Julian

S-P-A-M ....come on guys its an advert for a dating site

It's not always what it seems like Andy. You are showing a lot of prejudice here.

There's one thing that bothers me though. The photo is corrupted, the link doesn't work and the actual gender isn't stated anywhere...

It depends on what part of the image is most important to you. In the +2 stops histogram there seems to be steep clipping going on in the higlights - red channel. Probably you won't be able to recover all of the highlights with those settings. If those highlights are crucial, then i'd say in this case +1.5 stops would be the max. It's easier to recover details from dark parts / shadows in general. Depends on the sensor, the Sony/Toshiba-sensors can do this extremely well for example. Canon sensors show more artifacts when recovering shadows, still you can get more out of clipped shadows then out of clipped highlights.

P.S. Julian, dhessel - guys, please, dont comment my topic! ;)

lol wtf?

You think I'm not serious? :(

so i talked to one of my DP friends yesterday about this whole anamorphic/bokeh thing. 

i notice that when I shoot with my 5d mark iii, i get a lot more cylindrical distortion in the background.   Something like this:

 

distortion.jpg

 

you'll notice in the upper right corner and the left side on the grass there's this kind of smearing.  which I really like and think is dreamy.

 

i don't get that kind of smearing on the pocket camera.  my DP friend said it was mainly because the 5iii sensor uses the whole lens element and that will always get more distortion.  that's why i'm getting that.  whereas the pocket camera crops even the m4/3 lenses that i'm using.

 

is this what you guys meant mainly by the sensor size having an effect on the bokeh?

thanks

Yes, this is exactly the case. A smaller sensor won't really have an effect on how 'oval' the bokeh shape is, but if you use lenses designed for bigger sensors you are just cropping the middle part. Bokeh gets distorted near the corners of a lens (as an effect of that, the ovals might look more pronounced). The solution would be to find some glass that is made for the sensor size. For the Pocket you should be looking into C-mount lenses / Super 16mm glass.

Doesn't the C100 use all its pixels for image capture? In that case, Dual Pixel AF might affect the performance?

Still shooters have been screaming for a still only cam for years — now they can pony up for one. : )

This. Smart move by Nikon to leave the movie mode out. The amount of photographers crying with happiness over the lack of movie mode is astounding.

The Canon photographers on the other side are crying a 1000 tears over the fact that Nikon does pay attention to the photographer, instead of Canon who only cares for the movie makers (yes... that's what they think, it's more like Canon doesn't really care about anyone or anything).

This camera is bullshit anyway, yes, it has appeal.... ohhh the looks, ahhh the buttons! But what is wrong with the ergonomics of a D800? What is the point of selecting your shutter speed (limited to full stops) with a huge wheel, that you first have to unlock... Form over fuction.

2.5K is a kind of random resolution I think. It's not really a standard and is there any camera except for the BMCC that shoots 2.5K?The difference with 1080p is small... 4K has been around for a long time. A step in between wouldn't make much sense imo.

Absolutely love it. Great look. I like the hand held, makes it more 'real'.

Can you post a pic of the camera/lens combination?

I'd go with a bigger SSD. Even if you'll only use it for OS and software, it fills up quickly, in my experience. 256GB isn't that much extra cost. Also, the bigger the SSD, the faster it is in general.

If you want to save money, I think you can do with a i5 processor. GPU is more important for fluid editing.

Also, you picked an older CPU, you should go for the newest generation (socket 1150), it doesn't cost more. So I'd go with the Intel Core i7 4770K or the i5 4670K. Of course you also need a socket 1150 motherboard. I don't think you have to spend so much on it, if you're not planning on over clocking.

And why the expensive liquid cooler? A big fan cooler is more than enough and can be very quiet (the GPU is going to make most of the noise anyway).

Also you can save on the memory, no need for fancy coolers.

For the power supply, I'd go with one that has a 80 Plus Gold certification (more efficient). 850W also is overkill. 650W should be plenty, definitely if you go for the Gold certification.

That monitor looks crap btw... I wouldn't buy 1080p@27" (23" or 24" is fine with that resolution). But more important, buy a monitor with an IPS panel. This looks like a cheap TN panel, those have bad color and viewing angles. Dell has good screens for good prices. You can get a 27" ips screen with 2560x1440 for less than 500.

This is a double digit billion dollar market segment... even if ten thousands of people would buy the 5D3 to shoot raw (which I doubt), that would have a tiny impact on the total value.

That video really looks too sharp to me. Like camcorder sharpness... but that's up to the sharpening settings in Resolve I suppose. Curious to try the Resolve 10 beta though, Canon DNG in Resolve 9 wasn't very good. DNG support in Premiere sounds nice, but after reading this I can't think of any good reason to use it.

When will Canon and Nikon stop blaming the economy for their sales decline?

 

Do they realise that it's the PRODUCTS that are to blame?

 

Incredibly arrogent to say the least, not to mention dangerous too.

How big is the percentage of people that actually realise a Canon 550D is basically the same as a 700D? I think it's very small.

That doesn't necessarily mean the economy is to blame, although it does make sense. People have less trust in the economy and that stops them from buying stuff, that's a fact.

Also market saturation could play a big role. Average Joe who buys a dslr isn't going to upgrade anytime soon. You could blame this on lack of innovation, maybe if things really got better people would be tempted to buy, but then again.. the economy really doesn't help. It's not just the camera manufacturers that notice this, even the shops around the corner do.

Thinking a 5D3 Mark III hack makes a big impact on sales is also naive... sorry.

Yes, some people will buy it now because of it. The world isn't full of enthusiasts / indie filmmakers. On the grand scheme that really isn't going to make a big difference.

Not defending the manufacturers here, but we're talking mass market here. 8 million camera's. The percentage of nerds like us is just a small part of that.

Don't know what you need but the super cheap Fotga stuff works for me. See:

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/2903-isco-gottigen-ka298-help-needed/?p=37018

Congrats, do share your results. Flowers, cats, or blockbuster... :)

With the mac pro you will still be bottleneck with storage reads, and you don't need the killer server processors unless you plan on doing 3D rendering. The 4700 series CPU on the iMacs will be more than enough for encoding.

 

I'd go with the top speced iMac with Nvidia 780M, you'll be fine. Importantly you'll need some sort of Thunderbolt RAID array if you want to work with raw or high bit depth 4K.  They are expensive, but fast storage is a must, and only second in importance to a good GPU. 

When is storage read speed going to be a problem? You can hook up external raid configurations, ssds, or whatever with tunderbolt at speeds the same as internal drives.

The CPU on the iMacs is fine, it's all about the GPU's. If you do serious work in Resolve with a decent amount of nodes, you'll need GPU power for realtime playback. A 780M is a GPU made for laptops, it's not going to come any near a discrete GPU card, or a double one like in the MacPro. Yes, the MacPro might be overkill, but I think the built in GPU in an iMac is'nt very futureproof. Enough to work with a few nodes on relatively simple stuff, but what if you want to do something complex, with speed? We're talking about a pro environment here...

Also an iMac with a lot of options is pretty expensive, so why go that route?

When it comes to programs such as DaVinci, what is the major difference for my use, between the Lite version and the full version? 

The lite version does 1080p max, but apart from that it is the full thing - which is pretty amazing indeed :)

My work is very serious, pro-level stuff. I've got clients paying in the thousands for their videos on a regular basis (of those thousands I see only a fraction, expenses and all), and I get by with what I have now, but with progress comes a time when you need to step up another level. Its a personal artistic thing mostly, besides from the fact I'm trying to attract bigger clients! 

So get a MacPro (new one). Sounds like you can justify it for the kind of work you do. Starts at $3/€3K. With the kind of (compressed) files you are using you don't need to max it out with all the upgrades like a 12 core CPU.

http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/22/mac-pro-2013-launch-date/

Basic configuration with 3.7Ghz Quad Core, 12GB, 256GB SSD seems fine. Not sure about the GPU's, it's a Dual AMD FirePro D300 (2x2GB). If you pay more you'll get better GPU's. The $4K version with 6-core CPU, 16GB, 2x D500 GPU's (2x3GB) sounds killer. I'd say wait for some some reviews to see what you need exactly and how they perform. You do need an external storage solution but that makes sense anyway.

