KnightsFan

APS-C is usually 23.5mm x 15.6mm (Sony, Nikon, Fuji), or smaller (Canon). That's a 3:2 aspect ratio, so the area when shooting 16:9 or wider is smaller still. If anyone does "APS-C with MFT mount" it will likely be 23.5x15.6--Z Cam, for example. No one expects all MFT lenses to work on an APS-C sensor, it's the adaptability that makes it appealing, and mirrorless APS-C lenses like the the Fuji MK cine zooms.

I have only surface level knowledge, but any time your lens is longer than your FFD, you'll need extra lens elements to provide a "reverse telephoto." For example, an 18mm lens on an EF mount 44mm from the sensor. The extra elements introduce aberrations, which require more elements to correct, and so on. Add to that the complexity of making a zoom lens in the first place, and you quickly rack up size and cost. That's one reason there are smaller wide angle lenses made exclusively for mirrorless mounts, such as the SLR Magic MicroPrimes. On the telephoto end, it's simply the sheer size of the lens elements required. As focal length increases, the physical size of the aperture also increases to achieve the same f-stop.

Because no one cares about APSC except for Fuji.

In all seriousness, definitely the latter. I remember the first time I shot with a Sony, which was right around the time I first shot with a Blackmagic. Those kinds of experiences stick with you.

Maybe it's because you post topics titled "Sony A7R IV - can confirm colour is still SH**!" ? Regarding lack of Panasonic FF and Z Cam, I bet a lot of us are just constantly a few years behind on new gear. The S1 has looked perfect to me since day 1, but I'm waiting for a really good deal and/or a big project to use it on.

I can't believe the poor NX1 is relegated to the "Something weird" category Actually on second thought that's pretty accurate. Carry on.

I meant an example showing how the P4K is better than the GH5s in the same conditions. As long as you white balance in linear gamma, I've found no benefit to shooting raw in terms of ability to white balance in post. I have edited quite a bit of material shot in 400 mbps on a GH5s and never really ran into any compression issues even on extreme grades, so I'm curious to see any examples where the P4K does better. Same with exposure. You can correct exposure with any camera with the same results as raw if there aren't compression artifacts, and you can do it in linear. Since they share the same sensor, I would be very surprised if noise levels were different, and in my experience I haven't run into compression issues with GH5s footage.

Do you have examples showing the difference?

That's pretty much what I was saying terminology-wise: f stop is not just a theoretical number from a spec sheet, it's a value you can measure on a physical copy of a lens. I didn't mean to imply you were incorrect at all, just thought what you said could be misunderstood to mean that f-stop is some sort of voodoo number a manufacturer pulls out of a hat.

Actually what the rumor says is that the person who claimed anamorphic, articulated screen and has been shown to be wrong on the date so we should not automatically trust everything else in the list.

Also all lenses have some light loss, you won't find any f1.4 lenses that are also t1.4. (Unless its a pinhole lens but that won't be a happy solution for video lol.) So that doesn't mean they will have worse light transmission than any other given f1.4 lens, make sure to compare t stop to t stop when deciding on a lens. I have to quibble about semantics. f stop isnt theoretical, its focal length over the diameter of the aperture, a physical property of a lens you can measure. f stop simply is not a measure of light intensity, so its only theoretical if you use it as such. Of course you are right in practical terms, its just wording.

Happy new year! Just waned to say how much I appreciate your website and your work. I recommend it every time someone asks me where to get music.

I didn't watch Gerald's entire video, just the part linked to, but what I didn't see was a test of color across the exposure range. Most cameras have excellent color at middle grey exposure. In my experience, "bad color" is almost entirely due to color shifts across the exposure range. The same object won't be same exact same hue depending on how you expose it. What I do with new cameras is shoot a color chart at every exposure (using shutter speed or iris to adjust, NOT gain), and then create a LUT that makes the color chart maintain hue across different exposures, without touching any of the adjustments for the middle grey exposure. I've found such a LUT to make 95% of shots immediately look better. The other part of bad color is white balance. Auto WB aside, even balancing from a grey card won't be identical between cameras. The only way to do it properly is to transform the footage to linear gamma, perform white balance corrections, and then transform it into a your gamma of choice for other corrections/grading. If your software isn't color managed, this is all but impossible. Older Sony cameras had both issues, and with the amount of correction needed to simply even out hues across the exposure range, and correct for the atrocious WB, the 8 bit footage fell apart. It gets pasty and loses vibrance, especially in the shadows. It loses its "thickness," to use a popular term. And the compressions starts to show blocky hue variance that absolutely ruins skin tones--I imagine this last part can be mitigated with an external recorder to some degree, but no amount of pseudo-10 bit ProRes can account for WB issues and hue shifts on any camera.

