EthanAlexander

@Andrew Reid Is there any way you could show us an example of Pro Color 2 vs 3? Especially on skin tones? I'm super interested,but not being able to see direct comparisons I'm not sure what the difference is (besides the benefits like using any WB or the recovery LUT, Etc). 2nd question: On the page you list the A7S as being both compatible and incompatible. Can you clear this up, please? Thanks!

I'm going to check it out!

DXO is a joke for smart phones. It took them one year to review the iPhone 7 Plus, and they still rated it lower than the pixel. HOW?? This is from their own test:

Wow. Incredible stuff. You're right it makes me want to go outside right now! (But I can't...)

That exposure is simply trying to judge the scene and place what it considers middle grey at 18%. It actually has nothing to do with clipping. Go ahead and use the histogram and zebras to get a better exposure judgement. If you're exposing by adding more gain (raising the ISO) then yes, but if you add more light (either through aperture, shutter, or actual lights) then you can reduce the appearance of noise. Many people have found that using a cinegamma or s Log and over exposing is the best way to get a clean image. This is because you're lifting the image out of the shadows and the extended dynamic range of the cinegamma/SLog give you head room in the highlights. But again, do this by adding light, not gain.

Yep, the defining factor in "facial flattery" is how close you physically stand from the subject. There are other factors like @dhessel mentioned, but ignoring quality of build in a lens, a person's face would look the same on a M43 shooting 25mm as the 645 shooting 80mm if you maintain the same distance from the subject. The reason medium format has its "look" is really more due to the fact that to get the equivalent DoF of 2.8 you'd need an f/0.8 to match, in this case. I'd like to add though that there are certainly other factors such as light gathering ability and overall dynamic range that larger sensors certainly have an advantage for. Just trying to clear up the compression thing.

Most Truth is found in Paradox.

I want to like your post @jcs but I also don't want to ruin your triple 8 rep Hmmm... This is where it gets subjective. I'm looking at them on a calibrated monitor, and they all look great to me. Weird. Mine have been rock solid. I doubt they'd hold up like my 5D3 though... that baby was submerged in the Pacific ocean briefly, died (canon service center pronounced it dead), and on the third day came back to life! Not even joking.

I agree, and because everything I shoot is graded, I appreciate the flexibility in post that S Log provides. Ultimately, for my work this is more important than "out of the box" colors. On the other hand, cameras like the F55 and F65 do "see" WAY more colors than even the FS7. In fact, none of the cameras below the F55 can even detect the entire range of S-Gamut. This is due to the quality of the color filters. Even though they're named the same thing on cameras all the way down the line, this is just for ease of workflow so that LUTs will work as expected, etc. http://www.xdcam-user.com/2017/04/will-a-bigger-recording-gamut-give-me-more-picture-information/

It's hard to imagine the Venice won't continue in this tradition. I do hope that some of the color science makes its way down the line, though, yes.

Right? Sony colors are the worst! So gross. Look at this grossness: Or this disgusting s***: This makes me want to puke: I mean, how can you even think this looks like real skin??:

If only we could speedboost! @Brian Caldwell Internal speedbooster: go!

I did read your list. My reaction has to do with this: The fact that you don't care about which company you buy from, only that your "needs are met," is the reason that big companies can get away with things like false promises and unnecessary crippling of products. Important: I'm not trying to say that big companies are bad or the system is bad. What I AM saying is that it's ultimately not in our self interest as video/film professionals to keep buying from a company like this. If we vote with our wallets, then we can force these companies to listen to us and give us better options. In fact, it's in the best interest of Canon in the long run, too! There are dozens of other cameras that you can use. People have made good livings using cameras that didn't have DPAF or internal raw for decades. You WANT this camera. That's fine. I'm not mad and I don't think you're a bad person or anything, I'm just trying to point out how we can enact change (or not).

