Haters gonna hate: RAW videos in your pocket!!!! - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 170 Old 11-15-2013, 08:23 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

So for me Mark the question is, forgetting the work that would be involved, how do we achieve a 'realistic depiction' of what one sees days or weeks later? Do we really remember what that scene looked like? Do we really remember the highlights as our eyes saw it? Do we really remember the subtle shades of green, red or what have we?

When I read that I think that you are a SUPER SCIENTIST that wants everything perfect!!

But when I remember that 4:2:0 is good enough for you that thought goes away!

And PLEASE, are you that worried about WB? Again, put the video you posted with the GX7 in your NLE and you will see that YOUR WB IS WRONG!! You have NO REAL WHITES! Your white balance is more of a BLUE BALANCE!!

Are you happy enough with your footage?

Please, tell me again how the WB can be a deal breaker for RAW videos rolleyes.gif
thedest is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 170 Old 11-15-2013, 08:31 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tugela View Post

I don't think you know what dynamic range is. It has nothing to do with the bit depth.

Dynamic Range is totally dependent on bit depths when you think about linear converters, and it has some influences in non linear converters - but in that case there are more variables involved. We are talking about one, bit depth.

We could talk about algorythms, curves, pixel size etc, but hey, the BMPCC has better algorythms to compress DR data and has bigger pixels than most full frame cameras - so in every single aspect it has better factors to create a wider DR than other ordinary cameras.
thedest is offline  
post #93 of 170 Old 11-15-2013, 08:44 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Mark has posted 2 RAW videos made with the EOS M. Do they look "inaccurate"?

https://vimeo.com/72310879
https://vimeo.com/71944234

Ken, are you worried about accuracy? Please, read something about Chroma subsampling and you will learn how accurate the colors of your GX7 are! The sky of the video you posted is fluorescent blue.
thedest is offline  
post #94 of 170 Old 11-15-2013, 09:14 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

I think you are correct - you really do have to recreate the scene in the editor. The BMPCC lcd screen shows focus, but not really the color. There is no auto WB, you just set the relevant temperature, use zebras to get the right exposure, and use peaking to get the right focus. Hard to know what you got until you see it in an editor and then can fine tune.

Here's an idea - take a still photo for each different scene/site, and then use those as a guide later! Match the video frames to the pictures (which have even more resolution and dynamic range). That's what painters do. Of course, the BMPCC does not take stills, so this requires two cameras (two pockets, maybe two photographers).

Mark, you dont need that. Every camera gets wrong WBs in a lot of shots, thats why people that are really worriied about accuracy always use white and grey cards. If you are happy with the auto WB of the EOS M, im pretty sure that WB wont be a problem shooting RAW.

Accuracy is certainly not a problem compared to what we have
thedest is offline  
post #95 of 170 Old 11-15-2013, 10:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedest View Post

Mark, you dont need that. Every camera gets wrong WBs in a lot of shots, thats why people that are really worriied about accuracy always use white and grey cards. If you are happy with the auto WB of the EOS M, im pretty sure that WB wont be a problem shooting RAW.

Accuracy is certainly not a problem compared to what we have

You cannot adjust the WB in the BMPCC using white or grey cards. You could shoot using the cards and then use them in post to manipulate to get the scene correct (I have many scenes with no natural whites in them). Of course, WB camera settings are completely irrelevant (except perhaps for exposure) shooting RAW, whether it's an EOS M or a BMPCC - you can set WB in post any way you want. And you really have to set it in post with the BMPCC. Perhaps shooting a clip with the cards is the best you can do to re-create the scene accurately. And, of course, in principle one can get the colors more accurately.
markr041 is online now  
post #96 of 170 Old 11-15-2013, 11:54 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

You cannot adjust the WB in the BMPCC using white or grey cards. You could shoot using the cards and then use them in post to manipulate to get the scene correct (I have many scenes with no natural whites in them). Of course, WB camera settings are completely irrelevant (except perhaps for exposure) shooting RAW, whether it's an EOS M or a BMPCC - you can set WB in post any way you want. And you really have to set it in post with the BMPCC. Perhaps shooting a clip with the cards is the best you can do to re-create the scene accurately. And, of course, in principle one can get the colors more accurately.

