Leaderboard

Lots of convincing detail in the rumors post. USB C with DisplayPort enabled for 4K video output is a good idea, for instance. The gyro shutter thing is interesting. I have no idea if real or not but one thing that strikes me as strange is that the NX1 is was never based around one chip (like the Exynos) and instead had lots of different custom hardware, dealing with separate tasks, like AF tracking, video encoding, etc. So not sure if building a prototype around one chip even makes sense with NX1 architecture the way it is (or was). Also to develop a brand new sensor for a prototype seems like an expensive thing to do if they have no intention on releasing it. Would be amazing if Samsung made an NX2 as a tent-pole of some kind to say to the world - look what we can do in cameras, now buy our S9 for a taste of the same specs.

Talking pure 4K quality alone, the picture seems to have an edge on the D850. Shooting a comparison now, including the GH5S and it's clear. The D850 has less moire and aliasing, more solid and convincing detail, which doesn't have as much false detail on fine patterns. It's a small but significant difference. Codec and colour seem to have an advantage on the D850 as well. I'm surprised. It's like a 'Nikon' 1D C. I wonder why Sony put all their latest tech into Nikon's 46MP sensor and stuck with the slightly less capable 42MP sensor themselves? There are other differences though... A7R3 has proper LOG modes not just a flat profile. I've yet to test dynamic range, will do soon. In low light, I realised I made a mistake in the last test that focussed on the GH5S. The D850 had noise reduction completely off. It really does seem to turn it off and give you a fine noise grain. Need to retest the ISO 12,800 vs A7R3 and see the impact of noise reduction on both cameras, and whether it turns off completely on the Sony (or not) and which has the most capable system of reduction. We all know the A7R3 noise reduction in full frame 4K is pretty much magic. Does the Nikon do a similar job? If we're talking video features and form factor it's a non-contest... A7R3 cleans up across the board especially with it's superb video AF and stabilisation.

Interesting post today at Mirrorless Rumors. I actually don't believe Samsung is going to bring back their camera line back. But the CPU numbers match the claimed speck. I would rate this as 5-10% plausible, but you never know with Samsung https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/good-true-high-end-samsung-aps-c-camera-based-exynos-9810-soc/ https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-optimizes-premium-exynos-9-series-9810-for-ai-applications-and-richer-multimedia-content www.samsung.com/semiconductor/minisite/exynos/products/mobileprocessor/exynos-9-series-9810/

We can always dream. High-end Samsung APS-C camera based on Exynos 9810 SoC

This. And I'm betting all this chatter is just R&D for future Galaxy phones. Samsung isn't about to re-enter the same space they abandoned a couple years ago with little/no chance of turning a profit. Even if they could reach 10% market share - which would take years, that's still only a few hundred thousand units. Sony is killing it with high price/high margin bodies and lenses - but they also make sensors for most of the other camera manufacturers, which is why they're so far ahead of Canon in most respects - the costs of sensor development doesn't have to be recouped by selling cameras. Samsung can't just drop a $3,000 body and a few $2,000 lenses and instantly become a big player. Nor can they release a NX2 - or whatever you want to call it - and resurrect the old lenses to say "we're back", too many will ignore them because of their past. Casual photographers will still buy plastic Canon Rebels because that's a name they know. Outside of gear heads chasing the spec, it would be a complete flop.

Yes absolutely agree @kisaha Not even Sony could make all those components in-house... the OLED, Exynos, RAM and other custom semi-conductors.

