Laughable Chris and Jordan video on medium format

[Andrew Reid]

10 hours ago, Django said:

Now while all that Yedlin says is factually true, I can't say I necessarily agree with his conclusions that lean on the Chris Nichols side that there is no Large format look because DoF & FoV can be matched by equivalencies and that the audience won't know the difference:

It's all fine in theory but it ignores the reality.

In reality you simply have different lenses designed for different formats.

You cannot mimic the look of a Canon 50mm F0.95 Dream Lens from the 1970s on full frame by taking a different lens with equivalent focal length and aperture on another size sensor because:

A) One doesn't exist

B) If it did exist, it would not be a Canon from the 1970s

C) The hand of the original optics designer matter

D) The rendering is unique to that original lens. Not even the Leica Noctilux 50mm F0.95 looks anywhere near close to it.

Also there are certain lenses that don't even fit a Speed Booster. There is simply no room for a focal reducer between Leica M mount lenses and any of the mirrorless mounts of today.

If I have a special lens that is only at its best on the sensor size it was designed to match then I am stupid to use it on something else.

Equally if I have a LOMO anamorphic that simply doesn't cover full frame, how exactly would I try to mimic the look in any other way on my full frame camera without cropping?

So Yedlin's theory can go and do one to be quite honest.

There's a lot more to the look of a large format than matching DoF.

10 hours ago, Django said:

Since the audience can see only the final blur circles and neither the f/stop nor the sensor size, they can't see in the final image if blur circles are increased by a larger format size or by a larger aperture. Those two things are interchangeable in the final image, so this is not a "look" that's discernable in the final image

 

What exactly does he define as the look?

Of course the look is not just shallow DOF.

Far more depends on sensor size and format than that.

10 hours ago, Django said:

This is where the MINI/65 comparison video comparing the 35mm to the 70mm shows a huge difference in look/aesthetic and imo contradicts this conclusion.

Yeah well different lenses were used weren't they?

So hardly surprising... Even if you go crazy about matching everything with equivalence you will need to use different focal lengths and apertures, and if you are using prime lenses that means you need different lenses for different camera formats.

[leslie]

I reckon, all you can do is continue to swim upstream against the tide of mediocrity, that is youtube. I'm fairly confident that you have the lenses and cameras and could  do a deeper dive and offer a valid rebuttal but all you'd get is a handful of applause from a small group of people that had a clue in the first place. The rest of humanity wont even  look up.  

I personally have bought a couple of full frame lenses, for their "look".  The others lenses are brothers / sisters of the same brand and hopefully make it easier to match in post.  I'm on mft, the "baby format" i guess you could say. Since roger deakins and people of his ilk   😉 , still tend to shoot on huge movie formats,  i'll go out on a limb and say there must be some differences between the different formats and lenses. Not that i am complaining, just realistic. Its kinda dumb to say their all equivalent or there's no magic. Clearly there are differences other wise good ol rog would be right beside me with an olympus e-m10. 😃 

While youtube is useful for a lot of things and there is good stuff out there. The problem is specialists, or the lack of them on youtube.  If you had a problem with your arm, you'd go to a doctor. If he couldn't fix it you'd be sent to a specialist. That whole chain of command gets thrown out the window once youtube gets involved. The norm now is anyone with a webcam a wifi connection and an opinion is the new specialist.  All you can do is try to educate.

There will probably be years before you get any thanks for your efforts but then the same could probably be said of the great painters as well.

[MrSMW]

Education by ‘content creators’ and ‘bedroom based businesses’ is the new norm.

To be fair, some are quite good. Most, as we know are just copycats and doing it badly.

It’s the world we live in and as I always say, you either have to tread through the trash to reach the treasure, or just block the entire thing.

[PannySVHS]

Or rewatch Tony Zhou! Which i hopefully will take my time to do soon again. @MrSMW

[PannySVHS]

@leslie
There is appreciation for good stuff. When I talk about lenses to people in real life, they love it. After all my 20eu Canon Fd 28mm 2.8 looks like Hollywood even though it's no f2 Distagon.

That lens shines on 0.71 speedbosted Mft with full sensor width. On cropped 4K with G7, G85, Gh4, GX85, Gx9 there is some sensor estate and magic missing. Factor 0.64 might give enough back. But no cheapo focal reducer offers that. Just saying to get back to the topic of sensor size😊

One a sidenote. My gain in sensor estate with a focal reducer also made me avoid my ordinary faulty adapter. Latter had too much light bouncing inside due to reflective surfaces. That screwed up my footage under sunlight. Always good to experiment and try things in a practical manner. Such as sensor sizes or estate.

[UncleBobsPhotography]

If they wanted to do the test a bit more seriously, they should have at least tried to find lenses with the same design for the different formats. Finding a Double-Gauss design lens with a similar angle of view for all formats shouldn't be too hard.

[Andrew Reid]

28 minutes ago, UncleBobsPhotography said:

If they wanted to do the test a bit more seriously, they should have at least tried to find lenses with the same design for the different formats. Finding a Double-Gauss design lens with a similar angle of view for all formats shouldn't be too hard.

It's not about matching the formats though.

They are stopping down to F3.5 on medium format and using just that example to say - "hey it looks the same as APS-C"

They are denying the differences that exist between sensor size and lens combinations.

There is only one good test that shows how depth of field differs between formats: Use same lens, same focal length, same focus point, same aperture, different sensor sizes.

[kye]

9 hours ago, MrSMW said:

Education by ‘content creators’ and ‘bedroom based businesses’ is the new norm.

To be fair, some are quite good. Most, as we know are just copycats and doing it badly.

It’s the world we live in and as I always say, you either have to tread through the trash to reach the treasure, or just block the entire thing.

I think a few are doing "education" and the rest are on the wrong side of "infotainment" and sliding into confirmation-bias and hear-say.

I think there's a broader challenge with this stuff, which is that there needs to be a balance between information and entertainment.  Take books for example, a pulp fiction novel provides entertainment but no information and a textbook contains all information and no entertainment, but sadly the textbook also provides no benefit unless there is enough motivation provided to make the person actually read and understand it.  I have many dense books that I haven't read due to lack of motivation, unfortunately.

8 hours ago, UncleBobsPhotography said:

If they wanted to do the test a bit more seriously, they should have at least tried to find lenses with the same design for the different formats. Finding a Double-Gauss design lens with a similar angle of view for all formats shouldn't be too hard.

It's harder than you'd think.  It requires:

• critical thinking
• an understanding about matching variables
• familiarity with lens design and history
• capability, capacity, and motivation to prepare and plan the video
• a willingness to go out of their comfort zone
• motivation to do anything except whatever half-baked thought happens to occur to them at that moment (or is provided to them by a vendor, a forum, or some other flaky information source....)

[leslie]

16 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

@leslie
There is appreciation for good stuff. When I talk about lenses to people in real life, they love it. After all my 20eu Canon Fd 28mm 2.8 looks like Hollywood even though it's no f2 Distagon.

That lens shines on 0.71 speedbosted Mft with full sensor width. On cropped 4K with G7, G85, Gh4, GX85, Gx9 there is some sensor estate and magic missing. Factor 0.64 might give enough back. But no cheapo focal reducer offers that. Just saying to get back to the topic of sensor size😊

One a sidenote. My gain in sensor estate with a focal reducer also made me avoid my ordinary faulty adapter. Latter had too much light bouncing inside due to reflective surfaces. That screwed up my footage under sunlight. Always good to experiment and try things in a practical manner. Such as sensor sizes or estate.

20 eu.....    your a thief....  @PannySVHS. 😉  None of my fd lenses were that cheap. But maybe i was a bit late starting to accumulate fd's.  I think mark holtze and a few others had started  waxing lyrical about the  fd series lenses by then.