You must be wrong Mark, because we're lucky enough to have someone here who knows more about most everything than any of us here. I am so done responding to his hyperbole. If he knew as much about etiquette and good manners as he thinks he does about video, normal conversations might be possible. rolleyes.gif
Ken Ross is offline  
post #97 of 170 Old 11-15-2013, 12:23 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

Perhaps shooting a clip with the cards is the best you can do to re-create the scene accurately. And, of course, in principle one can get the colors more accurately.

Thats what I was talking about. And thats what most serious shooters do when they want to recreate exactly what they were seeing.



There are different type of cards. Whites, greys etc. Thats the only way to grant perfect WB. The in camera WB gets it wrong most of the time.

So, what they do is to shoot the card in the beginning of the scene and then with a simple click they have the perfect WB.

Of course that for home videos that may be totally useless since you can get totally real and believable results using only your eyes.

Dave is one of those video shooters that always use that method, even for his DSLRs videos. He has posted some tutorials about that. But if you are happy enough with the auto WB of your cameras, you should be fine because things wont look fake at all with good eyes + RAW.

There are lots of guys happy with the footage from cameras like the panasonic camcorders, and their AWB is totally wrong.

http://www.learningdslrvideo.com/white-balance-confusion/
thedest is offline  
post #98 of 170 Old 11-15-2013, 01:53 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

If he knew as much about etiquette and good manners as he thinks he does about video, normal conversations might be possible. rolleyes.gif

Ken, dont take that personal. Im just tired of repeating facts.

You should stop saying that an F1 car is a bad product because most people wont know how to drive it and because it doesnt feature a big boot and some airbags like a family minivan.

Be happy with what you have, and dont blame an equipment just because you cant see yourself using it. All the BMPCC promises were accomplished. You wont find it in the shelf right next to a point and shoot. Those who buy it have to know what they will have to deal with.

If you go to bhphotovideo.com you wont find the BMPCC in the consumer camera store: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Camcorders/ci/1871/N/4294548093

But if you go to the PROFESSIONAL camera store, you will see that the BMPCC will be the first best seller camera: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Pro-Camcorders-Cameras/ci/16763/N/4256818817
thedest is offline  
post #99 of 170 Old 11-15-2013, 04:54 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
More showcase of RAW potential
thedest is offline  
post #100 of 170 Old 11-15-2013, 06:59 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
And an extremely beautifull low light video.

Those reflections and colors are so amazing. Its REALLY strange to see a footage that good. My eyes are not used to that kind of image quality

I cant see me shooting JPEG pictures anymore. Im afraid that will also happen with video shooting.
thedest is offline  
post #101 of 170 Old 11-16-2013, 02:09 PM
Advanced Member
 
brunerww's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 991
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Wow. I had the same reaction when I saw what the FS100 could do in low light a couple of years ago. But I couldn't afford one of those. smile.gif
brunerww is offline  
post #102 of 170 Old 11-16-2013, 07:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,884
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 48 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedest View Post

And an extremely beautifull low light video.

Those reflections and colors are so amazing. Its REALLY strange to see a footage that good. My eyes are not used to that kind of image quality

I cant see me shooting JPEG pictures anymore. Im afraid that will also happen with video shooting.
It seems to me that the first thing here is that the shooter identified scenes where light was at extremes. It is not "low light". It is bright light mixed with nearly no light. Second, there was PP to compress the light range to get it to display on YouTube. There are two very different skill sets set here.

Most of what I've seen so far, either the shooting is bad or the PP is over done. In this case it seems both are good.
bsprague is online now  
post #103 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 09:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked: 124
I think we will be seeing a lot better examples now that the BMPCC RAW is out. It is MUCH easier to edit that and get good color (although time-consuming).