Upgrading an excisting iMac is kinda impossible. You need a better graphics card. There are external options that work via Thunderbolt I think. But your mac probably doesn't even have thunderbolt. Also not sure if this is a great idea - you could look into it though.

Buying and old MacPro seems like waste of money to me. They still might be powerfull now, but spend the extra for a new one and you're futureproof.

The MacPro is a lot of money, but it's an investment over time. GPU wise an iMac is never going to get close, unless you go for an external GPU solution.

If you want to go cheap, the PC route gives much more options though...

Nice. Probably Panasonic will announce it shortly before or during the Photokina 2014 in september. The GH2 was announced at Photokina 2010, GH3 at Photokina 2012.

Awesome! Hope the Lumia 1020 gets an update for raw. I actually like the 1020 less (for photography) than the 808 because you don't have any control over sharpness/contrast. The jpg's out of the 1020 have too much contrast, sharpness/noise reduction and saturation. The 808 would let you set contrast/saturation/sharpness in steps from -5 to +5.

I wouldn't be cheap on it, since you're going to put all your optics in front of it... But yes, if you can wait for the reviews, why not.

I think the Speed Booster is worth the money over the Lens Turbo: http://www.mirrorlessworld.com/?p=6265

Cool Gábor, making your own speedbooster? :)

Yeah, the image circle is probably big enough. I've put a Sigma 18-35mm on a 5D2... 18mm is tunnel vision, but at 35mm it almost covers fullframe.

I too, would love to know how this performs on the larger sensor of a GH3.

Would love to see that too. Even just a little test... Andrew, pleeeease? :)

1 more question. I have a variable ND filter of 67mm. The 16mm has a filter size of 77mm. If I use a step-up ring and mount the 67mm filter on the 77mm lens, is that a garuanteed vignetting? And will that be a slight vignetting, or will it be really large?

 

Otherwise I have to buy a new ND filter as well... I already tested it on the 35mm and there is no vignetting. But considering that the 16mm is pretty wide...

With the SpeedBooster and the 16mm you will probably get (heavy) vignetting. Because you are really using the whole lens for your image. With the other lenses, that are made for full frame, you're not using the whole lens because you have a smaller sensor (even with speed booster) so that's probably no problem, like you noticed with the 35mm.

Btw, when the SpeedBooster was launched this was exactly the kit I was thinking about. I switched to Canon raw since then, so I've never bought the SpeedBooster or used it. Still feel a bit sad about that, it's an amazing invention.

By the way... almost forgot, but you also could consider the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. Since you already have a Samyang 35mm, it's probably not as relevant.. but you could do without the 16mm and 35mm and go for the zoom... the quality of the Sigma is really extraordinary. On the same 'to good to be true' level as the SpeedBooster.

This seems almost too good to be true.

Welcome to the SpeedBooster :)

If you have a 35mm 1.4 and a speedbooster, buying a 24mm 1.4 is pointless indeed (unless you want to use it on the speed booster, as 17mm f/1.0.

Normal adapters don't give any quality loss. They just extend the mount. Optically the Samyang lenses are all the same. The ones with MFT mount just are longer with a different mount, so you don't need the adapter.

Buying the Nikon versions with a Speedbooster is a good idea. Results with the SB can vary from lens to lens, so you might want to check out other peoples results with the Samyang lenses on the SB, although I don't see any reason for trouble. Just have a look on Vimeo and you'll find good results.

The only doubt is the Samyang 16mm f/2.0 - it's made for aps-c-sensors with a crop factor of 1.5x

With the SpeedBooster your GH3 will have a crop factor of 2x 0,71 = 1,42x, so you'll be pushing the 16mm a bit 'over the edge'. Most lenses have an image circle that is bigger than what they are designed for, I think it will work without problems, especially since you're in a 16:9 crop for video. But best thing would be to try before you buy.