BTM_Pix

They do quote 40 mins of record time per battery though so I suppose Fuji would argue that that exceeds the maximum single take time and that the grip allows you to use continuous power blah blah hence why they'd see it as normal.

But that completely disregards the fact that the battery drain rate on the X-T2 is completely erratic in my experience, especially in the boost mode that the grip brings.

My bugbear with it is what it does when you take a memory card out and put one in again (which I have to do a lot when working) as its seems to just panic a bit and I have to power cycle it as being the only reliable way to get it to be ready to shoot again in short order. Its not that it locks up or crashes its just that you never know what its doing (presumably file reading) or how long its going to take to do it and whether it is actually going to do something if you press the shutter.

4 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

It does not. The contacts do seem to pass data. 

Cheers

<Cancels trip to the shop >

6 hours ago, Vladimir said:

Fuji X-T20? small, great colours, may be speedboosted, great lenses, superb stills

I use the X-T20 and it is a little gem.

Unfortunately its the pocketable aspect that it can't offer that the Sony does.

Bit of a mixed bag thus far with the RX1005

Can't say I'm really bonding with it yet to be honest.

I probably need to study it a bit harder but its all a bit fiddly.

Have mainly been just been goofing around with the slo mo on this little holiday video wise but did a few stills today and its not bad considering its size and meets the expectation I had of it for taking a few snaps while away.

What was more interesting for me was happening upon a poltical rally so I thought I'd see if it was of use for that kind of similar in close stuff that I often have to do when theres a bit of 'heated debates' going on between rival fans outside football stadiums. With the high fps and it being really compact it actually worked quite well in that role to be fair so it might - literally - see some action for me for real work in situations where having the content trumps having the image quality.

37 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

I'm having trouble doing the GX85 cinelike d installation with my phone. The html won't open in chrome (does't give the option to open it) and firefox opens it but it's blank. Is it possible to do it through my iMac? 

Yes.

Just put the camera into wifi mode, connect the Mac to its WiFi and load the HTML file into Safari 

Did you get a chance to check if the gear turns without the lens being attached @HockeyFan12 ?

13 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

 

Plus the DR10L is a pretty damn sweet kit if you're going to use lavs but won't bother to monitor those either..... :-/

It has a headphone output on it for monitoring or am I missing the point?

Anyway, who cares, tell us more about your unauthorised visitors !

For scenario 1, I've mentioned the Roland Binaural system in another thread and it might be worth looking at for this.

I think it might be a good fit for what you're trying to do in terms of fly on the wall as many people are using it and similar for environmental based recording like soundscapes inside a cafe etc. 

In this respect it might just suit the vibe that you're after where you might not want particularly focused sound.

Its a try before you buy product though to make sure it suits. As Roland are more music focused, you might have to go to a music shop to try them. Dawsons in town or PMT on Regent Rd should be able to help.

Thread here 

For your other scenario, I have the Saramonic dual channel system with one lav pack and one plug on xlr transmitter so its got a lot flexibility and you can run both simultaneously.

An alternative to the radio system if you don't mind post sync is the Tascam DR10x which is a recorder in the same form factor as a plug on XLR transmitter.

Can be a lot less hassle depending on where you're working and is also a much cheaper alternative too at about £140.

They do a lav version of it as well which is also pretty clever.

http://tascam.com/product/dr-10x/

This is a bit of an alternative to consider - and the big caveat here is that you've stated you will use lav mics for key audio elements - so is based on you needing something discrete for general wide field capture on camera.

I'll do a specific thread about these at some point but the Roland CS-10EM binaural microphone/headphone system is something that could well be worth a look.

Not only do they provide a very interesting and immersive stereo recording but as they just look like regular earbud headphones they are incredibly discreet and of course completely non-threatening.

They have foam shields which are essential outdoors but, again, they don't look out of place.

