New fp video samples

Scottelly said:

Some video clips with a Leica lens:

. . . and here's a similar one with different lenses:

Click to expand...

Scottelly said:

Something different from a different person:

Auto-focus testing video from Patrick9880 (lots of slow motion):

Using the fp for live streaming:

Short, panning clip of city traffic, which shows auto-focus tracking and rolling shutter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2c82wkaKPw0

(I suggest viewing that last video full-screen in 1080 and 1/4 speed.)

Here is an fp vs Panasonic S1 auto-focus test (1/4 speed works great for this one too):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8Rwin1tKb8

That girl's hair is almost as long as mine!

Click to expand...

saltydogstudios said:

Scottelly said:

<....>

Click to expand...

saltydogstudios said:

Here is an fp vs Panasonic S1 auto-focus test (1/4 speed works great for this one too):

That girl's hair is almost as long as mine!

Click to expand...

<...>

Also the girl the last video has.... Uh, a lot of things that you don't (I've seen photos of you). It's surprising that the Panasonic focuses faster (and closer) than the Sigma with a Sigma lens.

Click to expand...

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

saltydogstudios said:

Scottelly said:

<....>

Here is an fp vs Panasonic S1 auto-focus test (1/4 speed works great for this one too):

That girl's hair is almost as long as mine!

Click to expand...

<...>

Also the girl the last video has.... Uh, a lot of things that you don't (I've seen photos of you). It's surprising that the Panasonic focuses faster (and closer) than the Sigma with a Sigma lens.

Click to expand...

The interesting thing about that focusing video was that both had issues...

The Sigma's eye detection AF worked pretty well right up until the head went off-screen, then when her full face came into view close the eye AF I think was not expecting to look for an eye that was so large, so never re-focused...
The Panasonic had a pretty strange issue though. On a lot of later clips after she moved really close to the camera (which worked great even when head went off screen), when she moved back the focus seemed soft or off when she was back in the distance. The FP looked much sharper when she moved back to the background.

Click to expand...

saltydogstudios said:

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

saltydogstudios said:

Scottelly said:

<....>

Here is an fp vs Panasonic S1 auto-focus test (1/4 speed works great for this one too):

That girl's hair is almost as long as mine!

Click to expand...

<...>

Also the girl the last video has.... Uh, a lot of things that you don't (I've seen photos of you). It's surprising that the Panasonic focuses faster (and closer) than the Sigma with a Sigma lens.

Click to expand...

The interesting thing about that focusing video was that both had issues...

The Sigma's eye detection AF worked pretty well right up until the head went off-screen, then when her full face came into view close the eye AF I think was not expecting to look for an eye that was so large, so never re-focused...
The Panasonic had a pretty strange issue though. On a lot of later clips after she moved really close to the camera (which worked great even when head went off screen), when she moved back the focus seemed soft or off when she was back in the distance. The FP looked much sharper when she moved back to the background.

Click to expand...

Panasonic's continuous autofocus is notoriously bad. Their "Depth From Defocus" - that examines the characteristic of the out of focus areas to determine if it's front or rear focused and by how far - doesn't do very well on AF-C.

Most people who Panasonic for video, don't rely on autofocus - at all.

Part of the Panasonic DFD is that it's aided by knowing the characteristic of the lens - the specific character of each lens' out of focus rendering.

Which is why I found it interesting that the Panasonic often did better than the Sigma.

Why does Panasonic continue to pursue this Depth for Defocus? I suspect that they really care about image quality and PDAF pixels can affect the final image. Phase detect is an obviously superior technology - at least right now - but they continue to eschew it for whatever reason.

Click to expand...

Scottelly said:

saltydogstudios said:

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

saltydogstudios said:

Scottelly said:

<....>

Here is an fp vs Panasonic S1 auto-focus test (1/4 speed works great for this one too):

That girl's hair is almost as long as mine!

Click to expand...

<...>

Also the girl the last video has.... Uh, a lot of things that you don't (I've seen photos of you). It's surprising that the Panasonic focuses faster (and closer) than the Sigma with a Sigma lens.

Click to expand...

The interesting thing about that focusing video was that both had issues...

