The eye detection is a total failure with spiders!Just amazing AF
Checkout 4k and 8K samples too from the same guy.
Upvote
0
The eye detection is a total failure with spiders!Just amazing AF
Checkout 4k and 8K samples too from the same guy.
For you, I'm probably deeply in the "stills" camp, but I wouldn't mind using 8K raw for a 30fps burst of raw stills.
Raw shall be raw, just cropped for video aspect rate.I was wondering how is the quality, meaning if the compression or anything making it look worse, or would it be identical to same shot taken with still 35Mpix camera.
Well, if, as an end result, you want both stills and video, you better use two cameras, of course.Another problem though, shooting at 30p means you should use 1/60 ss. Stills I'm using 1/500 (90% of the time), so we're looking almost 10-fold more motion blur. I could use same 1/500 ss for video, but then it would look bad as video.
That's an interesting question. I was thinking the same for even less key point time spans at air shows. Then again the devil on my other shoulder is saying what's happening to the skill at getting 'that' photo. If the tech is really good is it going to rip the heart and fun out of my hobby?I was wondering about this last night. I often shoot sports, and match is typically 2-4 minutes long. So especially for important matches (final etc) could I just record the whole match and the frame capture 35Mpix taken at 30fps.
I was wondering how is the quality, meaning if the compression or anything making it look worse, or would it be identical to same shot taken with still 35Mpix camera.
Another problem though, shooting at 30p means you should use 1/60 ss. Stills I'm using 1/500 (90% of the time), so we're looking almost 10-fold more motion blur. I could use same 1/500 ss for video, but then it would look bad as video.
I guess if I end up buying the camera, I can test and experiment.
Raw shall be raw, just cropped for video aspect rate.
Well, if, as an end result, you want both stills and video, you better use two cameras, of course.
That's an interesting question. I was thinking the same for even less key point time spans at air shows. Then again the devil on my other shoulder is saying what's happening to the skill at getting 'that' photo. If the tech is really good is it going to rip the heart and fun out of my hobby?
You can choose a higher speed. I have often heard the advice of using 1/frame rate as looking most "filmic". I have used a variety of speeds to see the difference and found that the high speeds were not an issue in terms of IQ. The issue you may have is rolling shutter artifacts as the scan rate is often about 1/60 or so. The Sony A9 has a much faster scan rate so this is less of an issue.Another problem though, shooting at 30p means you should use 1/60 ss. Stills I'm using 1/500 (90% of the time), so we're looking almost 10-fold more motion blur. I could use same 1/500 ss for video, but then it would look bad as video.
I guess if I end up buying the camera, I can test and experiment.
I would test this idea with the camera you already own to see ht effect. IMO it will be fine especially since your goal would be stills.
Of course you can always pick an Olympus m43 kit and get 60fps.
I’d actually prefer an adult conversation with you that has nothing to do with saving anyone’s reputation or dignity.If you'd like to try abstrating a different sentence to try and save face, have at it...
Just buy a Samyang/Rokinon RF 85mm f/1.4 AF and be happy.You're telling me we have to wait all the way to HALLOWEEN for the 85mm f/2???!?!?
Can anyone tell me why you would announce this right now? This makes zero sense to me when it could easily be announced in the fall.
Now I begin the 112 day wait until the thing can actually ship...
Very true. She's lucky to have Microsoft as her sugar daddy. Smart girl. No university, but managed to become an engineer for Microsoft. I am so very proud. Next year, should the virus abate, she gets a trip to Monaco... all expenses paid again. Better all around than her dad.Fish and chips, oh yes but has to be from a chip shop next to the sea. There is nothing like it. I would never drive in London. Always use the train lol.
I'm not surprised your daughter enjoyed it as someone else was paying for it. That's the best way to enjoy London and Paris, they are very expensive places to visit.
Depends how you look at it really. Personally I think there are amazing bargains for people interested in actually taking compelling high quality images rather than people that buy in to the gotta’ have the newest, bestest, influencer driven toy. You can get a brand new 5DSr for under $1,400, kuhhji, used lenses offer similar bargains.
I just did. latest with my R at 4K . I shot at 1/60 of a fan and the blades were blurry. I also shot at 1/1250 sec and the video still looked great but the fan blades were now very sharp. Of course they were showing pre-cession in that they looked like they were going slowly. Also there was significant rolling shutter. But high shutter speed in video can still look great.If I start taking video, I probably want also use the video too, hence it should look good both video and still. Currently I usually live-stream (with iphone) but depending signal sometimes it looks really crappy. I also have live-stream setup (Cerevo) for my video camera but using it at location is too much hassle that I tried it only 2-3 times and decided iphone is close enough quality with 10% of the work.
I have been eyeing other brands too, around m43 and one inch to use as video camera. The Sony A6xxx series was good contender, especially if I slap some 30/35mm F1.4 lens on them. But I'd like very high frame rate so I can do good slow-motion on post, and there's very few cameras (in my price range) who do more than 120fps. I'd love something with even 720p at 240fps, so I could use 1/480 for shutter. (and I think the "180" rule is 1/(2*frame rate) for the normal look/feel).
One thing I hated learning after I bought 5D4 was that the 720p120 mode didn't do AF. They were really quiet about that. They glamoured about the dual-pixel AF on 4k and 1080p, and also mentioned that 720p you can shoot 120fps. They "forgot" to mention the AF doesn't work on 120fps. The Lumix -series seems to be my best bet, but they are bit pricey for just one trick (for me).
Raw shall be raw, just cropped for video aspect rate.
I thought the RAW video was 12 bit?Stills raw will be 14 bits, video raw - 10 bits and lossy.
I don't know if it's important for the case in question.
I thought the RAW video was 12 bit?
That video is *incredible* I can see the f7.1 in use which means it's going to be the RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1, and this is the first lens I've ordered with the R5 (woo-hoo!). I'm normally a "stills" guy, but this animal eye detect has made me a believer that I will *have* to cross over to the "dark side" and start taking some videos! And if that's not enough, I believe that you can get raw stills (at 8K by 4320) at various per frame exposure speeds from the video, although I'm hearing that video is 12 bit compressed raw instead of 14 bit raw, correct?Just amazing AF
Checkout 4k and 8K samples too from the same guy.