You could modify deadcat material to them and just pass it off as excessive ear hair if you are of a certain age such as myself

They are the sort of thing you'd have to demo to make sure that they were right for you but I think they might just work for what you're describing, particularly if its for social event coverage.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/ROLAND-CS-10EM-Roland/dp/B003QGPCTE

8 minutes ago, Hans Punk said:

Makers of Vinyl records never wanted crackles and pops to be heard on a first play - it is only from passage of time and advancement of technology that these audible artifacts become nostalgic and add a layer of pleasant experience to the listener. When CD was introduced, the horrible compression of audio dynamic range made the same songs sound sterile and without life when compared to a vinyl (a technical inferiority)...but many gravitated to the more identifiable 'crackle and pop' as an identifiable 'warm feel' artifact that they missed from the previous technology. I feel a similar thing may have happened with film.

Film can technically outperform digital to this day, especially when considering overall latitude and handling of highlight roll-off and especially when talking about large format...but the Alexa and Alexa 65 is pretty much there in terms as to what traditionalist film people consider a 'filmic' image. 

There was some interesting research done about 20 years ago regarding CDs that suggested that we possess far more accurate timing circuits - for want of a better expression - when it comes to audio than was ever considered and that we are actually able to perceive the sliced element of digital audio and so our brains then de-prioritise it and let it tick along in the background as a reduced 'threat' that needs less immediate monitoring. Which translates if not to outright boredom then certainly in being less engaged in it than we are with a subtly changing analogue source.

I think its going to be difficult for anyone to give you a definitive answer really because there can be such a broad difference between the light in say a dingy pub and an arena concert so the answer is always going to be 'it depends'.

What might be useful for you though is to go and look on this flickr group of concert photographs.

There are over 200,000 on there from gigs in all different conditions and using all different camera and lens combinations. The majority of pictures have the exif data displayed to show you the ISO/SS and Aperture used so pick a sample set of the sort of level of gigs that you'll be covering and you should be able to get a feel for the exposures required.

I suspect the support with that lens might give you more challenges than the light if you intend to use it handheld.

https://www.flickr.com/groups/concertshots/pool/

21 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

What a good analogy, I always enjoy the parallels between music and filmmaking / video.

They nearly always hold up.

I have rarely seen a higher-end shoot that didn't have a lot of complexity and setup, unnecessary in some cases. Overkill is common too, in pro video industry... guys doing interviews with an EPIC. What's all that about?

 

I think it just effects your whole vibe as well to be honest.

All this stuff I'm doing with hardware controllers and stuff is a laugh and it fires you up creatively to make these cameras do more because its trying to bridge these gaps and get more out of less.

And do it for the benefit of everyone.

If I was developing stuff to control REDs etc I'd be far more po faced about it and undoubtedly looking to make money off it.

You and I haven't actually met but the first time I came across you - and then in turn discovered this blog - was at the Convergence event in London about six years ago. You were there, Bloom was there (and already seemed to me to be interested in commercially riding the wave of what was happening if you know what I mean) and I remember you had a Teradek hdmi transmitter that could do the at the time magical feat of streaming live to an iPad. At that point you were already eschewing the 5DMKII in favour of the GH2 as it was more interesting and more versatile and cheaper etc for young film makers whereas the vibe even then was heading towards the 5DMKII being the entry point and wanting to go up in price from there. 

So, whilst I understood where people were coming from on that C200 thread, in terms of how people view this stuff now compared to then where a C200 is now almost like a base point then it really felt like a shark jumping moment reading it.

It felt like punk then. 

It feels like prog rock now.

I remember a story many years ago when home studio recording first started to take a hold and Tom Robinson (ask your Dad, kids) was talking about why he'd got a new fangled (at the time) Tascam Portastudio to record his demos on. His reply has always stuck with me because he said that when a band reaches a certain level of success the first thing they do is get flight cases for their gear and cables that you could tie the QE2 to the quayside with. This all then has to go into storage. So when he felt like writing a song, he'd have to call a roadie, call a van hire place, get the roadie to go to the storage place to pick up the gear, book a rehearsal room (because the flight cases made it impractical to have in the house), drive to the rehearsal room, wait for the gear to be unpacked and plugged in and then he could start to jam and record ideas. At which point he'd forgotten what it was he wanted to do and had lost the energy to do it anyway. With the portastudio, he could just switch it on and get on with it.

I see a lot of parallels here too.

The only thing thats inspired me to pull the RED Epic out of its case since I got it back was to do the side by side to tune the GX80 profile.

It felt like having to go to the corner shop in a Sherman tank.

