kye

Isn't the 10-25 an MFT lens?

I'm gradually refining where I choose to setup. I've found that there's a fantastic angle about half-way between the coaches tent and the 50m line, which is here: However, it's so fantastic that every time anyone does anything of note there will be a player, umpire, water-person, etc standing exactly in the way, just for the critical moment. The number of shots I have where something cool is about to happen, someone runs across your shot, and as they exit your field of view you only see the aftermath of what happened... let's just say it's beyond amazing in its regularity!! I've learned not to position myself there, but normally try to be closer to the middle so the opposite end is closer and I've got greater coverage. It's especially fun to note the comment on the above image that the length of the ground isn't fixed, it's variable. Also fun to note is that unless the ground is used for games where there is a lot at stake, many of them don't even meet those (very loose) standards, so basically the distances are variable everywhere you go! Unsurprisingly, a country where "she'll be right mate" is a common saying as soon as you leave a cities inner suburbs isn't a country with precision and quality in its DNA. I don't know much about soccer, but apparently the grounds are smaller than ours (although our main grounds are on the small end of that scale, so probably comparable considering ours don't have corners): The 150-600mm did look like it would be great, but the Tokina 150-500 looks a lot cheaper and might be within reach of my wallet. I was looking at FD 100-300 lenses but they're not that much longer than my 70-210, but 500 sure is longer! Plus it has a tripod mount on the lens itself, which is way cool! ??? I have been studying framing of football action, in video as well as in photographs, and worked out I need to get closer. Most of the action happens a long way away and shots don't need much head or foot room in frame, and most shots are waist-up or closer, so the 500mm or 600mm does seem like the way to go. That video of paintball looks like fun, although it looks like you would be on the field with the players? There's a shot mid-way through where a paintball hits the camera lens, or at least a screen of some kind very closely in front of the camera. I would imagine that a cameraperson might make themselves unpopular by pointing at players hiding and revealing their locations, so learning the etiquette of the situation might be a thing. That video didn't seem to have 120p slow-motion, so I think your setup might generate a punchier end result, with the fast bits looking faster and the slow bits really revelling in those crazy split-second moments. There's the potential for slow-motion gold almost everywhere you look in that situation, everything from people firing, the balls travelling, people getting hit and the splatter, as well as the acrobatic elements and, of course, the elation of victory and the pain of getting hit somewhere it hurts! Edit: actually, just remembered that teleconverters are a thing, and it turns out they're cheaper than buying a new lens, in fact, so much cheaper I don't need funding approval from the CFO! ???

Am I right in assuming you mean that you shoot 1080p120 by default and only 4K24 for specific shots? I've just done some tests of different modes and now have an understanding of the tradeoffs involved. In my case I'm struggling to reach the action with a long enough lens, so I don't want to shoot 1080 because I can't crop into it in post, which leaves me shooting 4k50. Maybe I should switch to 1080p100 when the action is closer and I won't need to crop in post. EdIt: Or I simply live with the fact that I can't do 20% speed slow-motion but are limited to 50% speed slow-motion. It's not as epic, but... Damn the size of our playing fields!

Very interesting question. Maybe the GH6 will be similar in terms of specs, but just in the MFT format and GH5-ish body, maybe the GH6 will be lesser than this and it will push the serious GH5/s users to FF, maybe it delays the GH6 announcement, maybe it kills the GH6 altogether. At the point when people are talking about how it's hard to know how to talk about it, because is it a GH5 with better specs and FF for MORE money, is it a similarly-priced but differently specced camera to competitors, is it a feature-reduced version of a FF cine camera for MUCH LESS money... if this is how people are talking about it then I think we can't even guess what it means for the GH6 and MFT in general. I get the same experience with my GH5 - DR is fine, image is lovely to work with, low light could be better. I shoot MF so AF doesn't bother me, but it does some others. Still, if the S2H comes out in a couple of years time with 14, 15, or 16 stops of DR, or 4K50 10-bit HLG, or 4K100 I would certainly be tempted!

Framing in post is definitely a thing, but I could never learn to shoot wider than what I needed - my framing while shooting habits were too strong! The extra resolution definitely wouldn't go astray for you either.

Does it give the "tourist with huge camera" look?

My understanding is the ETC mode reads 1:1 from the middle of the sensor, whereas the non-ETC modes downscale from the whole sensor (6K? something like that, anyway). Noise is always reduced when you downscale an image, so this will kind of act as a kind of in-camera NR. The only way to improve the ISO noise and keep the same framing is to change lenses - either to keep the same focal length but get a faster lens (narrowing the DoF of course) to bring more light into the camera, or to go for a longer focal length and not use the ETC mode. I realise neither of these is terribly convenient, unfortunately.

I agree that Osmo Action will be a hit amongst YT creators quite widely, I'd love for it to be what I was looking for! The people who do this stuff regularly are basically shooting and editing machines. I see the good YT creators eventually talking about burn-out, creative stagnation and ruts, and taking time off followed by "where I've been" videos upon return. I think the pace is unforgiving well beyond what I can imagine. I remember Casey Neistat saying that he spent 4-9 hours editing each daily vlog, and he did that uninterrupted for something like 500 days. It's almost a good thing that social media is addictive or we'd all think of them as masochists! One lesson we can take from this whole thing though is that practice really helps. I know my project isn't big by other peoples standards. It was just bigger than I could deal with using my existing knowledge and approach, thus the request for advice. It's always good to stretch yourself and keep learning I've heard of docs commonly being 100:1 and blockbuster movies sometimes go well beyond that IIRC, I remember a ratio above 400:1 which is just madness! Plus with a doc you don't know where the story is and so until you work out what the story (or stories) are you can't even work out where the 'good bits' are. At least in my situation, as well as a scripted piece, you can review the footage and have a general idea about what you can cull on face value. Docos are only a couple of stops short of being given a newspaper and having to write poetry by cutting it up into individual words and rearranging them!

Been to India? I know the Og Pocket is a great camera and all, but after being enamoured for months and months with the soft painterly light in the video I posted I eventually went there and discovered that about 70% of the look of that film is visible with the naked eye and is caused by the horrendous air pollution. I couldn't believe my eyes when I first get there and saw it myself - it was like stepping into that film. You can look directly at the sun without even getting trails in your vision, I'm talking the actual sun itself and not just the bright area around it, and not even limited to sunset, you can do that at 5pm. With diffusion like that even an iPhone happy-snap looks like a high DR cinematic beast!

Just doing some casual browsing for zoom lenses that go to 400mm and noticing that they're all slow (5.6 or more), and wondered what that really means in terms of DoF. At 100m, here's how the DoF comes out (from DoFmaster) : My 135/2.8 has 64.5m DoF My 200/4 has 39.3m DoF My 70-210/3.8 at 70mm has "infinite" DoF My 70-210/3.8 at 210mm has 33.4m DoF A hypothetical 100-400/4.5-6.3 at 400mm has ~15m DoF A hypothetical 100-400/4.5-6.7 at 400mm has ~16m DoF A hypothetical (and expensive!) 100-400/4.5-5.6 at 400mm has ~13.4m DoF A hypothetical 100-400 would only have to be f13 at 400mm to match the 33m DoF of my 70-210/f3.8 lens Interesting example of how aperture behaves at long zoom lengths. It also kind of answers the question about those 18-400/3.5-6.3mm lenses in terms of them being pretty shallow DoF at 400mm, but zoomed out a bit to 200mm it's likely to still be close to f6 and that's not nearly so shallow a DoF at around 60m.

Yeah, the low light from the P4K would be lovely on the GH5 Completely agree that it's about tradeoffs in getting the shot. I'm up for the comparison, but grading it is much easier than shooting it (and I don't own the cameras, so...), which is where it's currently at. In good time Indeed it does! It's good to see people sensibly trading things off against each other instead of just going for the latest thing. And speaking more generally about older tech still being good, tradeoffs in size, accessibility, and usability, I thought I'd re-share this 720p video.. ???