@Mattias Burling NX500 cost half the money of 70D and still is by vast oceans better in most things. NX1 is a direct competitor to those kind of cameras and totally annihilates them. Cameras don't kill people, people do! @jonpais to ignore something is even worst than a bad review. Ignoring is not accepting, something ignored and not spoken for it doesn't exist. Also, the DPR review came when Samsung decided to kill the division, that same year DPR awarded NX1 as best in its class (including the 7, and 70D cameras by the way), and the 16-50S as the best lens of the year. Too late though. Also, when the NX500 was out, everyone laughed about the 4K crop (and the lack of EVF, which for some is a big thing I admit, not for me obviously), when the D500 came a year or two later, with a 8mgpxl smaller sensor, and a huge and heavy body with a similar crop, it became the best camera of its category. The Cinema 5D's review was the first and influenced most the industry. DPR did the aforementioned good things about the reputation of NX1, but it was too late. Mainly it was managements fault, review of the market/trends (mobile camera phones are much more profitable), power strangle inside the company, and the such. The camera was great though, and the system back then(and still now for the most part) had a better lens selection (and cheaper, in APS-C always) than Sony, Eos M, Nikon is not competing, and in some specific areas better even than Fuji (of course not as complete, but the S lens is unparalleled, the similar Fuji has no IS and its worst in most metrics, no native fish eye in fuji etc.) One of the reasons I am not changing, is because there isn't a clearly better APS-C camera right now in the market (and I am talking native APS-C), nor a better lens selection for what I DO (and I have 4 NX bodies and 7 lenses), or I have to "invest" a substantial 5 figures number to achieve something similar. I do have the feeling that we will see something soon, maybe the new Nikon, in anyway we will see, and NX is still relevant. Remember, back then GH4 was a 16mgpxls camera, and Fuji also without doing video.

http://www.digital-intermediate.co.uk/film/pdf/Cineon.pdf https://pro.sony.com/bbsccms/assets/files/mkt/cinema/solutions/slog_manual.pdf http://www.panavision.com/sites/default/files/docs/documentLibrary/Panalog Explained.pdf

Gee, is a complete mystery why this got a downvote from a mod! :-P But @jonpais is completely right, to do tests you need to do them scientifically and controlled conditions to reduce as many variables as possible

Don't Leave Max, it will be boring as hell here without you! And maybe the first to have Log might be. "The CvpFileEditor can be used with the HDW-F900R for creation of custom gamma curves. Existing gamma curves, generated for use with the original HDW-F900, can also be applied." 2006 camera. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/633399-REG/Sony_HDWF900RPAC1D_HDW_F900R_CineAlta_24P_HDCAM.html

I use a mix of http://freemusicarchive.org and you can search SoundCloud with a checkbox for CC-licensed music. They kind of hide the option for CreativeCommons a couple clicks down, after you've actually searched for something. But it's good for searching genres or for a specific instrument. my recipe for SoundCloud on the attached image.

Sony colour is perfect for horror! Don't dial contrast low on a standard profile. Didn't you use the Flat profile instead? It's like c-log! Couldn't touch it all, well that's a bit dramatic I'd say. When both are graded they end up with very similar dynamic range. Nikon's colour science is excellent. S-LOG 2 is good to have, but I prefer rec2020 colour mode and HLG on the A7R3 to S-LOG2. Was it a zombie film? Yes D850 autofocus is undead. Video at least. Stills, it's best on the market and level with D5! If you had blackmagic as A-cam and A7S as C cam, what was B-cam? Was it 5D raw? Did you also have D cam, E cam, Z cam too?! (Z cam = zombie cam). So many cameras. You must have more than even me!

@Kisaha While FCPX is great if you own Apple hardware, I have had a very hard time getting the Quicksync to work in any of the hackintoshes that I have built. Stability is great if you get most of the drivers right, and for a laptop that is not always the easiest task but might be worth trying. The community in tonymacx86 is huge and you can get a lot of help. With the Xeons it depends on the version. For example, I could not get any of the X99 Xeons to work but I am guessing older versions that exist in the mac pros might work out of the box. Definitely try the desktop first to get some experience and once you feel more comfortable try the laptop.

I'd say it is far away from true. From all samples I saw - including that last one from Max Yurev - for me it seems that at iso3200 video frames from GH5 have obviously more details than GH5s. It looks like GH5s has some enormously agresive noise reduction algorithm deep inside of codec usage. Testing samples, I found that up to iso 3200, GH5 with simple temporal noise reduction values in Resolve 14 keeps more image resolution than GH5s. Yes, GH5 is completely useless at iso6400, but level of plasticity in GH5s image at the same iso 6400 value simple is not at all for professional use as advertised.

