Mark Romero 2

Yeah, regarding the sigma lens given away with the s5, I guess for people who want to shoot 4K 60 / 50fps, it might make sense. I was shooting video on my 24-105 f/4 at 60p two days ago and realized just how much tighter 36mm is than 24mm when filming indoors.

Forgot to ask: Does the Panasonic Lumix 24-105 f/4 that came with my S1 count as a "kit lens" since they were bundled together (this was before the launch of the 20-60 and the 50mm f/1.8, which are currently sold as a kit)? New, it sells for $1,300. I like the lens a lot, but if I hadn't got a great deal on it in a kit, I am sure I would just be some vintage primes with it. And speaking of kit lenses, Adorama has a kind of weird Panasonic S5 kit that is bundled with a FREE copy of... the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 lens (a $374 value), which sounds great until you realize the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 is an aps-c lens, not full frame 😕 https://www.adorama.com/pcs5.html

If it is done live, I am guessing that it is two cameras positioned closely together. If it wasn't live, I would guess they were shooting in 6K or 8K and then in post just doing a zoom in to 4K or 1080p resolution. Maybe there is a way to punch in from the board, but there isn't a way to punch in while recording on the S-series cameras.

Actually, I find the rolloff on the S1 / S5 quite pleasing. I don't have an a7 III (only aps-c sony cameras) but I feel 10-bit V-LOG in the S1 / S5 cameras is much better than in the Sony aps-c cameras I own. No one can predict the longevity of the a7 IV, but I would say that sony usually splits their price point in to one of three branches: basic cameras (the a7 III), high MP cameras (a7R III and a7R IV, for example) and fast readout cameras (a1, a9). Then there is the a7 S series of cameras. So... I think if you want less rolling shutter, you are going to have to pay for one of the more expensive fast sensor cameras. Unless, there is some breakthrough to speed up the readout of the more affordable sensors.

Glad to hear the Sony's are working out for you. Hopefully you are staying safe and still having a good time.

I am not sure exactly what you mean by "relegated" here, but... 1) 50p /60p 4K is only available with the aps-c crop (no full frame 50p / 60p in 4K), and it is 10-bit, 4:2:0 Long GOP (same as with the S1) 2) You can still shoot 24p / 25p / 30p in aps-c (super35 mode) in 4K if you want (along with 50p and 60p).

Yes. And if one is willing to use the gyroscopic stabilization method, it is supposed to be great. But there seems to be a few compromises (using faster shutter speeds and you can't batch process clips unless you upgrade to the paid version of Sony Catalyst).

Well... hardly laughable in my humble opinion. Certainly a noble effort. I think it does move general understanding about this forward, and the fact that it is pretty much demonstrable is great, too. I remember seeing the Juan Melara tutorial "Re-creating the Linny LUT" and I was like, "I never want to shoot video ever again." I was basically lost within the first 10 seconds of that video (since removed from youtube).

Would love to see some of your work using the S1Alex Alexa lut. Also, are you grading in resolve? If so, what color management are you using?

Thanks for doing all the work, @kye Probably the thing that is most surprising to me was looking at the scopes between the P2K and the Alexa. When I look at the skin tones, the P2K looks a lot more magenta and the Alexa a lot more green. So I thought the SATURATION levels would be much different than they are on the scopes (i.e., P2K have more saturated magenta, Alexa having more saturated greens). But in the scopes, the main difference seems to be the P2K has magenta rotate more CCW and greens rotated more toward Cyan, while Alexa greens and magentas are more "true" and the yellow is really heavily saturated. Unless i am missing something (I often do)... Oh, and there is a luminance difference between the two captures, which leads into the other part of the equation, which is how bright or dark a profile captures a particular hue. If I understand correctly how the scopes work (and I probably don't), and how the human mind works (I definitely don't understand that) a color checker would show the same saturation levels even if the luminance levels varied somewhat, but the human eye might PERCEIVE more saturation in the darker level. I mention that because it is an old lightroom / photoshop trick that if you wanted to make a bright sky look more saturated, instead of going overboard saturating the blue channel, you would saturate some and then darken the blues to make it look like a deeper blue sky.

I don't own an a7 IV, but I do own an S5 and an S1, and at least the Panasonic 24-105 f/4 (the other lenses I own are adapted Canon EF and vintage Minolta MD lenses). But I have been eyeing the a7 IV. I might be mistaken, but I think that @Trek of Joyhas one??? (Maybe he owns the a7S III instead of the a7 IV). As an S5 / S1 owner, the things I envy about the a7 IV would be the lens selection and smaller size. And of course, the autofocus. If it had 4K 60fps in FULL FRAME I would be really tempted (although I already own several E Mount aps-c lenses that I could throw on the a7 IV when I want to shoot 4K 60fps in the crop sensor format). There are some things that I would DEFINITELY miss that the S5 has though, namely: waveforms great IBIS Ergonomics (even though the S5 is still a bit bigger / heavier than what I would prefer, and the S1 is DEFINITELY a beast). Luminance spot meter The other things I might POTENTIALLY miss would be like the ability to record in RAW externally, but I don't currently own any external recorders, so that might not be an issue for me personally. Anyway, hope this helps you with your decision.

I am using the Weebill S. I think that technically the gimbal is strong enough, although it is a pretty hefty payload with the S5 + Canon EF-16-35 f/4 L and the MC-21. It's also a bit difficult to dial in the stabilization. If I use the Auto-Tune feature of the gimbal (where it adjusts the motor strength automatically) then it tunes the motors TOO STRONG and the gimbal just vibrates on its own. (Just setting the gimbal down on a table with a tripod screwed in to the base and after about five seconds it just starts vibrating like crazy). Yeah, it's a bummer that you can't set a function button to turn the IBIS on and off. With lenses that have stabilization, you can use the switch on the side of the lens. On the S1, it has two levers, and I think one can assign one of those levers to turn on and off IBIS quickly.

Thanks. I have tried that but unfortunately for me I end up with a LOT of micro jitters whenever I turn off stabilization. It is "fixable" to a point with stabilization in resolve but as you know, when you shoot real estate video you are usually walking / sliding / panning so sometimes dialing in stabilization in post can be tricky.

Thank you for ithe input, @stephen Regarding the EF-S 10-18mm lens. Can you tell if you are able to use the LENS stabilization for three axis stabilization and the body's IBIS for the other two? Meaning, when you turn on stabilization, is the lens stabilization working, too? Or is it JUST the body's IBIS that is working? I ask because ultrawide angle lenses tend to have corner warping if using JUST the camera body's IBIS (when on a gimbal). But if the camera is using BOTH the stabilization from the lens and then two-axis stabilization from the body, then the warping is reduced. (I have seen a lot of vlogs of people using the 20-60mm lens - which doesn't have stabilization - and the corner warping is really annoying.)

It's funny because when i was watching the video this morning I was thinking, "what a bad grade!" Sure, it is kind of a bland shot of a bland Alberta sunset but Jinkies, Scooby.

Thanks so much for the photo. Zoinks!!! So it looks like using the EF-S 10-22 on an MC-21 does not automatically switch the S5 in to aps-c mode the way it does with the EF-S 10-18. I am surprised though that there is so much vignette still after you zoom in. I say that because the Tamron 10-24 (another crop sensor lens) has only slight vignette once zoomed in to around 16mm. (Because it is made by Tamron, the MC-21 doesn't automatically go in to crop mode).

Thanks for the feedback. I am surprised about that. You are using the MC-21 adapter, right? Or are you using the fotodiox or commlite adapter?

Is anyone using an ultrawide crop-sensor / aps-c lens on their S5 / S1 cameras for 4K 60p? I have been looking at the Canon EF-S 10-18 as well as the tamron 10-24 VC lens, and just kind of wondering how well they work. With ultra-wide lenses, I find it is important that the LENS stabilization works (and doesn't default to ONLY the camera's IBIS), since that will help eliminate corner warping when filming on a gimbal. Any experience greatly appreciated.

@kye Amen.

@kye Thanks for the post. Certainly makes us look in the mirror. For my real estate / architecture work, I like sharp(ish) lenses just because people are expecting to see detail. But for people, I think that most of the kit zoom lenses are fine for 4K. Convenient, inexpensive, relatively-lightweight (so they balance well on a gimbal and are less tiring to use). I would have a bit of a problem with the variable aperture if I zoomed more during shooting, but I don't, so I don't worry about it too much. One of the better kit zooms out there seems to be the Panasonic 20-60mm f/3.5-5.6, which has minimal focus breathing. (Some people would note that Panasonic has minimal focus.) Also, when youtubers say to get the "cinematic look" you need an ultra-shallow depth of field, I just want to punch them in the throat. These tend to be the same people who sell creative LUT packs that look like a dumpster fire.

@tupp Merci!!!

I am a little confused by this (Again, I come from a photography background, but I haven't seen anything to contradict this). In terms of shadows, I understand that softness "is a matter of degree between a point source and completely surrounding your subject with a smooth light source." But wouldn't there still be a difference in specular highlights? I know that (in still photography) when a silver-lined umbrella is used, the specular highlights are stronger (more pronounced / more contrasty) than when a white-lined reflective umbrella is used. (And they are even more contrasty when using a non-bounced light.) P.S. Wanted to say thank you again for your input in this conversation.

Yes! Thanks. Good to know. I certainly wasn't aware of that. Again, good to know. Thanks. That raises two questions though: 1) When would you choose the Fresnel over an open-faced focusable source? 2) Can you give us an example of a (more-or-less affordable) open-faced focusable light (or modifier)?

I think that when shooting through a scrim, you are correct. Moving the light far back enough to get an even spread is going to make the lights more or less equal, regardless if it is a fresnel or a cob with a dish. On the other hand, if you are actually shooting in a softbox, you are actually bouncing the light around so that the light can be closer to the diffusion material and still cover the entire area of the front diffusion. Plus if the COB light is in an enclosed softbox, you won't have the spill that you would have from bouncing it off of a scrim. All that spill is just wasted light. I don't know the exact mathematics but I am pretty certain that when inside a softbox, the light that is bounced off the front diffusion material (and bounced around the softbox), eventually makes its way out to the subject, but at some reduced amount. In terms of bouncing light off the wall or a ceiling, I guess that yes, you would have to back the fresnel or COB with dish further from the wall. This could be good or bad. If bouncing off a wall, you would probably want to use a COB with dish to get the light further away from the talent (and further from the mic) as you could move it closer to the wall than a fresnel. When bouncing off a HIGH ceiling, it might be easier to use a fresnel because you wouldn't have to raise the light as high to achieve the same light spread. This would be applicable in a place with high ceilings. But in a place with low ceilings, the fresnel might be at a disadvantage as you might not be able to get it low enough to get the amount of spread you want. Ideally, I think the best solution would be to get a COB light with an optional fresnel attachment. Also, a disclaimer: all of my practical experience with fresnel lenses / attachments is from shooting flash photography with strobes. The AD-200 and other strobes I use allow for either a bare bulb or fresnel head on the same light, so the only variable is the actual head.