Leaderboard

Hello all. In the appraisal of small mirrorless cameras, here’s a music video I shot, DP’d, edited, graded for Dit h artist Charlotte Wessels, ex-singer of Delain. Shot in SLOG3 and a bit of 2. Lenses used were Tamron 17-28, Tamron 28-75, Sony 24-105mm, Lensbaby Sol45, 7artisans 35mm and ProMist 1/4. Most of the video was lit with an Aputure 600d through 8x8 white diffusion and bounce / reflectors. Fire scenes lit by fire light only and a 2x2 silver bounce. Stick around for the credits. 😊

Our friend @Alpicat has posted his spiffy 8bit lowres material from a 1000fps super slo mo parade. Just, it was posted in the footage section. For ever hidden not to be seen nor heard. But I love the colours, vibe, music and approach. So I am the gallerist of the minute and pull this gem infront of us, the image lovin, nerdy admirerers of some 8bit goodness. Just like @kye he shows us there is more than just 10bit overkill to please the eye. Here is Alpicats original post: " 1000fps with the Sony ZV-1 and RX100 VII I've been making some creative videos for the synth music I compose, mostly recording them with the Sony ZV-1 and Sony RX100 VII at the moment. I've been trying out recording high frame rate 1000 fps on those cameras - it looks awful but it's a nice feature to have! Here's a video I recorded entirely at 1000 fps on the ZV-1 (40x slo mo), since it looked so bad I added a VHS filter on Davinci Resolve to fully embrace the retro style. "

There are substantial reasons why BRAW is better than CinemaDNG mainly file sizes and post workflow: Blackmagic RAW is much more preferable than CinemaDNG. Filmmakers that have worked with CinemaDNG know exactly how much this codec is complex from post production point of view. CinemaDNG makes post production more complicated. Furthermore, in CinemaDNG every single frame is actually separate file (image sequence), which means that before the exporting to NLE, a transcoding process must be performed. You get the RAW, but with a lot of hassle. Balckmagic RAW is much more post production friendly, since you treat it as a regular file (like ProRes).

Actually, something that apparently used to happen quite a lot but was kind of hidden by you tubers was that they used the Sony FF cameras in manual focus mode when vlogging because they didn't have flippy screens and couldn't be sure that the AF was getting them in focus. I saw it mentioned once in a video by Matti Haapoja and he laughed and said that everyone does it but doesn't talk about it and then had a passing dig at Sony about flippy screens. IIRC it was when the A7s2 was the best Sony camera that all the YT vloggers who jump brands all the time were using. The technique was that you held your arm straight out and bent your fingers up, held your camera at your chest and manually focused on your fingers. He showed it in the video. In terms of poor AF ruining video - yes it absolutely does. This "AF is necessary" sentiment is what is making people use AF when they shouldn't. Your comments about "Panasonic needs to give users AF" just makes me think that you don't know when to use the right mode for the job. I mean, AF is useful, but it's not the end of the world like the AF zealots make it out to be. The fact they can be useful doesn't mean they're not a complete PITA when they're compulsory when not wanted. It's like if a piece of kitchen equipment put strawberry sauce into everything it made, someone complaining about it, and then the rebuttal being that strawberry sauce can be useful. Sure, but get it out of my pizza dough! At this point it's like people are trying to cancel Panasonic because they're not skilled enough to work around a particular limitation that Panasonic has. I understand that it's a bit of a significant limitation, but cameras are chock full of limitations that we all have to work around all the time. It's like people have developed a fetish about it or something.

I actually think what camera you choose can be crucial for a project like this but not for the reasons most may think. I'm thinking mostly about budget and time constraints. A big cine cam takes time to rig, to setup. do reverse angle shots etc. It all eats up precious time. Having two or even three cameras like OP can allow multi-cam or multi-rigs speeding up down time. Then you have the crew to think about. Big cam usually means first AC, 2nd AC etc. With an A7S3/FX3 you could get away with AF on gimbal shots, handheld with IBIS, monopod instead of tripod etc. This all saves you time & budget that can be allocated to more shots, location, production value. Anyways maybe OP can share his own experience & congrats to him on the music video!

