Leaderboard

this is still a discussion on the hybrid camera with the 8 second delay right

At first I thought you were going to tell us all to get off our arses and get on our bikes! I am all for a hike around the British countryside with a camera the size of a match box. Just to be clear, smallest camera wins, or best shots? And don't forget small lenses. Smallest lens must count for something 🙂

I have the same access as any/everyone... It used to be (6 years ago), I lived in the UK and travelled to Europe or beyond. These days I live in France and mostly get booked for France, but do still get jobs outside of such as this year, I have clients for weddings in Germany and Switzerland. I only have enough gear to do the job, nothing surplus. Actually, having said that, I do have a Sigma 45mm f2.8 I received for free when I bought the S5. I have used it a couple of times but it just does not fit in with anything now I have finalised my 2022 kit. I also have Panny's own 85mm f1.8 and again, have used it, but it doesn't fit it in anywhere. Currently, I am keeping it for the few times I get stuck at the back of a church and need something longer than the 65mm f2. I may switch this out for the Sigma 90mm f2 at some point just to keep the consistency of an all Sigma lens lineup. I just need this season to get going in early April so I can actually crack on with everything I had planned back in 2019! 2018 was the first year I felt I had really cracked hybrid coverage, but still had a huge amount of refinement and polishing to do. I thought I'd cracked that in the 2019 season, but ended up somewhat frustrated when I realised I was still well short in so many areas. 2020 was going to be 'The Year', but it turned out to be 'The Year That Wasn't' apart from one solitary, compromised wedding. 2021... Nah, really limited and just could not get any momentum. 2022 is going to be the year 😉

I'm sure they will all change their toon when Fuji releases their next MF camera and lenses and they need to "review" it. I'm sure Chris will say. something like: "...and you get that unique medium format look...". Don't watch the marketing monkeys.

I already shoot on my lightest gear, and the person who normally uses a cinema camera would end up being the winner anyway! Now, if it was a thread dedicated to selling equipment we don't actually use, then that might be a different story 🙂

I wish I thought of this before the new year… Is anyone interested in doing a weight loss challenge for camera gear? My thought was we would start February 1st and everyone would do a 5 or 10 minute project with the lightest camera gear they own (no phones tablets or phablets) before the end of the month. In your project post show us your normal gear and what you used to shoot the project. Winner will be crowned the EOSHD biggest loser. Any takers?

In their promo video at the cued up point here, they dedicate a whole section of it to the "hey, switch to stills....hey, lets do video...hey, back to stills". They make it appear to be seamless and pretty much instant when the reality is they should have shown this between each switch. So whether you need it or not isn't the point for me, more that there's no need for such blatantly misleading bollocks from Canon in their promo video. Mind you, its probably fixable in firmware as we know what they are like when it comes to timers don't we ?

The delay is there because the camera essentially reboots to a whole other OS when you switch modes. Think of it as windows/Mac boot OS on a single computer. I think its an ok tradeoff considering all the video options you benefit from the full C line OS (assist tools, shutter angle, LUT import etc). Panasonic gives you a lot of that in their hybrid OS but Sony, Canon, Nikon, Fuji never and I hate that. It's true that for hybrid shooters that need to switch modes at the blink of an eye (sports, action, news, wedding etc) an R3, Z9, A7S3, S1 would probably be better suited. For all others including myself that don't switch modes so often and can accept an 8 sec delay it's a complete non-issue and a well-worthy tradeoff.

Step 2 - Holy Kit OK, so we've established that there is no way we can contemplate the financial, physical and personnel resources available to The Mandalorian but we do need to look at just how much kit we need and how much it will cost to mimic the concept. From the front of our eyeball to the end of the background, we are going to need the following : Camera Lens Tracking system for both camera and lens Video capture device Computer Software Video output device Screen No problem with 1 and 2 obviously but things start to get more challenging from step 3 onwards. In terms of the tracking system, we need to be able to synchronise the position of our physical camera in the real world to the synthetic camera inside the virtual 3D set. There are numerous ways to do this but at our level we are looking at re-purposing the Vive Tracker units mounted on top of the camera. With the aid of a couple of base station units, this will transmit the physical position of the camera to the computer and whilst there may be some scope to look at different options, this is a proven solution that initially at least will be the one for me to look at getting. Price wise, it is €600 for a tracker and two base stations so I won't be getting the credit card out for these until I've got the initial setup working so in the initial stages it will be a locked off camera only ! For the lens control, there also needs to be synchronisation between the focus and zoom position of the physical lens on the physical camera with that of the virtual lens on the virtual camera. Again, the current norm is to use additional Vive trackers attached to follow focus wheels and translating the movements to focus and lens positions so that will require an additional two of those at €200 each. Of course, these are also definitely in the "to be added at some point" category as the camera tracker. The other option here are lens encoders which attach to the lens itself and transmit the physical position of the lens to the computer which then uses a calibration process to map these to distance or focal length but these are roughly €600 each so, well, not happening initially either. Moving on to video capture, that is something that can range from the €10 HDMI capture dongles up to BM's high end cards but in the first instance where we are just exploring the concepts then I'll use what I have around. The computer is the thing that is giving me a fit of the vapours. My current late 2015 MacBook Pro isn't going to cut it in terms of running this stuff full bore and I'm looking to get one of the new fancy dan M1 Max ones anyway (just not till the mid part of the year) but I'm not sure if the support is there yet for the software. Again, just to get it going, I am going to see if I can run it with what I have for proof of concept and then defer the decision until later regarding whether I'm going to take it further enough to hasten the upgrade. What I'm most worried about is the support to fully utilise the new MacBooks not being there and having to get a Windows machine. Eek ! At least the software part is sorted as obviously I'll be using Unreal Engine to do everything and with it being free (for this application at least) there is no way of going cheaper ! The video output and screen aspect are ones that, again, can be deferred until or if such time as I want to become more serious than just tinkering around. At the serious end, the output will need an output card such as one of BM's and a display device such as a projector so that live in camera compositing can be done. At the conceptual end, the output can just be the computer screen for monitoring and a green screen and save the compositing for later. To be honest, even if I can get my addled old brain to get things advanced to the stage that I want to use it then its unlikely that the budget would stretch to the full on in camera compositing so it will be green screen all the way ! OK, so the next step is to install Unreal Engine and see what I can get going with what I have to hand before putting any money into what might be a dead end/five minute wonder for me.

