Liam

There's a weird way to be obsessed with gear. It's true. Sometimes you do actually need more than you have. Find a balance.

I relate a lot to that. Hardly requires a response, but I'm inspired by a lot of the same things and agree that it shouldn't be for anyone other than yourselves (especially if you're making something Cassavetean). I've had some trouble thinking of things to write about lately too, but sometimes I'm still making notes of a situation that gives me crazy anxiety and hoping later they can combine into something. A loose scenario with creative friends is a place i wanna go soon, maybe straight up improv, maybe more like group writing, but that could be a freeing solution or detour while still being significant. Good luck, Baxter! I enjoyed that post a lot

this is ungraded, right? that could change things. But my understanding is that there will usually be some noise with the GH4 (something some people like about the camera to help reduce banding etc). are most of your finished products in 1080p? that downscaling will help with noise a lot. you could maybe overexpose slightly and then adjust in post to get a less noisy image - can be risky for certain shots, especially bright daylight like this, making dynamic range and highlight clipping worse, but it will hold up better to this than some camera's images. Don't think it sounds like you're doing anything wrong though. the noise there was pretty subtle and not distracting imo Edit: plus Neat Video helps

even with this younger generation of gamers, I don't hear much about them PREFERRING the higher frame rates. often they can't tell the difference. Maybe sometimes they still think 24p looks better but don't realize it or know why, but it looks more professional like other films they've seen. anything the TV does to fake a higher frame rate is going to have awful artifacts. there's also more flexibility with shutter speed for artistic effect at a lower frame rate and smaller file sizes. Of course a higher frame rate can be a tool, but would kinda suck as a standard.

Say how, DBounce

@cantsin - exactly. Though, don't the canon cinema line not have "true 24p"? Since it's a 60fps sensor and just sort of skips frames and holds others to look basically right? Like if you tried to export something shot in 30p to a 24p file, that's what I'm thinking most are saying this magic is, but yeah most cameras should handle that fine. If people are saying the c300 has good motion candence, then i don't understand this topic. Of course rolling shutter and shutter speed are going to affect the motion. And of course your tv trying to smooth everything out is gonna blow chunks

Interesting. I definitely have done this and like the look, but is that what people here are talking about for the most part? Seems like there's the idea here of 24 frames per second, each frame being held for the exact same amount of time. Like in some cameras you might not get "frame, frame, frame.." you'd get "frame, fraame, frame, frame, fraame.." which shouldn't have anything to do with rolling shutter. Though obviously that affects motion. And there's kind of a charm to a perfectly choppy low frame rate. Idk, are we talking about all these things added up? Feel like maybe this is too general

my point was more sensitivity in the a7s could mean dropping down closer to 8 megapixels for the full frame, which is fine.. (except as a stills camera really), but can't do any lower than that, and the crop mode would be like 2 megapixels.

But you don't don't wanna be left behind if the 4k standard sneaks up on you. Wouldn't more sensitivity mean less megapixels and less likely it can even do 4k? And the stills resolution is pretty low on the a7s, pushing it as is.

couldn't it just be a semi-crippled 4k? wouldn't it almost have to be, if it had that insane megapixel count? it could just be showing intentions of 4k (better 4k) in the future. doesn't necessarily mean it would steal the show from an A9 or as7ii with 4k. some people are saying 4k should be in everything now, and it's possible people are starting to not settle for anything less. if it's the new 1080p, the a7rii can have 4k

I use like the $10 fotodiox, and.. It's not great. Feels a little too tight into the camera and a little wobbly on the lens even though it's impossible to take off, so definitely take your time, but i don't have a better suggestion

it's a pretty specific niche camera, but of course it's interesting. can you post footage you've seen?

you kinda did it too jfr, and tons of people here love the nx1. I'd rather we get off topic than nasty

Ekt was saying lenses were just part of the budget to keep in mind, not that the nx1 would require a different set than for the d7200. Buying the nx1 would just leave less money for lenses (if I'm not mistaken)

