Leaderboard

Just kidding... 🙂 My understanding is that Premier is probably still a better editor than Resolve (although Resolve is closing the gap) and that the main issue with Premier is that it crashes all the time. Save early, save often. In terms of colour though, we all love to think that the 5,984 controls that Resolve has are required for good colour, but it's not true - if you get the basics dialled in then you can get great looking images with the tools that basically any NLE has.

IBIS and OIS in no way can deal with the shakiness of walking with the camera. But gyro stabilization alone can. Here is a gyro-stabilized 4K video shot with the BMPCC6K in 6K BRAW (no IBIS or OIS), which has handheld static shots and walking shots:

I'm a sucker for cheap wide angle and have found a nice contender for APSC and speedboosted M43. The Tokina 12-24 f4 is a well regarded wide angle lens for APSC Nikon and Canon DSLRs, but you can totally get away with using it on larger formats to a certain extent. It has good build quality, very little vignetting, is fairly sharp out to the edges and has very little distortion in the middle of the range. They go for very little now and I picked up a copy for €150 including postage on eBay. Here it is on a GH6 with 0.64x Speedbooster wide open at f2.5 12mm (15mm full frame equivalent, 7.5mm M43 equivalent). Vignetting is evident. This is a lens for APSC formats, after all. 15mm (19mm FF / 9.5mm M43 equivalent). Vignetting is mostly gone. Could maybe go a little wider stopped down a bit. 18mm (23mm FF /11.5mm M43 equivalent). This is the minimum you can use it on full frame, where corners are quite soft at 18mm but speedboosted on M43 the corners look decent. Any distortion levels out around here and is quite good as we zoom in further. 20 (25.5mm FF /13mm M43 equivalent) 24 (31mm FF /15mm M43 equivalent). Purple/green fringing is quite bad at 24mm, probably the biggest problem with the lens. It cleared up for me using Digital Film Tools Chromatic Aberration effect. All in all, I'm quite pleased with it and would definitely recommend it as a cheap wide angle option for Speedboosted M43. On full frame it suffers a lot with corner softness, but is still good for square format photos if Insta is your thing!

Well since it is 35 degrees C in Berlin today I decided to do a quick test. Put it in 4K HQ mode (8K sensor readout) and record until card fills up. I'll let you know what happens. (Don't expect any melting! The magic screw trick showed it could go for hours virtually non-stop shot after shot in 8K!) Of course the client reviewers will all now be out praising Canon for fixing the non-existent problem they tried to cover up.

I think the R5 would melt inside. Canon just shut off any time of heat management which the hardware cannot provide. Slogan " just leave that sucker on and keep it running til it melts". And it runs and runs and runs til it melts and melts and melts😄

c'mon Emanuel... surely you'd help out a fellow cinematographer 😲

Does this mean I finally get to retire my Magic Screw? https://www.eoshd.com/news/2-years-later-canon-quietly-removes-fake-overheating-limits-of-eos-r5-in-firmware-update/

Unless there's an error in their matrix transform, the "intermediate gamut" metadata tag being added into the raw stream by the Ninja V already displays the raw image in Vgamut. So under the hood it's already transforming from Sigma RAW gamut to Vgamut. So then all you need to do is apply the single Vlog/Vgamut to Rec709 LUT on the Ninja V. The two step transform is only an issue in FCPX. It's possible that the gamut transform LUT in FCPX is incorrect because it was supplied by Panasonic for their cameras. Having said that, I realize now that the S5 has the same sensor as the fp, so it's not too bad a choice for Atomos to co-opt Panavision's color science as a workaround for the lack of an equivalent from Sigma. If you suspect there may be an error on Atomos' part, what might be worth trying is using Play Pro to transform PRR to Vlog/Vgamut, then apply the standard Rec709 LUT. Then use the Ninja V as output from your computer via HDMI and seeing if it visually matches the way the Ninja displays the PRR clips.

Yeah I have a Viltrox II EF/M4/3.

Thanks for the test Mike I will have to look into one.

First test done. Went to 29m59sec maximum continuous recording length for 4K HQ with no issues whatsoever. Could start another clip straight after. No overheating warning. Camera body feels very hot all over, makes a nice hand warmer.

I second leslies comment. Two of those, so you can go tele and wide without changing lenses. Good thing is, I already got one. So only need another one.😄

i have the gopro 9, fairly confident the stabilization is either on or off. I have not seen an option to lower the effect. One thing to be aware of is when you use the stabilization it cuts into your frame width, depending on how bad the shake is you can lose a bit of real estate. i grabbed the following off a web site because i'm lazy at explaining things. But there’s a quirk that’s worth knowing about: when you’re shooting in the Wide field of view, you’ll end up with a slightly cropped imaged and lose some of the image around the edges. With the HERO6 Black, it’s about 5% of the image. With the HERO5 models, even more is cropped–about 10%. And because the Wide FOV is the default, it’s something you might run into often. With newer models with even more aggressive HyperSmooth stabilization, it can use even more of the frame for its stabilization buffer. Other software stabilization options, like those in Final Cut Pro X and Premiere Pro, do the same thing. That’s because the way they work needs to cannibalize space from the edges of the frames in order to follow the rest of the frame smoothly. Cropping vs Zoom The cropping we’re talking about here isn’t technically the same thing as when we talk about cropping with still images in that it’s not actually making the dimensions of the final product smaller. As an example, without stabilization, the 4K footage comes out of a GoPro with dimensions of 3840×2160. It will come out with exactly the same dimensions when you turn on stabilization. So what’s actually happening is really a digital zoom, with the camera’s processor interpolating to replace the missing information. In practice, the degradation of the image quality is more theoretical than visual–you really can’t see the difference, although it’s technically there. Hope that helps.

Canon really shot themself in the foot over this overheating thing… A couple of years back when it launched, on paper, it was as quite comfortably the number one contender for my needs but the sheer amount of negative press over the issue put me off. It wasn’t so much the Canon shenanigans, but more the fact I was not going to invest in something potentially so unreliable. There have been several times since when I have had my S1H sitting in direct hard sun with temps in the shade of 100f+ and it has not missed a beat and at the time thought, “ha, do that Canon!”, but actually maybe it could have done it… It’s back on the list as a contender for sure but I’m still hoping that any Panny rumors become reality over this next Winter…

I'm no expert, as I only know Resolve, but from my understanding its normally worth investing in things like shortcuts as they'll pay off in the long-term. In terms of learning Premier shortcuts vs customising them, I'd suggest reviewing the Premier ones and seeing if they suit your workflow. The problem in editing that no-one talks about is workflow and how some peoples workflows are very very different. Some examples: Do you add all your clips into a timeline, then make selects by removing the material that is no good (bad takes etc), or do you review the material from the Bins and add the good stuff? Fundamentally different shortcuts and even mindset. For larger non-linear projects, do you sort your selects into timelines (eg, b-roll by location, interviews, events, etc) or do you do this filtering via tagging and metadata and not via timelines at all? My understanding is that Premier and FCPX have much more power in their media management (like tagging etc) than Resolve, which is why editors don't think Resolve isn't really "ready" for big projects yet. Do you build your final edit by a subtractive or additive way? ie, do you pick all the good bits and pull them into a timeline, then cull and re-arrange and tighten in passes until you're done, or do you just pull in the absolute best bits and add and re-arrange things until you're done. If its the former then you'll spend a lot of time looking at clips that will eventually get cut (if a clip makes it through many passes and gets cut at the last minute), but once you've cut something you're unlikely to ever look at it again. Alternatively, if you add the good stuff then you'll potentially be reviewing your entire collection of clips every time you want to find the next clip to add. If your media is well curated (metadata, tagging, etc) then this can be an efficient process but if not you could get lost forever as there's no guarantee that you're making progress. When you're making an edit, do you want to move the timing of the edit point to suit the content of the clips or do you want to change the content of the clips around a fixed timed edit point? If you were editing dialogue you'd do the first but if you were editing to music you'd do the second - fundamentally different shortcuts and thinking. When you're editing, are you concentrating on the edit point, or the clip? For example, if you're looking at the edit point then the Clip End will be of one clip and the Clip Start will be of the next clip - so the editor will be focusing on editing two clips at once. If you're in a clip focussed approach, Clip Start and Clip End will be of the same clip. I hit this issue in Resolve as I edit in a clip-centric way and edit to music but some of the Speed Editor controls (very handy ones I might add) are in a edit-point-centric way, and there's no way to change this. etc... The other thing to realise is that there are many small tasks that must be done in an NLE, and the different editors may have different ways of doing them. It's easy to compare shortcuts, but it might be that to accomplish that outcome in one NLE can be done at (potentially) a fraction of the time by using one mindset over another. This is the hidden aspect of NLEs - they are designed to edit in a particular way and may be less efficient to be used in another way (or may not really support that other approach at all). Obviously this is very personal to what you edit, how you edit, how large the projects are, etc, so the answer ultimately can only be determined by you, but don't only learn how Premier can do what Resolve can do, try to learn what Premier can do that Resolve can't do.

So you were here among us, only for complaining? Now that you've found the one... you've forgotten us?! ; ) Or a few short shots for once, I guess... ;- )

I have spent 5 years on this forum complaining about every camera on the market. All I needed was 4K120, great reliable AF, IBIS, full frame, 10 bit, and great photo capabilities. We always had some of those specs in a camera but never all of them together in one package. Then the R5 was released. I sold my Sony, and been happily shooting ever since. You probably didn’t see me post anything since then. It has all the specs I listed and MORE (canon colors, great ergonomics etc). after 2Y of use I am still extremely happy with the R5. First time in 10y that I couldn’t care less about any camera release. the temperature issue is a joke. I have been shooting for 2 years and never got any overheating once.

This is basically just begging for a fairly modern GoPro or Insta360. Lately, I've been using a GoPro mounted to my bumper and an Insta360 One R (Leica lens mod) on a rigid mount on my roof rack. I drive a Wrangler which is definitely not known for a smooth ride - when I take it on really gnarly backroad trails, it's smooth to the point where it can be a bit disappointing (the footage no longer reflects just how bumpy the trail was). I'd try a Hero 9 (or 10) and/or an Insta360 One R with a simple pole mount before spending too much time rigging up a crazy Z Axis or gimbal for your bigger camera.

If you have 180 shutter and shake the camera then your images will have shake and motion blur. This will look normal because the blur will match the shake - if you shake / move left the blur will be horizontal and the size of the blur will match the shake / motion in the shot. If you stabilise in post, you remove the shake but not the blur. If you stabilised in post completely so that the shot had no shake then it would look like a tripod shot because the camera movement would be gone, but all the blur would remain, so a stationary shot would blur in random directions at random times for no conceivable reason. This is a test I did some time ago comparing OIS / IBIS vs EIS (stabilisation in post is a form of EIS). The shot at 25s on the right "Digital Stabilisation Only" shows this motion blur without the associated camera shake. The IBIS + Digital Stabilisation combo was much better and is essentially the same as OIS + Digital Stabilisation. The issue here is that people using IBIS or OIS often have all the stabilisation they need from that, so the gyro stabilisation is aimed at people who have neither. This "blur doesn't match shake" also happens in all action and 360 cameras when they shoot in low-light and their auto-SS adjusts to have shutter speeds that include blur (which is why I bought an action camera with OIS rather than EIS).

It all goes to prove our original point that it was a purposeful software limitation, and that you were not allowed to use the full capabilities of the hardware you just paid £4000 for. It should have been a class action lawsuit and maybe Canon knows it, which is why this u-turn has happened. At least we don't have to do the card trick now. I currently have an EOS R5 because I'm a hypocrite. So I'll see if it can go the full 2 hours of 8K without the card pull, and report back.

I did shoot yesterday all day on 4k50p and some 100p, no overheating symbol once! Soo over the moon with this update! Man if they do that in the first place 2 years ago it will be way different market now.

...which put them to be ashamed for, to my book : ) On the other hand, no surprises here, the world is cruel anyway, as I've heard this week from someone who had no fear of dead people, only living ones. It's mere waste of time, it is what it is... But people should call it what it is with no thrift.

So it was a fake timer then.

The big question is, how will this affect camera life? Once bought a second hand 70D with low shutter, that failed quickly with a faulty motherboard (was used a lot for video).

I have 4x units... Don't ever think to come to ask any of those, no way! ;- )

Is this going to be a regular gig? If it is then I'm going to go against the grain and say you should look at doing it like a regular music video and doing post-sync audio. If they have a recording of themselves to lip sync to then great but if not then you can record it yourself in a more controlled environment and for the type of music that you are looking to record I'd recommend getting a pair of Samson C-02 mics. There are plenty of examples of them being used on YouTube for voice with acoustic like this one (though he's gone a bit wild with the panning to be honest). They include a foam pop shield but they're pretty sensitive to plosives so you might want to look at spending a few quid more on a better shield. Or a pair of tights and a coat hanger if you want to go old school improv. The big bonus though is that they do a pretty competent job for indoor dialogue/interview scenarios as well so you'll find you get a lot more use out of them as an all round tool for other work. The even bigger bonus is the price in that they are £75 for a pair. Recording the audio first and getting the musicians to mime to it will improve the end result immeasurably from the audio side obviously but also from the video side as you can do multiple takes and multiple shot sizes without having to concern yourself with the mic placement and capture quality. Another alternative if you want to do it live with a recorder would be the Zoom H2n which has a very flexible microphone array in it which gives you some degree of post capture control. It doesn't get a lot of love but its actually a very interesting and practical device that can produce decent results in the field for what you are trying to do. Thomann do a variety of bundles for it starting at about £113 for the recorder on its own but I'd budget the extra £30 for the Rycote for it https://www.thomann.de/gb/search_dir.html?sw=zoom+h2n&smcs=3be5e9_3212