The details is what gives it a small amount of plausibility. I believe the new chip is for their next smart phone designed to go after, iphoneX, but reusing it for other product lines might just make sense. There are many factor involved: From one side, re-introducing their DSLR camera line makes no sense. Especially within the corporate politics. It's hard to tell your team why you need to close something and then have someone inside the team try to resurrect. There is also their brand. It's hard to convince users to buy their product line only to later drop the product without any further update, support or lens lines. Then there is the other argument. Samsung already has the body, they have the basic lens mount and setup, they have the basic OS to operate a camera. So internal cost of developing it, once there is an all encompassing chip to handle it all, might be reasonable, even as a pet project. Perhaps someone argued internally, having a DSLR using their chip might help improve their video on galaxy or even perhaps be used as a marketing vehicle. "The new Galaxy uses the same chip that runs the most advance digital SLR". This might have been the internal way to have gotten the green-light on this. I see your point with this. Yes, there are niche users like Andrew and others here, who like the NX1. But for other users, the possibility of investing on something that might once again face a dead-end is a no go. So because of that, I think Samsung will have an uphill battle to get large enough buyers to buy this, for it to be justifiable. With Canon and Nikon lining up with their mirrorless camera, and Sony having a huge lead, I just don't see Samsung doing this, unless they can justify a secondary benefit to another product vertical.

The problem then was - and still would be - the lens selection. Unless you go with adapted lenses, there were hardly any lenses that matched the quality of the camera itself. If they could do this with a different already-existing mount (E-mount, if they could get permission), or Sigma's mount, that would allay a lot of fears. Leaving the market so early was immense hubris, and if they want to try again, they're going to have to overcome that fear.

@Damphousse dude! we are far from burned! most friends and professionals have changed 2-3 systems since 2014 in search of a better system, and I am confident in my equipment for at least a year or two! 16 and 20mgpxls were the sensor's technology back then, and for some even now, Super Amoled EVFs and touch screens were a luxury or a total miss, and for some even now, uncroped APS-C 4K/no overheating/H265 are still novelties (even latest A6500 does not comply). The first and truest pro APS-C mirrorless (until A9 and A7Riii). NX1 was a hybrid for the future (which is now!). We tend to forget that products and companies are pushing the envelope. Back then, the GH4 was a big step forward, I have friends now saying the worst things about that camera, but they forget what were the other options, really. GH5, the same. NX1 was such a camera. We have to look at history when is happening, not of what we wish could have happened (history is my hobby!). @Andrew Reid If anyone could do a prototype such this, then Samsung would be the one. The newer processor is so much powerful (eating Snapdragons for lunch and dinner!), and I am sure they would have optimized their older chips where it counted. They have unlimited resources and mobile phone cameras is one of the strongest selling point in that industry right now, and in the near future. NX1 was made exclusively by Samsung, in house, and in most components (SAMOLEDs, touch interfaces, RAM, mobile processors and efficiency, data transfer etc) are the best in business, not just good.

Of the Sony lenses I own, I have the Zeiss 55mm F1.8 FE, Zeiss 35mm F1.4 ZE, Batis 25mm F2 and Batis 85mm F1.8. Can highly recommend them all, but the Sigma ART lenses are WAAAAY better value for money. The advantage of the Sony ones is generally.... smaller, lighter, quieter, no adapter needed (obviously) but the optical performance is similar to Sigma and no giant step up even on the best lenses. In fact the Sigma 85mm F1.4 ART is better than the G-Master from Sony!

