Don Kotlos

Yep.

Nope, no buttons. But I rerouted the cable to the usb port and I have the button controller board in case I need to change anything.

Are you talking about the original footage or edited? Original should rarely be modified since storage is cheap and you always loose information during transcoding. If it is for just viewing your edited clips, then you might be able to get away with less bitrate than 100. How much lower depends on your subjective quality criteria.

Since there was no leatherette that was pre-cut for an X-Pro1 without LCD or buttons I had to get sheets and cut it myself. Got few different patterns of impressia leatherette from hobby-nexus at ebay. I thought it would be much harder that it actually was.

So it took me few hours but I ve managed to fix the most of the crazy colors. One problem with these color matching techniques is that you don't sample adequately the whole space so some times interpolation can create spurious results. It is similar to the crazy coloring of the highlights in the original files that occur when Resolve tries to do a similar thing . Since there were not any colors like that in the images that I used, the points were off. I restricted the LUT to more reasonable values and here is the Velvia example of your original image: I cannot do better than this... I updated the original files so you can download them again...

Only zone focusing with the CV25 snapshot. It has clicks at 1,1.5 & 3m focus points so I don't need to use my eyes in order to focus. I just estimate the distance of my subject and set the focus point relative to that. I actually don't need anything from the menus...

8bit with high bitrate 4:2:2 downscaled from 4K will give you much better color, and better gradations than the internal highly compressed 8bit 4:2:0 image. I had no idea Sonys can do downscaling! Now I am thinking of getting the ninja for the A7rii...

Can you send me a frame after the color matching but before the lut?

I did not see any banding on the brief tests that I did. My guess would be that it depends on the rec709 base file and how close it is to the Fuji. I would either try reducing the saturation/contrast of the base file a bit before applying the LUT or you can lower the intensity of the LUT (I don't know how to do that in resolve though...). The problem is that the blue channel had the most precision after the affine transformation so it wouldn't matter if I recreated the LUTs with more images. But if it is really bad maybe it needs fine tuning with your specific profile. Do you see it with many LUTs? Deadcode these can be applied to any rec709 image, even with a natural profile. The colors are going to be close but not exactly the same as the Fuji ones since each camera has a unique way of responding to colors. To get exactly the same colors I would need the same image of a colorchecker with a Fuji and your LX100 with the profile that you use. Then I can do the rec709Pana-->rec709Fuji LUT, and when you apply the LUTs on the top of the page (which are actually doing the rec709Fuji-->Fancy color) and then that should be much closer to the Fuji's color. I wouldn't worry that much with that though since you would lose the ability to control the image (contrast/dynamic range/saturation). I find these LUTs more pleasing when applied to a less contrasty/colorful image giving a more subtle result than the Fuji.

Yes, with A7RII/S you cannot adjust all the offsets, but you shouldn't have to in order to have a balanced image. SGamut offers a large range of colors but it has 4 problems : 1) Is hard to get good balanced colors when grading. 2) It is easier to make WB and exposure errors and If factor in what Oliver mentioned it gets even worse. 3) It is more sensitive to WB and exposure errors. 4) While it can record a large range of colors it does it in the tiny range of 16-235 which messes up color tonalities and increases banding especially when coupled with the highly compressed 4:2:0 H264 codec. So while your LUTs might help with the 1st, the other 3 problems remain. The profiles that already exist can give very nice natural results and minor tweaking of the color depth you can get an excellent starting point that can actually be more accurate than when using s-gammut. So while there is a need for correct sgammut interpretation which your LUTs might help a lot, it is my personal opinion that the majority of the A7RII/S users should avoid using sgammut if they want to have consistent results. The biggest reason that you can advertise your product as "No more “Sony look”" is because inexperienced people are using sgammut and not the other color profiles. A proper LUT from you can help but as I mentioned before it is just one of the 4 things that can go wrong with sgammut, and I doubt is going to help the majority of the people that much with that "Sony look", since they will be using slog2/sgammut thinking that a simple LUT will create wonders, only to realize it actually takes a lot of effort and knowledge to create a respectable image. I know WB is off with Sonys but have you tried using a grey card + offset? Tedious I know, but should be more consistent and accurate than AWB. Slog3 might work better on the FS7 that has a 10bit intra high bitrate codec, but on the A7sII produces visible banding quite frequently.

