Wishes for 10 years on from the birth of mirrorless

[jonpais]

40 minutes ago, Simon Young said:

If the the GH5S would have had in body image stabilisation it would have been the perfect m4/3 camera with regards to video and I would without hesitation have sold my a7riii for it. The color science and malleability of the files seem truly exceptional. There is just something about the magenta and the greens in the Sony skin tones that even the stellar af or the full frame look can’t compensate for. 

The GH5 and GH5s are still great cameras. When the GH5s was announced however, there was heated debate about the lack of IBIS (some were even derided for questioning Panasonic’s decision), the timing of the release and the pricing as well. In fact, the only overheating Panasonic suffers from are online debates about sensor size, AF and low light performance.

[webrunner5]

4 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

1. The lenses are the limitation of MFT
2. That there are no fundamental limitations of MFT
3. That the sensor is a fundamental limitation of MFT
4. That the lenses are the limitation of MFT.

I disagree with 1, 2 and 4. In the case of 4, primarily because 3 trumps everything and also because I don't even think Panasonic and Olympus in their wildest dreams ever thought it had a shot of taking over the entire industry.  

I'm more than happy to agree to disagree and leave it there though mate  

Ahh you know how them Kangaroo Ropers are over there. They think it's night time when it is daytime here. They think it is winter when it's summer here. They drive on the wring side of the road. They are ass backwards. They have been kicked too many times as a kid. ?

 

 

[BTM_Pix]

6 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Ahh you know how them Kangaroo Ropers are over there. They think it's night time when it is daytime here. They think it is winter when it's summer here. They drive on the wring side of the road. They are ass backwards. They have been kicked too many times as a kid. ?

 

Steady on, I think you'll find that its you lot that drive on the wrong side of the road.

[kye]

Wow, lots of discussion!

@IronFilm Yes, I realise that low light is more than sensor size..  Your comment about a larger sensor requiring more light seems confusing, and I suspect that it's one of those situations that doesn't make sense because "all else isn't equal".  

My rationale is this - if you have a camera that is a certain physical size and has a number of photo sites on the sensor then each photo site will get a certain number of photons per second.  If you were to take that camera (camera body, sensor, lens, etc) and make an identical but smaller copy, you would have a lens that was gathering less light (because it casts a smaller shadow on the wall behind it so less light goes into the lens) but it has the same number of photo sites, therefore each of these photo sites gets less photons per second.  

This exercise of scaling everything down to the same proportion isn't how cameras are actually implemented, which is where I think the vista vision sensor discussion was coming from.

@jonpais I get that not a lot of videographers are feeling the gap that the FF F2.8 zoom lenses that pro photographers swear by, but did you also see that basically every FF prime from F1.4 and faster is not available on the m43.  FF F1.8 = m43 F0.7 and FF F1.4 = m43 F0.6.

And yes, we could suggest that super35 is our reference, making m43 only one stop behind, but also putting FF one stop in front.  It still won't change the fact that the most exotic lenses on m43 have the same amount of DoF as my $100 canon nifty fifty, which is hardly an exotic lens in FF circles.

@BTM_Pix No worries - I thought perhaps my tone was coming across a bit too directly

Your summary of my position isn't quite right and is potentially due to my wording..  Let me have a go at clarifying and choosing my words a bit more carefully, feel free to reply or not as you choose

I think the sensor size is a weakness if you scale the physical size of the lenses to match (as it would have to spread less light over the same pixels), but this doesn't apply if speed boosters are used, and even if they aren't used this can be overcome through high ISO performance, which as @IronFilm points out, they're doing a great job at.  I think that in every other way, the sensor size is an advantage, for reasons I already mentioned.  In this sense I think the format has no fundamental limitations, just the odd engineering challenge here or there.  The current lack of available lenses I think is a barrier to some potential users from adopting the system, but this is also something that can (will?) be overcome in time.

In a sense much of this thread is about where m43 has come from and where it's going in the next 6 months, but I'm trying to look at the bigger picture.  In the longer term everything that's difficult technically gets done if there's demand for it, and standards can last an incredibly long time in the tech space.

Damn it's hard to talk about complex and nuanced topics online..  ???

@webrunner5 We could show you photos to prove that we're correct, but you'd just blame photoshop and stick to your story!! ???

[anonim]

Please, if someone with experience with Sony A7 III could direct me to the best sample(s) of usage of this camera (not screen grabs) similar to quality as, say for example, here already well known clips by Filippo Chiesa and Oliver Daniel (I post them again just as orientation and for comparison). I mean, judging just about possibility for higher professional (more accurate and subtle grading) image quality... In the recent time I was occupied with other sort of job, so it must be I missed many samples... what I found as the most promising was two months ago (or so) an Jon Pais's shot made with Zeiss Distagon ... But it was just nice test shot without too much variations and tasks... All others that I saw were not IMO at the level of best GH5(s) samples in terms of general quality (i. e. what I saw always look somehow "flat", not so rich in colors and details).

 

 

 

[webrunner5]

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

Steady on, I think you'll find that its you lot that drive on the wrong side of the road.

No we just righted a wrong by driving on the right, get it? Most people are right handed so makes sense to be right. Oh I am a Lefty, you probably guessed that by now. ?

[BTM_Pix]

6 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

No we just righted a wrong by driving on the right, get it? ?

