Mark Romero 2

Although I didn't actually shoot any footage, I set the camera up for 120fps and turned it to AF-C and panned around and the AF seemed to adjust fine. Didn't give me any warnings. This is with the SEL 10-18 f/4. Tomorrow I will try and confirm by shooting some footage. It's 10:00 at night now. I imagine the 120fps of the a7S II would be significantly better. all of the 1080p on the a6500 / a6300 is not good. It is like some of the Canon cameras shooting 1080p in MP4. Maybe a bit sharper but with more aliasing and moire. 120fps on the a6500 is supposed to be even worse.

Thanks for the clarification / update. That does make sense. Off Topic: Do we know yet that the D850 sensor was made by Sony??? I know people were claiming it was made by TowerJazz, but as Thom Hogan pointed out, that is doubtful. Not familiar with the 105 AI-S lens myself. Probably great for video, less so for stills. Even the D750 with its lowly 24mp full frame sensor and with an AA filter could out-resolve some of the vintage lenses and AF-D lenses for stills. If the D850 screen is anything at all like the screen on my D750, you might not need focus peaking. My D750 screen is very sharp, and when you press the center button, it will automatically punch in. Much easier to manual focus my D750 than it is to manual focus my Sony a6000, a6300, a6500, a5100, even though the sony bodies have focus peaking and can punch in as well. In fact, I often turn OFF focus peaking when using my a6500 and just rely on punching in, because, Sony. The drawback for the D750 is if you want to move the AF focus point (which is the punch in point when using MF), it is slower to move around than the Sony bodies (at least it is for me). Plus the focus point is one size. I don't know if on Canon bodies, for instance, the focus box can be different sizes when you are moving it around or not. On the D750, the focus box is small, which may or may not be good depending on your needs. Oh... forgot; focus ring on Nikon turns backwards compared to Canon, so there is that...

Maybe I am going blind, but after watching your comparison, I don't know if I would use the word "better" to describe the D850 4K video... at least at higher ISOs: It looks sharper than the A7R II and III models but looks pretty noisy to me. Am I missing something? But for me, the real reason I don't own one is because I don't think it would work so well on a single hand gimbal, which is something I use most of the time for my filming. I imagine I would need at least a Ronin M, which I can afford, but would not find that convenient. And Nikon LiveView autofocus... As much as I hate my a6500 for the ergonomic / UI issues it has, it works pretty darn well on a one-hand gimbal.

Sounds like it would be a nice camera, and I am sure whomever buys one will be delighted with it. But it also sounds kind of like it is a day late and a dollar short... For that price, I think people might look at a GH5, or a G9, or an a6500, or a used a7R II, or... Don't get me wrong; I wish them much success. Yes. Agree with this 110%

If you want to record in XAVC S 50Mbs codec then you are going to need a 64GB card in xFAT. For some stupid reason, a 32GB card won't work (even if formatted in xFAT). Has to be a 64GB card (I am 99% sure of this but always pays to double check). No picture profiles on the a6000, but I have been happy using the portrait creative style and reducing saturation and contrast by -2 and detail by -1, then doing minor grading. Definitely reducing contrast in the creative style of your choice will help increase dynamic range a bit (one stop???) No mic jack, but sony makes shotgun mics that plug into the hotshoe. Don't know if that matters to you or not. The kit lens is useable for 1080p. Sony e mount lenses are pretty expensive (compared to their older A Mount lenses). It MIGHT be worthwhile to look for an LA-EA1 adapter (Sony A mount to Sony E mount) so that you can mount older / cheaper A mount lenses (although they will technically autofocus, the autofocus won't be that good). At least you will be able to mount some minolta MF lenses as well with an LA-EA1. I bought my adapter for $50 US and use it on my a6500 with the very capable and very inexpensive Sony A Mount 85mm f/2.8 SAM. Sony A mount lenses DON'T have built in stabilization, so using them on an LA-EA1 adapter won't help keep things less shakey. On the other hand, there are a few sigma and tamron lenses for Sony A Mount that DO have stabilization built in, so that might be helpful.

