Leaderboard

Yep that interview was also conveniently less than 3 min

Really nice Info on gear used We shot on an Alexa, all kit was very kindly given to us by TAKE 2 along with some fantastic old 1950s Russian anamorphic lenses supplied by the also amazing people at LOVE HIGH SPEED

Shot on super 8 and seriously beautiful. Slow motion, highlight roll off, color. It's all there folks.

If you want to shoot stills and video with one camera then a hybrid sounds like the best tool for the job to me!!

Can't really go wrong with Olympus glass. They've solid rendering all around their line-up. I didn't go with Pana's 12-35mm f/2.8 OIS, I actually decided to go E-M1 for stills and then use the 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO kitlens (even though the lack of stabilization on GH2/GH4/BMPCC/Z E1). You can get quite stable handheld or just use a mono- or tripod anyways. Then I've added the Olympus 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO. Not really interested in the 8mm fish-eye or the just announced 300mm tele. But the 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO with MC-14 1.4x teleconverter would be a welcome addition and give you 3 flexible zoomrange lenses with consitent qualities throughout. Additionally I have the excellent classic which is the 45mm f/1.8 and last year I finally pulled the trigger on the 75mm f/1.8 ED which I had been eyeballing for the longest time (doesn't get much better than that for portraits). For macro the 60mm f/2.8 ED. Don't have the 12mm f/2 ED, because it used to be priced ridiculously high (they've first brought out a silver version then sold the black version as 'limited edition' :') ), it has come down a fair bit (about 300 EUR), but still didn't go for it. Other lenses would be the 17mm f/1.8 and 25mm f/1.8 of which I've heard good things. But this is a common range in which I have enough alternatives. They've got some pinhole-like body cap lenses, but I wouldn't mess with those. Nespresso, what else? Well, starting out with the Pana GH2 I had the 14-140mm kit lens. At first I adapted vintage glass in addition (Minolta, Pentax). Then added the must have 14mm f/2.5 and 20mm f/1.7 to have a really minimal set-up. Added the 100-300mm for wildlife (with custom r-roesch.de lens collar). Just. There's something about Panasonic lenses... they're very sharp, which kinda makes it brittle, very contrasty and punchy on the colors. It's a very modern and poppy look... which doesn't really help with the stigma that stuff shot with Panasonics looks like 'video'. Olympus just has that more organic rendering. OIS for primes used to be reserved for the expensive Leica branded lenses... the 45mm f/2.8 OIS Macro-Elmarit and the 42.5mm f/1.2 OIS Nocticron. Recently they've brought out the 30mm f/2.8 OIS Macro and 42.5mm f/1.7 OIS under the Lumix branding and priced them accordingly (that's also why I don't understand people saying M43 lenses are so expensive, they don't have to be at all! And recently I picked up the 25mm f/1.7 for 99 USD only!). They're actually pretty great lenses to have and seem to have lost a bit of that typical Panasonic modern look and render a bit more organic. Seems like they're heading the right way! But... I'm still not really in love with any of Panasonic's offerings. Sure, the 42.5mm f/1.2 is probably quite magical, but I see it go for 1249 EUR right now and there's just no way. It probably should've been priced roughly like the 75mm f/1.8 by Olympus. The pancakes are quite attractive just for their shear size. But other than that, Panasonic is not really all too exciting. What's exciting? Well, third parties. Just the lens manufacturers. Before Sigma renamed the 19mm, 30mm and 60mm f/2.8 to 'ART', these were availlable as 'EX DN' and actually featured proper grippy focus rings (now it's just one smooth surface). Managed to snap up the 19mm and 30mm for 100 EUR/each. Optically really damn good for the money. Build quality a bit iffy and rattles when powered off, but who cares. Had gotten into SLR Magic. Had seen a shootout here: http://3d-kraft.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=137:adorable-25s-25mm-f095-speed-lens-comparison-on-lumix-gh3&catid=40:camerasandlenses&Itemid=2 and decided the SLR Magic HyperPrime CINE 25mm T0.95 had to be the next to get. I don't regret it one bit, it's probably my favourite lens to throw in front of a Micro Four Thirds camera. It's just epic. That's the only SLR Magic I went for so far though. Another Chinese manufacturer is Zhongyi. I have their 24mm f/1.7 and 42.5mm f/1.2 (like the previously discussed Leica DG Nocticron). A good write-up can be found here: http://www.mirrorlessons.com/2014/11/17/the-zy-optics-mitakon-24mm-f1-7-and-42-5mm-f1-2-micro-four-thirds-mount-complete-review/ . Alan Besedin also has an impression on his channel. Basicly these lenses have some really quirky character, reminiscent of vintage lenses. It's a kind of you either hate it or love it situation. But I like it! Recently I've gotten their 25mm f/0.95 in, which fits right in with the other two and is just so damn small! These are not lenses you'd use for their solid politically correct qualities, but for their quirky creative bursts. Not for everyone, but I definitly appreciate it! I guess the only other native mounts are the Veydras, which I jumped on when they were still rather affordable on Kickstarter. I was send the 16mm, 25mm, 35mm and 50mm T2.2 right away, the 12mm took a little longer to get finished. It was a bit of a risk investment, but the risk paid off in the end! Very solid glass and construction, proper cinema primes. Detail rendering is on point and they're solid throughout. Not the most exciting lenses in terms of character, or in the words of Adam Wilt perhaps even 'boring', (solid write-ups: http://provideocoalition.com/awilt/story/first-look-veydra-mini-primes-for-micro-four-thirds & http://noamkroll.com/veydra-mft-cinema-lens-kit-review-rokinon-cine-lens-comparison/ ). But he also states they're basicly 'scaled-down Ultra Primes for micro four thirds cameras' and I can't think of any bigger compliment than that. Good thing now is that the mount is user swappable, which means I can get conversion kits and change the mount myself (to either E-mount (only S35 covering, and the wide lenses will vignette) or C-mount). So, that kinda of makes me excited to get a Sony A6100...

I shoot photo and video professionally and I'm heavily invested in M43. Had the opportunity to go full frame a month or so back but chose to stick with M43 (GH4). Just so dam convenient, compact, amazing battery life, easy menus etc etc. The key is good glass. I'm 100% native glass too (I have everything from wide to Tele and everything in between but the nocticron Basically lives on my gh4. That lens is the key to amazing photos and video on m43 and is the main reason I was convinced to stay with the system!

The F35 looks the most natural, like it was shot on 35mm film. It pops - it gets the blue highlights in skintones right - it gets the motion right. It handles light like film handles light. But the Red One has a certain feel that is also quite beautiful - as you see in Mattias's test - there is something lovely about it. But, the f35 handles color as naturally as possible, so I would go for the F35 for most stuff. Unless well , if the director likes the red one look - and some days I like it better. Depends I guess on the project, but I wouldn't rule either out. I guess, for darker, sci-fi or horror type stuff, the Red One feels really good. For drama, narrative, historical, indie, etc, the F35 feels the best.

I think Samsung merely miscalculated how long it takes to break into a new market, especially one with products that are pricey. I wish they had sucked it up for another couple of years, came out with an NX2, an NX600, and a crap-ton more lenses, and they would've had a pretty good shot, especially if they had set up a pro support network. Half-hearted efforts won't cut it against competition like Canon, Nikon and Sony. Even Fuji & Olympus have made decades of experience in the field. It's the height of hubris to think they could just jump into the photo game and success in a short amount of time in anything other than the point-n-shoot part of the market. The deep end of the pool requires you to be able to swim and defend yourself against what else is in the water.

