Marcio Kabke Pinheiro

Very sad here with the news, Andrew. Even more because now I have a daughter, that will make 4 on Saturday - I can relate with this kind of pain. There is no words that can help with this. All we can do is send some good whishes for better times ahead. Be there with Arabella, Liam and your mom - all of you will need each other. Things are kind of hard here too, but I made a little contribution - more to show our love than for the value. Hang on and take all the time needed. We will be here.

I've started seriously with photography and video with m4/3. As the opposite of the majority here, I'm no professional photographer or filmmaker. Probably could be classified as "enthusiast". I like to make movies and stills on my trips, love to film or photograph live concerts, even made some videos for some friend's bands. m4/3 was perfect for me - VERY small lenses, does not attract any attention from people when using them on trips, always been dismissed by security at concert's doors (only happened one time, with the GH2, that looked like a DSLR...), and could carry all the lenses that I needed in a messenger bag. In my last trip, before covid, had a GX85 with the 12-32 pancake zoom, the Panasonic 42,5 f/1.7, the Panasonic 45-175 and a Rokinon 12mm f/2. Never got in a situation during the trip that I needed other lenses. To be kind of invisible on trips and concert, I had a primary rule: never use a body that looked like a "professional" DSLR. For this reason, "rangefinder" bodies are my preferred, most people even mistake them as film cameras. Had the GX7, GX85 and GX9; and midrange Olympus silver bodies for the same reason: E-M10 MK I and III, E-M5 MKII. No more GHs after the GH2, or E-M1s. Then I sensed the tide - m43 probably would become a niche format. Full video for Panasonic, wildlife and adventure for OM Digital. The horrendous G100, the E-M10 MK IV and E-P7(which was already developed before the spinoff) were the last discreet m4/3 cameras - and I see no signs of them returning. And yes, I think that the future of the format is in danger - OM Digital must sell to keep afloat, and Panasonic could pull a Samsung in any moment. Lenses, same thing. With the exception of the (amazing, in my opinion) Panasonic 9mm f/1.7, almost only Olympus PROs and the Panasonic f/1.7 duo. Big lenses, APS-C size or bigger when you brings equivalency on the equation (and I, contrary to most people, looks on equivalency most about low light that depth of field). Coupled with the fact that here in Brazil Panasonic and Olympus never sold their cameras officially, and the prices are very high, I started looking to APS-C. Easy choice: APS-C was already left to dust by Sony (albeit the newer primes are good, the bodies still sucks), Nikon and Canon did not have options at the time (EOS-M was out of question, and the Nikon and Canon APS-Cs mirrorless came after and still have very few lenses), and I gone to Fuji. Fuji is much better then m4/3? Compared to my previous kits, kind of. But not always. First: weight. The retro cult of Fuji lovers despises anything that is plastic, hence the lenses are kind of heavy compared to my previous ones, but not using equivalency. The 18-55 f/2.8-4 is AMAZING compared to the smaller m4/3 zooms; never thought that the m43 zooms that I had were bad, but this one is another league; ok, I could have the Oly 12-40 f/2.8, but it is larger, heavier and pricier. The 55-200 is VERY good too. The "Nocticrons" are lovely. Tiny, sharp, have the 35 and the 50, probably will get the full set. Are the "Olympus 45mm f/1.8" of the system. But to make the same equivalent travel set of my last trip will be heavier. Would like to see some "Nocticron zooms", f/4 or even f/4-5.6 - the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 is an example, will get one as soon Sigma releases a X version. Another problem on Fuji is IBIS. I have the only "discreet" body that have it, the X-S10. If the X-E4 had IBIS, would had bought it on pre-order, but...purists won. And would have 2 interfaces, PSAM and retro-dials, have a little bit of preference for PSAM (works better with custom positions), but no problem with retro ones, just wants consistency. Fuji is better for me now, in comparison, because of two factors: - PDAF all across the line - for single AF...m4/3 is better, a tiny fraction but a noticiable one. Could be the larger DOF, but in S-AF it was a little faster and confident. But for moving subjects (almost never used C-AF before, but now I have a little daughter...), MUCH better. Good rate for stills, and for movies, more than good enough. Ok, I never had a PDAF m4/3 camera, because only the E-M1s and the E-M5 MK III had it, but this week I filmed my daughter going back and forth on a swing, with very good AF, a thing that was impossible from my previous cameras. - Possibility to pull in focus DURING recording, withour recording the enlarged image - is a thing that I've always wanted when filming concerts, and in the m43, only was implemented now, on the GH6...now that I have it, could not go back. Worst problems? - The IBIS is kind of bad for vídeo. Looks like the same algorythm is used for stills and video, very jumpy on vídeo. Not a deal breaker, but even my GX85 was better. And from the samples that I saw, were not fixed in the both the X-H2 models. - No tracking on video. And the face detection have a serious problem - works VERY well when you have only one person on the frame, but put two or more people and the system goes crazy, jumping from face to face. You should have an option to lock on a specific face, or have tracking. Sold a lot of my m4/3 stuff already, kept the GH2 and the E-P1 (for sentimental reasons and low value nowadays), will keep the 12-32 pancake and the 45mm f/1.8. And I have to confess that the OM-5 look like an almost perfect camera for me - good PDAF (juding by the OM-1 performance), small and not "DSLRish" body, good enough video, and that amazing IBIS. But will not have focus pull assistance during video, no smaller and lighter revised zooms on sight, and the future of the format still a danger.

