DJI Ronin 4D Camera | 6K & 8K

To me the most impressive thing is the LIDAR. The gimble part feels like a gimmick that gimps the entire camera for anything other than gimble only shots. The IQ reminds me of the GH4. The shadows don't look particularly great and a bit too crunchy (in every single video from a wide range of DPs all have the same crunchy shadows.)

I would love to see this LIDAR on other cameras, but it seems impractical once you add a matte box.
 
ahalpert said:
This makes a lot of sense... I just wonder about the opportunity cost. If there's a different camera you'd consider buying and making your A camera instead... such as an FX6 or FX9, or a c300mk3 or c500mk2... but right, if you're totally pleased with a pocket in its role, and you just want something for gimbal...

I dunno, I'm still not sold on that concept. why not buy an extra pocket and leave it built on gimbal, not just ready to build on gimbal. I have 2 little gimbals now (ronin-s and weebill-s) and I leave them built with 2 cameras (a7siii and fx3) and 2 different lens options (such as 70-180 and a 50). I was inspired by seeing wedding photographers wielding 2 cameras simultaneously with different primes. and now, beyond weddings, I bring this set-up to any gimbal-specific jobs I do. or to an interview that needs gimbal b-roll. I operate the fs7 on a good fluid head and leave 1 or 2 cameras unmanned on gimbals on light stands, ready to rock and roll later.

if your purpose is just to have a gimbal camera ready to rock and roll, why not buy an extra pocket and a gimbal for way less money and leave it built? it will be lighter. you could buy 2 such rigs for less money than the ronin 4D. the 4D has to be qualitatively better in terms of camera IQ or gimbal movement for it to make sense to me. which maybe it is, I dunno. but then I'd want to make it my A camera...
Click to expand...

z axis = it IS qualitatively and quantitatively better in terms of movement if it successfully improves/addresses that axis. I haven’t used it yet, which is why I said I need to see how it shakes out. But if we’re going on discussion and on paper, it has a clear advantage, duck walking technique mastered or not.

and being able to just pull it out and go. I’ve done and continue to do built gimbals, and they are still a pain, especially if you want good monitoring , control of different lens choices, etc. the 4d looks goofy, but is still much more tidy than a fully built gimbal setup with the pocket.
 
jonpais said:
!; that you can run full tilt boogie with this contraption and the stabilization is incredible; .
Click to expand...

Where do you see footage of this? The fastest running I saw was messerschmidt following a woman in a dark room and it looked like he was going about half of full-tilt speed while employing soft footfall techniques and the footage looked a little jerky.

I agree with Rob that the footage that would be the most impressive seems to have been left on the editing floor. Which raises questions about how good the stabilization actually is. I don't see anything in the marketing materials that couldn't be accomplished with gimbals that are currently available

I think the most significant aspect is the system integration and simplification. But it's a devil's bargain to limit your camera/lens choices in order to use the system. You better be happy with that sensor and satisfied by the lenses you can put on it
 
Bob Loblaw said:
To me the most impressive thing is the LIDAR. The gimble part feels like a gimmick that gimps the entire camera for anything other than gimble only shots. The IQ reminds me of the GH4. The shadows don't look particularly great and a bit too crunchy (in every single video from a wide range of DPs all have the same crunchy shadows.)

I would love to see this LIDAR on other cameras, but it seems impractical once you add a matte box.
Click to expand...

unfortunately, I agree that the image is so far not that impressive in the samples being shared.
 
ozmorphasis said:
z axis = it IS qualitatively and quantitatively better in terms of movement if it successfully improves/addresses that axis.
Click to expand...

This is theoretically true. I'm just not sure how much I actually need that feature... meanwhile all the close-range shooting they show (messerschmidt circling a woman in CU, Morrison in the jeep close to the rear view mirror) still displays handheld shake from the whole unit wavering. And that's the only aspect of my gimbaling that still bothers me. Z axis should take out part of that. But it's still quite noticeable in what they showed
 
ozmorphasis said:
I’ve done and continue to do built gimbals, and they are still a pain, especially if you want good monitoring , control of different lens choices, etc. the 4d looks goofy, but is still much more tidy than a fully built gimbal setup with the pocket.
Click to expand...