Here is another recent example:

https://vimeo.com/79585359#at=132

Might compare to Bill's beach video with the SD750.

I have shot a real RAW video now, and learned a lot about the advantages from the experience, which I will post soon. One has to change almost completely one's approach while shooting (wb does not matter, and optimal exposure is completely different).

And editing a RAW file, in say, Lightroom is as satisfying and magical as the old days when you would see a picture develop in the liquid from a blank photo paper. Dull, lifeless images come to life!

You can get exposure and WB and saturation and contrast exactly right (whatever your criteria - pseudo creative or accuracy) without any noticeable degradation of the image. It is amazing. And this is besides the extra dynamic range (that is just a bonus).
brunerww likes this.
markr041 is online now  
post #104 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 09:57 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
I hate to be the naysayer again, but although that video was very nice, if this was tagged (fill in your camera's name & model #) would anyone real think this was from a 'special' camera? Again, it was very nice, but I certainly wasn't wowed by it and I really don't think I would have watched it for more than a few seconds other than to see if I could see something 'special' from it.

In looking at it, although I obviously wasn't there, there were colors that again appeared wrong to me. The berries should have been redder (when we were at the zoo last week, we saw several areas with this kind of berry and it was a purer red), the jeans that the guy was wearing appeared over-saturated and flesh tones, although somewhat away from the camera, looked too red and areas of tree bark also seemed too red. Am I being critical? Probably, but this is a camera that I thinks deserves to be critically examined for colors given how the video needs to be 'processed' relative to other cameras.

Again not doubting that it has certain 'special' attributes, but all I care about is what the final video looks like.

Honestly, I've seen much nicer videos from your EOS. smile.gif

But I have no doubt we'll see the best examples of what the camera can do from you Mark.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #105 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 11:12 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Yep, mark is probably one of the best benchmarkers around. Make sure to write a full review mark. You help a lot of guys when you do that.
thedest is offline  
post #106 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 11:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked: 124
Thanks for setting me up to fail guys.

I think I share Ken's taste's for color (real), and we seem to be in a minority for some reason among posters on other forums using cameras that require editing.

In principle in the editor one can get the color almost exactly right (whatever one wants), better than in-camera auto mode (on the Canon, I almost never use auto WB anymore for shots in the shade, as they are too blue otherwise). Once one learns the quirks of a camera, and it has a good LCD (realistic depiction of what the will be recorded) you can do pretty well. Manipulating the "picture" on the computer in principle should be easier - you have many more controls and no rush. But it does require experience and knowledge different from using the camera, so it is not obvious that doing well with a particular camera translates to doing well with this new way of taking video. We will see.

It is kind of fun, as I said, to "develop" video pictures and not actually have to worry as much about settings in the field - it's almost "just expose not to get zebras" and then in post you can get the picture any way you want. If you did that on a regular camera, you would often get overexposed images, but that does not matter for RAW because you can just bring exposure down with no degradation. I will show examples where it looks horribly overexposed from the camera and then spot on after editing, with great DR and color.

I deliberately shot in the worst possible conditions - bright low sun, so there are shadows and areas both in the shade and in the sun in the same view. I shot back-lit. These are conditions I basically avoid using any of my cameras. In general you want to avoid them even with great DR, but this is test. And, yes, it would have been great to at the same time take video with, say, the EOS M., but this is supposed to be for fun.
brunerww likes this.
markr041 is online now  
post #107 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 01:23 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Mark, one thing we haven't discussed and is kind of a non-starter for me, is the 30p limiation. I shoot everything in 60p and i think that's what you've largely done too over the years.

So how much of a limitation are you finding it? Certainly with any kind of rapid motion it can be an issue.

The other thing is the run n gun concept. This doesn't strike me as a run n camera. Thoughts?
Ken Ross is offline  
post #108 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 01:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Mark, one thing we haven't discussed and is kind of a non-starter for me, is the 30p limiation. I shoot everything in 60p and i think that's what you've largely done too over the years.

So how much of a limitation are you finding it? Certainly with any kind of rapid motion it can be an issue.

The other thing is the run n gun concept. This doesn't strike me as a run n camera. Thoughts?

The EOS M does not have 60p either, and I have been happy with it (I would prefer 60p, but it does not seem to be a big deal given my EOS M experience). I would use neither the EOS M nor the BMPCC for sports (and don't).

In my expedition yesterday, I was using the BMPCC just as I would any other camera - precisely run and gun - walking around and shooting, no set ups. It is small, light and inconspicuous just like the EOS M (and actually looks more like a cell phone). So we will see what I get. The scenes have plenty of people moving around (walking and gesticulating).

The interesting thing is I cannot know what I got until I edit - the camera plays the videos just fine, but they are the RAW-looking, desaturated files so it is not possible to know what they look like until they are put in the editor. I think run and gun is ok (I had the Lumix 14-140mm on it and the OIS worked fine); it is not run and gun and show!
markr041 is online now  
post #109 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 02:20 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
I find it a bit disconcerting not knowing what you've got until you're editing, especially for those moments that can't be repeated. I guess it's something you can get used to, but very different than how we've shot for years.

Regarding 30p, I've found it an issue with rapid motion (not sports) and even slow panning. The stutter can be disturbing IMO. My Samsung plasma does a good job controlling this when put in the 'soap opera' mode, but that's very display related.

I don't think it's the acquisition device for me, but I find it all very interesting. I strongly suspect that other cameras will arrive before too long that address some of my concerns. I'm looking down the road for a manageable, reasonably priced, 4K camera bundling features offered by the RX10, GH3 and GX7. Not too much to ask for. wink.gif
Ken Ross is offline  
post #110 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 03:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

I find it a bit disconcerting not knowing what you've got until you're editing, especially for those moments that can't be repeated. I guess it's something you can get used to, but very different than how we've shot for years.

Regarding 30p, I've found it an issue with rapid motion (not sports) and even slow panning. The stutter can be disturbing IMO. My Samsung plasma does a good job controlling this when put in the 'soap opera' mode, but that's very display related.

I don't think it's the acquisition device for me, but I find it all very interesting. I strongly suspect that other cameras will arrive before too long that address some of my concerns. I'm looking down the road for a manageable, reasonably priced, 4K camera bundling features offered by the RX10, GH3 and GX7. Not too much to ask for. wink.gif

It is (was) exactly disconcerting. But it seems as long as you expose not to get zebras (which is what the AE on the camera does, or you can do this manually), there is nothing to be worried about. You will have no blown out parts and the most detail in the dark parts. I will show examples.

There is no question a more friendly (and better audio) camera shooting RAW is needed, but once you get RAW shooting, then the need for many of the nicieties are less. I also hope that the 4K ones that we can afford will also shoot at least 4:2:2 and 10-bit, if not 4:4:4.
markr041 is online now  
post #111 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 04:26 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
60p is awesome, but most movies are 24p and they have lots of action scenes. Its not the end of the world. Not a long time ago I saw some guys talking about 120fps being the next standard. Lets see.

Mark, is your display set to "film" or "video" mode? In "video" mode you get more saturated colors in live view. It helps a little bit.

A lot of guys are complaining about the lack of features of the BMPCC, but something that a few are seeing is that they actually made something really nice. Shooting with it is videography at its roots.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

I find it a bit disconcerting not knowing what you've got until you're editing, especially for those moments that can't be repeated. I guess it's something you can get used to, but very different than how we've shot for years.

Are you forgetting about film days Ken? There are lots of film producers that still work with film, because of the superior image quality. RAW digital video may change that game. If you expose using the zebras, its pretty hard to miss a shot because of bad exposure.

