Leaderboard

Desperate for any excuse to actually use my fP again, I've just gone outside to shoot this very quick, non-scientific and, indeed, slightly not focused on the ColorChecker test to show you the different profiles. I actually quite like the Portrait one as a flatter profile myself. STANDARD VIDID NEUTRAL PORTRAIT LANDSCAPE CINE TEAL&ORANGE SUNSET RED FOVEON CLASSIC GREEN FOVEON CLASSIC BLUE FOVEON CLASSIC YELLOW MONO

...and posting no links to work or a reel. Does your first name happen to be Ebrahim?

We are here to share and learn...But lately i see just complete bullshit from fake users that claim their pro colorist with their science Post your work and talk.

Now there's a phrase you don't hear every day.

Stop changing words and post your work like everyone requested here.

@Django Check out this list https://pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/the-best-cameras-for-color-reproduction-ranked/ TBH I am really confused as the Fuji's are up at the top directly followed by Sony. How can they both be super color accurate while both being very different?

Don't worry about the R5 bashers. Haters gonna hate. Watch em come around in couple months.. CS is a tricky subject, there are a few dedicated threads about it here. Most of them don't end well lol.. Canon is known for their warm skin tones and Reds that pop. Clog is also pretty easy to grade. RAW 14-bit is glorious. Pleasing CS doesn't necessarily mean accurate colours though. Strangely you will often find Sony on top of color accuracy rankings. In the real world however, Sony are often last in the CS preferences. doesn't help their WB craps out as soon as mixed lighting comes in. That said I love Venice CS and shoot almost exclusively with the Venice LUT on my FS7. I haven't worked with recent BM cams but generally speaking the ProRes & RAW footage from them grades beautifully. My problem with BM is they can be unreliable cameras. Some Ursa Mini 4.6K had magenta cast issues for example. Very difficult to get rid of.

Did ANYONE said that? What people ARE saying is that GOOD colour is subjective. As for ACCURATE colour, well that is an ENTIRELY different argument and to me (my OPINION) the cameras with the most ACCURATE colour that I have used (accurate to what I saw when using them and not grading) was Sony and Canon has been close to the LEAST accurate (especially since people seem to like vivid colours from Canon..I pretty much always put lower Canon cameras into vivid mode) though no camera has had BAD colour. I keep looking for high end colourists saying what you have been but can not seem to find any. Lastly, I find it funny you say you think people should use what they want, then in the next breath putting down their choices.

I'm not sure arguing your point of view counts the same as sharing your knowledge. If enlightening others including me is your goal, you need to rethink your strategy I never argued that accurate colour isn't important. I personally feel Nikons colours are more accurate to real life than Canon, though also feel that Canon look is more pleasing to the eye than Nikon. Yes, I did ask what accurate colour is? But those screen shots no more prove or disprove that. Some shots to me look good to me, 1 looked a bit off. But maybe that's my own eyes. Or my phone. How do we prove accurate colour when we all have different eyes, different devices to view the colour and a preference for colour that can cloud our judgement on what is and isn't accurate? To be honest I'm not sure whether you're arguing which colour science is easier to grade or which is more accurate straight out. Or both. You seem to swing your argument to whatever you feel gives you weight to your opinion on Canon. If Canons colours are superior to others for being accurate straight out, what's your thoughts on the below tests of camera models for accurate colour reproduction. https://pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/the-best-cameras-for-color-reproduction-ranked/ I would have thought all Canon cameras would be top, but no, and it also seems not all Canon cameras are equal for accurate colour reproduction. Of course this test is contested by some on the comments section. By Canon users naturally 😄 But then it seems accurate colour reproduction is subjective.

Just throwing this out there... So the plan is - I will be putting some future blog posts out in Mattias Burling style, with the voice over, the artistic shots and camera gear reviews in video form. I really like this format and Mattias did it brilliantly. The other thought is around some kind of live streaming and online camera 'festivals' with a good atmosphere and lots of guests. Like CineGear but online. I'm open to advice and what you guys want from EOSHD on YouTube. It is actually going ahead this time in a big way and won't be a one off podcast or interview. Suggestions welcome and ideas even more so

If you ever decide to launch a hobbist camera project, I'd be willing to contribute some of my free time to designing the user interface module. I've been an advocate of real simple UIs (User Interfaces), however with a balance of the things you need most often right at your fingertips at all times. Today I mostly don't like any of the user interfaces on any of the usual suspects in the camera business (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, etc), and I think this could be much improved if these manufacturers gave us tools to create our own user interfaces and be able to share them with anyone else; heck, it could be something as simple as designing the UI with HTML, CSS and/or JSON and then providing javascript hooks into the actual functions, something similar to this: camera.setISO(800); camera.setSpeed(50); camera.setApperture(lens.getMaximumApperture()); timeToShoot = 300; camera.shootVideo(timeToShoot); etc

What I would like to see is XY film scanner using video mode to improve resolution and dynamic range. It's only about making proper code - mechanics and optic is easy.

