Laughable Chris and Jordan video on medium format

[Django]

@kye @MrSMW should have probably specified the comment both of you quoted from me was directed at photography. no issue with crop sensors for video/film as S35/S16 have been standards in digital cinema. 

8 hours ago, kye said:

What are your thoughts on the OG BMPCC and BMMCC in this regard?

I thought they were well known for their magic / mojo.  If so, they are an interesting example because they're doing it despite their sensor size rather than because of it.

They do raise an interesting element though, which @Andrew Reid touched on earlier when talking about how much of the lens image circle falls onto the sensor.  Despite the BMPCC / BMMCC having smaller sensors they are often used with c-mount lenses that were designed for this sensor size, or potentially even smaller, and thus they are looking at almost all of the image circle from many lenses they are used with.  
I must admit that I find them less magical when used with glass designed for larger sensors like MFT or FF.

I never got into MFT, probably due to the fact all my lenses are FF so no particular thoughts.

The form factor & battery life made the OG BMPCC a double no-go for me despite its impressive specs/price.

The one small sensor camera I really really really regret not buying is the Digital Bolex. Mojo for days on that one!

CCD sensor + C-mount lenses was magic combo. 

Just like my Leica M9 (CCD) + M lenses. Some combos just create the perfect storm.

7 hours ago, MrSMW said:

Personally, shooting Fuji APSC for around 9 years, I did find ‘magic’ in the system…but it varied between sensors (first there was the Bayer 12mp and then I think 4 versions of Xtrans going through 16, 24 and 26mp) dépendant in the lens choice, focal length, Jpeg or raw, how the images were processed and how/where they were viewed. Basically a gazillion variables and certain combos would shine just as some wouldn’t.

For photo.

For video, difficult to call…

I liked the output mostly, but prefer the results I am getting these days from Panny FF.

Yeah like I said, mixed results on the Fuji XT system. Some combos worked and when they did it was amazing, other times I'd hate the rendering. That inconsistency bothered me. XTrans is just weird like that I think. Sharpness/detail was incredible though, made a 24MP still feel like a 50MP.

Loved the hardware. I know some folks hate the dials but it really spoke to me. Was like shooting on a Nikon FM.

Film simulations was nice too. 

I don't know what's going on with Fuji, feels like XH2 has been pushed back forever. 

[Andrew Reid]

On 1/25/2022 at 1:17 AM, Video Hummus said:

I'm sure they will all change their toon when Fuji releases their next MF camera and lenses and they need to "review" it. I'm sure Chris will say. something like: "...and you get that unique medium format look...".

Don't watch the marketing monkeys.

This is a better video by far.

Don't know much about this channel, maybe I should dive into his other stuff too?

The point about having 100 megapixel for stills justifies the existence of the larger format just by itself because there are huge proportions of commercial photography and fine art that ends up printed very large and placed where viewers are just a few inches away.

The absolute largest billboards tend to be very far away from people on a building, so you can get away with much lower resolutions for those.

If you had the tech to put 100 megapixel into an APS-C sensor it would probably top out at ISO 400.

Medium format at 100 megapixel can be cropped to full frame and you're still at 70 megapixel. A full frame camera at 100 megapixel probably won't be as clear in low light as a larger sensor at same res. I can comfortably shoot ISO 12,800 on the GFX 100 if I forget about pixel peeping at 100%. The same image on a full frame 100 megapixel sensor would probably be much noisier with less DR and worse colour.

It's by no means a perfect system for autofocus, because Fuji did the same as they did with the earlier XF lenses, whereas some are slow to focus with a big noisy motor and some have an internal stepping motor which focuses really quick and silently like a modern lens should do. Compare for instance the 45mm F2.8 GF to 50mm F3.5 - the cheaper nifty 50 is much quicker to focus especially in low light.

But the GF lenses have absolutely insane optical performance and resolution up there with a Cooke S4i.

The main reason I got a GFX 100 was to use it with vintage lenses.

