Leaderboard

At least they got Tidying Up With Marie Kondo (Season One) https://ymcinema.com/2020/01/13/the-cameras-behind-43-best-netflix-original-tv-shows-of-2019/?fbclid=IwAR2y_Qf7aYSbLNz7L5Dj7CemB7oB528TUBFc77SI1amGl81UftSthduUT9o Are high-end shooters looking elsewhere in 2019? Looks like it. C300 II has been a flop? Looks like it. Will C500 II change things? Not without ProRes or a better raw codec. C700? Nah. RED and Arri just seem much more attractive at the moment for filmmakers...

Because no one cares about APSC except for Fuji.

Maybe Cinema EOS should be renamed Video EOS then?

This was stats from 2019, so likely they were filmed in 2018. Thus is no surprise to me that C700 doesn't have a strong showing there. Is more interesting to see the stats in 2020. (although my gut instinct is to suspect C700 won't have a strong showing) Am not surprised to see a lack of C300mk2 cameras, look there are also no FS7 cameras there either! (be much more interesting if they showcased the top 43 documentary shows from Netflix, I bet we'd see a FS7 there! And a scattering of C300mk2 too?) Because the C300mk2 was not designed to play at this level, the C300mk2 was Canon's response to the FS7 for the low budget productions. https://ymcinema.com/2019/05/28/the-cameras-behind-netflix-best-series-spoiler-red-dominates/ Looking at the comparisons between mid 2019 and 2019 I see the Panasonic Varicam has experienced a big drop, which is sad. As in 2018 it was the #3 camera. Looking deeper into the results I'd say the two major factors are ARRI ALEXA LF & Sony VENICE The last Netflix production I was on set for last year they had 3x VENICE. Going into the future I bet 2020's stats will show this trend growing even stronger. As VENICE was still largely in "kinda beta" firmware up until recently, just lately in 2019 has it got some really big firmware updates to bring VENICE into prime time. 2018 was very early days for VENICE, that's why the earlier survey only showed one VENICE camera. We're going to see many more VENICE productions coming. As for ARRI, well, they're ARRI! Of course they'll be picked. And now they've got the LF and even better the Mini LF (for gimbal / crane / car / etc shots), which the MiniLF didn't exist last year, then the ARRI cameras will only continue to dominate Netflix stats even further I'd say the most impressive result from that chart is how the Sony F55 (which is the oldest camera on the list) still has a number of productions shooting with it! (the F55 is in 4th= place!)

American Factory is the doc of the year, yep. Great film. I think Canon really blew it with the C300 Mark II. The original C300 was one of a kind and huge for all sorts of productions. By the time the Mark II came along, there were much cheaper and more specced out options (FS7 being the obvious one). I won't say better because I still like Canon's image considerably more, but hard to argue with 4k 60fps, 180fps in HD, more codec options - all for about half the price. With that said, I think Canon is moving in a very good direction with the C500 Mark II and 1DX Mark III. Everyone has been comparing the C500II and FX9, but I don't think that's going to be the real comparison because the C300 III will be in that same $11k price range when it is released (apparently very soon, probably NAB 2020). Here is how Canon should differentiate its lineup: C700 - nobody cares. C500 II - full frame, 6k raw, all 10-bit codecs - $16k C300 III - full frame, 4k only, 4k 120fps, 4k raw, all 10-bit codecs (basically a C500 II but without the 6k options and 6k raw) - $10-11k - THIS would the direct FX9 competitor. C200 II - Just a C200 but with the 10-bit codec (Super35, 4k raw, 10-bit 422 4k, 60fps) - $7499 C100 III - Super35 sensor, as small as possible, no raw, 10-bit 422 4k in 60fps - $5499 (and SMALL - for Ronin-S gimbals. Maybe 2/3 the size and weight of C200). If they did that (and soon), they would have a great range of products from journalism/broadcast/documentary up to feature film and narrative series - all Netflix approve with plenty to differentiate the costs. The most important ones and the two they should release this year (since they are rumored to be releasing two this year) would definitely be the C300 III and C100 III.

Changing gamma and color space with the right-click menu on the node only works if your timeline gamma and colorspace is set according to the clip you're viewing. So if you're viewing an F-Log clip, and you're timeline is set to Fujifilm F-Log, you can right click the node, set gamma to linear and adjust exposure with the curves the way I described before. It will be like a node between two colorspace transform nodes, but compressed to one node. But what do you do when you have clips from multiple cameras? I like the color space transform plugin better because I can see better what's happening. And sometimes you want to see what's happening between the transformations, in our case the linearized image. When you use the one-node method you don't get to see that, you only see the output of that node.