I'm drawing 2 conclusions about this whole thing:

1. it's all about accessories. Most of my gimbaling is OMB or with a producer looking over my shoulder. I leave a monitor on each gimbal at all times, no need to detach or reattach. HDMI cable velcroed at its midpoint to the gimbal column. The camera is mounted on the gimbal, I show up to work and plug in my cables. Integrated motor and handwheel on the ronin-s for zoom control. Imaging edge mobile from camera to smartphone (strapped to my wrist) for remote control and autofocus control.

So, the 4D solves problems I don't have. If I were doing more serious production and required high-quality, low-latency wireless monitoring and remote follow focus, etc, then this unit starts to look a lot more attractive. (Although I also feel like you can then afford to become more choosy about what sensor and lens you're using...)

2. I think that some of the excitement from these DPs is due to being able to cut out a gimbal op. If they like to shoot handheld themselves, now they can shoot gimbal in a similar fashion with an easy-to-use device. I wouldn't be surprised if we also see directors operating it themselves sometimes
 
The DJI 4D is simply awesome. The image quality is excellent. Millions have watched the videos on dozens of channels and most appear to have enjoyed the footage or were at least intrigued with the concept. One or two disgruntled folks in the forum here are the outliers, typing page after page of anything at all. LOL Nowhere else have I read thoughtless comments about leaving the best footage on the cutting room floor. Or outrageous remarks to the effect that the footage resembles the GH4. Or levying personal attacks on forum members who refuse to join in on the poisonous - and frankly, quite boring - negativity; insinuating that they don't know what good footage looks like while suggesting that they're just stupidly repeating what one of the filmmakers in the launch video said. But that's par for the course here, isn't it? Over at the BM forum, where the reaction has been mixed, several forum members have already begun threads asking when BM is going to innovate, when they're going to offer full frame, LIDAR, better autofocus, different lens mounts, stabilization or do anything exciting - and these comments are from loyal BMD shooters. I believe it was Maati Haapoja who was running full tilt and the footage looked super stable. Not sure why that is so difficult for anyone to believe - and honestly, I could care less - but there you are.
 
Last edited:
jonpais said:
The DJI 4D is simply awesome. The image quality is excellent. Millions have watched the videos on dozens of channels and most appear to have enjoyed the footage or were at least intrigued with the concept.
Click to expand...

Peer pressure is even less convincing than argument from authority. But there you are.

I, too, am intrigued by the concept. I'm so glad they did this. I'm just doing a comprehensive analysis. As one should... Life isn't black and white.

I think this is the video you're referring to:


I think the running footage looks great. But it's a wide-angle lens. If you can't already get smooth footage on a gimbal at high speed with a wide-angle lens, then you're probably doing something wrong. Editing in during constant momentum also makes for smoother shots than showing the pivots and speed changes.

There is some jerkiness there as well, most visible in foreground objects. And more visible when he's running on asphalt tracking the guy on the skateboard or whatever. But all totally usable and better than your average gimbal.

where I think the footage really shines, and the z-axis concept, is the low-angle shots along the beach. Which makes sense, because i think that the z-axis stabilization relies on surface sensors pointed at the ground. Hovering low over the ground is an ideal time for such a tool. And it's also a case where the ground in front is very close to camera and will clearly reveal it bobbing up and down, which has been nicely sorted. A very nice result there.

Maati also mentions how the limits of lens size is a drawback, how the unit is heavy to do handheld at length, and how it currently takes 30 seconds to boot up. None of which means it isn't a great product. Just food for thought.

the reference to shots on the cutting room floor was Rob pointing out that the marketing video didn't show what the camera recorded during some difficult moves of which we saw BTS
 
It all depends how you are positioned. I don’t care about anyone’s perceptions how a client “feels” about anything I choose to use I only care about what I feel works best. Also I don’t have clients looking over my shoulder. That’s just how I work. So for me it all boils down to what I feel works best. This setup has eliminated everything I hated about gimbals - the messiness- for 7k it’s a steal. I’ll wait for early reports from non-bloggers but I’m confident I will get this very soon. I also happen to have a nice collection of Leica m primes so it’s a no brainer
 
jonpais said:
Or outrageous remarks to the effect that the footage resembles the GH4.
Click to expand...

