Frage von ennui:
1. If I have understood correctly, provides you with a DSLR the gain on the iso-sensitivity. What areas are you still Iso without gain, up to 400? 100? And have some faint levels below 100 meaning?
2. Picture Style: I shall not now vs. in-camera. Post-debate begin. The idea with "flat" for as many tones seemed initially plausible, I also like the look synonymous, if it is not quite so exaggerated as the "Superflat01. In my tests, but I have both "Cine Marvels" as synonymous with "Superflat01" partly evil blocs in the highlights and shadows, and synonymous to meantone, monochromatic color fields. Looks tw. mies like a Divx encoded movie. Since the cine-gamma curve is probably at the expense of the middle Resolutionder? Respectively. rich but not the 8-bit or liegts s.Codec?
Gibts the Advanced Flat "PS somewhere, and someone has done something else with some good Erahrungen? The "neutral" preset I was against all flat / neutral hp from the net too contrasty.
How is it with the PS, the chem. Movies emulate? Good for what are in any way realistic? I tested the Kodachrome25, was too gaudy and too much "plastic".
However, I'm now only in the milky-white winter testing softbox light, sunny weather may look at everything differently from?
3. The sharpness is really not great, as does tw. even the 100-euro 720p fixed focus Billigcam sharper (although there probably artificially things along). I (the digital sharpness / sharpening?) Rotated to zero, and tested a Sigma EX30-aperture lens for medium-sized screens, which should be good, according to tests, at least up to 5m right. In the long range but probably not. Are the corresponding focal length of the old Nikon because much better?
Antwort von masterseb:
s.1) to ISO800 (approximately menschl. auge) keeps the noise limits in. I would keep myself in the middle. if enough light is there, always ISO 100
s.2) it depends on what you want to do with the material. you straight out of the camera makes a flat profile of course a not so good picture, if you intend to color Gading, however, do not you come around it. I contrast and sharpness to -4, -3 and saturation of tone to +1. did so for me the best results.
s.3) sharpness is of course dependent on optics and light. In principle we wish to raise any hard working professional, so is the picture of the minutes at ansich 7D. digital sharpness and very good optics cinematically. s.otpiken but there are only a small range that are not worth anything really as a video lens. the nonplusultra would nikon zeiss primes, or primes. the lens, but there are already several threads here in this question forum.
I hope I have given you more infos.
Antwort von ennui:
Yes, that will help me next time already.
To 2) I would really like a fairly straight neutral / natural picture, and as little as possible. So far I have - for MiniDV footage - more than once made the low notes little darker or saturation minimally increased. According to my research, it is probably more critical, with the increase codec afterwards because of the color saturation artifacts. Also one should expose as bright as possible, since darken subsequently improved, as a bright, again because of the artifacts. The flat profiles, which I've tested (Marvel, Superflat, the Panavision Genesis-curve, the Advancedflat I am looking for something) I looked all too flat, making tw. funny things with the middle tones, and grading was as synonymous with not much, if occurring even in the original image blocks in black or light blue color planes. Much more disturbing than the moire.
So if I had the desired result "would unravel in-camera" before the compression, I'd be very right. A little flat, "" it would be anyway, so no "gekrushten Blacks" or Warmtönungen, green stitches or the like. But the neutral preset 7d is me because of too high contrast and hard / dark.
Encode the idea that Chrakteristik footage of 'Picture Style, I was synonymous only good, but the result is less then impressed. What kind of footage you have actually used in the 70s or 80s so as to get a neutral look? Kodakfilme was rather warm, right?
Antwort von ennui:
To 3):
I do not mean this Kantenaufsteilungs video sharpness, but even this 35mm-film-to-purchase DVD-sharpness. When I put the Sigma on infinity, are classified in 50, just 100m away (very) little bit muddy blur. Is this the camera, the sensor or the lens? I thought that video codec Resolutionsowieso below the optical resolution, which is why there is more to things like Lichstärke and distortion free.
Antwort von masterseb:
So the sharpness is in the first line of optics: how to draw well is worked sharpen the ring, how exactly can the and of course the quality of the optics and processing of the glass ansich. sigma is not necessarily for high sharpness. tamron even sooner. the output is indeed a fraction of the chip info, but still you see that, see what the chip. zb is a very sharp optics. synonymous, the canon 50mm 1.4 (the 1.8 is indeed a plastic toy, but image is the same).