(6:15 for video - really short section) actually pretty impressive. didn't expect it would be a full pixel readout. 60p, probably pretty sharp (needed for landscapes), flat profile if you want it, good Nikon colors. Can't tell too much from youtube though. gotta be better than canon at the same price. can't change aperture in live view I guess..? don't know if that would be too annoying for you. also the 60p crops - hoping the normal 1080p doesn't(?) - I'd understand not wanting to jump all the way up to the nx1, I think this could be a good choice

Don't feel bad for asking questions A lot of people, Andrew included, have had good results cheating a bit with shutter speed for exposure. Don't go crazy with it. Definitely less movement is better. faster could be better than slower, if you're breaking the 180degree rule. 120 and 240 won't look the same as 60. I'd think you at least have iso 400 as well if you want it, which could help, especially if your nd's aren't variable (which could be a good option too, but variable nd's have issues in specific situations and get pricey) - but if you've tested and decided against iso400, you know better

used a7 could be under $1000 too, or could speedboost a used lower end sony nex for cheaper. the lower end mft panasonics would be a similar price and almost full frame with a speedbooster. not sure you'd want to skimp on the sb though, so not saving you tons and limiting your lenses a bit, needing that hunk of glass to fit between

​http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Sigma-18-35mm-F18-DC-HSM-A-Canon-versus-Carl-Zeiss-Distagon-T-21mm-f-2.8-ZE-Canon___1141_0_326_0 - idk exactly how accurate that is but eoshd compared it to voigtlander primes - impressive glass, but the sigma outperformed it http://www.eoshd.com/2013/10/ultimate-blackmagic-pocket-cinema-camera-lens-sigma-18-35mm-f1-8-speed-booster/ and it beats nikkor primes according to The Camera Store https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQHi8L0athY

​if it's 1080p in-camera, both modes are downscaled from a higher resolution readout, so they'd be pretty similar. I actually heard the crop mode may be slightly sharper..(?) but they're comparable. In 4k there's a difference

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uy5iH56s2is ^about 2 minutes in, dslr video shooter tests what you're saying, and i thought there was still a little vignetting throughout, maybe...

t3i random shots can lemme know what you think if you'd like nerd info- had my manual non ai nikkor 50mm f1.4 on it, usually at 1.4. used Magic Lantern to turn down the fps and shutter speed a ton, for low light mostly (it's about 12fps at 1/12th shutter). I think iso 3200 is pretty damn usable on it, especially when I only had the ability to export at 720p, which kind of denoises a bit. just the one lens, and a camera strap was my setup. used Lightworks (free version) to edit. I like the grading options, but had a ton of clips (should have cut a lot more), and didn't want to grade them all.. I think I graded one clip. but I use a semi-flat custom profile (sharpness all the way down, contrast all the way down, saturation down 1), but since it was so dark and naturally contrasty, it ended up mostly fine, and I had no motivation to see if something could look better. you can only exposrt at 720p, but I really don't mind.. I'd like some other options in the export, but 720p is plenty detailed for me (for this soft camera and kinda soft lens absolutely). Usually not a fan of videos this pointless, but I guess I see the appeal. should have cut it down a lot more really

​https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTmj6NoByz0 - 10:05 ^Faymusmedia says the production camera can be used at iso 3200 (boosting in post), and the ursa mini is supposedly better this test could be faulty - he seems to maybe have some bias, and of course the youtube compression is denoising it a lot for us (I've heard plenty that it is completely unusable by that point, those with experience will probably confirm)

​I'm assuming there WILL be an a7sii, but I'd heard a few places that the r would be coming first, and that's the order the originals were released

​Jimmy wasn't saying a7sii won't have 4k in camera (I assume), but the a7s with a shogun is one of the cheapest ways to get full frame 4k still. It's a great value for what it does as a 1080p camera. If it had 4k it would be more impressive, yes. The crop mode would be a little crippled in 4k too, not having enough megapixels to give 4k to match the full frame, so they might want to get a new sensor.. which would hurt the low light and apsc slow mo at least a little. so in some ways it could be better now than the later model.

Seems to me they are kinda dropping that model, putting it on the backburner. And it would be the same price as the mini which may not be attractive for most people. It could be nice, since it's just a box and can be adapted better, but i think they kind of look at the ergonomics of the mini as like a solution for people doing that before instead of just a different option. So I guess I doubt it.