View of Coulon Pier from inside tower with rounded stairway ©2025 SilverLight Photo Co. If image is black & white, final photos or videos are in post-production (check back). Coulon Pier from Right of Stairs < All Scenes Behind-the-Scenes SUPPORT US TO GET FULL BEHIND-THE-SCENES ACCESS (& PRODUCTION DETAILS) GET ACCESS GENERAL NOTES (Parking, etc.) *As A.I. (artificial intelligence) started sneaking into the photo & video production industries, I decided to go for 100% realism in my work. What this means for me, is to shoot for realistic-looking photos and video content. My approach includes using custom, lens-sensor specific CAMERA SETTINGS (and sometimes lens-sensor LUTs when needed). I never use A.I. to generate images, and I don't do tricks using Photoshop. There are adjustments I make to produce more accurate PRINTS but my goal is to limit editing as much as possible.

With these settings, the level is a little bit high when NOT using a FURRY, but if you are using it (the one included with the microphone) it will take the level down a little bit, and be just about right. Note this test (and almost all tests at the "BOOM" proximity) adds an AUX. Amplifier (Neotek NTK059). "BOOM" Proximity [35 inches / 88.8 cm] Zoom H1n AUX: Neoteck NTK059 Saramonic SR-VM4 + Furry (Deadcat) WAV 24-bit/96kHz REC. SETTINGS OFF REC. LOWCUT OFF REC. LIMITER 5.5 REC. LEVEL AUX. SETTINGS OFF AUX. BASS LOW AUX. HIGH-LOW @FULL AUX. OUTPUT MIC. SETTINGS ON MIC. LOWCUT N/A MIC. HIGH PASS +20 MIC. BOOST (RFI) RADIO FREQUENCY INTERFERENCE LESS THAN 1.1ft / 0.34m BETWEEN 1.1ft / 0.34m -2.2ft / 0.67m BETWEEN 2.2ft / 0.67m -3.3ft / 1m BETWEEN 3.3ft / 1m -4.4ft / 1.34m Published: May 4, 2022 at 1:33:55 PM REAL RATINGS After testing each microphone, I like to know if it sounds realistic (accurate lows/bass, mids, highs/treble) in combination with the recorder and/or AUX. amplifier, to see if it needs EQ. LOWS/BASS DO THE "LOWS" SOUND REAL? MIDS DO THE "MIDS" SOUND REAL? HIGHS/TREBLE DO THE "HIGHS" SOUND REAL? NOTES: With these settings, the level is a little bit high when NOT using a FURRY, but if you are using it (the one included with the microphone) it will take the level down a little bit, and be just about right. Note this test (and almost all tests at the "BOOM" proximity) adds an AUX. Amplifier (Neotek NTK059). Remember to always monitor your audio while you're recording (using accurate headphones) because good settings can't fix bad audio. Also, these settings will not establish the exact level you'll need for every scene, but the goal is to provide a good starting point that will become clean, after adjusting in post. Additionally, these "custom settings" are used to make the Microphone-Specific EQ files work (as they won't work as intended if any of they aren't used). The EQ files were created to correct any imperfections of the microphone and/or wind protection (FOAM and/or FURRY) and were made in Audacity (the free audio editor) to make them as affordable & universal as possible.