In my real day job I have to take the same 'get the big clunky stuff out' approach because there is an expectation to deliver a set standard both in terms of image quality but pretty much in terms of content too. Coverage is what its all about to be honest. And the demands of that type of efficiency directs you to a certain type of kit. All of which means I'm about as creative as the guy sitting next to me who has also got exactly the same sort of kit (with a 50/50 shot on the brand). Which means to say, not very creative. Or certainly not a massive differential in creativity. We're looking at the same scene and covering it with the same kit so inevitable we're going to be much of a muchness creatively. But the creativity can sometimes be forced upon you (by equipment failure usually!) so you have to do something with what you've got and that triggers the resourcefulness response that is so often at the root of creativity.

Being in a situation of "I can't make what I want" often makes you find better ways to make what you actually need.

After wrestling with the Epic and then putting the same lens on the GX80 and shooting the same thing, I was left (with a bit of twiddling) with these two test charts.

So, could I shoot this same scene with a camera that cost less than the media of the other one?

Yes.

Could the same be said the other way round about what I could shoot with the little camera?

Yes but not without calling the roadie and hiring the van and getting the flight cases and, well you get the point.

You're going to have to trust me over this enable thing

The enable is only to tell the app what to display to the user.

There is no enable command sent back to the camera. It is only sent one way and that from the camera to the app.

I wasn't suggesting you weren't following the steps, I was saying that if you were and it didn't work then it was because the camera was not capable of doing it rather than anything to do with the enable status.

If you've enabled Auto ISO  - and again only if your camera is actually capable of doing it - you should see the ISO change on your display when you do a half press of the shutter.

If you take a series of photographs pointing at different light sources with Auto ISO on then you should see on playback that it was using different ISO values for each shot.

If you put the camera in aperture priority mode in movie mode with Auto ISO on and take a few clips of differing light sources you should again see on playback that it is displaying that it is recording them at different ISOs.

However, if we are talking at cross purposes over Auto ISO in manual mode (and I suspect we might be) and you are wanting to do it while the camera is recording video then it won't do it as it (and the GX80 for that matter) do not support Auto ISO in manual mode in video and you have to use shutter or aperture priority.

7 hours ago, Screengrab said:

Dear folks,

I have been stealthily snooping around and making grateful use of your experiments and knowledge exchange. Thought I'd pay it back with a little test: Cinelike D.

Settings: 0, -5, -5, -3. GX80 had a Olympus 12mm, and the G80 a 17mm, for the rest settings are all the same. Hope it's worth your while.

Jpg 1 is G80, 2 is GX80.

 

 

So we've extended the life line of your GX80 without you having to cross Panasonic's palm with silver is the symbolism here then

1 hour ago, mercer said:

Sounds pretty cool. Do you think this would make a better B-cam to a 5D3 than a 70D would...

You've done it now mentioning the B word haven't you?

I've only just finished reading that C200 thread

3 minutes ago, Lentozo said:

Below you can see ALL settings for M Mode on my GX7.

As you can see the cinelike modes do not appear anywhere, so that's why I can not enable them.

BUT what might be useful is the auto iso option in M Mode (highlighted in red colour) which now is disabled and I think that it can be enabled but i do not know how to do it!

Any help with that?

Thank you.

 

The enable purely tells the app what to display to the user, it doesn't determine what the camera is capable of doing but just what the app enables the user to tell it to do.

By and large, this does correspond with the camera's capabilities but not always.

So, this isn't the reason why you can't get Cinelike D to work.

If you followed the instructions that I mentioned in my reply earlier regarding selecting another profile etc and you don't see a blank when you do the deploy for Cinelike D then the camera unfortunately isn't capable of doing it.

With regard to auto iso, again the enable/disable is purely to do with what the app displays to the user.

However, if you connect to the camera and send this 

http://192.168.54.1/cam.cgi?mode=setsetting&type=iso&value=auto

Then if the camera is capable of the function then this command will enable it.

14 hours ago, Lentozo said:

Just tried several times but I can not get it to work.

The Handbrake returns "err_non_support", connect replies "Ok" and no Cinelike profile can be loaded.

Same as Hugues Canadaa above.

Too bad. It would have been great but my camera seems to be rather old (or odd)...