I would love a better LCD in the BMPCC, but words cannot express how happy I am with the simplicity of that camera. You just have to worry with the essentials. You dont get distracted with those stupid options and icons that all digital cameras have. Im always at full manual mode with my cameras, otherwise I get lost on those endless menus.

mark, how good is the OIS at 140mm? Im thinking about the stability of the 200 or 300mm super zooms. And how clean those images look at full telephoto?
thedest is offline  
post #112 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 04:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedest View Post

60p is awesome, but most movies are 24p and they have lots of action scenes. Its not the end of the world. Not a long time ago I saw some guys talking about 120fps being the next standard. Lets see.

Mark, is your display set to "film" or "video" mode? In "video" mode you get more saturated colors in live view. It helps a little bit.

A lot of guys are complaining about the lack of features of the BMPCC, but something that a few are seeing is that they actually made something really nice. Shooting with it is videography at its roots.
Are you forgetting about film days Ken? There are lots of film producers that still work with film, because of the superior image quality. RAW digital video may change that game. If you expose using the zebras, its pretty hard to miss a shot because of bad exposure.

I would love a better LCD in the BMPCC, but words cannot express how happy I am with the simplicity of that camera. You just have to worry with the essentials. You dont get distracted with those stupid options and icons that all digital cameras have. Im always at full manual mode with my cameras, otherwise I get lost on those endless menus.

mark, how good is the OIS at 140mm? Im thinking about the stability of the 200 or 300mm super zooms. And how clean those images look at full telephoto?

I set the lcd to 'video'. It really does not do much. We will see how good the OIS is when I make the video from the scenes I shot - the 14-140mm lens is actually pretty heavy, although not large (one is getting the equivalent of 40-400mm). I am still 'grading' the scenes and the workflow with Lightroom is slow.
markr041 is online now  
post #113 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 05:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post


There is no question a more friendly (and better audio) camera shooting RAW is needed, but once you get RAW shooting, then the need for many of the nicieties are less. I also hope that the 4K ones that we can afford will also shoot at least 4:2:2 and 10-bit, if not 4:4:4.

Agreed. I do think they'll offer 4:2:2, not so sure about 4:4:4. To be honest, not that sure we need it for what we use it for.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #114 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 05:48 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
I dont expect RAW video or even 444 from the major companies any time soon, but having 10-bit 422 could get them back in the game.
thedest is offline  
post #115 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 06:09 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedest View Post


A lot of guys are complaining about the lack of features of the BMPCC, but something that a few are seeing is that they actually made something really nice. Shooting with it is videography at its roots.
Are you forgetting about film days Ken? There are lots of film producers that still work with film, because of the superior image quality. RAW digital video may change that game. If you expose using the zebras, its pretty hard to miss a shot because of bad exposure.

There are less and less producers working with film today for a variety of reasons and some would argue the quality issue when it comes to film vs 4K. But that's a discussion for a different forum or thread. I don't agree that using this camera is 'videography at its roots', at least not in the form the camera is presented out of the box. I see no real reason to take a step backward in some equipment design elements and usability functions. We already have the tools to be more assured of what we're getting, when we're shooting. The designers made some obvious design compromises when deciding to make this camera as diminutive as it is. It wouldn't be the first time that's happened, as we've seen that with other cameras that don't shoot RAW video.

For myself, every single time I've bought a camera without a VF, I've regretted it. I simply don't think it's as fun and it makes you less a part of the action than when using a VF. There is absolutely no way, no matter what anyone tells you, that you can a) compose b) focus c) judge color...yes I understand this camera is different in THAT respect, and d) see the damn thing in bright sunlight without a VF. And yes, I understand you can use an auxiliary VF, but we're back to square one with what I consider an awkward arrangement and implementation. Not having 60p is, IMO, another strike against it. Future iterations will more than likely have 60p as we've seen with DSLRs that started with 24p & 30p. All of those failures detract from 'videography at its roots'. What you call 'simplicity' is what I call a lack of controls that could only improve your end results. Professional cameras have the complexity they do because when the operator understands how to use them, he gets better results.