These SETTINGS are for using the BUILT-IN (XY) MICS at the "AFAR" proximity...still testing... A few random notes are: 1. The BUILT-IN mics cannot be used without a windscreen (not sure if FOAM or FURRY is best, but when they're used BARE, the mics are way too sensitive, and they can't even handle normal speech without clipping from certain plosives). 2. A shock mount is necessary when using the BUILT-IN MICS (I will test Movo shock mounts...) "AFAR" Proximity Zoom H1n (NO AUX. Amplifier) (BUILT-IN) FOAM OR FURRY? WAV 24-bit/96kHz REC. SETTINGS ? REC. LOWCUT ? REC. LIMITER ? REC. LEVEL AUX. SETTINGS AUX. BASS AUX. HIGH-LOW AUX. OUTPUT MIC. SETTINGS N/A MIC. LOWCUT N/A MIC. HIGH PASS N/A MIC. BOOST (RFI) RADIO FREQUENCY INTERFERENCE LESS THAN 1.1ft / 0.34m BETWEEN 1.1ft / 0.34m -2.2ft / 0.67m BETWEEN 2.2ft / 0.67m -3.3ft / 1m BETWEEN 3.3ft / 1m -4.4ft / 1.34m Published: January 23, 2023 at 7:25:54 PM REAL RATINGS After testing each microphone, I like to know if it sounds realistic (accurate lows/bass, mids, highs/treble) in combination with the recorder and/or AUX. amplifier, to see if it needs EQ. LOWS/BASS DO THE "LOWS" SOUND REAL? MIDS DO THE "MIDS" SOUND REAL? HIGHS/TREBLE DO THE "HIGHS" SOUND REAL? NOTES: These SETTINGS are for using the BUILT-IN (XY) MICS at the "AFAR" proximity...still testing... A few random notes are: 1. The BUILT-IN mics cannot be used without a windscreen (not sure if FOAM or FURRY is best, but when they're used BARE, the mics are way too sensitive, and they can't even handle normal speech without clipping from certain plosives). 2. A shock mount is necessary when using the BUILT-IN MICS (I will test Movo shock mounts...) Remember to always monitor your audio while you're recording (using accurate headphones) because good settings can't fix bad audio. Also, these settings will not establish the exact level you'll need for every scene, but the goal is to provide a good starting point that will become clean, after adjusting in post. Additionally, these "custom settings" are used to make the Microphone-Specific EQ files work (as they won't work as intended if any of they aren't used). The EQ files were created to correct any imperfections of the microphone and/or wind protection (FOAM and/or FURRY) and were made in Audacity (the free audio editor) to make them as affordable & universal as possible.

DAMAGE WARNING: The copy of this lens I tested had fungus on the inside of the second element. So, these settings may not work on your copy of the lens (unless your fungus is identical...but does that ever happen?) Even with the fungus, I can see this lens had (even in a clean state) trouble with chromatic aberration, though it's not too extreme, and mainly shows up as RED and YELLOW fringing (and not the super-distracting, yet 3-D looking blue and red of some other lenses). Any links below are affiliate links. FILTER: None Novoflex 105 4 AUTO BELLOWS ADAPTER: Pixco Focal Reducer Panasonic GX85 Natural "PHOTO STYLE" LENS-SENSOR LUT CONTRAST -0 SHARPNESS +4 NOISE +3 SATURATION +1 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW -1+1 iDYNAMIC OFF LUMINANCE LEVEL 16-255 Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD Blur / Sharpen DAVINCI RESOLVE POST-PRODUCTION LENS @FULL WIDE LENS @MID-ZOOM LENS @FULL TELE REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST B IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS B IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE A IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR B IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). NOTES: DAMAGE WARNING: The copy of this lens I tested had fungus on the inside of the second element. So, these settings may not work on your copy of the lens (unless your fungus is identical...but does that ever happen?) Even with the fungus, I can see this lens had (even in a clean state) trouble with chromatic aberration, though it's not too extreme, and mainly shows up as RED and YELLOW fringing (and not the super-distracting, yet 3-D looking blue and red of some other lenses). The goal of our camera settings is to improve what we call the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color to create an image that looks less digital and more organic (more like film, etc). Therefore, the first step is to apply the custom settings while shooting, and the second is to add a lens-sensor LUT, to finalize the image.

