jonpais

I’ve got no opinion either way on the original topic, since all I watch are the occasional youtube video and netflix. however, I can say that watching hdr on my lg oled, hdr images look like they have more detail than sdr images. it can be very beautiful to see and is not the same as UHD vs HD, which I have trouble telling apart anyway. that highly detailed appearance is the result of the much higher local contrast hdr offers. (lack of blooming probably enhances this effect too) unfortunately for filmmakers, we won’t be seeing affordable true hdr monitors for a while, even though the tech appears to be there. and vesa’s loose guidelines have allowed manufacturers to falsely claim every model on the showroom floor is hdr, just as I predicted they would. the few hdr monitors that are out there are for gamers, not content creators.

There are already tests online and over at DPReview showing the difference in high ISO performance between the X-T2 and X-T3. Most seem to agree that the increase in performance outweighs the slight loss of low light ability if I remember correctly. Check out the DPReview video I posted above.

I've got to hand it to Sareesh for his honest review.

Five seconds is nothing for a cinema camera, no?

I'm getting the Ursa! hehehe

Perhaps you didn't hear me - I've worked on automotive and product photography at studios with art directors standing over our shoulders; done event photography and portraiture for General Motors; processed film at a professional lab in the Detroit metropolitan area; did photography for human interest stories for magazines and newspapers; and worked for one of the busiest wedding photography studios in Oakland County, Michigan. And we didn't have the luxury of digital - everything was film. So yeah, I guess you could say I know what it's like to work under pressure.

But you and your cohorts were trying to pull the same shit with me. Not desperate. I could care less about your imaginary showreel, your imaginary clients or your imaginary website.

I'm with you on that. Sony FE lenses are outrageously expensive; Olympus Pro and PanLeica lenses can cost upwards of $1,200 or more. By comparison, taking into account their superior build quality and optical performance, the Fujinon lenses can seem like a real bargain.

Two years and eight pages later, but you still never showed any of your work. Wonder why?

What focal length was that?

As I said before, you're an idiot if you think I can't do wedding videos. I've simply got no interest in doing weddings. This is just a lens test of the Leica Nocticron on the GH4 (firmly affixed to a tripod) with the bride-to-be getting her hair done. Oh, right - and a Hoya ND filter. And this is a shoot I did in the park with the G85 and Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4. Not a wedding shoot, but so what.

Nisi 75mm f/0.95 FE Prototype.

I’m still using the original Crane.

bingo! I can fly practically all my Sony FF lenses on the original Crane. No need for a four-pound DJI Ronin S. (or whatever it weighs)

I practically always shoot with my a7 III on a gimbal; footage would be too shaky otherwise.

I don’t go along with future proof anything. If I did, I’d be visiting the chiropractor every month shooting Sigma ART lenses on my Panasonics; dealing with miserable AF on my Sony; and never being able to appreciate just how superb Fujinons are on my X-T2. The beauty of micro four thirds is compact lenses - not bodies - and hanging a two pound chunk of glass off a G85 is not only not fun, but I prefer the image quality from the Olympus PRO lenses anyhow.

Dynamic range, low light, eye AF, rolling shutter and a bunch of other Fuji goodness, much of it shot on the sensational 16-55mm f/2.8.

The one thing I’m not looking forward to are the ten million YouTube AF tests after the firmware update. ? https://www.panasonic.com/global/consumer/lumix/gh5_firmware.html

Right. They’re something like $24,000-$25,000/set. ?

The Fujinon 90mm f/2 is brilliant.

They’re $7,995.00 apiece.

True that.

@Vintage Jimothy Is there a dealer where you live? The G85 has outstanding ergonomics and reliability, it’s economical, it has a nice 4K image, IBIS and flippy screen. While I haven’t used the G7, it still has many adherents and sells new for just $500. The lack of IBIS would be a dealbreaker for me though.

For me, it’s about native mount lenses. Not fond of adapters. If I were investing in APS-C, I wouldn’t hesitate to choose Fuji. In general, their lenses have incredible build and optical quality. For full frame mirrorless, there are hundreds of choices for Sony full frame, from affordable cinema lenses by Rokinon and SLR Magic to Sigma and Zeiss as well as photography lenses by Sigma, 7artisans, Laowa and Voigtlander and dozens more. Not to mention Sony’s own lenses. But from what I’ve seen, the Nikon is an excellent camera, besting Sony in many categories.

She’s probably got some headstones, a Dedolight, a beauty dish, a couple foldable reflectors, a diffuser, a variable ND filter, light stands and two assistants buried in that duffle bag she hauls around.