Samsung is the sleeping giant in the camera market. We all know if Samsung wanted to put a cinema grade sensor with HDR with great low light and battery life into the NX2, they are in a good position to do so. Much of that tech is already going into their smartphone sensors. But the smaller format requires many more compromises.

https://silkypix.isl.co.jp/en/ I run a windows version in Wine. It's not a very popular software because the interface, but it's by far the best raw developer for Panasonic cameras (i have a GH3, a GX7 and a GX85).

Already seen some really cheap ones in the UK on ebay going for just over £1000

Please be true..please be true.

And you are probably right about that. I just looked up when SD cards were invented. It was in 1999. I would bet that was probably the beginning of when you could have Log files loaded into a camera. Just a guess on my part. Sony Memory Stick was invented in 1998. I bet those 2 items started this thing about changeable Logs. Somehow I remember we had setup things that could be removed of some kind, in the Sony ENG cameras I used in the TV station I worked at. And that was Way before 1998 LoL. We, as cameramen, were not allowed to touch them. And we were restricted to not F ing around too much with any camera settings. It was so all the cameras out in the field all looked the same. But maybe I am wrong. Long time ago. I have owned a Lot of more Modern ENG cameras on my own years later. So I may be confusing it with one of them.. I still own 3 or 4 of them. They have been at my daughters house in California for Years and years in the Original big ass plastic cases they come in. One of them is a Sony 3 2/3' Plumbicon Tube camera that I still think put out the most beautiful signal I ever seen.

And that is what Rec. 709 has been doing for 30 years or more.

Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe this: https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/good-true-high-end-samsung-aps-c-camera-based-exynos-9810-soc/

Good point However on the other-hand it has some advantages. Sigma 24-35mm F2 ART becomes a 30-45mm which is quite useful with the extra reach you are almost getting a 28mm wide angle and 50mm prime in one.

Panasonic will take advandtage of the 2020 Olympics in their own country to launch new hybrids. Tokyo 2020, heck yes, you bet they gonna launch some nice cameras. Pride in their tech and national heritage commands that opportunity like no other! 3 CMOS 2/3 inch 4K broadcast cameras from Ikemgami and JVC, very recent 4K tech too:)

Actually, outside sources reveal iPhone X is a flop and manufacturing will be cut by 50% this quarter. iPhone 8 is also underperforming.. but you know what i find most amusing? all this fuss over HDR.. to end up being viewed, by what 1% of the population? on a glossy 4" phone display in mixed lighting (while being bombarded by on-screen notifications & incoming calls..) what a time to be alive! seriously though i'm with others here.. HDR at this point is mostly marketing hype. Nobody in the real world is equipped for it yet and just like 3D TVs which came and went or even 4K TVs at launch that were being pushed before there was even any 4k broadcast material available.. heck i remember when HDR was the next cool thing in photography, now it's considered kind of corny.. time will tell but something tells me HDR video is just the trend of the day like hyper-lapse, super-slomo, VR etc.. All of which are cool things but I'm certainly in no rush to jump on the bandwagon, then again it's a subjective thing, and my aesthetic tends more around organic/filmic rather than hyperrealism.

"only"! For half that price you can get a set of Sony PL lenses: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/906631-REG/sony_scl_pk6_f_cinealta_4k_six_lens.html