This used to be a top-of-the-line telephoto zoom (it was the first AF 80-200 2.8 Nikon produced) and the build quality is excellent. However, it's not super good for video because the "focus breathing" is so bad (the image changes size as you focus, etc.). Lower cost 70-300 lenses such as the Promaster I've been using, are MUCH better for video, as some are even parfocal. (One thing to note about those, is that even though they don't have a constant aperture, you don't normally zoom while shooting.) This lens is also heavy and slow to operate. It's slow because of the push-pull zoom, and because of the focus (there is a focus limiting feature that helps with that). Optically, it's a great lens, and though each lens-sensor combo usually needs some work to look its best. Any links below are affiliate links. FILTER: None Nikon 80-200 2.8 D ADAPTER: Viltrox NF-M43x (.71x) Panasonic GH4 Natural "PHOTO STYLE" LENS-SENSOR LUT CONTRAST -0 SHARPNESS -4 NOISE +3 SATURATION +1 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW OFF iDYNAMIC OFF LUMINANCE LEVEL 16-255 Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD Blur / Sharpen DAVINCI RESOLVE POST-PRODUCTION LENS @FULL WIDE LENS @MID-ZOOM LENS @FULL TELE REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST B IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS A IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE A IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR C IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). NOTES: This used to be a top-of-the-line telephoto zoom (it was the first AF 80-200 2.8 Nikon produced) and the build quality is excellent. However, it's not super good for video because the "focus breathing" is so bad (the image changes size as you focus, etc.). Lower cost 70-300 lenses such as the Promaster I've been using, are MUCH better for video, as some are even parfocal. (One thing to note about those, is that even though they don't have a constant aperture, you don't normally zoom while shooting.) This lens is also heavy and slow to operate. It's slow because of the push-pull zoom, and because of the focus (there is a focus limiting feature that helps with that). Optically, it's a great lens, and though each lens-sensor combo usually needs some work to look its best. The goal of our camera settings is to improve what we call the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color to create an image that looks less digital and more organic (more like film, etc). Therefore, the first step is to apply the custom settings while shooting, and the second is to add a lens-sensor LUT, to finalize the image.

This microphone has a self-noise that sounds like a calm ocean, even though it was easy to extract (using Noise Reduction effect in Audacity). I am recommending turning the MIC. LOW CUT filter on (for all "proximities") for a few different reasons, but it did not remove the "ocean" sound. What the MIC. LOW CUT did improve was (at this "CLOSE" proximity) it removed the excess lows/bass frequencies that occur due to the "proximity effect" (being too close to a microphone creates more bass). In this case of this microphone, the result is that it sounds more "REAL" and natural, so I'm keeping the MIC. LOW CUT on (it also helps reduce handling noise, as the shock mount on this mic is not too good). Like the older version of this mic, it is also interesting is that when using this with the Zoom F2 32-bit float recorder, the audio sounds cleaner and more "REAL" without turning the +10 MIC. BOOST on (I had to turn it on for the other non-32-bit-float recorders, to get close to a proper level, but with the 32-bit float recorder, boosting a low level during editing sounds really clean! The same was true with the Takstar SGC-598.) This microphone is also louder then the older version (the Takstar SGC-598) at the +10 setting. Likewise, the +10 boost on this mic is not a very good quality amplifier, so it sounds more fake when it's on, as well as amplifying that "ocean" sounding self-noise of the microphone. So, do NOT use the +10 boost when using this with the Zoom F2 at this CLOSE proximity. "CLOSE" Proximity [ 3.5 inches / 8.89 cm] Zoom F2 (NO AUX. Amplifier) Takstar SGC-600 + Foam (Stock) 32-Bit Float REC. SETTINGS OFF REC. LOWCUT N/A REC. LIMITER N/A REC. LEVEL AUX. SETTINGS N/A AUX. BASS N/A AUX. HIGH-LOW N/A AUX. OUTPUT MIC. SETTINGS ON MIC. LOWCUT N/A MIC. HIGH PASS OFF MIC. BOOST (RFI) RADIO FREQUENCY INTERFERENCE LESS THAN 1.1ft / 0.34m BETWEEN 1.1ft / 0.34m -2.2ft / 0.67m BETWEEN 2.2ft / 0.67m -3.3ft / 1m BETWEEN 3.3ft / 1m -4.4ft / 1.34m Published: December 26, 2022 at 12:01:09 PM REAL RATINGS After testing each microphone, I like to know if it sounds realistic (accurate lows/bass, mids, highs/treble) in combination with the recorder and/or AUX. amplifier, to see if it needs EQ. LOWS/BASS B DO THE "LOWS" SOUND REAL? MIDS A DO THE "MIDS" SOUND REAL? HIGHS/TREBLE B DO THE "HIGHS" SOUND REAL? NOTES: This microphone has a self-noise that sounds like a calm ocean, even though it was easy to extract (using Noise Reduction effect in Audacity). I am recommending turning the MIC. LOW CUT filter on (for all "proximities") for a few different reasons, but it did not remove the "ocean" sound. What the MIC. LOW CUT did improve was (at this "CLOSE" proximity) it removed the excess lows/bass frequencies that occur due to the "proximity effect" (being too close to a microphone creates more bass). In this case of this microphone, the result is that it sounds more "REAL" and natural, so I'm keeping the MIC. LOW CUT on (it also helps reduce handling noise, as the shock mount on this mic is not too good). Like the older version of this mic, it is also interesting is that when using this with the Zoom F2 32-bit float recorder, the audio sounds cleaner and more "REAL" without turning the +10 MIC. BOOST on (I had to turn it on for the other non-32-bit-float recorders, to get close to a proper level, but with the 32-bit float recorder, boosting a low level during editing sounds really clean! The same was true with the Takstar SGC-598.) This microphone is also louder then the older version (the Takstar SGC-598) at the +10 setting. Likewise, the +10 boost on this mic is not a very good quality amplifier, so it sounds more fake when it's on, as well as amplifying that "ocean" sounding self-noise of the microphone. So, do NOT use the +10 boost when using this with the Zoom F2 at this CLOSE proximity. Remember to always monitor your audio while you're recording (using accurate headphones) because good settings can't fix bad audio. Also, these settings will not establish the exact level you'll need for every scene, but the goal is to provide a good starting point that will become clean, after adjusting in post. Additionally, these "custom settings" are used to make the Microphone-Specific EQ files work (as they won't work as intended if any of they aren't used). The EQ files were created to correct any imperfections of the microphone and/or wind protection (FOAM and/or FURRY) and were made in Audacity (the free audio editor) to make them as affordable & universal as possible.