Well the two never crossed paths for me because I sold the RX100 5.5 years ago and picked up the ZV1 about this time last year. But without consulting spec sheets, I’d say yes.

I like the Lumix 100ii and considered it myself but if I remember correctly, the ZV1 had it beat for video work. I loved that fiddly little bastard, the RX100v and filmed entire weddings on it. Mostly on a free-standing monopod and only 5-20 second clips without any dedicated audio. More to make little highlight freebie video pieces to help sell my destination wedding photography. Drove me mad as a photography camera however as did the ZV1 when I tried it on vacation last year!

i have been looking around for similar competitor(compact ones, pocketeable) ...lumix lx100 II, or tz200, or the various canon g1x, g5x,g7x..also the previous sony rx100 But it seems that zv1 in that segment is just unbeatable...even if would like to spend more money zv1 remain the first That's for what i have found...If there are different opinino or suggestion welcome!

Sorry yes, I realised you quoted me on the bones adaptor link but not the ZV1. Just assumed you weren't interested in my opinion or experience in regard to the ZV1 but my error. But just to recap, - I think it's a brilliant little bit of kit... Bigger than a GoPro or your alternative action cams but not as big as anything interchangeable which get disproportionally larger when you add 'faster' lenses. IMO, the ZV1 is The Pick of the pocketable cameras for video. Great quality output, great stability, great reliable AF. OK, a fastest prime 4/3rds camera is going to beat it in lower light conditions, but good luck with the AF... It's all use case in the end... It's main purpose for me is actually as a static long form video backup for me and can either sit on it's own dedicated tripod, or on another cameras hot shoe. Great bit of kit and it's only downside is it has Sony written on it 😉

Sounds good to me!

So it seems did the OP who appears to have ghosted my efforts... Hey ho.

I tried the 3x bitrate on my 700D and found it did very little to improve the standard compressed file, as both were low resolution (700D had ~1.7K) and were still over sharpened. YMMV of course and the EOS-M is a different camera too. This is a great feature as 2.8K is a sweet spot in resolution I think. It's hard to make a true 1920 sensor look sharp because it's not 1920 4:4:4 so the debayering adds a blur, but 2.5-2.8K adds just the right amount of oversampling without having 6K or 8K ridiculous-o-vision and the file sizes to match.

Ah yes, I had forgotten you'd shared info early on the first page. I guess I got distracted by the subsequent posts where it seemed nothing had been established except an increasing urgency!

@ZEEK posted these figures a little over a year ago: Evidently, the 2.8K mode is closest to BMPCC, and it works with Super16 lenses. However, it would be wise to watch some of the EOSM settings videos from @ZEEK , to see how much the resolution must be reduced to get continuous recording. Also, I think that reducing the resolution creates a smaller image capturing area.

They dismiss a lot and gloss over an insane amount, and it makes you wonder why. If they're only talking about shallow DOF as being the primary advantage of medium format, or portraying it this way - in a myth busting video - you have to dismiss 99% of the truth and focus on 1% misinformation otherwise it wouldn't work as clickbait. But I think mainly Chris and Jordan dismiss the incredible creativity behind medium format and lens selection because they don't understand it. They don't understand why you might shoot a close-up of a face at F11 on medium format, they dismiss the resolution of a larger sensor and the low light advantages as well, they also dismiss the video capabilities of something like a GFX 100, because they're your usual run of the mill Cansony shooters who take 1 or 2 seconds over a shot of a pavement or a wall, stick it in a video and call it art. In common with nearly all the "leading lights" in the clickbait industry I never see any images from these people that rise above the merely boring (some don't even qualify as eye candy!) but it would be great if for the next myth busting video Chris and Jordan could bust themselves by shooting some portraits on medium format vs full frame, and looking at the rendering of a classic medium format Hasselblad V lens vs your autofocus Sony, and maybe going even further and looking at the resolution of 100 megapixel vs whatever is the max on a Canon full frame camera (50?) Not a small difference is it!

