MattH

Yeah, it's meant to be a 'clever' pun but at the end of the day the company is called dog shit.

Pretty significant example of posterisation on the jeans from about 1:14. And on the big plant pot to the right. Could that just be the grade? Also I found the whole video quite macro-blocky, though you never know how much of that is down to youtube, im sure I've seen cleaner.

It's actually a good point it not having 60p 4k. It hadn't occured to me that it didn't, so I was glad for the info. And its a z6 thread, not a z6 autofocus thread, so perfectly on topic.

In 4k? I'm pretty sure there is a significant 1.7x crop (in the EOS-R) as evidenced by the test in the video above and as publicised by every single person talking about the camera on this forum.

If 'speed' matters THAT much to you, you will use a f1.4 prime anyway. And you'll probably never see that speed in a zoom. If you abslutely need a zoom, there aren't many situations were f2.8 on full frame is going to look flat.

It's image stabilisation, not a steady cam. Image stabilisation is for reducing shaking while you are stood still trying to hold the camera as stable as possible. Its to give that extra boost of stabilisation to help you out. It's not there to do the cameraman's job. It always amuses me how people try to test IS by jumping up and down and sloppily walking down the street. How do they expect tiny movements within the image circle of the lens to compensate for such large movements? So silly!

You mean when you set jpeg to 4 by 3 ratio and you plug in the HDMI it doesn't work? Or is it just showing a 16:9 crop?

Basically you have no idea what kind of deranged setup someone is going to be viewing on. Slight browser differences are likely to be the least of the problem. If you are lucky enough that a viewer is watching on a large desktop monitor (as opposed to a phone or smooth motion tv) with no overscan and not set to some weird 'movie' preset with the brightness too high and the sharpness to the max, then to have the only problem be a slight browser difference is really not much of an issue. So its best not to worry about it.

I prefer knockers!

The main thing that struck me about that video is that it was all about HER. You would have thought a young CEO would be eager to promote their company. But what did she say about Vimeo? Barely anything. Literally the only thing she said was "When I made the decision to go to Vimeo one of the main reasons is because I was attracted to the fact that in online video Vimeo was doing something different". Your company is doing something different? Wow what a sales pitch! And by the way, the way she casually says made the decision, as if she had offers to be CEO of 10 companies, and she though "hmm, ok I'll have that one". Anyone under the age of 35 who is given the opportunity to be CEO of a company they didn't create should be grovelling at the feet of the board of directors. There shouldn't be any decision in it. What she should have said is something like "I was amazed and truly grateful to be lucky enough to have been given this opportunity at this young age to take the helm of such a high profile company". Obviously there is a large sense of entitlement from finance students at ivy-league colleges who assume (correctly in many cases) that they can (for some reason) just walk into high profile positions. And this sense of confidence actually helps them. I think the fact that she probably did well at that start up bank helped her get the position, but also I cant help but think they were trying to be trendy in having a CEO who ticks a lot of boxes in terms of 'diversity'. It's a shame that they are about to fly down the pan for having such a suicidal policy. Though maybe we can see some positive in this. They don't have some "un-savy stuffy 60 year old who is closed off from the world" as a CEO, and instead they have a "young vibrant go-getter who is mindful of the new internet landscape who can adapt quickly to new challenges and engage more with the customer base yada yada". Given that, maybe you could try contacting her personally about your concerns. If she really is worth her salt maybe she can actually do something to change course before the ship runs aground.

What do you think about the video? Did you notice the weird colour stuff?

That isn't your video is it Snuff? Or is it? Just letting you know that putting in the shooting details with nothing else makes it seem like you are sharing your own work. Anyway thanks for the link and copying the info from youtube. There are some funky colour things happening there. The reds seem to be almost showing that red clipping issue and the yellow shadows on the face are strange. I wonder if that was the grade or whether the sensor reacts like that naturally.

I think he just means the boys face looks more goofy in the right image.

Well to be fair he figured out that its a native DCI 4k sensor, which is a valid observation as its different to all other stills cameras. But to say never shoot UHD is a bit of a stretch. If you know you want UHD and you shoot DCI you've just given yourself a job in post.

The PROAV dynamic range tests are pretty useless. They don't understand that ISO is not exposure. So they have not actually increased the exposure at all steps in these tests. In some they have just changed the iso. Which just shows how the camera reacts to the same exposure at different iso's. Thats why you see such a masive difference at the so called "+3 stops" on the pocket4k test. Between "+1 stops" iso 400 and "+2 stops" 800 thats actually exaclty the same exposure and native iso with a different tone curve aplied. So there would be no difference in what clipped. Whereas with the "+3 stops" thats the same exposure but with a real 2 stop iso boost, so the clipping point has gone down 2 stops in a single step. A better test would be to keep the iso the same and change the actual exposure. You could then do the same test at different iso's to see how iso effected dynamic range.

It's an inbuilt time lapse funtion. It would be impossible with real time playback. But you can tell everything is sped up.

You think that isn't a problem? You can't photograph a landmark and sell a print of it? That's the end of profesional photogrphy.

Cognitive Dissonance: Person (A) recognises that an anti democratic bureaucratic multinational corporate controlled syndicate is trying to implement draconian laws that infringe on civil freedoms in the most blatant way possible, and is deeply unhappy about it. Person (A) wants to remain part of that syndicate.

Have you looked at the samples? The main lenses compared are maunal lenses. The Laowa 7.5mm and Samyang 12mm, which dont have any corrections happening in any camera. These tests even show these lenses at f2 on a GX85 out performing themselves at f5.6 (even f8) on the Pocket4k.

I doubt it is a firmware issue causing the soft edges. More likely due to the physical nature of the sensor such as the sensor stack thickness or the nature of micro lenses or lack of. Ideally it could be a flaw with that camera in particular, but thats being optimistic.

Just a note that the 'soft edges' discussion on BMC user has moved forward significantly. Kin869 has uploaded loads more examples. The upshot is that (unless his camera is an exception) if you are using a non telecentric wide angle lens (native or speed boosted) and you shoot a wide shot you will probably see an edge softness issue at any aperture wider than f5.6.

That would be the stock answer for a company like apple. But BM are more like Linux. Open source. canon batteries, apple codec, and they certainly couldnt say "use our lenses" either. Though I agree its obviously not ideal.

It was probably either that or not include a battery. I guess at least this way you CAN use it untill you get proper canon batteries.

Yeah, even the battery knows it is about to die and its pulling the ejector seat canopy. After a second the battery will fly out the bottom, then release a parachute before it hits the ground.

Sure, If you can. The more tests the better I suppose. That's the f3.5 EF mount I presume. Looking at reviews it is supposed to be 'soft' at the edges wide open (soft could just mean field curvature). So if it is field curvature it would potentially exaggerate if the same thing happens. So I guess f3.5 focused at infinity at a fairly uniform distance 'landscape' or 'streetscape' would be the test to try. Ideally It would be good to compare it on a canon (or other camera) from exaclty the same place and same settings.