Still testing, but so far not a good lens for this sensor... Any links below are affiliate links. FILTER: None Minolta AF 28-85 3.5-4.5 Panasonic G85 Natural "PHOTO STYLE" LENS-SENSOR LUT CONTRAST -3 SHARPNESS +1 NOISE +2 SATURATION +1 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW -4+3 iDYNAMIC OFF LUMINANCE LEVEL Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD Blur / Sharpen DAVINCI RESOLVE POST-PRODUCTION LENS @FULL WIDE LENS @MID-ZOOM LENS @FULL TELE REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). NOTES: Still testing, but so far not a good lens for this sensor... The goal of our camera settings is to improve what we call the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color to create an image that looks less digital and more organic (more like film, etc). Therefore, the first step is to apply the custom settings while shooting, and the second is to add a lens-sensor LUT, to finalize the image.

This latest test was in the NATURAL profile (first test was in CINELIKE D). I'm trying to get away from using CINELIKE D (when it's possible) because the colors don't look too "REAL". Also, I decided to use Highlight Shadow compensation instead of reducing the CONTRAST excessively, for a better image. This sensor produces a lot of noise and so I added a lot of NOISE REDUCTION as I usually do (for this sensor) but could not max it out because I needed to leave a little bit of definition in it's image. Any links below are affiliate links. FILTER: None Panasonic 14-42 ii ADAPTER: None (Native Mount) Panasonic GH4 Natural "PHOTO STYLE" LENS-SENSOR LUT CONTRAST -0 SHARPNESS -2 NOISE +5 SATURATION -0 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW -2+2 iDYNAMIC OFF LUMINANCE LEVEL 16-255 Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD Blur / Sharpen DAVINCI RESOLVE POST-PRODUCTION LENS @FULL WIDE LENS @MID-ZOOM LENS @FULL TELE REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST C IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS D IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE D IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR C IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). NOTES: This latest test was in the NATURAL profile (first test was in CINELIKE D). I'm trying to get away from using CINELIKE D (when it's possible) because the colors don't look too "REAL". Also, I decided to use Highlight Shadow compensation instead of reducing the CONTRAST excessively, for a better image. This sensor produces a lot of noise and so I added a lot of NOISE REDUCTION as I usually do (for this sensor) but could not max it out because I needed to leave a little bit of definition in it's image. The goal of our camera settings is to improve what we call the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color to create an image that looks less digital and more organic (more like film, etc). Therefore, the first step is to apply the custom settings while shooting, and the second is to add a lens-sensor LUT, to finalize the image.