The Sigma's eye detection AF worked pretty well right up until the head went off-screen, then when her full face came into view close the eye AF I think was not expecting to look for an eye that was so large, so never re-focused...
The Panasonic had a pretty strange issue though. On a lot of later clips after she moved really close to the camera (which worked great even when head went off screen), when she moved back the focus seemed soft or off when she was back in the distance. The FP looked much sharper when she moved back to the background.

Click to expand...

Panasonic's continuous autofocus is notoriously bad. Their "Depth From Defocus" - that examines the characteristic of the out of focus areas to determine if it's front or rear focused and by how far - doesn't do very well on AF-C.

Most people who Panasonic for video, don't rely on autofocus - at all.

Part of the Panasonic DFD is that it's aided by knowing the characteristic of the lens - the specific character of each lens' out of focus rendering.

Which is why I found it interesting that the Panasonic often did better than the Sigma.

Why does Panasonic continue to pursue this Depth for Defocus? I suspect that they really care about image quality and PDAF pixels can affect the final image. Phase detect is an obviously superior technology - at least right now - but they continue to eschew it for whatever reason.

Click to expand...

I think that Sigma's phase detect couldn't keep up with Panasonic's depth for defocus goes to show that Panasonic has chosen the right path, and all others are going down the primrose path.

Click to expand...

saltydogstudios said:

Scottelly said:

saltydogstudios said:

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

saltydogstudios said:

Scottelly said:

<....>

Here is an fp vs Panasonic S1 auto-focus test (1/4 speed works great for this one too):

That girl's hair is almost as long as mine!

Click to expand...

<...>

Also the girl the last video has.... Uh, a lot of things that you don't (I've seen photos of you). It's surprising that the Panasonic focuses faster (and closer) than the Sigma with a Sigma lens.

Click to expand...

The interesting thing about that focusing video was that both had issues...

The Sigma's eye detection AF worked pretty well right up until the head went off-screen, then when her full face came into view close the eye AF I think was not expecting to look for an eye that was so large, so never re-focused...
The Panasonic had a pretty strange issue though. On a lot of later clips after she moved really close to the camera (which worked great even when head went off screen), when she moved back the focus seemed soft or off when she was back in the distance. The FP looked much sharper when she moved back to the background.

Click to expand...

Panasonic's continuous autofocus is notoriously bad. Their "Depth From Defocus" - that examines the characteristic of the out of focus areas to determine if it's front or rear focused and by how far - doesn't do very well on AF-C.

Most people who Panasonic for video, don't rely on autofocus - at all.

Part of the Panasonic DFD is that it's aided by knowing the characteristic of the lens - the specific character of each lens' out of focus rendering.

Which is why I found it interesting that the Panasonic often did better than the Sigma.

Why does Panasonic continue to pursue this Depth for Defocus? I suspect that they really care about image quality and PDAF pixels can affect the final image. Phase detect is an obviously superior technology - at least right now - but they continue to eschew it for whatever reason.

Click to expand...

I think that Sigma's phase detect couldn't keep up with Panasonic's depth for defocus goes to show that Panasonic has chosen the right path, and all others are going down the primrose path.

Click to expand...

Sony's eye-AF is said to be nothing short of phenomenal. Canon and Fuji's are also said to be excellent. I know less about Nikon.

Sigma doesn't make many cameras - maybe this AF implementation is a bit of growing pains? I suspect they're not expecting continuous AF to be used much on this camera anyway. And of course it's one of those things that can ship somewhat incomplete and be updated in firmware.

Click to expand...

ushere said:

i am not here to troll...

having been in the video and tv industry for more than 50 years, i have some questions:

a. auto focus on both cameras was unacceptable for run and gun. not that i know many pros who actually use auto focus in the first place, but in certain circumstances it's really a boon. i would presume anyone using this camera for commercial use would be shooting in either a studio or serious efp environment.

b. to be of any real world use the camera would appear to need a heck of a lot of peripheral gear; audio, external hd, viewfinder, etc., etc., (this i might add applies to all of the 'dslr' type video cameras i've used), and thus the actual cost of ownership would then rocket astronomically?

c. i have yet to find any 'decent' affordable zoom for any dslr - ie. the equivalent of say a canon / fuji 16x with the equal control over all aspects of operating such a lens. i do realize that primes are much better overall, but in a real world commercial situation nothing beats a professional zoom lens.

d. what sort of videographer is this camera targeted at?

i've worked my way through a number of dslr rigs, (incl. bmpcc) in a great many situations, and whilst they are very capable of taking superb shots under controlled circumstances i still haven't found them any substitute for a dedicated professional video camera.

i'm hoping that someone here can address 'my' issues.

meanwhile, my quattro is still making money, so on that score i'm still a very happy vegemite ;-)

Click to expand...