Had a quick play today. It was -17C so I mostly stayed in. Got borred and played with the exposure of the R1. Its really not that heavy when striped down. Did a quick comparison to the BMCC as well. Think the Blackmagic did alright besides the moire on Gunpowders cheek.

http://www.hifinesse.be/wfi-761672.html (in Dutch, sorry). They also have a NX500 with kitlens for 449. Only seller yet with these prices though. With all the love going around here for this somewhat tragic camera, I thought I'd mention this as an indication where prices may be going. Looks like patience is paying off for potential buyers, at least in the regions where Samsung announnced discontinuation.

Maybe I'm unique, but my must-haves were pretty simple for an affordable DSLR. I would have spent up to $2-$3k for: APS-C/Super 35 sensor;At least 2k, pref. 4k (reframing for low-budget, 1 camera shoots and being able to pull great keys are huge for me);Ability to take a wide range of glass;Image with decent enough DR to be able to "light for the sensor" - I don't need 14 stops, I can light for 10.Audio meters, manual audio control, some sort of usable 1080 slowmo.I really wanted to love something from Black Magic, but those sensors meant Speedbooster, and the 2k cinema camera meant speedbooster and SDI monitoring. I really need at least 60p@ 1080, too. And freaking interchangeable batteries that last 45 minutes or so. The NX1 really hit the sweet spots for me, and then some. I don't take a loupe to shoots anymore for chrissakes. Technically, the image is superior to the Nikons I've been shooting for client work. Aesthetically - my D7100 is still "prettier" in some ways, and it's got nothing on BMC at their best. OK, find some tech guy to contact Samsung, license their tech, and create a reasonably priced cinema camera for pro, semi pro, corporate and enthusiast market. Give it Prores 422 to the card or an SSD, boost the DR and gives us some output options for raw or bit depth. There is a market - assuming it's Nikon or Canon's market is the big mistake forum posters here and otherwise make. I live in Dallas, which has a lot of well-employed people. Not just the rich, but those with expendable income. I'm really used to seeing the soccer-mom, the hipster dude, the dorky dad, the "I'm a big fan of live music" 20-something, all rocking nice cameras at shows or outdoor events. Look close and they have the mid-level zooms (not the 2.8 stuff but not the kit - fairly chunky F4 stuff in the $800 range). And the strap. For this market, the strap is of vital importance and equal to the physical size of the lens. It absolutely must say Nikon or Canon. I don't recall ever seeing a Sony or Panny strap on those shoulders. Can't tell you how many times I've chatted with such a camera owner - "Oh, I have that body" and you find they're shooting it 100% program/auto. They're getting the exact shots they'd get with a little mirrorless rig. But man, they look so legit! This, and semi-pros concerned with lens ecosystem is likely what did Samsung in. I've yet to take a single still with the NX1, but on my third paying gig with it. I'm a drop in the bucket market-wise though.

