Leaderboard

I dunno why on this thread you keep pushing for FX3 and on my thread with FX3 you keep pushing not using FX3 😂 As I said i have colab with company/ppl that use Canon so I have to use Canon cameras if I shoot with them.

I spent some time learning more about color management and think I have a better system for color grading in Resolve. I create two nodes. The first one is an ACES transform and converts the color space from that of the camera into ACEScct, like this: The other node is also an ACES transform that converts from ACEScct color space to Rec.709 for display on a monitor, like this: Then I set the timeline color space to ACEScct, thusly: I then create additional nodes between the node that converts camera color space to ACEScct and the one that converts ACEScct color space to Rec.709 and make all adjustments to those additional nodes. That seems to be a much better way to color grade in Resolve, and the HDR color wheels seem to work much better and more predictably.

Insta360 just posted a teaser for a new action camera.. The only things I can tell are that it has a flip-up selfie screen: It has a Leica lens: ....and that they'll cost a billion dollars each because they appear to be manufacturing them in a particle accelerator. I'm also guessing it has AI in it, because of the red letters in the thumbnail, but then again, everything has AI in it these days, so....

Yes, had it for over a year, too slow in low light. Otherwise, yes, had and still have one of those lenses, the 28-70 which is my workhorse, the 105 not quite long enough, the 135 OK but a very limited lens compared with say a 70-180 or 70-200 or even Tamron's 35-150...which was going to be my 'lens to build a system around', except I decided it was too big and too heavy and actually more limiting than having the 20-40 and 70-180 I opted for. 40-70 is kind of a dead focal area for me, so no loss for me not being able to cover it. But it's all moot anyway as I dislike the S5ii as a stills camera, never bought the 3rd unit, already sold the second unit and MUCH prefer the Nikon Zf for stills. I know I will prefer the Z6iii and/or Z8 also for stills having had a play with a Z6ii. Comparing the Z6ii with the S5ii as direct rivals, the Z6ii felt better in the hand and I prefer the Nikon files, but the S5ii is the better pure video unit and probably the better hybrid. In fact I'll say the Lumix is the better hybrid. I think the Z6iii will still be better for stills, perhaps even better and at least equal for video and probably the better hybrid. Total guestimation but pretty sure. And the Z8 is just of course better, in the hand, at least for stills, possibly video... Whatever L Mount did or can offer now doesn't matter to me anymore as the decision has already been made to go Nikon (at least fro stills, possibly for hybrid, maybe even full video also...) gear has been sold, gear has been purchased albeit I am still as things stand, 50% in the L Mount camp having; an S1H, S5ii, 28-70 and 70-200. It's just a question of where I commit to next, but it will not not be back to L Mount (for stills), mainly due to the lenses available. Not having something equivalent to the Tamron 35-150 or 70-180 is a massive issue to me and has been the core of my issues for the last 2 years. I could even live with the S5ii for stills had the lenses been available. And a battery grip that actually fits properly...

