Here's my latest Corpo for Turkish Airlines. This one I used the stock zoom and a sony 50mm f 1.8, The camera was set to 'no profile' and I only had to pull the blacks down a bit in post. This is a beautiful golf course btw. I love using the Sony it's a bit large for a monopod but there's no other solution for a tournament like this - tripod's a no no, too noisy and bulky. The 50fps feature allows great slomo that mixes in the edit nicely. Have a gander and let me know what you think.

Dave

Turkish Airlines World Golf Cup 2014 | Vienna - YouTube

Hi Dave,

Great video, some beautiful shots.

Was "no profile" used for the entire video? What made you decide to go with that rather than one of the other profiles?

Cheers

Awesome Dave!

Shots have a really nice flow to them too ... it's over before you realise which means the viewers attention is on the video all the time ... that's what you want to achieve on all videos!

Chris

tripod's a no no, too noisy and bulky

So everything in the clip was shot on a monopod, also the interviews? I think it looked great, especially considering you only used 2 lenses.

Great Work....

Nice work - Shows what can be achieved with this camera that we all seem to struggle with at times :)

Nice work - Shows what can be achieved with this camera that we all seem to struggle with at times :)

It's true. I've seen others pull off some stunning footage with this camera that I just haven't been able to match most of the time...

It took me a tournament to get to grips with what the golfers were going to do next, you kind of have to preempt a bit. Also I realised with such critical focusing I needed to give myself time to expand focus and check the peaking was at its optimum on the subject. On the stock zoom the extra job is to adjust the variable ND filter to correct exposure - I use the histogram. Sometimes I just don't make the shot in time, I guess if your filming a live event that's not an option. The EA 50 stock lens is bad in low light! I never use it in those situations. The camera is a keeper for sure, at least until my next purchase which will be a 4K. The only problem I get is when filming the city associated with the golf course I can't get in anywhere because the camera is too big, the Canon 5D boys just pass me by at the monument ticket office (but they have no 50fps function) and i'm not willing to bag the camera every time and take the lens off. I just bought a Canon 24-70 f2.8. it weighs a ton and I'm not used to it yet, the colour is totally different to the sony lenses - has anyone found this?

Oh yeah - all on a Monopod except the slider shots, and just the 2 lenses, I love that little sony prime. I don't use the profiles, I prefer it simple and if i need a certain look I do it in post, plus if you use a really flat 'pro' profile the focus and exposure are tough for a live event. Thanks for the great comments.

It took me a tournament to get to grips with what the golfers were going to do next, you kind of have to preempt a bit. Also I realised with such critical focusing I needed to give myself time to expand focus and check the peaking was at its optimum on the subject. On the stock zoom the extra job is to adjust the variable ND filter to correct exposure - I use the histogram. Sometimes I just don't make the shot in time, I guess if your filming a live event that's not an option. The EA 50 stock lens is bad in low light! I never use it in those situations. The camera is a keeper for sure, at least until my next purchase which will be a 4K. The only problem I get is when filming the city associated with the golf course I can't get in anywhere because the camera is too big, the Canon 5D boys just pass me by at the monument ticket office (but they have no 50fps function) and i'm not willing to bag the camera every time and take the lens off. I just bought a Canon 24-70 f2.8. it weighs a ton and I'm not used to it yet, the colour is totally different to the sony lenses - has anyone found this?

I find my Canon 24-105mm lens is sharper than the stock lens and the image has a different quality to it - colours are the same though. I also use the 24-70mm Tamron f2.8 which is my favorite lens - the bokeh is way better than the canon and the stock lens and is sharper than both - heavy though! I still prefer my EA50 over my 5D because, simply put, i can keep things in focus - the 5D has no peaking or zoom focus assist - it's a true nightmare in a live situation

Hey Pete

Sadly yes the stock lens isn't really sharp at all! My Sigma 18-35 F1.8 is razor sharp at receptions and stunning ..that's all I use now. I had an 18-50 F2.8 Tamron but it was the one that got nicked in May and that was also way sharper than the Sony lens. I have been putting off replacing it cos the thieves also made off with my 2nd Novoflex adapter so replacing it means not just the lens cost but another 2nd adapter cost. Once our "lean" season is over (our Winter) I'll spring for another adapter and then a Tamron.