This one is my favourite, as it always gets a mention when discussing poor AF. Right, let's compare a solo operated MILC with an ARRI on a gimbal.. with dedicated focus puller. And your comment clearly makes me thing you've never experienced latest gen video AF. FYI I learned to focus with MF. Still use MF on my Leica glass. I hire focus pullers whenever I can. I have contrast based AF on my FS7 which is my daily workhorse. I know how to adapt to it. None of those negate the fact AF has made substantial progress and can be a reliable asset. When shooting Vlog style with your own face in the frame, you're usually going to shoot one handed with some kind of Gorillapod arm or something. You may despise these types of shooters but its a valid community and one of the reasons why most video centric cameras have face detection and such.. You are so focused on yourself (pun intended) you missed the point I was making. I'm not telling you what to do with your action shoots. I'm telling you there are other scenarios, such as closer shots on bigger sensors with faster glass, where critical AF is required. Oh cmon you're the one that started plugging your GH5 and your camera footage in a Canon thread. It's systematic here. You won't find me rambling off about DPAF benefits in Panasonic threads. Could we maybe get back on topic?

You are limited by the difference in gain between the high and low signals, the more gain the lower the saturation point, and there has to be a fair bit of overlap between the two signals to combine them properly. A balance has to be struck. For a more technical breakdown on saturation point take a look at Jon Rista's post https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/600061-a-little-confused-about-full-well-and-read-noise/ Also take a look at Dual ADC audio recording which operates in an analogous fashion.

Audiences also decide they want 40 showings a day of Marvel tripe at the cinema. "The individual doesn't get to decide?" That is pure nonsense and is like saying I shouldn't have an opinion because he's popular. He is basically a marketing guy. If you want to look to a marketeer product salesman as the ultimate authority on filmmaking tools that's your choice. I think it is a slap in the face to all the better qualified people who actually shoot, when the audience is obsessed with social media influencers. I also can't stand the way Philip Bloom comments on every video, and Gerald pins it. The cynicism of that. It's a big circle jerk and the sheep love it. I want no part of it. If you enjoy his creatively non-informed non-shooting non-real world reviews I don't mind but it is a shame large audiences can't reward people with more principals and more talent. Kubrick used a culinary analogy as well. The best restaurant in town rarely has the biggest queue outside. Is the most popular music the best? Is the most popular food the healthiest? Best quality? McDonalds?? Bloom shouldn't be anywhere near being an idol, especially knowing what I know about him. Popularity on social media only means someone is good at communication, presentation and marketing. Gerald isn't creative, he can't even be bothered to shoot a single still let alone video. Either he has no interest in using all these cameras he has, or he is embarrassingly bad behind the camera and embarrassed to show his work. Therefore I won't be taking my advice from him simple as that because it's just pixel peeping and specs sheet pimping, without any real life usage of the tools.

Budget was around £20k, and it’s in Dutch.

We were shooting this week on an ARRI Mini on a gimbal. Last time I checked.... the ARRI Mini doesn't have autofocus. I think too many people think because Panasonic's DFD AF is second best to the competition's PDAF that mean it must be "bad". Panasonic's autofocus is still pretty darn good, and people would've killed to have had that level of autofocus performance a couple of decades ago.

Yeah I appreciate the external RAW codecs but why not some internal H265 12 bit codec or something like that. I know people are obsessed with RAW but if you have the color information you can recover incorrect WB, may not be as easy but no one complains about shooting prores 444 on an Alexa. Seems like an easy way to get around RED's strangle hold on RAW.

You absolutely can use manual focus in all of those situations. I do all the time. And no one is arguing that Panasonic AF is behind everyone else. But a camera that overheats and is unusable is a far bigger issue than a camera that lacks PDAF. That's just a fact. One can still be used, while the other cannot. With that said, Panasonic AF is usable once you learn it's weaknesses and how to adapt. Single point AF is pretty reliable in real world use, to the point where I use it while filming pro-wrestling and that's pretty unpredictable. The only time it really struggles is in low light during ring entrances, but I combat that using a LED. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Oh I think Ukraine has already won the war. Putin Really screwed up on this bone headed decision. Not sure Russia will ever recover from it, and Russia has lost the false narrative that their Army was strong and advanced. There will be more and more countries join NATO down the road and Russia will be boxed in forever. Putin has thrown all the people in Russia under the bus I am afraid. I think down the road Russia will even loose what it already had in Ukraine. They will be driven out.

