonic cameras to accomplish what I'd use an action camera for. They also lose their value faster than pretty much any other camera out there. I just can't see investing in one unless you really need it.

Tony’s video reminds me of a nightmare I had recently.

F900, David... Yes indeed, you're right and it fairly was the case, the year is 2001 and we were just finishing the film school (in my personal story of life, the first level -- editing*, directing came two years after), thinking to split it in 52 shares as many weeks the year has. To also match different needs and pockets, obviously. When DVX100 and subsequently HVX200 later (despite that pixel shifting controversy) popped up (E : -) * One of my mates was from your department (sound), he is producer and director today and I helped him to co-produce the next piece of work : ) Once I was accused : D up there to not give a damn for my content activity, even though, this forum I guess is gear oriented not for showing up our ego LOL because there's a right place out there for that, here is a re-post of the trailer for the feature we were able to shoot on a stock 5D Mark II (so, no ML hack there) half a dozen years ago, released the following year:

Again, you can hold whatever opinion you want but when you make a blanket statement about Sony not used by serious photographers, as far as I am concerned your opinion is as valid as if you said your "opinion is that one plus one equals three". I AM a fan of Sony (because of the A7s and Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 among others) but equally i am a fan of Canon (because of the 17mm TS-E for example) and there are things i like in most brands. I see great work from Sony users and Canon users and Nikon ETC ETC ETC if you don't that is your problem.

Can one really make an evaluation of a tool, such as a camera, purely on a single video by a user many here don't seem to care for? I think there is plenty of examples of good images coming from Sony A7 III etc. but can also agree that SOOC of XT2/3 is typically more appealing. If you don't AB the heck out of it and just watch quality filmmakers with any camera the images look good. Sometimes its more of a limitation of the user than the tool.

mr reid has given them every opportunity to succeed, statistically sony have had 7 bites at the cherry and still lag behind in percentages. make of that, what you will ! theres a base of 30000 forum readers, 36 votes is embarrassing. It seem like bloody hard work to engage any of them in any sort of activity on the forum ? Maybe mr reid should have added a { i desperately want a cinema camera category } for the other 29964 others or perhaps their all out vlogging ?