Don't you find that 24mm limits your wide angle shots at a ceremony a little ...sometimes I find I need to go back to 18mm at some stages of the ceremony.... actually I do have a Tamron 18-200 for my Nikons ..I think I just might do some test shots with it against the stock lens? It's not going to help low light at F3.5 but it might be sharper ... As far as I remember Sigma make a 24-70 F2.8 too but it's a brute and very heavy .. I did have one but the zoom kept sticking so I sold it. I think that was quite sharp too!!

Dave? Have you used "no profile" on indoor shots ?? I found the over saturation was very heavy so I'm using a flat profile on indoors ... I think I might try using no profile and then see what happens when you pull the saturation down in post??

Chris

Chris I use my 24-105mm Canon f4.0 for ceremonies - it goes down to f2.8 with the Metabones which gives me as much as 21db gain in dark churches (normally though around 12db)

I find the 24mm wide enough as I have another camera wide at the back and yet another wide but on the opposite side to me at the front - I just cut to these for wide views and use my main cam for medium/close shots.

The problem I have is filming guests arriving as this is where I need autofocus to track guests walking towards the church - arrival of wedding cars etc - the stock lens is ok for that, but then I'm in and out of the church and as soon as I go back in the church I'm usually at 21-24db gain with the stock lens. I can't possibly switch lenses each time - would be a nightmare.

When I was a film student back in the day I used to use a Bolex 16mm that had 3 lenses on a revolving ring on the front of the camera - what an idea that would be with modern cameras! - and heavy!

Pete

Thanks Pete

For me I reckon the Sigma 24-70 would do the job nicely on a dumb adapter. My Tamron 17-50 ( F2.8)also was way sharper than the stock lens!!

Maybe I will put one power zoom on the market and see what I get?? I think I would rather use an F2.8 Sigma or Tamron at a lot less money ...I need to stick to Nikon mounts so I can also use the lenses on my Nikons and my one Novoflex adapter is a Nikon to NEX

Chris

Chris.

The indoor shots on the Vienna video are shot no profile. I had to pull back the saturation like you said and brighten them, the indoor shots were a bit red also but that's easy to fix in post. - it's important to get the white balance too. It's almost impossible to remember to keep flicking from indoor to outdoor on a hectic shoot tho. I'm assuming my canon sets itself to f2.8 on a dumb adapter right? I reckon next purchase for me is the metabones - sounds like it'll solve the lowlight situation. Them tamrons sound great, how about a 70-200 tho?

I find my Canon 24-105mm lens is sharper than the stock lens and the image has a different quality to it - colours are the same though. I also use the 24-70mm Tamron f2.8 which is my favorite lens - the bokeh is way better than the canon and the stock lens and is sharper than both - heavy though! I still prefer my EA50 over my 5D because, simply put, i can keep things in focus - the 5D has no peaking or zoom focus assist - it's a true nightmare in a live situation

Try the magic lantern hack for the 5D, it gives peaking - not sure about zoom focus assist.

Hi Dave

My exact problem as well. I modified my PP3 profile and lifted the colour up two steps and it gives a decent indoor shot but of course outdoor is somewhat de-saturated so I have to lift that in post.

The big question now is : Is it better to shoot no profile and get rich outdoor shots and then de-saturate (and kick out the red) in post for all indoor shots OR is it better to use an indoor profile like PP3 and then boost your outdoor shots.

I wonder which would work better??? I have been told that PP3 lifts detail in dark areas so I'm now wondering if that would end up with too much shadow detail when you shoot outside with the profile?

