Something is nagging at me to go back to smaller sensor

[Andrew Reid]

When the 5D Mark II and Panasonic GH1 were all the rage, I picked the GH1.

I keep thinking back to why and it appears that the full frame look wasn't important enough compared to other factors, like price, codec, articulated screen, EVF, autofocus and so on.

Now Panasonic is doing it again... The G9 II has 4K/120p for $1500, extremely good codec, packed feature set, cheaper than GH7 but same sensor, very clean in low light, the list goes on...

If I wanted these features on a full frame camera I'd have to pay at least $3000.

Also something else is nagging me...

I have grown to dislike the cliche of a shallow DOF where you can't see the setting or background properly.

Yet I still want the character of a lens wide open, the smoother bokeh, the light vignette, more 3D and the best flares.

So I think back to my Kern Switar 26mm F1.1 or Voigtlander Nokton 25mm F0.95 on the GH2, and realise that I can shoot wide open at mega fast apertures yet still see the background. It will be lightly out of focus (unless the subject is REALLY close) and that I like. On a large sensor it would look very different.

I think it's time to do a Micro Four Thirds vs full frame test, at fast apertures wide open on both, same FOV, same setting and framing.

It will be really interesting to see what the rendering is like and how the G9 II stands up in terms of image quality, dynamic range, and high ISO. As they have come a LONG way since the GH2 and GH4.

I also think some of the Super 16mm and 2x crop lenses out there are really characterful, whereas full frame lenses at least all the modern ones tend to be too perfect looking.

I think it's more challenging to set up a shot on a large sensor... You often have to stop down, which negates the low light advantage, changes the rendering and bokeh, the flare, and nearly everything.

By the way, I'm sure part of this is nostalgia... In 2009 when Vimeo and DSLR filmmaking community first got going, everyone was happy to be called a filmmaker. It's interesting that now "creator" is the preferred term, as it covers anyone who creates anything. But does that also mean we are specialising less in one area and relying on modern technology over human artistry and the human hand?

With IBIS, shallow DOF, unmotivated camera movement, drones, walking around with IBIS handheld, autofocus, and such like... I feel all this usually fails 9 times out of 10 compared to a simple locked down shot on a tripod Spielberg style.

Maybe it's time to get a G9 II, turn off IBIS, take my time, stick it on a tripod with a C-mount prime on the front and see how this style works compared to the convenience of luxury of no-tripod, a faster shoot, a full frame Nikon Z8 with IBIS and autofocus on a modern lens.

 

[EduPortas]

I get you, man.

For me, Nikon APS-C fills that sweet spot right now. Smalish yet high-quality results and great AF. I can't say anything negative about the tiny Z50 OG for the price point.

Full frame MILCs and lenses are just a tiny bit better in overall quality when compared to current smaller sensor, yet the lenses are three times bigger and as expensive. Not a fan, really.

 

[eatstoomuchjam]

10 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

I have grown to dislike the cliche of a shallow DOF where you can't see the setting or background properly.

IMO, shallow DOF should usually be shallow enough to separate talent from background and draw the eye to the talent, but without obliterating the background into a mess of shapeless blobs of color.  Exceptions may be made for extremely dramatic moments, especially if the talent is intended to seem alone - or on the other side, if setting the talent in a specific place in a wide.

10 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

With IBIS, shallow DOF, unmotivated camera movement, drones, walking around with IBIS handheld, autofocus, and such like... I feel all this usually fails 9 times out of 10 compared to a simple locked down shot on a tripod Spielberg style.

A lot of the main YouTubers would have people believe that "cinematic" footage involves continuously moving the camera without any reason for it.  I've also received some looks from younger filmmakers in my area when they're onset as a PA or similar for shoots that I'm doing - when I'm putting the 20-pound Komodo-X kit on sticks, they sort of roll their eyes at the old fuddy duddy.  It's cool, though - as you've pointed out, Spielberg does a lot on sticks and I challenge any of them to explain why Fincher's work isn't "cinematic."
Not that I'm Spielberg, Fincher, or any of their DP's... but a strong composition with the camera on sticks is ideal for some things.  Switching to handheld for narrative purposes is one of the specific reasons that I bought the Ronin 4D.  Now I have the options of locked down with the K-X, shaky handheld with the OG Komodo which is rigged to be under half the weight of the K-X, and fairly smooth gimbal handheld with the Ronin.  I used it on a shoot yesterday and it's the best experience I've ever had with a gimbal on set.

 

Anyway, having been mostly S35 for my shoots in the last year, I've been finding it a real pleasure and I've missed FF a lot less than I thought, especially once I got the Fujinon MK set.  In general, I'd say S35 is great in a practical sense - shallow enough DOF at t/2.8-5.6 to be pleasing, but not so shallow that pulling focus gives an aneurysm by the end of a long day on set.

[MrSMW]

I'm heading back to working mainly on a tripod or monopod for as much of my work as I can.

