Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 98
  1. Collapse Details
    #71
    Default
    Off sneaked specs - only 14-bit recording (the $10,000 version has 16), a much lower res EVF and a smaller battery (off XT4). Still has both PD and CD auto focus.

    No mention of the 4x pixel-shifting mode, so I was probably correct.

    Official announcement tomorrow.


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

  2. Collapse Details
    #72
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    11,394
    Default
    Not specific to this camera, but has ANYONE seen any video samples from any medium format VIDEO capable camera that looked perceptibly better than what good footage shot with FF or even S35 imagers looks like?
    I haven't and I have combed far and wide. Rephrasing this, is medium format video a boondoggle designed to just get sheep-like video buyers into the fold because, "It's an even huger sensor than FF, bigger sensors
    must be better, right?"

    Personally, I am holding out for the upcoming 32K 8x10 sensor cameras, you know they'll be here soon. if the larger the sensor, the better the video camera, why not just go for the classic 8x10 or 9x12" sensor?
    They'll probably look like big iPads eventually.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #73
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,174
    Default
    My god, can you imagine how slow the readout would be on an 8x10 camera

    I dont think medium format looks terribly different. I think it's better for selective focus in a wide shot. Sure, you can get the same DOF on a smaller sensor with a faster lens, but it'll be crappier IQ. That's the one thing- you can get better quality optics at equivalent DOF in medium format, and possibly objectively superior optics at optimal apertures.

    But the difference is nothing that would loosen my purse strings.

    Of course, the GFX100 has a crop factor of 0.79x, so I suppose that the difference between it and full-frame is less than the difference between full-frame and S35.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #74
    Resident Preditor mcgeedigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Potomac Falls, VA
    Posts
    8,033
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by puredrifting View Post
    Not specific to this camera, but has ANYONE seen any video samples from any medium format VIDEO capable camera that looked perceptibly better than what good footage shot with FF or even S35 imagers looks like?
    I haven't and I have combed far and wide. Rephrasing this, is medium format video a boondoggle designed to just get sheep-like video buyers into the fold because, "It's an even huger sensor than FF, bigger sensors
    must be better, right?"

    Personally, I am holding out for the upcoming 32K 8x10 sensor cameras, you know they'll be here soon. if the larger the sensor, the better the video camera, why not just go for the classic 8x10 or 9x12" sensor?
    They'll probably look like big iPads eventually.
    Even though I have a GFX50s for stills, (exclusively landscapes, really), I find it comical that companies like Fuji try to add video "features" to MF cameras.

    When the GFX100 came out, I went to my local photo shop to check it out, get my hand on it, etc.

    After messing with it a bit I started exploring the ports and when I came across the mini HDMI ports, I looked at the Fuji rep and said "Look just make it a great MF camera, doing crap like THAT just shows us you don't GAF about video, so don't bother."

    He wasn't amused.
    Matt Gottshalk - Director/ Dp/ and Emmy Award Winning Editor
    Producer/Director, Digital Creative for the United States Postal Service


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #75
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    11,394
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by mcgeedigital View Post
    Even though I have a GFX50s for stills, (exclusively landscapes, really), I find it comical that companies like Fuji try to add video "features" to MF cameras.

    When the GFX100 came out, I went to my local photo shop to check it out, get my hand on it, etc.

    After messing with it a bit I started exploring the ports and when I came across the mini HDMI ports, I looked at the Fuji rep and said "Look just make it a great MF camera, doing crap like THAT just shows us you don't GAF about video, so don't bother."

    He wasn't amused.
    Exactly. I really wanted to be impressed by some of the GFX100 footage but in the end, it's almost indistiguishable from what I shoot on my $800.00 X-T3. I already pretty convicted that FF is mostly a crutch for people
    who don't know how to light and think shooting everything ISO 12,800 should be the norm, "I gits lower noise and higher ISO so that's betterer, right?" I personally really dislike the FOV from FF video/lens compared to S35.

    I'm beginning to think that MF video is probably going to be just more of the Emperors New Clothes for shooting 16K video on a gigantic sensor in fake anamorphic for 4" iPhone screens. It's the world we live in.
    The manufacturers have clearly painted themselves into a corner. The market is shrinking, almost every camera that their client base owns is MORE than good enough to do almost anything so we've devolved into
    there really are very few new technologies coming out in new cameras that means anything (DGO? Meh, maybe. 8K? 12K? Definitely almost worthless. HDR? Meh, not important really. FF? Please. It's quite a stretch to call
    that an innovation, more like the new tail fins on the '58 Caddy versus the '57 ;-) BMD gets a trophy for the new 12K sensor, not because it's 12K, but because it's actually pretty damn innovative.

    MF video? Unless they can demonstrate a significant and noticeable improvement over S35 and FF sensors for video, then who will care? Those damn lenses that can cover that Texas size sensor aren't cheap either!
    Last edited by puredrifting; 01-26-2021 at 09:34 PM.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #76
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,174
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by puredrifting View Post
    I personally really dislike the FOV from FF video/lens compared to S35.
    Huh? You can get the same FOV on either with different lenses. Except you can get wider rectilinear lenses for FF than are available for S35. And for a cheap guy like me, i can get high quality full-frame lenses and use the full FOV such that the focal length makes sense (and there are many handsome vintage lenses available for the format like my Leica M 21mm which wouldn't be a proper wide angle on S35).

    And low-light capability is awesome for doc (and certainly wedding) shooting. Same goes for fx6/fx9.

    Horses for courses! I don't see as much value added to MF but then again it's not as much of a sensor area increase as S35->FF. Traditionally (and currently) I think it was used mostly for higher resolution. But as they pack more pixels onto smaller sensors, that advantage may evaporate.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #77
    Default
    GFX100S will have a 400 Mbps 4K video. Obviously, it's a photocentric item but it can shoot video as a side job. And it will have those classic Fujifilm emulation looks too.

    One also has to assume that, somewhere down the road, Sony will make a medium format model for the high end production. Realistically, it could do it now but it won't compete with Fuji on stills and is playing a waiting game with Venice, which is their well regarded high end offering. On the other hand, Tarantino and Spielberg love their 65mm film. ARRI Alexa65 is a major hit on the super high end rental market also. Sony could match those for under $30,000, had it wanted to. But it's going to do it on its own schedule.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #78
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,174
    Default
    I dunno dude...there are a lot of important specs beyond codec/framerate/resolution. And regarding high-end cameras, there are a lot of form factor/ergonomic/accessory compatibility concerns that make or break the camera. (on the low end, just look how people are ripping the fx6 for the lack of evf and audio input on the main body.) I'm not sure the grip of the dominant cameras will be loosened so easily.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #79
    Default
    Ya but they can make the high end camera body in the same form as Alexa or Red. The only difference will be the sensor size but one could use the same 65mm manuals with the same effect. Everything else - media, codecs, etc. - is already out there.

    The only thing for Sony is that they're pushing the E-mount and FF as their main standard and FF (Vista Vision) is plenty good for feature films already, while having enough potential to deliver quality 8K too. But, hey, if someone wants 65mm and willing to pay for it, why not? As folks pointed out to me, top portrait photographers had shot with the medium format Rolleiflex and Hasseblad since the 1930's. The street photographers like Doisneau preferred something less intrusive with their 35mm but medium format was dominant in a studio. It's just that digital had to start small - literally - because the technology hadn't been there. But it is now.


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #80
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,174
    Default
    This is all true. I'm just skeptical that they can pull out a class-leading design when they continue to make such large missteps in so many cameras with regard to use in field. It's not clear to me that they're evolving in the right direction, either. But hey, I guess people like Venice.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910 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
  •