Leaderboard

Another year, I return with my traditional police Christmas video. This year a short film of a thief who climbs the walls dressed as Santa Claus, to camouflage himself as the popular Christmas decoration. Remember that it is a video that we make in which each roll is interpreted by policemen, not actors, and that the technical section this time is made up of some more members of the squad, where only 2 of us have audiovisual knowledge. I hope it makes you laugh at least a small part of what we have laughed shooting it. A greeting to all, and especially to Andrew.

I'm beginning to think we've tricked ourselves into believing something great might happen when it's probably going to be another get together where a Panny rep says "we know the AF isn't up to much but we are looking into it. would you like some more sushi internet guy?"

My god it better be good or the internet will explode with rage! Lumix cameras will be burnt in their dozens (according to the latest sales figures), Panasonic reps will receive several hate tweets (now permitted) whilst the remaining doubters will be carried over onto the populist march to total dominance by Sony.

DJI gets to bring focus to the alliance.

Only the leopard at iso 16'000 has NR applied, mostly chroma noise reduction. All the others have zero NR applied. RAW is more noisy and rightly so as most camera apply NR to 10bit Log, RAW should have none (I think a bit is there anyway but not sure). Imo this is great as you can fine tune the NR that you need, you can even go fancy and apply NR to only specific area or color range. If you open a R5 RAW picture in LR you will see that by default it apply color noise reduction, so some NR on RAW is needed even for photos. Although imo a well exposed ISO 800 (base iso) RAW video does not need any NR. Not knowing the settings and what was done in post out of the RAW of the video that you posted is impossible to judge imo. In general I find it better to expose to the right with Canon RAW and lower the black in post than raising the shadow.

Here you have a fair comparison and where one and the other one can sing, respectively:

In any case, it is natural the shooter had often used a very high set of ISO values which will naturally increase noise artifacts more visible in the dark areas such as those blacks and blues. Not apples to oranges. That's the only way to compare tools.

On 00:14 I don't notice anything but on the rest, yes, you're right although that looks like to me the introduction of compression artifacts, not necessarily coming from the native files : ) You're watching processed pictures, not the original acquisition. Anything adultered is nothing about the ones SOOC. You can only have an accurate idea when you face that stuff the camera directly produced, shot by the device without any further processing or you can fairly infer that's noise introduced later on.

Licensing their tech for $ for one thing… Panasonic have something like less than 5% market share right now, but if they can start producing higher selling units, then a win-win for both parties.

Well he wasnt fucking wrong