This is what happened in 1967 on switchover day after Sweden made the decision to go from driving on the left to the right hand side of the road.

I bet you there's still people waiting for that bus to show up !

[webrunner5]

Why would they have switched?  I don't see a good reason for either side to be honest.

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, kye said:

Your comment about a larger sensor requiring more light seems confusing

Put yourself in the shoes of a DoP, with the various constraints you have of director/story/crew/actors/resources/time. Thus (taking into account all those factors) you pick a certain DoF you want to shoot at for this particular shot. For whatever that DoF is, you will need more light if shooting with a larger sensor. It is as simple as that. Thus the complaints from vistavision shooters on redusers because they hadn't considered the obvious. 

[webrunner5]

3 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

But yourself in the shoes of a DoP, with the various constraints you have of director/story/crew/actors/resources/time. Thus (taking into account all those factors) you pick a certain DoF you want to shoot at for this particular shot. For whatever that DoF is, you will need more light if shooting with a larger sensor. It is as simple as that. Thus the complaints from vistavision shooters on redusers because they hadn't considered the obvious. 

Hmm I thought a larger sensor gathered more light, or no less per square inch compared to a smaller one. F2 is F2 is F2 no matter the sensor size on exposure.

[jonpais]

I guess bcs you'll want to stop the lens down for deeper depth of field.

[IronFilm]

I'm talking here about DoF. 

As sensor size goes up, to maintain DoF the F stop goes up (which means the ISO must go up and/or the lighting must increase)

[BTM_Pix]

4 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Why would they have switched?  I don't see a good reason for either side to be honest.

To harmonise with the rest of Europe would be my guess.

The drive on the right thing was a by product of Paris having a keep right rule for horse traffic and then Napoleon spreading this custom through his conquests, hence why the resistants to being conquered (i.e. us and a few others) didn't adopt it. Of course we then passed that defiance on to our colonies and it stuck.

Japan had an entirely different reason to do with Samurai swords and the scabbard being on the left (as most people are right handed) so you could pass another rider without the swords clashing and causing any accidental "hey did you just knock my sword" fuelled duels kicking off inadvertently. It also meant that you could get on and off the horse easier without stabbing yourself in the Jerry Hall's.

The good news for us is that Japan have kept this up which means we can import lovely little vehicles like this Toyota Prixis Mega and revel in its devil may care squareness without having to worry about the steering wheel being on the wrong side.

 

[anonim]

11 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

I'm talking here about DoF. 

As sensor size goes up, to maintain DoF the F stop goes up (which means the ISO must go up and/or the lighting must increase)

Yes, and it is strange to me that seriously video oriented shooters so rarely consider that fact "from the field". This fact and personal experiences drove me even to conclusion that m43 sensor (with high end rendition capable lens) is actually some sort of sweet spot for shooting guerilla art-movies that very rarely, from narrative reasons,  need DoF more shallow than provide by aperture value of 4 (in FF terms)!

[sanveer]

33 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

The drive on the right thing was a by product of Paris having a keep right rule for horse traffic and then Napoleon spreading this custom through his conquests, hence why the resistants to being conquered (i.e. us and a few others) didn't adopt it. Of course we then passed that defiance on to our colonies and it stuck.

I believe the movement from the left hand side of the road to the right, was the movement from swords to pistols, and which side should prepare you for a possible attack. 

I could obviously be wrong. 

[BTM_Pix]

32 minutes ago, sanveer said:

I believe the movement from the left hand side of the road to the right, was the movement from swords to pistols, and which side should prepare you for a possible attack. 

I could obviously be wrong. 

Sounds like a modern day drive around some parts of London in the past couple of years.

[sanveer]

10 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Sounds like a modern day drive around some parts of London in the past couple of years.

Hahaha. Half of London is a ghetto, filled with extremists, thugs and beggars. It's amazing how people can be oblivious to it or pretend it doesn't exist. 

[BTM_Pix]

2 minutes ago, sanveer said:

Hahaha. Half of London is a ghetto, filled with extremists, thugs and beggars

And thats just the Houses Of Parliament.

[sanveer]

Just now, BTM_Pix said:

And thats just the Houses Of Parliament.

???

[kye]

@IronFilm @webrunner5 this is why these things are hard to discuss, there are so many variables.

Consider this..  Lenses gather light.  For a given design, the bigger the lens diameter, the more light goes in.  This is why people have telescopes with really large diameters - they want to gather more light.

Lenses then focus that light into an image circle of a given size.  This is why m43 lenses won't cover a FF sensor - the image circle isn't big enough.

Sensors detect that light.

So when people say that "a FF gathers more light" it's only true if there's a FF lens on the front.  If we put a Super35 lens on the front, put in a focal expander to spread the light out a bit more, the FF sensor will see less light because there is less light coming in from the lens.

The problem with people changing sensor sizes is that they don't change everything else in their camera.  I suspect this is what happened with the vista vision sensor - they probably didn't buy all new lenses.

If two people go out to buy a camera setup, one buys a FF camera and 50mm F4.0 lens and the other buys a m43 camera and a 25mm F2.0 lens and they then meet and point their cameras at the same object with the cameras right next to each other, then with the same settings (ISO, SS, aperture) and their lenses wide open they will get the same exposure, and they will get identical angle of view and depth of field.  When we're talking about the camera industry this is the comparison we're talking about, not changing from one setup to another.

Does that make sense or did I mess something up?