If it's any help, Resolve automatically treats image sequences as clips, so converting them to a video clip can be as easy as dragging in the image sequence (which looks like a clip) to the timeline, then hitting the export button and choose a preset and it will export. IIRC you can't export more than UHD with the free version, but it's an option for converting if you don't have anything better at your disposal. Plus if you want to colour grade then it's the best colour engine in the business. One caveat is that I don't know what RAW image formats it understands, so that might be a stumbling block potentially. Good think I volunteered you then!! I'll keep you in mind for everything else I see wrong with the world ???

Yeah, that lens is a pretty good match for that situation. The lack of fast / cheap / stabilised lenses is what pushed me from the P4K to the GH5, and while that lens isn't fast, it's probably the best compromise I've seen for that purpose.

Yeah, odd. You'd think that it would be a pretty standard kind of app - it's not a complicated problem "I want high quality sunset timelapses" or a difficult challenge technically (a quick burst of multiple exposures with heavy exposure bracketing every <interval> and a combine algorithm). I'm sure @BTM_Pix could do with another project?

I agree that a great number of travel videos aren't well made at all. I typically end up with videos in the 3-6 minute range, but these are for friends/family only. Making a video that is nice to watch for strangers is a completely different challenge and I'm not sure I'd be much good at it TBH. I have thought that I could take some of the more interesting trips I've had and make a 'public' version, but I haven't gotten that far yet. In terms of longer travel videos, I really like Kraig Adams on YT who seems to have pioneered the Super-Vlog genre of long form travel videos. His Japan one is particularly good, and he has also made some BTS videos too which are quite informative.

Which is ALWAYS welcome in my book!

Seems unlikely it's related to the new cine camera from them, but price reductions normally accompany new cameras, right?

iPhone or Android? I don't know if it does everything on your list, but ProCam on iPhone is the app with the most features that I know of.

Impressive zoom range. The sixth image appears to have some separation between colours in the top right of frame (the edges of the tree leaves)? It's got that red/blue 3D colour separation look. Is that the 3CCD alignment issue, or just a bit of CA exacerbated by JPG compression perhaps? I can't see any separation on any of the other images though, which seems odd.

@BTM_Pix thanks for those videos, I haven't seen them. I am a subscriber to This Guy Edits and it's great stuff, possibly the only video editing YT channel. @mkabi I like the Good / Bad / Ugly analogy, it works well. @User 17000 clips would be a nightmare for most I'd say. I'd also imagine that lots of those clips would be interviews where it's not one moment, more like an entire dump trucks worth of dirt in a pile and you have to dig through and really hope there are some gold nuggets in there somewhere. I'll have to go through my YT watch history and browser history and find some of the good editing stuff I've watched over the last few years. There's quite a bit, unfortunately it's not nearly enough, especially compared to how many videos are telling you to buy an ND filter and use a 180 shutter. As my videos are basically just random shots of where we were, what we did, and that sort of thing, for me it's not about re-arranging the footage hugely, as the plot is mostly written, the story elements (inciting incidents, challenges, etc) are all from what happened, so my job is basically filtering all that down into a highlight reel of sorts. My films don't really have much dialogue either, so they're mostly visual storytelling with music and ambient sounds. To that end, my first pass is an assembly where I pull every potentially usable bit onto a timeline to cull the Ugly as Mkabi says. Then second pass is to go through that and on a shot by shot basis I sort them into several categories using tracks. Track 1 is the default track, if a clip is of no interest it stays here Track 2 is nice B-roll that might be useful for establishing shots or whatever Track 3 is spectacular B-roll, potentially being visually stunning or if I know it's a critical shot for something we did Track 4 is any usable shot of the people I was with (because people are more important than random b-roll, however pretty it is) Track 5 is any great shots of people I was with (beautiful, funny, memorable, etc) This stays as the first timeline. Then I duplicate that timeline and delete all the shots from tracks 1 and 2. Then I cut out entire sections I don't care about. Then I go through and start making the little micro-stories by only putting back enough shots from Track 2 (or track 1) to make the great shots make sense. At this point I can get a sense of how many people shots I have and start removing the bad ones if I have too many of a person. For me, coverage of the people is more important than the quality of the shot, so if I have a usable but not-great shot of a person then I'll probably leave it in rather than them not really appearing much (or at all) in the video. Then comes music, and I start editing the timing of clips because now I can get a sense of pace and rhythm from the music. Then it's titles and grading etc. I've just started using Markers in Resolve and it's quite good actually. I have the list of markers open in the side panel, and it kind of treats them like chapter headings, so if you have marker 1 on clip 10 and marker 2 on clip 20, then if the play head is anywhere between the two markers it keeps marker 1 highlighted, so you kind of always know where you are. The problem I've had with this edit is clip order. This trip was shot with the XC10 and my iPhone. Ideally I'd sort the footage by timecode, but the iPhone doesn't have it, so you get those in the wrong order (all at the start IIRC) so I sort by Date Created, which mostly works. The issue is that as I'm editing on the train from my laptop, I've generated proxy media and the dates on the proxy media isn't quite right because (for whatever reason) Resolve didn't process the clips quite in sequential order so the date created for the proxy files is a bit messed up, and you get different events split into 2 or 3 chunks. By creating Markers every time there's an event change in the timeline I can detect separate chunks of clips and easily highlight all the clips from that chunk and move them next to the other chuck of clips from the same event, thus giving me that next level up view and sorting the footage properly. Then once all the footage from an event is together I can just zoom in and work out what shots to keep and what stories to tell, or even to mention that event at all. So far so good.