I'm willing to take that challenge. Arri... hand me over an Alexa 35.

The only real thing holding Panasonic back is the autofocus. It's what the market demands, whether us Panny users care about it or not. If they had comparable autofocus to Sony or Canon I think they'd have lured a lot of people away. They are superior video cameras in every other way.

Great, that's a big deal that you got the image in FCP and the Ninja the same. That's half the battle. You might just find though that the false colors on the Ninja are not changing to account for PQ. That's a guess on my part though, as I haven't used them. Yes, raw (and film) is technically an HDR medium. Often the exposure will be adjusted to match the scene after capture because it captures integer values, so it wil transform to linear floating point raw which has values above 1.0. Then that is transformed to something like a log space or an HDR display space. All HDR is, is a way of displaying a linear raw file with more highlight range for high-nit 10-bit displays, using a custom gamma transform. Yes, any color transform for display purposes is always transforming linear data into a viewable range. You just don't want to add to that yourself directly on the footage when you're trying to work out what your color/exposure mismatch is. There is a more fundamental issue in the color processing pipeline that is causing the mismatch and you just need to identify the inconsistency, then it falls into place. Basically you have proven that the footage in FCPX and on the Ninja is the same with the same view transform applied on input to FCPX, but it doesn't mean you need to use it. You could just use it right now for troubleshooting while you work out the exposure issue. What I suggest is look at where middle grey falls in Rec2020 PQ as an IRE value (look at technical documentation online). I don't have that knowledge handy. Then you can see if the false colors are working in Rec2020 PQ on the Ninja and not just Rec709. Like, does it change the false color mode between Rec709 and PQ? It needs to do that. Basically, it should not matter what device you're viewing on (camera, Ninja, FCPX), the false color for middle grey should be green as long as the false color implementation is aware of the display space on the camera, Ninja, FCPX project.

It is because if people admit autofocus is not that important for some folks/uses, then they'll be forced to admit that Panasonic would then be their #1 choice. And Panasonic has been so the #1 leader for years and years.

Yes please would be great to see some samples from the Z9, especially RAW. Shoot it whilst you still can and before RED comes and takes it away 😉

Yeah, it's a really good sensor. The reason I went for the Fp-L over something like an S1R is as follows: Storage is getting cheaper and M1 Pro absolutely flies in Resolve now. I will jump back on the Uncompressed RAW 4K wagon. 500GB T5 SSD cost me £59 brand new. The Fp cages and SSD mounts are really small and light. The 61 megapixel sensor is a step up from the S1R sensor which is already cutting edge. If you don't mind a slight 1D-C style crop to APS-H (1.3x) you get an oversampled 7K image in RAW video mode up to 30p. That's going to look very nice in 12bit Cinema DNG. Better than BRAW. Real RAW. Huge sensor. So a clear upgrade from the original Fp which was pixel binning the RAW from 6K. It is tiny, with an EVF and runs off a GH2 battery. Can't say the same about RED or Blackmagic stuff!

I don't know much (enough) about patent law. What strikes me as interesting is why would IntoPix, who has been in the video compression since 2006 and patents dating since then even go into developing a new RAW compression method and hardware implementation when there is seven years until RED's patent expires? Is it a good business move to invest yourself like that or have they done something in the process that makes them sure they can avoid infringement? Also, I have been shooting Z9 for the past six months, it is an almost flawless camera. I only now have some use for its video specifications, RAW not being crucial. But if anyone is interested and wants to play with the files, I can shoot some samples.

I'd say it's the type of Canon apologists that I read on this thread and all over the internet that allow them to get away with this crappy kind of crippling because despite al the gotchas they know that people will keep buying their cameras in droves. I'm a Canon user (damn you Canon for your great lens legacy), but will call them out whenever they're low balling their customers - there is no excuse for the ridiculous crop on 4k 50p on a new camera in 2022. The jury is still out on overheating but the signs aren't great, they've seen what they can get away with in the 'best selling' R5 and R6. Saying it's better than Sony's ancient half arsed A6xxx series is hardly praise worthy The 7d was Canon's flagship crop dslr camera, the 7R seems like a toy in comparison. I hope they are going to bring out a properly weather sealed mirrorless crop camera with decent video specs, cause this isn't it. This is Canon dropping the quality - a worrying sign

Alright, will have a look on the false colors of the camera, but I assume that they are just showing the internal preview of the camera in false colors, so not RAW data. Will revert back on that. in regards to FCPX and the files I have tried something now which I didn't do so far. Created a new project in Rec2020 PQ setting. If I import the files now at least the visual presentation is the same as what I have seen on the Ninja. Without the need to touch files in any way. Will investigate how the waveforms of the Ninja are matching to the ones in FCPX. Guess that makes sense, because RAW means the camera is basically transferring its full dynamic range to the recorder at anytime. And therefore RAW can technically always considered as being a HDR medium(?). What if the hidden culprit is a correct missing RAW to Rec2020/Rec709 conversion for the fp? You rightly said all data is there (in the recording) and linear. It just does not fall into Rec709 or Rec2020 without a conversion in regards to dynamic range. Seems what I have done by manipulating the curve is to squeeze the dynamic range of the original file into Rec709. Basically a similar approach to these HDR tools which are built in into FCPX. They by the way give some sort of okayish result, but not as good as the curve I have created. Does that make sense?

They can rename it to 24 fps continuous burst mode in single file raw container

The red being pushed up was a trend, IIRC it was made popular by this video: Outside of camera forums, no-one gives a shit about getting natural looking colour - they want colour that will do something for them - to support the aesthetic and vision of the film - to bring the film success and popularity so it reaches a good audience and makes the effort of making it worthwhile. We discuss cameras colour on these forums in some sort of strange parallel universe where making a camera neutral and accurate and nice is this kind of goal in itself, but it's really not. If you guys have a challenge with that level of pushing/pulling colours then you'll have a heart attack when you start watching movies and other music videos..... plus, you know, check out the terribly inaccurate colour on these little-known films that failed due to their poor colour.... What awfully inaccurate colours - I guess the cameras were rubbish! Looks like those were shot on Alexas - man must those cameras be overrated!

Nice! Anything is usable as long as it's aligned to the creative aesthetic. Footage from any camera can also be a disaster, regardless of how technically good it is, if it's not a good fit for the aesthetic.

We have to be careful here. Comparing a GX85 to film and implying that the GX85 is better than film is simply flat out wrong. The GX85 is better than film in terms of: camera size resolution (for cameras of remotely the same size - 8mm or 16mm) artificial sharpness lower-noise Film is better than the GX85 in terms of: dynamic range / highlight rolloff colour natural rendering of details rolling shutter motion cadence film is "raw" - ie zero compression artefacts cinematic image rendering slow-motion (film can be as slow-motion as you like and doesn't decrease in quality) While the size of the GX85 is definitely a huge point (it's why I bought one), everything I care about in images is better with film.

No idea about FCPX.

I'm genuinely happy you are so satisfied with GH5's AF performance. If I were picky though I'd say those scenes aren't too challenging AF-wise with wide shots at that distance and with such wide DoF. Try that on a bigger sensor close range under F2. There are tons of other scenarios then talking heads on a tripod. Here is the GH5 clip from the YouTuber I was referencing. It's basically unwatchable and the AF just can't seem to lock on face: I'm sure you'll be quick to claim user error but that's just piss poor AF performance imo. I read he's switching to Fuji..

Hyperbole much? I've literally stated for years at this point that Panasonic needs to fix its autofocus because it's what the market demands. Acknowledging its weakness, while expressing how the autofocus performance is overblown by YouTubers that don't spend enough time to get the best out of the camera, isn't being apologetic. It's sharing my experience as someone who uses these cameras for a variety of types of professional work, from sit down interviews to pro-wrestling. Who has a more valid opinion of Panasonic's autofocus? The person that filmed these clips or the people that tested the camera while bopping in and out of frame while it sat on a tripod? Are these shots unusable? Am I wrong to be satisfied with this AF performance? People just parrot what YouTubers say. How are these shots even possible given how AWFUL and UNUSABLE Panasonic's autofocus is?

