jonpais

In real life, I'm white as a ghost!

Nice LUT samples, even better subject matter! And the previous pages over in that same thread show some even more remarkable images using LUTs (all shot with the ancient GH4).

I should probably say how I white balanced and which settings I used as well. Settings: Standard, Contrast -2, Sharpening -5, NR -5, Saturation 0. I manually white balanced just using the LCD screen. No color correction in post. So of course, it's not any example of perfection. But I thought what Inazuma was referring to is the general overall skin tones having a tendency toward orange. I'm no expert on chroma smearing, but I thought that referred to splotchy patches of color (green/magenta) showing up in footage, not to the overall color rendition. Anyway, if you'd explain what you're seeing, I'd be very interested in learning more.

When I was still a prepubescent, about a hundred years ago, I learned that you didn't spend $300.00 on a turntable and match it with $50.00 speakers. I've had that mentality my entire life. So if I'm going to put a $2,000.00 camera, $800.00 lens and a $700.00 adapter on there, I'm not going to trust a $60.00 tripod. Old habits die hard.

I don't have any cheap tripods lying around to do a comparison, so I have to use my light stand and C-stand as a comparison. One is lightweight, and could probably support my LED monolight and softbox. The other is a bit heavier and there is no question it can support the load. But if I tripped over one of them, which would be the first to hit the ground - the light stand or the C-stand? If I were shooting outdoors, which one would withstand the wind better, the C-stand or the light stand? What about materials? The light stand is made of lightweight aluminum, the C-stand is made of more durable materials. Which will probably withstand years of use, the plastic knobs on the light stand or the metal knobs on the C-stand? The light stand cost about $20.00 USD, the C-stand around $100.00, but I've got from $400.00 to $800.00 worth of lights sitting on top. Which am I going to trust? Is the $80.00 in savings buying a light stand worth it?

My first test footage with the Fuji 50mm f/2 lens. My first impressions are that this is another solid performer, great build quality, beautiful image quality.

Looking good, thanks for sharing.

Why on earth would anyone place skin tones at 90%? That makes no sense whatsoever.

I'm not seeing that, though my earlier white balance and color correction skills were seriously lacking. The Leica lenses also produce a much more pleasing color than the yellowish Panasonic lenses I've used.

Damn, only 9 bits? I'm cancelling my order!

Very few lenses have impressed me like the Leica DG Summilux 12mm f/1.4. First of all, it is exceedingly difficult to design a micro four thirds lens of those parameters; and while there have been several very Good wide angle primes designed for the system, none have exactly smashed resolution records. And whatever their actual resolution, I've never been able to get satisfyingly crisp images from either the wide end of my Panasonic X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 or my Voigtlander Nokton 17.5mm f/.95. I know they're capable of delivering detailed shots, it's just that I've never managed to get truly sharp pictures with either of those lenses, while other lenses in my collection, the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 and Sigma DC DN 30mm f/1.4 have never failed to produce dazzlingly sharp images; the verdict is still out on my Olympus 25mm f/1.2. It took me months to decide to purchase the Leica 12mm f/1.4 - firstly, because I seldom shoot ultrawide, and secondly, because there has been next to no convincing work online to make me want to drop $1,300 on an unknown quantity. And none of the videos I had seen taken with the Leica could persuade me that it was any better than the modestly priced Samyang 12mm f/2, so highly praised by readers here. One thing that held me back from getting the Samyang though is that an aperture of f/2 does not really allow you to play with depth of field on a wide prime, and I prefer AF lenses for the kind of work I do, which is street photography and vlogging. So I felt I was taking a huge gamble when I ultimately decided to pull the trigger on the Leica. And now that I own it, I believe 12mm is a perfect focal length for vlogging from home or out on the street with a gimbal: at home, because it gives me more flexibility with lighting and allows me to sit near the microphone; outdoors, because even when holding my arm outstretched, the field of view just barely covers the top of my head to my shoulders. And whether mounted on a tripod or shooting handheld, wide open or at f/4-5.6, the Leica has consistently delivered insanely sharp detail. It also produces some very beautiful bokeh. And the build quality of the current lineup of Leica lenses surpasses that of most other micro four thirds lenses. I realize that the lens is expensive, most good glass is; I'm also aware that many reading this already have a wide angle Zoom that covers 12mm: but I would still recommend this lens to anyone who wants to see just how great micro four thirds can look with the right glass.

I was under the impression that e stabilization added an extra 5-10% crop to the image, but I've never used it, so can't confirm. You definitely want to enter the correct focal length as you're zooming or IBIS won't function properly.

I think once more photographers see the colors from this lens (compared to the Panasonic) they'll want nothing but Leica from here on out.

@pekoo I'm not familiar with that particular tripod/head combination, but I would take the manufacturer's load capacity and divide it by ten. So it should be fine for the GH4 and the price seems fair. But... I don't know what kind of slider you're using, but mine weighs some 15 pounds, so it wouldn't be enough. And if you bought a Fuji X-T2 and slapped on a hunking 50-140mm f/2.8 lens on there, the tripod would crumple under the load. Also, I work around lots of families and hyperactive unattended children, and if one happened to run into my tripod, the chances are they'd fall before my camera ever did. Just like computers and everything else I buy, I don't just purchase to meet present needs, but also anticipated uses. You may not want to spend the money on a tripod that can handle 40Kg, but for a little more money, you can sort of future proof your investment. Also, I'm not fond of those center columns, they add instability. I do however like the flip lever leg locks, I hate the twisty ones.

You're aware that the tiny rubber piece from the bottom of the camera is stored in the battery grip, right?

In Vietnam, stuff like this is a common sight, but I wouldn't try it. (the image is actually from Nanjing, but we see similar examples in Saigon all the time).

I don't really have a consistent method. There were times when I would begin editing on the iMac, then I'd feel the need to get out of the house, so I'd continue editing on the laptop. I'd check the final results and fine-tune things like color, sharpening, etc. on the iMac before uploading to YouTube. Now, I find myself doing more of my videos on the iMac alone. It is just so much easier to see the flaws on a 27" screen, things like camera shake, whether something is truly sharp, everything. The new MacBook Pro has superb color, but since I go to a coffee shop with tungsten lighting, I can't really do any color correction there. And my room has all yellowish walls, so that's not ideal either. But hey, it doesn't matter anyway, since Safari is going to destroy my colors no matter what! Anyhow, I realize there are times when everyone has to edit on a laptop, but given a choice, I'd caution against it.

Will you be using this with an Arri and a 12 foot crane? Will you eventually be using a slider? Hard to recommend a tripod without knowing which camera you're using and how you intend to use it.

Smart move. I'd been meaning to ask for a while now how you can edit on a laptop, the extra real estate is better, even in 2K. I'd been thinking of getting the LG for my MBPr Touch Bar, but I'm still happy with my iMac 2013. Sorry I can't help answer your question, though.

It's laughing till I cry.

??? Enjoy your new lens, Fredrik!

It's almost in my tiny sweating hands. ?

Rule number one in my book. I hear many talking about codecs breaking up under extreme grading, but I've watched dozens upon dozens of grading tutorials by experienced colorists and have yet to see any do an 'extreme' grade. The cameraman should be getting as close to their vision in camera as possible, and the best cinematographers don't want the colorist messing around with that. I don't even like photos where it's obvious that everything was done in post, they just look phony.

I haven't tried that combo, but pretty certain it won't balance.