Leaderboard

What cameras don't use Sony sensors? Arri, RED, obviously Canon, Sigma (Foveon, anyway, the Fp is a Sony sensor), and by all indications, the Blackmagic Ursa 12K. And I'm unclear about some older sensors, like the Panasonic Varicam/Varicam LT (guess that isn't "old" - it's still being made). That camera was the first true dual native ISO (vs. dual GAIN, which is what most cameras actually are despite being described as "dual native ISO") and predates anything Sony did with dual native ISO tech. So, my guess is they did not make that one - maybe Panasonic themselves or TowerJazz. Someone more internet savvy than I might be able to figure it out. I don't put much stock in this whole "did Sony make the sensor or not" as it relates to how the image looks. Sony makes multiple sensors used in Hasselblad, Nikon, Panasonic, Fuji, Olympus, Blackmagic, etc. And every single one yields completely different raw output in a number of different metrics. The processing pipeline that Nikon/Fuji/Panasonic/whoever implements matters infinitely more. Looking at images from, say, the original Blackmagic Pocket vs. the Pocket 4K/6K and preferring one over the other has far less to do with who made the sensor and more to do with what Blackmagic is doing (advancements from their Gen 1 color science to their new Gen 5, for example). Exceptions would be comparing CCD to CMOS; Hasselblad's Kodak CCD sensor clearly is very different from Sony's CMOS sensor, no matter what Hasselblad does. But that's a bit apples and oranges. Now, should someone (like a big company) start making sensors? Absolutely. Competition is f***ing great, and Sony is bulldozing the sensor market. Samsung is probably best poised to do something like that, and I hope they do.

We did an Heliski video in the central Swiss Alps "Sustenhorn" It is a glacier you start around 3200, and go down to 1600m. We waited almost a month for having good conditions and be there alone.... This one is a good example that I would not have it if taking only photos as it was not planned to do this small jump and did not catch the crevasses there until I saw the video: same this one IBIS+IS helps a lot when you don't have time to put out the tripod..... this if from an insta360 on my helmet while I was filming For these cases I mostly don't take pictures anymore I pull frames, no fear to miss something and 8K RAW or still RAW is not a huge quality difference, I wish it had an open gate mode. I do one run with higher shutter speed and one with lower but for sports like this even higher shutter speed for video imo is not a huge issue as most of the people are so used to gopro and co action footage that are all taken at high shutter speed..... The 1Dx III stayed on the heli as backup..... too bulky...

Ohhh wow I would not have accepted at all. Here I’m platinum CPS (here is based on your equipment and is free) I had one issue many years ago with a 1D III and they gave me a loan replacement in 1 day and I had an issue with a lens 5 months ago and the turnaround was 2 days. My 1Dx III is exactly 1 year old this week and it had served me well but since October I have also a R5 and I pick the R5 much more often that the 1Dx III. The only advantage of the 1Dx III over the R5 in my experience are: -Much faster AF acquisition for photos from full defocusing but only when using the mirror. So for some sports that the athlete comes out from hidden place like alpine ski is still an advantage. Tracking I find it better in live view and it seems the same with the R5. -50-60fps especially RAW but this is also my biggest complain why not AF ?!? -Much better construction I carry my 1Dx III with the 200-400 attached only from the grip with one hand a lot…. I don’t trust doing the same with the R5 + adapter… -Battery life but at the end the weight is more so not sure is really a big advantage Advantage of the R5: -45 mpix vs 20 mpix is huge the crop-ability is just so much better. -8K RAW > 5.5 RAW again I can frame even more loose and crop in after. Also I’m pulling a lot of stills and the res is just better. -IBIS! -Swivel screen is very handy on gimbal and low angle shoots. With the 1Dx III I had to use quite a bit an external monitor on the Ronin S and is just a pita…. Cable management, battery, weight, etc…. -4k 120 fps is just night and day compared to 1080 120 fps of the 1Dx III (this is just terrible in my opinion) -RF-EF ND adapter -Lightweight -Zebra!!! So far my R5 has never overheated or even warned but I do a lot of small takes. Last week I did capture 1.8 TB of 8K RAW in 3h but here is cold at the moment. My R5 for video is basically setup in two custom modes: 8K RAW and 4K 120fps CLog….. I rarely use any other video mode. My biggest complain for the R5 so far is the micro hdmi and 4k 120 is conformed to 25 or 30p with no audio, I wish you could do the same as the A3SIII to record at 120 with audio so you can slow it down or not in post. Of course you can conform it back to 120fps but you don’t have the audio…. 4k 120 fps screen grab: I edit 8k RAW without transcoding or proxy or optimize media in Resolve on a gaming notebook normally on a 4k DCI timeline with no issues, I switch to 8K timeline to render out stills that I want. Same notebook struggles with the h265 as discussed multiple times, for the 4k 120 parts I generate optimize media as is too painful without. Bottom-line for most of my work R5 is the A camera and 1Dx III is the B (or remote cam). 8K RAW frame grab cropped a bit, heavily processed for the blue sky...