Please do a Sigma FP video review. I would love to see 4-5 minutes shorts, each show different aspects of the camera. 5 min about DR in different bith depth modes, 5 min low light against A7 III / S1 / etc, 5 min about color comparison. My favourite videos from you are the comparison shots between cameras. Or one big 20min+ long review, but it's a really big project

Canon thought the same. But then everyone switched to Sony, Panasonic, Blackmagic, ... instead of buying the Cxxx series for video. Sony will have the same problem if they keep crippling their camera's. People will just as easily switch back to Canon.

I gave my opinion about my A7s which happens to BE made by Sony but I would have got it if it was made by Lego if it was the same. The best camera I have used (my opinion) IS my A7s (on my second one) the WORST camera i have owned was ALSO a Sony. I have a heap of little P&S cameras from a range of makers and the Sony I have is the worst of them with a Nikon the best (none are great)....I am no Sony fanboy, I am an A7s fanboy if you like because i can use it walk around at night with a Canon f4 TS lens and just shoot among other things The A7s WB is easy to change (who would have thunk it). I love Canon gear (MOST of my mainly used lenses are Canon) and i am considering getting an RP for using some of them with AF over MF on my A7s (either that or an AF Sony portrait lens) but if I DO get the RP it will NOT be because "Canon colour is more accurate" because i do not think it is. As for the R5, it may well be what it is being hyped as (I hope it is) but on past history I can understand people being sceptical.

There is a reason why people (real people not on video/photography forums) say they like Canon for VIVID colour. The same with Fuji and Velvia and it was the same in the film days

You weren't technically, but with you, the word argue just seems to fit when discussing your replies.

I think the strawman in this argument is you. You've been consistently arguing with other members on this point. Some of my replies to you have got likes. Yours are not so well received. 😄 In fact one of your replies was to argue why a forum member wasn't using the viewfinder in a DSLR camera when recording video in sunlight. Whereas we all know such a thing is impossible for DSLR cameras as the mirror is up when using the camera. So remind me again, which of us is foolish. Now I'm not arguing cameras like 1DX Mark III can be better than the Pocket cameras for colour grading. I can't, I don't own the 1DX. My only issue is with your blanket statement that Canon Colour Science is easier to grade. Whereas I feel it is wholly dependant on the camera and codec being used. My point about how our eyes can see colour differently, is one of the reasons why I feel colour is subjective, even accurate colour. I'm sorry it went over your head. 😄

Blimey I come back a few days later and you are still arguing with yourself pretty much - not being funny but you seem to have gone down a rabbit hole and killed whatever interest I had in this thread. Anyway sorry to interrupt, as you were...

Not at all. Owned 550D, 5D III, C100, C300, GH3, GH4, a7S, A7S II, bmcc 2.5k, ursa mini pro, pocket 4K, pocket 6K (and shot with FS5, FS7, fs700, Arri amira, alexa mini lf, sony venice, F55, ...) All camera's have their strenghts and weaknesses. One has better color out of the box, one is easier to grade, one has slowmo, one is too light, one is too heavy, ...)

Deep Impact is a 90s flick, it was shot on 35mm film with an ARRIFLEX. Strange example to bring up in a CS discussion about digital cinema. I wanna say CS isn't an issue in Hollywood. They shoot the flattest log or RAW footage and then send it to a pro colourist who will dial it in. Recent Canon Cine Log tries to copy ARRI's Log C. Sony FX/FS have Venice CS. S1H/EVA1 I'd assume aim towards VariCam CS. Those are the industry standard. On most consumer cameras, picture profiles & log follow other standards. One of the reasons why cine cams rule imo is they can load custom LUTs and you can also paint in camera. Very practical when you're going after a specific look and don't have time/budget to grade log/RAW footage.

My camera of 2025 is a digital Mamiya 7. Not going to happen...

Everyone has been pushing video lately, including Fuji & Nikon.. two outsiders. It's totally puzzling to see Sony take the back seat when the mirrorless market has never been so crowded & competitive. Surely they have something up their sleeve but it's a mystery why they are taking so long. My theory is they want to wow the public but keep getting sent to the drawing boards. They'd rather show nothing than tarnish their reputation as spec leaders by coming out with a non-showstopper. It's a double edged sword though as their alpha cams are falling way behind. edit: FX9/FX6 definitely don't leave much wiggle room for an A7S3.

I'd love it if someone to built this into an 8mm camera body and wire the trigger up to start/stop recording. The VF doesn't even need to work - or better yet, make it some kind of rangefinder. Also, here's the first still image from the camera (As far as I know)

If only, see above.