I think the problem is the really different needs of different user groups. Cameras like a RED or a Sony F3/F5/... are clearly amazing video cameras but the question is how you plan to use it. I can see how these would be perfect if you're shooting commericals or narrative movies with a crew. A Canon C100 / C300 or a Sony FS5/FS7 are amazing for documentary run&gun work. But as has been mentioned before, as soon as you also need high quality pictures, that adds problems. If we say the right tool for the job and you need movie and pics, are you willing to bring a RED One MX plus lenses plus tripod plus a Canon 1Dx/5DIII plus lenses? Then there comes the saying to "make your light", so will you bring the continous lighting for video and the strobes for the stills? I guess we exceeded the 20kg of kit already as well as the 10k € of invest. If you're not commercially making money with what you create that goes above most enthusiasts will and/or capability of spending money. To be less generic I'll take myself as an example: I travel a lot both for vacation and business (not related to photography/filming). I used to shoot pictures (landscape, architecture, night time long exposures, etc.) on these trips. But when I was to Thailand for example I brought a 1Ds III, 17-40 f/4, 24-70 f/2.8, 35 1.4 and 85 1.2 plus tripod, ND filters and a flash. That's like 6kg of kit which at least partially travels with you depending on what you plan to shoot that day, but it's also equivalent to a whole carry on bag when traveling by air. I think most enthusiasts can't take along another 5-10kg of camera gear for the motion picture side, after all most people can't afford a personal sherpa to come to the beach. If you can cover both to a rather good level, I think it's way preferable to do it with one single system of equipment. That also keeps down on accessories like batteries. Currently I have 5 different types of batteries between my main stills cam, my pocket stills cam, the cam I currently test for video, my field monitor, my LED lights and then regular AAs for my flashes. Of course every batterie needs a different charger. Do I expect D810 level stills and RED/ARRI level video in one single system? Clearly not. And most enthusiasts - and I'd argue even a lot of professionals - don't need that. But for a lot of people the GH4 stills side won't cut it while the 1080p 8bit 4:2:0 low-bitrate video of most cameras won't cut it. I think the A7r II and NX1 were currently the two most convincing cameras. But Samsung gave up with NX just when it became interesting and never built a convincing native lens lineup (in my personal opinion; I'm missing more f/1.4 glass) while Sony has prices skyrocket (A7R II and A7S II both sell for equi. 3500$ in Switzerland) and you'll easily spend 5k on the body plus two lenses while being over the top with the super high res sensor for a lot of people (between ALL the people I know who are into photography, no one actually WANTS more than 20-24 Megapixel) and therefore costing way more than actually neccessary. If the rumored A6100 would be like the A7R II but only with the APS-C part of the sensor and for 2000 €, I'd be over that like bears over honey. If you look at photography forums, you'll find a lot of people to preach that manufacturers should stop investing into video features and use that money for improving stills quality. Therefore I'm not even surprised Nikon brought the lackluster 4k video, there were probably at least just as many feedbacks about no need for good video as there were prayers for quality video. So for someone who travels alone and light with unexpected circumstances to what he photographs/films, the choice is not so easy. A possibility would be for example a 5D III with ML plus the new BM Micro Cinema Camera (if it every comes out) so you can share batteries for example between both cameras and a SmallHD monitor plus use the Canon lenses with the Metabones SB on the BMMCC. But then Canon is a worse choice than Nikon for night photography because of the difference in DR and the heavy banding in shadows if you push the Canon image. And seeing how I like to stay light, I'd rather have a 4k image that lets me punch in as well as faking slider moves than using a B-cam and an actual slider. So there is no perfect solution and I guess my rant gets too long to bear but I think for a lot of people it's really about finding the right compromise. Tl;dr: If you are stationary or have a crew, use the right tool. But if you're alone and traveling, pick your poison.

Thanks Mattias and Ed. These posts are so helpful at the moment.

@joema Don't underestimate the importance of a pro body. Ergonomics and build quality are very different. While now I prefer a small body and tilting LCD I can see how for many (like photojournalists) pro bodies are a better choice. Shooting a D3 has left me with some very pleasant memories...

It completely solves the colour correct hassle of normal SLOG 2. S Gamut is really tricksy. Has anyone else tried shooting this way? Downsides? Results? I am trying this on the FS5 and A7S II and suddenly I can grade SLOG 2 like Canon LOG with just a simple master luma curve adjustment in Premiere and nothing else!

True, the Ultra Contrast is awesome, especially on the voigtländer 0.95 - i regret selling that lens... the combo is plain awesome.

#2 is interesting. I hadn't thought of it like that before. I've always pretty much stayed away from the MP.

Yeah! Those filters can work some magic. We've discussed that a good year ago. Inazuma's post back then convinced me to get one as well!

