Leaderboard

S1 and S1H cleanup awesome in post with noise reduction in Davinci Resolve, using their light 10bit LongGop. Great image pipeline. @kye Could be the best h264 camera of all when it comes to pure image quality and the best Long Gop in the biz.

I’m just glad we have people now who know how to consistently test and report on how these CMOS sensors actually perform. It’s the core of every camera, yet all the other stuff they build around it gets all the attention. We’ve been bumming around with 12-bit ADC video modes and adequate LOG profiles for half a decade now, VERY little actual innovation in image pipeline with regards to color or dynamic range. I’m hopeful that with consistent reporting on each CMOS, the manufacturers will be pressured to actually innovate. A leap-frog all the way to 16-bit video ADC seems appropriate now that 12-bit has overstayed its welcome, or now that 8K sensors are showing up, perhaps a dual-ADC bayer pattern or ND Filter Array would be appropriate. This global shutter sensor is an important step, and I’m glad to see it. It indicates that they’re paying attention to demand for sensor improvements, and although it DOES still have trade-offs, they’ve set a new benchmark for hybrid cameras in the category of shutter performance. Critically, I think they learn a lot from *actually* bringing a camera to production, and hopefully the next time out, they’re sticking to global shutter, and innovating further to minimize the trade-offs. Additionally, Sony builds sensors for Panasonic, and it seems like they have some form of ~2-3yr tech swap agreement. If one comes up with something, the other seems to eventually add it into their sensors a few years later. I think Panasonic remains the leader in hybrid bodies for video users, and if they take a swing at full frame global shutter, it will be implemented really well.

Nah I got it the first time you pointed it out and it all sounds very valid. Appreciate you sharing this by the way. I was curious why an FX6 wasn't chosen given it's the same sensor but the cameras is "more pro". My takeaway was that although it's lightweight, the rig needed something even lighter (the FX3).

The 70-200 f4 though counters with not being as big or heavy as the f2.8, but keeps the internal non-extending zoom and constant aperture, but is slightly bigger and heavier than the 70-300. If you don’t need that extra 100mm. F4 with modern high ISO capable cameras make it for me the sweet spot for L Mount and I really rate this lens. Used prices are quite decent and I paid around 1000 euros for mine from MPB. Along with the Sigma 28-70mm f2.8, these have been my two workhorse lenses all year…and will remain so if I do not go to Nikon for video as well as stills. And if that happens, two even better lenses; Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 G2 and 70-180mm f2.8 G2…which will at least change focal distance in the same direction! Lumix is the opposite of Sigma 🤪 Which is another one of those annoying little things that all add up when you have mere critical seconds…

I've said it before. The camera was chosen because it was part of the directors on-set process. You're all trying to say how you would have done it with an Alexa. But you didn't. It couldn't have been done. Not with the lenses they chose, the way they wanted to light, and the METHODOLOGY they wanted to shoot with using a hybrid gimbal handheld rig. No way are you hand holding an Alexa mini LF on a gimbal for 30 mins. Maybe with a rig sure I hear you say, but then it's DIFFERENT because the camera is a different height, it's not going into the same positions you can go with a hand held should rig. I'm surprised that creatives like you all don't understand this simple idea... The Director chose a certain way to work. This was the only tool that could work the way the director wanted. You keep saying a different camera could be used when it was not really as feasible. "The FX3 was chosen as an extension of the methodology director Gareth Edwards was interested in fostering on the film. In an effort to embrace an immersive, authentic filmmaking approach, and inspired by Gareth's approach in making his first feature film Monsters, we sought out a very small and lightweight camera that still provided a robust image for post-production and visual effects purposes, and that could be paired with a Ronin RS2 gimbal to be operated for extended takes and with massive flexibility and freedom to move around a location and react spontaneously to what the actors were doing, or to something happening just outside of frame Gareth would catch out of the corner of his eye. One of the unique things about this film is that Gareth operated the camera himself in order to be able to react in real time to spontaneous occurrences on set and would often shoot 30-minute extended takes with the actors, going over actions a few times and discovering different angles and approaches to playing and covering a scene in the moment with them, like a kind of dance."

