anonim

I don't understand ES also. Is it so hard to answer politely if someone ask you something? I don't know also who The Bangles are, but I believe it is part of base education which some of us here lack, when @jonpais find it so funny to put a lovely smile... But it didn't help @Kye who ask - except he now know that you didn't want to answer him.

What for stands abbreviation ES in English - Enough said? (imported but often used so) En suite? Erase Screen?

Agree, if @Yurolov indeed found that you are obsessed with 10-bit - it is for me, I have to say, complete nonsense. (But I'm pretty sure it is not such - his arguments and manner of argumenting are too noble for such BS level - if he thought so, I'm sure he would told you that openly.) As about "people" being obsessed - I don't know, as part of his global thinking discourse about topic in form of contrary-view strategy, it may be accepted But hay! - both of you really thought and explained opinions at really-really at high end level not just for local BS-type-accurate often knocking down standard.

I hope that sign :P targeting @jonpais means - Look, I'm little bit salty! Because "Troll on duty" is the last that I could say about character of @jonpais's involving in hundreds of threads here. I never saw that he esteemed his opinions or capabilities above others. Quite contrary - he was always ready, and inspirativelly sober-mindly, to admit his non-interested lack of grading intervention. But he has his without discussion always relevant opinion and - which is for me the most important - always first in detail, and without any grain of lifting up his nose, explain it. Than, if attacked, or as result of misunderstaning, may be salting-add (besides, very witty, I think). Personally, resisting in Indian's subname of @jonpais as "Troll on duty" - to me more speaks about caller.

Actually, I think that Yurolov's (actual target of quoted saltiness not @Deadcode) thread of argumentation was very nice, as your also - and that both could be simply united. When now conclusion-claim "And the GH5 is not good because it has 10 bit" is precised, I, for myself, am very glad to read his, as also your, before these-saltiness-intrusion argumentation. Contrary, Deadcode's comment is obviously very "salty" and include direct personal attack from the lines - he wished it to be so. Sadly, you, obviously, personally irritate him here or irritate in general him - as I irritate someone else or many here. And as every single person here and everywhere whose first act toward others is (explicitly or hypocritic hide) from the position of I-know-better-and-more-than-you - irritate me, equally when someone use words as Bullshit or other Shit-x variants as powerful sound argument. Comment "Those people who mostly complain about 8 bit limitations are usually backyard flower shooters" could be seen as opinion - I don't like formulation, and I'm think that "usually" is a bit of exaggerating. Do your argumentation in this thread deserved to be seen as irritating in this thread? - I think not at all, and I strongly agree with its conclusion theory side wise - as with @Yurolov's practical side wise. edit Appendix - I'm noticing that in the last time I'm becoming irritated with usage of unexplained word "cinematic" from EOSHD self-proclaimed authorities

I understand, it is irony - or, as Matthew Hartman learned me, at idiom-English it is little bit "salty". I hope other side will not be too angry. I think that It is very hard for many talented reviewers not to project some inclinations (or also something else) in comparing task once when climb to the level that could easy acquire many different cameras, lenses etc. That's why rather choose to follow reviewers who are openly fond to one system and achieve exceptional results with it - Brandon Lee with Sony, or White in Revery with Panasonic. @Deadcode "In conclusion: 10 bit for most of the users in EosHD forums wont give any benefit over 8 bit." Let's help each other to get more benefit - I like @Yurolov sugestion's path: let's compare (who can and have resources) concrete cameras in respective fields and relevant variables and provide results. It will certainly help (at least me) in future decision where is the best for me to invest.

I really don't know - I don't shoot stills, and without actually and strictly concrete testing between two cameras, I can not claim anything. I have no prediction about including of raw capability - and I think that I surely, you maybe, couldn't know what will be the state of quality than respective FF and m43 sensor. That I surely know is - if Panasonic GH5 include via firmware update raw video shooting as option - I'll be rarer in this forum Why - because, actually, I restrain myself to speculate about theory. In my ideal vision of EOSHD or similar (not high-end filmmakers) community, we will help each other to spare money - that's what interesting me the most How - simply comparing concrete cameras in relevant variables and provide results of its combination in concrete camera. In my ideal world, we have to unite powers and time and discipline manufacturer to bring to us just the best As Frederic Rzewski told us with powerful piece of music (on words Sergio Ortega and Quilapayún) - The people united will never be defeated

This, I think, summarize topic very nicely - with other lovely compose thread of argumentation. But than "And the GH5 is not good because it has 10 bit" - I don't understand? From my experience, its strong side is that it has 10bit, not just 8bit - not because its 10bit is better than 8bit from some other cameras (especially those with better DR - and it is difference between EVA1 and GH5), but simple because GH5's 10bit is better than GH5's 8bit. I think that just there's no any reason to think of quality of 10bit or 8bit in general - of course, we can, but than it is theoretic question.

Agree, mostly with example of balanced answer - "different things to a 'mostly stills shooter' as opposed to a 'mostly video' guy". Because you explain position of view of still shooter, just to note what is video shooter's - capability not to have too shallow DOF at f1.8-2 or even f1. That leads to another remark - Opinions are highly divided if total light on the sensor in modern m43 sensors is still less in functional sense (because in mathematical it never was). From my experience and careful testing when I decided to use Sony or Panasonic route - total light usability is the same. From mine experience and at least one side of opinions - sensor ratio FF/m43 in modern, higher sensor sensitivity m43 cameras means just difference in DOF. Of course, FF cameras sensor sensitivity progress as m43's - so I limit my comment to the last time and distinction that I've tested - GH5 vs Sony A7sII and A6500. Just to add about Nocticron - besides more love for more analogue image, I sold it because of its F/T ratio: as I found, its T is near 1.8. Contrary, Voigtlander 42.5 T is arround 1.1 - and I need every drop of light for GH5.