I'm just not a fan of the handheld look that seems to becoming increasingly popular...and increasingly annoying to my eye as in rather than simply being part of the unfolding narrative, all I see is a camera operator.

Anything and everything I can do in 2025 on sticks, is happening and the key to that for me is instead of having my principal run& gun video unit on my right hip to hand, it will always be on either my freestanding monopod indoors, or new super-quick and super-lightweight tripod outdoors which will force me out of the laziness of shooting handheld.

If I ever need to or want to shoot handheld, it will be with either the monopod or tripod still attached.

And when I say laziness of shooting handheld, I am not saying it is 'lazy' per se, because if you like that look and are deliberately going after it, great, but rather it grates on me personally.

There will still be a place for handheld and for gimbal type work, but at very specific times for very specific purposes.

Nothing to do with M43 or APSC, but the mentions of tripod resonated with me!

Most of what I learn and then act upon, tends to come from not so much what I like, but rather what I don't like and as someone in the industry, I find it impossible to switch off when watching anything, whether it be a series or a movie because all I see is the BTS! 

Well it's not all I see and I am inspired by some of the stuff that I see and like, but it's like bad audio, - bad (to me) camera movement really grates on me and as a result, I am determined not to inflict that on my own clients if at all possible!

[BTM_Pix]

18 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Maybe it's time to get a G9 II, turn off IBIS, take my time, stick it on a tripod with a C-mount prime on the front and see how this style works compared to the convenience of luxury of no-tripod, a faster shoot, a full frame Nikon Z8 with IBIS and autofocus on a modern lens.

Perhaps the Nikon Z50ii might be the solution ?

There is no need to switch the IBIS off when it doesn't have it in the first place😂

People seem to be clutching their pearls because it uses the sensor from the D500, which is a clear indication that they’ve never shot with the D500.

And it moves the video side of the story on massively as well from the D500 of course.

10 bit 4:2:2 N-Log with the RED lut compatibility, single button access to custom built profiles, waveforms, wireless timecode, headphone jack etc etc.

If you want to shoot 4K60 then the additional crop will be less significant to you if you're shooting on S16 lenses and its worth bearing in mind that the D500 had an additional 1.5x crop to shoot 4K25 etc so thats a win anyway !

If you want higher frame rates for the occasional shot then up to 1080p120 is available without penalty.

All with the Z mount which will take every type of lens even hoarders like us can throw at it.

With the TechArt you can have AF as well if you want it for all the vintage glass.

The native Z mount DX lineup isn’t stellar in it’s breadth but with the Megadap adapter does that even matter when it turns it into more or less an E mount native camera to massively expand that choice of compact lenses?

I might have talked myself into getting one.

 

 

[Thpriest]

I used to really enjoy filming with the Voightlander 17.5mm 0.95 on the GH5. I filmed several weddings without changing the lens and really liked the results.

[Ilkka Nissila]

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

10 bit 4:2:2 N-Log with the RED lut compatibility, single button access to custom built profiles, waveforms, wireless timecode, headphone jack etc etc.

All the video recording modes on the Z50II are 4:2:0.

[BTM_Pix]

Just now, Ilkka Nissila said:

All the video recording modes on the Z50II are 4:2:0.

I'm doing this a lot recently.

I need to take the hint and retire.

Ignore everything @Andrew Reid

[IronFilm]

@MrSMW, I just assume you're talking about the upcoming Z90 / Z50 mk3 instead? 😉  One can dream!

[sanveer]

This is amazing Andrew. Your B&W GH2 video was very surrealistic and the natural grain at high ISO on that camera is crazy. 
 

Could you also compare the G9ii with the GH7? It apparently has slightly better dynamic range, and a tiny bit better rolling shutter too.

https://www.cined.com/camera-database/?camera=LUMIX-GH7

 

 

[MrSMW]

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

@MrSMW, I just assume you're talking about the upcoming Z90 / Z50 mk3 instead? 😉  One can dream!

In what regard...because nope, never heard of either of them?!

I'm aware there is supposed to be a fairly imminent Sony A7V, but I don't have any real interest in that either.

Or any other cameras or lenses except one and that is I am hoping Sigma do make a longer sibling to the 28-45mm f1.8 such as a 45-90 or 50-100 f1.8, but other than a Pocket 3, no plans for anything in 2025!

I would have stuck with my main 2024 set up other than I found it a bit overkill so made some adjustments by removing 2 video units and replacing them with a single hybrid, but otherwise, no complaints.

 

[KnightsFan]

Interested in seeing the comparisons! There's definitely certain styles that benefit from smaller sensors.

Digital images have been around long enough that we might also be approaching a time when digital noise is considered nostalgic in the way that VHS effects, film grain, or even interlacing can communicate timeliness rather than ugliness. Artistically, clean or "filmic" images don't even have to be the goal, and smaller sensors and lenses can certainly evoke specific feelings that larger formats don't.

On 12/8/2024 at 11:24 AM, Andrew Reid said:

Yet I still want the character of a lens wide open, the smoother bokeh, the light vignette, more 3D and the best flares.

