Leaderboard

Right, well I got so pissed off with both the eye/face detect and the tracking option, I wondered if there was anything else I could do. I tried everything from trying to create a timelapse of motion instead. I could. It was awful. I tried 6k mode and that kind of worked, but when it lost focus, it never regained it. So before finally biting the bullet and moving to Sony for my video (AF) needs, I thought I'd just try all the options that are not supposed to work. Such as 225-area AF. And it pretty much worked. At least good enough for my needs based on this one test. The kit and settings were: S5 + 20-60mm @60mm and f5.6, 4k 50p, 1/100th, variable ND, Natural profile (individual settings such as contrast & sharpness turned down mainly), 225-area, speed -1, sensitivity -1. Unless I happen to have hit upon the best all round settings for this kind of capture...which I doubt, I think there is still room for slight improvement... Really, the only area I have to play with now is the speed & sensitivity settings which I have played with extensively using pretty much every combination of pluses and minuses available, but only in the face/eye and tracking mode. I could test with the 85mm f1.8 and will when I get some more sunshine so I can back or sidelight as on a wedding day I can't control any of that such as if the bride is walking down the aisle at an outdoor ceremony with the sun behind her, that's what I have to work with, so my kit has to pass worst case scenarios. But the latter is not critical, ie, the 85mm f1.8 not working 100% in this kind of scenario would be a bonus rather than a need because as long as I can get a few seconds of it locked on...which I can, in any scene, it's enough. So AF summary based on my experience/testing and needs: A. For stills, it's not in question. It's not the fastest but it's reliable/accurate. That's an easy pass. B. For static video, ie, the subject is people doing things such as; hair, makeup, eating, drinking, talking, wedding ceremony etc, which is 95% of my coverage, it's again, an easy pass ie, this camera does not have a problem with anything like that other than in very rare situations, ie, is pretty much as reliable as anything out there for this kind of thing. C. For tracking AF, based on my above test, it's not 100%, but it's good enough for my needs for those 5-10 sequences on a wedding day (bride entrance, couple exit, confetti walk, couple walking shots, entrance to meal) provided I can replicate (and maybe even improve upon) what I managed in the video. I have been quite desperate to make this thing work, just as I once was moving from the Nikon D3s to Fuji X Pro1 with it's garbage AF. Why? Partly sheer bloody-mindedness, but also because the camera and sytem very much is just right. Top of the list are video quality and stills quality and it's as good as anything and better than most. The size & ergos and build are just perfect with the Smallrig L bracket to just bring the size and weight up a little. The lens options that are beginning to appear and more so in '21 are excellent. I'm still waiting on the complimentary Sigma 45mm f2.8 (I have been battling with Panasonic but it appears I have now won, probably just to make me go away) and that will be my next major test. I'm hoping the Sigma(s) will work for me in the hybrid role. I'm sticking with the Pan 20-60mm for all tracking pieces regardless and it's also my wide-angle stills lens so retains a place in my bag regardless. But I am really interested in the 35mm f2, the 65mm f2 and the 105mm f2.8 macro as these mirrorless designed lenses would complete a perfect line up for me. Various tests have shown however that within L Mount, native works best but we'll see and if the Sigma route doesn't work out, I'd be disappointed but more than happy with Panasonic's own new f1.8 lineup.

Today's AF test, posted below, but otherwise I ain't saying nothing at this time other than...pretty much SOOC, lockdown scruffy beard, mostly making a muppet of myself. We are only interested in the actual AF and whether there is any pulsing and not the colour or if it's 'cinematic as fuck' etc. Password = EOSHD

This was a good question five years ago.

The S1 stabilization doesn't require any external processing though as it quite amazing. It is also a much more capable stills camera. But yeah the video specs on the A7s3 are definitely impressive. I just wish they'd give an option to disable the heavy handed noise reduction.

I think it basically means there is more dynamic range and less noise than there would be on a non dual native ISO. The lower base ISO will always be cleaner. Even in the case of the A7S3, I think the reason the 12,800 ISO is so clean is because of heavier noise reduction. The S1H uses less noise reduction so the comparison between 640 and 4000 iso aren't as dramatic.

The high iso performance of my XT3 is worlds ahead of my previous experience. While 3200 and 6400 do add some noise; I find it looks more like film grain, which I don’t mind! Very usable.

You're not the only one who wishes there was an URSA Micro Pro released by BMD! I'd agree. Even an ARRI Alexas Classic, that's not a bad idea. As then you've got a baseline to compare yourself (and your cameras) against.