The thing is, they don't looks the same. The testers even acknowledge that fact on the video (but they dismiss it). Furthermore, they didn't actually set the cameras to look the same -- they set the cameras mathematically, according to the DOF formula, but they disregarded any inaccuracies in the aperture markings, and they apparently didn't match the effective location of the apertures. Well, there actually seems to be general differences in the DOF from optics designed for different formats. The difference is not in the location of the front/back DOF -- the difference is in how the focus generally "falls off" within and without the DOF range. Unfortunately, like 99.99% of all such equivalency tests, we can't see how the focus falls off nor can we see the location of the front and back limits of the DOF range. Here is what we see in the videos main test : SOFT FG OBJECT >> AIR >> SHARP SUBJECT >> AIR >> SOFT INTERMEDIATE BG OBJECT >> AIR >> SOFT OPAQUE BG WALL Most such tests don't include the foreground object nor the intermediate background object, so I will give them credit for adding those items. However, to properly conduct any DOF or equivalency test there must be a continuous ruled surface (or continuous line of closely-spaced, uniform objects) that runs from the near foreground to the distant background. Such a proper set up will reveal the locations of the front/back DOF extremes and how the focus falls-off at those points and elsewhere.

The usual with every thread about a new Canon camera. People need to argue against cameras??

Yeah there is nothing special about medium format. Please if you happen to own a hasselblad or phase one system, put it on sale on ebay. Hurry before people notice how overpriced they are. I will happily buy your gear from you because I'm a very kind and generous idiot. I'm specially interested in outdated and primitve CCD backs like a IQ280 or a h5d60.

I am not too sure I would totally agree with that statement, but I really don't like the old well all you have to do is step back or forward to get the same viewpoint. You can't always do that and I don't want to buy super zooms just to make it even.

I think this is a neat idea. Anything that encourages more viewfinder gazing than navel gazing is a win for me at the moment. I'm in.

Haha on this last one I fully agree with you : ) Albeit not in general on the first paragraph :- ) BTW and in order to be clear, you're one of the most enthusiastic and unforgettable contributors over here, so please keep going with your legit love for the pictures expressed among us. Enjoyable. If there is one who has this merit, this guy is you : ) Love to be your reader and follow your perspective. There are other people to worth the same attention anyway, even with a different angle from yours. That's life and pretty healthy ; ) Cinema is also talking, in behalf of its improvement. Without it, no outcome to evolve or hardly serves for anything... To share is and will always be key, so thanks for sharing kye -- don't focus too much on this rhyme though ;- )

The people in the comments section always know more than the people in the video, even if they don't lol. I was just going to post a reply saying "where has this been all my life??" but I realise I watched one recently that was hilarious.... they try sparkling water! In a rare moment where every star in existence aligned, I sent that to my daughter while we were out at breakfast with a few of her friends and she played it for the whole table on her phone and everyone watched and for 5 whole minutes no-ones ADHD interrupted. I wouldn't have believed it was possible if I didn't actually witness it!

On the other hand, we have the shills, not exactly here but spread nowadays on YouTube who kill all the valuable information we are used to find on a few places like a brand agnostic voice as EOSHD still is. I believe that's why this discussion is yet possible between both sides and you're not exactly flooded with the customary paid BS. At least here. That said, I don't see anything wrong on taking ARRI ALEXA as parameter : ) Just committed with a couple of feature films shot along 1x Classic and 2x Mini for some good reason. Even though, in one of them, basically RED Dragon as preferred capture device other than the ALEXA Mini, mainly used for low light but not because the RED was not able to perform well as actualy was. Factually for narrative exigence, the circumstances were restricted to low light footage during the night time.

Early 2022. It's already here the latest build for real : D hybrid shooters: https://github.com/mirsadm/motioncam/releases - Aperture switching on phones with variable aperture; - Black and white level clipping indicator; - Improved contrast curve in photo mode. No other product in the history of filmmaking has been so developed and improved ever! Practically in a daily basis!

I'm already ahead of you, lost 5k kilos since i saw the dietician late last year. I do have an issue with getting the p4k mounted to the bike however 🤔 Since there not much else happening down in the forums i'm in.

I know this late reply but heck anyway 17-28 tamron internal zoom lens.

With a name like Cycling Ben I think I will pass lol. 😬

Canon is making good enough cameras so far. It's a cutthroat business and making shitty cameras isn't going to help. We're not getting better cameras if say Sony was the only game in the town. Innovation is incentivized through competition, and the improvement in camera tech over the past 10 years has been nothing short of astounding. Lastly, not sure why so many are emotional. Pretense of certain obligations? Companies have to abide by consumer protection laws, but none are obligated to fulfill your personal idea of a perfect camera that violates all patents that's infinitely future proof with unlimited upgrades with a lifetime warranty. A company's aim is to sell you something. If you don't like it, don't buy.

The crazy thing is that a couple years ago everybody was complaining that Canon wasn't giving its customers enough resolution. Now they give 8K and people still hate them.