The Handshake probably isn't necessary as the older cameras didn't have the encrypted connection so the err non connect is expected and OK so don't worry about that.

As long as you get an OK on Connect and the camera says under remote control then its working.

To confirm that, change the colour profile to black and white or vivid or something else and hit Restore and it should change to the Standard profile.

With regard to Cinelike D bear in mind that it won't show the colour profile so if there is a blank where the colour profile name would be on the screen then its worked.

If not, then you'll still be able to benefit from the hardware controller with your camera so stick around

1 hour ago, Joe F said:

Just signed in to say a big thank you to BTM_Pix for you efforts in realising this very snuckily sweet upgrade, squeezing a little extra love out of the Lumix mini-beasty  Great job, and many successes on your hardware implementation. Kudos to you and this community.

Thank you.

Make sure you stick around and join the community testing effort for the hardware controller

14 minutes ago, HockeyFan12 said:

Well, it isn't quite what I was looking for.

I've only tried the lens indoors with poor light so maybe it gets better outside. But it seems to flicker exactly like in the videos above (less than some lenses, more than you want) unless you zoom in wide open, in which case the aperture racks just over a stop between 18mm and 135mm.

It doesn't seem like that much, though. This is pretty acceptable.

At a consistent f5.6, it flickers noticeably but subtly. Both On my SL1 and C100.

Even in auto ISO. I think? Auto ISO pulses for some reason or another. And the C100 doesn't have it.

Even if the flicker weren't a problem, the ramp acceleration takes a long time to begin and is difficult to control in both fast and slow speeds. Inadequate to follow action or fast-moving events. It's not all the smooth either. The rocker feels great but doesn't seem analogue but instead very granular. The rocker might have a total of five steps on it. It might have just three (zoom in, don't zoom, zoom out). Slow zoom looks cool, though.

Programming a zoom into a wireless FF seems the better option. By far.

For the 80D crowd it's nice, though. Great balance, good ergonomics. Weird rocker placement makes sense for C series and dSLRs given the grip placement. Image quality seems okay. Great zoom range and light weight. And despite the adapter's flaws, it approximates the job closely enough to be functional and fun to use. Non-picky consumers will like it. Creative people willing to fix problems in post or who need to shoot a fake newscast or something will have fun with it. And I might sell my hvx still. But it's a lot of $$$ for just fun. 

To me it just seems like an immature consumer product. Not particularly good at anything. But not an embarrassment, either.

What's really crazy... REALLY crazy is that it seems the contacts are only for power and they don't do anything to zoom or focus. They're also exposed all the time and kind of unsightly. Strange for such a ubiquitous kit lens... The mechanism actually seems to be similar to a wireless FF where a lens gear catches the gear on the zoom/focus mechanism. It's not internally controlled. The finely notched grip on the zoom ring catches a fine gear for the PZ-E1, and so that might account for the slow acceleration and slightly inconsistent speed with the inconsistent give on the zoom ring as you zoom in. Really weird!

Not very good. But it sits well on the C100 in terms of size and feel.

A bit of a mixed bag then to say the least.

I wonder if there is any additional jiggery pokery going on when its on an 80D.

Whats piqued my interest here though is the PZ-E1 and the contacts part. I suspect that there some of those pins are for comms though as it is drivable from their smart phone app so the camera has to tell the lens to tell the PZ-E1 to move the zoom position but its how it operates (or not) standalone that intrigues me.

I know its battery powered but does it turn the gear without being attached to the lens? 

If it does, it strikes me as there may be some mileage in a modification for it to work with other lenses.

It has the right form factor, ergonomics and price to be an interesting add on for a lot more people than just users of one specific lens I think.

7 minutes ago, mercer said:

Is the CineLikeD command different in the GH4, than the next generation?

Same command but I've got a suspicion it does something with master pedestal level at the same time, which we don't have access to.

Its just a guess but it looks like the same effect as if you altered that level. And altered it badly!

I need to have hold of a GH4 but ideally an HVX200 as that has its own app that can alter the master pedestal level so I could at least fish the command.

Just now, mercer said:

Also, I forget, but has there been any confirmation if the CineLikeD is possible with the LX100?

Mmmmm....yes and no.

It takes the command and protects highlights for sure. But it does this by shifting everything a bit to the left of Karl Marx.

