Image quality - something stupid to say but I say it :)

[charliehorse]

Yes Charliehorse. If someone is able to give good practice of using the settings of the cgo3+ it would be great!

I set the camera to manual mode. Use the lowest ISO I can. (start at 100)
I set the shutter speed to roughly double the frame rate
so 1080/30 would give shutter speed of 1/60. This gives realistic looking video.
I adjust the light with the shutter speed up and down from there
to give a good exposure for the scene I am shooting.
You might have to raise the ISO if there is not enough light.
It will over expose if you turn into a bright sun
but that is always a challenge for any camera without using filters.
I'm no pro so just my take. Maybe others can correct/add to this.

 

[Ddraiggoch]

This is more awwwwwwwwwwwesome

LG - 65" Class (64.5" Diag.) - OLED - 2160p - Smart - 4K Ultra HD TV with High Dynamic Range - Metallic Gray

Oooooooooooooooo I'd take two but, just like Dudley Moore's Arthur, "I'm poor"

Besides, my wife is the Telly addict.

 

[Tecneek]

You will find it probably stupid but do you know the quality of the video depends also of the quality of the screen where you watch the video?

It's seems stupid to write it but I just recently discover that. I use a laptop 4-5 years old (screen 720p) and the quality is not good at all. On a quite new Samsung tab 7 the quality is much better, also on a new laptop with a 1080p screen. I was a little bit disappointed of the results of the cgo3+ and after the check of the quality of the screen it's much better!

Sorry for the inconvience for the reader that knows that for a long time! And for me I have now to buy a new laptop for post production...

Exactly, that is why I use a 4k computer screen to take a look...

 

[Tecneek]

I set the camera to manual mode. Use the lowest ISO I can. (start at 100)
I set the shutter speed to roughly double the frame rate
so 1080/30 would give shutter speed of 1/60. This gives realistic looking video.
I adjust the light with the shutter speed up and down from there
to give a good exposure for the scene I am shooting.
You might have to raise the ISO if there is not enough light.
It will over expose if you turn into a bright sun
but that is always a challenge for any camera without using filters.
I'm no pro so just my take. Maybe others can correct/add to this.

Once you choose your shutter speed, try an ND filter so you won't have to change it..

 

[Mickeyboo]

I've been in contact with some M12 board lens producers...we are trying to calculate what back focus needs to be to get a
5.4 mm 64 degree field of view lens to work in an H and then modify a 5.4...I have holders which would work now but the gluing of the existing mount makes swapping things out quite problematic...there are 4 hair thin gimbal control wires attached to the area you need to work in as well as a circuit board smaller than a postage stamp...Nolan of Peau and I have also been discussing this and he is a couple weeks late in providing a viable solution...they did manage to convert one but he too found it difficult because of the epoxy glue of the existing mount.

 

[PatR]

$5k for a TV is a bit over the top for me.

 

[banned user]

I've been in contact with some M12 board lens producers...we are trying to calculate what back focus needs to be to get a
5.4 mm 64 degree field of view lens to work in an H and then modify a 5.4...I have holders which would work now but the gluing of the existing mount makes swapping things out quite problematic...there are 4 hair thin gimbal control wires attached to the area you need to work in as well as a circuit board smaller than a postage stamp...Nolan of Peau and I have also been discussing this and he is a couple weeks late in providing a viable solution...they did manage to convert one but he too found it difficult because of the epoxy glue of the existing mount.

I'm guessing you are trying to increase not decrease the back focal distance, to get the same FOV would a different lens work the same? I've been looking a lot too at different solutions to get a better image, I thought I saw a 7mm lens with about that FOV you are looking for.

 

[Mickeyboo]

I'm guessing you are trying to increase not decrease the back focal distance, to get the same FOV would a different lens work the same? I've been looking a lot too at different solutions to get a better image, I thought I saw a 7mm lens with about that FOV you are looking for.

There is a 7 mm I can't recall what the field of view was I've looked at so many from the Chinese vendors but as I recall it's field of view was something like 47 degrees....I think that's too tight with regard to that sort of magnification you dramatically amplify the micro vibrations assuming it will even focus properly, owever there is some room to play with if you dispense with the filter...but the way I'm arranging things is to test a variety of lenses once we have correct dimensions...I have gutted a CGO3 just for that purpose...