Andrew Reid

Your white balance is crazy off in that shot. WAAAY off. Make the white objects look white... Use auto white balance if you find it easier.

Perfect isn't an option all the time... Nature doesn't always give you perfect lighting. If a controlled interior scene is lit for the narrower dynamic range of a Rec.709 8bit image you can get it looking good, as the guys with the GH2 showed in the famous Zacuto shootout that had Francis Ford Coppola fooled. If you try to pack too much dynamic range into the frame then colour is going to suffer with 8bit. That is why the 1D C has good colour but not 14 stops DR And it is why 14 stops DR in S-LOG doesn't have good colour And it is also why Canon LOG on the 1D C never quite regains the punch of the standard picture profiles if you want to keep your extra highlights and shadows intact. It is all the fault of 8bit. I foresee BIG gains for Sony colour if they do the entire imaging pipeline 14bit -> 10bit on a future A7S3, along with the improvements to the colour science evident from the A9's JPEGs. Isn't that what I am saying? Well there's lossless compression which means you don't lose any visual information, the structure of the file changes, but the end result is the same. Compression can be lossy... meaning you throw stuff away in the image. LOG is lossy in 8bit, you are throwing away fine gradation and colour information to make room for more dynamic range. Honestly it's easy to see When you tweak the shadows and highlights in 10bit RAW on the 5D Mark III it maintains the natural, realistic still-life look of the shot, smooth roll off between two subtle tones in the shadows like a dusk sky and the street... whereas in 8bit on a lossy camera it turns to Digital Sick™

Ok I take on the challenge. I'll shoot 10bit GH5 and compare it to 8bit GH4 And I'll shoot some more 10bit RAW on the 5D Mark III and compare it to 8bit 4K on the Sony cameras. I thought Blackmagic already showed that 10bit was superior... Problem was maybe their sensors were a bit behind, so shadows were a bit noisier and so on, compared to an A7S or the like.

There's a lot of misinformation out there because there's a lot of fake 10bit. The whole camera, colour processing, colour profiles, image pipeline and codec need to be built around 10bit for it to be an advantage, like on the GH5, or in raw on the 5D Mark III with Magic Lantern (where the colour profiles and image processing is done in POST, bypassing the camera's 8bit processing limitations). The 10bit GH5 Rec.709 image is night and day better than the GH4 10bit HDMI output. And don't get me started on 8bit "uncompressed" HDMI... It is compressed as hell! No point in recording it. Especially not as 10bit ProRes.

You're not quite understanding the way the hardware works Jimmy. The sensor delivers that 3840 pixel wide image under the normal Canon firmware, every time you hit the focus magnification button and it's capable of sensor windowing with any full pixel readout crop of the full frame sensor, like 3.5K, 3.3K, 2K, whatever you like. Magic Lantern are extracting the existing capability of the camera within the normal spec and clock speeds of the hardware, they are not running it at full capacity or increasing clock speeds. That 3.5K image goes into the buffer as normal and then Magic Lantern take it from there and put it onto the card. The only heat increases come from a harder working card and battery due to the data rates. The processor and sensor do not get 'worked at breakneck speed'. In fact the processor is relaxing if anything because it doesn't need to think about compression or H.264. The only reason the live-view isn't as nice as in the normal 1080p mode, is that Canon's code is designed to show the 5x punched in display for focus checking, so Magic Lantern had to hack it to give us accurate framing for the entire resolution, which is very difficult as they lack any kind of documentation from Canon or an SDK to tailor camera operation to their choosing. The hardware is 100% capable of 4K video and likely with the same MJPEG codec as the 5D Mk IV and 1D C. The reason it is not in there is due to marketing. They wanted to reserve the feature for the 1D C and target the 5D3 predominantly at a stills audience and consumer crowd for whom 4K would be somewhat overkill or wasted and result in more support costs, distracted focus in the marketing messages, confusion on the shop floor, etc. The 5D3 also wasn't allowed to compete against any of the pro Cinema EOS cameras which were fresh on the market at the time it was released, because the margins would be much greater on these cameras and video shooters should not have been tempted by something cheaper offering such a recording high spec... That's another reason the 1D C cost $15,000 on release. Plenty of compact flash cards in 2012 were fast enough for MJPEG 4K, otherwise they wouldn't have released the 1D C the same year doing MJPEG 4K to compact flash cards. You talk like the cards didn't even exist or would drop frames. Also in 3.5K there are no dropped frames or occasional messed up frames, it is continuous recording with perfect image quality, like you see in my video. Sometimes a clip may stop due to the data rate being on the limit of the card, but there are no corrupt frames...and we always did have these occasional stoppages with the original uncompressed 14bit 1080p as well... that didn't stop a ton of AMAZING work being shot with it. For many things, shorter takes are enough. And if you want longer ones just decrease the resolution slightly and shoot 10bit lossless instead of 12bit. 10bit has more advantages than just less banding my friend In rec.709 your dynamic range is limited in 8bit because you simply run out of room. We know the look that comes with trying to compress more dynamic range into a rec.709 8bit, colour suffers, it looks like HDR puke. That's because with 0-255 you have regions of large variation in brightness crammed into the last 5 or 10 shades, so things like a sky looks like crap, no accurate colours in it. LOG is a way around this to a certain extent but is also a form of compression The reason the rec.709 image looks so good on the GH5 is the entire image processing pipeline is 10bit this time round... things have room to breathe and when you do bring up the blacks or pull down the highlights there's 100x more information in there and they don't fall apart. So in short, 10bit = more dynamic range, especially on a 10bit HDR display using Hybrid Log Gamma. That's why the HDR standards all demand 10bit or more. Dynamic range! Also 10bit raw = more dynamic range, plus more control over colour and white balance as it isn't baked in. Also lossless compression = 50% smaller file sizes with no loss of visual quality, so it is almost like having uncompressed raw, rather than compressed H.264 10bit. In addition the bump to 12bit and 14bit on the 5D3 with Magic Lantern gets you a bit more dynamic range, but close to the ceiling of the sensor. I'd say the image quality at 10bit is very close to 14bit... 12bit even closer as to makes barely any difference. 14bit has a bit more accuracy in the highlights. Shadows still look AMAZING in 10bit, like the Blackmagic raw cinema cameras but less noisy.