Maybe this site should be renamed ANTI-EOSHD? While Netflix is technically TV, Canon was all over the Oscars documentary category last year: https://***URL not allowed***/oscars-2019-all-nominated-documentaries-shot-on-canon-cameras/ And in this years 2020 nominees, one of the most talked about docu, American Factory (first film out of Obama's production company) was shot on... a 2014 C100 mk2: ..ironically it was picked up by Netflix at Sundance (and is currently streaming on the platform). So while many seem to obsess over "Netflix approved" cameras, this seems to prove that shooting great content will always trump camera specs.

If Blackmagic can license from Apple their codec for a $1000 Pocket camera... Why can't Panasonic license it on a $3999 S1H? The S1H is tarnished by the H.264 label on the box. We need both options. ProRes is forever associated with filmmaking, it is a proper editing codec. H.264 is a flexible but CPU intensive codec, and I'm grateful for it when I need smaller file sizes but it should never have become the one and only Default option in mirrorless cameras like the A7S, GH5 or S1H. As for Raw, to delegate such an important feature to exclusive Atomos hardware is a complete joke. It's like Canon delegating out autofocus to a start-up who provide it through specialist channels as a module. Would pro stills photographers put up with JPEG only? No. We have had a lot of patience as filmmakers with no RAW codec. Also RED should recognise that REDcode would be better off as an industry standard in all cameras and not an exclusive to their cameras only. I think they'd make a lot more profit if they did that and it'd be good for us as well, a win win. Thank you, trying out a few options which are more 'cinematic'... The current logo was done in a rush in 2011 after Canon asked me to change it or get sued. Changing just the forum avatar allows me to see how clear it is when viewed as a small icon. For the final design which logo works best for you guys out of these two? Candidate 1 Candidate 2

I don't think he meant to be condescending. Action cameras have their uses but outside of their incredible stabilization GoPro has done little to move forward. Honestly if I needed an action camera for anything I'd just get one of the cheaper knock offs before paying the GoPro premium. That's assuming I couldn't just use one of my Panasonic cameras to accomplish what I'd use an action camera for. They also lose their value faster than pretty much any other camera out there. I just can't see investing in one unless you really need it.

oh I know they have their usages still, I was just surprised my friend had got a GoPro for more general filming

10bit is like 4K vs 1080, even if you're going to be filming in 8bit (or 1080) most of the time, it is really nice to have the option of 10bit for when you want it. Hopefully soon manufacturers will realize 10bit is just as important at 4K to include in their cameras.

Was surprised when a friend rang me up last night and told me he purchased a GoPro 8 Black People are still buying those???? Gee.... Personally I think for his purpose a DJI Pocket Osmo + secondhand Panasonic FZ1000 would've been a better pick, and cost around the same amount.

Not sure I would say TOTALLY abandoned the video side but yeah, it is a bit behind some of the opposition now (they only really had the A7s pair and a few odds and ends before that in the ILC space that were more video centric though). I would just say NOT class leading and they still make great hybrid cameras with excellent stills and decent enough video for many serious users. They are due for something soon I think (as are some others). Great time to like and use photo/video gear.

Who cares about what T&C uses? Since when have they been an authority on videography..or even photography? They use what they see fit for their needs. Like most people. Sony has had a long head start on FF mirrorless. Chances are if you've made the switch to Sony before CaNikon entered the market, you're going to stick with it. Main reason EOS R has been so successful with Youtubers is because it has a flip screen, DPAF.. and solid CS SOOC. Sony is in a coma though concerning video specs in 2020, I think we all agree. Same codec/resolution for the last 5 years. Still WB/CS issues. It's quite mind-blowing considering how competitive the FF mirrorless market has become. They seem to have totally abandoned the video side!

It’s no secret RED & ARRI share the spotlight in high-end filmmaking production. That ranking has more to do with budget and industry standards than anything else. When you’re on a high budget and can rent anything you’re going to go for that latest RED or ARRI. Maybe a Venice or Varicam if you’re going for a different look. The C300 II is by far the cheapest camera on that list. It came out in 2015. The fact that it’s even on that list is to me a testament of its long lasting appeal. It certainly isn’t a flop in other filmmaking scenes like docu where it usually comes up on top. BTW I don’t see Ursa Mini, EVA1 or FS7 on that list at all. All Netflix approved cameras that came out around or after C300 II. What does that make of them?