These old Minoltas do NOT look like this on full frame...

https://jonasraskphotography.com/2017/08/16/minolta-x-fujifilm/

I suppose I'll do my own YouTube rebuttal of DPReview dismissing medium format in such over simplistic ways... Just a shame about the misinformation out there funnelling everyone into silly opinions.

We want informed customers otherwise camera industry goes down the toilet.

[Andrew Reid]

6 minutes ago, Django said:

I don't know what's going on with Fuji, feels like XH2 has been pushed back forever. 

X-H2 and GH6 are just on a similar release schedule to the other pro video mirrorless cameras such as the A7S III. They're not on the usual 2-year update schedule like the more consumer orientated stuff is.

It was a 5 year wait for the A7S III!

[Emanuel]

Medium Format is categorically a whole different format towards stills rather than dealing with motion for obvious and inherent reasons : ) Nice find @Andrew Reid and very enjoyable to watch if any odd doubts people could still raise :- )

[Yannick Willox]

I am no expert, but isn't the entire point that sensor size at least matters & makes a (significant) difference because:

a. for the same resolution, the pixels are much bigger

b. different lenses, even if equivalent

c. and even if you put the SAME lens on different sensor sizes, it effectively becomes another lens.

Over the years I have found some lovely lenses for MFT, as the Kamlan 50mm f1.1, and the DZOfilm 20-70 T2.9 parfocal zoom (and an old 43 Samyang 85mm f1.4). Those lenses on MFT sensors just work. No point in discussing equivalency.

[Django]

2 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

X-H2 and GH6 are just on a similar release schedule to the other pro video mirrorless cameras such as the A7S III. They're not on the usual 2-year update schedule like the more consumer orientated stuff is.

It was a 5 year wait for the A7S III!

True but Sony admitted having to go back to the drawing boards on A7S3. Panasonic apologised for delaying the GH6 release from 2021 to 2022. I'm thinking the chip shortage must be seriously affecting the production/release cycle. 

[Andrew Reid]

1 hour ago, Emanuel said:

Medium Format is categorically a whole different format towards stills rather than dealing with motion for obvious and inherent reasons : ) Nice find @Andrew Reid and very enjoyable to watch if any odd doubts people could still raise :- )

Don't forget you have large formats in cinema as well like 65mm, with similar image area size to GFX.

RED WEAPON Vista Vision MONSTRO 8K at 40x21 is slightly smaller imaging area to GFX at 44 x 24 in video mode.

65mm Ultra Panavision is a bit larger horizontally at 52x23

Likewise Alexa 65 is also similar to medium format at 54x25.5

GFX frame for stills is almost as high as full frame is wide so not a small difference.

[Andrew Reid]

4 minutes ago, Django said:

True but Sony admitted having to go back to the drawing boards on A7S3.

I don't think they did? Got a source for this?

A7S III took a long time because they wanted to establish full frame FX6 first.

It was a marketing decision rather than anything technical.

Plus A7S II was still selling well even 4 years later.

4 minutes ago, Django said:

Panasonic apologised for delaying the GH6 release from 2021 to 2022. I'm thinking the chip shortage must be seriously affecting the production/release cycle. 

So far it has only been delayed a few months, not years.

[MrSMW]

3 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

X-H2 and GH6 are just on a similar release schedule to the other pro video mirrorless cameras such as the A7S III. They're not on the usual 2-year update schedule like the more consumer orientated stuff is.

It was a 5 year wait for the A7S III!

My spider sense tells me that both are going to be announced ‘soon’ for late Spring/Summer launch?

[Django]

12 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I don't think they did? Got a source for this?

A7S III took a long time because they wanted to establish full frame FX6 first.

It was a marketing decision rather than anything technical.

Plus A7S II was still selling well even 4 years later.

There were several interviews that to me hinted there were technical / R&D issues:

Many people have enjoyed the a7S II as a video camera, but originally we designed it for stills photography users. So if we’re going to create products [specifically] for video shooters, we’ll have to modify them in the future.