Shame, I could have done with 4k120 in 12-bit!

It's interesting but this is one of the things that you don't really get people on YT talking about, it's kind of a blind spot. I guess that people who make YT videos, therefore have short and frequent production cycles, aren't experts in managing long infrequent production cycles Kind of like most things in high-end professions, the people who know how to do it are either off doing it, or are selling the content and not giving it away for free! ???

Yeah, I'm right there with you!

Cool. I am more and more tempted. Damn my curiosity! Interesting about being fine wide open. It's not what is said elsewhere... eg https://***URL removed***/forums/post/60459694 The guy sounded knowledgable too. Or this talk of an optically corrected adapter: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?360652-2-3%94-B4-lens-for-GH5&p=1986756211&viewfull=1#post1986756211. Gotta love the internet! It seems like the smart move is to at least get the 2x built-in so you're not paying extra. Depending on the design it might be that they cover the ETC mode, or even full m43 sensor when zoomed in a bit? Personally I could live without the widest end so that part wouldn't bother me. @BTM_Pix has played in this space.. What did you do on your GX80 / B4 lens setup? Was it sharp? Did it cover the whole sensor?

I am just starting to edit the largest project I've taken on, and I can quickly see myself getting a bit lost in the footage if I'm not careful. It's from a 5 week trip I took through Italy and there are ~5400 source clips totalling almost 6 hours (average 4s per shot). I have done a leisurely (~10 hour) first pass and pulled in any sections that I think might be useful in the edit, and I'm down to 2300 shots and just over an hour. My strategy with this first pass was to cull the dud stuff and never go back to the source footage again, only ever looking at this timeline for the rest of the edit. I typically do each pass on the footage and then duplicate the timeline to work on the next pass, so I can easily refer back if there are shots I culled previously but want to find again, etc. I like creating little sequences that tell micro-stories with 3-5 shots and linking them together to create the broader story arcs, so I find I often choose hero shots then need the other random shots to make the story work, so I refer back quite a bit for the supporting footage. My next step is to look at what sequences and locations I have so I can get a high-level view on the project, ahead of deciding the overall structure, which locations and sequences I will keep, etc. I'm doing this with markers at the moment, but will probably make a list in a text editor outside the NLE. I don't have a target format or final duration so for me it's just about shaping it the way I want it, then paring it down so it's constantly interesting, and it will be however long it ends up. My challenge will be that my footage isn't quite in the order I want it to be in, and I'll need to go through a process of rearranging it before I get into it on a shot-by-shot basis, and I fear that I'll make a mess of it and confuse and frustrate myself in this phase. My understanding is that people who edit docos do this rearranging all the time, essentially making the story in the edit. What's the best way to manage this volume of footage during this process? Is it just an admin process, do people sort footage using Compound Clips, separate Timelines, Bins, colour coding the clips, something else? I'm using Resolve, but I expect that the tech doesn't really matter, it's more of an admin challenge of sorts. Who is editing on this scale? What do you do? What advice do you have for me?