This atrocity.

I'm rocking the GH5, the G85 and the GX85 for my multicamera shoots these days. My original plan was to sell the G85 and buy a second GH5 but then I got the GX85 for a steal used and decided to also get the 35-100mm f/2.8 when I found it in pristine condition for an absolute bargain. I still use my JVC LS300 too, though I'm considering selling it. It's hard to part with, as I really do love it, but I also feel bad not putting it to use more. I instinctively just grab my Panasonic kit most of the time. I think a lot of people have gotten caught up on full frame, which I understand, but I still love M43 and see so much more upside in the system than full frame. I want a small, compact kit. It's literally what I dreamed of way back when. If you told me 10 years ago that I'd be able to fit my entire multicamera kit in one small Pelican case AND get the quality that I'm able to get, I don't know that I'd have believed you. Using the GX85 has really reignited my love for the system and reminded me of the possibilities. It's so tiny and lightweight! But the image! It's lovely! And slap that 35-100mm on there! It's insane! I won't hold my breath, but if they could pack all the features of a GH5 into a small body like that? Gimme!

It is 2020, a year which marks 10 years of EOSHD this month! Those 10 years have flown by. I'm wondering how the filmmaking landscape for gear has changed since the GH2 days. What are you shooting with now?

I've used it quite a bit, yes, and totally agree with you. I even said that I think the C300 II produces a MUCH better image than the FS7. What I mean by "blew it" is really the price compared to what else it offered besides a beautiful image. That's my main concern, which is why after using a Sony for a bit, I went back to using Canon and/or Panasonic, but for a lot of people, the FS7 offered more (4k 60fps, 180fps in HD, ability to speedboost it, high bit rates, etc) for about half the price. I'd still take the tradeoffs for a better looking image at 24p (which is 85% of my work), but there are plenty of people who need all the other stuff the FS7 offered or wanted to save $8k. As an actual image-making device, it's a fantastic camera. Just released at a weird time at a pretty insane price.

RED's reputation has been hurt recently, so it makes sense for them to try to grab lower end customers with a cheaper camera that uses non-proprietary accessories. People thinking "RED sucks it's so overpriced" will probably be ok with the Komodo since it's so much cheaper. People who own one will likely stick with RED and upgrade to something more expensive later. It's what Mercedes does with the CLA or A class, for example - They're grabbing younger people with less income and building brand loyalty for later in life when the same customers have better paying jobs. Arri's reputation has been, and probably always will be, that it's just the best option for most situations. Part of that prestige is that the price makes it inaccessible by all but the highest budget productions.

Lol I probably jumped the gun with that GIF ? I know it seems like a s35 sensor behind a mft mount comes with lots of drawbacks, but honestly it doesn't. This is something many of us discovered at the release of the LS300. The implementation was honestly amazing. You saying you guess there would be significant drawbacks is sorta the point we're making - everyone dismissed the camera because it didn't seem possible, but it was! Just a sad missed opportunity for cameras that came afterwards.

I think that Arri are currently quite comfortable concentrating on and dominating the high end market.

? I wish @Andrew Reid had reviewed it. It didn't get nearly enough attention and still is an excellent camera. I do hope they were serious about releasing a follow up. They really thought outside the box with the LS300 and supported it with updates/features long after most companies do. Of the "big companies" only Panasonic has done that

It's been done - the JVC LS300. Fantastic implementation, too. It just wasn't popular enough of a camera to spark a movement.

At least with Sony You could buy something like a Sigma 16mm 1.4 and use clear image zoom and you have a 16-32 1.4 zoom in effect with little loss of image quality for video and jpeg stills. I have it set with the down button on my Sony A7s and then use the left/right buttons to zoom in and out (on the little NEX-3N it works from the zoom switch like a P&S camera) Works great with all lenses but with things like the 55 1.8 and FD 24 1.4 it is fun. On really fast lenses like an 85 1.2 at 1.2 it is too shallow to use while filming (for me anyway) and even 1.8 FF would be something i would zoom first then use rather than zoom while shooting. I wish all manufacturers would allow something like this.

Ι had same thoughts so many times. Then I have a look on this comparison and forget everything.