Or it might be none of those, and it might be because he was looking at images created by highly skilled and experienced DoPs, supported by an entire crew who are also highly skilled and experienced. And it is that which is creating the "cinematic look & feel" that @bonesandskin speaks of.

Yes ...In the case of a native dual ISO (Panasonic), the dynamics offered via each of the two native ISO concerned, is exactly the same ( "X" stops above the medium gray, "Y" stops below) I d'ont know ...

The problem with film cameras is the rapidly dwindling number of people who know how to repair them and the scarcity of spare parts. I have a lovely, almost mint, Olympus OM-2 SP (for may years my dream camera). Unfortunately it has a power issue that is relatively well-known but very fiddly, more fiddly than I want to attempt, to fix. I've been looking for a year for a company that can do it for me at a reasonable price, but to no avail. I also have a Canon 1V - once their top-of-the-range pro model - that I picked up non-working for £50. It turned out that all it needed was the batter contacts cleaning and it worked perfectly. A great bargain for me, but with the knowledge that if anything else ever goes wrong with it it's unlikely I'll be able to get it repaired. So my point, laboured as it is, is that while there might be a good supply of cameras (although for the desirable ones that comes at some eye-watering prices sometimes) they're mostly one-shot deals as the expertise that supported the market is disappearing as people retire/die.

I think another factor is that the expectation for quality is also dropping. It's become so easy with cell phones that anyone can do it so now the "viral" photos are based on who is in the image vs. the skill that was required to create the image. A horribly lit and composed cell phone picture of Kim Kardashian will get 50M views yet a photographic masterpiece that took weeks of planning and years of experience to create will barely get seen by 1,000 people. Another factor is no one prints anymore, so even if a camera were to advance by the magnitude of a decade or two....the typical viewer would never be able to tell the difference because it would never be viewed on anything other than a cell phone. The same thing can be said for video....who needs 8K raw when the average viewer is going to watch the final video on YouTube using their cell phone? If your client can't tell (and isn't going to pay for) the difference in quality between a $15K camera and a $2K camera why would you buy the $15K camera? I have to face these harsh realities each time I consider my next equipment purchase, I would love to own the Inspire 2 but my clients are not going to be able to tell the difference between the Inspire 2 and the Mavic Pro. Likewise the C70....why bother buying the C70 when my clients are going to pay me the same if I use the S5 instead. Thanks to cell phones which are "just good enough" for most people they are less and less willing to pay for quality.

I wonder if lack of a need for upgrade is a factor. A 5D Mkiii from 8 years ago is obviously much better than any cell phone, but also pretty comparable to a DSLR bought yesterday. I think cameras have been good enough for a while. This is obviously the case for video cameras... My partner takes photos for her business with a Canon 60d and an iPad. That camera is 10 years old and still more than enough for most quick product photography shots for the web... Why would she upgrade? The film market is pretty decent right now. Tons of people shoot film, but all of those cameras already exist. There are more than enough to supply to demand, unless you want a particular point and shoot, Leica, certain medium format cameras etc.

I'm going to go with...pleasantly surprised. But since I'm now a Canon user: It sucked balls bro compared to my rig.

No, they are not. Directly at least for the most part. But... The whole point is you have now windows you never had before. I mention it from my own experience and bills to afford, nothing vague coming from elsewhere. U.S. has a different tradition but even in the States the things move fast. Tradition is not the same. - E.

I think the panasonic s5 is the best price/quality hybrid atm.