IMO this camera is flawed in several significant ways, despite the fact that it apparently can create some very nice results. But again, even with that last Vimeo that Mark posted, I absolutely contend that if someone posted that same video and said it was made by the Canon *** or the Panasonic ***, people would have said "nice" and not much more.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #116 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 06:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

I set the lcd to 'video'. It really does not do much. We will see how good the OIS is when I make the video from the scenes I shot - the 14-140mm lens is actually pretty heavy, although not large (one is getting the equivalent of 40-400mm). I am still 'grading' the scenes and the workflow with Lightroom is slow.

Mark, one question from a design standpoint with a camera this small, is ergonomics. I recall that one of the NEX cameras I had was very small and when equipped with a relatively long, heavy lens, made for an awkward arrangement. Balance wasn't good, weight was too much in front of the camera and the entire setup was, again, not 'fun'. This really created a limitation in my mind as to what lenses I was comfortable using with such a small body. Since I don't carry a tripod when I'm shooting for furn, this becomes an obvious issue. Any thoughts on this?
Ken Ross is offline  
post #117 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 07:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
brunerww's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 991
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Mark can answer for himself, but some may be interested what I did. I started out as a Super 8 shooter and still feel comfortable with the pistol grip form factor. Simple and inexpensive*, and it works.



*$15 LCD shade, $21.50 pistol grip
brunerww is offline  
post #118 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 07:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Mark, one question from a design standpoint with a camera this small, is ergonomics. I recall that one of the NEX cameras I had was very small and when equipped with a relatively long, heavy lens, made for an awkward arrangement. Balance wasn't good, weight was too much in front of the camera and the entire setup was, again, not 'fun'. This really created a limitation in my mind as to what lenses I was comfortable using with such a small body. Since I don't carry a tripod when I'm shooting for furn, this becomes an obvious issue. Any thoughts on this?

The NEX, the Canon EOS M and the BMPCC are similar in design - small and light, but with their bigger sensors one sometimes has to use big lenses. The 14-140mm is one of the biggest. But I basically I hold these cameras by the big lens - basically I carry around and shoot with a lens that happens to have a "back" attached to it. There are pancake lenses of course for all three; when they are on, I hold the camera like a P&S. It is a very difference experience than a camcorder (where I have a hand on the extended LCD), and a big DSLR.
markr041 is online now  
post #119 of 170 Old 11-17-2013, 07:49 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,786
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked: 915
Mark, this was part of what I went through when deciding whether to keep the GH3 or GX7. As you know I chose the GX7, but there was no doubt in my mind the GH3 had superior ergonomics and was actually more fun to shoot with. That was the main issue I wrestled with in giving up the GH3 since their output was so similar.

There's an interesting 'line in the sand' I've noticed between cameras that are just too big, like some of the large Sony camcorders I've had in the past, and those that are too small. The first NEX I had was in the category of 'too small' for me. OTOH I might actually have considered a camcorder like the Sony FDR-AX1 if it had been smaller & lighter. I was surprised at how big it was when I saw it at Sony. Of course there was also the price issue. smile.gif

Honestly I would really love to start archiving footage in 4K since that's where we're all headed.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #120 of 170 Old 11-18-2013, 05:01 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Having 4k wont be a big revolution. The real revolution will come only with better codecs. 4k just adds more resolution. And good resolution can disappear when the footage lacks dynamic range.

.

.

Recently there was a big meeting between TV specialists, engineers etc and they were talking about the future of television. They started a discussion to know what REALLY makes a difference in image quality and what should be the next step. They ALL voted.

Thats the result:

- Dynamic Range (Better Colors/Latitude) is the most important aspect
.
.
.
.
- Faster pixels (more fps)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
- Higher resolution (4k) - the least important thing
thedest is offline  
Reply Camcorders

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off