Unfortunately the average buyer is so utterly clueless when it comes to lens mounts. So many times I've heard people say "I only brought this because it is an EF Mount, I'd never have bought it if it was MFT" when referring to the BMPCC6K (or other cameras too, like an URSA Mini, Z Cam S6, or a Panasonic EVA1). I mean come on, seriously??? You can't name even one good reason for EF on those cameras over using a locking MFT mount. You're certainly not buying a BMPCC6K for its great AF with EF lenses! haha And a locking MFT would give the maximum flexibility and benefits. You could slap on a S16 zoom for those days you need massive zoom range all in just one lens. You could put on a focal reducer for Vista Vision Field of View and an extra stop of light. You could put on adapters for lenses that can't even be put on EF, such as FD lenses. Or even lenses that you could put on EF with an adapter, such as Nikon F Mount, you could have a much more solid connection (would basically feel like a "native F Mount") using a locking MFT mount than using the usual EF mount. Unfortunately I suspect these companies are intentionally choosing EF Mount because they know they'll likely sell more to the idiotic buyers by having an EF Mount, in spite of all the technical reasons for choosing a locking MFT mount (which perhaps even BMD are unaware?? Wouldn't surprise me, I've sadly season folks like J.B. who beta tests for BMD being a strong advocate against MFT, ditto other companies like Panasonic where Mitch Gross argued very strongly against MFT for EVA1. Which is extra madness, as Panasonic ought to be supporting their own MFT mount and GH series of cameras!!). But if only they could at least have offered us the choice! Like BMD did back at the start with BMCC EF vs BMCC MFT. Or ship out all cameras with an EF adapter to appease the fears and worries of Canon diehards (kinda a bit like Sony did with the VENICE and all of the F3/F5/F55 cameras, so many of those users don't even realize there is another mount underneath!!).

I'd rather they come out with a radical 15-90mm f2.8 lens instead

Lightning in a bottle is my guess. Sigma released it very early on into their new Art line - maybe the first or second lens. I wouldn't be surprised if they priced it barely above cost in order to attract a ton of people. Then, they were able to keep their margins due to the massive scale. Everyone that wants this lens has one, so I don't know if it would be wise for another manufacturer to even try their own version. They probably wouldn't be able to match the price:quality value.

The German video site Slashcam just ran a new test for using run-of-the-mill SATA SSDs in USB 3.1 enclosures as recording media with the fp: https://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Kurztest/slashCHECK---Nachgereicht---Guenstige-SATA-SSDs-an-der-Sigma-fp-Teil-2.html A test they had conducted earlier did fail, but it turns out that you need an enclosure that supports USB-C 3.1 Gen 2 with, most importantly, the USAP protocol (USB Attached SCSI Protocol). The enclosure they tested, and which meets these standards, is the UGREEN 2.5" USB-C 3.1 Gen 2: Turns out that an older Sandisk SanDisk Ultra II 960GB, while performing slightly worse in that housing than the Samsung T5, recorded 4K RAW with the Sigma fp without any trouble or disruption. So this might be a budget tip for the camera.

I wonder how long until he calls me out for posting links as well.... ? What camera were you thinking about getting? It isn't a terrible idea, I know for example people who went halves on buying a Sony FS7 or Canon C300mk2 when it came out. (in the case of the C300mk2, I think they divided it in quarter or maybe it was even between five of them? As was a tightknit flat of guys who'd recently graduated film school. A good situation if you can get it and trust everyone!) Am tempted sometimes to partner with a friend or two to go halves on buying an ARRI ALEXA Classic, but honestly I don't think I can personally justify owning even a third of an ARRI so no point.

Really like my Contax Zeiss 35-70 3.4, bought it to be a flexible addition to some other Contax primes. http://youtu.be/JhpT3UfJub8

Sony I think is strongest with YouTubers that can't live without AF and think they need shallow depth of field while standing in front of their "sets" that all look the same. I don't think this site attracts those types. The Sony shooters here I've found to be pretty competent videographers/filmmakers. Sony's offerings provide the YouTube crowd good bang for their buck and quick results right out of the box. They're not too concerned with a lot of the things we care about. They do minimal, if any color grading, etc.

Since Tony and Chelsea switched to Sony for stills (with the A7r4) they have been using the EOS-R for video (whilst also still using the GH5 and Blackmagic.) He posted a video about it about a week ago. That being said - the fact that they are using different cameras for stills and video obviously speaks volumes about what they feel about Sony's video capabilities. Sony has absolutely nailed stills photography (particularly autofocus) and seems to have got very lazy with the video side.