Agreed, I don't even know how we got on the subject of HDR. :/ Maybe we should just move off that, since it's apparently a contentious topic... and I think hopefully when HDR hits it big it will obviate the need for log gammas since we can see fifteen stops of information on screen at once without having to flatten it out. @Maxotics as best I can recall, log gammas were introduced for film scans to save file space. 10 bit log could represent the data from a 16 bit linear scan. I believe Cineon was the most common format, designed by Kodak, and–apocryphally–I hear some of that same magic lives on in the Alexa, even though Log C doesn't look at all like a film scan to my eye. There are still formats out there that are wide DR in linear colorspaces, Open EXR, for instance. Maybe DPX? Though I usually get DPX in log these days. Panalog was the first log video format I've heard of. I haven't worked with it. The first log format I worked with was was possibly from Red (it was poorly implemented; their current IPP2 stuff is much better). The first good log format I worked with was S LOG, on an F3. I was so impressed. Or maybe the Alexa. I forget. I do remember SLOG on the F3 benefited tremendously from 10 bit capture. Later I got to work with in post (but not shoot) some SLOG footage from the F35, and that camera produces a great image to my eye, although it's pretty controversial on some forums, and a pain to use I'm told. The image reminds me of a really beefed up C100 a bit. Here are some white papers for Cineon, SLOG, and Panalog: I couldn't make it through them. Math isn't my strength; I've really struggled with it. It is interesting that Cineon is apparently 10 bit in a 12 bit wrapper. Not sure why... but it seems to indicate that 10 bit log is sufficient to capture the vast majority of film's dynamic range. Though Kaminski would note that the DI burns the highlights and crushes the shadows a bit... which he liked. I really can't speak to 10 bit on the GH5. I'd be interested to hear a good colorist's take on the subject. I do think "8 bit" has a bad name among people who don't run their own tests, though. Like you, I have separate cameras for video and for stills... and most just use my iPhone for both.

Hey Max, but only because you are up to some great treats real life has to offer, I am sure! Don´t bother with one or two polemic comments in this thread. You are contributing very well written, very interesting and knowledgeabele articles, providing perspectives and approaches to novice techies like me and others. What I know is, DR helps big time to avoid clipping. What I also know, 8bit SLOG does that by stealing too many values in the dark areas, giving us natiest banding of two color values instead of gradations of 20-60 values. This is something I found in your comments as well beside a whole lot of interesting observations. Anyway, great post of yours and some great arguments and knowledge from some other posters as well.

I still think something is wrong with the crop factor maths If 4096 is 1.796 that would make my BMPCC 0.58x speed booster 1.04x crop, i.e. hardly any different to full frame, yet as I have already tried, much to my surprise this is not the case, looks more like 1.2x. And the XL (I have that too) is 0.64x, and looks like 1.3x crop not 1.149x. Maybe the sensor is only 17mm wide after all?

Oh I dunno, maybe because Sony didn't make that sensor? https://www.google.com.au/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=d850+sensor+manufacturer&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&gfe_rd=cr&dcr=0&ei=WZh3WvOQC6PM8gfdsZrwAQ And according to this list (https://nikonrumors.com/2015/12/16/list-of-all-nikon-dslr-cameras-and-their-sensor-manufacturerdesigner.aspx/) some of the most important cameras Nikon has produced (The D3/s & D4/s which arguably pushed the industry towards low light ability rather than sheer megapixel count) were sensors designed in house. It goes against the grain of "Internet Wisdom", but Nikon has more of a hand in designing their sensors than anyone gives them credit for. In any case, shoot any two Nikons of the same generation and the files mix together just fine in the edit. So why does it count against them because they can get a Sony sensor package with Nikon specs and marry that to a Nikon processor and code that does the actual magic, and save themselves the time and cost of developing a sensor from scratch?

I don't get to use fancy cameras that often! I own an 8 bit camera and am happy with it for personal use. I'd rather focus more on filmmaking... something I seem to have neglected lately. I don't know if the GH5 is really better in 10 bit, or if it has "true" 10 bit color. Haven't used it! Online tests seem to be inconclusive. I'd guess it makes a difference, but not a huge one. Then again, the Alexa has 15+ stops of dynamic range, and the GH5 doesn't, so it shouldn't matter as much with the GH5. I'm also not sure why SLOG 2 looks so bad from the A7S. I remember it didn't look great from the F5, either, which is a 10 bit camera (I think). F55 RAW looks better to me, but still not as good Alexa ProRes by any means... until it's expertly graded, at least. So each step up does improve the image, more in terms of grading potential than initial look imo. Still, I believe the arguments about 10 bit vs 8 bit on the C200, for instance, are overrated. I suspect 8 bit is enough for Canon Log 3. So it's only if you need those extra two stops of barely there dynamic range that the 10 bit codec would be better (letting you to use Canon Log 2). But that's not a camera I'm likely to buy. It isn't for me to say what others' needs are. If they need 10 bit, they need 10 bit. Not my concern since I don't. I still agree with @jonpais about HDR. In theory (I think), any "normal" or "flat" look, no matter how stretched it is, is just a flat rec709 look, and only has colors within the rec709 gamut. Where log differs is that it takes a container designed for rec709 but lets you capture colors outside that gamut, and then a LUT brings those colors back to a given colorspace. RAW, likewise, is only limited by the thickness of the BFA (which I believe differs between the C100/C300 and C500, fwiw), so you can take a RAW image and bring it into rec709 or bring it into any other given color space if the color is there in the first place. While I bet you could take a rec709 image and map it into HDR, that would be "faking it." Even a GH5 is (presumably) capturing a significantly wider dynamic range and color gamut than rec709 in v log, and shooting log or RAW will let you access those colors. But yes, tonality will suffer. How much? I'm not sure. I'm also not that interested in producing HDR content, at least at the moment, so for me color and tonality matter more. I suspect it requires a really good source to get high end HDR that has great tonality, but I wouldn't be surprised if HDR from the GH5 still looks good. I completely agree with @Damphousse that highlight roll off matters more than dynamic range to the average viewer. That's why I never got behind the A7S. The chroma clipping is severe. With a C300 or F3, my image might clip, but I can make it clip in a way that's aesthetically pleasing. With the A7S (and the early F5, it's better now) colors clipped wrong and it looked like video. So for me, the camera with the lower dynamic range is the one with the better image and grading potential, subjectively. The Alexa gets both right, you'll want to grade to burn it out. Furthermore, I have reservations about HDR. My first taste of it was Dolby's 10,000 nit demo with high end acquisition, so I'm really spoiled on it. I also can't afford a new tv, so there's that. More than anything, HDR and 4k feel like a simulation of reality, whereas film feels like a more physical organic medium. You go to a movie theater and watch film and the image is 24fps in a dark environment and your eyes are in mesopic vision and the film has a sort of built in tone mapping from the halation around bright spots and diffusion filters or anamorphic lenses, both of which which I love, bring it out even more with wild flares. There's not so much resolution, but the color is beautiful, and the contrast in the color allows the image to look much richer and higher dynamic range or higher contrast than it is. I like theatrical lighting with film, vivid and colorful. It feels like a dream a bit more, but I prefer stylized (not over-stylized) filmmaking. Whereas HDR, though stunning, seems to lend itself better to very naturalistic photography. Granted it makes anything look way better, but I see it being most useful in VR with like 8k per eye 120fps reality simulation. And I sort of think that's its own medium. Generally I think photography has tended a bit too much toward naturalism lately. So for my own purposes, I'm just happy doing weird stuff to 8 bit footage. But HDR is stunning. HDR nature documentaries are going to be breathtaking.

In RAW, 10-bits would mean 1,024 values of each R,G,B value. That is certain more dynamic range than storing 256 values (8-bit). The problem I have with pushing this is you act like there is No white, No black in 8 bit. I will agree there is less of both but, and less of any color variation, but hell All the colors are there. We are not just seeing B&W on Rec. 709. I seem to have lived for most of my life having color TV's that people have loved to look at and have not felt like they have been screwed over about. And hell most have watched it at 480p, 720p at most. I am sure in the future HDR, 16 bit stuff will be the norm, but right now most people don't give a crap or even know about it. But to push this 10 bit stuff and 20 stop DR the eye see's like we are all going to implode if we don't have it or understand it is just over hype from hell. Rec. 709 is Not going away anytime soon. It is what all 98'% of all TV's in the world can even output. A hell of a lot of people on here act if we don't have a F ing camera that has at Least 15 stops and it can't shoot HDR, or I can't deliver it, shit we are all going to die. Sure if I am shooting a movie with a 200 million dollar budget I would get the new Arri, but we are going to be lucky to have a You Tube or Vimeo audience and 90 % of them will watch it on a device that is showing it in Rec. 709. But hell keep the info coming. Good debate is just that, good debate. We all need to learn about new things, even bone up on the older things. But I think we are letting our passions rule, and that might not be the best approach.

I like you I just think you're wrong. JK ; ) - Seriously though I just disagree about benefits outweighing the costs. I believe you that there are certainly drawbacks to trying to cram so much info into a small container; as I mentioned I don't shoot SLog nearly as much now, after reading some of your posts. But I know, having compared the HDR and SDR masters of a huge-budget feature, that ultimately HDR is more pleasing to me. I do appreciate all your posts though! They're educational and make me think. And your posts back in June are actually the reason I even signed up for a forum account... I signed up to argue with you about S Log

You guys are killing me! You know, I want to be as liked as the next guy. When I first started this stuff years ago I got into a huge fight with someone on the Magic Lantern forum. I insisted each pixel captures a full color. I went on and on and on. Much like you guys are doing to me. I feel shame just thinking about it. In the end, I learned 2 things 1) What a CFA is and what de-mosaicing does and 2) Always consider the possibility I might be not just wrong, but horrendously, embarrassingly wrong. It's what we do after learning our errors that define us (hint, hint @IronFilm). Anyway, after the MF thing I try to be like the guy who educated me. He didn't give up on me and I'm glad he didn't....but it's hard.

https://jimchungblog.wordpress.com/2017/12/15/viltrox-ef-m2-adaptor-tested/

I seem to remember El Capitan or earlier had patchy support for 4K 60hz I don't think it's a hardware issue because the Mac Pro graphics card and Thunderbolt 2 definitely support 4K 60hz, even 5K. A lot of grunt on that side. So yeah I think it was the OS. I grazed this issue myself briefly and I think an update fixed it. Hazy memory though. In the end I squashed the romantic notion of the Mac Pro 2013. I love the unique form factor, how small it is, how quiet it is, how reliable, how the power still holds up today, how so many idiots write it off even at half the price it was, I think it's a cool little beast. However the iMac 2017 is just boringly... better value for money. Due to the more up-to-date graphics and Intel Quick Sync it will too often outperform the Mac Pro 2013 and I picked up a Apple refurb from their UK site for £1900... It is the 2017 27" iMac 5K, P3 display, i5 3.8ghz which runs cooler and quieter than the i7 4.2ghz but with very similar performance, 580 Pro graphics which has 8GB memory (huge!) and runs on par with the desktop GPU, so you are basically getting a top of the range professional 5K display for £900 and the computer for £1000 whereas the Mac Pro 2013 deal I was considering was £1900 just for the machine. I plan now to maybe sell the LG 4096 x 2160 display and just use the iMac. The Hackintosh will go into PC gaming mode and sit next to my racing sim rig in another room. If I want to as well, can run Forza 7 in bootcamp on the iMac and save myself the hassle of spending another £400 on an XBOX One X. Plug the iMac into the LG OLED and bang you have a 4K games console. The D500 wasn't powerful enough to achieve 60fps in most modern games in 4K, unless I am mistaken - they only recognise one and not the SLI config?

Completely different cameras. Size and ergonomics completely different. I would go Canon C100mkII for sure. My favorite workhorse of a camera, low price, extremely capable in high ISO, incredible Dual Pixel AF - the only worthy of pro use, best size per performance codec ever (Canon voodoo here, for sure), deliverable picture almost immediately. Best size and weight for such a camera. If you care more for the extras @IronFilm mentioned, then C300, but then there are better options out there in that category (he named few, definitely more research to find out the best option as they vary in era, features, weight, ergonomics, ets), and with C300 you need a full rig for it, it isn't "plug n play" such as the C100. If you want more options for a dead low price, the aforementioned JVC LS300 is an extremely and unexpectedly capable camera. With all the modern bells and whistles (no worthy slow motion though, worst ergonomics than Canon, worst low light capabilities, C100mkII is a low light monster - do not forget), some innovation (prime zoom function, native m43 - S35 sensor!) and in the dead low price (new) was an Atomos recorder (I do not know if the offer still stands) capable of recording 4K/60f, so a camera still relevant for the near future. JVC does cameras since forever by the way, in 1978 (yep, when Super 8 film was still king) they did the first ever portable video system, and in 1984 they did the first all-in-one video camera ever (camera and recorder in one box)!

ahah, will the bears be back? Crickey!