Hi Andrew, BTW, there is a Mitakon 85mm F1.2, and I think is available also in GFX mount. Not much info about it, reviews, etc. I always wanted to try one on my GFX 50R, never got to it....

Now with a human subject. Everything done by myself - so those screen grabs may be slightly out of focus. Alright, here are the results: No key light, only Neewer CN 176 giving some background. Partially geled with an aqua foil. Power @10% f/1.4 , 1/60 s, ISO 1000 (can't get any lower when recording HLG video), WB - 3700K Next - adding a key light. Approximately 2.6 m (~8.5 feet) away from me. Yongnuo YN-300 III 5500K @1% power f/1.4 , 1/60 s, ISO 1000, WB - 3700K No light modifiers in front. I didn't point it straight at myself, it was rather feathering me. YN-300 @10% power f/1.4 , 1/60 s, ISO 1000, WB - 5700K And @100% f/1.4 , 1/125 s, ISO 1000, WB - 5700K I used an external monitor with false colors to match the exposure on my skin. All walls in my room are white and it's really showing here - the light is bouncing everywhere and the depth is gone. What's more, I think the colors are more yellow-ish? Finally - two of the four LED bulbs I teased you with earlier. Each rated @17W, though in reality they aren't as powerful as one would expect. Key feature: >95 CRI I put them in a reflective umbrella (95 cm diameter), pointing at the back of it, and then hung one layer of a diffusion cloth in front and a grid to make the light more directional. Just like this: Since there is no way to dim them (I can only turn them on or off), they were blasting at their full power. And once again - not pointed directly at me and around 2.5 m away. f/1.4 , 1/60 s, ISO 1000, WB - 3700K I like the color rendition and the quality of light here. I only wish these bulbs were more punchy.. Sure, I realize that the gridded umbrella may cause around 2 stops light loss (I haven't measured it) and that I used 2 bulbs out of 4, but still. Though, if I was a YouTuber, I think a setup like this would be sufficient. No need to overpower the sun when you record in your own room, right? Total costs of the final setup, if that interest you: Neewer CN-160 ~15$ An aqua gel ~2$ Light stand ~20$ Four socket bulb holder (~10$) and 2 bulbs (~4$ for each) 95cm umbrella softbox with grid ~35$ All in all: 90$ Not bad, I guess? Also: I need haircut.

Not ideal, but I can live with slightly reduced dynamic range if the rolloff is really nice (like Cineon log curve where colors desaturate to white as they get near 100% luminance). I just can't stand the nuclear orange supernovas around the sun... or around hotspots on peoples faces. A while ago (about three months or so) someone posted some film footage here from a formula 1 race (Le Mans???) and even though the DR was spectacular, the rolloff was nice.

But which Canon camera? I've worked with 8 bit Canon footage from various versions of the 5D, 6D and 7D over the last decade and the footage was a terrible experience to grade compared to my experience with BRAW from the Pocket. Sure, when you pay money for their higher end cameras, you get the sort of files that make colour grading easier. But does my Pocket 4K or 6K sit in the same level as a Canon C500 or 1DX III. Of course not. It's not in ARRI territory either. Its foolish even to compare them in my opinion. I do look at image quality and colour, just as any other buyer of camera. I chose the Pocket 4K. I will doubtless choose the 6K too. I won't be choosing the R5. I am certainly intrigued by its developments and welcome Canon taking their lower end cameras more seriously, but it's not for me. As you say, no one cares what you shoot your footage with. They care about what you created. I pick the camera that is in my budget, has features I need and like and an image quality and colour I can work with. For those reasons, I chose the Pocket. Others on this forum chose the URSA. In my opinion they made great choices. Whether Canon colour is easier to grade with certain models and with the R5 is frankly besides the point. If I like Blackmagic colours, then I'm not fighting their colour science, I'm embracing it. That will always make grading easier. Why would I want an image I am working with to look like Canon, when I am not always a fan of the Canon image. Aside from great skin tones, which I do like, their colours often don't do much for me. And your examples have only proved that point to me. I'm sure we can all dig around on the internet to find videos to support our points of view. But frankly it's an argument that still is as many have said, including you at one point, very much subjective.

I just want a board sensor that covers 16mm and has dual pixel AF so I can hack my 16mm camera apart and replace the ground glass with a CMOS and have reliable AF on a film camera.

Do not do it. We have the shadow flickering bug that affects only some cameras - so in case this needs to be fixed in hardware, you will be out of luck. Besides, have you fully read the statement by Sigma? Any repair of a grey market camera does not only need to be paid out of your own pocket, but you'll also be charged $250 extra. That means that the money you saved will evaporate as soon as you need the camera to be serviced.

I don't know. A few EOSHD members have had issues with their FP that I have not had. So it is random and variable. It's a very new camera with not many users globally. So if you are worried about hardware issues I would buy from a recognised dealer. Some official Sigma dealers my have an ex-demo body, or customer return. I regularly buy nearly new gear from main dealers.