Here's another little tidbit. I found this out many years ago after subscribing to obscure mailing lists in the 2000's and my own experience. All manufacturers have significant sample variation between copies of lenses. This includes Zeiss Leica and the Japanese makers. In fact Kubrick was famous for ordering 10 of a lens from the manufacturer and sending 9 back. Back in the day, for instance, Nikon was jealous of Konica for their consistancy in lens manufacture production. In the 50's Kingslake made the discovery (Kodak lenses are legendary) that the Tessar designs is one of the most difficult to manufacture due to the extreme low tolerances required. A Tessar design can be very sharp two stops down, most aren't. Also, you can guarantee most lenses sent to photography reviewers will be golden samples. An, aside, Kubrick also used still camera lenses on his cameras, notably Nikon Nikkors. Lens rentals blog is the most significant lens testing outfit to measure sample-to-sample variation. Sigma seems to me to be the leader in lens tech these days from what I can tell.

I did address it to you. Just pointed out that part is what i objected to. Look, you can have an opinion that YOU do not like Sony (or any camera or brand) if you want but to say that a brand is not used by serious photographers or videographers (and especially one that is selling quite well) is simply trolling as well as being absurd in my opinion as well as being insulting to the many people who make their living using such gear. You don't like it, fine....others DO. I like all the brands of photography gear I have used and just occasionally do i not like a piece of equipment. I never got on with a Canon 7d for instance but that does not mean others did. I almost never watch Tony and Chelsea and have not for a year or so and last I was aware of there were just a few more Sony Users than the Northrup's. No gear is perfect ...for ME, the A7s (first version is still the camera I want and use), for others it would be the last thing they want...same with the newer higher FF Sony's and all those cameras from any brand. Yes, Sony has a colour issue for many people (not all) but equally, other people find greater limitations with different brands. I think the main issue is AWB for Sony and I mainly use Jpegs and do not grade the songs i video....I do not consider myself to be anything but an old amateur but my photos and (odd video) do get used by newspapers, councils, record companies, bands and others from time to time. I have to use RAW with my old Canon DSLR as there is a noticeable difference but with my A7s, not so much.

Hey all! After taking many of the good suggestions into considerations- I believe I will be selling my a6500 kit. It meets many of my needs but not all of them! With that money I am eyeing reinvesting into a (used) g85, GH5 or G9. Unless anyone else has similar suggestions! G85, is currently making the most sense as the profit I would net from my a6500 kit would allow me to reinvest in lenses (even though I love my Nikon primes they aren’t always the best fit!). Curious to hear your thoughts! For me, decent 4K codec, ibis, tolerable rolling shutter, slow mo options (60p or 120) and good color science with a flat profile, are my chief concerns.

If yall wanna walk around with a dinosaur egg with an integrated sensor, good for you.. Count me out.

Now this is interesting. Mike Johnston, as Chief Editor of Photo Techniques, commissioned a series of three articles on bokeh back in the 1990s, and he added an "h" to "boke" (Japanese "boke-aji", lit. "quality of the blur") so people wouldn't pronounce it as rhyming with "broke". It has caught on -- I mean, the spelling with the "h" -- in the English language enormously, while the Japanese have moved on, nowadays, to a different term, viz. "outto fokasu". Go figure. He could also be credited for anointing Leica's 4th generation 35mm Summicron (last generation pre-asph, designed by Walter Mandler) the "Queen of bokeh" for rating it 10 out of 10 (one of three lenses that get this rating) for its bokeh rendering. What many people fail to realize is that Johnston specifically refers to the bokeh rendering of this lens at f/5.6, not at f/2 where people are baffled why the rendering is very far from 10 out of 10. So yes, we should be talking about the rendering of the bokeh at different apertures, and especially while stopped down to f/4 or f/5.6. It is wrong to assume that bokeh is only about blurred background in the widest apertures. [Edit] Here is a recent article of his, where he revisits this ongoing tale. Also note that his latest article is, rather coincidentally, also on bokeh. https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2019/11/what-is-bokeh-and-the-dogs-nose.html

I have a GH5S. It’s a great camera. I do wish Panasonic would have payed more attention to it to make it more competitive, feature wise. The sensor is clearly capable of a bit more since it shares the same sensor in the P4K, Terra4K, Zcam E2... I think however, it being built on top of the GH5 platform and not given more leg room put it at a disadvantage. I still bought mine after seeing the P4K release because I value the weather sealing and build quality. I would say despite the FF hysteria the little MFT sensor in these cameras proved to be very popular and met the needs and wants of those that bought the cameras. With the success of the P4K I think it has shown that their is a demand for a MFT camera that has IBIS, a dual gain sensor, and a bit more power features for those that need them: ProRes, RAW, 4K60p+. im hopefully Panasonic will make the GH6 that camera. I don’t think their will be another MFT BM camera.

Yes. The idea is not to keep updating it. How often do Arri change their colour science? Once you get it working, once you get it looking beautiful, there is no need to keep tweaking it. Sony had it right in 2008 then fucked it up and tweaked it for past 8 years to the point where it's only 10% better than the fuck up. Honestly head should roll, but just like they doggedly stick to the same broken menu system, it seems they stand by their failures in people management too. My reading of the situation, is that most people are attracted to Sony by the high-specs. I am sure they have more enthusiast usage than pro for stills. I think most stills pros are on Canon / Nikon / Leica. If you buy a stills camera for the high specs you are not going to care about JPEG very much. You are going to care about the raw files, and have ample skill in Lightroom to do what you like to the colour and dynamic range. In video, it's a different story and you are at the mercy of the image processor to a much higher degree. It has to be right. I have had lovely results from Sony's cameras because they at least afford us a great control over the picture profiles, gamma modes, colour gamuts, etc. and enable us to mix up the settings to patch over any shortcomings in the default ones... of which there are legion. But it is still the case that my 1D C beats it every time for skintones and teal / orange shooting where you want to maintain a nice emphasis on warm and cool tones in a single frame. The auto white balance is also far better. I will do a comparison between the 1D C, Leica SL2 and Sony A7 III soon which proves there is a big difference in the ways the cameras handle colour and WB. The good thing like I said above is that Sony is not shy about giving us a lot of settings to play with. When you have the Minolta colour science to compare with (Sony A900), a Leica SL2 and a 1D C, or even an Alexa, you have the best industry reference for colour science in the world to act as a guide. This is what makes EOSHD Pro Color possible, so thank you Sony for allowing us all those complex options to diddle with while I compare. On the other hand if you are a non-technical shooter with a great eye and a job to do, but no time to diddle around and not a high level of nerd ability and nerd patience, are you going to have a spare 100's of hours to test settings or even the benchmark cameras to compare to? I don't think so. You just want the damn camera to deliver out of the box effortlessly like your last one did. If I were the latter, I would not let a Sony mirrorless camera within a yard of my shoot. It would be Leica SL2, Fuji GFX, or Canon 1D X III all day long.

The great thing is, Speed Booster GH5S outperforms the 6K EF Pocket in low light as well. Unless you can get one of Luca's rather nice Magic Boosters. Who's for a GH5/GH5S Shooter's Guide?

Good to see such loyalty round here. So many Panasonic users ? Maybe I should concentrate on more GH5 coverage. I have been more focussed on the full frame cameras since a few years ago now. GH5S and GH5 deserve more articles.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1476987-REG/smallrig_hsn2270_smallrig_nato_handle_for.html/DFF/d10-v21-t1-x961387/SID/EZ That is a very cool handle which Tom Antos is using!

The laptop screen is just an example, I am talking about shooting in a room with mixed light sources. Sony can't handle it. It is total shit. 8 years of fucking it up and still nobody fired.

I think if Deakins was let down by his Alexa and dreadful skin tones, he'd consider it a big waste of time. And I think that way about Sony's cameras. A big waste of time. I can spend hours dialling in the right settings which look great for one subject, but awful for another. A7R IV is a camera that does well for landscapes, but naff for human subjects... And if you dial it in for skintones, suddenly you have problems elsewhere, or it lacks impact. The white balance system seems to use the sensor, it doesn't handle mixed light. If anyone can figure out how to stop it from making a 3200k lit interior look like Donald Trump's face when there is a 6500k laptop screen occupying 1/100th of the shot, please write the answer below.

The only tool here is Peter McKinnon thinking he needs a 2400Mbit codec for YouTube vlogs.

Speaking as a former a7iii user, I can echo what others have said. You don't gain anything from recording externally with the a7iii. Really, the only thing that the a7iii has over other cameras is video AF. It's a great camera but you're not going to gain much from rigging it up.

The A7iii is a good allround video camera and really excellent stills camera (I do own it), but no cinema camera because of its weak codecs and 8bit limitation, no matter how you rig it up.