Saw an article somewhere talkin about this new "joint venture" between Panasonic and Leica, and mentioning that "PDAF is a possibility". I guess that it is a good "way" to move to PDAF without having to admit their "defeat" on DFD, saying "with the joint collaboration with Leica we could bring a new AF method", something along these lines. Panasonic was stubborn for ages to not implement IBIS in their cameras, saying that OIS was a much better solution - until they caved in because of the Olympus's IBIS success, and now they have one of the best stabilizations on market. Japanese pride make camera manufacturers VERY stubborn.

Most interesting of this camera is the media part -only one CFexpress Type B, and a massive 1Tb internal PCie SSD. Connect the camera in the computer using it's USB-C 3.1 Gen 2 port, and file transfer is fast as hell, or use it as an external SSD and edit the files without transfer. About the new resources (PDAF, IBIS), let's see the tests. One thing is implement PDAF and IBIS, other is implement it well.

Manufaturers will not allow it now, afraid of a massive lawsuit from RED.

Gone to do some research in gsmarena, that usually do some very technical reviews. The Fold 4 uses the GN3 sensor, 8160x6144 resolution, and yes, the stabilization is electronic. Since 8k is 7680x4320, probably Samsung is using gyro data to do the stabilization on the fly, using the extra area of the sensor as a "fluctuation" zone to avoid cropping. Probably with more shaky movements, this extra area could not be enough and could be more jumpy, @markr041 could test this. But why Sony and now Blackmagic don't perform this on-the-fly gyro stabilization in their cameras, since both have internal gyro data? Simple - camera chipsets use much older technology and could not touch the grunt power of a modern smartphone chipset. Last note: looks like the Galaxy S22 have an even better sensor (GN5) and uses the same kind of stabilization (it have OIS too, but looks like that there is no option to choose between OIS or OIS+EIS, only both or nothing).

Now imagine a NX2 with this kind of stabilization...

That's why I only mentioned the smallest gimbals out there - I only use small cameras / lenses as possible (that's why I will never go full frame unless there is no option), and the smallest possible gimbal, to attract minimum attention on the streets when travelling. My last setup travelling pre-Covid was a GX85 with the 12-32 and the OG Crane M. Not a single glance from anyone. My current camera is a bit larger (X-S10) but the G6 Max is much smaller than the OG Crane M (it indeed almost look like a bottom handle), probably will not get attention too. But you are right, with a monitor and cable, probably will not be so discreet. And @webrunner5 have a point too, gimbals have a visual very different from handheld.

Probably a small gimbal is the solution. The newer Crane Ms and the Feiyu G6 Max (I have one) and the newer Scorp Mini could easlily handle a OG BMPCC and a 12-35 2.8. Even the original Crane M, that could be bought very cheap probably could handle it.

GX80 works wonderfully with the @BTM_Pix hack to get Cinelike-D. When I had one, used it with Leeming Lut for Cinelike-D and the colors were amazing.

Yep, they revealed today that all the BMPCC cameras (4K, 6K, 6KG2 and 6K Pro - not the OG BMPCC, of course) already had an internal gyro that is now enabled, and the data could be used to stabilize in post using Resolve.

Probably one of the most "one more thing" surprises of the last years - even the BMPCC 4K had the hidden gyro sensor. 🙂 Only problem with gyro stabilization is that a crop is needed - more movement, more crop. In the Grant's demo you can see it clearly, the boat shot have a bigger crop than the person shot. A great thing (in theory could be done in firmware, but probably would spend a good deal of processing power) is that the camera uses the gyro data to estimate the crop and provide a crop box on the fly. Probably kind of complex to implement. But in the 6k, if you already plan to deliver in 4k, you could leave some room for crop already. And the stabilization looks solid, a very welcome feature for the cameras.