Test done, but needs a LUT. Any links below are affiliate links. FILTER: None Tamron 70-300 4-5.6 LD Di ADAPTER: Nikon F/G-M43 Panasonic GH4 CineLike D "PHOTO STYLE" LENS-SENSOR LUT CONTRAST -3 SHARPNESS +1 NOISE +2 SATURATION -0 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW 0 / 0 iDYNAMIC OFF LUMINANCE LEVEL Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD Blur / Sharpen DAVINCI RESOLVE POST-PRODUCTION LENS @FULL WIDE LENS @MID-ZOOM LENS @FULL TELE REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST ? IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). NOTES: Test done, but needs a LUT. The goal of our camera settings is to improve what we call the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color to create an image that looks less digital and more organic (more like film, etc). Therefore, the first step is to apply the custom settings while shooting, and the second is to add a lens-sensor LUT, to finalize the image.

Known as the "plastic fantastic" this lens is a decent optic, for a not much money. It has a good close focus distance, and though the focusing ring is very thin (probably too narrow for focus gears to be added) it's somewhat easy for me to use when focusing by hand. I don't think the color rendition of this lens is very accurate. Any links below are affiliate links. FILTER: None Canon 50 1.8 ii ADAPTER: Metabones XL (.64x) Panasonic G7 Natural "PHOTO STYLE" LENS-SENSOR LUT CONTRAST -3 SHARPNESS -5 NOISE +2 SATURATION -2 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW -0, -0 iDYNAMIC OFF LUMINANCE LEVEL 16-255 Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD Blur / Sharpen DAVINCI RESOLVE POST-PRODUCTION LENS @FULL WIDE LENS @MID-ZOOM LENS @FULL TELE REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST B IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS B IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR C IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). NOTES: Known as the "plastic fantastic" this lens is a decent optic, for a not much money. It has a good close focus distance, and though the focusing ring is very thin (probably too narrow for focus gears to be added) it's somewhat easy for me to use when focusing by hand. I don't think the color rendition of this lens is very accurate. The goal of our camera settings is to improve what we call the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color to create an image that looks less digital and more organic (more like film, etc). Therefore, the first step is to apply the custom settings while shooting, and the second is to add a lens-sensor LUT, to finalize the image.

REAL ANSWERS Answers from REAL people with REAL experience (not from A.I.) What cameras and lenses are good for wedding photos & video? For wedding photo & video coverage, you'll be capturing a variety of shots including wide angle, normal (portraits) and telephoto. Therefore, you'll need a few different lenses, and probably multiple cameras (for video). Full-frame cameras are usually best because they're better in low light, but other sensors can work with low-light lenses. < Back to ANSWERS Wedding Photo & Video Coverage For effective wedding photo and video coverage, it's essential to capture a variety of shots (wide, tight, tele) and by having the right equipment and knowing the types of shots needed, you can get comprehensive, high-quality coverage of a wedding day. Overall, what you'll need will be: Wide Angle Shots: Ideal for capturing the venue and group shots. Normal Shots (Portraits): Focus on the couple and key moments throughout the day. Telephoto Shots: Great for candid moments from a distance, ensuring you don’t intrude on personal spaces. Equipment Requirements To achieve these results, consider the following equipment: Multiple Lenses: Having a variety of lenses is crucial to adapt to different shooting scenarios. Multiple Cameras: Using different cameras for photo and video can enhance coverage and ensure you don’t miss important moments. Full-Frame Cameras: These are generally preferred due to their superior performance in low-light conditions, which is often encountered during weddings. Low-Light Lenses: If using cameras with smaller sensors, pair them with low-light lenses to improve image quality in dim environments.