Yeah, ML with 3x bitrate, and Ive Lotus "FILM" picture style (my favorite). No grading except a very small contrast curve. http://www.filmpicturestyle.com/

What do you use for monitor calibration? I use the Spyder and love it. Highly recommended or everything is off to view.

And some weeds are good to smoke also! And that way you get a lot more mellow than most women I have ever met!

We want to see pictures of Hot Women, not out of focus Weeds!

Sony's new sensors have a very impressive pixel design when it comes to low light, the A9 is another one - was blown away how good it looked at high ISOs in 4K, considering it has none of the compromises of a 10 or 12 megapixel camera on the stills side. I actually would not mind that 24MP sensor in an A7S 3. It no longer needs to be just 12MP! The pixel architecture, low noise readout, aluminium process instead of copper, less heat, oversampling, downscaling, BSI, all helps. Sony also designed the sensor in the GH5S. I hope Panasonic's Fuji partnership for an organic sensor bears fruit, as Sony definitely need better competition. Canon 5D Mark IV is shit in low light for instance.

Yes, that article, from 2009, goes into the trade-offs of LOG gammas! My theory is that many young filmmakers identified LOG with professional, so when LOGs appeared on their cameras began to shoot with it, forgetting the fine-points of data capture mentioned in technical papers like that. Also, the cottage-industry of color profile makers set out to "fix" LOG footage, conveniently forgetting to educate their customers that sometimes what a filmmaker needs, to get the colors they want, is to shoot in a normal rec.709 gamma.

Does anyone see this camera cutting sales from the EVA? I do! Panasonic going all in with 4 cameras in less than a year.

The reasoning behind this: The GH5S has a bigger sensor compared to GH5 (17,3 mm x 13 mm), but not as big as that of my A6500 (23.5 mm x 15.6 mm). Lowlight performance with my camera is still better. But I don't care at all about lowlight. Dynamic range is also slightly better, 13 stops (Sony) over 12 stops (Pana). The Pocket (as well as the Micro, which has the advantage of 50/60p @ 1080) has 13 stops. People now have introduced the term usable dynamic range in connection with the cleaner shadows of the GH5S. But there is another side to this: gradation of the highlights. You'd usually ETTR and bring the highlights down to IRE 100 in post. Dave Dugdale has made a video in which he proves 8-bit to be much less problematic compared to 10-bit than is commonly believed. But this is for rec_709, where you squeeze 13 stops into 6 stops: ultra low dynamic range. The Pocket, with it's tiny sensor, is by no means a lowlight performer. Shadows will be very noisy (you see it in froess' fairground clip, but also in the shadows in the forest clip). The noise does look a lot like film grain, but of course you would want to avoid it nonetheless. You can do so by setting zebra to 100% and adjust exposure so that the highlights just start to clip. This camera really is (contrary to it's reputation) the easiest of them all in this regard. Of course: there has to be enough light and/or you have to use fast lenses and additionally speedboost them. But. Then. The colors are beautiful to start with, and with 10 or 12 bit, they stay beautiful in post. Now finally we here the bell ringing for SDR. I bet if you saw a highkey image with sun and sky in HDR, shot with Pocket, you said wow! Shot with Slog in 8-bit? Probably eew ... I wonder if the GH5S could be the right compromise. Good enough images, good resolution, low noise in the shadows, enough bit depth for good highlights. That's paramount. Missing AF, IBIS and high ISOs don't need to show in the final image.