Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 93
  1. Collapse Details
    #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    6,146
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by SJX View Post
    Funny didn't see it. Even used browser search.
    I was curious so I checked the FS5 II and they actually do not mention it on that one (they do mention HD's 10-bit).

    IMO, maybe because there was a lot of outrage the camera didn't shoot 4K 10-bit for the asking price (and it was a very underwhelming second version of a model), so maybe marketing omitted that little 8-bit note.

    ___

    And I don't know much about good ND filters, but I'm sure others do.

    I've been using the same Tiffen variable ND for like 6 years because no one will notice a difference between a $100 and a $1000 ND filter.


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #22
    Default
    Although it's probably not what you're looking for in small compact form but definately is the best bang for the buck IMO is the Sony FS700r with the Odyssey 7Q+. You can't go wrong with this combo for the price and what it can do,
    Sony F3/Odyssey7Q and FS700R/Odyssey 7Q+


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Beverly Hills, CA
    Posts
    2,073
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by SJX View Post
    But so the X-T3 is 10 bit or 8 bit 4k internally? You started like it did 10 but but then by the end I wasn't sure.Thanks.
    The X-T3 has 10-bit internally (for some modes). The point is that it's a good idea to test both cameras if budget is a major concern, as the A6400 is quite a bit lower cost vs. the X-T3 and has superior AF. Out of the camera Fuji looks to have better skin tones, however I've learned (as have many others so you can too!) how to deal with Sony color, so I wouldn't hold that against the A6400 or A7 III at this point. Sony's color has slowly been getting better with every release...

    A6400 / A7 III / A9 AI AF:


    I never had any major banding issues with the 8-bit A7S II and SLog2 + sgamut3.cine with +16 saturation. Again, was using 12-bit RGB 444 and now am using 8-bit YUV 422 in the same environment (green screen set in my home) and am getting better results with the 8-bit camera (green screen keying). It's not that 8-bit is better of course, it's that the 4K detail in the latter camera is better than the prior camera, and 8-bits (and YUV 422 vs RGB 444) isn't hurting the final result. For extreme grading, 10 or more bits will be helpful (which we don't need). Also remember the C300 and C100 punched above their weight with CLog and 8-bit codecs: https://nofilmschool.com/2011/11/lat...canon-eos-c300 . So really important to test something like that 8-bit A6400 against the 10-bit X-T3 for your specific needs (again, for overall features and performance, I'd spend more and get the A7 III (if you don't need to super AI AF right away (A7 III gets it in April)).


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #24
    Senior Member SJX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,039
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by NorBro View Post
    I was curious so I checked the FS5 II and they actually do not mention it on that one (they do mention HD's 10-bit).

    IMO, maybe because there was a lot of outrage the camera didn't shoot 4K 10-bit for the asking price (and it was a very underwhelming second version of a model), so maybe marketing omitted that little 8-bit note.

    ___

    And I don't know much about good ND filters, but I'm sure others do.

    I've been using the same Tiffen variable ND for like 6 years because no one will notice a difference between a $100 and a $1000 ND filter.
    I probably looked FS5II then.

    Tiffen variable ND is only $100?


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #25
    Senior Member SJX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,039
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by SrtBrad View Post
    Although it's probably not what you're looking for in small compact form but definately is the best bang for the buck IMO is the Sony FS700r with the Odyssey 7Q+. You can't go wrong with this combo for the price and what it can do,
    This was my first idea. But while used FS700 is now cheap 7Q is not. Almost more than FS700. So I decide to look for alternatives. To be honest I don't need RAW. When I need really nice and cinematic footages I have another camera. I need something for more run and gun and quicker to use. RAW is not needed. Log is fine. So Prores or any codec with log and good DR in 4k 10 bit 422 is enough. So FS700 only advantage ins built in ND. Ergonomics are as bad as mirrorless anyway and I don't need RAW.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #26
    Senior Member SJX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,039
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by jcs View Post
    The X-T3 has 10-bit internally (for some modes). The point is that it's a good idea to test both cameras if budget is a major concern, as the A6400 is quite a bit lower cost vs. the X-T3 and has superior AF. Out of the camera Fuji looks to have better skin tones, however I've learned (as have many others so you can too!) how to deal with Sony color, so I wouldn't hold that against the A6400 or A7 III at this point. Sony's color has slowly been getting better with every release...

    A6400 / A7 III / A9 AI AF:


    I never had any major banding issues with the 8-bit A7S II and SLog2 + sgamut3.cine with +16 saturation. Again, was using 12-bit RGB 444 and now am using 8-bit YUV 422 in the same environment (green screen set in my home) and am getting better results with the 8-bit camera (green screen keying). It's not that 8-bit is better of course, it's that the 4K detail in the latter camera is better than the prior camera, and 8-bits (and YUV 422 vs RGB 444) isn't hurting the final result. For extreme grading, 10 or more bits will be helpful (which we don't need). Also remember the C300 and C100 punched above their weight with CLog and 8-bit codecs: https://nofilmschool.com/2011/11/lat...canon-eos-c300 . So really important to test something like that 8-bit A6400 against the 10-bit X-T3 for your specific needs (again, for overall features and performance, I'd spend more and get the A7 III (if you don't need to super AI AF right away (A7 III gets it in April)).
    Didn't watch the comparison video yet. But read a C5D review of X-T3. Not seeing much reason for GH5, A7SIII or any other mirrorless instead of X-T3 to be honest. XT-3 seems impressive for what it is and price.