Thanks for the input. Yeah, I think in general that is the way things are headed. I mean, an iPhone is pretty capable now... Trying to keep ahead of the curve wherever possible. Hence, I have a drone and pilot's license as well.

Thanks for the note. Actually, I work for several different companies... as well as individual agents who have a "preferred vendor" but choose to work with me. I hope they work with me because of the quality I provide, but maybe they just look at how I dress and it makes them feel good about the way THEY dress... But you are right; a lot of it is run and gun and at those prices ($200 to $300 per gig), it doesn't make much sense to spend a whole lot of time and money on it. And quite simply, some agents couldn't tell the difference between a video shot on an Alexa and one shot on an Osmo But since I aspire to work with those agents / companies that DO appreciate good work and who ARE willing to pay for it, I would like to make my work as good as I can in the meantime (within reason).

THANK YOU!!! Almost everything I have shot has been in Cine 1 or Cine 4 so I am going to go back and re-visit some footage and adjust the clip attributes. I really appreciate you pointing this out to me.

Thanks for the suggestion. The best way to do that is just turning down the gain during post processing, right? (Using resolve.) Or are you saying while actually shooting?

Thanks so much for the info. Yes, I try to underexpose to preserve the highlights and avoid the ghastly rolloff, but it is kind of walking a tightrope to avoid the noise penalty. Since I find SLOG to be a bear to shoot in, I have a picture profile set up based on Cine 1 (by Dom Blond???) to handle scenes with lots of highlights, and based on Cine 4 for scenes with lots of detail in the shadows. Still not there yet. Thanks for the info. I noticed that the Alexa footage on youtube does seem to do well with mixed lighting. Good to know that ProRes is good with mixed lighting as well (as when shooting RAW). True, the ultimate solution would be lighting, whether it is changing interior lamps or bringing LEDs, but the problem for us real estate shooters is (mostly) time. Even though I am in an affluent area (the CHEAPEST house I photographed this last week was a 3 bed, 2 bath home selling for $975K), agent's are willing to spend a lot of money and they want things done QUICKLY. Can you elaborate a bit on what you mean by better tonality? I am used to using the term "tonality" as it relates to, say, the subtlety in skin tones, but not sure if you are using it like that in this instance. I don't know why this isn't quoting you Deadcode, but I thank you for your response above and will try as you suggested. Thanks again. Thank you for the chart. Interesting, hadn't seen that exact chart before. I am often shooting in the 1600 to 3200 range when shooting interiors.

Thanks for the input. I always appreciate your thoughts when it comes to Canon and RAW, so I am happy you chimed in here. I was thinking of the D850 and the a7R III (still am). The other appeal of RAW is the ability to fix color casts, because often I have to deal with daylight, tungsten, and three different kinds of fluorescent light in the same shot. I figure it would be able to deal with color correction better than 8-bit 4:2:0 Thank you for your thoughts. Shooting professionally, but it is mostly run and gun real estate. However, I will be doing real estate agent commercials (where the agent talks about what a great real estate agent they are and why you should hire them), and also going to do some small business commercials as well. The pay is not great though ($200 to $300 for a video up to about 1:30 in length). Also, I want to do MORE high end real estate, and dynamic range is pretty much key here because we have some stunning views here in the SF Bay Area. But that is down the road a bit I think. So right now high-volume real estate work, but with an eye toward higher end stuff. I like the D750 for a LOT of reasons but the image is so soft... I know that sharpness isn't everything, but sometimes when editing D750 footage I sit there and say, "Was I shooting out of focus???"

Thanks for the input. Mattias did a comparison between the d750 shooting in flat profile and some blackmagic cameras and he concluded that the DR was pretty similar, so I guess that means the DR of my D750 would be pretty close to the DR from Canon RAW. Thank you for the input. I much appreciate it.