Brevity, for clarity, as follows: 😜 Was/am very happy with L Mount for video but less so for stills and as stills are 50% of my work, I needed a solution after several years of trying to wrestle a solution within L Mount...but failed, hence going back to Nikon. My work is near 100% hybrid and I can either partition off stills and video into separate units as I am doing with Nikon and Lumix, ie, there is zero crossover/compatibility other than in an emergency, or have all units designated 'hybrid'. So Lumix for the video capture and Nikon for stills but together on a single job, the overall result is 'hybrid', ie, full video coverage and full stills coverage. It would make more sense though to have cross compatibility with lenses. Other than a single cheap 40mm f2 that came with the Zf, I have/am going over to Tamron for lenses as they are the manufacturer of the closest to my ideal when it comes to focal ranges, size, weight, cost etc. As mentioned before, cost no object, I'd go Canon...but that is another story entirely and an 18k one I cannot justify, never mind afford, so can forget that! Now if I was to trade the pair of Lumix cameras with their pair of L Mount lenses, and for a single Sony, because all of my kit would now be cross compatible, whilst that single Sony body (in whatever flavour) could be my sole dedicated video unit, the pair of Nikon's that were designated as 'Stills Only', could be used in a hybrid manner to fill in some of the holes not covered by the single dedicated Sony unit. But then, the more logical conclusion is why even bother with any Sony unit when a third Nikon would provide the same solution but actually probably better as it would have matching (or much closer) results. The total collection of kit would then be as follows; 3 bodies, 4 lenses with those lenses being; 20-40, 40, 28-75, 70-180. If the next gen Nikon Z6iii gets launched any time soon/before March 2024, it makes the most sense because then the: 40mm f2 lives on the Zf as my candid hybrid unit which is around 50% say of my work, so low-key, small, light, discrete etc. One Z6iii has the 20-40 welded to it for hybrid. The second Z6iii has the 28-75 indoors and flips to the 70-180 out, all also hybrid. It would then probably be the most capable and compact full-frame set up for my needs. Or that second Z6iii, I go with the Z8 which is arguably a little more 'pro' and would allow me to try out 8k raw, assuming the Z6iii will not have that capability. Or as I was mooting, the FX3 or FX30, but I guess neither make as much sense as a third Nikon... Plus I'd be giving up L Mount totally and the S1H plus S5ii combo just works...so it comes down to the question of: 4 cameras + 5 lenses that are not totally compatible vs 3 cameras + 4 lenses that are compatible and the cost is equal. With my current direction back towards, smaller, lighter, faster, with no lenses above 1kg, the latter option makes more sense and has more appeal...but I would be VERY sad to have to give up L Mount. Not much brevity after all 🤪

You mean a bunch of them lol 😆 Usually it's the colorist who fix the colour if they have budget for that. Otherwise it will be up to the editor themselves for colour grading, and unfortunately not all editor are good at colour grading..

Size & weight of overall kit as a one man band hybrid shooter. As things stand, going into ‘24, I have a 4 camera, 5 lens set up split: 2 bodies, 2 lenses, L Mount ‘video’ plus 2 bodies, 3 lenses, Nikon ‘stills’ Many reasons including; preferring Nikon for stills over anything Lumix currently offer, but preferring what Lumix offers for video, plus cost as I’m mainly already invested in L Mount (although sold 1 body and 4 lenses very recently). I would rather have 3 bodies and 4 lenses however and 4 interchangeable lenses at that, but nothing is cross compatible between Nikon and L Mount. Switching to Sony or Nikon for video would give me that cross compatibility plus less kit to lug around and use. Switching to Sony for video only really gains me the ability to cross swap lenses but a full switch to Nikon perhaps makes more sense as I could use all 3 cameras as hybrid rather than designated as video or stills. Better low light FX3 vs better rear screen of the FX30 plus more reach with the same lens FX30. I’d go with the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 G2 because it’s compact and an excellent lens and on an FX30, would give me more like a 40-110mm lens. But, yes, I do sometimes have a requirement for something longer… Which I don’t need and am covered for all my needs with the 70-180…except it’s on a stills designated body… So, flipping my 2 remaining L Mount bodies and 2 lenses for a 3rd single Nikon and a third Tamron lens, 28-75 would make most sense having the 20-40 and 70-180. But what? I have a Zf and it’s perfect for my needs, (candid stills) and is supposed to have very nice video (not tried it yet for that) but is it suited to being an all day, principal video unit? I think not. My intended second unit is a Z8 even though I prefer the Z9. It’s just more compact and costs considerably less. Could I afford/justify another Z8? Nope. So the only other option is a used Z6ii, but is that in any way better than an S5ii? I don’t think so… Which leaves something that does not exist yet but most likely will pretty soon, the Nikon Z6iii. And that is the final piece of the puzzle I am waiting on and will determine whether: A. Stick with the Lumix/Nikon mix for ‘24 B. Go fully Nikon but perhaps the Zf plus a pair of Z6ii’s C. Zf, Z8, Z6iii D. Pair of Nikon’s plus a single Sony I would and will be happy with any of these options which is why I am heading in this direction, but I think B mostly likely, then C, then A and least likely D…though that option still makes huge sense. As always it is a juggling act but all the options are great now, so it’s a case of which suits me best.

