Hanriverprod

This owner of a ursa mini 4.6k, who received from the batch of new cameras (serial #32xx), tested the magenta issue on a "White board" and "cloudy sky" f8 on a 50mm prime. He says, "The one of the cloudy sky worries me the most since I see the magenta edges without tempering with the saturation..." for posters in this thread laughing at users testing the images from this camera by pushing it around. http://bmcuser.com/showthread.php?16812-4-6k-Ursa-Mini-magenta-issues/page91

How a camera handles highlight roll off is not important at all. Clipping is a look.

Yeah going med to med tight on actor at night doing shoulder mount for that cinema-verite look and even with a good focus puller is doable but tough. Really wish this camera had better video features with that dpaf! Oh well, thanks for translation.

Autofocus with Tokina 11-16 2.8 Dutch Videographer I think talking about whether a focus puller is needed with Mark IV. Maybe somebody can give a short synopsis of what he's saying.

Colors face tracking

I've gone through 30 takes with a dp and a good 1st AC focus puller keeping focus of an actress medium close-up walking straight at an even pace at night. I don't know if this dpaf could've done any better in a controlled situation like that but remember even with a good focus puller and actors who know their marks, a lot of takes, they are moving out or into focus when it's wide open. I think this looks pretty good for two people running around at night, but yes everything could be better! Also, a lot of those shots are usable as long as there's movement and some focus and there's no focus hunting. It makes it more natural.

You think? Besides the orange tinted close-ups that might be 1080 slo-mo, really soft and out of focus I'm assuming because it's night, the 4k stuff looks pretty good for handheld and both the single operator and subject moving. Erratic shots this wide open at night is going to challenge any focus puller. How are you going to set marks for this kind of shooting? For this style, it looks pretty good to me. I imagine with more conventional shots with set marks for blocking the autofocus will do pretty good. I'm going to rent a 1dx ii and try it out.

This guy does a rough comparison between NX1 and Mark IV. Compares how his computer plays the files, a video frame at 1600, file sizes, and how Premiere performs with the clips. Clip starts when he begins his comparison.

Some of that autofocus at night wide open when it catches is impressive. That video looks like hyper reality almost cgi like. Can't tell how i feel about. It's alluring but strange.

eoshd c-log AF test Tony Northrup comparison

I think the grades I'm seeing is fine, but just pointing out that it looks like an office setting or some kind of convention hall so people need to put that into account when being too harsh on this footage. It's flat drab lighting, it's never going to look great. I didn't mean to sound negative on the footage or the camera, in fact, I'm excited that another small company is putting these cameras out there. Good times for indie filmmakers!

I think the lighting is bad in this shot.

Is there a speedbooster for this thing? You need ~14mm to get 24mm, so are you risking distortion? This crop on this beautiful fullframe is such a f*ck up.

I like flaat10 if you're going for a more natural look. Also cinestyle. But if it's like a hyper-reality with that moody music, super tightshot and a very contrasty scene then I can see fine detail working. But that ones too dark and maybe oversaturated? (on my screen) to make a clear choice.

Some of the footage of 1dxii online looks good, not as thick as graded raw images, but sturdy. It almost has a glow to it, don't know how to describe it really. I like the size of it since most of the shoot will be location interiors, apartments and shops, but the dp is a little hesitant with the dslr form factor. He's also skeptical about the dpaf. If I go that route I will look into the xc10. Thanks for the tip. Sorry for derailing the thread...