Pixies, the band that changes my life. Almost did not believe when I first saw them 18 years ago ("indie" bands almost never comes to Brazil at that time), thought that would be once in a lifetime. Yesterday bought a ticket for me and my wife, to see them for the 5th time, in October, here in São Paulo. Will be my 1st music show in 4+ years... Filmed them in Amsterdam with a Kodak Zi-8 in 2009. Amazing as usual. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwHixRVQ3pw

Just saw it now. Wando was awesoming hilarious, the crowd shoot panties (yes) on stage when he was performing, he had a home collection of thousands. Brazil is almost ended. This week, with Bruno Pereira and Dom Philips horrendous murder, ended a little bit more. And will become worse (a lot) until the end of the year.

Yep, one of my gripes moving from m4/3 to Fuji - their lenses are on the bigger side (albeit VERY good optically), except the Nocticrons (have 2). The newest Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 size should be the standard for modern APS-C lenses size.

My wild guess is that a future firmware update will bring waveforms and anamorphic modes.

Did not read all the RED patents, but when everyone cites the RED compression, talk about "raw Bayer data". RED specifically patented raw Bayer-only data, or all kinds of mosaicing formats? Because if it is specifically about Bayer filters, Fujifilm using X-Trans could implement internal RAW.

I think that is to bring some "mojo" to Panasonic, expecting to cater some Leica diehards. Leica sold (stillsellss?) rebranded Panasonic cameras. A lot of their L mount hardware is clearly Panasonic developed (like IBIS). Would not be surprised if a lot of the internals of the L-Mount Leicas are manufactured by Panasonic. About the L-Mount Alliance: it is 4 years old and until now no one is able to ask if DFD only works with Panasonic lenses (like in the m43 world) or with Leicas and Sigmas too.

In fact, forget my previous post asking Fuji to hire a video specialist for its IBIS. Just stuff a kestrel inside. https://t.co/VhTNh0pGLz

The video features of the camera, specially codec-related, really drawn the attention to the video sid of it, but I'm interested (for curiosity and prossible trickled down the line - I'm a midrange body guy) to see more tests of the stills performance. Ok, the supposed "stills centric" camera would be the next X-H2 non-S, with 40mp, but this is the wildflfe / sports model (the 40mp model reportedly will not have a stacked sensor). The dedicated grip with MIMO WiFi and Ethernet reinforces that. The buffer sizes are amazing, the fps rates too, but the AF performance is crucial in this scenarios. Did not saw a really dedicated anamorphic mode (the open gate was cited as an option for multiple crops), but probably we will see it in a future firmware update. Anamorphic is getting attention, lots of newer lenses, probaly will be implemented, with more video tools too, like a waveform viewer. About AF and IBIS performance...already a bunch of reviews from smaller reviewers praising it (it becomes norm from ALL manufacturers). I would wait for a production version and more "calm" reviews. For now, albeit they are kind of hated here, I'm more in the camps of Chris & Jordan in their review - AF is better but still not on par with Sony and Canon, and IBIS for video looks the same of the X-T4. But the firmware is not final (almost all reviewers got bugs, even locking the cameras and needing battery removal), better wait the production version. I think that Fuji need to snatch someone from Sony / OM Digital / Canon that have a video focus approach - I always have the impression that thay use the same "logic" for AF and IBIS for both stills and video, and they are different animals. In stills, AF needs absolute precision and IBIS need a stable fram at all costs. For video, AF precision is desirable, but between a slight unprecise focus point is preferrable than a hunting image to achieve focus perfection - is better a single movement to a point a (very) little out of focus than pulsing. And IBIS must priorize smooth movement that a fast movement to stabilize - better drift than jump. Both AF and IBIS must have different logic for video and stills.

As a software developer, I'd be afraid if they used agile, probably the camera will be refactored every 3 weeks. 🙂

And one more note: that newer anamorphic Laowa Nanomorphs are amazingly cute.

That explain Leclerc's accident. "That guy is not using a full frame, really!!!???? ...oh shit" (bang) Interested in getting one of the FZ's as a concert camera (security in stadiums tend to hate cameras that changes lenses).

A little thing that marveled me in the Fuji X-S10, and I was amazed that only was implemented in m4/3 in the GH6 (I always used mid-tier m4/3 bodies): the ability to punch-in focus during recording (enlarge the image to focus but the recording was not enlarged). Since Andrew already mentioned that you could enlarge the image with little to no loss detail durign recording (a neat trick that I had in my E-M10 III), maybe there is a setting to punch-in focus?

It is not the kind of lens that is the central talk here, but holy shit, the Viltrox 85mm f/1.8 is sharp (and the DOF, even in a Fuji APS-C, is very thin). Photo and center crop.