Look at the footage. Take off the rose colored glasses of being wowed by the hyperbolic mechanics, and really look at the image. Not at how cool the stabilization is, that's purely inconsequential when it comes to IQ. Look at the color, the shadows, the highlights. This camera seriously reminds me of a DSLR from 5+ years ago. This camera is competing with the Red Komodo, Ursa 12K, FX6, as well as the FX9 and C300MIII. Every single one of these cameras blows DJI's IQ out of the water ten times over. I would even say that the Z-Cam, A7 IV, BMPCC4K & 6K, & C70 all have better IQ.

I'm not saying the image is bad (the GH4's image is solid), and I'm sure plenty of people care more about the mechanics than the IQ, but this is not going to change the world of cinema & video as some people claim:


That guy might as well have SHILL tattooed to his forehead with ridiculous hyperbole like that. That was painful to watch. He even says that you don't have to rebalance the camera when swapping lenses, but that isn't true at all. You do still have to rebalance whenever you swap lenses. DJI certainly knows how to use influencers, I'll give them that.

All that being said, I don't hate this camera. I like a lot of what it offers. But I'm not going to pretend it's image is anything more than it is to appease the 'hyperbole beast.' DJI isn't sponsoring me so I don't have to.
 
Bob Loblaw said:
He even says that you don't have to rebalance the camera when swapping lenses, but that isn't true at all. You do still have to rebalance whenever you swap lenses.
Click to expand...

lol of course you do. like - not if the new lens has the same mass and center of gravity? but some lenses are even listed on dji's spec sheet as requiring counterweights. so it's not like even dji is pretending that you won't be rebalancing
 
Bob Loblaw said:
Look at the footage. Take off the rose colored glasses of being wowed by the hyperbolic mechanics, and really look at the image. Not at how cool the stabilization is, that's purely inconsequential when it comes to IQ. Look at the color, the shadows, the highlights. This camera seriously reminds me of a DSLR from 5+ years ago. This camera is competing with the Red Komodo, Ursa 12K, FX6, as well as the FX9 and C300MIII. Every single one of these cameras blows DJI's IQ out of the water ten times over. I would even say that the Z-Cam, A7 IV, BMPCC4K & 6K, & C70 all have better IQ.

I'm not saying the image is bad (the GH4's image is solid), and I'm sure plenty of people care more about the mechanics than the IQ, but this is not going to change the world of cinema & video as some people claim:


That guy might as well have SHILL tattooed to his forehead with ridiculous hyperbole like that. That was painful to watch. He even says that you don't have to rebalance the camera when swapping lenses, but that isn't true at all. You do still have to rebalance whenever you swap lenses. DJI certainly knows how to use influencers, I'll give them that.

All that being said, I don't hate this camera. I like a lot of what it offers. But I'm not going to pretend it's image is anything more than it is to appease the 'hyperbole beast.' DJI isn't sponsoring me so I don't have to.
Click to expand...
the cameras you mentioned don’t blow the DJI’s image quality ‘ten times out of the water’ and it is wacky hyperbole like that which (a) none of the reviewers I watched, however impassioned, used and (b) alerts the reader that you are no longer even being reasonable. So with that, any further discussion with you is out of the question.
 
jonpais said:
the cameras you mentioned don’t blow the DJI’s image quality ‘ten times out of the water’ and it is wacky hyperbole like that which (a) none of the reviewers I watched, however impassioned, used and (b) alerts the reader that you are no longer even being reasonable. So with that, any further discussion with you is out of the question.
Click to expand...

The sodium content of this post is off the charts. It's okay, I still like you. :beer:
 
ahalpert said:
I will say this - it makes interesting competition for the FX6. Because it can use my E-mount lenses. So I could get an FX6 for let's say $6500 with cheap batteries and use the media I own already. Or a 6K DJI 4D for $8000 or so with batteries and cheap media.

