Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: New 4k Sony  (Read 15675 times)
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2196


WWW
« Reply #100 on: May 04, 2012, 09:38:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Coots

Talking of wasting money I think you shoudl consider a SoundDevices Pix240 is you want to record Proess

(you could do it right now with the HDMI on the FS100.. and be getting a backup on your internal drive if the wire goes wonky

My experience of Sound Devices is that they are brilliant build, run off Vlock batteries (you can run the cam from the same batt) and the sound preamps are top class

And you get I think jamable time code and maybe four tracks of sound .. 2 mics at 2 levels

I think you should try recording the Scarlet too and then you get XLR on it..

S
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #101 on: May 05, 2012, 12:27:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Morgan,

We'll look at them all.  The only reasons for this is for the REDS, we can go to hopefully a workable proxy without waiting to run through cine-x.

The reason for the Sony is obvious as it shoots h264 in a wrapper and has to be unwrapped, then transcoded, then slightly adjusted, even for proxy.

But, thanks for the info, we'll test both.  I only thought of AJA because they've been around for a long time.

IMO

BC
Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2196


WWW
« Reply #102 on: May 05, 2012, 12:59:59 PM »
ReplyReply

I have a Sound Devices audio recorder - its the only tool that I have apart from my D3 stills camera that I like

Not only the quality but all sorts of brilliance

- Pre Roll
-You cant power down while recording
-power management between onboard and offboard batts

Everything is designed better than your expectations

If their DATA recorders are in the same class you will have nothing but joy using it

Best

SamMM
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #103 on: May 18, 2012, 03:01:57 AM »
ReplyReply

1/2 disclaimer and 1/2 apologies to Cooter about AF.

I've been trying a little more AF on small crane config both with the Panasonic and could get my hands on a Sony.
Different systems, different prestations, same plastic-fragile feeling toy on both lenses. Sony was the kit I guess and Pana the 14mm.

Cooter is right, it's usable. Far from being perfect though but it will be highly desirable that engineers keep going developping a reliable AF suitable for motion requirements.

I think we're not there yet. I find that there is a very annoying limitation(s) (for ex), that when they lock focus, there is often a slightly "search" before locking that can or can not be smooth.
Specially when subject to focus moves on the lens axis.
It's more a bet than anything else if it will be noticiable or not. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't so well but overall not ridiculous. It's easy to smell that the next generations will improve
and get each time closer.

It could be indeed that we end to use AF 90% of the time in a close future.

« Last Edit: May 18, 2012, 03:09:14 AM by fredjeang » Logged
Hywel
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 139


WWW
« Reply #104 on: May 18, 2012, 03:20:10 AM »
ReplyReply

I use AF on my Hasselblad 100% of the time. Sure, I have to focus then recompose, but the AF system is much more accurate than I am when shooting quickly (which is how I always have to shoot- if you have a model tied up in a stress position you HAVE to get the set shot quickly and get her out). So what about video?

AF worked sorta on my small chip camcorders, but not well enough for anything other than run-and-gun documentary and behind the scenes. For narrative stuff it was better to park the focus in approx the right place and rely of depth of field and occasional manual nudging to save the day.

Since moving to large sensor cams I've not had a great time with AF. The Canons didn't do it at all IIRC. The Panasonic AF100 did it, but very lens dependent. We used it mostly with a wide angle 14 mm lens for documentary/behind the scenes shots where everything was handheld, again using an increased depth of field to compensate. I might have had a better experience shooting with their dedicated 14-140 lens which was built for continuous AF, but that lens was far too slow optically for my needs.

The Scarlet has a system which doesn't work well right now, but which in my mind is the wave of the future. You can tap on the touchscreen to autofocus on that point, tap and drag to follow something as it moves and keep it in focus, and even prefocus on two spots and rack between them.

If this system was highly responsive and free from hunting I'd be using it all the time. It isn't, right now it is sluggish, the touch screen is a bit clunky. (I yearn for an iPad as my touch screen control so I can control focus remotely - something which I think is the wave of the future).

But yeh I can also see AF going from a useful tool in the armoury to the dominant way of shooting after another generation or two of development. Even now, with the right camera/lens/subject combo, it's useful.

Cheers, Hywel.
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #105 on: May 18, 2012, 04:01:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Absolutly Hywel !
It's very lens dependant and also that the lens developped - caution, according to marketing claims - for motion in mind are ridiculously slow in terms of aperture and not the best glasses in the world by far.
The problem, and only current solution right now, of increasing D.O.F and shooting wide makes the imagery easily video style, wich is something we don't want.

