Leaderboard

Seriously the 'sharpness' of the NX1 is NOT an advantage. 4K should be soft. There I said it... Otherwise it just looks digital and WAY too harsh for any kind of human being in front of the lens.

The price is not going to stay low, specially if you keep posting the link on forums Anyway, with the kowa and the slr rangefinder around ,who knows how high bidding on a compromised iscorama will end.

What is called for is really a change in perception. To say something looks like video does not mean the same thing today as it did 20 years ago. Years ago it was an insult, because most video looked pretty darn bad. Today it is simply a different feel... Cleaner, sharper and it can still be very cinematic. It think instead of saying something looks like video, what most people really mean, is it does not look cinematic.

I'd be very wary of disregarding the Iscorama purely based on recent products. So far I've not yet seen a single result from the new units that come close to the Iscorama for overall compactness, optical quality, character, etc on a full frame sensor. A pre 36 rama and a single coated 50mm lens on full frame is a wonder and delivers the widest proper anamorphic option available, and also the sharpest and most refined.

I must clarify once again, I'm not talking about this test. Just a comment. And of course it's not a winner, neither is the 1DC. Which camera is better than another is always 100% subjective and can only be answered by the person buying it.

Okay I have to chime in here on the NX1 sharpness that everyone is harping on. Sharpness is not an issue unless it's creating visual artifacts like moire. Like adding sharpening, you can blur the image to your hearts content in most modern editors. Also you can use diffusion and filters to get the look you want. I would rather have the sharp image and reduce it than have to artificially sharpen an image.

I would say the opsite. In the shootout the 1dc strikes me as more realistic. The world doesn't look to my eyes like what the nx1 shows. But of course, neither you or I know what where talking about. We weren't there.

Here is my first hands on with the SLR Magic Rangefinder

This article makes me kinda sad. Sad over the fact that Canon cameras clearly have so much potential, and yet much of it has been left in the dust thanks to their ultra-conservative marketing tactics. Shit, for all the beef Andrew has with Canon, even he can't deny when they produce something magic like the 1DC. And Magic Lantern proved that if you unlock the power of Canon's sensors, they can stand toe to toe with cameras costing hundreds of times more. Why do people continue to use 5Ds and 7Ds despite the fact that Sony and Panasonic have them absolutely creamed on specs? It's that mojo, that warmth, that friendliness to the human face that the competition just can't seem to nail. I have used both the A7S and GH4 in recent weeks, and while each camera has its charms, I wasn't really feeling the image that much. Too digital, too plastic-y, not enough soul. And while much of this can be rectified by recording externally and doing color-grading, Canons are much more pleasing straight from the camera. And this is by no means recent. I remember when I was in school, working on prosumer cameras. We had Panasonic HPX170s and Sony EX3s recording HD on solid state memory cards. Variable frame rates and everything. Real futuristic shit. And yet I always skipped 'em and went straight for the ancient Canon XL2, shooting standard def to DV tapes. Why? 'Cuz I thought it looked more cinematic. Had more character. Made me look like a better filmmaker than I really was. Would I do it again? Fuck yeah.

Depends on how powerful is your hardware, and also if future software updates will support it ! Hardware decoding just makes it possible with most compatible software and faster.

There is no camera Vs camera list done by anyone that's not personal preference. I don't know why people don't realize this and spare themselves getting worked up for nothing. A Gopro is much better than an A7s. The A7s kills a BMPCC. A Bmpcc murders a NX1. An NX1 rapes a Gopro. And the list goes on and on. There is no camera in the world that's "better" than another camera. It just doesn't exist. DEPENDING ON WHO YOU ASK!

My friend took delivery of his RX10mk2 today. I played with it for about an hour. The image quality is superb. Sony has really fixed almost all my issues with the first version. Namely the zoom speed while recording is variable based on how much you toggle the switch- and it can be quite fast if needed. There is a full Picture Profile menu, but with only Cine1 and Cine2 from the cine-gammas. Not a big issue but I will miss Cine4. As for people saying you can't get bokeh with this camera- you can definitely get bokeh and good focus is actually quite critical even on wider shots. I kept the lens at f2.8 the entire time, and it is softer there than say f5.6. The internal ND is helpful but you'll need additional ND 0.6 to hold wide open in direct sunlight at ISO 100, do the math out if you want to shoot Slog2 at 400/800. These are frame grabs from resolve. I shot 1080/24p, f2.8 at ISO100/200, Cine1/Pro, added filmconvert. It is a solid camera and I wouldn't hesitate to take it anywhere. I can see it being a great option for Doc 1-man band shooters, it is quite manageable once you have it programmed. The intelligent-active steadishot was very impressive too. I think paired with a tight little cage to hold the xlr audio adapter and the SmallHD 502/Sidefinder you could really work quite hard with this thing.