Glad this thread was reasonably considered!
My mind is not made up. Getting both sounds good....
My bank account and red loyalty say go Komodo.
A lot of other factors say BM is incredible. It really is a decent quandary.....
|
Glad this thread was reasonably considered!
My mind is not made up. Getting both sounds good....
My bank account and red loyalty say go Komodo.
A lot of other factors say BM is incredible. It really is a decent quandary.....
As supremely cool as this video is, I can’t help but think their BM footage looks like shit. As a former owner for years of an Epic-W, I’d say BM looks worse, and the play in the mount is ridiculous. However BM is 1/3 the cost.... so definitely impressive. Why does every thing non red look thin and plastic.
It's also slightly OT. The Helium solves a problem I don't really have (higher frame rates) and creates problems I don't want (fan noise, power and weight issues, no live focus magnification). Komodo seems like a reasonable compromise for a reasonable price (with Hydrogen discount).
I wish it were in the cards to see what was behind door number DSMC3 before deciding on the Komodos, but they tick enough boxes that I feel I can get them now and then decide whether to upgrade existing cameras or start selling them off.
The lack of OLPF for the BMD shows their blind spot. I sincerely hope that when DSMC3 is announced it does not carry forward some of RED's greatest design weaknesses.
The used lens can often work as an OLPF and otherwise https://rawlite.com/
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/201...-good-sensors/
It's good to see that many know what is happening and how to overcome hurdles these days, it has nothing to do with magic.
Update - Some more info:
https://vimeo.com/johnbrawley
and
https://cinematography.net/BMD-12K.html
Last edited by Misha Engel; 10-11-2020 at 06:39 AM.
It's funny cause I shot a quick test for lenses, very rushed, and I wasn't going to post it. (you can see me moving around, I just did this in prep when trying to test some lenses I hadn't shot before)
But in theory the "moire" issues should show up in this chart and I don't see anywhere near the same issues.
I'm starting to wonder if it's post related...
https://vimeo.com/435784343
JB
To really excite moiré I think you need to have a little motion either in the subject or in the camera. Nevertheless, in your 200% Lens A test, the moiré is painfully obvious at 0:43 in the central 9.5 wedge (where lens is sharpest) and evident in the 9.5 wedges that make up the corners of the 4:3 aspect frame. The lens lacks the resolution to really buzz the 9.5 wedges in the 16:9 corners. Lens B almost lacks the resolution to buzz the central 9.5 wedge, but it does barely toward the center. I suspect if camera or subject moved slightly, we'd see the ringing.
In the 400% test, Lens A shows a little chromatic moiré in the central 7.5 wedge. And the moiré evident in the upper right corner (9.5 wedge) is definitely confirmed. Lens B certainly shows its softness, however, once it does start resolving the pattern--from the 6 wedge down to the 3 wedge--we see moiré-related artifacts plain as day that would ring like hell if there were a little motion in either the camera or the subject.
So, no, I don't think it's post-related. I think it's confirmed by your test. The lack of an OLPF is a blind-spot for BMD. Just as the lack of built-in ND is a blind-spot for RED. To each their own hill to die upon...
You realise though these are same shots, blown up to 200 and 400% ?
Even cameras with OLPFs will moire.
This is a torture test and it’s barely registering, I’m seeing more CA issues than moire.
If the previous example was typical, then this should be diabolical.
It’s not in my view at all and this is a good result for any camera on this kind of chart.
JB
« Previous Thread | Next Thread » |