Blaise Douros
Forum Replies Created
-
Why look for something “like” these cameras, when you could just go with the FS7 with the 28-135 kit lens? Or do you need more reach? Any reason you’re discounting it?
As for thoughts: the Sony FS7 is the best full-size camera I’ve used in years. I highly recommend it.
-
I, too, would like to have my cake and eat it too.
Just rent an A7s if your budget doesn’t support buying it. There is no camera out there that does all the things you want for cheap money. So either rent it and save money that way, or raise some and get the camera you need.
-
No need to go to After Effects for something this simple. As long as your wide shot stays static, you can do it in Premiere.
https://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/corner-pin-effect-premiere-pro/
Edit your onscreen sequence, put it in a track above your wide shot, and then use the Corner Pin effect on it to tag it to your wide shot. Any b-roll or cutaways get edited over the top of these two layers.
-
Laggy? This isn’t a term we use in video. Can you elaborate on what you mean, and/or post a sample?
-
Forget Nikon for video; your research is talking about the Canon and Nikon of the 90’s, when everyone was shooting stills. If you were shooting stills, there’s no effective difference these days, but Nikon is lagging in the video department; their lenses focus the wrong way, and their video support is a little lame in general. Canon has been in the video game a lot longer. Look at the Canon t3i, t4i, t5i, or t6i; go with whatever fits your budget; I’d say get a cheaper body and better lens if you can. No 4K on any of those, but that’s usually not a problem for web.
Forget about autofocus. It’s noisy, inaccurate, and not very useful on DSLRs, you’re just going to have to learn to pull focus manually. If you need good autofocus, forget about DSLRs entirely, and look at camcorders like the older Canon XA10/XA20; they have integrated XLR for audio, and their small sensors are perfect for autofocus.
Don’t forget about audio; a lav mike will be necessary if you’re doing any talking to the camera; otherwise a shotgun will do.
-
Adjustment layer -> Effect: RGB Curves, with a slight drop in exposure. Make a mask in the desired shadow shape, and feather for nice blurred edges. Keyframe the mask from right to left. Crack open a beer.
Am I misreading the post? Are you trying to make something more complicated?
-
Consider the A7SII. It doesn’t have as much grading latitude in the codec as the Black Magic cameras, but has more than the GH4. You also won’t be stuck using MFT lenses (or severe crops on 35mm lenses); you can fit almost any lens on it, and the full frame sensor gives you a nice wide picture.
If you or your camera operator have any 35mm lenses, you can easily get an adaptor that will allow them to work on this camera. It’s lightweight and has incredible low-light performance.
The others are fine choices, but in terms of flexibility of lens choice, and a wider FOV with 35mm glass, that’s the direction I’d go.
-
Sony FS7 will give you plenty of color headroom for grading, and it’s not too heavy. Does pretty well in medium-to-lower light.
If you need to go really lightweight with really good low-light performance, the Sony A7S or A7SII is your best bet. Slightly less color flexibility, but incredible low-light performance and very lightweight.
The nice thing about these E-mount cameras is that you can adapt almost any glass to them, so you have a lot of flexibility where that’s concerned.
-
You may find DXO’s measurement of the T-stop transmission of the lens to be illuminating (har).
Click the “Transmission” tab to see. It pretty much lines up with your observations, as well as my experience; the EV drops by about .2 when zooming from 24mm to 105mm.
-
Your lens is not broken–this is normal for the 24-105. It’s well documented; I have two copies of the lens and they both do this.
Remember, f-stops are not T-stops. F-stops basically have to do with the ratio between the front element of the lens to the size of the aperture–it’s not a guarantee of identical exposure. For example, if I put a big medium-format lens on my DSLR, f/4 might let as much light in as f/2.8 on a lens of the same focal length meant for 35mm, because the aperture would be larger to compensate for the larger front element.
T-stops, however, are meant to tell you how much light is let in through the lens; T2 will ALWAYS be the same, even if you change lenses–that’s why T-stops are the standard for cinema lenses, so that exposure remains the same, regardless of how big the lens’ front element is (and thus, the ratio to the aperture, which is the f number). F/4, though, changes depending on the size of the front element/entrance pupil of the lens.
In the case of the 24-105, I believe what’s happening is that as you zoom, because of the narrowing FOV, less light makes it into the lens in general; the front element/entrance pupil stays the same size, as does the aperture. But because the FOV narrows, less light makes it to your sensor since a wider FOV=more light. So the f/ratio remains the same, while the equivalent t-stop changes slightly.
Someone with more experience in lens design/physics will probably have more concrete answers, but this is my understanding of the difference.