jonpais

and that is what rec2020 will be doing for the following thirty years!. And, I’m sorry, @maxotics, but you’ve been going on about how shooting in log, we’re losing all this vital color information, when in fact, the gains in dynamic range are more perceptible to the human eye. Some here are saying, ‘but displays can’t reproduce rec2020, so we’re not really seeing true HDR!’ Which is not true - we are still seeing large gains in dynamic range and local contrast. rec2020 is a goal, nothing more. It’s a standard. 90% of P3 on a home television is nothing to sneeze at either.

Regarding dynamic range and loss of color saturation, log profiles, and this whole idea that “you don’t get something for nothing”, I find Joseph Moore’s explanation over in a thread about the GH4 and V-log to be very clear and, most importantly, an accurate description of what I see with my own eyes when watching a moving image, as opposed to charts and 400% enlargements. I think it's important to recognize that the tonal areas in which precision is being compromised (which any LOG curve must do) are the areas in which our eyes can't distinguish fine gradations. (Especially highlights.) The sensitive midrange is being afforded the most bits. This isn't revelatory, this is what a LOG profile is for...sacrifice precision in the extremes in order to squeeze in more dynamic range. That's a trade-off that will almost always yield a better PQ. source In his blog, he also describes very coherently, in layman’s terms, the three types of spatial resolution. A very good read.

@Matthew Hartman Aside from Cinema 5D’s overwhelmingly negative review, I’m not seeing the hate for the NX1 that you’re referring to. Matt Granger and Philip Bloom don’t even review the camera, and TCSTV ‘s coverage seemed balanced to me, as do all their reviews. The only thing that killed the NX1 was Samsung’s management. FWIW, when the camera came out, I saw many positive reviews. my 2 cents

Why is his lens so noisy? Why is he recording the sound of the lens? Do all lenses sound like machine guns with that adapter?

If it’s not too much trouble, could you post links to some of these reviews?

i

@Matthew Hartman I read your comment with great interest up until your last statement about the industry lynch mobbing the NX1. Could you clarify?

BTW, to my great relief, I’m no longer a mod.

Even shooting with the same camera and lens, you can’t draw sweeping generalizations about how the sensor responds to skin tones when your methodology is not rigorous. The lighting conditions and white balance; the wide variety of complexions; the dramatically dissimilar grading: these factors all make any attempt at arriving at a definitively conclusive assessment futile. Which is why Art Adams, in his evaluation of the AJA Cion, uses the word ‘appears’ over half a dozen times in his article: he can’t be absolutely sure whether the colors he is seeing are accurate or if they are the consequence of improper lighting, white balance or grading. All I can say with any certainty is that the Arri LF blows my socks off.

E.S. - The methodology is flawed. Here’s why: (1) the Canon and Arri shots are made under different lighting conditions (2) models wearing make-up vs. no make-up (3) footage has LUTs applied, has been color corrected and graded with creative intent (5) cannot make definitive judgements about color without reference monitor (6) no color checker in the frames to verify proper white balance (7) Arri primes impart a vastly different color to Canon lenses (8) reason for comparing Arri to Canon? (9) different models with entirely different complexions are compared in the examples. A proper test would use the same model in identical lighting conditions without color manipulation in post, e.g.

Sorry, I was confused. The ART lenses are photography lenses. For filmmaking, you want to use cinema lenses.

Maybe this will help answer your hype question. This is from a review of the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 over at dpreview: How did the Sigma 85mm F1.4 Art compare with the G Master? The answer, in short, is that the Sigma beat out the Sony in nearly every category. Sharpness, vignetting, distortion and the handling of lateral CA (though not LoCA, in harsh lighting situations, wide open) all went to the Sigma. It simply outperformed the Sony across the board. In terms of lens character the Sigma does an excellent job in subject isolation and overall bokeh presentation, but so does the Sony. In fact, it's really difficult to see any majordifferences in this respect. The Sigma is also much cheaper than the Sony equivalent.

? A set of seven cine primes, all manual focus, will only set you back $25,000.

What hype, @Grégory LEROY ?

bcs it works too well ?

@Grégory LEROY Sigma lenses are fbw

IBIS works great with adapted lenses. I’ve shot with Sigma ART 50mm f/1.4 and even Veydra 85mm with ETC enabled (over 200mm equiv.!) with no issues. These were all shot handheld. Keep in mind, I shake a lot.

animal cruelty

Best wishes to you too.

I find her smile beguiling, but the absence of tonality in her shirt makes me wary of approaching. ? Let’s get real - wide dynamic range isn’t always about maintaining detail in every highlight. Having wide dynamic range gives the filmmaker and colorist more creative freedom to decide what is or isn’t important.

I guess @kye is just trying to justify his purchase of the XC10.

why bother is right. I had to double up on my Amlor. ?

@IronFilm That was exactly my reaction when my mom threw me out of the house when I was only 45 years old, saying I had to get a job!

Your comment disappeared @IronFilm.

@Orangenz I’m still waiting for your GH5s unboxing!