You can use more lens, tamron 24-70 g2, canon EF 35 1.4, 16-35 2.8 III tested myself. i think can use any EF lens... great image, bit heavy and bulky..

I assume you could as long as you use a program that has ProRes Raw support. There's no point in shooting raw if you can't adjust the raw data at the camera level.

They need to get their shit together and announce something soon as I just see people drifting away from MFT (me included).

I like the look of the pocket 6k/ 6k Pro Sony sensor, I don’t like the look of the Pocket 4K GH5s Sony sensor. I compared the Pocket 4K to the original BMCC 2.5k and the difference in dynamic range and highlight roll off was obvious and significant. I would take the Pocket 6k over the OG BMCC. To me it’s not that it has a Sony sensor, but which Sony sensor it has and what file type and bit depth it is being recorded at. I also like the look of the GH5 so take my opinion with a grain of salt. Above all, the Ursa 12k looks the best to me sensor wise, so I am hoping that in the future there will be a more affordable version.

Going to add the 1D X Mark III to the mix as well. Not much to shoot and little colour in Berlin at the moment. Not feeling inspired but will get on with it during the week probably.

The Canon VariND adapter is the only native behind lens solution for a hybrid mirrorless system AFAIK. I can’t wait to receive mine, game changer for sure.

Same sensors maybe, but different bodies and company tech applied, different lenses, tweaked settings, filters, profiles/film sims/different logs, 10 bajillion LUTS (get my set for ONLY $17 from my on-line shop sorry sold out!!), differently calibrated screens, phones, tablets, laptops... I couldn't tell you what end result came from what sensor only if I like the end result or not.

Panasonic announced the S1 will get internal 10 bit 4k 60p as well as RAW out. Better deal as it has full hdmi. I always found Fuji to have pulsing issues as well as just moments of randomly losing focus. It works great sometimes just not reliable like Sony and Canon's best implementations.

The A7S3 overheats too, just not as bad and it can't do 8K or RAW. Its 4K isn't oversampled either so in some ways the older cheaper A73 has a more detailed IQ. Also 12MP for stills is a major downside (vs the 45MP on R5). If you're not a hybrid shooter and only video matters than you might as well skip the R5 & A7S3 and go straight for FX3/FX6 or C70 imo. Right, my point was that the Nikon Z6/Z7 can't do any type of internal log which is kind of a joke. Personally, I can't go back to 8-bit 4:2:0 log after having 10-bit 4:2:2 log, difference is major when it comes to grading.

Watching other people's mistakes is a great way to learn. Much better than making those same mistakes yourself.

Panasonic cameras don't come with good Rec709 conversions by their own manufacturer. Especially Gen 5 Film Extended is much superior over any Rec709 conversion Panasonic provides. But all the color issues mentioned derive from that very problem and can be fixed with third-party conversions like these: Color between both systems is an almost 100% match.

A Nikon A1 clone has all the chances of being the better (selling?) product: 1. Sony bodies has always been criticized for subpar ergonomics, menus etc. 2. Compete on price, Sony is very expensive. 3. No cinema line to protect, so lots of video features. 4. Nikon colors may suit some people more than Sony's. 5. Make big claims about weather sealing. 6. AF should be reasonably good, it doesn't not need to be every superlative ever conceived. 7. The market is in no rush for 8K, so take the time to make a really robust implementation. 8. Do some A1 user research, see what they dislike and like after using it.

I've just ordered one and it arrives this next week! Why? Taken a few bookings recently for '22 jobs so the coffers have had a little top up. Still at least 4+ months from my wedding season getting going, if it even does this year, but... I made a final decision to run with 2x S5's and not the pairing of an S1H with an S5. There were pros and cons to both set ups but in the end I decided the S5 has enough for my needs and I prefer it's compact form. If only it had the S1H screen though... I have my (used, courtesy of a member of this forum) 24-105mm f4 and it's a great lens, but... although it's not huge or heavy for what it is, it is larger and heavier than I'd like any lens to be and it's still f4 which at the longer end is not so bad, but at the wider, as someone who likes a shallow DOF, it's not quite right for me. I'm keeping it though and it's going in the bag that stays in the back of the car and only comes out for specific purposes which will be certain commercial jobs and church weddings (very rare here in France) where I need something longer than everything else I have got. So my main workhorses are going to be a pair of S5's (not buying the second body until I know my season is about to start, but I do have various marketing projects and styled shoots prior) with as principle lenses; this Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 on one body and the Sigma 65mm f2 on the other. Also buying that lens later when I actually need it. Some crossover there surely with the 65 falling into the top end of the zoom? Well I shoot 4k 50p for 90% of my work so actually the zoom lens is going to be used more like a 42mm at the wide end and 105mm on the long, ie, will be used as a 'twin prime' only at these equivalent focal lengths which is perfect as my needs are pretty much 50, 100 and occasionally 150 (which the 24-105 provides in APSC crop mode). I do need something wider for just a couple of scenarios and that is covered with the 20mm of the kit lens. My complimentary Sigma 45mm f2.8 becomes redundant in this mix but keeping the only other lens I have which is the Panny 85mm f1.8 as it's a '130mm' for low light indoor rare church weddings where I need a bit more reach, but kept in the same bag as the 24-105. The bottom line in all this is when weddings actually do start back up, I will effectively be shooting 90% of all my work with a 40mm f2.8 on one hip (the zoom) and a 100mm f2 (the prime) on the other which is as close to my ideal as I can realistically get.

