thebrothersthre3

lol I hate these auto focus tests because you can make the Fuji fast or slow to focus. I imagine its the exact same with every other camera. The Canon was missing though. The colors all look different, auto WB. That said last time he set them all at 4000k and they looked different too so lol

He used auto white balance. Auto focus test is a bit silly as you can change how fast or slow they focus. The Canon and Sony look similar color wise. But this is a pretty straight forward safe lighting situation (single continuous light). The Fuji does look softer then the others. I have noticed Fuji skin usually looks softer.

Debating on whether to fix my Phantom 4 pro (broken gimbal) or get a Mavic Pro 2. The color does look nicer on the Mavic pro. It is way softer though.

Mainly all I'll do to adjust my video image is use the color curves tool. Crush/raise highlights/shadows and adjust the red/blue/green channels. I'll also add saturation to the entire image sometimes. Thats all I really know how to do in Vegas Pro. Lightroom seems to have more options but I don't usually use them, I don't really do photography outside of just for fun. This is why I want a good image out of camera lol.

Yeah the A6300 1080p was truly terrible. For some reason the moire was just off the charts.

Ebay has a great return policy so I just make sure it works well. I am a bit crazy though. I bought a camera that was labeled as broken. I asked the seller what was wrong with it. He said he wasn't sure but it seems to work fine, turns on and all. I bought it and its been working good for two years now lol.

Well it makes me more confident in my video making abilities at least.

Interesting. The 3D tech is sweet. Could be interesting if they put in a heavy duty sensor.

Damn that is unfortunate. I'll have to see how mine holds up. Two weddings in so far with no issues. I usually get things used so they are already broken in and I know they aren't lemons ?

lmao

Gotta agree with Andrew here. Its especially true if we are talking 8 bit H264 rather then 14 bit RAW.

If trying to do a slider imitation with a gimbal you could always shoot in 60p and slow the footage down. You can get some pretty slow movements with practice. Having a lens with OIS helps and having a two handled attachment for your gimbal also helps. I could see it getting pretty tedious if you have to do a ton of slider shots though, might be easier to buy one at that point.

I don't really think this test or video proves anything in regards to color science. Get a group of colorists together and show them pictures of each of these cameras in tricky lighting scenarios and see which one ends up on top. In the end I think it doesn't matter much. The only people paying attention to color science are the types that frequent a website like this.

But you illustrate a good point. Lots and lots of shooters aren't good colorists, for various reasons. That's why good color science can be very helpful for some people.

Depends on your needs. A gimbal can get good slider imitation shots. However for a timelapse you need some type of slider. Can't replicate that with a gimbal.

I'd not be happy with that blown out window on that last shot if I paid 100,000

I won't count on Canon utilizing the BM Raw. I can sort of see Panasonic as they are saying RAW will be a feature on the S1.

Doesn't the Pocket 4k just display darker at the same ISO? The fuji looked darker as well.

I would say it is better at DOF, because of lens availability. I mean when most people speak they are talking about real world practicality. The other thing is wider lens have more distortion. A 12mm 0.7 lens will not look the same as a 24mm 1.4, in terms of DOF, otherwise no.

I used sandisk 95MB/s V30 class 10 for 400mbps on the XT3, maybe its the H265 compression vs H264 on the GH5

Does anyone know if you can punch in while recording? The XT3 has this feature and I am finding it essential to have. Does the battery last any longer when recording only in 1080p?

Z7 looks bright but doesn't hold much detail.

Thank you for the info, that makes complete sense now. Seems Sony is one of the more accurate ones. I wonder if they are consistent across all cameras though.

One good thing about a more detailed image is for high ISO shooting. When you raise ISO the image gets softer generally(with NR). The softer the image is to begin with the softer it will look when you get to higher ISO's. Something like the A73 may look a bit too sharp to begin with, but when you get to ISO 12,800 retains a really nice looking image while most other cameras look unnaturally soft. Wouldn't a blur in post or filter on the lens attain that soft image on cameras like the GH5 or Sony