I'm going to disagree with all the sentiments in this thread and recommend something different. Go rent an Alexa. For practical purposes, maybe an Alexa Mini. Talk to your local rental houses and see if there's a timeframe you can rent one and get a big discount, often rental houses are happy to give you a discount if you're renting it when the camera wouldn't be rented by anyone else so have a chat with them. Shoot with it a lot. Shoot as much as you can and in as many situations as you can. Just get one lens with it then take it out and shoot. Shoot in the various modes it has, shoot into the sun and away from it. Shoot indoors. Shoot high-key and shoot low key. Then take the camera back and grade the footage. I suspect you won't do this. It's expensive and a cinema camera like an Alexa is a PITA unless you have used one before. So I'll skip to the end with what I think you'll find. The footage won't look great. The footage will remind you of footage from lesser cameras. You will wonder what happened and if you're processing the footage correctly. I have never shot with an Alexa, but I am told by many pros that if you don't know what you're doing, Alexa footage will look just as much like a home video as from almost any other camera. Cinematic is a word that doesn't even really have any meaning in this context. It really just means 'of the cinema' and there's probably been enough films shot and shown in cinemas on iPhones that now an iPhone technically qualifies as being 'cinematic'. Yes, i'm being slightly tongue-in-cheek here, but the point remains that the word doesn't have any useful meaning here. Yes, images that are shown in the cinema typically look spectacular. Most of this is location choice, set design, hair, costume, makeup, lighting, haze, blocking, and the many other things that go into creating the light that goes through the lens and into the camera. That doesn't mean that the camera doesn't matter. We all have tastes, looks we like and looks we don't, it's just that the word 'cinematic' is about as useful as the word 'lovely' - we all know it when we see it but we don't all agree on when that is. By far the more useful is to work out what aspects of image quality you are looking for: Do you like the look of film? If so, which film stocks? What resolution? Some people suggest that 1080p is the most cinematic, whereas some argue that film was much higher resolution than 4K or even 8K. What about colour? The Alexa has spectacular colour, so does RED. But neither one will give you good colour easily, and neither will give you great colour - great colour requires great production design, great lighting, great camera colour science, and great colour grading. By the way - Canon also has great colour, so does Nikon, and other brands too. You don't hear photographers wishing their 5D or D800 had colour science like in the movies. What lenses do you like? Sharp? Softer? High-contrast? Low contrast? What about chromatic aberation? and what about the corners - do you like a bit of vignetting or softness or field curvature? Bokeh shape? dare I mention anamorphics? But there is an alternative - it doesn't require learning what you like and how to get it, it doesn't require the careful weighting of priorities, and it's a safer option. Buy an ARRI Alexa LF and full set of Zeiss Master Primes. That way you will know that you have the most cinematic camera money can buy, and no-one would argue based on their preferences. You still wouldn't get the images you're after because the cinematic look requires an enormous team and hundreds of thousands of dollars (think about it - why would people pay for these things if they could get those images without all these people?) but there will be no doubt that you have the most cinematic camera that money can buy. I'd suggest Panavision, but they're the best cameras that money can't buy.

A small Making of with some smartphone videos we took:

1. Bluetooth connectivity issues. External mouses and peripherals don’t work properly (including MM2). 2. WiFi issues. Over 3x times slower than previous models in some cases. 3. USB issues. Don’t expect to see speeds above 400 Mbps on any external drive. This is quite low even for a USB 3.0 controller. The list may be longer but these are the most known issues so far. Various reports and videos have been posted on reddit and YT by thousands of users. I won’t post any links to keep this thread clean but those reports are all over the place. Some of those issues may be resolved through software updates but that won’t happen if nobody talks about them, right? Apple has a bad history of fixing things, my 2015 iMac still has bluetooth connectivity issues and my 2019 4500$ MacBook Pro still has audio issues (pops, crackles etc). I am also excited with the new architecture but i would think twice before purchasing an unfixable machine with major issues like these.

"the lack of internal ND filters is just stupid! How long is it going to take before we see the basics of exposure coming to a mirrorless camera near you?!" This is 100% on target. That, and stupid recording cutoffs at 29 minutes and no option to upgrade to a video version with longer recording options.

Here's how the music industry is... https://news.sky.com/story/nile-rodgers-calls-on-mps-to-tackle-unfair-streaming-system-12155250 Big profits for Spotify but talent kept completely in the dark. We cannot have our culture controlled in this way and pimped out over the internet whilst live audiences become obsolete.

I can't see it myself. Those with an interest in cinema have already bought all of that stuff. What changes? Just because Matrix 4 comes to streaming first, and you can't go to the cinema - you are not, as an average mainstream ex-cinemagoer, going to spend $3000 on gear for that are you? I disagree with that too I'm afraid. What is the point of a director at all if the customer makes all the decisions? (Yes The choice of viewing device is a creative decision) Sure, and they can already spend their money on Netflix, or whatever. I don't care. But depriving cinemas of content at a time like this is a bad move for culture. We need the rousing blockbuster social experience like never before. New Bond film at Christmas. That kind of thing. Short sighted beancounters at the studios risk killing that future. It's short term thinking. The math and damn statistics are nothing to do with it. Emotionally I can tell the difference between a big cinema screen and a TV! It's a completely separate experience. sounds quite charming to me 🙂 Music streaming has killed music. They are not paying per film. It's a monthly sub, creative cloud style. Do you want to tie yourself into 10 of those all at once just to get the same selection of studio content you would at any one time in one cinema? Sounds fucking expensive to me! I can just see it following the music industry to a tee. Smaller artists lose out from Spotify in big fashion. The pirated copies of HBO Max streams will be full HD, 1080p, probably identical quality to what you get from the paid service.

It seems like a lot of sensors that don't list having dual native ISO actually do. XT3 seems cleaner at 3200 than 1600, which would make sense considering it uses a similar sensor to the BMP6K.