Gah wrote a big post and lost it. The jist of it was : This Kowa 8.5mm looks nice: And Tiffen Ultra Contrast and HD/TVFX filters do a lot to attenuate the clinical/digital look of Panasonic lenses: Ultra Contrast on a 25mm 0.95:

Yep, I often shoot at 25fps or 24fps with 1/30 shutter. That has two nice effects, imo: - 1 stop more light - less stuttering (more blurred subjects in motion) I really like this setting.

Why would anyone who has serious about film want to use either? The trend to try and make cameras the best choice for stills and video is not a good one. Get the tool that is right for the job.

Intro reminded me of Dexter a little. *Which had gotten so bad by the end Pretty epic visuals!

If anyone is really interested I will sit down and find the article and point to it.

Film/Video setting doesn't affect raw. It is always flat (film) internally, but what you actually see depends on the raw processing settings in your software. What app do you use for processing raw?

Seems a little presumptive to think that no one is giving Nikon any feedback or that the people who do are just corporate whores. None of us have a single clue what feedback was given and subsequently ignored or decided to be too difficult or not cost effective.

i use sandisks extreme pro 128gb 160MB/s and they never let me down. They write 1080p raw 24/25 fps with NO stops (from 5d3, they are much more relialiable than komputerbay 1000x which i also have but not using now). You can also continously record 50 fps raw with 2,35:1 aspect ratio (with lower vertical resolution but very usable). You can do 65 fps for about 6 seconds, you can extend this time by reducing resolution (you can set whatever you like in multiple aspect ratios). With full 1080p quality with 2.35:1 aspect you can record 10-11 seconds at 39fps. Back to the cards - having two of them where each one gives 23-25min of footage and copying takes about the same (~70-75MB/s with CF, ~20-25MB/s with SD) gives almost continous recording. I would say that having 3 or 4 would be just perfect. And those cf cards gets cheaper and cheaper (1/3 price drop from the last year). In my nexto i can swap HDD drives very easily, it supports up to 2TB so you can take couple of these with you It has an internal battery which lasts for copying about 400-500GB but can be also powered from te wall, car lighter or cheap USB powerbank The current model ND2901 can also make the second copy to external USB 3.0 drive. How cool is that? CFast cards are still so damn expensive and devices like nexto which supports cfast cards are over 2000$. If you need any information go to magic lantern forum http://magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php

thats great andrew!! could you post a couple screengrabs?

Keep in mind they also jump-started their ILC division by acquiring Konica-Minolta, thus gaining access to tech & people with decades of experience.

Sony's been remarkable in this regard. Their stills camera division was a distant third for a decade. They just kept chip chip chipping away, adding more features than the competition, iterating and modifying their designs radically until they found a way into the future (mirrorless). People who were paying attention switched a few years ago with the NEX-7 era. Now I see a huge sea change happening with a majority of filmmakers I know switching and lots of photographers taking Sony seriously as well. Nice to see the hard work and patient approach pay off. Their consistency approach is smart, too. They built an array of product categories and packed each with category leading features, so you can confidently move between the levels. I can use my A7s, RX100 IV on most standard shoots, and rent the FS5/FS7 when I need something more capable, knowing I can shoot S Log on all and have a color matched solution. The idea of adding pro codecs on the RX100 IV especially, was genius. I've picked up B Roll for major shoots when I'm just walking around and pull it out of my pocket. to grab something in 4K S Log.

With slog2 i found Pro to work much better than sgammut. I will give stills a try too. Edit: the difference of stills from pro is less bright red and blues. Not bad at all. Do you find stills closer to canon than pro? The FS5 allows for even finer color matching if you play with the color depth, phase and matrices. In principle you should be able to match clog in camera. I guess the only downside is you can't use LUTs that presume sgammut

Yes absolutely, they should have stuck it out. Good post. They had NX on the market for about half a decade, trying to do what it took the rest the best part of half a century to achieve.