Big corporations couldn't even imagine someone would patent the idea of saving RAW file.

Not if you're on gimbal, Vlogging or certain run & gun situations. I literally just watched a video from a pretty popular solo YouTuber at a music trade show in Berlin where the entire footage was ruined because of constant wild hunting. What do you know, it was shot on a GH5. Sure you can claim its user fault but there is no denying that Panasonics DFD AF is a major setback when compared to the competition. And like it or not, strong AF is crucial for some types of shooters. The AF reliability I get from Canon, wether in stills with eye-tracking shooting wide open at F1.2 or in video with DPAF tracking is outstanding. When I have to go back to contrast-only AF on my FS7 it feels like I'm getting punished, constantly punching in to check focus. Stressing I may have missed shots. DPAF is so liberating, you won't realise it until you get used to it. I know that a lot of M43 shooters use manual glass so this doesn't concern you, but it does to others. I was just reporting Gordons testings, since he's the only one that actually performed one. All I stated was that they were pretty promising, even if indoors under controlled conditions. I also added: Sorry but I'm not sure what you are arguing against?

Ha ha, there's a comment on the cinematographer's Insta (Olan Collardy) "It's the wizard, not the wand" I'm going to try the remember that one!

Indeed RED were a pioneer with REDcode. Graeme Nattress did what the Japanese camera companies like Sony didn't bother with or even attempt. They should be rewarded and there are other solutions like BRAW that avoid the patent infringement. So why doesn't Nikon implement BRAW or license a similar technology and call it N-RAW? In other words why doesn't Nikon get a clue? Or is their intent to purposefully infringe RED's patent before countersuing as they know they have a bargaining chip and that RED have infringed their patents on sensor design or whatever? I know it's shit for us and it doesn't generate much good will for RED in the industry and with customers. A middle ground should be reached at this point, it's gone on long enough. RED should license the technology and Nikon should pay up for it.

A few things. RED isn't a troll, they are an innovator who actually commercializes the patents they claim, and they should be able to benefit from spending the time/resources to make those inventions (assuming the patents are valid). That's not to say trolls aren't a problem in other areas, but more so this isn't one of those cases. It's not always the case, but trolls are typically non-practicing entities (they don't practice the technology they are claiming is patented). Also, Disney exploits copyrights, which is a whole other beast. Patents expire after ~20 years, which seems like a reasonable amount of time to benefit from an innovation (and thus to incentivize new innovations). Copyrights now last ~100 years, which is utterly insane, and completely detached from any notion of rewarding artists for their work (to incentivize the creation of new works). It's also sick that Disney seems to be able to get copyrights extended any time any of their main IP approaches the public domain (and in this light, I agree with your point about the corruption, or at least complicity, of public officials).

The VHS filter is a nice touch @Alpicat! Fellow musician here, I also use the JD-990 with the vintage synth expansion. Thanks @PannySVHS for shining a bit of light on this!

I think they take care of themselves nutritionally and exercise wise and I’m guessing the numerous patents he has on casino gaming machines help to fund a more relaxed approach to the daily grind, which is a big help. Also, and perhaps most importantly, he doesn’t seem to be a bitter, selfish and hateful gobshite , as that really does age people very quickly. As my latest driving license picture testifies.

My Sigma Fp-L is coming tomorrow so we'll see how accurate a reviewer Gerald is 🙂

