galenb

I just wanted to quickly pop in here after reading the article. It's not that I disagree with Andrew's words on the A7III, or that it's ranked in the number 2 spot but that you had nothing positive to say about it. Again, it's not that anything you said was necessarily wrong. But how about giving it credit for shaking things up. For being the new de facto for "Entry level" full frame. For not holding back where other camera manufacturers would have. Yes, the Fuji has some of the best video quality but I'd say it's only just 'Slightly' better than the A7III. I have a feeling that a lot of the time you won't notice the difference. It's got the Sony beat with color straight out of the camera but most of us do a little grading anyway so I'm not sure I could fault them for that. But I get it, Fuji deserves the #1 spot and Sony deserves the #2 spot. I agree with that. It's just that it would have been nice if you had mentioned some of it's stronger points: With the A7III, Sony brought highend features like IBIS, 10 FPS, dual card slots, amazing low light performance, amazing auto focus, beautifully detailed 4K video, improved color science, and far better battery life ("Amazing" I should say) to a platform that many people where on the fence about. And I think they also forced Nikon and Cannon to show their hands. Maybe even before they were ready. The A7III showed the camera world that Sony were serious about about being #1. Even if they only made #2. ;-) But yes, you're right, it's a boring looking, utilitarian, working photographer's camera. It's menu's are crap and the screens are average at best and don't flip out and around. But your argument that it doesn't inspire artistic photography... again, I'm not sure I can really fault them for that. Sony has a very subtle, clean, and flare-less design language. And just like the car industry, some people appreciate flare like BMW while others like the subtlety of Audi. I have to say, I do feel inspired by my A7III. It's perfect for me because I do a little of everything. Portrait, landscape, still life, street, plus tons of video. it's small size paired with the right lens, makes the A7III great at all of it. To me, Sony hit a sweet spot with this one. Just enough high end features where it matters and skimping on the features that aren't as good as the competition but are ultimately "good enough" to keep the price down. This is the first camera to tick off all the little camera features that I wanted and it did it in a $2000 body. That works for me. Take my money!

Sounds like you're describing the Micro Studio Camera 4K. ;-)

Question about the a6300: How bad is the rolling shutter in 1080p? I have to say, this "Sounds" like my perfect camera for me: - Super 35/APS-C sensor. - Great low-light performance. - In body stabilization. - Small size. - Very adaptable lens mount. - 120 HFR. These are literally all the features that I've been wanting in a camera for the last four or five years now. I almost got a G80/85 recently because it has stabilization but the micro 4/3 format means more of a crop and not as good low light performance. I also have an m4/3 camera and I'm kinda done with it to be honest. As far as issue with the camera, 4K is nice but I probably won't use it that much so I'm not sure if the rolling shutter will be as much of an issue for me. I never ever shoot continuously for long periods of time so I have a feeling the overheating issue people suffer from won't be an issue for me either. We'll see though. I'm either going to get one when it comes out or wait till the A9 comes out and see if I can find a used A7sII.

5. All of the above. Obviously it's the sensor at the base of the image chain. How much light it can capture, bit depth at which it captures it and how accurate it is matter a lot. But even before that, the lens you use is what the sensor is capturing so that might be even more important than the sensor itself. The processor applies color science to decode the sensor data into an image that looks good so that has a lot to do with it as well. The codec then takes away data and accentuates other details and so on. So that has a lot to do with the image too. Finally, the artist behind the camera has a part to play as well. ;-)

It's funny, I have only minimal interest in 4k video in the first place and even less in 6k. For my needs, better low light performance, less rolling shutter distortion and in body stabilization are way more enticing features. My dream features would be if they added compressed raw and global shutter. I'm tired of the resolution wars. Make the cameras more useful please. But I'm a realist and I know that will never happen in a pro-sumer camera.

Just came across this. It's the full onstage announcement. Apparently it's not called the Osmo but rather the Zenmuse X5R:

I see. Thats to bad. I thought by now it'd be more prevalent by now. In body stabilization has the advantage of working with any lens. I'm sure lens based stabilization is superior in some way but I would have to buy all new lenses and I'm not to keen on that.