That's covered in the guide, you see the answer in there Yes it's centred and the framing is 100% accurate in live-view for 3.5K. Nope. The grey scale is a bit lower res than the colour live-view. Test it. It's damn fun.

VENICE is a really good name for a camera. I hope they work through the rest of Italy and call the A7S III "Florence".

Your mug shot racked up so much screen time I thought you were going to try and beat Philip Bloom's record!! Throw a GH2 in there next time, I am sure it will beat the F65 on the shirt test given the right light

I agree the 18-55 is a fantastic lens. Not just a good kit lens. One of the best lenses end of story for it's class (APS-C zoom). It's cinematic. It has very low distortion for it's class. It's got a faster aperture than you'd expect for the size and price and better build quality as well. Only the Samsung 16-50mm F2.0-2.8 is a better APS-C zoom along with the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 but they are both triple or even quadruple the price of the Fuji and MUCH bigger / heavier! I saw on your channel just now that you had the Leica Q for a few weeks. Bro!! we must have been separated at birth or something because I just decided to pick one up as well, used, when I was in the UK last month. I had it before for 1 week and decided to send it back as at the time I was in love with the Sony RX1R II. But then I found myself seriously missing it. I've never known such a 3D pop through the EVF. A joy to use! It is clearly a Panasonic, but man... if they make a full frame interchangeable lens version of that for Panasonic prices... I'll dump my Sony mirrorless stuff faster than a very punctual Japanese bullet train.

I will be uploading some of the original ProRes clips and Cinema DNGs. They amount you can push them in post without them falling apart is incredible.

I usually prefer a d-pad for the menus to a joystick. Don't know if this is just from habit or whether a d-pad really is better for menus, because I sometimes forget the 5D Mark III lacks a d-pad altogether and it's all joystick and scroll wheel action in the menus. If I were Fuji I'd try and put more clear water between their models... X-T20, X-T2 and now this, all quite similar in features, form factor and specs. The X-E3 just has the EVF at the side instead of the middle, and that's the only real substantial difference?!

I'll provide some proper downloadable footage soon.

Available now! The new EOSHD 5D Mark III 3.5K RAW Shooter's Guide With the new Magic Lantern experimental build for the 5D Mark III, we have an amazing 3.5K 10bit lossless raw mode with Super 35mm continuous recording. Read the full article

That poor lens. Was it in good condition?

So tomorrow is "Fujikina" aka party time and 4K firmware update for the Fuji X Pro 2!! If it doesn't happen, we are going to have to hang the DJ (FujiRumors) from a VERY high post. I have my hopes up like anything!! I see they are reporting in-body 5 axis stabilisation for the X-T2S as well... That would be a very nice move by Fuji.

You get to choose... You can encode it to 10Mbit H.264 for YouTube if you want, it's up to you. With ProRes you get to choose between the different bitrate flavours, like LT, Proxy, etc...

This is a very good suggestion. LUT folder on the memory card. Menu on the camera to select them. Job done. Once converted to 5K ProRes they're smooth as butter.

Yes, going to be good for warp stabiliser. With Dual IS, 5 axis IBIS and Warp, maybe we won't need that £1000 tripod Flowtech 75 after all

With the new firmware 2.0 update, the Panasonic GH5 becomes the first 5K 10bit H.265 mirrorless camera, and you don't even need an anamorphic lens to join the party. Read the full article

Yes, as the sensor is better. A lot of junk noise, banding, in the Blackmagic files.

Finally, they did it. What took so long?!

Thanks for the good explanations!

Thanks for clearing that up Brian I was secretly holding out some hope for an anamorphic Speed Booster but if it's not possible, some new anamorphic lenses are always welcome. A few years ago I thought there were some soviet zooms on eBay with the anamorphic elements at the rear of the lens, like the Foton 37mm-140mm Anamorphic F3.5 but it turns out not to be the case (blame bad eBay descriptions)! The anamorphic went on the front and was enormous. I wish someone would do a modern version of the Iscorama... Small, focussing adapter, fits on almost any prime.

Exactly, they said "middle" codec between 8bit 4:2:0 low bitrate H.264 and 10bit RAW. Then they went back on it, but are still calling it a middle codec and an upgrade. It's deceitful practice.

No that A99 II measurement will be the full frame pixel binning mode, the Super 35mm mode has worse rolling shutter, more towards 30ms-ish as with the A7R II Super 35mm mode, as it's a 5K full pixel readout. Pixel binning is faster. The more pixels you need to read, the slower it can scan the sensor from top to bottom. Nice. How did Sam do the maths? I take it accounts for different panning speeds and different focal lengths between camera test footage?