Yes, IBIS is very good on this lens, especially with the S5II and S1. Sometimes you can get it for about 800€ in Europe with cashback. It's a fine lens, even the colors are pretty nice. The 70-200mm is pretty heavy yes, but the Sigma is not so much lighter. The bokeh is nicer on the S Pro. And I just love how the light renders on this lens, the local contrast and colors, this is truly beautiful, it's similar to the 24-70mm S Pro and it is why I prefer the S Pro lenses over the Sigma DG DN.

You don't need the upper part, its A7siii.

Maybe but not really… 5 years, Nikon film cameras, 2 in 5 years, followed by Nikon D2x I think it was until the D3 came out. Stuck with those until the S model came out as it was quantifiably better. But then, around 2011/2012, getting a little fed up with lugging around 2 huge/heavy units when paired with the 24-70 and 70-200, - something like 2.5 and 3kg each (?) so when the Fuji X Pro-1 came out, jumped to that small, lightweight, prime based system. But then, every couple of years, Fuji did keep moving their game forward and I was also moving into video so needed more specific gear than my stills-orientated set up. XT3 was my pinnacle of Fuji and was great for stills but less so for video with no IBIS and limited stabilised lenses so during the Covid era, took a leap of faith into L Mount and full-frame with the S5. Wrestled with it ever since, (S5 AF wasn’t good enough for my needs, S1R great for stills but didn’t have the video spec, S1H has been great but iffy AF and S5ii great for video, but don’t like it for stills) never managing to find the right balance of; types of bodies, number of bodies, types and number of lenses…for my very specific niche in the market which is offering a 100% stills service at the same time as a 100% video one. As a one man band. There are of course many ways a thing can be done, but some are better than others and there is no such thing as a ‘right’ way, only the way that works best for us as individuals. Plus no manual or training so I have very much had to teach myself through trial and error and that has meant trying stuff/kit/combos that have not worked or not worked as well as I hoped. We are now at that point however where the tools exist. For me there is no more, “if only my cameras could shoot at 1600 iso”, then 3200, then 6400, or “I wish I had IBIS”, or 4K 50p internally or… spec-wise, I am more than done and I don’t know but I could make maybe 10+ different cameras work these days? For me, it’s no longer chasing anything I NEED, simply what I WANT and what I want, is quite simple and that is… A more compact set up that covers all my needs without compromise (at least anything significant) and is more enjoyable to use. To that end, Canon have the best option for me, a bit heavier than I’d like, but I could live with that, but without trade in, it’s an 18k investment and I don’t have it and even if I did, that would be a BIG commitment. So musing/fantasy aside, I have to scrap that non-starter! Sticking with what I had was not an option. Too big, too heavy, great for video, less so for stills, not enjoyable to use. Back to Nikon for stills with adapted Tamron lenses and it ticks every single box. My only debate is whether I continue with L Mount for video, which is great and I love it, but am I not better off trading 2 bodies and 2 lenses for 1 body and 1 lens to have everything in the same system, ie 100% Nikon? I think probably yes but not if that 3rd body was a Z9 because that would be overkill. Z8 maybe… Z6ii no because it’s not as good as my Panny S5ii never mind my S1H so any change has to be at least sideways, if not forwards…and I suspect the Z6iii will be better than the S5ii…and if it is, I will almost certainly go that route, but not because it’s simply better as a camera, but because it makes more overall sense as part of a total system. And part of me hopes it isn’t so I can stick with L Mount for video as I am not exactly trying to flip for the sake of something that might be better, ie, grass greener elsewhere, but only if it actually is!

The cinematography of the frogs part is stunning

Yes, FAR too slow. The 70-200 f4 is borderline as it is, plus zero requirement for anything longer than 200mm and 150 would be enough for my needs and that is why I have the 70-200 f4 which is under 1kg, not much heavier than that 70-300 but nowhere near the size & weight of the f2.8’s I’m not looking for anything else in L Mount as I have all I need and it’s simply a question of whether I carry on with L Mount at all for my video needs. That’s the only fence I am currently on and I’m just sitting on it right now waiting on news on the Nikon Z6iii as that is now the pivot point.

