Mark Romero 2

First, you need to do more research about what job opportunities are realistically available to you. You need to find out who is likely to hire an editor / colorist with little to no experience in your location, and what their software requirements will be. If you aren't sure, and just want to start editing and grading to know what it feels like, then start with something like Resolve (which is free) and at least learn whether you LIKE to edit / grade or whether you think it is going to be really annoying. (Although I don't know how it handls 360-videos. It is constantly being upgraded / improved upon, and most concepts you will learn in resolve will translate over to the other editing programs, if not the exact techniques.)

Doesn't one lose certain autofocus features doing this? (Like face detect or something like that???) Can you elaborate? The only tests I have seen online didn't seem to show much of a difference at all...

I don't know if this is helpful or not, but if you like the video image quality of your GH5, then maybe a Panasonic S1 might be usable for you? It is full frame, has 10-bit, 4K 30fps GOP at 150MBS (no all-i yet, but maybe in a firmware update down the road???). Has HLG-like and full VLOG similar to vericam / EVA1 Great stills camera. The lenses are pricey... VERY pricey, but good. The 24-105 kit lens is claimed by many to be parafocal and has no focus breathing. I am still testing out mine to confirm (only had it a day so can't say for sure). Autofocus is NOT in the same league as your a7 III, no matter what anyone says. It is not in the same league as my a6500, and the a7 III is better that the a6500 in terms of AF. There is a Sigma MC-21 adapter to adapt EF glass to the S1. I have only tested it personally with the Canon 16-35 f/4L and first impressions are that it works fine, except that... There is no AF-C when using Canon Glass on the MC-21. Only AF-S and Manual focus. Then again, the BM cameras don't have ANY af-c so there you go... Manual focus is pretty good when using a native L Mount lens, as it will magnify the area of focus. It isn't so great with a vintage lens. I tried with my Minolta MD Rokkor 50mm f.2 on a "dumb" adapter, and while the LCD screen and EVF are good, the focus peaking is very subtle, and when using a vintage lens on a dumb adapter, there s no magnification. The Bad News: It is HEAVY. Very heavy. S1 + 24-105 f/4 = 1,772 grams, or 3 pounds 15 ounces. The Good news: you can skip Arm Day at the gym now!!! There are other trade offs too but I don't know the exact technical specs of some of the trade offs. I could be wrong, but I think that the 4K 60p is in Super 35 instead of full frame and it is only 8-bit, but 10-bit if you output to a recorder. I might be totally wrong on this though. Otherwise, just go out and buy an X-T3 and be happy ?

Thanks for the tutorial.

Nice video. Looks like everyone had a good time. Colors looked good.

Guilty as charged. But to be honest, it only happens when I accidentally bump the camera when i am trying to film test charts. Well... too be honest, sometimes some of the people who frequent these boards are straight shooters with their opinions, and I am a bit reluctant to post my work, which is basically all real estate videos up until the point, on these boards. But I will certainly do my part to view more work that gets posted by members on the forums going forward.

Thanks for the feecback on this light.

Ok, thanks for the clarification. If I was going to make a runner-up for a "general" item, I guess maybe Sigma Art Lenses? I know that people love them (I don't own any though), and they have probably helped to force the major camera makers to be more competitive with their own offerings. Of course, Arri Alexa might fit in there as well since it has been such a workhorse for so many indie movies (not zero budget ones of course). And it has also set the "gold standard" for image quality for all of us mirrorless shooters who are trying to make something look "cinematic."

Does it actually have to be a SINGLE camera??? If not, I would say a7 series of cameras for the reason that they proved to other manufacturers (Nikon, Canon, Panasonic) that full-frame mirrorless cameras could be popular / profitable . Now, maybe if the a7 series hadn't been so popular Canon / Nikon / Panasonic would still have come up with FF mirrorless cameras. I just think they might have dragged their feet even longer. As for my piece of gear that I actually USE myself, it would have to be my a6500 since it is what I use for paying the bills.

Thanks so much for the explanation and the clarification.

Did you use organic oats??? That will give your footage a more "organic" look.

Thank you for the explanation. Can you clarify for me what "ISP" means though in the statement, "ISP can affect DR as well - by applying noise reduction," as I am unfamiliar with the term ISP. I am sure it is something simple, just can't think of it right now. My grasp of the English language is tenuous at best since I am a product of the public education system in the USA.

Yeah, I guess Nikon has a competition going on with Panasonic to see who can make the most cumbersome License purchase system.

I ain't no engineer, but... Doesn't the Analog to Digital Converter (ADC) have the "final say" in the amount of Dynamic Range? That's kind of been the knock against mirrorless cameras is that the codec / output will always be constrained by the ADC. Or am I just confused again??? (Happens quite often.) Anyway, do any of the non-cinema cameras read both a high-gain and a low-gain signal from each pixel and then run through two different ADCs the way an Alexa does? Because if it doesn't, I am not sure how much (theoretical) dynamic range boost there will be shooting with RAW on the Z6. Maybe in the real world it will allow people to overexpose one more stop over what they could expose with N-Log and still pull back highlights, so maybe there is an advantage there (I am just pulling this one stop over figure from out of my hat just to make a point that there might be a real world benefit that isn't readily apparent from looking at the math - I have no idea if RAW will allow people to pull back the highlights better or not than N-Log). Did I mention I am not an engineer???

From watching a couple of different videos on the Z6 and ProRes RAW update, still seems like one has to ETTR about 1.5 to 2 stops... which means you do have a stronger chance of clipping highlights. So is it really going to give that much better real-world dynamic range than a Panasonic S1 / S1H, or even a BMD Pocket 4K???

I might have to try shooting slog2 / sgamut3.cine with the saturation cranked up to 10. I normally have saturation set to 0 or at the very most, +3.

Thanks for the feedback. Glad to hear the lens works well because I might get one.

It could be, but you are going to want fast AF, and I don't know if the Tamron lens is going to focus as fast as the Sony native lenses. And is 28-75 going to give enough reach to you? If 75mm is going to give enough reach to you, then maybe look at the 85mm f/1.8 and see if the AF is fast enough for you and if you can live with a fixed focal length range. I would ASSUME that the 85mm f/1.8 is going to have better AF than the tamron 28-75, but can't confirm either way.

So does the update / upgrade allow for shooting in 12-bit codec that is NOT RAW??? Meaning, instead of 10-bit N-Log, can one shoot in 12-bit NLOG???

For all the standard profiles and the cinegammas, it always seems that the most important thing to me is protecting the highlights because generally when colors clip, they clip nasty. Every time I clip using a standard profile, the highlights get super-saturated. You might see this in many videos posted on youtube, too, where a highlight on a person's face just becomes sort of a nuclear urine blotch.

Nice job, and thanks for posting.

I just don't know if you are going to overcome the same low-light problems you had with your Fuji if you go with an f/4 lens on the a7 III.

Thanks. Yeah, original a7S was not a speed demon when it came to AF.

How's the AF speed on the Sony 85mm f/1.8? On paper, it looks to be a good lens for sports in dark areas where you don't need a super long reach. Just I know that some very fast lenses tend to hunt... don't know if the Sony 85 f/1.8 is one of those or not.