Leaderboard

SF is my favorite genre, and perhaps not surprisingly, Blade Runner my favorite movie, but this one never connected with me. That said, my hopes weren't high to begin with. Of the director's previous work, I much prefer Prisoners over The Arrival, the latter which--unlike apparently most critics on rottentomatos--I felt insulted by. Not Elysium insulted, and certainly not Signs violated, but the air of condescension was a bit thick as the credits rolled. But back to this new work. First off, however, I need to send out a message to the film mixers and/or theater owners in this country: PLEASE STOP TRYING TO BLOW OUR F*CKING EARDRUMS OUT!!! What's the thinking here? Rattle our bones with Zimmer horns every 20 minutes just to wake us up? Film scores are supposed to help guide us emotionally through scenes, not jar our goddamned teeth loose. My wife was measuring the decibels (from inside her bag--no ambient light a-holes here) in the back row and it was averaging over 126 dBs whenever there was a scene transition. She had earplugs and still had to sit the last 45 minutes in the lobby of the theater. Such a gentleman she's got, I know... Actually, that's really all I had to say for now. In my youth, I could talk all night about a new movie, but these last few years consuming Diet Coke, I have to watch it at least a second time before I can even approach forming a concise and fair opinion worth the time it takes to listen/read. I do, however, agree with at least one other contributor before me saying the plot was pretty convoluted. To be fair, I think half the plot was already lost on me, because despite the volume set to "sphincter-puckering," all the women not named Robin Wright mumbled their way through half their lines. Not that it would have mattered, because I think the main point for now is that after watching the original at least 200 times, the entire point of the movie was never intended to be that complex: A robot hunts other robots and discovers what it means to be human. Ridley, God bless his heart, was just old school enough to let you figure that last part out for yourself. Wasn't even a twist by then, really. Too subtle for some, never accepted by others, painfully clear to the ones that would go on to subject themselves to a 2nd viewing...and maybe a few more after. The reason I love the original was actually because the story was thin, the theme was heavy, but the visuals made me feel like I was looking into a window into the future. Dystopianland. Yeah, screw it, I'd go. Anyway, one last detail before I sign off: This film, for all its visual competence, fell sadly short on one movie staple that really would have gone a long way: who exactly is the baddie? Rutger Hauer might not have been a traditional villain, but he was a perfectly compelling foil to Ford, particularly when Ford wasn't onscreen. Luv was a tool, Leto was embarrassingly lame, and as bad as his acting is, I would have preferred keeping Bautista around for at least some degree of physical menace on the hunt. Also, the android physics were wildly inconsistent. Like stupid inconsistent. But nothing that a little Zimmer-induced aneurysm shouldn't be able to take care of. Despite my critique of the movie, I really don't hate it--I just don't feel much for it. Oh, my God, was that the intent all along..?

Nothing in print, but at NAB this year I spoke directly with a Panasonic rep who gave me some juicy stuff. I recall him saying this to me: “Most years when all of the reps bump into eachother on the airplane or at the airport the Canon and Nikon guys act as if they are the elite and look down on us (Panasonic reps). This year (2017) is the first year that they told me that we along with Sony are eating their lunch when it comes to video and mirrorless and Canon corporate has taken notice.” Also, I remember when I was at NAB was when Casey Neistat announced that he was shooting his vlogs on the GH5. The Panasonic rep told me that the amazon orders went up 20% within those 24hrs when Casey announced that.

The 420 does not make a big difference, since 422 for 6k would need to be downsampled from around 8k to show a benefit. Banding shows due to the specific implementation of h265. h265 shows stronger artefacts compared to the h264, which hardly shows any on the gh5. A7R/S cameras nor any other DSLM don´t have an 18MP video mode with a 200Mbit h265 codec. It´s a matter of processing power, which is required. H264 on the GH5 does not show these problems. Sony FS5 already struggles with internal 10bit HD, that is less than 2MPixel video! GH5 is a technical marvel, showing off whats possible with current mass produced technology.

It is a good film, but so what? Technically perfect but cold and soulless movies abound these days (see also; Arrival, Alien:Covenant, the new Planet of the Apes trilogy). Proper descriptors: clinical, cold, respectable, lifeless. Gosling is bland, and as in The Force Awakens, Harrison Ford is effortlessly the best thing in the movie. It's not about how someone looks, it's about charisma and Ford has it, Gosling doesn't. I think it will be remembered about as well as 2010, the sequel to 2001. It too is a perfectly good movie, but like I said, so what?