You could try flocking your adapter with some black material, it would be a cheap exercise to try, and it may fix your light reflection problem. 

i wasn't trying to vilify the mft format, Far from it. However in a purely physical comparison mft is kinda small.  

I'm sure there are plenty of enthusiasts out there doing good work. However my youtube algorithm seems to of been hacked by gremlins, all i get is dross. My issue is leaning more towards influencers  producing mediocre content or even wrong content. If i'm watching a utube its either to learn something or be entertained. If its entertained then i want to be left happy, buoyed, uplifted you know,  generally more positive. Sadly there's not a lot  of entertaining out there.

I generally used to like camera conspiracies , however lately i'm not sure, just walking around and vlogging counts as a valid test anymore, not to mention  the satirization going on . In small doses its ok but not every episode. That gets tedious. Sure you can take something away from his vlog but lately i have kinda been left wanting.

Same goes for theoria apophasis, the last few episode i have seen from him. Have him sitting next to a pretend fire and he's just talks about stuff,  saying if he flogging it it must be good. where's the evidence?  the empirical data ?  Maybe a pretend fire appears cozy  from where your sitting, but where i am, a real fire is well... real cozy. 😃

In a nutshell i want to see a visual representation of the product pros / cons. Even warts and all is good with me  at least i can see authenticity then.  Not just talk or an opinion because that bores me to death and i cant help but wonder if my time might be better spent mowing the lawn.

To paraphrase @MrSMW there's alot of dross out there, finding the gold can be a chore.

[PannySVHS]

@leslie  To the point! Camera conspis is fine for what it is BUT do i yearn to recipe it instead of watching Tony Zhou or better one of the masterpiece films in his essays or better enjoy any other beautiful fullfilling activity? No.

I bought my 28 Fd six1/2 years ago. It's a newFD lens, mechanically nothing close to Zeiss or others but working smoothly. But this tiny lens is a marvel in the IQ department. It's still affordable around 40 to 70 Euro. Now other FD primes and some zooms are getting expensive. The L or aspherical lenses are reaching into Leica madness, I mean Leica M! Get the tiny 28 Fd as long as they are cheap. Put it on a cheapo focal reducer an enjoy.:)

[MrSMW]

3 hours ago, leslie said:

I generally used to like camera conspiracies , however lately i'm not sure, just walking around and vlogging counts as a valid test anymore, not to mention  the satirization going on . In small doses its ok but not every episode. That gets tedious. Sure you can take something away from his vlog but lately i have kinda been left wanting.

I don't think it was ever a test, other than for walking around vlogging!

The only really valid tests are the one's that are at least close to your own intended use.

It's pure entertainment. If you like his particular form of entertainment...

His 'process' (because there is a semi-serious side to it), is in finding the perfect vlogging camera for his needs...which is in order to create content for his channels, so by it's nature, will be never ending. It's become a self-perpetuating thing now.

But as a serious educator? He's about as far from being one as most YouTubers are, but having 10's of thousands of followers does make you some kind of guru these days, even if that info is often conflicted. Or just wrong!

It's amusing in small doses, sometimes, but as you say, gets a bit tedious after a while.

As with most things, you can always take away a positive and in these types of cases, it's often NOT how to do something. And that in itself is a positive takeaway!

Who is imparting the information is as important as the information itself.

[kye]

11 hours ago, MrSMW said:

I don't think it was ever a test, other than for walking around vlogging!

The only really valid tests are the one's that are at least close to your own intended use.

It's pure entertainment. If you like his particular form of entertainment...

His 'process' (because there is a semi-serious side to it), is in finding the perfect vlogging camera for his needs...which is in order to create content for his channels, so by it's nature, will be never ending. It's become a self-perpetuating thing now.

But as a serious educator? He's about as far from being one as most YouTubers are, but having 10's of thousands of followers does make you some kind of guru these days, even if that info is often conflicted. Or just wrong!

