Leaderboard

Good. Back to "Panasonic and what they have up their sleeve." ... not M43 vs. FF. Thank you!

Agreed. I got lost in the details on my first set as DoP. The director set me straight really quick and things were better for it.

A lot of us don't like Sony cameras, and there are no comparably small full frame versions of the 12-35 and 35-100. For the 12-30 it's 305 g vs. 835 g for full frame equivalent. The 35-100 is 357 g vs. 1480 g for the full frame equivalent. Once you get into telephoto primes you're dealing with a significant size difference again compared to their M43 counterparts. It's always weird when people insist there's no size advantage when I'm both a M43 and full frame shooter. There is such a huge difference, not in the bodies, but the lenses.

I did finally edit a first version of the SA video. Canon R5c, DJI RS3 Pro, RF 70-200 2.8, RF 100-500, RF 400 2.8, EF 24-70 2.8. All shoot 8K RAW 50fps other than the Cheetahs running that are at 4k 100fps.

Looks like pro res with the X and it’s a blacked out stealth finish plus probably at least one CF Express B slot. Anything else/everything we’ll find out in a couple of days I guess…

Sounds like a dick measuring contest. Have you actually read any of the arguments I was making in this thread? My comments on telephoto advantages of M43? My list of compared lenses? I gues you did not or it slipped your attention somehow. I think I am gonna end this discussion right here.

Ok. Can you cover 16mm-ish to 600mm (FF equiv.) in under 1kg with ANY single FF mount kit? How about 2kg? 3kg? That's what I'm saying. There are lenses in M43 with simply with no equivalency in FF in terms of weight. When you do find a lens, you won't find the other lens you need in the same mount.

You're comparing lenses that don't exist to ones that do. A f2.8 is a f2.8 regardless of whether the lens is M43, APS-C or Full Frame. You can add all the qualifiers you want, it doesn't change the fact that the full frame equivalent to most M43 lenses are substantially heavier AND more expensive. Let me know when you find a 24-70 with a constant f2.8 that is even remotely close to the 12-35 f2.8 in weight. Ditto the 35-100, or the 100-300mm f/4-5.6. It's easy to get shallow DOF with M43 except when shooting ultrawide unless the lens has a close focusing distance. It is insane that people discredit an entire system in part because it isn't easy to get enough toneh.

I don't have the GH6 unfortunately, but I checked a ProRes HQ V-Log L sample and the chroma channels are very good. The Fuji chroma smoothing is there in all internal and external recordings, the only exception is ProRes RAW. As I mentioned earlier it's weird though. ProRes RAW can not hold X-Trans data, it's designed for Bayer. Atomos already confirmed to me that they don't modify the raw feed. I'm still waiting for Fuji's answer, but the only thing I can imagine is they demosaic X-Trans in the body, then remosaic it into Bayer and send that to the recorder. While it works it is kind of a trick, and when we compare ProRes RAW features to BRAW, one of the main things that sets them apart is that ProRes RAW is not debayered and thus more raw-like, while BRAW is partially debayered. So I'm not sure if we can talk about being not debayered as an advantage here, as the raw feed that the Ninja V records is actually already processed by the camera. And if you go into details, demosaicing is basically filling the "holes" in the R,G,B planes by interpolation methods, using the pixels that are known. See the "holes" here (it's for Bayer, but you'll get the point): Now if you remosaic the R,G,B planes to Bayer, you have to throw away about half the originally known values, as the pattern is different. You exchange them to interpolated values and send them to the Ninja as if they were the known values from the sensor. I have my doubts about the quality of this method, but I will test it when my Ninja V Plus arrives.

Thanks for the reality check that was honestly good to hear 😂

If I were going small FF, I'd rather go Sigma FP than anything Sony. The OM-5/ E-m5 iii would destroy the A7C in IBIS, a much less expensive camera. With the 17m f/1.8, you get similar DOF. Both are 8bit. The Sony can seriously bust out great performance on the DR chart, but I personally don't like that image. The Olympus combo would be lighter too. The real advantage for M43 is with longer lenses, where FF cannot compete in terms of size. Like you say, it's just physics.

Maybe it's just me and my background as a doc guy, but you're being incredibly particular there as the two shots are pretty similar. Your shadows are only slightly more defined from one to the next. If you're looking to be a wildly accomplished and precise gaffer and you are OCD by nature, I suppose you could be this discriminating, but even then? Debatable. In fact, it might be a liability on set, depending on the production you're doing. Personally, if I had crew fretting about lighting issues and THIS was the thing they were worried about, I'd be, like, yeah, I'm not going to be able to work with anyone that precious ... I don't know ... ain't too many narratives I've ever done wherein I'd be upset about this technical result if t was the look I wanted. I'd be much more worried about the storytelling, the acting. Heck, even the craft services table (seriously, gotta keep the crew happy) than this lighting difference.

I wouldn’t say they ruin the quality of the light but they do indeed change the characteristics a bit. Consider this - when you’re looking into the source from a slight angle there will be less surface area visible witch leads to a “harder” feel of the light hitting your subject. Not always bad though, and I don’t see any hotspots (except what to expect from an harder light) only slightly more defined shadow areas. This is where makeup can help a lot of you want a look that’s a bit more punchy but stay out of trouble with shiny areas. So - consider it’s a tool to both reduce spill in a quick and easy way with the slight change in characteristics and then use the knowledge to create the moods you’re aiming for. And like PPNS says - if you want to keep the softness use good old cutters and flags. Happy new year!

Yes, PDAF, improved colors and rolling shutter are what I want. I'm not in love with the GH6, but the rolling shutter and colors (IMO) are better than on my S1.