Totally. Lets makes the blacks black for starters on night scenes. Otherwise it’s not night it’s a day scene. JB

I think that people rag on these cameras because they'd never be comfortable not seeing every detail in the shadows. "Crushed blacks. I see CRUSHED BLACKS" is all they'd say. Noam Kroll has an interesting article "How dynamic range is killing your images" or something like that. People get obsessed with preserving highlights and shadows at the expense of a creative image.

Growing up with a film. He's already past it The stuff we watched when we were kids or teenagers tends to stay with us as we grow up. Blade Runner was my Star Wars. I couldn't care less about Star Wars though.

Hello community, I have finally finished my new video "A Journey through the St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge”, when you have 15 mins to spare and want to relax to some nature / lens porn, I love for you to check it out. On a good screen with sound ;) Filmed over 3 years with Baby Hypergonar 1.75x, Bolex 16/32 1.5x, Kowa C35 1.5x and Kowa Inflight 1.75x. Taking lens used were the Voigtländer 42.5mm f0.95, Voigtländer Color-Skoparex 28mm 2.8 , Olympus Zuiko Pen F 38mm f1.8, MeVis 35mm f1.8, Takumar 200mm f3.5, SMC Takumar 135mm f2.5 and the Zeiss Ultron 50mm f1.8. Edited in Adobe Premiere and colored with Colorista III and Film Convert. If you give me a screen grab of a shot you like I will tell you the combo. Bonus, of the 160+ shots 2 are not scope. A special shout out to John Barlow for his lovely Rectilux Hard Core DNA and 3FF-s which are all over this piece. Thanks.

We'll as I see it the two websites that were champion of NX1 was EOSHD (it earned its own hack forum here) and DP Review (they prob got paid by samsung) article looking back at what was and what could have been. After reading the article check comment section is quite interesting. All most 300 replies in 24hours. https://***URL removed***/articles/3890465710/tbt-the-samsung-nx1-is-still-impressive-three-years-later

Hello EOSHD forum First time poster and long time reader here. I wrote/directed a short film based on Aussie sci-fi novelist Greg Egan's story 'Axiomatic'. I shot this on a 5DmkIII with Zeiss and Takumar primes and the older 1080p ML Raw hack as the 4k option wasn't available yet. Please feel free to check out the teaser trailer on Vimeo:

Hi there, I just uploaded the final teaser trailer to my short film based on the Australian novelist Greg Egan short story of the same name: Axiomatic teaser_3 Thanks to @mercer for his suggestions on the edit for it. I've love any forum readers and indie film fans to check it out and let me know what they think. The full short will premier online next week so stay tuned if you'd like to know more.

+11 I am sick of it!! I go to watch a movie not to be blasted into submission. It's a form of punishment that only the sadistic and the moronic actually enjoy! Glad someone else spotted this mini-trailer for yet another sequel. With the crap box office, I hope they cancel it!!

@kaylee thanks very much :-) I'm not much of a AE or graphics person so I just quickly hacked the titles together in final cut but definitely they could be better. I could type out a huge volume of tips but its hard to say what would be useful or pertinent to what you're shooting, so are some thoughts: - pre-visualize, pre-visualize, pre-visualize and then pre-visualize again. Is what you're shooting going to actually say what it needs to say? - do tons of camera/lens/high ISO/over-under exposure/camera movement and grading tests on everything at every location and come up with solutions to everything that can and will go wrong prior to production - treat the whole camera side of things as if you were shooting on actual film, 64GB card = 10-12min footage (without ML compression) or a 400' 16mm magazine, and economize where you can - rather than doing the traditional wide-med-close coverage can you say everything from a single set-up giving your actors or crew more time on an important scene later in the day? - come up with a rock solid shot list and have some storyboarded still photos from your camera tests in a directors binder to work from, giving you the bare minimum needed to tell your story, making you efficient with everyone's time and if there's any extra space available or anything your actors would like to try you might actually be able to do it - having a Thunderbolt CF card reader to daisy chained Thunderbolt external hard drives onset was essential at the DIT station for me as there was no 10bit/12bit compression option when I shot Axiomatic, 64GB cards download in 8min via Thunderbolt - remarkable!!!! - even though you'll be stressed out try to have fun, remember to smile and thank everyone for being on your set

Hahaha, it's a valid question I think! I would still stick with Pre-36 or original Iscorama - since that's what they were, by coming attached to an infinity-fixed 50mm (various mounts) -, the anamorphic attachment was labeled purely "Iscorama", and the differences between the original one and the 36 are tiny. I would love to hear other people's opinions as well, though! :D

I would also like to add to that I am extremely happy with how the NX1 has aged meaning that if you asked me last year if I would still be using my NX1 in a year I likely would have said no yet here I am and I don't even see anything on the horizon that could really grab my attention for another year. I always thought that once the GH5 saw a price drop I would pick one up but I am not really that drawn and with the GH6 at least a year or more away I could be using my NX1 until I end up finally dropping it off a cliff and need to replace it.