    Pros for my needs:

    ALL Intra
    10bit 422 4K
    4K/60P 4:2:0 10-Bit internal
    120 frames per second in full HD
    Zebra pattern . Maybe all mirroless cams have now. But last time I used mirrorless was GH2. So this is good to have
    AF. Is it actually good? Probably not Canon good but.
    11.2 stops of DR. So more than A7SII or GH5. Almost as good as FS7. If C5D gave it that then it must be a 13-14 stop camera by DVXuser standards.
    Good rolling shutter it seems. 9ms is better than A7SII and even FS7 and FS5.

    Cons for my needs:

    H265 codec and H264. Highly compressed right? Of course is nitpicking in this size and price. But not much else for the cons list so...
    No internal body stabilisation system. I guess gimbal then. But seems every other competitor has it? No deal breaker though.
    LCD seems limited. So for pro work it needs an EVF.
    FAT32. Must be annoying having some files for a single take.
    Recording time limit is a bit annoying. But I almost never need a 30 min. clip.

    But none of cons are deal breakers for me. Worst is LCD.

    But this tab confuse me:

    pic_05.jpg

    I see no 10bit 422 4k internally. But review says it does it.
    Last edited by SJX; 02-22-2019 at 12:44 AM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    6,146
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by SJX View Post
    I probably looked FS5II then.

    Tiffen variable ND is only $100?
    Sometimes it's on sale for less than that. Currently, it's $119 for the 82mm.

    That one or the 77mm ($130) would cover most lenses and you'd use step rings to step down.

    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...l_Density.html

    The rest are around $100 (67mm, 58mm, etc).


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Beverly Hills, CA
    Posts
    2,073
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by SJX View Post
    Didn't watch the comparison video yet. But read a C5D review of X-T3. Not seeing much reason for GH5, A7SIII or any other mirrorless instead of X-T3 to be honest. XT-3 seems impressive for what it is and price.

    Pros for my needs:

    ALL Intra
    10bit 422 4K
    4K/60P 4:2:0 10-Bit internal
    120 frames per second in full HD
    Zebra pattern . Maybe all mirroless cams have now. But last time I used mirrorless was GH2. So this is good to have
    AF. Is it actually good? Probably not Canon good but.
    11.2 stops of DR. So more than A7SII or GH5. Almost as good as FS7. If C5D gave it that then it must be a 13-14 stop camera by DVXuser standards.
    Good rolling shutter it seems. 9ms is better than A7SII and even FS7 and FS5.

    Cons for my needs:

    H265 codec and H264. Highly compressed right? Of course is nitpicking in this size and price. But not much else for the cons list so...
    No internal body stabilisation system. I guess gimbal then. But seems every other competitor has it? No deal breaker though.
    Only fixed LCD. So for pro work it needs an EVF.
    FAT32. Must be annoying having some files for a single take.
    Recording time limit is a bit annoying. But I almost never need a 30 min. clip.

    But none of cons are deal breakers for me. Worst is fixed LCD.

    But this tab confuse me:

    pic_05.jpg

    I see no 10bit 422 4k internally. But review says it does it.
    Yeah I thought it did 422 10-bit 4K 24fps and 420 10-bit 4K at 60fps. If not, you'll never likely ever see the difference (perhaps for VFX)).
    Again, suggest testing the X-T3 alongside the A6400 and/or A7 III before purchasing. Spec sheets don't tell you everything.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #29
    Senior Member SJX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,039
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by jcs View Post
    Yeah I thought it did 422 10-bit 4K 24fps and 420 10-bit 4K at 60fps. If not, you'll never likely ever see the difference (perhaps for VFX)).
    Again, suggest testing the X-T3 alongside the A6400 and/or A7 III before purchasing. Spec sheets don't tell you everything.
    From the review I got impression it does 422 10 bit 4K internally. But I guess it doesn't:

    Clear-codec-indication.jpg

    It only says 422 for HDMI in this menu photo.

    But if it doesn't, then is GH5 the only 10bit 422 internal 4K cheap camera? Pity it's only 4/3.


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

  10. Collapse Details
    #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Beverly Hills, CA
    Posts
    2,073
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by SJX View Post
    From the review I got impression it does 422 10 bit 4K internally. But I guess it doesn't:

    Clear-codec-indication.jpg

    It only says 422 for HDMI in this menu photo.

    But if it doesn't, then is GH5 the only 10bit 422 internal 4K cheap camera? Pity it's only 4/3.
    Yeah it looks like 422 is only HDMI.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... 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
  •