Scottelly said:

I'm under the impression that the fp is targeted at the Black Magic "pocket 4K" buyer. That camera seems to be very popular. I think it's targeted at people who want to get high-quality BTS and B-roll shots with a full-frame camera that has the same mount as their Panasonic S1 or S1H too. I can see people buying two, thee, and even four of those little fps cameras, while using a pair of S1H bodies as their main production cameras. People with Arri and Red cameras with PL mounts may end up using one or two of these little fps bodies with PL-mount adapters, for second and third cameras, but I'm not expert.

How is the auto-focus of the little Black Magic camera?

Click to expand...

ushere said:

i am not here to troll...

having been in the video and tv industry for more than 50 years, i have some questions:

a. auto focus on both cameras was unacceptable for run and gun. not that i know many pros who actually use auto focus in the first place, but in certain circumstances it's really a boon. i would presume anyone using this camera for commercial use would be shooting in either a studio or serious efp environment.

Click to expand...

ushere said:

b. to be of any real world use the camera would appear to need a heck of a lot of peripheral gear; audio, external hd, viewfinder, etc., etc., (this i might add applies to all of the 'dslr' type video cameras i've used), and thus the actual cost of ownership would then rocket astronomically?

Click to expand...

ushere said:

c. i have yet to find any 'decent' affordable zoom for any dslr - ie. the equivalent of say a canon / fuji 16x with the equal control over all aspects of operating such a lens. i do realize that primes are much better overall, but in a real world commercial situation nothing beats a professional zoom lens.

Click to expand...

ushere said:

d. what sort of videographer is this camera targeted at?

i've worked my way through a number of dslr rigs, (incl. bmpcc) in a great many situations, and whilst they are very capable of taking superb shots under controlled circumstances i still haven't found them any substitute for a dedicated professional video camera.

i'm hoping that someone here can address 'my' issues.

meanwhile, my quattro is still making money, so on that score i'm still a very happy vegemite ;-)

Click to expand...

ushere said:

i am not here to troll...

having been in the video and tv industry for more than 50 years, i have some questions:

a. auto focus on both cameras was unacceptable for run and gun. not that i know many pros who actually use auto focus in the first place, but in certain circumstances it's really a boon. i would presume anyone using this camera for commercial use would be shooting in either a studio or serious efp environment.

b. to be of any real world use the camera would appear to need a heck of a lot of peripheral gear; audio, external hd, viewfinder, etc., etc., (this i might add applies to all of the 'dslr' type video cameras i've used), and thus the actual cost of ownership would then rocket astronomically?

c. i have yet to find any 'decent' affordable zoom for any dslr - ie. the equivalent of say a canon / fuji 16x with the equal control over all aspects of operating such a lens. i do realize that primes are much better overall, but in a real world commercial situation nothing beats a professional zoom lens.

d. what sort of videographer is this camera targeted at?

i've worked my way through a number of dslr rigs, (incl. bmpcc) in a great many situations, and whilst they are very capable of taking superb shots under controlled circumstances i still haven't found them any substitute for a dedicated professional video camera.

i'm hoping that someone here can address 'my' issues.

meanwhile, my quattro is still making money, so on that score i'm still a very happy vegemite ;-)

Click to expand...

saltydogstudios said:

ushere said:

i am not here to troll...

having been in the video and tv industry for more than 50 years, i have some questions:

a. auto focus on both cameras was unacceptable for run and gun. not that i know many pros who actually use auto focus in the first place, but in certain circumstances it's really a boon. i would presume anyone using this camera for commercial use would be shooting in either a studio or serious efp environment.

Click to expand...

Most people who use a Panasonic GH5 don't use autofocus. At least not beyond acquiring focus (single AF, not continuous) before locking it down. Yes - I don't think this is for "run and gun" - this is more for sit down interviews, cinematography where people someone is doing focus pulling that sort of thing.

saltydogstudios said:

b. to be of any real world use the camera would appear to need a heck of a lot of peripheral gear; audio, external hd, viewfinder, etc., etc., (this i might add applies to all of the 'dslr' type video cameras i've used), and thus the actual cost of ownership would then rocket astronomically?

Click to expand...

Yes - but these people are already buying a ton of gear. These people like buying gear.

An Atomos screen ($300) and a Sandisk external flash HDD ($400) isn't that expensive. Then you also need a Gimbal ($400) because it's not image stabilized.

All in - I could see a starter rig around 3k. And then you start investing in lights and external batteries (for the lights) and....

And this assumes you already have the lenses - which you were previously using with a speedbooster on your Panasonic GH4 or Black Magic. Look at the price point. Think of it as a step up from a GH5 or a poor-man's Red/Arri.

saltydogstudios said:

c. i have yet to find any 'decent' affordable zoom for any dslr - ie. the equivalent of say a canon / fuji 16x with the equal control over all aspects of operating such a lens. i do realize that primes are much better overall, but in a real world commercial situation nothing beats a professional zoom lens.

Click to expand...

AH - yeah this isn't aimed at the "talk show" crowd so to speak. This is aimed at the single-camera drama/comedy crowd. The music video on a budget crowd.

saltydogstudios said:

d. what sort of videographer is this camera targeted at?

i've worked my way through a number of dslr rigs, (incl. bmpcc) in a great many situations, and whilst they are very capable of taking superb shots under controlled circumstances i still haven't found them any substitute for a dedicated professional video camera.

i'm hoping that someone here can address 'my' issues.

meanwhile, my quattro is still making money, so on that score i'm still a very happy vegemite ;-)

Click to expand...

Should I make you a sandwich?

Click to expand...

saltydogstudios said:

Do the women roar and men thunder?

Click to expand...

Scottelly said:

saltydogstudios said:

ushere said:

i am not here to troll...

having been in the video and tv industry for more than 50 years, i have some questions:

a. auto focus on both cameras was unacceptable for run and gun. not that i know many pros who actually use auto focus in the first place, but in certain circumstances it's really a boon. i would presume anyone using this camera for commercial use would be shooting in either a studio or serious efp environment.

Click to expand...

Most people who use a Panasonic GH5 don't use autofocus. At least not beyond acquiring focus (single AF, not continuous) before locking it down. Yes - I don't think this is for "run and gun" - this is more for sit down interviews, cinematography where people someone is doing focus pulling that sort of thing.

Scottelly said:

b. to be of any real world use the camera would appear to need a heck of a lot of peripheral gear; audio, external hd, viewfinder, etc., etc., (this i might add applies to all of the 'dslr' type video cameras i've used), and thus the actual cost of ownership would then rocket astronomically?

Click to expand...

Yes - but these people are already buying a ton of gear. These people like buying gear.

An Atomos screen ($300) and a Sandisk external flash HDD ($400) isn't that expensive. Then you also need a Gimbal ($400) because it's not image stabilized.

All in - I could see a starter rig around 3k. And then you start investing in lights and external batteries (for the lights) and....

And this assumes you already have the lenses - which you were previously using with a speedbooster on your Panasonic GH4 or Black Magic. Look at the price point. Think of it as a step up from a GH5 or a poor-man's Red/Arri.

Scottelly said:

c. i have yet to find any 'decent' affordable zoom for any dslr - ie. the equivalent of say a canon / fuji 16x with the equal control over all aspects of operating such a lens. i do realize that primes are much better overall, but in a real world commercial situation nothing beats a professional zoom lens.

Click to expand...

AH - yeah this isn't aimed at the "talk show" crowd so to speak. This is aimed at the single-camera drama/comedy crowd. The music video on a budget crowd.

Scottelly said:

d. what sort of videographer is this camera targeted at?

i've worked my way through a number of dslr rigs, (incl. bmpcc) in a great many situations, and whilst they are very capable of taking superb shots under controlled circumstances i still haven't found them any substitute for a dedicated professional video camera.

i'm hoping that someone here can address 'my' issues.

meanwhile, my quattro is still making money, so on that score i'm still a very happy vegemite ;-)

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Scottelly said:

Scottelly said:

Should I make you a sandwich?

Click to expand...

You better make it a Vegemite sandwich.

Scottelly said:

Do the women roar and men thunder?

Click to expand...

The women bore, and the men plunder I think.

Click to expand...

SigmaChrome said:

Scottelly said:

saltydogstudios said:

ushere said:

i am not here to troll...

having been in the video and tv industry for more than 50 years, i have some questions:

a. auto focus on both cameras was unacceptable for run and gun. not that i know many pros who actually use auto focus in the first place, but in certain circumstances it's really a boon. i would presume anyone using this camera for commercial use would be shooting in either a studio or serious efp environment.

Click to expand...

Most people who use a Panasonic GH5 don't use autofocus. At least not beyond acquiring focus (single AF, not continuous) before locking it down. Yes - I don't think this is for "run and gun" - this is more for sit down interviews, cinematography where people someone is doing focus pulling that sort of thing.

SigmaChrome said:

b. to be of any real world use the camera would appear to need a heck of a lot of peripheral gear; audio, external hd, viewfinder, etc., etc., (this i might add applies to all of the 'dslr' type video cameras i've used), and thus the actual cost of ownership would then rocket astronomically?

Click to expand...

Yes - but these people are already buying a ton of gear. These people like buying gear.

An Atomos screen ($300) and a Sandisk external flash HDD ($400) isn't that expensive. Then you also need a Gimbal ($400) because it's not image stabilized.

All in - I could see a starter rig around 3k. And then you start investing in lights and external batteries (for the lights) and....

And this assumes you already have the lenses - which you were previously using with a speedbooster on your Panasonic GH4 or Black Magic. Look at the price point. Think of it as a step up from a GH5 or a poor-man's Red/Arri.

SigmaChrome said:

c. i have yet to find any 'decent' affordable zoom for any dslr - ie. the equivalent of say a canon / fuji 16x with the equal control over all aspects of operating such a lens. i do realize that primes are much better overall, but in a real world commercial situation nothing beats a professional zoom lens.

Click to expand...

AH - yeah this isn't aimed at the "talk show" crowd so to speak. This is aimed at the single-camera drama/comedy crowd. The music video on a budget crowd.

SigmaChrome said:

d. what sort of videographer is this camera targeted at?

i've worked my way through a number of dslr rigs, (incl. bmpcc) in a great many situations, and whilst they are very capable of taking superb shots under controlled circumstances i still haven't found them any substitute for a dedicated professional video camera.

i'm hoping that someone here can address 'my' issues.

meanwhile, my quattro is still making money, so on that score i'm still a very happy vegemite ;-)

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

See: The Happy Little Vegemite song .

SigmaChrome said:

SigmaChrome said:

Should I make you a sandwich?

Click to expand...

You better make it a Vegemite sandwich.

SigmaChrome said:

Do the women roar and men thunder?

Click to expand...

The women bore, and the men plunder I think.

Click to expand...

"Women Glow, and men Plunder"

Click to expand...

Scottelly said:

Scottelly said:

See: The Happy Little Vegemite song .

Scottelly said:

Scottelly said:

Should I make you a sandwich?

Click to expand...

You better make it a Vegemite sandwich.

Scottelly said:

Do the women roar and men thunder?

Click to expand...

The women bore, and the men plunder I think.

Click to expand...

"Women Glow, and men Plunder"

Click to expand...

I didn't see too many women "glowing" when I was down there a few years back.

Click to expand...

SigmaChrome said:

............

SigmaChrome said:

SigmaChrome said:

See: The Happy Little Vegemite song .

SigmaChrome said:

SigmaChrome said:

Should I make you a sandwich?

Click to expand...

You better make it a Vegemite sandwich.

SigmaChrome said:

Do the women roar and men thunder?

Click to expand...

The women bore, and the men plunder I think.

Click to expand...

"Women Glow, and men Plunder"

Click to expand...

I didn't see too many women "glowing" when I was down there a few years back.

Click to expand...

You have to get the urge to "plunder" first, I guess. ;-)

Click to expand...