The Crane 2 is a gimbal style stabilizer. There are many gimbal style stabilizers on the market, but the Zhiyun products have a pretty decent reputation. It would be considered a solid pro-sumer level gimbal. It's important that you find a gimbal that supports the weight range of the camera and lens that you want to use (minimum weight can be an issue as can maximum weight). A stabilizer isn't required. It depends on your style of shooting and what you want to do, and what kind of camera movement you're trying to achieve if any. There are many different kinds and styles of camera support that you could use: tripods with fluid heads, sliders, gimbals (one handed or two handed), steadicam or glidecam style stabilizers, cranes, etc.

Agree. I brought the 1dc for cheap around 2700 with mic, 3 batteries a card and new charger. I love the camera. Shane Hurlbut loves the 1DC, Shame the 1dx mark 2 has no CLOG. Guys, @DaveAltizer wants to do an in depth guide. Keen to hear everyone who uses it their workflow 4k - pro res options. Or any accessories you like of the 1DC

Here in the Mediterranean I did the same observations as NZ! We just finished shooting an on the road TV show for the most prominent network here in souther Europe with 2 GH5s and right now, I have more GH5s around me, than Canon (this is the first, ever, since the 5DmkII era). So many, that I bought my Edelkrone SurfaceONE and SliderONE motion module with the GH5 cable (sadly, no NX). There is a big waiting list here for GH5 and even the XLR thingy that we have ordered for months now, ain't available in my country yet. Real life observations show a trend for sure. Maybe your market is completely different, but all indications show that GH5 is a huge success so far, and honestly, what not to love? A couple of ergonomic mistakes, when Sony is full of them, and a slightly confusing menu system (my NXes have spoilt me!), when again, Sony is a total nightmare, on everything else, GH5 delivers. As of tourists, we have a lot of Asian tourists, and I was doing camera (C300mkII PL) for a Ancient Greek philosophy documentary these days (so being around all the touristicy places), and most of them had mobile phones on selfie sticks, a few "older" men with Canonikon dSLRs, and a few hipsters with Olympus. Most other tourists from other countries are carrying their phones, a few older dSLRs here and there, a few rare and random selection of mirrorless (a5100, a6000, an NX 300, others), and we had like 30.000.000 this year, and because of my work I travel a lot around, so I got an international sense of things. So, no seeing a lot of GH5s among tourists is less an indication, than my pro friends that are moving to Panny after decades of Sony and Canon.

You are gaining 4.2.2 colour and a much better codec which won't show compression artefacts (which people wrongly assume is an 8bit problem) This will allow you to shoot S-Log and not have smooth tones like skies fall apart (banding) when you apply a LUT / grade it later like it does with the internal codec. It's a clumsy solution though......

i will stay tuned, @Kelly! looks fantastic!! very cinematic im shooting a 5d3 raw ml short film soon myself – any tips???? lol i know there are many, but what jumps out after making this film? again, looks awesome, my only suggestion is that the initial typography could use some work looking forward to seeing more!!! great work!!!!

Ok but this means nothing in terms of actual sales. The top 10 on b&h shows 8 DSLRs and two compacts. On Amazon under "Photo/Video" its still of course film (instax, keeps Fuji afloat) on almost all top spots. First digital interchangeable lens camera is a DSLR. If I look at "digital cameras" on Amazon its mostly DSLRs and compacts in the top 50. When I look at one of swedens bigger retailers the GH5 isnt on the list. And its not a price thing. There are several higher priced cameras at the top. The guy at my local store says Fuji is selling nicely. Not like Canikon but still alot. Panasonic isn't as popular. And sadly Olympus is a tough sales for them. Ive never seen a GH5 used by a video crew, TV-team, pro photographer or even by a tourist. So saying that the GH5 is cutting sales from dedicated video cameras like the c100, FS7, etc doesn't ring true to me. In fact, when reading Sony and Panasonics financial reports its pretty obvious they are loosing money on their cameras. If they where selling like hot cakes they might have broken even. Fuji isn't making much either since their film sales finance their digital camera losses. But rumors says that Sony is releasing their first proper and uncensored financial report next year. Then we will know if they are doing better these days. My guess is that they still loose money on every mirrorless interchangeable lens camera they sell.

