Leaderboard

My vote is to formally change the term ‘creator’ to that of ‘shitter’ from this point onwards. But being serious for a moment and playing devils advocate, I think there is room…a need even, for ‘content creators’ alongside the more traditional titles of photographer, videographer, filmmaker etc. Ultimately, we are defined by what we do/produce rather than the titles we give ourselves. Now I do have 2 creators that need to go for their morning walk in the woods…

When our music turns rubbish and our language ugly we know there's trouble ahead. Filmmakers and photographers seem to be on the way out, to be replaced by something altogether more homogenous - the "content creator" or simply "creator". Why specialise when you can just "create stuff"? New blog post: https://www.eoshd.com/news/creator-replaces-filmmaker-meet-thy-creator

and the image quality happens to be ass as well

Of what I am experiencing recently "shitters" is definitely a more accurate term..

I think the problem is that the 24-105 has always been considered (by manufacturer’s, more a ‘kit’ lens than a ‘pro’ lens. Like many, I prefer lenses to be as small and light as possible (which is why I love the Sigma Contemporary line of primes and compact zooms and for me are the sweet spot of lens in all regards) and I do like my Lumix 24-105 in terms of the quality of image that it puts out, but it’s back up and/or my all weather lens. The reality is, for my use, f4 is just too slow for around 30% of my use case. If Sigma or Lumix was to produce something like the Tamron 35-150, even with a constant f2.8 aperture, I’d be all over it. Even something ending at around 120mm would be fab. I’d even be extremely happy if a ‘pro’ 24/28-105mm f2.8 with internal or very short zooming came out though the compromise would be size & weight, it would be a compromise I could live with. The reality of the Tamron 35-150 is that it is what I would call a ‘compromise lens’ (they all are to one degree or another) and for me would require a battery grip or the handling on even a short shoot would be awful, never mind a 15 hour gig. Going a bit off topic here, but hey ho… 🤪

1440 x 1080 pixels @ 60fps for those interested Raspberry Pi Global Shutter Camera Review: High-Speed Captures | Tom's Hardware (tomshardware.com) Could see someone making a cool super 8 rig with the new sensor. The rolling shutter on the HQ is bad.

I guess longer lenses feel less intimate to me. As an extreme example lets say being on 16mm for a close up feels to me like you are actually right next to the person vs say being on a 85mm. Though I would agree that longer lenses generally look more pleasing. All personal preference at the end of the day of course.

I wish Canon had something comparable to the Tamron even though that's a big heavy lens; I like everything about the 24-105mm especially on a crop sensor except the fact that the lens barrel falls down when the camera is hanging by my side, and the zoom ring is not smooth so very difficult to zoom while recording. The RF version added a lock button but I am not paying $1299 to fix those two minor things not to mention I would lose my RF vND adapter setup. For my typical event work I only need one body now thanks to the R7 so I am down to one body and two lenses; 24-105 F4 for daytime work and 50mm F1.4 for lowlight / night. The F1.4 at 1600ISO combined with an F7 Falcon Eyes panel is enough to light individuals and small groups of 3-6 people at night.

It's intentional for me as well as I'm most often doing docs or corporate personality profiles. So, rationalizing it as bringing the viewer intimately into their world. As you mention, using that bit of focal compression as a way of isolating the person unto themselves. OTOH, my wife and I did a narrative short last year and we ended up using 18mm on M43 mostly. So, 36mm FF equiv. Felt like the right choice as the main characters were a couple. To the topic's OP: as you see, none of these decisions are reliant on specific camera brand purchases.

I tend to find myself on 35mm most of the time, which I consider right in the middle. I feel it gives me enough depth without too much compression giving that almost voyeuristic look. I do like super wides occasionally even for close ups, though it can be too jarring. I don't use super long lenses that much. I think its nice to get a POV look, like a perspective shot looking at something from afar. I did that a few times with my last project on a 120mm. Another use is trying to make a character feel more isolated. I mostly shoot narrative projects though so I guess lens choice becomes a lot more intentional.

I shot a feature last year on the S1 and S1H in ProRes Raw and absolutely loved the results. Towards the end of last year, though, I considered jumping to the Nikon Z9, not immediately, but when I needed to as it wasn't clear the S line would have a future. Luckily the S line does have a future and I have not been able to find an Nraw sample that makes it look good. Curious to see the ProRes Raw from the cam, but bummed its not fully resolution. Thanks for doing these tests.

8k phone for an 8k tv, what a waste:) Lumix G7 will look better on a 4k tv than that:) what a waste of resources it is, all that madness of 8k from a phone on power hungry 8k tvs. whate a waste regarding energy for production, resources and power hunger when used. my two cents. but congrats on having owned the g7. a great but humble cam. love it. classic 😊 now best video quality from cheap phones is a hot topic imo.

Get a cheap 4k cam instead, if funds are low. Much better than any phone and much cheaper than a XH2! 😂 Used Lumix G9 does perfect 4K 10bit HLG for 500 USD, additional VLog profile per purchase possible. Awesome former flagship camera with all bells and whistles. G85 does nice 4K for 300 USD, GX85 for 200. Much cheaper than 8K XH2 and a 8K TV. 😂 That saves you lotta funds. And saves the planet too a tiny bit:)

Ended up ordering a used Xiaomi Mi 10T Pro for £180 (probably around $220). Will try to remember to post an 8K sample after I get my hands on it in a month. I expect it will be decent for bright landscapes, but mushy and/or noisy for lowlight. Will probably bake in the look I want to avoid editing artifacts but I think it does shoot log, so will try pushing it with editing too. Sounds like the sensor is the same as the one in 3 year old Samsung flagships like the Note 20 Ultra (Samsung ISOCELL HMX sensor). But it will shoot at a higher bitrate. I thought the first very high MP sensor on a Samsung was a bit of a gimmick when I tried zooming in with it in a shop 2+ years ago. Fingers crossed this isn't mushy too.

That's really strange that the H.265 of the A1 is coming out ahead of Z9's NRAW! Now that internal recording has been tested, what about testing the external RAW of the A1 against NRAW and the external 8K of the Z9 to see how that measures up? Also, despite the issues present, how do the clips hold up in post? Perhaps there's some attribute to NRAW that can be fixed in post correction? Lastly, could there have been any kind of setting on the Z9 that could have altered these results?

14bit readout on X-H2s absolutely does not offer any tangible benefits. The sensor design cannot take adavantage of higher bit-depth readout as the extra bits are really only there to quantise noise.

Forum rules 1. If advertising your own LUTs, camera guides or similar paid stuff please get permission from the site owner first. (Direct message Andrew Reid here!) 2. Only long-standing trusted members are allowed to offer their kit for sale, this is to prevent abuse or fraud. If you're a new user and wish to do so, please DM the site owner. 3. If a user account is set up purely to direct traffic away from EOSHD or to advertise, it will be banned 4. Please be polite to other users and myself. 5. Please over time post your own work, opinions, video and tests, because a forum should not just be a link farm or library of YouTube clips Have fun!