Inazuma

All this despite Sony Alpha Rumors saying a few days ago that there is almost zero chance of an A7Sii announcement Edit: http://presscentre.sony.eu/pressreleases/sony-expands-range-of-compact-full-frame-mirrorless-cameras-with-the-launch-of-the-ultra-sensitive-a7s-ii-1216386 Price: €3,400

Ah thanks! I had no idea that ring was removable

Has anyone else tried using a step-up filter with this? It ends up blocking the lens' retraction and extension when you turn it off/on.

The color control in Resolve is very powerful but I find for me as a non-hardcore colorist I find the tools in Premiere and Speedgrade easier to get where I want. Also, Resolve is slower working with h264 files than PP. So you either need to invest in a better processor or much more hard disk space to work with converted ProRes/DNxHD files. Neat Video also costs a lot more for Resolve than PP/FCPX. And from what I've seen of the editing I don't think it's really any better than what's already on offer.

Yes, Premiere Pro

Forgive me for my ignorance but is Cineon just a LOG converter?

Installed the app on my Sony Xperia Z3 Compact (which has the same 4k camera as the none-compact). But the app just crashes whenever I try to start it

Your shots were taken at ISO 12800. You sure you compared the LX100 at the same ISO?

I figured you might say something like this, so I took a very quick picture earlier. The attached picture was taken with my Tamron 17-50mm. The centre image was taken at 50mm and scaled down 50%. The rest of the image was taken at 25mm. See how closely they match up? Actually, Wikipedia and B&H both show that 50mm lens gives about half the angle of view of a 24mm lens. So with that logic in mind (that the central 50% of a photo is the same angle of view as what you would get with a lens that has double the focal length), its safe to safe the inverse is true. Therefore 600 * 1.3 = 780. Then * 4 = 3120. Also I think there's no way the OP's video there is equiv to 'just' 1700mm. It's gotta be closer to 3000mm+

Regardless of the 'crop' in photographic terms, he is taking about a quarter crop of the 4k image. So the resulting focal length would be 4x that of the lens (with consideration to the sensor crop). It's like if you shoot with a 25mm lens, took a picture and then put on a 50mm lens and took a picture. If you scaled the second image down to 50%, everything in view would line up with the central 50% of that first 25mm image.

4096 x 2160 = 8847360 1920 x 1080 = 2073600 8847360 / 2073600 = 4.3 So the effective focal length is actually 3354mm. Not bad! Or maybe I'm missing another step in my calculation?

Good job Only thing is I would avoid shooting into the sun with the filter on. Bit of a hassle I know but it causes all the detail in the shadows to go away What picture settings did you use btw? Also I've decided finally that Im going to get this camera!

The filter makes such a difference. I'm surprised not more people bought it after we talking about it

The LX100 is unique in its size and focal range with relatively large aperture and good low light. There is no other combination that can match it. If you want better low light your only option is to go for a prime lens on an ILC or a fixed lens camera like the Fuji x100 Ebrahim suggests the d5500 but from my experience that camera is only marginally better in DR and high iso (than my Panasonic GX7). I have to say that in most cases, sensor quality can not make up for poor/uninteresting lighting.

If colour is your only problem then you're in luck my friend. http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/8438-pleasing-neutralising-panasonic-luts/ It was created by colour matching GH4/GX7 footage to Canon footage of the same scene and colour charts.

Why are some of the Hoya ProND filters named with two digit numbers (ND16) and some with longer numbers (ND500)?

F stop measures the opening of the iris in the lens. But all the different elements of glass and their quality can effect the amount of light that actually hits the sensor. So the T stop tends to be slightly higher in numerical value to the F stop. Most of the time it's about 0.2 higher

Jonesy I think you might have a bad copy if yours is like T2.8. Mine is about T2 and slightly brighter than that at 28mm. Dearborn, if you want to be able to use that stabiliser then I would recommend lighting. In fact i would recommend lighting anyway. I use Aputure Amaran AL-H160. I have four of these little mothers. I use them on lighting tripods and sometimes with reflective umbrellas.

Xavc-s is essentially the same h264 codec that's used in most other cameras. It's really not even close to the 10 bit prores of the bmpcc Btw one thing I didn't mention earlier is that the bmpcc's dynamic range is only significantly better in RAW. ProRes is much more prone to blown highlights. I believe with the right picture profile you might get the same dynamic range on the a6000 as you would with the bmpcc in prores. But even so, there is something special about the blackmagic image. So if you have the time to work with it then I say go with it!

The codec itself doesn't affect image quality much. It's more about how the cameras process its raw information into that codec. From what I know, here's how I'd rate the cameras Sharpness: GH4 / NX1 (4k)BMPCCGH4 (1080p)NX1 / a6000 (1080p)Gradeability: BMPCC (by a large margin)GH4 / a6000NX1Colour (this is really subjective): BMPCCNX1a6000GH4Low light: a6000BMPCCGH4 / NX1Dynamic Range: BMPCCa6000GH4NX1

Id probably start by raising all the shadows a bit

What's your cameras base ISO, Zak? And what crop?

Well are you going to post some footage or what?

It seems like the colour is really off. Looks like infared interference or maybe a bad ND?

Maybe a used D5300 and Tokina 80-200mm f2.8? I got that lens for £250 ($400) on ebay.