The developer of RMMC is planning on releasing a new version of his much acclaimed H.265 converter tonight. This new version will now have the option for an input LUT. http://***URL removed***/forums/post/57045260 This will improve my workflow significantly. J I can't wait to try it out with the gammaDR2Log Lut

What do you like best out of the F35 and Red One ed? Well that turned out nicely. To say the least!! You better start hiding your RED ONE otherwise it will be $10k by February What lens was used on the R1... the Nikon 17-35?

It depends on the 4K though doesn't it... On mirrorless cameras it certainly beats all the 1080p internal stuff, even if you don't need the resolution there's more in the file because of the lack of pixel binning. 4:4:4 sampling and 10bit luma in theory when you squash it down from 4K to 1080p, although compression muddies that picture, quite literally XAVC SLOG does fulfil a purpose... file sizes, longer recording, cheaper media. But we need to start having more choice in our codec from the major manufacturers. No reason every mirrorless camera can't have ProRes like a BM Pocket Cinema Camera is there?

Of course they are, raw2CDNG, MLrawviewer, MLVProducer, MLVFS (for mounting MLVs and using "virtual" CDNGs - no need to unpack). I work on a PC and there is everything I need for comfortable work.

I second with Mattias decision for a red one mx . I own two of them, and three sony f35 - about to put up a test - f35 vs f3 vs red one mx vs a7s ii The Red One MX, Ebrahim, has a pretty good sensor. I also think of it as 12 stops. But has really good resolution. It also has the best looking skintone out of the bat in daylight than, in my eyes, the Red Dragon sensor. I think Shane Hurlbut did a comparison of how each optical low-pass filter affects skintones. I haven't done tests to see, but I notice that the motion on the red one mx feels better than the Epic MX - also David Fincher agrees with me and Mattias, he said he prefers the look of the Red One MX over the Epic - on his interview for AC about girl with the dragon tattoo. I used the BM4k and wasn't a fan of its highlight roll off - the CION doesn't look that appealing to me. The Red ONE MX is a workhorse. Mine has been going for over 2 years now after going thru some long, intense shoots. In -20 F weather in north Alaska. Also it has less fan noise issues than the Red Epic. It's compression is pretty good - it's clean and sharp and has nice motion. Red Customer support is HORRIBLE! If you break anything, even a SSD reader, they won't do anything but charge you. And reduser - a lot of them including the President are really mean to people on their boards. So they are a mixed bag. I still want to do a red one mx vs alexa mini vs fs7 vs f55 vs ursa 4.6k test vs c300 ii test if I ever have time or money - maybe someone else can do it.

For anyone interested in a GH4 (VLOG-L) + Atomos Ninja Assassin combo File Link: http://www.filedropper.com/assassins001s001t013 (1.88 GB) Camera: GH4 (VLOG-L Profile) + Atomos Ninja Assassin Lens: Sigma 18-35 + Metabones Speedbooster XL, F1.8, ISO400 File: Apple ProRes 422 10-bit, 4k (3840x2160), 24fps Frame Grabs Ungraded: Graded (IWLTBAP 9280 LUT):

Developing at home i easier than making mac n cheese and costs a fraction. Besides, imo, you dont shoot s8 as an alternative. Its its own thing. Btw, I shot some s35 s8 the other week

More closer to the D500 really. For 4K video the D5 is closer in spec to the NX1 but without the H.265 codec, DCI 4K and long recording times, or mirrorless mount, or EVF, or... I can go on!

I think m43 lenses are way to expensive for what they are.

This is the reason I'm not digging the new Blackmagic cameras. I think the old 1080, 2.5K images were so much lovelier.

haaa this is too funny~! we're all on craigslist shopping for used 5d2s right now im totally gonna find a cheap one, Dane and i dont care about shutter actuations or a few scratches $480 as a point of entry for that raw full frame image is p awesome... nice work man! also, Dane: always interested in 5d3 vs 5d2 raw comparisons!!!!!!

