fuzzynormal

So here's a simple story: I was in the market to hire a guy about 4 years ago for a video shoot. A shooter contacted me to inquire about the gig, but had almost no experience with motion pictures. He was just getting into video from photography and he asked me if his lowly Pentax, which only did 60p @720 would be okay. His photos showed that he had a great eye for composition and when we talked about the assignment he explained that he was a video neophyte, but was willing and eager to learn. Seemed like a bit of a risk to hire this dude. After all here was a guy shooting on a decidedly not video-centric DSLR and admitting that video wasn't his main thing. After some coaching, both of us reviewing past examples of the job I was hiring him for, and collaborating about what I wanted to see in the footage, we decided to partner up, and off he went. Meanwhile, I simultaneously hired another guy for the same sort of shoot on the opposite side of the country. Dude made sure to tell me more than once what his list of gear included (would you also like to know about his C300 and PL mount lenses? Apparently he was convinced I did) --and how he was a video professional with years of experience. Sure, he knew what I wanted, not a problem; don't even need to discuss it. After watching past examples of the job and assuring me he could do it, off he went. With that narrative set-up you can probably imagine who delivered spot on incredible b-roll shots that were a bit IQ mushy, but captured great scenarios and emotion --and who gave me a pile of shit footage with no cohesiveness or creativity, (plus couldn't even get the horizon level) but sure looked super sharp with great colors. I don't know if any of this is germane to the thread, but... Here's hoping that niche players like aspiring videographer Phil from North Carolina hang in there...and their camera gear supplier does too.

I used to have a 55mm Canon FD f1.2 on a speed booster for my M43 cams... I mean, that's kinda in the ball park. On M43 that would render DOF shallowness like a f1.8 on FF. So that narrow focal plane capability was there if I wanted it. (turns out I really didn't that much) Also had the Voight 42.5mm f.095. Which is a 85mm f1.9 FF equivalent on M43. All decent lens stuff and kinda neat to own. And I'll be honest, having the extra bit of "oomph" that FF gives is nice sometimes, not going to deny it. (I mean, I still have a 5D) But, in my world it's not worth the trade off of exceptional IBIS and some really crazy compact gear...and the shooting flexibility that offers. That small gear flexibility is often overlooked by a lot of videographers, I think. I love going on shoots with modest stuff; a single small satchel camera bag and a tiny camera --then knocking out ridiculous handheld shots that look like they rolled off a jib or camera dolly tracks. I'll take that capability as long as it's available. Other people like piling on a bunch of outboard stuff so much that even a modest DSLR ends up looking like some Panavision rig on a major studio movie production set. That's fine if that's what you want, just not my tempo.

Which is the exact reason I’m on M43. M43 video IQ, IBIS and compactness in tandem are a great combo for my work. I also know what I want in FOV’s so I do the math when I mount a lens. No biggie.

I try to solve this issue by not shooting images that need pushing around too much in post.

Sad day . To find out I’ve only been using parts of my images for years? Bummer.

I don’t do auto focusing, so can’t offer an opinion on that. As for color profiles I use “natural” as Oly offers it out of the box. Tried a few experiments with flattening the image, but didn’t seem worth the effort (for me) BTW, I prefer the Oly histogram over the GH5 waveform. I’m only ever protecting the highlights anyway, so the Oly histogram is quite useful. (Again, for me)

I film my dog and then never edit the footage.

Well, there's you go in regards to Olympus. Personally I'm still hoping they're gonna try to do a little Japanese corporate tap dancing and attempt to wiggle out of letting their camera division go...but that still doesn't excuse their numerous mistakes running the company.

FWIW, when I'm uploading a video with twice the resolution I tend to make the file twice the data rate. My anecdote is based on naked-eye results from when I started doing these sorts of uploads 4 years ago. I imagine things are constantly changing with platform codecs, for better and worse. All I can tell you is that uprez'ing/up'data'ing my film files made the vids look better when when watching 1080 on said platforms. Really made a difference back then on YouTube more than Vimeo.

Ding ding. Upscale your vids for online platform viewing. Take advantage of whatever IQ edge you can squeak out of their systems.

I was going to buy a used Gx7 for $100 more than I got my waranteed/refurbished EM10iii. Its a good value for $300, yes.

SD slot is fine. I don't care about that too much. Will say the Cam's mount screw is too close the battery gate. When I put on my Manafrotto mount plate it needs to be moved to open the door. Battery life is really good. 1hr+ shooting time. Ergos are decent. Not as good as my old Em5ii with bat grip, but not bad for such a small camera. I really like smaller cameras. Changing ISO when filming is technically possible but impractical. Auto WB shifts too easily. Would rather it was more subtle. BTW, same issues on my EM5ii --just an Oly thing. 4k IQ is great. Love it and the colors. I bought this camera for $300 refurbished. Good value.

Yup

Using my em10iii today on a paying gig.

No worries there. Its WYSIWYG.

I bounce on and off YT. Never followed anyone, probably never will. I know channels exist with lots of info relevant to whatever you may like, but paying close attention to any of them seems like a chore. Besides, it's a destination, on the popular side, mostly for those that are easily influenced. The ones pulling cash on the platform are not called "influencers" for nothing. Pop culture is never as interesting as it pretends to be. It's not designed to be that way. And exceptions tend to prove the rule.

Maybe the image is horizontally flipped. [you beat me to it]

I recommend you giving me $6K so I can but that lot.

FWIW, my understanding is that corporations are basically told by their legal team to never apologize about product lest they open themselves up to class action lawsuits. They might apologize for "feelings," but usually not about stuff like this.

As an outsider looking into this Canon fiasco I find it amusing how so many people are drawn into the drama that have no dog in the hunt. (like me -- perfectly content with shooting 4k my humble $300 camera M43 camera) I'll never spend 4K on a camera for video again, but I certainly used to. And if I was dropping that sort of expense I'd expect it to work as advertised. That said, I used to have to do some rather violent hardware hacks to get the HDV 0's and 1's out of my old XH-A1 at times...and I thought that camera was a bargain @$3.5K. It's always something with Canon, on that you can rely.

I've used it in a horror movie to put people on edge a little bit.

As an American I'm going to assume this metaphor means I should take off my mask and tongue kiss Sony smart phone?

You're not wrong. Good specs help sell cameras. People like me say they don't need it, but in a few years when all manufacturers offer it and it's decent across the board even on middle and low-end models, I'll end up with it --and when that happens I assume I'll find the same practical use for it as everyone else, for sure. Just not going out of my way to acquire it right now.

Yeah, that's my thing too. Give me a person manually hunting for focus if need be. It's actually a pleasant aesthetic, I think. I'm not knocking anyone that uses AF. My wife does, for example, (she's stills oriented) but I'm just not that into it for motion pictures...and when I see many cool hybrid cameras passionately dismissed because they lack high-end AF capabilities, I'm curious about that rationale. An affordable FF camera like this S5 --made affordable because it's without all the bells and whistles sounds pretty great to me.

BTW, yes, those of us that shoot 8-bit are limited in what we can do in post on a bad shot...so I've just accepted that as a challenge to try not to get unforgiving shots to begin with. It's baked in shooting discipline because you know you're not working with as much of a "fix-it-in-post" safety net. I got my start with imaging in my dad's old darkroom. I shot terribly thin B&W negatives for way too long, but as the literal costs started adding up for my bad shooting habits, (a 15 year old blue-collar kid old trying to buy chemicals and film was a huge financial burden) I learned to really consider light and exposure and figured out how to "thicken" my negative. Mostly just from the technical side of things, but developing that skill/craft led me into the artistic side.