Yeah so I realize this might just be confirmation bias on my part, as I currently haven't done a side by side. All I can say is I've shot a ton with the 4k/6k (although the 6k is almost always in the first gain stage) and I was really pleasantly surprised with the character (not the amount) of the noise. And when it's dark I don't shoot to lift the shadows as if I'm shooting a circa 2008 Ken Rockwell HDR landscape photo. My blacks are black. I see the noise that's in the log and it's a ton, but that gets crushed anyway, what I care about is the relative lack of color noise in the exposed parts and the lack of color shifting. I'm planning on doing a side by side next week with the 6k.

Glad to hear you're enjoying it! Some cameras record "super-whites" which are values above 100%. They can be recovered if you pull down the exposure so they come into the "legal" range of 0-100%. IIRC my Canon XC10 does it, and my Panasonic GX85 definitely does it. Yet another reason to use colour space transforms rather than LUTs is that LUTs clip any values that are below 0% or above 100%, whereas the colour transforms are able to access and use that data, so it's accessible downstream. When I'm getting familiar with a camera, or I'm grading shots with a lot of dynamic range I'll often pull the exposure down and see what's in the highlights and pull it up to see what's in the shadows, so that if there's anything relevant then I can grade appropriately.

So very painfully true!!!

Sounds like he needs to learn about colour management. The more I learn, the more I realise "I can get better colour with X" really just means "I don't use colour management and I prefer the LUT I happen to use for X over the LUT I happen to use for Y". In my recent attempt to match GH5 to OG BMPCC, I was surprised at how easy it was, and how difficult I found it in previous attempts. It's taken me a long time to get here, but now I'm here I look at cameras fundamentally differently - they are just devices that capture an image (with whatever DR / noise they have), process and compress that image (NR, sharpening, compression) and then I pull it into Resolve and (assuming they have a documented colour space) I can do whatever I like, applying whatever colour science I like. The thing that matters most is the usability of the camera to capture things and work reliably etc. Half the amateur camera / colour grading videos are "how do I grade Sony" "how do get the best from Fuji", but the colourist videos talk about colour management, and then talk about technique and workflow. There's a reason for that.

The image of the camera post-collision doesn't look modular - at least not like their current stuff. Among other things, it lacks the bottom battery and any sort of seam in-between the brain and the lens (plus it has a door, probably for the charger, in more of a GoPro-type location)

So I've been shooting some low light footage with this camera and I have to say ... I don't see what everyone is complaining about. Yes, this camera is noisey, but coming from Ursa's and a Pocket 4K/6K, it's MILES ahead. Very organic noise with little color, and importantly, colors of subjects hold up very well. I think people have gotten so spoiled with low light shooting recently, while I'm pretty blown away with the low light footage coming from this camera. The only thing which is really annoying (and BM PLEASE fix this), it that the large amount of (pleasant) noise completely throws off peaking above iso 1250, making it virtually useless. I can't recall this happening on my 6K ever.

I definitely enjoy the lighter lens after trying out Sony this year, but unfortunately the people I colab with definitely prefer the Canon colour 100% of the time.. the most recent one was shooting for this DJ from Canada where he used Komodo for Spain shoot and Sony for Oz shoots, and we shoot C70 RAW for him here in NZ, he said the Sony was really hard to get nicer colour vs Red or the Canon after he did some quick edit afterwards. So might stick back to Canon. And my friend who shoot with Panasonic does have people laugh at him for using old piece of gear (the EVA1), on this one job after seeing the result (it's a livestream job and they have a dedicated people that does lut and facial beauty thing done in real time as well) they said Panasonic looks nicer than the Sony's they used and need much less time on tweaking.

I can't stress enough how much I believe external recorders suck, it's just one more thing to fail (and I've seen them fail multiple times, whether it was due to a bad cable, a cable getting yanked, an Atomos locking up, an output setting from the hdmi being checked/unchecked) etc. Sometimes it won't even register until there's playback.