It's amusing in small doses, sometimes, but as you say, gets a bit tedious after a while.

As with most things, you can always take away a positive and in these types of cases, it's often NOT how to do something. And that in itself is a positive takeaway!

Who is imparting the information is as important as the information itself.

Ironically, I see him as being on the more useful side of the spectrum...

• He's consistent
   
• His motivations and commercial relationships are pretty obvious
   
• He is well aligned with his audience
   
• He is knowledgable about equipment and normally mentions when he has or hasn't used / tested the equipment he's talking about
   
• He shows the equipment warts-and-all and his skills in using it warts-and-all (this is exceptionally useful compared to the PR people that heavily edit and don't show equipment failing)
   
• He doesn't talk outside his experience (he doesn't, for example, claim to know what a professional cinematographer would want, or a wedding / corporate videographer, etc etc..  this is the trap lots of camera YT falls into)
   
• He's entertaining

I'd suggest that if you're not a fan then it's probably because either:

1. You're not his target audience
2. You don't like his style / humour

....and if so, that's fine.  But don't confuse that with being a bad reviewer.

[Andrew Reid]

Kai is entertainment to a select niche who like goofing around YouTube tech videos.

He isn't an in-depth reviewer.

[Emanuel]

Agreed... I guess they're talking about Kasey Stern though : ) That funny guy from Toronto who runs his comedy channels on YT:

https://vegetablepolice.threadless.com/about

This is his other and main one:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFuLNktnqqBEF_9ZcmjC_bw

 

[Andrew Reid]

2 hours ago, Emanuel said:

Agreed... I guess they're talking about Kasey Stern though : ) That funny guy from Toronto who runs his comedy channels on YT:

https://vegetablepolice.threadless.com/about

This is his other and main one:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFuLNktnqqBEF_9ZcmjC_bw

 

You really are determined to promote YouTubers on this forum aren't you...

Are you moonlighting as a manager or something? 🙂

[Emanuel]

54 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

You really are determined to promote YouTubers on this forum aren't you...

I don't get why.

No, I am not, I just find him funny (my point?...his comedy channel) and AFAIK you too from one or another intervention from yours in the past about his entries. YT became mainstream nowadays, don't blame me for that : D You even wrote it pretty fair: that's entertainment, not in-depth reviewers. I concur. What doubts there? You should know I find your free voice the most healthy we only have to support. I wrote that on dvxuser even before EOSHD existed, remember?

I even thought you'd appreciate my information to you about the guy, go figure... Phew ; ) Really.

No, Andrew, shills don't make my cup of tea or I wouldn't be over here reading these pages along my straightforward interaction. Love transparency not only for the sake of the discussion but incidentally from the way I am. As simple as that. I just keep my eyes wide open with the due pinch of salt, about all sides of life BTW. I don't buy one sided perspective on practically everything. I believe everyone should have noticed it as well. Nothing new to see here, no hidden connections from the eyes of your audience. My voice is no less free than yours and frankly I don't even figure out very well WTH I feel the need to write it now but it is what it is : ) My business model doesn't include shills or camera industry. I afford the latter ones instead... Feed them with my own investment release after release. And believe me, it's never little! No users' voice welcome? C'mon, what else could it be? People come here for fun, information, communication and because of you also... Never noticed? :- )

It's your home, mate... isn't it due to respect everyone and mainly the owner of the house and yet in a special irrevocable way who we have esteem for?

 

Hope this clear up any misunderstanding(s) just for the case anyone may feel it from my side < 3

[Emanuel]

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

You really are determined to promote YouTubers on this forum aren't you...

Are you moonlighting as a manager or something? 🙂

LOL You've changed your post... Yes, I do, many of them, this business is tough and I need to open many fronts but all of them connected with my core business, the film production.

YT is part of the equation nowadays but not in a way I may feel the need to sell my soul to the devil or my own beliefs, freedom, transparency and the most pure truth of the facts I still stand and love to adopt myself related to everything : )

We are all safe! : D

[shooter]

I like camera conspiracies guy, very entertaining, genuine.