We’ve had a lot of feedback from the market, including from DPReview! The basic expectation is for things like 4K/60, 10-bit 4:2:2, and a lot of manufacturers are doing that right now, but I want to think in a different way and create something that goes beyond the expectations of our customers. It’s easy to add 4K/60, but beyond these specs, a lot of customers have other kinds of demands, and that’s what we’re researching.

https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/9676983794/cp-2019-sony-interview-first-full-frame-then-aps-c

But in the end we didn't really get more than 4K60 10-bit 4:2:2. Maybe FX3 was what they were working on, but imo that was also a bit of a letdown as it was just a re-housed A7S3 with zero "FX" OS tools or E-ND.

Quote

So far it has only been delayed a few months, not years.

Announcement was in May 2021 so yeah some 8 months ago with still no release date nor explanation for the delay. 

[Andrew Reid]

I think that's just marketing speak from Sony. To me it shows that at the time of the interview they didn't even have a prototype out.

They wanted to wait and decide what features to include, what the market research was telling them, and monitoring demand for that kind of camera. There was no rush to replace the old model.

What do you mean we didn't get more than 4K60 10bit? We got 4K120p.

They could have gone further with E-ND, it's s shame they didn't.

Also I think A7S3 has a quad bayer sensor with high resolution mode but it is probably disabled to protect the A7R IV.

Panasonic's original ship date for GH6 was December, so shipping in March or April is not going to upset me that much.

It is Nikon who have the bigger problem because they put all their eggs in one basket with the Z9 and now can't make any!

[Django]

20 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I think that's just marketing speak from Sony. To me it shows that at the time of the interview they didn't even have a prototype out.

They wanted to wait and decide what features to include, what the market research was telling them, and monitoring demand for that kind of camera. There was no rush to replace the old model.

What do you mean we didn't get more than 4K60 10bit? We got 4K120p.

They could have gone further with E-ND, it's s shame they didn't.

Also I think A7S3 has a quad bayer sensor with high resolution mode but it is probably disabled to protect the A7R IV.

Panasonic's original ship date for GH6 was December, so shipping in March or April is not going to upset me that much.

It is Nikon who have the bigger problem because they put all their eggs in one basket with the Z9 and now can't make any!

Yeah my bad 4K120p of course. I do think you're right that Sony was in no rush to put out A7S3 as they really wanted to establish the FX line. Especially when it came to adding the 10-bit 4:2:2 codec inside Alpha line. Something Sony have been very late and reluctant to give away from the XDCams.

The real surprise comes from Canon with 8K RAW internal and now no overheating and full cine OS features at a pretty agressive price point. As well as the totally unexpected free C70 RAW update. I think this is mainly due in a massive effort to get people on-board RF mount. They've invested a lot in those lenses and as you recently said that's where the real money is for them.

What's happening with Nikon Z9? sensor/chip issues?

[Emanuel]

2 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Don't forget you have large formats in cinema as well like 65mm, with similar image area size to GFX.

RED WEAPON Vista Vision MONSTRO 8K at 40x21 is slightly smaller imaging area to GFX at 44 x 24 in video mode.

65mm Ultra Panavision is a bit larger horizontally at 52x23

Likewise Alexa 65 is also similar to medium format at 54x25.5

GFX frame for stills is almost as high as full frame is wide so not a small difference.

Yes, you're right : ) But let's not forget the whole paraphernalia associated with ; ) That's the whole point, making movies is everything we want but hard like hell as we all know here :- ) For some reason I am focused on the lighter the better, hence to adopt this revolution the miniaturization is! : P Minimum requirements are needed though, that's La Palice's indeed.

[kye]

9 hours ago, MrSMW said:

The other thing about crap YouTubers, is they make the good one’s look even better.

It’s all about balance in the end.

And opinions.

But the only opinion that really accounts is yours, to yourself, after you have personally tried something.

Happy for them to have all the opinions in the world about aesthetics.  