Don’t shoot the messenger. I’m just talking about the way BMD see it. They are known for how good their color science is, and now workflow, especially on their own cameras. I mean most of the best looking images shot on other cameras are still going through Resolve for final color. They made a great codec that works on even the oldest computers. BRAW 12K plays back faster than 4K ProRes even on Mac. Don’t kid yourself that 4K or 2K delivery means you only need 4K acquisition. Because right now you can shoot 12K BRAW for a SIMILAR file size as ProRes 4K. So why bother with a legacy codec. If you are BMD why would you bother supporting a legacy codec anymore. It’s not just KINDA supported. The only KINDA supported is FCP. In everything else BRAW works, especially the big boys like AVID. And until recently the ONLY way to shoot ProRes RAW internally is on a Nikon. I’m not sure that problem has been solved yet either. You’re currently FORCED to use an external recorder to record PRR. And from what I understand, PRR won’t easily support the higher resolutions like 12K because the file size is then massive. It can’t scale up. And before you say I don’t need 12K, again, with BRAW it can be a similar file size to 4K ProRes BUT you get the super sampling advantages. I’m not saying that’s what everyone actually wants, but think about it from BM’s perspective. They made an awesome raw(ish) codec that plays back on any computer often faster than 4K ProRes, in most editorial and finishing systems that can handle and scale to higher resolutions with no real file size cost. It could be implemented by other manufacturers if they wished, but they’d be happy just using it for their own eco system anyway. I think the main reason that people aren’t using BRAW more on other cameras is that they don’t like the recorders that Blackmagic make, not because they don’t want BRAW.

I'm sorry to hear that and glad you've recovered and doing well. These things definitely give clarity on what is important in life! Sounds like you definitely deserve a new camera - the S5iiX looks like a killer offering. I've been playing "if I won lotto, what would I buy" recently and the S5iiX is high on that list. Enjoy!! My only piece of advice is to just shoot a bunch of test shots and play with it to really understand how far you can push it etc. Especially shooting highly saturated, high DR scenes, and doing a series of under / over exposures, then trying to pull them all back to a normal exposure again. If you can get everything setup to where you can pull footage down / up to a normal exposure and have it look correct then you're in a good place with normal WB / exposure / saturation / etc adjustments.

So... I was diagnosed with kidney cancer on September 5. I had my right kidney removed on October 13 and am now cancer free (and if my scans show nothing in April I'll be considered cured!). During that entire period though, I didn't do any jobs and just focused on recovering, but had decided to dip my toe back into the water and had a small job planned for a friend this week. As I was just going through my equipment in preparation of getting back into the swing of things my pup Teri knocked over my main S5 and IT BROKE. Now, it doesn't impact my job because I have two extras of the same cameras, but obviously it left me needing to get a new camera. Sooo... I bought the Lumix S5IIX instead of getting another used S5. I swore I'd never buy a camera brand new again, but the used price isn't that much less, and I was able to get a decent deal on it with a lens. With all I've been through (having my kidney removed was, without a doubt, the most painful thing I've ever experienced, just FYI) I figured I'd treat myself. This is a long way to ask a couple questions while I wait for it to arrive tomorrow: 1. how easy is it to match the original S5 straight out of camera or with a little tweaking using the standard or natural color profile? I will use log, but for certain jobs it's just easier to skip that part. 2. why is there no third party battery grip? has anyone heard why? 3. I have a couple third party batteries. Wasabi and Newmowa brands. Has anyone encouraged any problems with third party batteries? I have like six OEM batteries but I've heard the S5II and S5IIX's battery life isn't as good as the S5. 4. what are the best settings? I've seen tons of YouTubers but I'd prefer to hear it from people that do more than film themselves in their spare bedroom/garage and actually are out there getting the most out of their camera. 5. This one is most important: I just want you all to know I love you all. My ordeal has given me a greater appreciation for life, the interactions I have with other human beings, and just everything, really. Thank you @Andrew Reid and everyone else that makes this place special.

I just got my G9II today. So far, the AF is very good, I only tested the camera with two lenses, but the issues I had on the GH6 (pulsing, and out of focus bug) seem solved. The camera shows 1.0 firwmare, so maybe Panasonic has improved the focus since the beta firmware.

For reference, here are both cameras. Same lens and same camera settings. The C70, shooting Canon Raw Lite, is first and the R1MX is second. They weren't hard to match. It's so close that I wonder why I am bothering with the cumbersome R1MX. But once I see the moving images, I'm reminded of why I go through the trouble.

My other alternatives will be Panasonic if I didn't try Sony, I was this close getting S5II but the no pdaf on 1080p kinda kill it me for me. Maybe I will get back to Pana MFT in the future who knows.