But in certain situations it's possible.
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #106 on: May 18, 2012, 04:15:32 AM »
ReplyReply

The sony fs100 is plastic feeling and can look very video without a lot of trial and error and work.  It responds well to under exposure, hates being overexposed and has some of that cmos look where it picks up a lot of ambient color.

Given that the autofocus is pretty good, not perfect, subject dependent, but when your in a bind it works fast.

Note to Sony on their new 4k.

1.  Make the 4k part work out of the box, don't make anyone wait for it because nobody trusts waiting for anything in the digital world.

2.  Buy a RED ONE, and emulate the look of that file, not the Scarlet, not the FS100, not any panasonic . . .

3.  If you can't make a Raw 4k I don't care, just make it moveable, with a little better highlight response, less ambient bounce and get rid of that avchd (or whatever it's called) wrapper, so it plays on all computers quickly.

4.  develop a software suite where you can design your own looks and import them into the camera.

5.  Improve the autofocus.

6.  Come out with more e-mount lenses in f2 minimum.

That's it.

IMO

BC
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #107 on: May 18, 2012, 05:24:40 AM »
ReplyReply


6.  Come out with more e-mount lenses in f2 minimum.


That's one of the big dilema IMO.

And it concerns both Panasonic and Sony. Their fast lens line is ultra limited. (if they have any so-called fast)

I've just ordered one of these "plastic" prime, the 14mm 2.5 only to use in AF config for certain purposes but wide lenses aren't normaly my C.O.T; I hardly shoot something outside 40-90mm.
The lens line catalog is very restricted in those brands.

I don't mind that much about the plastic, although it would be nice to have military grade construction, but most of those AF lenses are too slow.

If Sony and Pana want us to stop buying manual glasses on the used market or Zeiss cine stuff, they need to expand their lens offer and work both on AF and max aperture.
Also that if we switch to AF-MF, having a precise MF ring wouldn't be a luxury. Less fancy design, grey painting and marketing, more seriousnessss when it comes to lenses.
Because those are curently more suitable in the bag of a nice lady walking in the Croisette than on set.

AVCHD is also another plague indeed. So as 8 bits.
The problem of 8 bits is that it's almost impossible if you don't have a B option to use those cameras in serious assignements with confidence. That's not tolerable. The banding issue can easily ruin a footage.
Truth that it only occurs in limited circunstances and we end to learn when and can avoid or minimize it, but when it does occur it's painfull.
I wouldn't care too much to have raw, but yes more  than 8 bits.

About the software suite (oh no...not another suite please, an integrated all-in-one, please please...), to design our looks and import them, that would be great.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2012, 05:27:28 AM by fredjeang » Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #108 on: May 18, 2012, 06:22:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Also, I wanted to ad a quick note on lightworks. Sorry for deviating the thread, but in this thread a lot of concepts have been mixed.

I want to give a chance to this software for several reasons.
So far I'm not advanced enough to report but I'll do it on this forum once I master it enough. The fact is that if it does well what they pretend with Prores, Red files, DNxHD...it will be a serious player.

I mean serious. It's a very powerfull tool. Not surprised famous editors are currently working with it.

As an example, in a project you got rooms. Well, those rooms are literally like physical rooms. You have an edited sequence and graded it. You can access other rooms and make instant clones of the raw sequence but with different gradings, different cuts proposals and you can display instantanously to the client each variation.  Work on one without affecting others, access instantanously a room or another. That, I like it! Those rooms aren't like sequences copies but entire proper workspaces, of the same project. I've been doing just that yesterday and beleive me, it's incredibly flexible and usefull.

Moving footage, cuts, in short: material, to another project is also immediate. No wait.

Also, I've noticed that being open source, there are people currently working on filters, looks etc...and it will grow. You can install those in the software, for free. Instead of having a commercial dev that not necesarly answer to people's needs but impose their road-map, proper users-developpers will take the features in their hands and it's way more powerfull IMO, at least on the paper; let's see how it goes.  We'll not be on bondage anymore of commercial wars and marketing priorities that rarely benefit the users but tend to complicate everything and close systems.

Oh yeah, and almost for free...

If Lightworks really becomes what it looks it can be, I think that this is the future.

Keep an eye this end of the month when they'll release the pro version with all the commercial codecs enabled.

They will release a Mac and Linux version soon.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2012, 10:54:16 AM by fredjeang » Logged
BJNY
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1112


« Reply #109 on: May 24, 2012, 03:33:37 AM »
ReplyReply

http://philipbloom.net/2012/05/22/240brighton/
Logged

Guillermo
Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad