Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: 4K video on Nikon D850?  (Read 2077 times)

spotmeter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 329
    • http://www.photographica.us
4K video on Nikon D850?
« on: March 03, 2018, 01:37:57 PM »

Has anyone shot 4K landscape videos with the new Nikon D850?

I have been shooting landscape videos in HD, but it doesn't really have enough resolution for all the fine details (leaves, grasses, etc.) in landscapes.

I have been shooting landscape photos with Nikon for several years and am able to print 3x5 foot photos with superb detail.

Not interested in skin tones, low light or autofocus since I work from tripod and only shoot landscapes.  If you have samples of landscape videos, would love to see them.  Thanks.
Logged

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1791
    • Pieter Kers
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #1 on: March 05, 2018, 06:14:29 PM »

In what motion imagery is concerned,....

thank you,
Very nice to hear a detailed opinion from somebody that really is into video, unlike me.
As a photographer using the d850 i noticed that shooting 4k delivers at least very good HD-quality. ( when brought back to HD)
It all looks much better than the things on my HDTV that are heavely compressed.
But yes, for me the dslr is a photocamera that can do some video if necessary.
Can imagine the gh5(s) et all is the better tool of choice for video.
But then; what do you think of the Sony7 video quality? Sony has like Panasonic enough expertise in video.

Logged
Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu

fredjeang2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1376
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #2 on: March 05, 2018, 07:04:26 PM »

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6OWs75BLCAA

Interesting to watch.

I like one of Lula member works and I think he did big steps in motion in order to deliver
Profesional imagery coherent with his stills.
BUT, and that's the interesting point,
The best unbeaten video for me as a viewer was done with a Canon dslr and
Little medium that I know. It was inspired. Pure inspiration.
If I was an art director, I'd ask him to leave the big artillery at home
And work on purpose with a 1Ds so he can really be free to move,
Express viceraly his art like he'd do in still and I know I'd have a more
Organic product because big medium tend to freeze too much the dynamic.
Too much thinking, too much roadies.

What happens is that art directors are for the most part arrogant freakies
Overpaied and generally there because they aren't good enough to be artists
(With some exceptions), and the shooter needs to provide certain mediums
That are not necesary just to get the contract. It's a vicious circle.
So don't worry too much with gear until Ferrari asks you to shoot their next bolid campaign.

If you have 4000 euros budget, get a GH5/G9. If you have 40000, get a Red.
Between 4000 and 40000, you'll notice a difference in IQ.
Between 1000 and 8000, you'll notice nothing in IQ.
But between a proper cine/video camera and dslr, you' ll notice a lot
In usability.

See those dudes who packed their dslrs with numerous gadets
To make it work like in cinema? Don't they look absurd in a way?
It reminds me the guys who tune their chevy to look like they are car racers.
Everybody know they are amateurs.
But a real race team does not use their cars. Motion is the same.
All that is the product of marketing depts.
And it works.

Here is a video example that could have been shot by you and me
With a simple camera with one tripod and zero extras. And it's a great ww recognized artist.
But she knows how to fill the frame.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WuJE40OBt48
« Last Edit: March 05, 2018, 08:22:42 PM by fredjeang2 »
Logged

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1791
    • Pieter Kers
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #3 on: March 06, 2018, 05:37:04 AM »

PJ Harvey is a fine artist indeed ( saw her perform a few times) that always has had a good eye for photography and video...
i agree completely that we shoud focus on the content and the story and less on the technical matter.
I am technical minded but understand that my images have to look very good small. ( but get an extra dimension when seen large and i like that)

In video/film i also think sound is as important as image...
in relation to PJ harvey here a film you probably like as much as i do;
An insane story; the beautiful BW, the special glass used and the way the camera is handled; the music.. everything  and all on a fair budget.
A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night (2014)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2326554/
Logged
Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1476
  • me
    • working
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #4 on: March 06, 2018, 05:51:07 PM »

If you have 4000 euros budget, get a GH5/G9. If you have 40000, get a Red.
Between 4000 and 40000, you'll notice a difference in IQ.
Between 1000 and 8000, you'll notice nothing in IQ.
But between a proper cine/video camera and dslr, you' ll notice a lot
In usability.

See those dudes who packed their dslrs with numerous gadets
To make it work like in cinema?


When we bought a 5d2, we outfitted it with over $5,000 of accessories, did a test, looked ok in sunlight and artificial light, looked great at night with limited supplemental lighting.

I stood back and thought this is silly for an A cam, knowing Iíd step up in two weeks for the upcoming project and bought 1, 2 then a third MX camera.

Had the Alexa classic not been 3 times the price I would have gone that direction, but that was a lot of cheese for one camera and I knew cinema cameras would go the way of stills with constantly higher pixel count, which we see with 8k REDs, so I thought over 4k would last a while.

But I think Arri got it right at the start with the 2.7 because A. they have the best color science, B. itís an Arri so itís going to be made for heavy production and C. You knew that Arri put a lot of work in deciding the pixel count and 2.5 to 2.7 is about the minimum to stop alaizing, moire and a lot of other things that come up in motion.

The Alexa became the standard, mostly because most DPís weíre use to Arriís and trusted them.   Roger Deakins, Anthony Dod Mantle, John Seale (who shot his first and only feature digitally on Fury Road with pretty much 1 zoom) all went with the Alexa.   If you want to see beautiful landscape imagery, look at Mr. Deakins work in Sicario. 

Actually on Fury Road the director George Miller rarely cut a scene above 15 fps, had no script that he shared, tiny, tiny thumbnails that no one could visualize and the movie is as more a multimedia piece than a large hollywood tent pole movie.

I've posted this before but . . .


Anyway, prior to purchase I heard a lot about the problems with the R1ís but Iíve never had an issue, except on clip and I love them and will use them until they just die .    If they do go to the grave, then I might go Arri, but since they keep cooking Iíll keep using them.

Fred, I slightly disagree with 1 grand to 8 grand youíll see a difference.  A c200II or c300II (Used), or a bm ursa mini there will be a difference, especially in deep color grading as long as you have the computer power to run it.

A used Arri Classic minus lenses is 9 grand, so there are options, though the Arri and REDs are heavy and draw a lot of attention and then there are lenses.  Unless you go Chinese youíll drop on the low end 9 grand for a set of RED lenses, 100 grand if you go Leica (but who buys Leica other than rental houses).

In fact if you outfit a 1dxII with a couple of constant zooms, cards accessories and batteries youíll be right at $8,900 and even though 8 bits of depth it shoots a nice file with great color at 800 mbs per second.

The thing is still photographers tend to look at each frame to see sharpness and detail like they do in a still file and thatís just not the way motion imagery is usually viewed. 

The issue we run across now is not the camera, itís how the cameras affect the cost of permits and locations.   

You  pull out two large long cinema cameras and the permits skyrocket.    We are into a project now that is still and motion of equal value.   My R1ís will work well with it, but Iíll be stopped in ten minutes in LA asking for paperwork for a film permit.  If I use the 1dxII theyíll just ask for a still permit and we keep working, unless we clapboard, yell out rolling, speed, action, because everyone I know is working from a bottom line.

Even though the OP doesnít care about skin tones, or autofocus, one thing to be clear of is if shooting closer in subjects additional lighting makes a world of difference and of course all the other aspects of motion capture. Bit Depth/rate, codec, lenses it's a long list.

And in motion don't be afraid of used if you buy from a dealer with a return contract.  Remember there are movies shot on film today that are on 50 to 20 year old cameras and Arri has always said their classic camera will upres to 4k cinema just fine. 

This was shot with a Canon 1dx mark I, 2k with two hand held 1ft light panels running on v-lock, about 1/2 power, but the difference between fill light and no fill light is the difference between this image or a silloutte.


But personally, I like flat cameras vs. long cameras for this type of work.  Theyíre fast, throwing on an ND doesnít bother me and honestly they draw much less attention. 

As far as 4k, 6k, 8k with the heavy post work and delivery I donít get it, but hey as you said people will buy what theyíre told is the right camera and the only way to know is to test them in the style you work.


IMO

BC
« Last Edit: March 06, 2018, 06:10:18 PM by bcooter »
Logged

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1476
  • me
    • working
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #5 on: March 18, 2018, 06:43:30 PM »

Ah ah! I finaly could get 1dx2 in the edit megasuite Mistika  8) and yep, I agree with you,
It's a damn good footage.

No camera is perfect and every camera serves a purpose.

I mainly use the 1dxII  for lifestyle advertising, or smaller areas.   The upside is Canon color, especially skin tones are very easy to grade.    In Resolve I can match them down very close to my RED MXís but if you want smooth, beautiful color this is a good camera.

The only real downside is it goes through a lot of storage at 800 mbs and though I nearly always use three zooms 16-35, 24-70, 70-200.     The 2.8 lenses in the smaller range do not have IS, so you have to go to f4s.

If handholding, a lighter weight camera IS is a must. 

The  comparison between my RED MX cameras and the 1dx file is the REDís have about 7 to 10% more latitude.   The funny thing is if the REDís are set at 800 iso, the Canon must be set at 1250 to match.

With Cfast 2 cards, lenses, newer batteries  it comes in at a hair under $9,000.   You can find demo or used for less  and save $1,500.

If Iím shooting both stills and motion, I rarely use the 2 for stills, as itís a 1.4 crop for motion which is slightly larger than  super 35, so Iíll use the 1dx1 for stills.   Due to time  on set itís much faster to have both cameras set up and ready so there is no stopping for changes and much less chance of a mistake.

Though it is heresy in the film world, the Canons dual pixel auto focus is crazy good, almost foolproof. 

If you're working quickly the focus is amazing.

IMO

BC

fredjeang2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1376
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #6 on: March 19, 2018, 12:05:00 PM »

No camera is perfect and every camera serves a purpose.

I mainly use the 1dxII  for lifestyle advertising, or smaller areas.   The upside is Canon color, especially skin tones are very easy to grade.    In Resolve I can match them down very close to my RED MXís but if you want smooth, beautiful color this is a good camera.

The only real downside is it goes through a lot of storage at 800 mbs and though I nearly always use three zooms 16-35, 24-70, 70-200.     The 2.8 lenses in the smaller range do not have IS, so you have to go to f4s.

If handholding, a lighter weight camera IS is a must. 

The  comparison between my RED MX cameras and the 1dx file is the REDís have about 7 to 10% more latitude.   The funny thing is if the REDís are set at 800 iso, the Canon must be set at 1250 to match.

With Cfast 2 cards, lenses, newer batteries  it comes in at a hair under $9,000.   You can find demo or used for less  and save $1,500.

If Iím shooting both stills and motion, I rarely use the 2 for stills, as itís a 1.4 crop for motion which is slightly larger than  super 35, so Iíll use the 1dx1 for stills.   Due to time  on set itís much faster to have both cameras set up and ready so there is no stopping for changes and much less chance of a mistake.

Though it is heresy in the film world, the Canons dual pixel auto focus is crazy good, almost foolproof. 

If you're working quickly the focus is amazing.

IMO

BC
Well James, I think that the Canon is the best current camera for the active professional who is looking for a top photographic tool but capable to deliver very convincing results in video.
I see the GH5 stronger in video aspect, but the GH5 is not near a professional still camera.
Also as you underline, the Canon AF works and maybe the only one that I know suitable for video? Maybe there are others I ignore.

And I think that above the specs, the feel is important. I love built like tanks cameras. They inspired one and made for work. One of the things that irritates me always are cables, screws, extra/external accessories, small buttons and menus and cheap plastic boxes that feels unreliable. I don't like battery grips but integrated. I hate menus and user manuals. It has to work or I get crazy. The 1d is a beast of camera. We can say, yes but for less you got the 5d...true...but it's not the same in hands. The feel is an abstract volatile concept but important. Not everything belongs to rationalism.
The only obstacle between me and Canon is that the D1 line is too big for my hands and Nikon D2,3,4,5 work best.
But heavy means stability and the experience of shooting the top Canikon line is unique.
I really think that when one feels that he drived a tool and not that much a toy, the work experience is different.

True that the Canon files are big cause it does not use a cutting edge compression codec bit old school. But then we gain
In post causr what's heavily compressed has to be decompressed.
Imo, there is little need to do Prores copies. Just ingest and good to go.

I think your Canon is the best this company ever made. Everything is balanced and right.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2018, 03:58:00 PM by fredjeang2 »
Logged

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1476
  • me
    • working
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #7 on: March 24, 2018, 07:50:59 PM »


I think your Canon is the best this company ever made. Everything is balanced and right.

Fred,

If anything hurts Canon it's the price and the protecting of territory.   The C200 is an example of what a camera is vs. what it can be.

For people shooting a combination of stills and motion, Canon's autofocus really is a game changer if your running a still sized vs. movie sized crew and time is limited.

Personally I think Canon could up their sales by double if they'd had made the c200 as a replacement for the c300 and offered higher bit depth, the ability to go to at least 100 fps without losing image quality, but Canon has their way and they don't seem to want to change it.

I guess it makes sense not to get into a price war against Sony, but it's obvious that people are looking at specs more than real world use and the C200 looks like it's limited on specs, though in testing it holds up well and the 1dxII at 8 bit can make the spec sheet reader hold off, though my 1dxII holds up well in the real world.

The thing is whether you are going for price like the gh5 or into the higher range of Arri, if you know your equipment, realise that every camera today has to be learned for it's limitations and it's positives, put your money in front of the lens, anyone with study and talent can make almost any camera work well today. 

It's interesting, a few years ago I viewed a short run 30 second lifestyle spot for a jeans wear maker.   Really nice work that made sense and was interesting.  Shot with a 5d2.  Nobody on a tech forum would think that way, but the story, the look and knowing what the camera and digital film would do, the artist did an amazing job.

IMO

BC





D Fuller

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 221
    • airstream.pictures
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #8 on: June 23, 2018, 08:26:35 PM »

Has anyone shot 4K landscape videos with the new Nikon D850?

I have been shooting landscape videos in HD, but it doesn't really have enough resolution for all the fine details (leaves, grasses, etc.) in landscapes.

I have been shooting landscape photos with Nikon for several years and am able to print 3x5 foot photos with superb detail.

Not interested in skin tones, low light or autofocus since I work from tripod and only shoot landscapes.  If you have samples of landscape videos, would love to see them.  Thanks.

This has been a good discussion, but Iím not sure that your original question has been answered.

The secret sauce for video resolution is data rate. Compression kills detail (resolution) and all DSLRS have too much compression for what you want to see. The higher the data rate, the better, for your purposes. Most DSLRs also record 4:2:0 color internally, which means they are throwing out half of the color resolution. The GH5 is an exception to that, I believe, and many DSLRs will record 4:2:2 color to an external recorder (doubling the color resolution). That may help the Nikon as well. I believe it sends an uncompressed 4:2:2 signal out its HDMI port, so if you try recording that in ProRes(HQ) or the like, you might be a lot happier with the results.
Logged
website: www.airstream.pictures
portfolio: airstream.format.com

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1476
  • me
    • working
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #9 on: June 30, 2018, 07:47:25 PM »

This has been a good discussion, but Iím not sure that your original question has been answered.

The secret sauce for video resolution is data rate. Compression kills detail (resolution) and all DSLRS have too much compression for what you want to see. The higher the data rate, the better, for your purposes. Most DSLRs also record 4:2:0 color internally, which means they are throwing out half of the color resolution. The GH5 is an exception to that, I believe, and many DSLRs will record 4:2:2 color to an external recorder (doubling the color resolution). That may help the Nikon as well. I believe it sends an uncompressed 4:2:2 signal out its HDMI port, so if you try recording that in ProRes(HQ) or the like, you might be a lot happier with the results.

Dave I think youíre 100% right.   Nobody has answered fully, but I think because itís all so personal.   I know that you know that everyone that shoots stills/motion or both, will rave over a camera system, dislike other cameras but it always depends on what you shoot, lens systems, lighting (real or artificial), set styling, wardrobe, color and of course how much time/money you have for post work.

I never thought about the Nikon, mostly for the spec numbers and only going to uhd.   Though because of this thread I looked at samples of the 850 motion and screen shots and the footage looked great,  though donít know how much post work was done, how long they had to scout locations, cast and shoot in the perfect time of day, but pro or advanced enthusiast also test on the wrong time of day, or the wrong room, because what you think will happen will many times be 180 degrees from the plan because those moments always happen and this will tell you a lot about the performance of any equipment and how it will work for the user, or how the user modifies how they shoot.

I guess the only real answer is to rent, borrow, beg . . . whatever, go out with the cameras you have in mind, match the lens as close as possible and shoot what you shoot and donít give up on it in a few minutes or hours.   Really work it like itís life or death and never forget that the right lens can change the look of the final imagery. 


IMO

BC

D Fuller

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 221
    • airstream.pictures
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #10 on: July 01, 2018, 07:05:12 AM »

Though because of this thread I looked at samples of the 850 motion and screen shots and the footage looked great,  though donít know how much post work was done, how long they had to scout locations, cast and shoot in the perfect time of day, but pro or advanced enthusiast also test on the wrong time of day, or the wrong room, because what you think will happen will many times be 180 degrees from the plan because those moments always happen and this will tell you a lot about the performance of any equipment and how it will work for the user, or how the user modifies how they shoot.

I guess the only real answer is to rent, borrow, beg . . . whatever, go out with the cameras you have in mind, match the lens as close as possible and shoot what you shoot and donít give up on it in a few minutes or hours.   Really work it like itís life or death and never forget that the right lens can change the look of the final imagery. 


IMO

BC

BC is absolutely right here. Test. Thatís really the only way to really know if a camera works for your kind of work.

Landscape is a particularly difficult case for digital video. Itís extremely delanding of compression algorithms. All those leaves moving constantly, or the rippling on the surface of water can easily break a compression scheme. (I used to shoot all the video for the Maine Office of Tourism and we ran into the limits of compression oftenóand that was using Betacams, Varicams, and Reds. It wasnít until Red introduced SSDs with their faster data rates that I could reliably shoot an exterior wide with deep focus and not see compression artifactsóand then, only if I used the lowest available compression.)

One of the things to pay attention to when viewing on-line samples is subject matter. It is really easy for a compression scheme to make a human face look nice in a medium or close shot. (Itís a large area with not a lot of detail compared to the detail present in a million leaves on a tree.) And shallow depth of field is very easy on compression.
Logged
website: www.airstream.pictures
portfolio: airstream.format.com

fredjeang2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1376
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #11 on: July 04, 2018, 08:26:51 PM »

BC is absolutely right here. Test. Thatís really the only way to really know if a camera works for your kind of work.

Landscape is a particularly difficult case for digital video. Itís extremely delanding of compression algorithms. All those leaves moving constantly, or the rippling on the surface of water can easily break a compression scheme. (I used to shoot all the video for the Maine Office of Tourism and we ran into the limits of compression oftenóand that was using Betacams, Varicams, and Reds. It wasnít until Red introduced SSDs with their faster data rates that I could reliably shoot an exterior wide with deep focus and not see compression artifactsóand then, only if I used the lowest available compression.)

One of the things to pay attention to when viewing on-line samples is subject matter. It is really easy for a compression scheme to make a human face look nice in a medium or close shot. (Itís a large area with not a lot of detail compared to the detail present in a million leaves on a tree.) And shallow depth of field is very easy on compression.
Very interesting imput and very true regarding the chalenges in Landscapes. Had that same experience with rippling on the surface of water. And in my budget/needs, there was nothing that could solve it satisfactory but going to a similar config you mentionned. It's very subject dependant.
Logged

D Fuller

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 221
    • airstream.pictures
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #12 on: July 06, 2018, 10:11:57 AM »


I have been shooting landscape videos in HD, but it doesn't really have enough resolution for all the fine details (leaves, grasses, etc.) in landscapes.


Hereís another thought that just bubbled up from the dark recesses of my brain and will solve your problem. (I am 99.44% sure of this): get an external 4K recorder and record the D850ís 4K HDMI output in ProRes 422(HQ) or the equivalent. The Atomos Shogun or the new 4K Ninja would work nicely (you can rent one from Lensrentals.com to try it out) or Black Magic Video Assist 4K.

According to the specs I just read, D850 puts out an uncompressed 4:2:2 signal through its HDMI port. That means you can bypass all the issues internal compression brings with it. It should make a marked difference for landscape video. Itís an 8-bit signal, so pay close attention to white balance (the internally-recorded signal is 8-bit as well).

We tried this idea with our Reds years ago for some very dark scenes where compression noise, even at low compression ratios, was an issue. The signal out the SDI port was cleaner, because it was uncompressed. The Red, though, only sends an HD signal out the SDI port, so we ended up not using it, opting to shoot 5K and use Neat Video to deal with the (really rather minor, as I remember it) noise.
Logged
website: www.airstream.pictures
portfolio: airstream.format.com

fredjeang2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1376
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #13 on: July 09, 2018, 06:17:08 AM »

But the problem I (personaly) find with this is that it kills to some extend the
Idea of compacteness, addind devices and more cablery in
What in the end becomes bigger, more expensive, and uncomfortable
To handle. (Cages etc..)
I don't really see the reason why, aside from commercial oscur decisions,
Manufacturers couldn't enable solid recording features within
The volume of a high-end dslr, when we see that it could be done
In the GH5 and the BM pocket.
For what I've heard, the GH5 (which is tiny) does not have overheating issues.
So the tech seems already there to be able to bypass external devices
But rarely implemented besides some exceptions.
At the end of the day, it"s adding devices, more crap to deal with, more cash to be spent
And more overall hassles.
It really puzzles me why can't we have in 2018 a camera like the Canon C15 (all integrated) priced
Under 3000 with a solid recording specs instead.

Why not simply put Raw just like BM does, or a solid flavour of a Prores/Dnx directly?
And sweep aside once for awhile high compression? At least on devices that
Are tagged high-end. It makes really no sense in the hybrid era to
Produce a high-end still camera with low-end video specs,

One of the mantra I hear most with landscape shooters, is that
They want light gear to carry outside.
If everything was integrated in-camera, it could be fully weather sealled,
Solving that way the problem of weight/cluttered as well as climate conditions at once,
Without having to worry about 8bit 4.2.0 signal artifacts.

There is already an open format,  Leica choosed DNG instead
Of backing it's own proprietary raw so it's universal but those are exceptions more than a rule.
In Canon's case, it is clear that there are protecting their high-end catalogue, but in the case
Of Nikon, which does not have to protect anything, it's quite bizarre because they could have
Attracted a vast clientelle of hybrid shooters. And I' d very surprised if they dare on its
Mirrorless about to come soon.
I read enthusiastic rumors on a possible Nikon / Prores in-camera implementation,
But I' m afraid it's unlikely to happen.
So yeah, there will always be external devices to cure the sin as there will always be an England...
Marketing decisions are sometimes hard to understand.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2018, 07:20:49 AM by fredjeang2 »
Logged

D Fuller

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 221
    • airstream.pictures
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #14 on: July 09, 2018, 12:50:25 PM »

Fred, what you describe isóat least todayóa fantasy camera. And it is a good goal to shoot for, but I was trying to solve the OPís problem with a solution that will work today. An external recorder can do that, and doesnít have to be huge. No, the whole kit wonít fit in a pocket, but it need be only a bit bigger than an iPad and a couple of camera batteries.

Your dream camera that shoots uncompressed 4K to an SD card or whateveróI think that is coming, but I donít think itís as easy as you make it sound. I think the principal barrier for a small camera is heat. For uncompressed 4K, twenty minutes will use a terabyte of storage. It takes a lot of power to move that much data around. Small cameras will really struggle to dissipate that much heat. They will get there, but not for a while.

I donít think the barrier is manufacturers protecting other linesówell, it may be that in Canonís case, but certainly not Nikonísóand I think Sony is up against the brick wall of physics with the a7 form. Iím so interested to see what they bring to the a7s3. The GH5 is pretty remarkable, but it doesnít record uncompressed, or even lossless compressed. (And compared to an a7x, itís not that small.) So while you get excellent color from its 10 bit 4:2:2 files, they will suffer from compression issues with the kind of subjects landscape shooters point the lens at.
Logged
website: www.airstream.pictures
portfolio: airstream.format.com

fredjeang2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1376
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #15 on: July 09, 2018, 06:33:46 PM »

Fred, what you describe isóat least todayóa fantasy camera. And it is a good goal to shoot for, but I was trying to solve the OPís problem with a solution that will work today. An external recorder can do that, and doesnít have to be huge. No, the whole kit wonít fit in a pocket, but it need be only a bit bigger than an iPad and a couple of camera batteries.

Your dream camera that shoots uncompressed 4K to an SD card or whateveróI think that is coming, but I donít think itís as easy as you make it sound. I think the principal barrier for a small camera is heat. For uncompressed 4K, twenty minutes will use a terabyte of storage. It takes a lot of power to move that much data around. Small cameras will really struggle to dissipate that much heat. They will get there, but not for a while.

I donít think the barrier is manufacturers protecting other linesówell, it may be that in Canonís case, but certainly not Nikonísóand I think Sony is up against the brick wall of physics with the a7 form. Iím so interested to see what they bring to the a7s3. The GH5 is pretty remarkable, but it doesnít record uncompressed, or even lossless compressed. (And compared to an a7x, itís not that small.) So while you get excellent color from its 10 bit 4:2:2 files, they will suffer from compression issues with the kind of subjects landscape shooters point the lens at.
I totally agree with your words and understood that you answered the OP question with today's solution in order to be helpfull.
You are also right on the GH5, it's not perfect although much better than others, there will still have compression issues if recorded internaly so
If a landscape shooter wants a super clean output, a recorded device is needed even on the Pana.
My point was probably a sort of wishfull thinking for the middle term.
I'd like things smaller, integrated with no extra stuff to attach included ND filters like in the Canon (limited though),
Cause things really look like a Legoland or Mecano: the mike, the cage, the recorded device, the clamps, the cable(s), the sunshade, the matte boxes...quite frankly I find all that surreal, hugly and old school.
Without talking about the fact that there is hardly standard when it comes to files.
Prores / dnx / dng could/should be what we find regardless of camera brands but instead of that we got proprietary workflows with myriad of log curves, none of which share the same Luts and so on.
So indeed the only way to bypass this holy mess of motion imagery remains the external recorder, but I can't help finding that it is a pity.
Sometimes I see big sets and it seems that the bigger, the better. In a recent past, I started to learn ACES in order
(That's what I thought) to simplify post. But then people complained, they started to complicate it more adding more flavour and if all the people involved in the chain aren't ACES compliant, it breaks. So in the end I stepped back.
I just wish motion imagery was a bit more simple in all aspects, because there is indeed a complexity that is exciting,
But IMO, a part of it went out of control.
Logged

D Fuller

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 221
    • airstream.pictures
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #16 on: July 09, 2018, 08:47:42 PM »

...
My point was probably a sort of wishfull thinking for the middle term.
I'd like things smaller, integrated with no extra stuff to attach included ND filters like in the Canon (limited though),
Cause things really look like a Legoland or Mecano: the mike, the cage, the recorded device, the clamps, the cable(s), the sunshade, the matte boxes...quite frankly I find all that surreal, hugly and old school.
Without talking about the fact that there is hardly standard when it comes to files.
Prores / dnx / dng could/should be what we find regardless of camera brands but instead of that we got proprietary workflows with myriad of log curves, none of which share the same Luts and so on.
So indeed the only way to bypass this holy mess of motion imagery remains the external recorder, but I can't help finding that it is a pity.
Sometimes I see big sets and it seems that the bigger, the better. In a recent past, I started to learn ACES in order
(That's what I thought) to simplify post. But then people complained, they started to complicate it more adding more flavour and if all the people involved in the chain aren't ACES compliant, it breaks. So in the end I stepped back.
I just wish motion imagery was a bit more simple in all aspects, because there is indeed a complexity that is exciting,
But IMO, a part of it went out of control.

I get what youíre saying. And youíre not alone, everybody wants motion to be simpler and lighter. (For that matter, everybody wants still photography to be simpler and lighter). And the truth is that motion is simpler until you want to raise the quality level or the level of control. Then it takes work.

You want better sound? The mic canít be on the camera any more. You want to record more detail? You have to lower the compression ratio somehow. You want to film an actor coming out of a store and walking down the street with no noisy trucks going by? You have to control the street. Every time you want to do something better, or control something better, it takes more time or gear or people or money. Or all of the above.

The depressing thing is that these days, Iím not sure anybody cares. Letís just shoot it on an iPhone and call it a day.

Logged
website: www.airstream.pictures
portfolio: airstream.format.com

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1476
  • me
    • working
Re: 4K video on Nikon D850?
« Reply #17 on: July 09, 2018, 10:54:44 PM »

it takes more time or gear or people or money. Or all of the above.

The depressing thing is that these days, Iím not sure anybody cares. Letís just shoot it on an iPhone and call it a day.

We had a sound guy from Bangkok that told me he was now an editor.  I asked what do you use and he said FCPex.  I asked how long has he been doing it and he said around a month.    I said that's not editing, that's just slamming stuff together.   (I guess that didn't go over well, cause he then became a problem child).

Yes I know that people think they have a very good camera in their pocket, but as you said, to get better takes work/time (which is money)  I don't pay attention to those people.   


But the problem I (personaly) find with this is that it kills to some extend the
Idea of compacteness, addind devices and more cablery in
What in the end becomes bigger, more expensive, and uncomfortable
To handle. (Cages etc..)
I don't really see the reason why, aside from commercial oscur decisions,
Manufacturers couldn't enable solid recording features within
The volume of a high-end dslr, when we see that it could be done
In the GH5 and the BM pocket.

Fred,

On this forum small seems to be the talk of the day, especially Sony.    I see the point, especially if your mounting in a car, or small area, when time is limited, but basically most small cameras like my Sony A7sII has a very low bitrate and honestly everyone tells me how it goes to such high iso, but mine doesn't and exposure must be very carefully checked, especially with skies as banding will come up quickly.   

But Fred, the marketplace is full of all in one digital motion cameras, from the c100, 200, 300, 500, Sony has about 10, Black Magic 4 or 5, Panasonic about 5 and the list goes on and if you watched any of those utube comparison videos it's all there with a long laundry list of what's missing, what isn't.

I think the panasonic gh series cameras especially the gh5 that shoots (I think) up to 400 mBs is pretty amazing given the size of the camera and costs, and ibis.    Also the gh series has about the easiest menu system to learn and set up.  In fact it reminds me of a mini 1dxII and has tactile buttons for quick changes in settings.

In regards to cages and atmos recorders I don't see them as an issue with small cameras because a little added weight and the ability to mount accessories makes it more adaptable, especially wooden cameras products.   It's probably a camera that everyone that shoots motion should have in their kit.    The only downside with 4/3 because it's a fairly small sensor.   I have a set of the voight 1.0 primes that allows for more focus separation but you lose some functionality.   I really wish the gh series was super 35 or aps-c, as it allows for more coverage and adjustability for shifting foreground to background focus.  But it shoots a highly compressed file so it's not a camera to do serious effects with.


Your dream camera that shoots uncompressed 4K to an SD card or whateveróI think that is coming, but I donít think itís as easy as you make it sound. I think the principal barrier for a small camera is heat. For uncompressed 4K, twenty minutes will use a terabyte of storage. It takes a lot of power to move that much data around. Small cameras will really struggle to dissipate that much heat. They will get there, but not for a while.

I donít think the barrier is manufacturers protecting other linesówell, it may be that in Canonís case, but certainly not Nikonísóand I think Sony is up against the brick wall of physics with the a7 form. Iím so interested to see what they bring to the a7s3. The GH5 is pretty remarkable, but it doesnít record uncompressed, or even lossless compressed. (And compared to an a7x, itís not that small.) So while you get excellent color from its 10 bit 4:2:2 files, they will suffer from compression issues with the kind of subjects landscape shooters point the lens at.

Dave,

I think the time will come where there will be high bit depth, bit rate smaller cameras that are 4k and will probably go to 60fps, but I also think that time is a ways off and won't produce a cinema look.

I also agree that the biggest issue is heat.  I know my RED R1s are big as the body weighs 10 lbs, but have never overheated in some very challenging conditions,  where the  original RED scarlet or epic had a tendency to get hot on long takes, and the fans would kick in, quite loud.   I added the aux fan kit which helps the dsmc mx cameras a great deal.

I will always (at least today) think most cinema cameras need at least super 35 sized sensors (or aps-c) and even with stills aps_C produces a nice file.

This still image was shot on a mountain top we used as a makeshift landing zone.    After we did the main session of landing, they turned around and flew by.   Every cameras next to me had the data cards were full and in the bag I had a 70d so  I just grabbed it and started shooting, really not knowing what I was gong to get.



This image was used large as a bus wrap and other very large print it looked good and a 70d is probably worth about $400 at todays prices, the 80d $800.

I do think Canon plays a little too many games in holding back specs like on the c200 and c300, but so does everyone.   In fact looking at what Panasonic gets from the little gh5, there is really no reason that Canon can't make a super 80d with dual pixel focus and high bit rate, at least 10 bit internal, a good codec, even if they sold it at 2.5 times the price.  I guess that would make it a Sony A-9 with better color.

Canon also needs to copy RED and BM with user changeable lens mounts, from PL to EF.    Maybe they expect people to buy two cameras, but there a lot of times you want to go to PL and for quick lifestyle the dual pixel AF is very good.

Nikon has always surprised me as like you I don't understand that because Nikon has no cinema territory to protect.   I'm just guessing but since their cameras have Sony sensors, maybe Sony kind of holds them back with second gen sensors, unlike what is in the Sony A9.

Bottom ine is real cinema cameras are large, with a lot of cables, variable output, variable inputs, variable power, and especially good sound suppression.

We have a great sound tech, that I always ask that every camera on set has sound running to it.  On the ol' R1's the sound it records, vs. the sound cards the tech gives me are virtually identical.  He never believed me until I set him down in one of our suites and let him listen himself.

Now he does it without complaint.

Second bottom line is if you're shooting utube instructional videos, get a gh5 and just shoot it with a directional mic pointed at the subject make it look good on the lcd.  Nobody will know or care cause it's the tube.   

That's not the goal, but nobody on the tube cares.

Third bottom line. I don't need new cameras for 90% of what I shoot, but there always comes a time they want slow mo and fast focus pulling.   So I guess my next camera is a C300 from a reputable reseller, used with low miles.  Is it what I want?  No, but when you're competing off the bottom line, it's probably the best bet because most don't know the difference between 12 bit and 8 bits and honestly with proper grading, fill and exposure it's almost impossible to see the differene.  They just know the words 4k, so to get to 60p reliable focus my 1dx MKII does it and honestly with some light grading it can match my REDs in a few minutes.

IMO

BC
« Last Edit: July 10, 2018, 02:08:53 PM by bcooter »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up