Mozim

If you actually remember when you downloaded the trial version of Color Finale, you can simply set back the clock of your computer manually to the date you downloaded the trial version and it'll work again. It's a fantastic product and of course I strongly advise to support them by purchasing their product, but still, this will work.

The D750 is fantastic both for stills and for video. It's not as flashy on paper as other cameras but it's rock solid and the results are stunning... sort of like the Canon C100 / C300 – it simply gets the job done and footage looks great. Colors are beautiful and the flat profile is extremely easy to grade, yet dynamic range is really good. Which lenses do you already own? For video work the 24-120 mm F/4 IS is a really good option, too. Gives you 90% of the range you need for video, it has in-built stabilization and F/4 doesn't look too bad on a full-frame sensor.

That's great to hear, thanks. I shoot lots of action sports so 120fps continuous recording is a huge advantage. I usually don't have time to record sound with an external recorder, so recording 120fps with sound allows me to either slow down the footage quite a bit or play it back at realtime and use the original sound that I recorder. Makes sense? :D

Andrew, thanks for the info! Does the a6300 record sound when shooting 1080p/120fps?

I'm not expecting a tiny mirrorless camera for $1k (or 1400€) to be the perfect camera. I really wanted to like this camera – as a sports shooter 120 fps instead of 60 fps would have been awesome. I'm also not saying Canon build better cameras but in a way I feel like Sony is doing the exact opposite as Canon. They implement as many features that sound fantastic but in reality it's a bit of a letdown (at least to me). Canon on the other hand is very, very slow at implementing exciting features but when they do, they usually work really well. I'm not saying that either approach is ideal. I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts about the a6300!

NX1 rolling shutter is pretty awful, too, and many people complained about it. Rolling shutter, 1080p is fairly soft, 1080p 120fps is very soft, no headphone jack, questionable button placement, no touchscreen, battery life. If it fits your style of shooting then that's great.

This looks like a fantastic camera for people who have a rolling shutter fetish. Between this and Jordan's honest opinion, I will definitely stay away from the a6300. It looks fantastic on paper but that's about it. It's not just Canon that is crippling their cameras on purpose.

In my experience with Panasonic cameras, you should avoid using LUTs. I haven't shot with VLog (I'm a GH3 owner) but whenever using LUTs I have to dial them down a lot in order not to destroy the footage. What happens is that your greens will turn into yellow / brown and your reds will look off, too. This is exactly what happened with the footage you posted the other day, too. I really enjoy the GH3 and other Panasonic cameras for the image quality, conveniance, battery life etc. but I'm getting to a point where I simply don't want to use the camera anymore because of the colors. I use Final Cut Pro X, Color Finale and IWLTBAP LUTs that you can purchase from benymypony. What I usually do is I do basic color correction (highlights, shadows and mids) and then apply a Delut that flattens the image (9090) and then use whatever LUT is pleasing for the particular project. I usually dial down both LUTs to around 50% opacity. After that I do a few minor tweaks. Keep in mind that the footage isn't LOG footage, so be careful using LUTs. It brings your footage to life when you have LOG footage but doesn't work well with regular footage. Color Finale is a fantastic plugin for FCPX in my experience but your results will strongly depend on the camera you've shot the project with.

Apologies for possibly taking things a bit out of context but I'm really, really hoping that you're not being serious. Drinking lemon water instead of coffee and cigarettes will affect your health positively because you don't consume caffeine and other toxic crap. It's not going to change your attitude towards your job, help you deal with insecurities, affect the social support you receive from friends and family etc. Working a regular 9-to-5 job doesn't neccessarily have to be sh*t. You're well-aware that it's not a dichotomy, right? There's surprisingly very little research about the way your psychological and physical health are affected by characteristics that usually go along with creative jobs. Lots of research has been done about job characteristics and their affect on health, happiness, work attitudes etc. but usually the sample consists of people working in regular jobs. That in itself is a big issue because "creative" people are extremely dependant on their personal health because you usually don't get paid when you're ill. Certain job characteristics are different compared to regular jobs as well and some of these characteristics will have a negative affect on your health, too. Plus job uncertainty most likely has a very negative effect on mental and physical health, job attitudes, job satisfaction and ultimately life satisfaction. As I said, there's surprisingly very little research about it but it doesn't mean it's an issue that should not be taken seriously.

I've used the Panasonic GH3 fairly extensively for Steadycam work. The 1080p/50fps looks fine. To be honest I never noticed any moiré or aliasing. I usually use it with a Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 stopped down to f/4. The only things that really do bother me are the dynamic range (or lack thereof) and the colors. In fact I've used the Nikon D750 as my A-Cam for almost a year now and when shooting with both the GH3 and the D750, I find myself hating the GH3 image more and more. The colors look wrong and it's very difficult to match them. I love the D750 but it's not going to be as sharp or detailed as the GH3. You mention that the D750 doesn't have a very high internal bitrate or internal focus peaking. Both don't really matter when shooting steadycam stuff. The image grades extremely well, way better than it should anyway. And you're not going to need internal focus peaking if you're shooting at <24mm - unless you're doing super high end stuff, and in that case you're not going to rely on the internal focus peaking anyway.

@ Ebrahim: Would you choose your tweaked Standard PP over the Flat PP on the D750?

I've shot a bit of stuff on the Sony FS7 and as far as I know, the FS7 and FS5 share the same sensor. There are minor differences and the codec is vastly superior on the FS7 (or should I say the 4K codec on the FS5 is garbage?). Still, the FS7 delivers near-perfect 1080p in terms of resolution and I can't see a reason why the 1080p of the FS5 should look like this mushy stuff that was posted in here. When the NX1 was released, the 4K looked spectacular but the 1080p didn't look very exciting. I know there have been firmware upgrades that apparantly improved the 1080p quality since then. Is the quality now comparable to 4K without the ability to zoom in / pan / crop the image in post? If so, then that'd be fantastic!

I'm afraid you're wrong, no experience with the NX1 whatsoever. I'm not saying that the NX1 footage that was posted in this topic looks incredible, although I'm a bit shocked (in a positive way) how good the 1080p looks in comparison to the first few firmware versions. What I was trying to point out is that the FS5 footage looks really, really bad and I doubt that that's what the camera is actually capable of shooting. It simply looks like the focus is way off. There's very little detail, the branches in the foreground are out of focus, all the detail looks mushy. The 4K codec of the FS5 is awful so I never really considered it to be a 4K camera, but I was expecting the 1080p to look really, really good and it looks really, really bad for no obvious reason.

Well in the video that was posted above, the FS5 looks awful and the NX1 looks great, no matter what mode it was shot in. It's hard to tell the difference between NX1 4K and NX1 1080p and it's hard to tell the difference between FS5 4K and FS5 1080p. Both FS5 modes look way worse than both NX1 modes, even the FS5 4K looks worse than the NX1 1080p. The NX1 performs great but that FS5 footage is seriously flawed, so it's hard to compare it to the NX1 really.

I have a hard time believing that the NX1s 1080p looks better or at least equal than the FS5s 4K and 1080p.