I (and many others) think Sony's color has improved considerably. I've done color work on a couple films shot with the A7 and A7s2, and those were the worst colors I've dealt with, especially SLog2. From what I've seen on the web, the A73 is a significant improvement. I don't think there's anything wrong with modern Sony color anymore.

Hmm, as far as I can tell there is no way for me to make it available in Australia, which is very unfortunate. It seems a little odd that that isn't an option.

Thanks! What location is that? It should be available in the US and UK, hopefully nothing went wrong...

Well if anyone wants to watch some content, the web series I worked on "#millcore" is out on Amazon Prime today. https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B0837HYJML/ref=share_ios_season There's also a topic in the Shooting & Footage section if you want to give me your savage internet opinions over there!

Happy New Years! After some minor setbacks and delays, the first season of #millcore is available on Amazon Prime. We appreciate any feedback you might have! https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B0837HYJML/ref=share_ios_season

The main thing with creating a look is to do it with set design, props, and lights, rather than in post. Taking a random, colorful scene and pushing the colors to be teal and orange will look fake, whereas a thoughtful image composed of a nice balance of teal and orange props with lighting to match will look natural but stylized. Just to pull some random examples from Google images: This looks fake: https://images.app.goo.gl/ss12w9oiff1gkoh49 These all look fake: https://images.app.goo.gl/UhkK4WPkANy8ujVv9 This looks natural using natural light: https://images.app.goo.gl/9b5pGmxKUfvB7nMaA This also looks natural using Hollywood lights: https://images.app.goo.gl/VjMp9oaK4JvLUXDN8 The other aspect worth mentioning is that for any complementary color scheme, you usually do not want equal shares of the two colors. Usually with teal and orange that means more teal than orange because then the small amount of orange (which is often human skin) pops out.

I'm trying to watch and comment on as many topics there as I can in the future. Being a tech/gear forum just means that we might consider evaluating each other's content with a special eye for tech and gear instead of just the story and art side.

IBIS can only do so much. IBIS might replace gimbals for low end cinema where you typically have a controlled environment, but once you're talking about running and jumping (think Devin Super Tramp type videos, parkour videos), the amount of shaking is too much for what IBIS could even theoretically accomplish. I could see specialty cameras that have built in gimbals that rotate a sensor/lens module with a compact form factor, but there's no way IBIS and OIS can compensate for the kind of rotation you get by sprinting with a handheld camera. You need to physically move the lens and sensor for that. It's not just the high end cinema that will keep gimbals, it's also the entire action sports crowd, which are typically lower budget even than enthusiast filmmakers.

This is great! I love the surreal imagery. Clearly a lot of work went into this, and also clearly it's the kind of thing that can be done with minimal gear and crew, just a creative vision and some good artistic skill. I love the backgrounds (the clock, the gears, the woods) and color palettes. Were they drawn or photo sourced? If I had one critique, it is that the singer's movements don't fit. He's often shot at an angle, and moves so realistically he seems a bit more like a "person with an effect." The woman is almost always shot straight on and has more controlled, surreal motions that really sell the "moving painting" effect better, imho. Did you shoot normal video and then do the low fps effect in post? It strikes me that for the low frame rate effect, you might have been able to do a timelapse of photos and squeeze more resolution or even raw out of the Z6--not that it would matter much for the end product.

I don't know about gear of the decade, but two pieces of gear I've really appreciated are my Sony MR-7506 headphones, and my Nikon 28mm f2.8 K. The headphones are quite possibly my oldest bit of kit that I still own, and they've been with me on every shoot and every editing session without fail. A few years ago I cut the godawful coiled cable and installed a 3.5mm jack. Paired with a cheap bluetooth adapter for music, or a normal cable for anything serious, they're better than ever. The Nikon 28mm is an amazingly imperfect lens. Just the right amount of distortion and CA paired with beautiful, vibrant colors. Fully manual with a nice big focus throw, which is complemented with a seamless focus ring I printed. There's an EF adapter permanently on the back which has allowed me to use it on everything from a C100 to an Ursa, and of course my NX1 (and +1 for the NX1, mentioned a few times already in this topic!).

I love it! I had to use google translate on the lyrics. The tune is very catchy, and I love the visual gag of being a a wheel in the system along with those gymnastic wheels. It's very engaging, both as a song and a video. The video clearly does a lot with very little, just a couple great performers, a gymnasium, and an eccentric collection of props. This is those projects where Sony's legendary zombie skin tones really worked for the story, they really melted into the colors of the floor. What difference did you see between the Atomos material and the native videos?

I mentioned the video in my post. It's too long for me to watch without understanding the language, I was more answering the general question of whether cameras were ADC limited.