[FalkirkEagle]

On 1/22/2022 at 4:09 PM, Andrew Reid said:

"Nothing unique or special about the look"

"They are all equivalent... APS-C, full frame, medium format"

*Stops down GFX lens to F3.5...."Same look to DOF as APS-C at F1.8"

FUCK

When camera store salesman become an authority on photography and video...

You get this!

Widespread misinformation.

Sad to see how many people in the YouTube comments just accept it.

Stopping down a medium format camera and then complaining it can't do anything different to an APS-C model at F1.8????

Put a Minolta MD 58mm F1.2 on APS-C, full frame and medium format and tell me they all look equivalent!

With same lens, look would be completely different on all 3.

Equivalency is being taken to mean there is no difference in the look of different camera formats.

It completely ignores the fact that lenses are matched to sensor size.

If you take one designed for one format and apply it to another, it looks different!

I wouldn't be surprised if they punted this out just to generate the heat.

It is after all quite chilly in Canada.

I disagree with the contention that there is no real difference between medium format and full-frame, APS-C and Micro Four Thirds. Or that there is nothing special about the medium-format 'look'.

I have seen sample photos coming out of a Fuji GFX-50 or even a digital Hasselblad and noticed that they both produce dramatically better images - in terms of sharpness, colour, resolution and overall image quality. 

Fashion, commercial and corporate photographers used to use medium-format film cameras for various reasons, and I just named four of them. The bigger the image capture area, the more light you can capture, and the better the resolution. It's simple physics. 

Chris and Jordan have pushed full-frame, APS-C and M43 cameras because that's where their bread and butter is. In the consumer retail space, medium-format cameras are seen as somewhat exotic and don't sell nearly as well. 

[leslie]

On 2/4/2022 at 4:47 AM, Emanuel said:

LOL You've changed your post... Yes, I do, many of them, this business is tough and I need to open many fronts but all of them connected with my core business, the film production.

YT is part of the equation nowadays but not in a way I may feel the need to sell my soul to the devil or my own beliefs, freedom, transparency and the most pure truth of the facts I still stand and love to adopt myself related to everything : )

We are all safe! : D

i'd say mr reids humour was shining through, there at the start. However its all together too easy to offend people these days. In this day and age i think its a wise man who can moderate himself. 

 

On 2/4/2022 at 6:42 AM, shooter said:

I like camera conspiracies guy, very entertaining, genuine.

 

On 2/3/2022 at 9:12 AM, kye said:

Ironically, I see him as being on the more useful side of the spectrum...

• He's consistent
   
• His motivations and commercial relationships are pretty obvious
   
• He is well aligned with his audience
   
• He is knowledgable about equipment and normally mentions when he has or hasn't used / tested the equipment he's talking about
   
• He shows the equipment warts-and-all and his skills in using it warts-and-all (this is exceptionally useful compared to the PR people that heavily edit and don't show equipment failing)
   
• He doesn't talk outside his experience (he doesn't, for example, claim to know what a professional cinematographer would want, or a wedding / corporate videographer, etc etc..  this is the trap lots of camera YT falls into)
   
• He's entertaining

I'd suggest that if you're not a fan then it's probably because either:

1. You're not his target audience
2. You don't like his style / humour

....and if so, that's fine.  But don't confuse that with being a bad reviewer.

I do/ did like him. I 'd call him authentic, i like how he demonstrates lenses capabilities with his walk around vlog. His earlier boardroom meetings where classics. Its just lately i feel some of his humour is a bit dark or doesn't quite gel with me. Maybe its just me.

I suspect my tastes are evolving. My utube subscribed list contains only media division, kinetek and make art now. The others, camera conspiracies, kai, a fellow aussie called blunty and another shayne mostyn and a few others, well  I'll look for them when i think about it.