It's questionable if you'd want a YT channel to have opinions about the usability of something like a cinema camera, when all they understand is making YT.

Opinions are absolutely NOT welcome when it comes to the engineering.  Sadly this puts them in the land of "alternative FACTS" which I like to just call "lies".

Sadly, there's a lot of the middle one from camera YouTubers, and a smattering of the latter, mostly concentrated to a minority.

8 hours ago, Django said:

@kye @MrSMW should have probably specified the comment both of you quoted from me was directed at photography. no issue with crop sensors for video/film as S35/S16 have been standards in digital cinema. 

I never got into MFT, probably due to the fact all my lenses are FF so no particular thoughts.

The form factor & battery life made the OG BMPCC a double no-go for me despite its impressive specs/price.

The one small sensor camera I really really really regret not buying is the Digital Bolex. Mojo for days on that one!

CCD sensor + C-mount lenses was magic combo. 

Just like my Leica M9 (CCD) + M lenses. Some combos just create the perfect storm.

Yeah like I said, mixed results on the Fuji XT system. Some combos worked and when they did it was amazing, other times I'd hate the rendering. That inconsistency bothered me. XTrans is just weird like that I think. Sharpness/detail was incredible though, made a 24MP still feel like a 50MP.

Loved the hardware. I know some folks hate the dials but it really spoke to me. Was like shooting on a Nikon FM.

Film simulations was nice too. 

I don't know what's going on with Fuji, feels like XH2 has been pushed back forever. 

Fair enough that you were talking about stills.

Do you find that with the higher resolution cameras (BMPCC 6K, R5 8K, etc) that sensor size makes more of a difference than it did in 1080p?  If so, it could be a resolution thing?

7 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

This is a better video by far.

Don't know much about this channel, maybe I should dive into his other stuff too?

The point about having 100 megapixel for stills justifies the existence of the larger format just by itself because there are huge proportions of commercial photography and fine art that ends up printed very large and placed where viewers are just a few inches away.

The absolute largest billboards tend to be very far away from people on a building, so you can get away with much lower resolutions for those.

If you had the tech to put 100 megapixel into an APS-C sensor it would probably top out at ISO 400.

Medium format at 100 megapixel can be cropped to full frame and you're still at 70 megapixel. A full frame camera at 100 megapixel probably won't be as clear in low light as a larger sensor at same res. I can comfortably shoot ISO 12,800 on the GFX 100 if I forget about pixel peeping at 100%. The same image on a full frame 100 megapixel sensor would probably be much noisier with less DR and worse colour.

It's by no means a perfect system for autofocus, because Fuji did the same as they did with the earlier XF lenses, whereas some are slow to focus with a big noisy motor and some have an internal stepping motor which focuses really quick and silently like a modern lens should do. Compare for instance the 45mm F2.8 GF to 50mm F3.5 - the cheaper nifty 50 is much quicker to focus especially in low light.

But the GF lenses have absolutely insane optical performance and resolution up there with a Cooke S4i.

The main reason I got a GFX 100 was to use it with vintage lenses.

These old Minoltas do NOT look like this on full frame...

https://jonasraskphotography.com/2017/08/16/minolta-x-fujifilm/

I suppose I'll do my own YouTube rebuttal of DPReview dismissing medium format in such over simplistic ways... Just a shame about the misinformation out there funnelling everyone into silly opinions.

We want informed customers otherwise camera industry goes down the toilet.

I've subscribed to his channel for years, but don't watch many videos.  IIRC It's the channel for a retail store and has relatively similar style to CVP - ie, based on specs and practicalities and designed to assist people in understanding equipment prior to purchase or rental.

5 hours ago, Yannick Willox said:

I am no expert, but isn't the entire point that sensor size at least matters & makes a (significant) difference because:

a. for the same resolution, the pixels are much bigger

b. different lenses, even if equivalent

c. and even if you put the SAME lens on different sensor sizes, it effectively becomes another lens.