Size matters in my setup, but I got the 58mm BPM 1/8 so that's fine. Those Harrison and Harrison filters are fascinating - a couple even look like they have bubbles in the glass. I'm not familiar with them, but for $500 US I can buy half a P2K, so that's where my money would be better going! In terms of having a set of filters, I know it's typical to add more diffusion on longer focal lengths, but I looked at the tests and found that the black levels typically get lifted almost the same amount from a 1/8 and then I can add extra diffusion to longer shots in post if I want to, with the 1/8 taking care of the things you can't do in post. I've seen DIY videos of people making their own with UV filters and black spray paint, but the 1/8 is ok. My concern with the BPM was that it would be too strong near the hot spot and too weak further away, and I'm sure that I can make a diffusion filter, but I'm definitely not going to be able to control the distribution of that diffusion across the frame. Why? I frequently follow a subject and am panning and pan from almost flat-light to back-light and the sun in frame. It's all well and good if you're shooting something where you get 20 minutes to set up for 5s of footage, but some of us struggle to get 5s to setup before a 2 minute shot. Sometimes I feel like the pros would recommend a C500, wide cine prime and Ninja recorder to a skydiver who wants to shoot POV video mounted to their helmet on the way down! True, but lifting the blacks in post also lifts the noise, which is great if you're trying to create an alien fog full of angry nano-bots who randomly self assemble in squares, but it's not an aesthetic I'm really looking for. Doing it physically raises the black levels optically, which then enables you to lower the exposure to put them back to black and get more highlights, increasing the DR, or for you to have higher black levels in the file, which gives you a softer look without having visible noise.

Just ordered a 1/8 Black Pro Mist filter. I searched and couldn't find Low Contrast ones for sale in the size I needed anywhere on earth. So I reevaluated, and looked at some tests I've been doing that have the sun directly in shot with various lenses, including vintage ones, and got a sense of the amount of halation that the vintage lenses gave. These two videos are interesting and useful: In the second one, the guy mentioned how he's a pro cinematographer and has the BPM 1/8 on his lens almost all the time. I'll see how it goes.

The 1dX3 looks awesome, I would love to try it. In the past couple weeks I have had the chance to try the Canon R5 and R6, and they confirmed that I did the right thing in purchasing the Nikon Z6 (or literally any other camera). On yesterday's shoot the R5 overheated. Thankfully it was working again after only a ten minute break, but we were only running it at 4k/24, and this is the important bit: WE'RE SHOOTING OUTSIDE IN CANADA IN WINTER! It's NEGATIVE FUCKING 12 DEGREES AND THE FUCKING CAMERA IS HOT AS A TOASTER! WHAT THE FUCKING FUCKITY FUCK?! WHO THE HELL GREENLIT THIS PIECE OF SHIT?! Anyways, we took breaks and finished the show, but I cannot really recommend this camera, as it is an undependable tool. I can't imagine how hard it must be to use in California.

