tomsemiterrific Posted February 10, 2017 Share Posted February 10, 2017 1 hour ago, Bizz said: Nice! In some shots you used E-Stabilization right? I had all stabilization methods on. It's really amazing to have the in-camera stabilization for the FD lenses with a speed booster. webrunner5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizz Posted February 10, 2017 Share Posted February 10, 2017 3 hours ago, tomsemiterrific said: I had all stabilization methods on. It's really amazing to have the in-camera stabilization for the FD lenses with a speed booster. Yep, but sometimes you get that wobbling effect like it was stabilized with warp stabilizer (when E-Stabilization is activated). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomsemiterrific Posted February 10, 2017 Share Posted February 10, 2017 2 hours ago, Bizz said: Yep, but sometimes you get that wobbling effect like it was stabilized with warp stabilizer (when E-Stabilization is activated). Don't know about warp stabilizer....but have you updated your firmware past 1.0? Stabilization was crap until I updated. I don't think you can get 1.1 any more, but just a few days ago they introduced 1.2, which included 1.1--so no biggie. Anyway I updated and it made a enormous difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webrunner5 Posted February 11, 2017 Share Posted February 11, 2017 21 hours ago, tomsemiterrific said: Put his short video together. All hand held using third party lenses, metabones speed booster, and FD speed booster, shot in low light situations near sunset, holding ISO to 200 in every clip. Great video, damnit I wish the GH5 was a Camcorder Factor, I would pay 3k for that! Get off the dumbass mirrorless form factor for your video cameras Panasonic that is affordable! Not everyone can afford a Varicam! Kisaha 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted February 11, 2017 Share Posted February 11, 2017 19 minutes ago, webrunner5 said: Great video, damnit I wish the GH5 was a Camcorder Factor, I would pay 3k for that! Get off the dumbass mirrorless form factor for your video cameras Panasonic that is affordable! Not everyone can afford a Varicam! You're interested in the cine cam/camcorder form factor? Have you seen this video? It was shot by Martin Walgreens with a high end Panny camcorder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimor Posted February 11, 2017 Share Posted February 11, 2017 On 8/2/2017 at 9:42 PM, markr041 said: Firmware update! V1.2 reduces camera noise while shooting video, dual IS2 stability improvements. Just updated and all internal noises are gone!!! kidzrevil 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 The $700.00 USD G85 (hat's what I paid for body only in Malaysia anyhow) slaughters the $2,000.00 made in Vietnam EM1 Mark II in low light, moire, aliasing and detail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonysss Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 My current setup for the perfect dynamic range , profile natural +1, -5 , -5 , -2(-3) light shadows 0/0 !!! - Any other setting is causing the poor skin tone ! and what is important is i.Dynamic, does nothing to skin tone, I set i.Dynamic standard or high. This is the best setting for me, at the G80, GH4 and LX100 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted February 19, 2017 Share Posted February 19, 2017 Good to know Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 11 hours ago, tonysss said: My current setup for the perfect dynamic range , profile natural +1, -5 , -5 , -2(-3) light shadows 0/0 !!! - Any other setting is causing the poor skin tone ! and what is important is i.Dynamic, does nothing to skin tone, I set i.Dynamic standard or high. This is the best setting for me, at the G80, GH4 and LX100 I guess this is what is considered the ULTIMATE look for wedding photography, but I find the skin tones in your video flat, washed out and rather cartoonish!!! (exclamation points and caps added for emphasis, since nobody would understand what I'm saying without them). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonysss Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 yes, this is exactly the wrong settings, high -3 (without iDynamic) with the adjusted contrast -5 !! and very inconvenient LED lighting the room with a narrow light spectrum radiation then everyone look as waxy :-) -------- This printscreen 1080p is setting: natural +1,-5,-5,-2 , iDynamic standard ,WB auto ISO 1600 skin tone is perfect jonpais 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 5 hours ago, tonysss said: yes, this is exactly the wrong settings, high -3 (without iDynamic) with the adjusted contrast -5 !! and very inconvenient LED lighting the room with a narrow light spectrum radiation then everyone look as waxy :-) -------- This printscreen 1080p is setting: natural +1,-5,-5,-2 , iDynamic standard ,WB auto ISO 1600 skin tone is perfect why do you need high dynamic range settings in a low dynamic range setting like this ? All you are doing is destroying the skin tones with all these adjustments Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonysss Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 My knowledge is , any setting Highlight to negative , destroying the skin tones !! ,and + shadows, increasing the amount of noise. iDynamic set to high, doing nothing negative skin tone. My previous Sony cameras behaved completely differently. Panasonic needs slight underexposure, overexpose also destroys skin tone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Kotlos Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 2 hours ago, kidzrevil said: why do you need high dynamic range settings in a low dynamic range setting like this ? All you are doing is destroying the skin tones with all these adjustments Stage lighting often creates very high contrasts requiring higher dynamic range settings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 1 minute ago, Don Kotlos said: Stage lighting often creates very high contrasts requiring higher dynamic range settings. all you have to do is underexpose with panasonic cameras. All picture profiles have 10 stops of dr except cinellike d which has around 11. All negative contrast settings do is destroy midtone contrast more than it does recover highlights in high contrast situations like stage lighting. I shoot events at default settings except -5 contrast and sharpness Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Kotlos Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 1 minute ago, kidzrevil said: all you have to do is underexpose with panasonic cameras. All picture profiles have 10 stops of dr except cinellike d which has around 11. All negative contrast settings do is destroy midtone contrast more than it does recover highlights in high contrast situations like stage lighting. I shoot events at default settings except -5 contrast and sharpness I don't know what that contrast setting does to the image, but underexposing a very high contrast scene in order to protect the highlights can irreversibly push everything into the noisy shadows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted February 20, 2017 Share Posted February 20, 2017 4 hours ago, Don Kotlos said: I don't know what that contrast setting does to the image, but underexposing a very high contrast scene in order to protect the highlights can irreversibly push everything into the noisy shadows. Definitely try experimenting with it for yourself with a Panasonic camera. The IQ & noise from only 2/3 of a stop underexposure is better than completely destroying the midtone information with negative contrast. Try it, you'll be amazed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 6 hours ago, kidzrevil said: all you have to do is underexpose with panasonic cameras. All picture profiles have 10 stops of dr except cinellike d which has around 11. All negative contrast settings do is destroy midtone contrast more than it does recover highlights in high contrast situations like stage lighting. I shoot events at default settings except -5 contrast and sharpness Am I reading this correctly - you shoot at -5 Contrast? ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 19 minutes ago, jonpais said: Am I reading this correctly - you shoot at -5 Contrast? ? LOL I mispoke ! meant to say I shoot at default settings with -5 sharpness and -5 NR. Contrast is left at default settings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 Just now, kidzrevil said: LOL I mispoke ! meant to say I shoot at default settings with -5 sharpness and -5 NR. Contrast is left at default settings Thought so! whew! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.