Over the years I have found some lovely lenses for MFT, as the Kamlan 50mm f1.1, and the DZOfilm 20-70 T2.9 parfocal zoom (and an old 43 Samyang 85mm f1.4). Those lenses on MFT sensors just work. No point in discussing equivalency.

Yeah, like I said - lots of variables change and so there's no comparison that's even remotely straight-forwards.

[Andrew Reid]

4 hours ago, Django said:

The real surprise comes from Canon with 8K RAW internal and now no overheating

To be clear there was not much overheating to begin with on EOS R5 original edition, it was a fake timer and initial firmware didn't even read the internal temps.

Canon RAW is a very difficult codec to edit, I'd much rather have BRAW in Resolve or ProRes RAW in FCPX.

These major NLEs aren't interested in supporting Canon RAW or making it work well as Blackmagic wants you to shoot BRAW with one of their products and Apple want you to shoot ProRes RAW.

So I would rather impale both my eyeballs on cocktails sticks than shoot 8K RAW 60p on the EOS R5 C, just so you know 🙂

4 hours ago, Django said:

What's happening with Nikon Z9? sensor/chip issues?

Can't make enough, shortage of raw materials like magnesium, worldwide chip shortages, lead times of 2 years on basic processors, and more.

[webrunner5]

I am not sure I will ever look at a Cocktail the same again! 😬 Only the British.

[Django]

2 hours ago, kye said:

Do you find that with the higher resolution cameras (BMPCC 6K, R5 8K, etc) that sensor size makes more of a difference than it did in 1080p?  If so, it could be a resolution thing?

Not sure what you mean. I don't see a correlation in between resolution and sensor size.

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

Canon RAW is a very difficult codec to edit, I'd much rather have BRAW in Resolve or ProRes RAW in FCPX.

These major NLEs aren't interested in supporting Canon RAW or making it work well as Blackmagic wants you to shoot BRAW with one of their products and Apple want you to shoot ProRes RAW.

So I would rather impale both my eyeballs on cocktails sticks than shoot 8K RAW 60p on the EOS R5 C, just so you know 🙂

What computer specs and Resolve version are you on? Because I can tell you that on a cheap $999 M1 MacBook Air, I can drag and drop an 8K Canon RAW file in Resolve 17.3 (which is optimised for M1 Macs) on a 4K timeline, do some tweaks, add some LUTs and I get 100% playback with zero dropped frames. That's on the most entry-level Mac you can buy today.

 

 

[Video Hummus]

11 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

The point about having 100 megapixel for stills justifies the existence of the larger format just by itself because there are huge proportions of commercial photography and fine art that ends up printed very large and placed where viewers are just a few inches away.

Fuji also seems to be making inroads amongst landscape photographers because of the combination of 100 MP and 16-bit RAWs, and I guess the Fuji colors.

[kye]

3 hours ago, Django said:

Not sure what you mean. I don't see a correlation in between resolution and sensor size.

What I was asking was if higher resolutions made sensor size more 'noticeable'.

ie, back in the day, we had S16, MFT, S35, and FF cameras that all shot a maximum of 1080p.  At this time there would have been people shooting video on all of these and so there would have been a certain aesthetic impression of what sensor size contributed.

Now, we have MFT, S35, FF, and MF cameras that are shooting 4K or above.  I'm wondering if there is now more of an aesthetic difference between these sensor sizes.  ie, "When we shot 1080p it wasn't that noticeable, but now with 4K I can tell a FF sensor from a mile-away!" or the opposite.

The reason I ask is that you said that your impressions of MF/FF vs smaller was only about stills images.  Stills are likely to be higher resolution than video, so I was wondering if it was the resolution bump from the stills that made format differences visible to you.

[kye]

(I would imagine that shooting in 240p would make sensor sizes very difficult to discern, so it makes me wonder if increased resolutions have the opposite effect.  Once again, trying to gather peoples impressions and see if we can learn anything about what might be causing these impressions for people)