I saw some beautiful looking 4K ML RAW footage from a 5D MK III and it looked like it had great dynamic range and great highlight rolloff (compared to my Sony a6500). Are there any SLR cameras that compare with that as of Feb 2018 shooting h.264 or other similar (non-RAW) codecs? Preferably something that ISN'T SLOG. I like the detail of the a6500, but the DR and Highlight Rolloff are still disappointing (even with EOSHD Pro Color and when shooting in the various Cine gammas). And to be honest, I can't get a decent image when using SLOG to save my life, so I avoid SLOG. Bonus Question: Is ML RAW going to give the most flexibility in terms of color correction (and grading, I suppose) when compared to non-RAW codecs? Because I shoot architecture / interiors without being able to light it, the two most difficult issues for me are dynamic range, multiple white balance, and high ISO. Would moving to RAW be the best to tackle those issues?

Goat's Eye has a comprehensive series of tutorials on resolve 12.5 on youtube, and there are a lot of similarities in Resolve 14. Can you clarify what you mean by "regroup clips"? In resolve, you have ripple delete where you cut a clip, click on the empty space AFTER the cut, right click ripple delete, and ALL the following clips on that track will move forward an euqal amount. Is that what you mean? sorry I am not familiar with FCXP. Is it insane in a good or bad way??? Would love to see any footage. I am using the free version of resolve so no built in noise reduction, but would certainly upgrade to the paid version in order to get awesome noise reduction.

From the videos I have seen online, The fans sound pretty loud (to me) so I would definitely look at some of the demonstration videos. I was going to buy one of the SLB 100 but I don't know, woulld have to do the fan modification that is linked to earlier in this thread.

Thanks for the observation. That helps give me a direction to figure out what I am doing wrong. I will try that. Thanks for the suggestion.

Actually, probably NOT a mis-match of timeline and footage frame rate because the footage itself looks jittery, too. Look at the corner joint of the two walls (between the tv and the large white closets).

Hmmm... Could be... I might have to retry this. I usually drop my 4K clips on to a 1080p timeline in resolve... I wonder if I should just use resolves feature to automatically adjust the timeline to match with the clip?

Thanks for the suggestion. I will have to do some tests when i have a free afternoon. Too busy this week with photo shoots (which is good, just need to get some filming done too).

Thank you for the very detailed list of suggestions. I had about four shoots over the last few days so haven't had a chance to try and implement them. But I wanted to say thank you and will let you know how they work out for me. Thanks.

10-18 f/4. I didn't have any ND filters for it.

Thanks, but I hope someone could maybe explain WHY there is that jitter? I know that may sound like a dumb question, but I would expect to see blur (or rolling shutter). I've seen people do fast pans with the a6300 / a6500 to demonstrate the rolling shutter, but when they do, I don't see that jittery effect. Just blur and rolling shutter. I ain't no engineer but it would seem to me that using a faster fps would make for MORE jitter... Anyway, thanks again. Maybe I am just not seeing the same thing you guys are seeing.

Thanks for the input. I can always try 30fps, but I guess I thought I would see more blur and less of the almost "stop and go" motion.

Firstly, sorry if this is supposed to go in the Shooting sub-forum and not here. But since it is (kind of) an equipment question, thought it might belong in the main forum. I tend to get jittery pans with my Sony cameras (currently have an a6500, formerly had an a6300). Notice as the camera pans left: https://youtu.be/YUNFNs9e_E0?t=1m42s I am using the a6500 on a Zhiyun crane. Because I didn't have an ND filter for this lens, I am stopped down to f/11, shooting at 24fps (23.98), and 1/50th shutter speed. It doesn't look like rolling shutter to me. It just looks like I am panning in "steps." There are a couple of other areas in that video where it looks jittery to me as well. The original footage looks jittery, as does the optimized footage once I upload to resolve. Any thoughts on what is causing this??? Thanks in advance.

Anyone here ever try any of these: https://www.adorama.com/fplcl1144r.html Or at least, do you know who the original manufacture is? (Yongnuo? Godox?) It looks like it has a hole in the center of the disk for an umbrella shaft. Not perfect, but might be good for my needs. EDIT: Just realized they only have a CRI of 83