I have an almost dead month coming up as it's Winter here ..cold and wet and windy so only one wedding! Maybe a comparison is worth a shot but does anyone know which is the better route to go??

Chris

Chris

I'd go with percentages, for me its a no brainer, only 20% of each of my golf shoots is indoors. So its 'no profile' for me all the way. Weddings is different I guess, and editing weddings is completely different. My post production on this video was minimal though, really like seconds on exposure for outside shots and a few more seconds to tilt the reds on the indoor shots. You can more or less copy/paste your efforts and put them right across your indoor/outdoor timelines. On the other hand imagine using 2 profiles on the day and forgetting to switch em half the time - you'd be screwed.

Dave,

Great stuff!

The 5D guys may have walked past the gatekeeper but how much crap did they need to shoot once inside? I'll bet their kit bag had accessories in it yours didn't. You had a monopod and you were ready to go.

Chris, If you have not tried "no profile" or "Profile 1" (I don't see much difference if any) give it a serious consideration. This video is a testament to it. Look at the latitude he was dealing with. Indoor shots with a wall of windows, hats shading faces outside etc. I did not see the tell tale signs of a reflector on the faces and the exposure was still right on. I don't get too much saturation with no profile for my taste. Not at all?

My kit lens is surprisingly sharp, even open at 18mm.. I must have been lucky on the draw. I read about the complaints and I just don't have the issues. I put it up against my Canon "L" glass all the time and it holds its own. I expected it to be mediocre but it is a damn nice lens for a kit lens.

Steve

My kit lens is surprisingly sharp, even open at 18mm.. I must have been lucky on the draw. I read about the complaints and I just don't have the issues. I put it up against my Canon "L" glass all the time and it holds its own. I expected it to be mediocre but it is a damn nice lens for a kit lens.


Having owned the camera and lens I did like shooting with it a lot, as long as it was not too dark, After switching to panasonic I noticed all lumix/leica lenses where much sharper, at least in resolving fine detail which I found the ea50 pretty average at and in combination with a 4k gh4 body makes the ea50 footage look pretty soft. But, when looking at Dave's film, that all really doesn't matter as it's the person behind the camera making the difference, no matter what camera or lenses are used. There is actually no bad camera anymore today and anyone thinking a better camera, having 4k, raw, 4:4:4 or whatever will make them a better cameraman, should stop dreaming :)

Well said Noa.

Disclaimer, I was doing some post just now and decided to refine a comment. I do not mean to imply the no profile setting is low saturation, it is there but I like it. Maybe it is a matter of preference ;)

Steve

Thanks Steve and Noa

Maybe it's just my eyes but shooting with my Tamron lenses on the camera, especially wide the image "looks" way way sharper to me. But then again that's my eyes OR something I never reckoned with it that I use the stock lens only in AF mode so the focus could quite easily be a fraction off as even when I'm using the lens in MF I tend to use auto to get me in the ball park and then trim in MF

I have shot in virtually all the profiles and yes default is great for outdoors (like PP1 ) but indoors even during the day I do find the blacks are a bit heavy and it's a tiny bit contrasty. Apart from PP5 and 6 which are the "film look" profiles, there isn't a huge amount of difference between none, and 1 to 4 and each can normally be corrected to suit. I must admit that PP3 that I use is flat so I need to lift saturation even on indoor shots. I simply use that one so I don't have to change profiles at weddings ..everything is shot flat and then I correct in post based on where it was shot. PP3 also gives a tiny boost to exposure so in dingy churches the stock lens at F5 looks a little better but moving over to fast and sharper generic lenses profiles seem to have less of an impact on the image ...I did a few tests with the Tamron on the camera and there was little difference from default thru to PP4 although 5 and 6 were contrasty

On my Panasonic HMC cameras I never used profiles (they call them scene files) as default was really nice but when I upgraded to AC-130's the default setting was awful so I had to play a lot in the 3 months I had the cameras but never got the picture looking really good!

Chris