Since you've got two sony's and e mount glass already, I'd say FS5 or 7II. (One note before I get into this: IBC is coming very soon and depending on camera announcements, this could change.) From the perspective of real estate vids, I think the FS5 will be plenty unless you need internal 10 bit 4K or 60p 4K. Personally, I'd love to have an FS7II, ( I used the Mk 1 for a few weeks and it's got an amazing image), but it's $4300 more than the FS5 right now, plus the extra cost of the XQD cards and all the more expensive accessories that come with a camera that size and weight, like tripods, sliders, gimbals, cases, etc. As a bonus, you can use the same SD cards on all 3 of your cameras if you get the FS5. Disclaimer: I own an FS5 and A7S. But I also have a 5D3 I love, so please don't think I'm a Sony fanboy. If the EVA had a more versatile mount, I'd say it's an option, but it's $3000 more expensive anyway and it's very hard for me to recommend a camera I've never used (or even seen real footage from).

This is why they'll never learn. They can make false promises and unnecessarily cripple their lower end products and they'll never have negative repercussions. I'm not personally blaming you I'm just using you as an example of the reality of the situation. I don't care your opinions about Sony and Panasonic cameras, but those two companies actually listen to the community and rarely hold back features on their lower end products.

Every morning, the Coen brothers read the news looking for interesting stories. Articles in the Rolling Stone or GQ tend to get me inspired (though, there's a lot to look through to find the good stuff). If you must write, these are good places to start. But otherwise I'd say just do what inspires you: the camera part. Bring your services to people who have stories but aren't camera-inclined. Exactly. Dark Knight Rises is basically A Tale of Two Cities, Westside Story is Romeo & Juliet, Lion King is Hamlet, Apocalypse Now is Heart of Darkness, O Brother, Where Art Thou? is The Odyssey.... The list goes on.

I don't have a problem with the codec itself, the problem I have is that Canon led (potential) buyers on. They teased a middle ground codec that isn't actually any better (just more metadata) and I find that unethical.

Totally agree, @maxotics These are great points.

Here they are in alphabetical order 4K(+) Bolded. I also Added a few from C5D numbers, and cleaned up the list. RX100 V 250 fps ---- 3.8 ms 1DC S35HD --------- 18ms 1DC 4K ------------- 25ms 1DX II 1080p 24 --- 11.1 ms 1DX II 1080p 60&120- 6.7 ms 1DX II 4k 24&60 --- 14.7 ms 5D MKII ----------- 25 ms 5D2 --------------- 25.9 ms 5D3 --------------- 20.5 ms (18ms C5D) 5Dsr -------------- 27.7 ms 7D ---------------- 21 ms a6000 1080p24&30--- 12.2 ms a6300 1080p24 ----- 15.2 ms a6300 4K 24fps ---- 39.0 ms a7r II 1080p FF---- 10.8 ms a7r II 1080p S35--- 10.5 ms a7R II 4K FF ------ 19.9 ms a7R II 4K S35 ----- 33.3 ms a7s APS-C 1080p --- 19.5 ms a7s FF 1080p ------ 30.5 ms (29ms C5D) a7s II FF 1080p --- 30.3 ms a7s II FF 4K ------ 30.4 ms a99 II 1080p ------- 8.7 ms a99 II 4k --------- 23.4 ms AF100 ------------- 14.85 ms Alexa 2K ------------ 6ms Amira S35 2K ------- 2ms BM 4.6K ----------- 15.2 ms (official) my measurement was 16.3 ms BM 4.6K (2K crop)--- 6.3 ms (official) BM 4.6K (4K crop)-- 12.6 ms (official) BM MicroStudio 4K--- 9.9 ms (official) BMC --------------- 23.6 ms (official) my measurement was 25.0 ms BMMCC ------------- 13.3 ms (official) my measurement was 13.4 ms BMPCC ------------- 17.7 ms (official) my measurement was 17.8 ms C300 -------------- 16 ms C300 II 4K --------- 6ms D5200 ------------- 22.4 ms D750 -------------- 14.5 ms D90 --------------- 33 ms F65 --------------- 14 ms Film --------------- 5 ms? FS100 ------------- 15 ms FS7 4K ----------- 15 ms (here) (14ms C5D) G7 1080p ---------- 16.9 ms G7 4k ------------- 28.1 ms GH1 --------------- 25 ms GH3 --------------- 15.5 ms GH4 1080p --------- 13.7 ms GH4 4K/UHD -------- 22.0 ms (official) my measurement was 22.5 ms (C5D: 14ms) GH5 --------------- 15.0 ms (official, preproduction) GX85 1080p -------- 15.4 ms GX85 4k ----------- 28.9 ms NEX-5N ------------ 29.4 ms NX1 1080p ---------- 7.9 ms NX1 4K ------------ 30.9 ms NX1 UHD ----------- 32.6 ms NX500 2.5k --------- 8.6 ms Red One MX -------- 16.6 ms RX10 -------------- 14.8 ms RX100 IV 1080p ---- 16.9 ms (without stabilization it's slightly faster: 16.1) RX100 IV 4K ------- 36.6 ms (without stabilization it's slightly faster: 35.7) RX100 V 1080p ----- 13.9 ms(first 2 with stabilization, last 2 without) RX100 V 4k -------- 17.5 ms (first 3 with stabilization, last 3 without) Scarlet ----------- 14 ms XT2 1080p --------- 16.9 ms XT2 4k ------------ 30.7 ms