Hi, thanks for sharing the information. However, do you feel comfortable tilting down with the HardcoreDNA simply screwed onto the Kowa 16H/8Z? Is using just the provided screws absolutely secure? I am afraid the Rectilux will unscrew and fall to the ground but maybe I am overreacting. Thought about buying an HTN adapter. Cheers.

@kidzrevil amazing photos mate !

@Kelly yeah I regret not getting the Zeiss 85mm 1.4, But in reality I need a Nikkor 85mm 1.4 more since I already have a few good Nikkors, so it was probably a good idea not to get partially invested in another set. In all honesty, between my Canon and Nikon lenses, I probably don’t even need another set but I’ve always had a thing for Takumars. I also may look into the Iron Glass Helios Cine Mod lenses since they’re fairly affordable and I have a flashback sequence that I think they’d be perfect for.

if I had known the Shwedagon Pagoda would give such an incredible array of colour in sky and location when I happened to be there whilst magical twilight descended, I would have brought a tripod to stabilise my NX1 with 16 -50, never the less incredible colour and the VIDEO viewed on an 8000 series Samsung 4K is UNREAL I mean almost 3D REAL unreal . Untouched Jpeg

Today I played around with the video in the D500 for ten minutes while waiting on a train. I only had a 75mm equivalent and no ND so the footage isn't very fun. The frames are HD so not as knife sharp as the 4K would be. Just wanted something to play with in color finale. There really is room for pretty much any creative look but without taking up any space worth mentioning on the card. These are all just quick adjustments, 2min on each, max. You have to click twice for full resolution, otherwise they will look even softer. Straight from camera Quick adjustment in FCPX using the regular color tool. Random LUT and intentional crushed blacks using the three way color corrector. Quick vintage with Fuji LUT and slight crush of shadows using the three way.

I have an AF100 and like it a lot. It's my go to camera for events where I just need the most reliable camera with low recording media and battery needs. You basically plug a Mic, an SD card and two batteries and you're good for an entire day of shooting. That said, the image can be great, but you have to be very careful with you exposure and white balance. The DR of this camera is around 10-11 stops, and the codec is weak. You can plug an Atomos samurai and get better recording codec though. But you won't get the possibility to do so much in post (you just get 4:2:2 All-I instead of 4:2:0 AVCHD). The image you get is a bit soft, but you can still add a good amount of sharpness in post without destroying the image. I got mine 2 years ago for 1300€ including a 7-14mm and 14-140mm. I think it is still a great all in one solution for the price, even to this day. Here is one of the videos I shot, in poor lighting conditions, for a night event with the AF100. I was using Minolta MD glass.

The colors in both videos are Standard, sooc. Only exposure, contrast altered in post.

Must be connected to 4.2.2 vs 4.2.0 rather than 8 vs 10 bit. Been banging on about this for ages though - nothing wrong with 8bit as long as it's not compressed to hell and has better than 4.2.0 colour. 8bit HDMI out from my Sony A7s/r2 is virtually unbreakable while the internal codec falls apart just looking at it. Still the 'voices' all demanded 10bit above everything else and that's what they got.......

I tried lots of different nitrile rings, all at different inner diameters and outer diameters...I still don’t know the exact size I used, since I ended up trying a load from an unmarked mixed bag until one or two worked. I think the quicker solution would be to buy a slightly larger than 30mm x 2mm or 3mm thick ring, measure it around the circumference of the rear optic edge...and then cut to size. Then apply a micro blob of superglue to join the ends of the rubber to make a ring with the exact inner diameter. Or buy a strip of the nitrile material and have lots of attempts to make the perfect sized ring that eliminates ‘square flare’, yet avoids added vignette : https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.co.uk%2Fulk%2Fitm%2F120893807581 Hold the rubber ring in place by small strip of electrical tape around outside of rear optic housing, so it won’t shift position. As I mentioned before, it works well as an added ‘bumper’ to help protect the optic edge and face when positioning very close to a taking lens...as well as get rid of the nasty ‘square flare’. This solution works very well but may take 2-3 attempts to work out the ideal sized ring through a bit of trial and error.

When not challenged by very high DR, I prefer Standard. But, what do I know?

Hi everybody - great posts on here. Long time reader and first time poster. I wrote/directed a short film shot with the 5DmkIII+ML Raw, just in 1080p as the 4k hack wasn't available at the time. Here are some screen shots. Teaser trailer on Vimeo now and entire short will be released in about a week.

It is very common for the pre-36 to have these ‘square rainbow’ flares on the edge of the frame. They are caused by the rear element not having edge blackening, so it will catch the light and cause these flares when used with most ‘non factory’ taking lenses. The Isco taking lens that would have originally come with the iscorama has an internal baffle ring to eliminate this effect, so that there is the most basic solution to eliminate these particular flares...by using the factory taking lens. The other solution is to use a thin nitrile rubber O-ring that can be installed to the rear of the iscorama to slightly ‘choke’ the light from hitting the rear optic edge that creates the flare. I have found this to be the best solution to use...as it also provides a thin rubber ‘bumper’ to the rear optic as a bit of protection when swapping out taking lenses. The thin rubber ring is simply attached to the optic rear edge with a small strip of electrical tape holding it in place from the outside edge (away from optic). The rubber ring - when correct size and thickness, will not introduce any noticeable image vignette, as it will only block out the light from hitting the very edge extremities of the rear optic...and therefore eliminating the ‘square rainbow’ or diagonal line flares.

The GH5 isn't a DSLR.. just saying

I have been using the Ursa Mini 4.6K for the last 2 months for client work. It is a great camera and I love the images it produces. But I have 2 qualms: It does not do low light - as in, it is not even an option. Period. It doesn't 'wow' naturally. Let me explain the last point: The canon C500 would supply all the 4k benefits, but you would be a bit weak on the codec side. But, and its a big butt, Canon will look like 'wow'. I am still figuring out why, but my feelings are irrelevant. My clients like Canon. Do them a favor and go Canon. The spec differences only smooth our experience, but not the image. The Blackmagic image is a specific look or stock that we as a community love, but is subjective. General folk see Canon footage and photos and appreciate that stock. They dont care about 444 or DR. They want to look good. Canon does that with their voodoo. Get the best Canon 4k image you can get get... and get a Ursa for yourself. Just my 2c. Oh, and low light does not mean night. Actually, with one light, the ursa is fantastic for night shoots. I mean, for example, you want to fo for a beauty or group studio look. LEDS cannot supply enough power, let alone if you want to expose in tandem with the window view etc. Your options become a bit limited once you want to get creative with light. Unless you buck up for more powerful lights etc. Which is where I would advise to hire. But bigger crew... Slippery slope...

I agree that the highlights are intentionally blown in order to gauge dynamic range and rolloff, but I don't agree with you at all that chroma clipping isn't a serious issue. Especially on a camera like the C500 that has less dynamic range than an Alexa or Dragon (but still good and better than its reputation), you can't always expose for the highlights. There are going to be traffic lights, headlights, practicals, blown out skies, etc. in some scenes and avoiding them at all costs or underexposing horribly isn't a viable option. IMO, you cannot make all camera systems look good, otherwise they would look good more often. Most digitally acquired content–even on the high end–doesn't look as consistently good as film, even with the same crew. Only the Alexa seems to get close imo, though I have seen some good looking content shot with other cameras, of course, and some "intentionally digital" looks that work. A friend of mine had a piece graded by Stefan Sonnenfeld, and I remember he mentioned that chroma clipping was Stefan's biggest bugaboo re: camera systems. I won't get into the details because I don't want to put words in someone's mouth, but if the greatest colorist in history struggles to wrangle with chroma clipping, it's a problem, and you'd better hope you're the greatest DP in history to never blow out a single source. Or just use a camera that handles chroma clipping properly. (Fwiw, I don't find hard luma clipping problematic if one grades the knee nicely, and even film appears to hard clip rather fast when processed photochemically–so this is a discussion about color space and rolloff, not dynamic range.) And there is a massive difference between how the Alexa handles chroma clipping and how the C500/Q7 (as set up there) and F5 or pre-IPP2 Red etc. do. Sure, you can make an Alexa look bad if you're wildly incompetent. But I'd argue you can't light a scene with someone lit by a practical flare on an F5 or C500/Q7 (at least with the settings above, and the ones in the C500 footage I've worked with) without it looking too terrible to really fix in post, because the camera will blow out the highlights to red or to red and yellow, not to white, as with the Alexa (which clamps saturation at maximum at 30 IRE then slowly reduces it over its extremely wide dynamic range). With the Alexa, lighting that same scene well is as trivial as exposing roughly correctly. Of course you can to SOME extent avoid that kind of situation, or white balance to your practicals so they blow out more nicely assuming nothing else is blown out (dicey workflow, though). And if you record raw and process correctly this likely isn't an issue even with the C500. I'm just surprised that Canon Log has this problem far less severely than the C500/Q7S combo does, though I imagine there are settings that handle chroma clipping better. Some of the newer film emulation LUTs and even the SLOG3 colorspaces for F5/55/FS7 are fine in this regard, too, to be fair. As is IPP2 a huge improvement over Red's original pipeline. Canon Log, weirdly, has always been kind of good... there's the appearance of chroma clipping, but detail is almost never lost and the knee can be graded smoothly. Not so with any of the footage in the test above. And all that said, I think most operators overexpose the CX00 series pretty substantially. And in practice this isn't a huge issue under normal circumstances.