Yeah, I'm leaning towards the c300 ii. I just have some downtime having the production company comb through the script right now for budgeting and scheduling and started obsessing over camera gear which I have never done before. I spend most of my time writing. Last time I researched stuff was a red one and actually brought the first red camera to Korea. I sold it to a rental house and they let me borrow it back for my shoot. I remember the production company and dp were excited to shoot with the red back then. I was telling a younger filmmaker how lucky they are these days to have such affordable gear that can produce high end images. I remember moving from super 16mm to a sony pd-150 and being excited to make shorts on mini-dv tapes. I used to work in post, and I helped two houses move from onlining tape (beta, digi-beta, d1) to Avid workflows. It took a while for cameras to catch up to what was happening in post but it's happening now as we speak. I'm especially excited over kinefinity, ursa mini 4.6k (hopefully they fix the color issue) and canon 1dx ii (want to test dpaf with moving actors). Now you can just buy one of these cameras and test and prepare to your heart's content. You can really sort out the blocking and pacing as well as some production design elements, choose focal lengths for shots, and design your lighting all before even preproduction and get a decent idea of how your film will look and feel. What a luxury for indie filmmakers. As far as resolutions, the quality is pretty clear between 1080 and 4k on a 2k monitor. I can't imagine the difference on a 4k monitor. I am in the process of buying one for viewing dailies at home, so I am thinking forward and seeing that for someone like me who drags their feet on tech (my first smartphone was iphone 5) I am starting to see why people working on very high end productions need 6k and 8k already.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying about Canon that's why I want them to do what others are doing but better, not great but two steps behind. Also, that quality differential is quickly disappearing with every company fine tuning their products. As far as 4k, I have a 2k monitor but I see a big difference between something shot on 1080 and 4k including the 80d when watching in 1080. For my eyes, the images that look best on my screen is shot on 4k but viewed on 1440 on youtube and 2k on vimeo. Watching it in 4k looks over pixelated. Again, for me, I see a noticeable difference when the material is originated on 1080 or 4k, 4k in 1440 or 2k looks nice, 1080 in 1080 not so much anymore.

linked to video part of review

But they are aware that tv manufacturers are shoving 4k screens down our throats, at least in Korea, and people who are shooting their babies and their vacations want to see this footage on their screens? Again, this is Korea, have no idea what's going on in USA and Europe. I just don't see why they handicap their cameras so much when they should be implementing 6-8k in their cinema line and just let their cameras try to catch up to what everyone else in the marketplace is already doing. You mean they are incapable? That's even sadder.

In Korea where 4k is ubiquitous most people here would not even consider this camera. I don't get who this camera is for. http://petapixel.com/2013/12/18/crunching-numbers-4-insights-camera-sales-data/ "While Asian sales ballooned, sales in the Americas (for which North America is the largest market) and Europe remained relatively constant. Meanwhile, sales in Japan as a proportion of total sales has shrunk by half, from 19.4% to jut 9.3%. If current trends hold, Asia will be the largest market for CIPA members by 2020. The distribution of sales across these different regions may impact the way that companies direct their product lines in the future. For example, ILC cameras are far more successful in Asian countries than in North America, where consumers tend to prefer DSLRs. If the Asian market continues to grow, or the American market shrinks, manufacturers will be incentivized to shape product lines that cater to those markets. Then again, they may simply choose to introduce tailored products in some markets but not in others." Color, compression, bitrate aside, if Canon can put 4k in their cameras and can appease the area between casual users and hobbyists who consider resolution a key point in cameras, why are they being so obtuse about something that is coming out in smartphones?

ISO: 1600 Filmsimulation: Classic Chrome Aperture: F/2.8 Shutterspeed: Lowest possible because of the low light. FPS: 24P Edited in Final Cut Pro X No post color grading. Colors look nice.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/2e8ol7fwb0od20o/AACWr3GJ2EpKMThOs2NmjLnFa?dl=0 Downscaled from 6K Wide to 4K Wide, ProRes422HQ Footage is in KineLOG

Thanks for sharing these. If that's you, you have good screen presence. I would like to see more dramatic tests like these using more lights even if it's just one more to see less contrast and more colors in play and also med to wider shots. I feel like tests like these with people acting or blocking in it is most helpful to see what these cameras can do in a narrative setting. It's hard to tell sometimes from just vacation shots and toy models what emotions the camera can create.