You can work around the S35 crop factor by using a speed booster on the A7RII when you're shooting video and you'll get super detailed 4K with only a 1.07 crop factor. When you switch to stills, use a regular adaptor to get the full frame 42MP stills. The A7SII has lovely stills, but like you said, you want more than 12MP. Plus, if you ever get any native E mount lenses, you can use the nice phase detection autofocus on the A7RII if you ever need it. And, yeah, like @aldolega said, if you go this route there's no point holding on to the a6300. Sell it to pay for the speedbooster

The only thing that will sway them is our money. If people don't buy it that will have 1000x more impact than a petition. But, you know this is going to sell well. *sigh*

This is new to me. Def want to try! Thanks for taking the time to write that all. Lots of great info!

I'd love to hear

It'd certainly be a great way to learn and make contacts! I think marketing has been a driving point behind this. It's very easy for Sony, Canon, etc. to advertise the number of pixels, outrageous ISO levels, and eye bleeding saturation. And people want to believe that with one camera and nothing else they can become the next Spielberg. Plus, to most people, new tech is sexy, whereas clamps, muslin, gaffer tape, and heavy steel C stands are very un-sexy lol. Awesome channel. If you know any others like this, please let me know. Nice!

Couple weeks back I read a blog post by Alister Chapman about how the term DP has become meaningless now that anyone with a $1000 or even less can buy a camera and advertise as being one. (http://www.xdcam-user.com/2017/08/when-is-a-dp-not-a-dp/) and it got me thinking. I started paying attention to the people I'm seeing on social media in a different way, and noticed that damn near three quarters of the work I see involves no lighting. I see productions with UMPs, matte boxes, cinema glass, huge monitors, etc., but not a light to be found! I mean, hell, I had one client not too long ago who was surprised I had any lights at all, which says a lot. In fact, I think it's reasonable to say that the huge dynamic range and great low light ability we can get on cameras these days is killing the "need" to learn any kind of lighting. In many ways, I find this frustrating, simply because I've been trying to learn as much as I can about lighting for narratives and there's very little to be found on youtube and the like, at least compared to the billion videos entitled "how to make your videos look cinematic - Use these camera settings." The videos I do find are limited mostly to "3 point interview lighting." But here's the good thing - Because there are so many people who know NOTHING about lighting, it's not hard at all to stand out! I'm sharing this post because for the past couple month I've been doing all kinds of tests with lighting setups while I've been learning from Shane Hurlbut's Inner Circle site and it's already made me stand out to one of my clients and gotten me in with a group of filmmakers I've been wanting to team up with for a while. I hope that anyone on this forum that is looking to make money with video buys some lights and learns and experiments as much as they can. It's really the best way to stay ahead of the curve in this super-low-barrier-to-entry world. (ALSO, I'd love if we could have a lighting section of the forum. Or at least a thread in the shooting section. Would that be acceptable?)