The only down side of using the Canon C500 is the cooling fan that kicks in when you are shooting 2K or 4K, the fan does turn off when you press the record button but after seven to ten minuets depending on your shooting location temp the fan turns back on? There is a fix for this and I got one, it's an external fan cooling set up that cools the input vent of the C500 when recording! there are two small computer cooling fans mounted on an aluminum mount that screws into the side cover cap that covers the input and output SDI connectors, this can run off a D tap or 9 volt battery, I have not had the C500's fans kick on once since using this set up, I only put the unit on when I'm doing sit down interviews. Bellow is the unit I got for the fan problem, it was found from an old blog by Matt Porwoll. http://mattporwoll.com/problems-solved/

The Ursa 4k I'd put below almost anything, including the cheapest 4k dSLRs. Super clippy and slow with lots of fixed noise. Fairly soft image, too. But the 4.6k I'd put above both Canons (except in low light). The C300 and C500 do have the same sensor and the C300 has the sharpest 1080p I've seen and it has to do with the sampling not being traditional Bayer interpolation but instead instead it just groups the photo sites into a faux-Foveon type array so it's just insanely sharp looking. Sharper than the Epic or Alexa or F3 or F5 or F55 at 1080p and noticeably. From what I've seen, C500 has a razor thin OLPF and the Q7 has aggressive debayering so the 4k image from the C500 is sharper looking than a 5k or 6k Red image but it has significantly more aliasing, but not objectionable. Both cameras have similar DR. RAW doesn't seem to provide much improvement there over ProRes, but better shadows than the internal codec for complex scenes. The C500 is basically a C300 with extra features if you use a raw recorder, so if money is no issue and you WANT to use an external recorder (I hate them) get the C500 instead. If you plan to crop or stabilize, 4k could be useful for 1080p delivery, though personally I'd (almost) never shoot 4k and if you don't crop or stabilize the 1080p output will actually look sharper, shockingly. But maybe not in a good way. The Alexa is softer, but... "smooth." But you gotta experiment with the Q7 workflow when you shoot raw. When it's set up wrong to record ProRes FROM raw, it can induce chroma clipping and aliasing you wouldn't get in the C300 or C500 alone. And shooting actual raw IMO is not worth the trouble (then again I don't think 4k is either). I dunno. Rent for sure, but think the 4.6k is Ursa Mini Pro sounds like the camera for you. It can alias, even worse than the C500, but in practice I haven't seen much of it. Maybe there's less sharpening to make the aliasing pop. Maybe I just haven't worked with it much. Dunno.

Yup, but then again, is that what one wants for whatever production they're doing? Speaking for myself, I'm not a big fan of huge dynamic range in fictional narrative. I'm a product of gritty 70's American cinema and I'm not afraid to admit that I think there's maybe TOO much "unthoughtful" resolution and dynamic range in modern productions. Hollywood comedies are the worst with this. Boring lighting and cinematography with such a high resolution sheen one starts analyzing the uncanny valley flaws of the sound stage. The visual info is just distracting. There's something to be said for deliberately obscuring what the audience sees in an image. That opinion maybe puts me at odds with the majority of people out there, but so be it. However, I do think good dynamic range is perfectly fine for corporate video stuff, nature docs, --or even certain narrative fiction, I guess. Depends. It's a tool, you know? I mean, I can Ooo and Ahh with the best of them when watching pretty 60p 8K time lapse footage on huge monitors, but just visual stimulation ain't enough for me and pretty pictures gets old real fast without an appropriate story. Eh, it's all subjective. All of this is OT anyway, so I best shut-up. Balance your decision on what matters to you, and you'll be fine.