I don't think Panasonic will give us all of that this year or in early 2021. Don't think the GH6 will have 8K, not even in 8bit. (but happy to be proved wrong!) Not unless Panasonic does the opposite approach to the GH5S variant, and gives us the "GH6R" with 8K as a sister camera to accompany the mainstream GH6. (and skip an entire generation entirely, and not offer a GH6S until the GH7 series comes around. This could be a smart approach, alternating between a GHxR and a GHxS for each generation, but never both at the same time) I'd really like the next DMW-XLR to go an extra step beyond with extra I/O than just having XLR inputs. And having 2x BNC for TC I/O & an independent SDI output would be perfect for many folks wanting to rig up a GHx camera in a more professional setting! Gives us a built in eND too and we'll all be as happy as a pig in sh*t.

What a bunch of nonsense. You think you know me but you don't know shit. I'm probably one of the most brand agnostic persons around here. While I have my preferences when it comes to camera companies for various subjective reasons, I started photography on Nikon equipment and still shoot film with them. Did a lot of work on the D750. I was one of the first here to go all-in the Fuji hybrid revolution with XT2. My favorite camera is my Leica M9P. I've owned the A7S2 and I also currently own a Sony FS7, my professional workhorse. Finally I won't hesitate to rent a RED/ARRI or whatever if budget/crew allows it. Oh and I won't even go into lens manufacturers. So you see trying to pigeonhole me as a Canon fanboy is pretty ridiculous. Its not cuz I enjoy a particular camera, that I hate others. I stand by my word about EOS R. As flawed as it may seem, for my personal usage its a great hybrid. Laugh all you want.. IDGAF. I work within camera systems. The body is only one element.. That said, I never stated EOS R was perfect or better than any other camera. I only defended it against attacks of those that thought it was a useless POS. Most of whom never even picked one up. And that's one thing I don't understand in these forums is people talking shit about gear they have never touched or have any intention of using. That to me is true fanboyism. Cuz see you're attacking me for a camera I appreciate. It's so stupid man. Doesn't make me a Fanboy. It does however make you look like a Hater.

lol you are as much of a Canon fanboy than the Sony fanboy you mention. Even when Canon ridiculously failed deeply with the EOS R your were saying here on EOSHD how great it was. What a joke. Personally I don’t understand at all fanboyism for a camera brand. Who cares if it’s Sony Canon or Nikon, I couldn’t care less about the name. I am bashing what’s wrong, and praising good stuff. When the 5D2 was out I was applauding. That’s why I bought it. When the EOS R was out I was laughing hard. Sony did an excellent job with the A7III when it was out. That’s why I bought it. The R5 looks absolutely fantastic and will most likely get it to replace my A7III.

Can't get better image quality than the pocket 6k or 4k for the money.

Yes. I would never stretch anything.

Well dynamic range was not that great + the crop were my problems with the eos R.

What are you actually talking about? You are absolutely ridiculous. I started photography with a 450D, used the 5D2 for years, the 5D3 for years. I have got the A7R II, the GH5, the GX85, Nikon D5500 and D5600, the A7III and multiple others. I am bashing shitty products from any company, and praising good products from good companies. You are again into this brand loyalty thing. It’s not about jumping ship, there is no ship. Only products. Yeah, it’s seems everything you see is hilarious, just as your first comment about the hilarious people bashing the R5 in the first place. You on the other end aren’t hilarious, you are sad.

It should be noted that 720x480 is 1.5 to 1 , and 640x480 is 1.333 to 1. So converting from one to the other means black bars must appear somewhere if you don't stretch the original image. I have converted some old SD interlaced footage in the PAL format. An some of it was widescreen PAL where the pixels are nowhere square ( can't remember the ratio ) but the result is a 16 by 9 image from SD which has ( in PAL ) 720 x 625. I wanted to put my old footage ( family movies etc ) made on a DV recorder ( PAL) into a non interlaced ( ie progressive ) format which I felt would be more future proof. I tried various things , but in the end I just put the SD footage into an editor and set the output to be 1920x1080 ( progressive ) and kept the frame rate the same. Davinci Resolve will not accept interlaced video , so I used handbrake to do this conversion. This would result in a image which had black bars at the sides. I would then if necessary stretch the image so that it was as original . I would try and find a circular object in the image and make it round . I found that Davici Resolve was useful for this as it allowed the x to y ratio to be fine tuned. I would still have black bars at the sides but at least people did not look fat or thin. I don't know if any of this helps , but that is what I do.

I beg to differ. SIgma Fp full frame RAW output to SSD Panasonic S1 V-LOG 10bit 422 Nikon Z6 ProRes RAW And arguably GH5S codec is pretty good looking.