alexcosy

Wow !! Very different indeed ! That N version seems like an excellent piece of optical engineering ! Do not let that one go ! It would be very cool to compare results and differences between the 2 of them !

The AE alternative exists, it's Blackmagic Fusion, on the same model as Resolve, but it's an entirely new software to learn indeed.

Casey's new vlog is out, and it still is shot with the GH5 (and looks pretty darn good). Looks like he is sticking to it for now.

Well, it's no secret, he has been showing that in the Vlogs for a few weeks/months now, explaining why he switched and what his new setup was so.... He maybe trying the GH5 as a possible contender, why not, just to see what the hype is all about. The FACT is the last one is shot (at least in parts) with a GH5, meaning at least possible interest. Good vloggers nowadays are the new filmmakers. Dismissing that is, i think, a mistake when you seen the content and quality some of them can put out every single day. Storytelling is storytelling.

"Color is not great either" Come on... Judging colour on such a test chart can never tell you how it does in the real world though. You can say many things, but the colour is clearly NOT bad in every video of it i've seen. Leica pays a lot of attention to that.

I might be late to the party, but i think it's worth saying. You can read ProRes on a PC but you cannot render/write ProRes on a PC, not with Premiere, not with Resolve. There's a "kind of" ProRes that's retro engineered (can't remember the brand) but it's not the true/real/official ProRes, ProRes is Mac exclusive (for exports) you'll just lose time trying to get it, and it won't be ProRes anyway. On a PC go for DNx.

It's not so much about IQ, it's about the overall rendition, pop, texture, bokeh etc... I'm not at all saying the A7s/II is a bad camera with bad IQ, it's a great camera by all means. There's an early Jon Olsonn vlog where they go on about gear, and they compare the SL and an A7 Marcus used to have, and they clearly state (and you can witness it as they show comparative footage) that the SL overall rendition is nicer, more appealling to the eye. and it does a great job with skin tones also.That and the Leica glass were a great combo. I just think that when they switched to an A7s + Sony Zoom (and it's a great zoom) the image lacked that extra pop, so it's not about IQ which is still great. Edit: check out Jon's Vlog 22, 10min00 in, there's the comparison, the combo of SL imagery + Leica 35mm 1.4 Summilux ASPH FLE is just great IMHO.

Those Chanel film are clearly (well) graded, and the crushed blacks seem more like an aesthetic choice rather than a technical limitation. For such a film (high end corporate / brand content) they probably recorded 4:2:2 10 bit via HDMI to get the best possible signal, which is another advantage of the SL over Sony, HDMI out is 10 bit, not 8.

The coming Summilux 50 SL should be a nice one. For AF you can also put TL lenses natively, i think in 4K they cover the crop, and offer wider option such as the 11-23, or the Summicron-asph 23mm.

No they indeed used a SL for a long time, probably about 200/250 vlogs, and the quality the got out of it was indeed extremely good (they used leica glass, be it manual M or SL AF, and it had loads of character). They switched to an A7sII and though it's a very good camera by all means, colour and overall rendition suffered from that change (to me at least), they also got a RED Helium which is a non-sense to me for a Vlog. Andrew, did they fix the Log problem on a firmware update on the SL, I remember your post on that subject when it got out ? I'm curious to see your results in 10bit 4:2:2, it should be great ! It is a great camera for both Stills and Video.

Strong softness in the corners though... I'd love to see them at 5.6 indeed, because wide open is near unusable unless at night like in this video when you really need the light at the cost of degrading the image.

Hi everyone, I know this is not a particularly cinematic lens, but it's a good lens, and i figured stills oriented lenses may still interest some of you. So, i'm selling my nice Leica Summicron 40mm f2, M mount lens + original rubber hood in very good state (rare these days as its rubber) + rigid metal hood (which i prefer) + filter screw converter: 5.5 to 39mm (this lens has a 39mm filter screw but with a different pitch than usual, the converter restore it to regular 39mm screw, just like other leica lenses). + Leica yellow filter Front and rear caps included. The lens is in very good state, the body has light traces of use as you could expect from this kind of lens, but all digits are still well painted, no missing paint anywhere and no scratches. The optics a in very good state, no scratches, haze of fungus, coating is still good too. The aperture ring is in perfect order, and the focus ring is smooth, no hardness, aperture blades are oil-free. It's a very good lenses, on par with it's 35 and 50 brothers. It's a summicron, so very crisp and sharp lens, but very compact (one of the most compact Leica M lens). Don't hesitate to look for reviews online, it's a nice entry into Leica lenses, no compromise on quality but at a nicer price (due to the unusual 40mm focal length). I'm simply selling it to inverst in an other Leica lens, a 50mm which suits me better. I can send worldwide (fee will vary depending on destination, but it's around 15€ for europe, and 25€ for the rest of the world, including insurance for the lens value). I'm asking 400€ + shipping. Payment via Paypal preferably. I can also sell through ebay if you prefer, but the price will be a little higher due to ebay's comission. More pictures can be provided, don't hesitate to ask. Thanks a lot, and i hope it can make someone here happy.

I'm sorry to say, but i think it's a terrible idea. We know how the consumer operates, people would then only look at the this megapixel count, as they already do with cameras. It's already not a good thing with cameras but it can make sense i guess sometimes, because it can be important. A lens is sooooo much more than its megapixel resolving power. Besides, most people actually don't care enough to really mind if it has a high resolving power or not. Like you said, a lot use the kit lens and they're very happy with it, it's good enough for them and the may not want to spend any more money on it. The few others who know enough about lenses, optic, and photography in general to really be interested in this matter, also know enough to go look for reviews, test, advice, photos on flickr etc... Plus, people would always ask "how many megapixels does that lens resolve" without know anything else about the lens, only focalizing on this, when everything else about a lens is so interesting and important. And to conclude, i guess MTF charts are there solely for that purpose.

​Eizo are not a rip off at all ! At least the CG series are not, if you need to be colour critical (and i mean critical, not "overall ok"), those are some of the best you can get for the money ! Can you elaborate why you don't like them ? The LG you present seems very cool for a GUI display at best, but the backlight uniformity is atrocious, it really make you wonder abour about gamma and colour accuracy too !

​ What you say is all true. But does this mean that film should be stpoped altogether. Because that's kind of what the article is saying, and that's what some people here are disagreeing with. Digital is the reality today, no point denying that, but why taking ALL film off the shelf if someone likes it ? That what i don't get, wanting film to be gone for ever for everyone. Plus, as you are a still photographer. Could you deny the quality there is to medium or large format film ? This doesn't apply to cinema of course, but large format photography is something else, even today with digital, it still can produce something digital cannot replicate. I understand it's very specific, but why would someone want that to be gone...