I have the old VAF-5D2 (not the B version), it's good, but unless I'm shooting an architecture-heavy shot which is unusually prone to noise, I don't like to soften the image with it and it makes accurate focus tricky in the magnified assist. Also it has the softer edges on wide angle lenses, although I believe the B version is improved in that respect. I rate it highly, but the moire really is minimally noticeable most of the time on the 5D Mark II in raw and it almost in a funny way makes for a more detailed image. The VAF-5D2 brings the 5D Mark II's image in line with the 5D3's image in raw. You can barely tell them apart with the filter installed. The 5D2 is a bit noisier. That's the ONLY difference. Both a bit on the softer side though, which is why sometimes I prefer the rough and ready non-filtered image of the 5D2 in raw.

While it was much easier to grade the source clip (could not save the overexposed sky though), I don't think I got the colors that much closer...

Thanks for having a go. However it would be better to use the original files. I'll upload them. By the way, this one was exposed to benefit the interior rather than the window. Remember this is a very challenging high dynamic range situation too, especially for 8bit.

Was bored and tried to match them as best I could, but there's a lot of strange things going on with the Sony image. Especially in the greenery and woods outside, but also in the papers in the window. (Hi forum btw, long time reader) Edit: Messed up the contrast curve slightly, re-uploaded.

Imo the f35 is the best digital look out there.

Nice write up. And please, this is in no way a "defense", Im happy people don't like it. Thats why I could get is so cheap But a few thoughts as answers to why I, even though I knew everything Ebrahim says before buying it, still went ahead. All clips in my video are ISO +800 pushed. Doesn't look noisy to me.The number of stops depends on what you compare to. I have decided to rate the BMCC at 13. Which means the XC10 has 12. And the R1 has in my experience more than the Canon. I will do a side by side with the BMCC. But what Ive seen so far makes me guess 13. Anyway, will know tomorrow.Power isn't a problem for me. Its like any other camera to me and the way I shot.The codec is what finally made me buy it. I takes up almost no space/quality, is super easy to work with and I just like it.The fan is very quite. Feels nice compared to the noisy BMCC.ND, again, business as usua (ursa mini includedl.Regarding the URSA mini 4K, I didn't want it since its lower DR, not what I consider "filmic", twice as expensive, no red code and I just don't se it when a BMPC4K can be had for so much less. After the URSA 4.6K is out I suspect I can pick up a BMPC4K for just over 1K. And of course the no above iso400 zone.And here is what it all as usual comes down to. Taste. I agree, the F35 has more mojo. But I definitely put the R1 in the top together with the f35, Bolex, Ikonoskop and... ... Don't really know any more. To me the R1 is the most filmic of all Reds so far. The BMCC has its color/DR but the Moire and the "digitalish" sharpening thing that happens in debayer is often needed to be fought imo. The URSA mini 4K needs a difusion so bad its crazy. To give an example. As I write this my girlfriend started watching my Bluray copy of "The Hurt Locker". Its shot on the same 16mm Fuji stock I have sitting n my freezer. This image is to me the absolute bench mark. It is what I consider "best". The super sharp NX1, BMPC4K, any of the Sonys, you name it, can't touch it. Its the utopia. Not even 35mm looks as good imo. So you can imagine why the R1 is a better choice for me. (only time I didn't like the image in Hurt Locker so far was the massive moire from the digital Phantom during the first high speed footage. Where up at the Sniper scene now. Intense stuff... Love the long canon zoom lenses they used also. Thats why I shoot long on the BMPCC. Drifting of topic here....) Also reason number 1 in my top 5 list was simply that its "fun" and "cool" Again not ment as a defense or argument, just my thoughts. Im well aware that Ebrahim only speaks for himself and know as well as I do that every single camera has flaws, deal brakers and major let downs... depending on who you ask. A heavy camera to one is stable to another. A GoPro kicks the Alexas ass for diving but falls short for feature. Both of them gets smashed by the Phantom in the slow department. The list can go on forever. /M

there are some, but not for this price