Hey Benjamin, The slog gammas imply sgammut for your LUTs right? So slog2/sgammut slog3/sgammut3 or sgammut3.cine?

http://menexmachina.blogspot.com/2018/07/rec709-luts-fuji-color-profiles.html

Wait, were you serious? What myth are you talking about? I guess you mean the perspective differences that just depend on the distance between the lens and the subject. Lens distortion for wider focal lengths, noise performance, color sensitivity, dynamic range, DoF depend on the size of the sensor and for a given sensor technology noise/color/dynamic range always improve as you increase the sensor size.

I believe it was sarcasm.

Sigma MC-11 adapter should be all you need...

"No more “Sony look”" aka "Correct s-gammut color interpretation" There are some examples here: http://omeneo.com/primers/ Camera specific LUTs are always better than generic ones especially for sgammut, but instead of buying packages like that, I would just use another color mode and tune the individual channels to my liking. It takes me just 10 minutes... Anyways, the neutral LUTs are the most interesting ones, since you can use them as a base and have secondary rec709 LUTs for a more specialized look.

insane: in a state of mind that prevents normal perception, behavior, or social interaction I believe it was used accurately Well done. P.S. I also find that FF/S35/+clear zoom works wonders sometimes.

Oliver, the knee parameter allows you to customize the highlight roll-off as you wish. For Cine4 I have found that setting the Knee to Manual 97.5% -1 works very well. Make sure anything you do, set the knee to manual cause Auto in Cine and s-log modes disables knee altogether. The G-M axis on the 2D grid should allow you to fix that. If not, try reducing the color depth in the settings. I set the R+2 and maybe that balances the magenta a bit. For all my cameras I always have a manual WB with both fine-temp and tint adjustments for best results. Even Nikon required that...

Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said we should treat people differently. I also didn't say that someone should change their beliefs. What I said that we should not be afraid to change bad religious traits. So in a way modify religion.

Sexual or racial discrimination is very different than any "cultural" discrimination such as religion. The first group is something that you are born with and thus cannot change whereas the second group is learned and modifiable. Humanity improves through modifications of the latter and failure to observe and analyze any cultural meme due to political correctness will undeniably lead us to decadence. Now correlation does not mean causation. So of course being a hasidic jew does not mean you are going to have a company that does not care about its workers or being a Muslim does not mean you are radical. But at the same time there are common religious traits that can influence human behavior, such as inferiority of heathens, and should be called out and modified for the sake of humanity.

Cine1 is just Cine2 with 0-255 range. Cine2 has lower contrast in the shadows and higher contrast in the highlights Cine4 has higher contrast in the shadows but lower in the highlights giving better roll off and protection (also slightly better dynamic range). To create the best roll off you have to change the knee parameters (not in auto mode). There shouldn't be too many differences in color other than their relative intensity that changes because of the different contrast in these modes (for example colors in the shadows will look more saturated with Cine2 than Cine4, but that should be mainly due to their luminance differences). There was a long discussion about Cine modes here: Slog modes should be avoided and I believe it is the only place where Sony intentionally crippled these cameras by allowing only the broadcast safe range to be used (16-235) for a gamma that is clearly targeted to heavy editing. I made this point while back:

I would appreciate it if people that have nothing to contribute to this thread take their negative attitude somewhere else. This channel is for people that want to exchange knowledge about a tool. The ability to change any aspect of the image before capture when dealing with an 8bit compressed codec is an advantage for me.

NX1 rolling shutter is pretty close and I haven't seen many people complain about it. But heck why spend just $1000 for a oversampled 4K log-capable camera with very good low light quality capabilities and very good AF in a tiny body when there are so many more expensive options right?

There are few settings posted there...

So I guess @Andrew Reid told Sony about our dream camera and they decided to make it: http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr2-rumored-specs-of-a-new-sony-e-mount-6k-camera/