I think that it is very self'-deceptive and even pretentious to think that anybody can discern fundamental quality/beauty distinction between modern high quality cameras just at the base of one single, from clip extracted image that is treated even with slightest elemental channel manipulation. Matter becomes even more serious (or funnier) with 1280x720 image that survive tone of stylistic finessing and software manipulations. More over - we are constantly faced with claims that something is "cinematic" or not without explanation what exactly someone see, and what with "cinematic" is called. Just from the last years Oscar examples - Moonlight is cinematic, The Revenant is cinematic - do their global artistic directions image-character wise have anything in common? I think that we too much relay our self-esteem on subjective premise that we know/see better than someone else what mysterious "cinematic" is. I'd like more that everybody spend few minutes and indicate/explain what he/she actually like in given example - instead of repeatedly operate with one single word as argument comes from real or imagine professional heights. Lets prove our eyes, knowledge and taste indicating exactly what we see and why we think it is important. (Btw - If, in incredible case, someone is interested - above presented short called Valentine is shot completely at Voigtlander's 0.95 f value, I asked DP and he answered at his channel.)

Iso for Iso, but it looks almost funny how Yuryev's face suddenly becomes the clearest/sharpest at 1600 in GH5

Thanks for comment. Well, I don't know, I've just exploring examples and forwarded it. Obviously, mr Hüseyin Taskin love its look of, I'd say, muted gamma and less contrasty image without any loss of greatly resolve details. Maybe somebody else also find it interesting and make some more conclusion...

I'm not sure and am lazy to check - but @Sage is creator of GH-Alexa lut? Several topic above, I mentioned the same, quoting exactly this lut as obviously great help in tweaking. Kieza's shot of little Oriental girl and upper example of walking/talking woman fully enchanted me - but, playing with same clips from both camera, I've found that daylight color wise result of GH5s is not at all unassailable to that comparative of GH5. -Actually, if obviously worse roll-offs GH5 can be tweaked as showed in GHAlexa lut site, resulted images are near identical - and give to me time to collect money and maybe buy GH5s... (But I must admit that effect of provided intervention on singer I, owing to my taste, don't like - image suddenly looks flattened to me )

Aren't these 3 images given in pretty low resolution for any comparatively fair comment? As such low-res, I see slight green or blue-veil cast in all of them and probably some sort of artistically added haze in second - indeed tender with chosen DOF angle and shadows under the girl's eyes to complete coming up of fragile face. Love this composition and its rich but mellow gamma. In full resolution it must be gorgeously 3dimensional. Dave Altizer's sample with singer has, as I see, pretty cold graded tone, clean with unobtrusive but present details and absence of predominant veil. I like how - in globally low saturated context and not so deep focus - that lovely distinctive nuances of white color of shirt discreetly help in leading attention to subject. Fine base, expected from modern 2000+$ camera, of course could be also and different variations of look.

@DBounce Thanks for the comment - actually I wrote "cinematic shooting situation", not determining genre or character of shots (i. e. author defined it as short movie). Out of discussion what is "cinematic" (after all, I think that notion needs little bit of subjective clarification), I think that this example is very well done and nice showcase of GH5+Voigtlander combo potentials. Idea was just to present some low light environments and capabilities out of usually marketed extremely high iso values, rarely used in similar production. For myself, I'd so gladly buy GH5s... as I wrote earlier, some clips with non-panasonic lenses are, for my taste, affordable pinnacle of neutral, non intrusive, natural color/detail balance. But not at all in iso values higher than 3200 - judging from so far presented clips.

I thought it might be interesting to upload here for the sake of comparing GH5/GH5s in real world cinematic shooting situation - so, an short movie and its brief behind the scene, GH5 + Voigtlander 17.5mm. (Maybe not to rush with GH5s.)

@Tim Sewell I beg mercy for this thread from angry serious lovers of straight lines! It must be that between Fuji users also have to be such that like to wandering and find unexpected views and inspirations! Borrowing newest used vocabulary, I'll bring to mind that even in content of "letting off steam" actually (shockingly) resides arpeggio and potentially some base melody, of course not heard if you think straight about it just as shit-anticipation...

(Well, to be honest, I have full three month experience with USA bombing people with especial uranium fill and other fireworks - actually, I participated in collecting traces of killed children by such generous USA treatment... Said story, of course not for this place and time.)

@Matthew Hartman (I just only wish you to really find a friend who, after many testing-concerning situations, behave worthily/according to full meaning of that sentence. And The woman also )

I'm completely not competent to discuss technical side of Arri or Panavision, but I think that it is not unnecessarily to remark and single out formulations that - proven with consistent attitude - are deep and noble as quoted one. (In fact, for me it is desirable top of the meaning even in specialized web forums as this one.) (Edit - Actually, owing to my origin, nature and wish to be always completely sincere - quoted sentence produce some tears in my eyes...)

I'm always so glad to meet such smart lapidary formulation (i. e. glossa, or... γλῶσσα)

Actually, the point of my lines was freedom in using free movement with camera, concerning dilema ibis-no ibis. About the others - in fact, it is not at all my kind of preferable style. Nor even the grading per se - but it was, obviously, some highly stylized goal, trying to match dynamic music of old Schubert with modern music video approach...