I've heard this called "Availableism". Using what's available to you to determine what's in the story. It's something that has been done since the beginning of cinema really. The advantages over writing whatever then spending money to obtain those things is that it's cheaper. You use what you have around you. The other advantage is that it can be about a certain subculture and made by the people in that subculture giving it an "authenticity" I suppose. This is a good approach I've used a lot producing short art videos. In the mid '90s I applied for an arts grant for a feature length video (FLV) to be shot in S-VHS, using this exact method. I had the themes figured out and the cast, who were playing characters based on themselves, a skeleton of a story but no details figured out. This would be done with the workshopping as we went. No script but notes about what would happen in the scene and how it would end. The actors improvising. Anyway, the arts grant jury were all traditional film people and they thought this approach was sloppy and likely to fail. They were so used to the cost of shooting film determining the level of planning needed (in those days there was a big divide between video art and film art,). I didn't get the grant (But I'm not bitter... Anymore.) I ended up making it as a short video out of my own pocket a year later having wasted all that time and effort in the application that could have gone into just making the thing a year earlier.

Never mind that colourists working on high-end material still regard noise reduction as a critical tool for every shoot, including the ones where all the material was exposed properly in-camera and recorded at native ISO! It's fascinating to download cinema camera footage for the first time and see that it has more noise in it than a mirrorless low-light test. I got a bit of a shock when I saw that for the first time.

I agree, I say as I'm shaking my fist on my front porch, these spoiled young'uns don't know how good they've got it these days! Remember, the P4K shared its sensor with the Panasonic GH5S, which was itself a low light beast for its time (which seriously guys, wasn't that long ago!) Even the original Pocket was regarded as being "pretty good at low light" (for its time, and for a cinema camera). I shot part of a vampire feature film (we never completed it 😞 Was a very low budget thing, ran out of steam) with my OG Pocket + my SLR Magic 25mm f0.95 + a friend's borrowed Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95 Fantastic setup for super low light situations! We'd shoot outdoors at night, with simply the full moon and some small handheld LED panels. I remember reading about a feature film shot a while ago with a RED Scarlet primarily, but all the night scenes were shot with an OG BMPCC instead because it did better low light than the RED!

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.

Yes, mostly because the AF is much better than the GH6, much faster and accurate, no more out of focus bug, nor pulsing in Open Gate mode. The GH6 was so bad when using low frame rate or when using Open Gate that I used much more my old GH5. Also the G9II is significantly lighter than the GH6. Like you, I would like a GX9II (without 4K crop), I bet it could sell very well. However, I still don't like the fine detail rendering in video compared to the previous Panasonic cameras like the S5/S1/S1H and GH5/G9. Since the GH6, the "improved" Intelligent Detail Filter makes the fine details very plastic in low light IMHO.

1. What makes you(tuber) think that I'm interesting to look at your face most of the time? If your video is about Something, make it to be about that Something, not about your narcissistic persona. 2. "Do not saw the air too much with your hand thus, but use all gently, for in the very torrent, tempest, and (as I may say) whirlwind of passion, you must acquire and beget a temperance that may give it smoothness." Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act III, Scene 2, 1603 AD. - So, tie your hands behind your back until you get used to not sawing the air. 3. If you must have some kind of opening, make it short. And do not let me wait for 30-60-90 seconds for actual start, go for It as soon as possible. 4. Also, do not put loud soundtrack that drums or screams into my ears. I'm not interested in your "musical" taste, nor I came to watch you video for that. Be polite. (And try not to use loud soundtrack in background that interferes with your voice and words.) Be articulate. 5. Do not bother me by asking to like or subscibe to your video)s). If they are interesting to me, then I'll do it. 6. Rehearse or make a plan beforehand, practice, that will make you more "pro" than any other gimmick. 7. Try to be economic with time. Do not waste yours, nor mine. Be short, precise and (and at least try to be) intelligent. Do not repeat yourself. 8. Find someone who would be critical but fair about your videos, and show them to him or to her, then listen. Four eyes could see more than two. Especially if you are trying to be innovative. 9. Don't just give to me your precious opinions. Give me the reasons why you think so-and-so, and then I'd accept your opinions (or I won't). 10. Go to the good museums, read clever books, watch classic movies. Your personal culture always needs improving.