One reason I like full frame is that I do not want the character of a wide-open lens! My most common lens choice is in the 28-35mm range at f5.6 or f8. I like landscapes and action scenes, more than faces, so I often want even sharpness and very little out of focus. That's not to say I don't appreciate other styles.

[fuzzynormal]

19 hours ago, MrSMW said:

bad camera movement really grates

I only have to assume you're editing this stuff too.  Once you're trying to edit footage from an inexperienced shooter using  stabilization, it'll drive you mad.  So many good shots wasted by the false stabilization shift. 

"Oh!  This looks like it's going to be nice pan to the... [image does an ugly shift/hitch] ... ah fuck!"

[kye]

14 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

I'm doing this a lot recently.

I need to take the hint and retire.

Please don't.

This is one of the main challenges for society - the people who care about truth enough to learn anything about the world self-censor when they realise they don't know everything or make mistakes.  Meanwhile, the people who don't care about truth and don't know very much about the world continue broadcasting at full volume unabashedly.

[ALKW]

The Realtime LUTs on the M43/Lumix cameras are worth it for that feature alone. Some of the ones by Nick Driftwood are amazing but I'm also having a lot of fun tweaking the image to my taste.

With the update to the Metabones to work with phase detection, it's brought new life to the Sigma 18-35 (which I had sold and now re-bought). This is for when I need to work in lowlight. Otherwise, I much prefer running around with my 15mm f1,7 , 25mm f1.4 and 42.5 f1.7 primes. So easy to carry around. I have the Sony A7iv as well but the G9ii is a much more fun camera to use.

[MrSMW]

4 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

I only have to assume you're editing this stuff too.  Once you're trying to edit footage from an inexperienced shooter using  stabilization, it'll drive you mad.  So many good shots wasted by the false stabilization shift. 

"Oh!  This looks like it's going to be nice pan to the... [image does an ugly shift/hitch] ... ah fuck!"

I have actually tried using second shooters from time to time and even farmed out editing, but nah, that drives me even more insane.

At least when you do it yourself, your mistakes are your own and you can then use those to 'inspire' yourself to reduce them going forward as much as possible.

Other than say tracking a couple with a gimbal and aerial drone stuff, I'm just not a fan of non-deliberate camera movement and I just decided towards the end of this year, I was spending too much time correcting in post or having material that just bugged me.

It's really simple for me and that is I ask myself the question, "did you want to see any camera movement at all in that shot?" and if the answer is no as it is 99% of the time, I then have to ask myself why da fuck I wasn't then using at least a monopod if not a tripod.

And the answer to that is convenience/laziness.

I can't fully trust the freestanding monopod to be left unattended and 3 legged tripods with typically 3 points of extension (ie, 9 twists or clicks) are not the quickest things to use in faster paced environments.

So in addition to my freestanding monopod and because my current lightweight tripod is no longer working properly, I am getting one of these:

https://www.amazon.fr/-/en/dp/B0D93FB6VG/?coliid=I3I7882LSYHI5Y&colid=3UZ2Z0IEUEIAP&psc=1&ref_=list_c_wl_lv_ov_lig_dp_it

I have a pair of heavyweight tripods for proper static use, but you can't realistically work with those in most scenarios other than situations where you do want to set stuff up and leave it unattended knowing it can't get knocked or blown over.

 

[QuickHitRecord]

I'm all about smaller sensors for passion projects in 2024. The EOS-M, GH1, and FZ47, specifically. I strive for a deeper depth of field, yet somehow a bit soft. After all of this trial and error over the past 15+ years, that's what looks best to me. And the shooting experience is a lot simpler and more straightforward than with modern cameras, which I feel is more fun and makes me more creative.

Funny how it has come back around full circle to some of the first sensors I've ever used...

[92F]

19 hours ago, sanveer said:

 

Pourriez-vous également comparer le G9ii avec le GH7 ? Il semble avoir une plage dynamique légèrement meilleure et un obturateur roulant un tout petit peu meilleur également.

https://www.cined.com/camera-database/?camera=LUMIX-GH7

 

 

The CineD test simply shows the relationship between dynamics and the internal denoiser:

The GH7 tested in raw clearly shows that the significant or total absence of denoiser, reduces the dynamics because there is noise.

So if the G9Mkii, I also noticed, has a significantly better dynamics in testing, it is at the cost of smoothing.

[sanveer]

23 minutes ago, 92F said:

The CineD test simply shows the relationship between dynamics and the internal denoiser:

The GH7 tested in raw clearly shows that the significant or total absence of denoiser, reduces the dynamics because there is noise.

So if the G9Mkii, I also noticed, has a significantly better dynamics in testing, it is at the cost of smoothing.

Interesting. That's what most people said was the reason why the iPhone shows 12 stops of dynamic range (whereas the real dynamic range and thus exposure latitude would be much lesser). 

[sanveer]

27 minutes ago, 92F said: