Glenn Thomas

Quick question, does it have the 1:1 crop that was in the GH2?

Yeah, definitely some nice looking footage from the D600. Since all my old Nikon lenses are manual, the non adjustable aperture wouldn't be a problem for me. But still, since it's the Sony 24mp full frame sensor that's being used, and the same as that which is in the VG900, I can't imagine a Sony NEX9 being too far off. As far as I'm aware, and correct me if I'm wrong, the Nikons don't have focus peaking? Which is somethng I use all the time on my NEX5N with old Nikon lenses attached. Only problem with Sony's cameras though, is the limited bitrates.

XXX, no actual music videos. You can check my vimeo link. There's probably 30 or so there by now. JG, yeah, I thought that shot looked a bit too good to be the RX100. I use the sunset profile on my NEX5N also, having read Andrew's post here about that a while back. I reduce the sharpness too and haven't had any issues there. I don't know if that helps much with aliasing. Reducing contrast and saturation on the NEX5N doesn't flatten the image too much. It would be much the same as the RX100 I'd assume. Still undecided on a compact. I've checked a few more LX7 videos, and noticed plenty of blown out highlights. Andrew, 100P woud be better for PAL anyway with playback rate of 0.250. Easier to calculate although I'm not sure how the camera records the clips.

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1346509724' post='17095'] I'm trying out a Windows beta version of CineForm Studio Premium which supports CinemaDNG from the Blackmagic thanks to David Newman. Did you convert CinemaDNG to CineForm in that too Glenn, or in another program using the CineForm codec for Premiere? [/quote] I haven't actually tried the footage yet. Busy with 12 or so projects to finish right now. There's an article here about it - http://eyepatchfilms.com/?p=903

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1346497622' post='17084'] I'm looking into CineForm. Performance wise it does sound promising too, the transcoding is mega fast - does in 5 seconds what AE takes 2 minutes to do. [/quote] Yes, it is fast, and works well for 8 bit footage too as the files are converted to 10 or 12 bit. If you grade using First Light and don't use any NLE effects, pans or crops, videos will render faster than real time. All the exposure, white balance and colour settings are saved as metadata in the video files. In an editing suite for example, one person could be colour grading some footage on one machine using First Light, while another could be editing that same footage on a second networked machine simultaneously, and any colour adjustments would be updated on that editor's screen in real time. Great for chroma keyed footage too. For one video I did, I keyed out a bluescreen from some HV20 clips, and then saved them back out as 12 bit 4:4:4 Cineform avi's with an alpha channel. It also includes preset LUT's. In this video I shot on the S95 a while back https://vimeo.com/35505778, I graded the whole video simply by simultaneousy copying one of those preset LUT's to all the clips in the project. It worked nicely. So for RAW 2.5k footage from the Blackmagic Cinema camera, it would be perfect. First Light even allows you to pan & crop with keyframing too. By grading, panning or cropping in First Light and rendering a project with no additional effects added, you literally wouldn't lose anything. Of course it's Mac & PC compatible. Loads more advantages than using ProRes.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Cineform Raw here? This would give you the best of both. A true raw workflow, but with much smaller file sizes. I've been using Cineform for years, and the image quality has always been top notch.

True, that footage does look quite nice. If only it had been shot manually with the contrast, saturation and sharpness reduced. There are parts where the exposure looks good for a second, but is then lost. These companies really need to hire a few good shooters and editors to show people what the cameras are capable of. Every dodgy bit of test footage posted online by people who don't know what they're doing could easily reduce the number of sales of the product. Nice video you've done there too JG. Was the shot of the guy with the train behind him shot on the RX100? If so, how far were you zoomed in there?

Low Light, ok, that's a good reason. I'm yet to find any decent low light footage shot with the LX7, so it's hard to know. The only clip I've been able to find is this Pretty badly shot, but doesn't look too bad. Dynamic range would probably be better with the RX100 too. I'm still undecided, but that 120fps option would be nice. If it were just used for a few random shots here and there, could easily be uprezzed to 1080P. Your "what do I want to use it for, and how" makes perfect sense. Although to be honest, my only real requirement is a camera that can shoot video at 1080 50P minimum, with either manual control or some kind of exposure lock. Anything else would a bonus, so I thought it would be nice to get a few opinions here on what additional features others find most appealing. Which I appreciate, thanks! In fact, if Nokia announce a Pure View Windows Phone 8 device at the Microsoft conference next week, I might even consider that.

I'm looking at making the switch back to using a compact camera for video. I had an S95 a while back that I shot over 20 music videos with, and got some great results from it. Then I picked up an NEX5N and have already shot over 20 videos with that too, about half of which are still yet to be edited. It's got a great look, and I've been using some nice lenses with it including a few old Nikons, but I'm missing the freedom I had shooting with te S95. The overheating slows me down, I've had dust on the sensor that I couldn't see on the LCD, there's more to carry, I miss having decent macro capabilities, and changing lenses all the time is a pain too. So I've been checking the RX100 and LX7. Comparing the two, the LX7 has caught my attention the most. I've looked at a lot of RX100 footage, but when it comes to shallow dof, I'm yet to see any clips that offer much more than what the LX7 appears to offer, judging by clips I've seen from that. But not a big deal anyway. I was happy with the look I got from the S95 with an ND filter attached. Here's a comparative list I've compiled so far. Panasonic LX7 advantages: 120fps at 720p. There's a waterfall clip on Youtube which is a good example. 3 step ND filter. Cheaper by at least $200 here in Australia 24mm wide Timelapse function 1cm macro Hot shoe Sony RX100 advantages Better photo quality due to larger sensor Camera is smaller Better in low light? Opinions anyone?

Sorry to go off topic, but what took me by surprise here is that John shot that Dusk clip right outside my friend's house! Want to see how those shoes in the 2nd shot of John's clip ended up on the powerlines? This music video I made [url=http://vimeo.com/40200111]http://vimeo.com/40200111[/url] shows the guy actually throwing them there, around the 3 minute mark. My only concern about this camera is that it appears to be a Mac only device. Or at least not compatible with anything other than FCP X and Avid.

Looks good to me, apart from the rolling shutter which is still quite noticeable. Although that probably wouldn't be a problem. But at least there's no visible moire or aliasing. As for the resolution. It's hard to pick. His focusing and camera movement are all over the place. But at least it has a nice look. Much better than the low light clip the other day.

Here's what I find amusing. 24mbps on a full frame camera. If Nikon were serious, they'd find a way around that without shooters having to use an external HDMI option. Even with an iPhone 4S and the $3.99 Filmic Pro app, you can shoot at 48mbps. Double what the D800 is capable of.

The gear is clearly not that important anymore, and judging by a lot of videos I see, a lot of people using expensive gear still don't look as if they know what they're doing. I think people just need to get away from all the camera blogs and focus on shooting and editing video. For those who already own a half decent camera or even something really cheap, my advice would be to stick with that and master it before even thinking about upgrading. Be creative, and instead of wasting time on camera blogs comparing specs, use that time to practice up on shooting, colour grading and editing. Or even script writing. For over a year now I've been shooting all my videos on a Canon S95, and I'm still using it. Having shot roughly 18 music videos on it, one of which has had over 150k plays on YouTube. Every now and then I'll think about upgrading to something better, but instead I always end up just shooting more videos on the S95. None of my clients even question the camera anymore.