Page 43 of 50 FirstFirst ... 33394041424344454647 ... LastLast
Results 421 to 430 of 497
  1. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Grug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    3,411
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by yoclay View Post
    I asked the tech guy and he replied "I'm not sure if there hardware limitations to get the PIX to 60fps, but I'll add that to our Feature Request list as well."

    I agree the LR unit is very convenient. However, I sense that it wasn't a big seller.
    Interesting. I love Sound Devices’ monitoring features and robustness, but I always thought the LR unit was the primary appeal they offer - since when you’re recording your video externally, it’s usually from cameras with limited audio features.

    I wonder if they’re either on the cusp of releasing something new and exciting (in the same space as the PIX/LR module), or whether that lovely, unified external video/audio recording concept is about to be lost to us forever?


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    4,729
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Fahnon View Post
    Look, man...
    I hear you. Loud and clear.

    The disconnect is truly a technicality.

    Hear me out...

    _____

    I am simply comparing the film stock simulations to the others' offerings by choosing to compare apples to apples (IN MY OPINION). It doesn't matter if Eterna is not voted as the best choice to be compared to neutral or natural. It can be any of the other 6 choices.

    However, since Provia is called 'Provia/Standard' then I think it's fair to say that that one would be compared to Canon's/Panasonic's/Sony's/Nikon's 'Standard'. Since Velvia is 'Velvia/Vivid' then I think it's fair to say that that one would be compared to C/P/S/N 'Vivid'.

    Now we have 5 left; Astia, Classic Chrome, PNH, PNS and Eterna.

    Now with the other cameras, you may find landscape, portrait, faithful and neutral/natural. Sony and Panasonic also have their Cine gammas. Then there is HLG in a few. And then the LOGs; everyone has their own LOG(s).

    _____

    Friend. Do you honestly believe that these Fuji film simulations are anything different and something special?

    Come on, man...I know you've been around the block for a long time. Through the Blackmagics, through the Canons.

    They are picture profiles/styles with subtle differences that corporate is providing us. They have been there as options for video the second Fuji started providing video in their stills cameras, and have looked very similar many years ago:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNxeybiiXoo (random sample)

    It's brilliant to name them after film stocks because the company makes film!

    I don't care what this digital Eterna is according to Fuji. It can be 250D 8663, 500T 8673, 500T 8573; it is completely irrelevant in my main argument. I'm sure they did an amazing job and provided some perfectly accurate digital Eterna stock in this digital camera to the best of their superior ability, but the X-T3 video with the Eterna film simulation does not look like film. It is a picture profile/style that tries to SIMULATE a look, a stock.

    _____

    All I am saying is that I choose Eterna or Pro Negative Standard as my comparison to neutral/natural on C/P/S/N cameras. It's not going to be a perfect comparison, of course, especially since Fuji cameras are pretty punchy, but that's just my personal choice.

    IMO, when someone is asking if the camera is capable of a more neutral look then the answer should point to one of the 6 film simulations, not F-Log and post-production. Because in post you can almost do anything. You can manipulate the heck out of any of them and call it "neutral".

    If you shoot F-Log and then add a LUT in post and call that neutral (and of course it very well could be and is) then that in my opinion is in a different category and doesn't count.

    You wouldn't hand over LOG footage (as you mentioned) to people who asked for neutral footage unless they specifically asked you for LOG footage.

    It doesn't count...and this is our disconnect.

    A technicality, IMO.

    I mean, am I crazy? Am I not providing a valid argument?
    Last edited by NorBro; 01-10-2019 at 07:40 PM.


    0 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    528
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by NorBro View Post


    I mean, am I crazy? Am I not providing a valid argument?
    You aren’t crazy in my eyes. The issue became an argument, or a debate, mostly due to semantics nuances.
    Happy New Year to all and happy shooting.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Aledo, Texas
    Posts
    128
    Default
    Just jumped onto the XT-3 bandwagon. I’m blown away by the 400mbits 4k 10-bit 4:2:0 footage...but I’m impressed even more by the autofocus capabilities during video capture. I never thought I’d see a Super35 sensor auto-focus that well.
    Sony FS5, A7RII, Fuji XT-3, MacBook Pro


    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    8,845
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by David_Manning View Post
    Just jumped onto the XT-3 bandwagon. I’m blown away by the 400mbits 4k 10-bit 4:2:0 footage...but I’m impressed even more by the autofocus capabilities during video capture. I never thought I’d see a Super35 sensor auto-focus that well.
    Welcome to the club! I'm a new member as well, it is a paradigm changing camera too as far as I have experienced. The dark secret is, I actually overall like the images better than the ones coming out of my C200 most of the time from a camera that cost 1/5th as much.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    737
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by David_Manning View Post
    Just jumped onto the XT-3 bandwagon. I’m blown away by the 400mbits 4k 10-bit 4:2:0 footage...but I’m impressed even more by the autofocus capabilities during video capture. I never thought I’d see a Super35 sensor auto-focus that well.
    So I'm looking at the camera, too. David, Dan, and everyone: This has probably already been discussed (and missed by me), but how would you compare the X-T3's AF to Canon DPAF? Especially in handheld verite(ish) situations? Not just in terms of better/worse, but how do they differ?
    Last edited by Jim Feeley; 01-12-2019 at 04:33 PM.
    ----------
    Jim Feeley
    POV Media


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    Senior Member macgregor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Lalaland
    Posts
    2,700
    Default
    Whaaaaaaaat?


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Beverly Hills, CA
    Posts
    1,390
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Feeley View Post
    So I'm looking at the camera, too. David, Dan, and everyone: This has probably already been discussed (and missed by me), but how would you compare the XT-3's AF to Canon DPAF? Especially in handheld verite(ish) situations? Not just in terms of better/worse, but how do they differ?
    Full sensor DPAF- as good or better than Canon for video; see differences here:


    Sony with MC11 seems to work ok for video with Canon lenses. Any options for usable Canon lens AF-C and the XT3 (Fringer?)?


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Central NY
    Posts
    1,865
    Default
    When comparing AF performance you really need to specify still or video. Stills, the Canon and Nikon (not cinema/video cameras) are still better, but the margin decreases every generation. I'll not comment on the video because I haven't experienced it, rumors are that it is getting pretty good during video.


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    Senior Member marvinhello's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    GTA, Canada
    Posts
    746
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Feeley View Post
    So I'm looking at the camera, too. David, Dan, and everyone: This has probably already been discussed (and missed by me), but how would you compare the XT-3's AF to Canon DPAF? Especially in handheld verite(ish) situations? Not just in terms of better/worse, but how do they differ?
    Quote Originally Posted by jcs View Post
    Full sensor DPAF- as good or better than Canon for video; see differences here:


    Sony with MC11 seems to work ok for video with Canon lenses. Any options for usable Canon lens AF-C and the XT3 (Fringer?)?
    Overall Canon's DPAF (Dual Pixel AF) is better than X-T3's PDAF (Phase Detection AF). It's more accurate tracking, less hunting and more consistent across different lighting scenarios.

    One of the reason being, Canon's DPAF is built into the pixels (split in half), it's 80% of the actual photosites, on 1DX II, it has around 17MP AF pixels. On X-T3 the PDAF pixels are masks and "only" cover 2.16MP across the sensor.

    Canon's DPAF also offers more tracking modes, while X-T3 only do full auto (no user control), area (focus box) or face tracking, and face tracking becomes extremely unreliable when the face becomes small in the frame.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 43 of 50 FirstFirst ... 33394041424344454647 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •