|
Forum: Video Recording and Processing
08-22-2015, 01:29 AM
|
| |
Edgar, you are preaching to the choir. Those individuals are in some other place on this forum, and I find them rather annoying too. There seem to be fewer these days though, or they keep quiet now.
|
|
Forum: Video Recording and Processing
08-20-2015, 08:33 AM
|
| |
I think the difference is that these days, S35 cameras are affordable. Customers may not be willing to accept small sensor work and the look that results in. It just tends to look cheaper IMHO. To me a DSLR also looks more professional than say a X900, just the camera itself. The latter reminds me more of tourists.
DSLRs are not an ideal form factor for video. That's for sure. I wish I had a way to get my hands further apart from the camera (camera roll is quite visible and annoying, the SR takes care of the rest), but then I would lose control.
I think what would be ideal would be if we could connect a smartphone to the camera as the rear display, at least for the settings, and maybe then there could be BT based attachments, like remotes that have buttons, dials, ...
|
|
Forum: Video Recording and Processing
08-19-2015, 03:05 AM
|
| |
Nice. Congrats, aaaaand... another one bites the dust (leaves Pentax).
If only Pentax would wake up, if only...
|
|
Forum: Video Recording and Processing
08-13-2015, 12:40 PM
|
| |
Can't watch the video now, sadly. But yeah, the white balance was... odd. It always had a bit of a green tint. Not sure how the white balance could fix physical limitations of the sensor though, clipping is clipping. Also not sure how a video hood would help... aren't those just large lens hoods? Or do you mean I'd have to use gradual NDs?
I recorded a video of a relatively easy outdoor scene with my K-5, and the owner of the HC-X900 did the same. The result of the K-5 is better. Hands down.
You can get sort of shallow DoF with the small sensor, but you'd be zooming in a lot, which gives you a different look again. I'll put on a 50mm 1.8 and have that nice creamy look at a focal length that is much easier to manage, especially indoors.
The SR of the X900 is ridiculously good (though a bit artificial looking IMHO), and the encoder does a lot with the relatively low bitrates (24 Mbps? The K-3 has 20 Mbps, and nowhere near as much detail to compress, yet the X900 has no problem with compression artifacts).
|
|
Forum: Video Recording and Processing
08-13-2015, 03:44 AM
|
| |
I've used the HC-X900 before, and there's a lot to like about it... except for the image quality. It is dreadful. Colors are horrible, easily blown out (i.e. the sky turns turquoise and then white), etc. The dynamic range is terrible. etc. And the everything in focus look looks cheap IMHO. In terms of control over the image I find my K-5 easier to use too.
I would avoid Canon for video work, unless you are talking about a Cinema EOS.
For me, unless you have the money to go for the big boys, something like a Samsung NX1, Sony A7S, Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II or Panasonic GH4 seem to be the best options. I'd probably go for the Olympus, since it stabilizes every lens, and very well at that. 4K isn't necessary for your work (though it would enable you to "zoom in" in post whenever you want to, so you can cut back and forth). The NX1 is a bit of a headache in terms of codec, for the moment, so if a quick turn around is what matters... Or, well, a Pentax K-5, if you want to stay with Pentax and don't mind manual focus or the lack of a flippy screen. There is a hot pixel problem shooting low light for a long time, but otherwise the image quality is beautiful, the video is stabilized, editing the files is a blast being MJPEG, compression artifacts don't exist...
|
|
Forum: Video Recording and Processing
08-10-2015, 02:32 PM
|
| |
Hollywood also only uses 24p... shoot at 1/50 and you should be ok.
60i... it would have to be deinterlaced, which is a bit of a headache, and costs a lot of (processing) time to be done properly.
Also, for 60p you'll need faster internet connections for decent quality, etc. IMHO it makes more sense to stick with 24/25p and learn how to do it.
|
|
Forum: Video Recording and Processing
08-03-2015, 06:47 PM
|
| |
Someone send that clip to Pentax then... maybe at some point they realize their error.
movie SR does have one advantage. It buffers the video for a while, so if you stop a pan the system notices and is able to slow down the pan gently. You don't get to see exactly what you are recording though.
What you should do is reduce sharpening as much as possible to make it easier for the encoder. Lower contrast maybe, in order to get more dynamic range.
|
|
Forum: Video Recording and Processing
08-03-2015, 04:03 PM
|
| |
Sorry... I directly translated from German. Faster. 1/800 instead of 1/50.
MovieSR (probably) works by capturing the whole sensor at, say, 2500x1400 or so (at least that'd be the ideal situation). It will then crop the image to 1920x1080, while moving the part that it takes the image from around. If you do software stabilization in post, you're working with a 1920x1080 image that you then crop from... after that you'll be blowing up the image again, but it won't look as sharp as before of course.
The faster shutter speeds help in freezing the motion... motion blur looks pretty ugly when you software stabilize it. It becomes very noticeable.
I don't know about the NX1, I think I've read something about adapters, but they are fully manual. So MF etc. Only Sony seems to have active adapters for Canon...?
|
|
Forum: Video Recording and Processing
08-03-2015, 02:56 PM
|
| |
It depends. If you do 1/800 you can stabilize in post (or even the movie SR may work, which would give you higher resolution). After that there are ways to re-add motion blur in post. It might be worth a test. Software stabilization needs short shutter speeds.
|
|
Forum: Video Recording and Processing
08-03-2015, 02:40 PM
|
| |
I do like shaky camera, but it has to be the shaky look of a big, heavy camera. Light cameras jitter too much. SR fixes that. During the concert (I once posted a video of the concert here... and IMHO the handheld footage shot at 50mm looks great) I also moved from one side of the stage to the other while at 18mm, and it looked great. Completely handheld.
Stabilized mount and avoid detailed scenes (shoot wide open) and too much motion, then the Pentax should perform very well.
If only Pentax reenabled SR and high bitrate MJPEG, the cameras could be at least competitive with Nikon and Canon.
Oh well. Olympus does look great, if you want to go handheld.
@jonsalty: Turn off movie SR. That should fix most of your problems. If you don't mind looking too goofy you could put your camera on a tripod and carry around that tripod. That can work, there are guides on the net.
|
|
Forum: Video Recording and Processing
08-03-2015, 07:01 AM
|
| |
Forget Canon. Hardy better than Pentax. They only enjoy the reputation they got early on.
A Pentax K-5 will turn out beautiful high bitrate AND stabilized video, the last Pentax to do so.
A Samsung NX1 would let you use your old Pentax lenses and shoot beautiful 4K video, however the codec at the moment is too high end, computers can't handle it properly yet. And with old lenses video isn't stabilized. You would also have to raise your budget.
If you want stabilization either wait for Sony or get an Olympus, those will stabilize all videos regardless of lens. Or, well, the K-5.
|