Okay, I've been away for a little while now and haven't been keeping an eye on the DSLR video world lately. I've been working at a small CGI animation studio and haven't even been able to shoot video lately. I'm a bit behind the times now. So, here's the thing, I'm going to be traveling soon and I want o shoot some cool travel-log stuff but my current camera isn't going to cut it. So, I've been thinking about getting a new camera. Currently I have a GH1 and it's a bit long in the tooth (whatever that means). It's not a bad camera but it gets really bad in low light, I'm kind of over the Micro 4/3 crop, and The image is always shaky and rolling shutter-y when head held. So I've been looking around to find a new camera but I don't know any of the video specs of all the newest cameras and the photography blogs aren't helping me out at all. ;-) I have a very specific needs from said camera though: - First is low light. I'd really like to be able to shoot at the beach or at bars or clubs in the evenings and this is just not the thing for my GH1. I've seen nice things done with the GH2/3/4 so far, but nothing that's really impressive as far as low light. I don't need to get into A7S/full frame/night for day territory but I do need to capture the moment in less that ideal lighting situations. - Second is image stabilization. In body would be the best like the OMD EM5 but the 30 FPS only limitation is a deal breaker for me. my hands are really shaky. Even when using my stabilizing shoulder brace. A lot of my lenses are on the longer side so that just exacerbates the situation. Most of the footage that I shoot with my GH1 is just jiggly, wobbly, jello-vision. I'm hoping to find a camera that can help me out here. - Third is 1080/24p. Pretty obvious here. As I just said, If it only shoots in 30p, it's an instant deal breaker for me. I'd also like to be able to shoot at 1080/60p or higher. Fourth is small size. I'll be traveling with it soon and I can't be caring around an extra camera bag. I'd love to be able to slip a small interchangeable lens camera and maybe an extra lens or two in my backpack and that's all. Nice discreet, run and gun shooting. - a few other things: I'd like to step up to APS-C. I was fine with M3/4 for the most part about a year ago but now… Not so much. I'm really trying to get nice shallow depth of field without having to spend a ton of money on sub f/2.0 lenses. If there was another m4/3 camera that had all of the above features, I might consider it but on the whole I'd like to go APS-C. Video image quality should be good and codec needs to be as high as possible but again, I'm willing to take a slight hit on this if the other features a there too. Other fancy features like Wi-Fi, touch screen and OLED viewfinders are not really so important to me. -I have a small collection of older Pentax, Minolta and Nikon lenses that I'll be adapting and using. This makes the inclusion of in-body OIS even more important as I don't own any lenses with OIS. Actually, do have one but it's just the basic kit lens for my GH1 that will not be coming along for the ride. I've been looking at the NEX line but I can't seem to find enough information on the stuff I've mentioned here. I'd love to see what you guys think of them. Thanks for any help you can give me!

Miraizon is only $50. That's the way I would go. I was actually just wondering about this the other day: How are people who have a BMPCC supposed to edit their ProRes Files on a PC without something like this? I mean, it seems to me, the benefit of using ProRes on a camera is that it's a drop-in editing format… As long as you are using a Mac though. What's the windows world supposed to do? I really don't understand why there isn't a more accessible ProRes codec for Windows.

Speed Booster?

This is my music that I make all on my own: Let me know if you like it and want to use any of it. :-)

Hey, I work at a studio that does stop motion. I've actually been in this industry since the early 90's. So, any kind light that you on a live shoot works for stop motion. We use everything from 100K Arri's to tiny peppers, and sometimes even simple incandescent clip on lights. If you're really worried about light flickering just use longer exposures and avoid florescent lights. It's not really something that we worry about. More troublesome are the cameras that we've used in the past that have automatic/motorized Apertures. Every time you shoot off a frame, it's actually slightly different. when you view the frames afterword, there's a slight flickering. So we always use Nikon manual lenses. Anyway, Now that I read your question I'm thinking that you don't actually mean "Stop motion" but rather "Time-laps". The two are not the same thing. I don't know if you know this or not so I'll just state it to be clear: Stop motion is where you move an object/puppet in small increments utilizing the principals of animation and take a picture, and then do it again and again until you have a sequence of frames that can then be played back at real-time. Time-laps is where you set up a camera to shoot frames at a very slow rate until you have a sequence to be played back. For this the BMCC is fine but for stop motion, you would normally just use a still camera and something like Dragon frame to help with the shooting and putting the sequence of frames together on your computer. Sorry if you know all that already I just wanted to be clear.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned or tested is the global shutter. I think this is where 4K Production camera will blow the GH4 out of the water with it's rolling shutter. Really, this is the main reason I would go with it over the GH4 in my opinion. A good example being: shoot hand held with a very long lens. It will be a mess of jello-vision on the GH4 but look normal on the Production camera. The 4K production camera will also look a lot better when stabilized too. I don't know, I kind of feel like the GH4 and the Black Magic Production camera 4K are going to be used in entierly different situation. Even though they are both going to be very nice and inexpensive 4K cameras, one of for DSLR shooting/run-n-gun while the other might be better suited for film work. We'll just have to wait and see.

I know I'm probably just going to come off as a hipster for saying this but... I really love the look of early anamorphic cinema lenses and this lens has non of that. For my tastes, it's far to clean and clinical. Yes, the edges are so clean and sharp but that's what i'm looking for in anamorphic. It has a kind of personality that doesn't exist in this lens. It looks more like a nice lens that's been cropped and an effect added to it for the flares. It's like if someone saw that Holga cameras are selling again and said, "We going make a new Holga type camera but ours is going to be better; No light leaks and plastic lenses! Ours will be perfect." ;-)   But, even saying all that, I'm sure I represent about .0001% of the people who are looking to buy anamorphic lenses. I'm positive it is just the hipster in me saying all that. I'm sure history will remember this lens as one of the "Good" ones. So, carry on SLR Magic. Carry on. ;-)    Oh and Yes, I agree with all those who have been asking for a 2x. 

Hmmm. So, I've seen footage that looks really great coming out of this camera so I have a feeling the softness has more to do with the lens or just plane being out of focus.   The thing I'm most concerned with is that with the small size and low weight comes potentially nasty shaky footage and wobble vision rolling shutter. How is he able to shoot this stuff handheld?   Hmmm. Now that I've looked at the footage in Resolve... Ugh... I really don't understand. Are these actually the files from the camera or are they files that came out of an intermediate step? They don't seem to have any dynamic range at all. The highlights are clipped right at the top and there is no latitude at all. What's up? Anyone?