As @Django said - you can't get colour like this without knowing how to properly expose and how to do at least basic colour work. These people are probably using a strong look LUT (it has that feel), but the saving grace for you is that they don't seem to really be that good at colour matching, so that seems to skew it in the direction of their look being more towards the LUT and less away from it being manually done in Resolve. A skilled colourist would probably be able to replicate this look in a few minutes by doing it manually. C-Log3 on your R6 is definitely the way to go, especially because you already have it and it's essentially free. When you're starting out in Resolve I suggest the following node tree to get you going: Node one: use this for manual adjustments to the clip like White Balance / exposure / contrast Node two: use an OFX plugin (which comes with Resolve) called Colour Space Transform (CST) and set it to Input of Canon C-Log 3 / Canon colour and output of Cineon gamma and rec709 colour Node three: use the one of the LUTs in the Film Emulation folder that come with Resolve - these all have different looks but you'll probably find one that you like enough to get you started (there are some Fuji film stock emulations in there you might like) Apply that node tree to every clip and then on each clip you need to adjust the first node so that each shot looks good. This process is called "grading under the LUT" and it's common to do things this way (pros do it this way) and unless you are manually exposing and lighting each shot (which you're not) then you'll need to adjust each shot separately to match. On that first node I'd suggest starting out with by adjusting the Contrast / Pivot / Offset / Temp / Tint / Saturation controls. These work as a set and should give you most of the control that you're looking for without being too complicated. The combination of the above technique (only using the controls I've mentioned) and your R6 in C-Log-3 is capable of creating world-class images, but will be limited to how well you are shooting the material. If you're not getting good results from that, work on your shooting (proper exposure and WB) and work on your technique. The internet is full of people selling you things, so they push the agenda that getting good results is complicated so that you'll buy the results from them instead of learning to do it yourself. This is BS. Getting good results is about mastering the fundamentals. Remember that 10,000 hour rule? Practice makes better.... Good luck.

Canon deserves every bit of criticism it gets, but people are being a little too critical here. If the 4K Fine mode overheats and makes the camera inoperable like it did with the R5 and R6 I'll change my tune, but an hour of 7K downsampled to 4K 24/30p with dual pixel autofocus for $1500 seems reasonable. If you shoot HD or absolutely need 60P then this camera isn't for you, which is a bummer, but that's how it is sometimes. These definitely aren't cameras for my kind of work, but neither are the Sony or Fuji APS-C offerings. It doesn't mean they're awful, it just means they're not for me.

Well, if you insist. I wouldn't say they're competing at all with the GH5/G9 due to the sensor size. Obviously, the GH5 is a great camera, but it's strengths lie solely in video, where the R7 is more of a hybrid camera. It will be better in lowlight, have better color, it includes a Log profile at no extra cost, and it will have great AF. Actually, Canon always gets a bad rap around here, but Panasonic should be ashamed of themselves for selling the GH5 for $1300 over 5 years after release.

I think OP needs to understand that to achieve those looks it's a lot more work than just what camera model is being used. Everything is actually broken down in that video: C70 shooting Clog2, 28-70F2, Aputure lights. Graded in Resolve (5 node tree). The C70 itself has a DGO sensor that gives you extra DR and clean shadows. R6 in contrast has pretty poor DR. Clog2 is also the most flat profile, most ideal for grading. R6 has Clog3 which is pretty close. The 28-70F2 is a jewel of a lens ($3,500). Lighting can go long ways, ND filters etc and finally the grading process which they say can take from 5 hours to 2 weeks depending on the project. So yeah that's quite a bit of gear, work and skill to get there. Getting great cinematic image quality is a lot more than just having good color science or the right camera body. Every step of the way counts and you will certainly not achieve that look SOOC. I love the R6 and you can get close to that look with the right tools (lens, lighting, grading) shooting Clog3. But you're definitely going to have to learn a few things. There is no magic "cinematic" mode like on iPhone13.

I think I found your answer. go to 8:00.

I've compared most of those cameras but not side by side (worked with almost all of them either in post or in person). LOVE the EVA1's image but the LCD and ergonomics are terrible. I put a little loupe on the LCD as I like a minimal set up but it would be a pain to "rig up" traditionally. I much prefer its image to the S1H actually. The colors are just better. It's not a world apart but it just looks better. Noisier though. C200 has a great image but the noise pattern is ugly and there's CMOS smear. It's just not the image I want. P6K I've only worked with in post but it's a pain in some ways from what I can see but the image looks great too. I think it boils down to ergonomics ultimately (and getting the right IRND filters for the P6K – or just getting the pro model) but both the EVA1 and P6K are capable of beautiful images, right on par with (or just a step down from) the Varicam35 and Alexa, which have quite different looking but really beautiful images too.