Inazuma

I actually find the colour from my C100 to be missing just a little something. So today I shot some colour charts with my Fuji XT10 and matched them to those shot with my c100 and created a LUT, which I am happy to share with you guys. There are plenty of LUTs out there, as well as plugins like FilmConvert but they often change the feeling of the image a bit too much. I just wanted something that would improve the colour a little. I shot the colour charts with all the different colour profiles but the results didn't really change much. I have attached two files. I'd recommend using the Provia one most of the time. The Chrome one is just slightly different. It would be interesting to hear how this LUT affects footage from other cameras too. Provia.cube Chrome.cube Raw (Cinema profile): FilmConvert Provia: My LUT: Raw (Cinema profile): Quick grade (curves + saturation): My LUT: Raw (Wide Dynamic Range profile): Impulz Fuji Pro LOG: My LUT:

What is the 1080p like on this camera? Is it cropped? Is it soft? What's the dynamic range and noise like compared to it at 4.6k?

BTW anyone else disappoint with the look of this new camera? It looks so much less sexy than the original

I heard from a trusted source that there will be IBIS

Try disabling any adblockers

1) I used CLog when I first got the camera but have since switched to WDR. It seems the main difference between the two profiles is how the tonal range is spread. Shadows are lighter in WDR, whereas they're darker in CLOG so you have to increase exposure to compensate. 2) Never seen that green bar except when I used a Nikon D7100 for photography (and only one of the two units I used had the problem). I would probably get your camera repaired/replaced. 3) One thing that I've not really seen mentioned anywhere is the use of "Phase" in the Color Matrix section. Increasing this can have a nice effect on the overall image, especially skin tones. I also spent some time tweaking CLOG to get rid of the raised blacks etc. But as I say, in the end I switched to WDR. I've only used the camera for a few projects so far though so my opinions may change.

Very nice. I really couldn't tell which was which. And I totally agree with his commentary

Unless you're a sports photographer that needs the extra FPS I would not recommend the d7100 over the similarly priced d5500, which has a better grip and IMO better controls despite having fewer dials and buttons. I speak from experience having shot a lot with them over the summer. And as has already been said, it has 60fps. Also the new Flat profile is great and gives very similar dynamic range to my c100 ii. The colour is also very nice.

You can also use davinci resolve or adobe speedgrade (and probably some other software that I don't know about) and pick out the particular hues of skin in footage and adjust them to your desire

Honestly I think it is to do with people's actual skin tones. Most people here are very pale, especially during the winter. I mean especially compared to Clooney who has a year round tan.

The images are great! What lens are you using?

If I were you I would go with the C100 Mk II, however you will definitely miss the malleable 10bit image from Blackmagic. I'm going to upload some videos from my c100 II to Andrew's new thread later.

Vimeo used to be great for image quality but YouTube have caught up now (or Vimeo have downgraded). Another thing is that they've now brought in adaptive streaming (the quality adjusts depending on your connection and size of player). This would be OK but it seems like embedded videos play at a really low resolution and can't be forced to play at a higher quality. I'm fully switching to YouTube for this reason.

But I mean how come the frame remains the same throughout? I have never shot motion picture film but I have shot stills where the scan came back with some of the frame in; but they never look the same from one shot to another. BTW I was also wondering; do you not feel uneasy having so many different cameras? Like you're a bit spoilt for choice If you were to shoot a movie what would you use? And how much do you pay for the film and processing?

Mercalli is a lot faster and better than Adobe's warp stabiliser

What causes the 'frame' on the film footage?

As far as I know, yes, it does use CUDA in editing

You should see a significant upgrade in speed because the software will use the graphic card's CUDA cores which are designed specifically to aid video production.

Large overhead fluorescent lights and close LED bulb lights. Like I said though, the colour is easily changed so its not an issue for me.

Actually it's the opposite. The c100 was whitebalanced with a card whilst the GX7 I just tweaked one of the presets. The c100 has the most accurate colour but not necessarily the most pleasing. Strangely, the LUTs I made to make Panasonic colours look more like Canon colours works very well on the C100 footage.

This is a bit of a problem for me atm

In fact the second one is the GX7 :-)

I own the c100 mark ii, panasonic gx7, lx100, nikon d5500. I wouldn't say the C100 is a significant step up in image quality from any of those cameras but the usability is really amazing, especially if you're wanting to get run n gun audio as well using a shotgun mic. I tried the Sony FS5 the other day too and that seemed like another step up in usability. The internal 10bit and high framerates sound good too. If you have the money I would probably go for that. Edit: Attached unedited snapshots of a shoot I did yesterday with the C100 and GX7. Which is which? Could you still tell if the colours were graded to match?

This is what I don't get about people complaining one camera has better colour than another. In the end, you can just do a colour match using a chart and your results will look as natural as possible.

I used to use it with a follow focus just fine. If you leave the lens in its autofocus mode (not declutched) and change the camera setting to manual then it focus' like a normal manual lens and has a decent throw.