I need to look at it again to see if its salvageable with the prodding device but haven't got round to it yet.

11 minutes ago, deezid said:

Well they say 4k or 18MP. 
But the lens doesn't seem to resolve any more than 1-2MP...

Yes but if it is shit then at least it can now be shit but with a much flatter profile

4 minutes ago, mercer said:

Haha, I was about to ask this question because there are some cheap ones on eBay. How did the quality look with the small sensor? A small sensor Panasonic P&S was the first digital camera I ever had and I must say I loved the monochrome setting plus mjpeg codec of those old compacts. I wish we could get mjpeg back into some of these cameras. 

I was only able to look at the rear panel to check it worked. I figured that putting a memory card in it and recording some footage would've been a bit of an abuse of their (unwitting) hospitality

For anyone looking for a cheap 4K travel camera with a 30x zoom (!) that can have cinelike d then I can confirm that it can indeed be done for the Panasonic TZ80 

And if you are travelling through Stansted airport then if you go to the Dixons tax free shop then ask to buy the demo one as I've just been there and left it already enabled on C3 for you

23 minutes ago, amp829 said:

Thanks BTM_Pix !

the gx80/85 owners  would have a party with BTM_Pix's work , it's really a very significant update . 

for g80 it gives some extra possibilities but not so crucial at the moment .....

As an idea i would propose (if it's possible off course because i don't really understand how this hack is working ) if someone can takes a profile e.g. 709REC and add it straight to the camera combined to the existing profiles  .....

as a G80 user I was swept away by reading from someone that can be achieved 200mbps as a video possibility and that would be huge upgrade to my g80 ....

 

 

 

 

You might want to look at these other threads about work I'm doing on colour profiles.

Main description of it is first 

And then some information about testing outcomes from it

The controller will allow multiple versions of these custom created sets to be sent to the camera. 

10 minutes ago, Hugues Canadaa said:

It's a bit newer, there's maybe a chance but I'm more confident in the next generation with GX8 and G7 because they already have some flat profiles stock.

They both have both cinelike profiles so its just hue and hardware controller functions that they benefit from.

1 hour ago, amp829 said:

i have the panasonic G80 and today i have tested  some of the files are available and i will like to thank you for your effort , but,

 i would like to understand some things  better .

At my case (panasonic g80) which are the benefits ? e.g.  i already have cinelike d & v . 

i came up to some troubles .....i used the extended iso at 80 iso but i could not recover it to the mainstream choices 

Also there are choices like 200mbps that there are not available , although , they exist at the files and create confusion about availability .

could someone  categorize these  files at panasonic GX..  and panasonic G..   and also remove things that they don't work at the moment ?

thanks !

 

This particular thread started as cinelike d for the GX80 as per the title so, yes, obviously there is no benefit to G80 owners in that regard.

The longer term benefits to the overall project for G80 owners will be found in the hardware controller to enable the camera functionality to be operated wirelessly from a physical unit rather than menu diving.

The different file formats are what other contributors have put up to enable testing to see if they work so you shouldnt have any expectation of those and I think that is documented in the responses by those who have tested it.

With regard to ISO, I didn't do the one with multiple variants and don't have a G80 but I suspect if you put it into an auto mode where the camera chooses its own ISO then this will take care of it.

If it doesnt, then put this into a browser while connected to the camera and it will revert to 6400 and take it from there.

http://192.168.54.1/cam.cgi?mode=setsetting&type=iso&value=6400

Hope that helps

The hardware controller, incidentally, enables the higher ISOs to be used in video mode if like the GX80 it is clamped at 6400.

The Hue command should also work if its not an already editable parameter in the G80. There is some usage guidance further up the thread for operating it from a browser but again its something that will be more readily and usefully controlled from the hardware controller.

58 minutes ago, Lentozo said:

I signed in just to thank BTM_Pix and everyone else who have worked on this project.

I do not own a GX80 (yet) but I believe that everyone should encourage people who spend their time to our benefit...

P.S: By the way is there any chance for Cinelike to work on my GX7?

Thank you!

I don't have one but maybe someone who does could chime in if they've tested it.

The G6 was a fail so I'm not sure where the GX7 sits in the chronology relative to that so wouldn't like to guess.