I guess it depends on how exactly we define things. An original idea may be "I Kye, will pick up my camera, and point it at that thing, and record video frames at these exact moments, with the light hitting the subject in exactly this way" and yes, everything we ever do is completely unique. If I say "potato centrifuge Halifax cumbersome trellis" then that's probably the first time anyone has ever said that.** However, if you abstract up a little, getting a mid-shot of the subject with a 35mm FOV, well, that's been done more than a few times before... I did purposefully comment rather cheekily and not actually answer the question. Redundancy in creation is contextual. You could post the same image and depending on context it may or may not be redundant. The Kuleshov effect is in the mix too. If you're creating content for a particular client where they know or care about who is in the footage, in some ways it doesn't matter how generic the style is (or it might even be desirable) because it matters who is in the footage. A corporate video full of middle-aged white men talking about their company in corporate speak is completely meaningless unless those middle-aged white men are the middle-aged white men from your clients company, in which case, the video is worth paying for. Ditto for wedding videos, or the videos I make of my friends and family. Its a tough gig making content for people who don't know anyone who is featured in the final video. In that case you would have to work super-hard to make the content interesting. I'm glad I don't have that burden! (** I look forward to your replies with the google results) Not at all. In terms of new ideas, my videos are far away from that territory. However, as discussed above, my videos are of my friends and family, or are camera tests of some kind, so either the audience knows the people in the video, or the audience might care about the camera test I'm doing. In either case, there's little redundancy. If I did want to push into new ideas or capturing things in a new way, I would have two options. I would either need to capture things in a radically different style, which would likely not be at all appetising. I could shoot my videos using only a fisheye lens pointing at the sky and a tele macro that only frames a single eye of the subject and have a video that cuts back and forward between these two angles at random intervals. New? yes. Desirable? NO. The alternative is to embrace the style, which in my case is on the continuum between Cinéma vérité and the cinematic highlight style of travel or wedding videos. I tend to create a mixture of the two, not showing the parts where the kids whine about everything and their mum gets angry at them, but also not making our activities look like we live a fantasy life where everything is interesting and everyone is always happy (like most travel films tend to). To get my videos anywhere near the level and finesse of the greats in this territory would require many lifetimes dedicated solely to the study of every aspect of creation, as well as doing deep work on myself to enable my own creativity to come forth much less unhindered than it does currently. Meanwhile, I don't worry about it. I have fun, do my best, and enjoy the process.

A used Panasonic S1 is a great deal and the IBIS is lovely. I never found Fuji AF reliable enough to rely on it so switching to Panasonic was no loss for me. You'll find the S1/S5 to be one of the best low light performers on the market. It also has some of the best dynamic range and IQ of any camera at its price range. It definitely punches above its weight. I like to think of it as a poor man's FX9. Fuji's 120fps beats Panasonic though. Fuji color is also nicer though not as much if you are shooting log. The XT3 is very capable but if you really need IBIS there is no better option than a Panasonic S1 IMO, at least in the 2k price range.

I have the Porta Brace AO-2XB which is great, costs $228 (pics below). Orca also makes great stuff, I have their OR-268 for my Zoom F6 when I just need something basic and small. But they have some very nice bigger bags, pricier than Portra Brace, though. Can't go wrong with either. I also have a Loudmouth Large Cable File Bag (on Amazon for $100: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07WW4HTLT/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_7?smid=A2D3DSPXQTS3U6&psc=1) which is great for organizing cables (audio or otherwise, I use it for all kinds of cables) when you're not using them.

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicraw Blackmagic BRAW Open Standard and Free to Download Cross platform and license free! For Panasonic and others Blackmagic is a competitor in camera business, so they prefer to use their own codecs internally. I doubt any Japanese camera brand will ever put BRAW inside their cameras. They didn't put ProRes codec too. Which is a pity because BRAW is very good codec and integrate so well with Resolve. And only Nikon and Sigma allow use of Blackmagic external recorders. Panasonic and Sony don't. Again for business reasons. It's another story if those buisness reasons are valid or not.

Canon are known to recycle old chips, as seen with the EOS R (5Div sensor), RP (6Dii sensor), and the upcoming C50 (C200 sensor), so why not an RC that pairs the 1DC sensor and a Digic X processor, shoots oversampled 4K 60, and adds peaking and pixel remapping - sub-$15K?

I have never had an original idea in my life that I am aware of. Instead, I take an amalgamation of inspiration from all manner of sources (should be sauces) and stir them in a big pot. I then focus on producing a result 100% for me despite the clients paying. I am somewhat ‘fortunate’ in that regard that I do not work to client briefs but instead produce something in my style specifically why they choose me, ie, they don’t want any input. I have tried to reinvent the wheel several times, but it has never worked for me so I spend my effort on polishing my wheel instead and making it as shiny as possible.

If you're doing this creatively or as a hobby it's very daunting to be faced with the best of the world's output. I faced this problem recently when I was starting to post some creative photography on Instagram. One negative thought that I had was, indeed, "what's the point of making and posting work when thousands of others are doing the same thing, only better than me?" The answer for me, in this context, was that there is still a local audience. And while the pics I was posting were nothing spectacular in a global arena, they were pretty good compared to what others were doing in my local area. I built up a respectable following after a while, 99% of which were genuine local followers. Similarly, I used to do a bit of documentary film making, but haven't for a while. But when I was it was fairly easy to get a screening at a local or national film festival, and quite a bit less likely for me to be screened internationally. The local festivals were lots of fun. I met great people and had a great time. The slightly more prestigious international festivals (when I was able to travel to them) were like a special treat in comparison, all the better for being a little bit more rare. So I would say: find your audience. You don't need to be broadcasting to millions or even thousands on YouTube. If you make a video about your granny's cat she'll absolutely love it, and you'll feel good too!