Each has its advantages. But the FX6 can't go on the gimbals I currently own whereas the 4D is a gimbal and can record internal prores RAW. FX6 has 120fps 4K full-frame, better low-light, and gets the nod for AF IMO. Plus XLRs and eND...

Nevertheless - comparable price. Very interesting...

One other thing the 4D has going for it is that -- if it becomes a famous rig, then buying one could open up additional gimbal op jobs
Click to expand...

I'd argue that the fx6 is in a different league and has way more function than this half baked idea from DJI.
1. The battery life was stated as 1.5 by cineD vs an fx6 that can run 3/4's of a day on a high cap batt or you can rig any brands v-mount and never have to turn it off. Dji missed that mark with this release without proprietary batts and no hot swap function of the R2.
2. On the fx6 you can quickly put nearly any full frame lens, including longer telephoto or zooms (which is vital for doc, eng, sports and and even some narrative jobs) all without having to take time to rebalance a gimble, vs only being able to use smaller shorter primes on that tiny gimble with it's 2 pound weight limitation.
3. Sdi on the fx6
4. Sony easily has better ROI based on A). being able to book gigs on shows that already shoot sony cams, and B). with way more Sony shooters in the wild you've got a better chance of re-selling your camera should you move on to something else.
5. 4D is always a gimble which doesn't work for every shot. And not a good one at that as the Z-axis mitigation isn't doing a very good job imo. My steady cam op says a professionally tuned high end Steady cam rig with a much longer dual arm system only mitigates 30% of the up and down of walking, and the op has to be good enough to take out the rest with practice. Which means it'd be safe to assume this tiny single arm probably only takes out 15% of the Z-axis(if that). Lot's of the footage posted seems to be shorter takes and to me it looks twitchy and robotic best.
 
I reached out to John Brawley on facebook for his thoughts on the 4D. He has working relationships with some of the DPs in the marketing material, and he said that they haven't been "testing" this on their shoots and that DJI just paid them to shoot "stuff" for a week. He said that the DPs they chose are funny because one doesn't operate and another doesn't actually DP anymore and has moved onto directing.

He thinks the camera is limiting in terms of lens weight and he doesn't like that it's a closed ecosystem because if anything breaks then you're at the mercy of DJI's terrible service and support.

All of which reinforces my belief that this tool will find a home more in high-end doc/corporate than in scripted drama. Which is fine, and more relevant to most on dvxuser. It's just funny to see all these products marketed for something that they don't do to appeal more to people who don't do that thing anyway
 
On left we have….
And on the right….
Unfortunately neither contestant has gloves (do they serve popcorn at boxing matches?)
 
Brawley just admitted that he was wrong about everything - Rachel Morrison has worked behind the camera several times in the past couple of years (working as both director and DP), and he no longer contests the fact that nowhere did DJI claim that any of the directors involved in the launch video had been testing prototypes of the 4D on paid jobs.

The camera supports all the lenses in my collection but one: the 20mm f/1.8 G, 35mm f/1.4 GM, 55mm f/1.8, 50mm f/1.2 GM, Sigma 85mm f/1.4 DG DN - the narrative focal lengths. Only my 135mm f/1.8 GM is not supported but I'd never shoot with that focal length on a gimbal either, it's ridiculous! hehe

I had the opportunity to download a few of the clips this afternoon and play with them in DaVinci - the footage looks very filmic, if a bit noisy.

Fortunately, there are several shops nearby that service DJI here in Ho Chi Minh city, including the camera shop where I just purchased my Peak Design backpack, so after sales support wouldn't be an issue. The Sony service center is just a few minute's walk from my house as well, and they're fast and inexpensive.
 
Last edited:
jonpais said:
Brawley just admitted that he was wrong about everything - Rachel Morrison has worked behind the camera several times in the past couple of years (working as both director and DP), and he no longer contests the fact that nowhere did DJI claim that any of the directors involved in the launch video had been testing prototypes of the 4D on paid jobs.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what you are talking about. Please quote JB instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top