Leaderboard

NEW BLOG POST https://www.eoshd.com/anamorphic/preview-of-coming-attractions-anamorphic-goes-medium-format-with-fuji-gfx-100-and-a-look-at-the-leica-sl2-5k-43-mode/

Well, inspired by your post, I thought I might sort out a setup today. Nowhere on the same level as your ones but here is my very compact L mount full frame RAW anamorphic setup. Taking lens is the Sigma 45mm and the (currently) less than ideal anamorphic element is provided courtesy of a pretty fucked SLR Magic Anamorphot-40 1.33x Compact. I got the Anamorphot-40 very cheap used about 18 months ago and it literally fell apart like a clown car the second time I tried to use it and as you can see it hasn't fully been re-constructed as yet ! Obviously, when picking up the separate parts of it I managed to get barrel grease all over the elements (front and back of both of them no less) so it needs a proper clean as well as a few more screws. I think I might persevere with that though as I think it will be worth the effort as even in its current smeary condition its got some promise from the couple of quick tests I did.

With the Fringer EF-FX adapter this lens is a BARGAIN. I have the 16-55mm F2.8 Fuji X and 18-135mm. I wanted something faster than the 18-135 although to be fair that is a very good run & gun lens. I wanted something longer than the 16-55. This fits the bill and the macro is amazing. AF is instant. Works perfectly in 4K too. It cost me about £250 used in mint condition. Will add some samples frames from it soon.

The Pro version (Gen 1) with the aperture ring. I have not yet figured out how to transfer control of the aperture to the camera body jog dials instead though. To be honest I'd prefer it there than on an aperture ring that is too close to the body and has no markings or hard stops. The other thing I like about the Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 is the overall rendering. It is pretty spectacular for such an affordable zoom. Really nice bokeh and focus roll off. Amazing resolution and contrast in the middle. I have both the old and new versions of this lens... will see what the difference is.

A few stills from a shoot last night all on the Pocket 4K XL and CZ 35mm 2.8.

Still very restricted here about how far we can go from home but managed to use some of our allotted exercise slot this evening to take a bit more footage with the FP/45mm/Anamorphot. And yes, that is a snake in the bottom left of the top picture. And yes, I did shit myself when I saw it.

Some shots from the Baby Hypergonar on GFX 100 The trick here is apparently to use a lens with a rear element as small as your thumb. On a sensor the size of the albert hall. Light works in mysterious ways.

I have this same lens (it's based on an Angénieux design) and the same camera. It's great! Here are a couple of examples; this is on my original Pocket Cinema Camera, not the Micro, as it's faster to set up (no external monitor required as long as it's not too bright outside). Using a Metabones speedbooster, Nikon version as I also have the Nikon version of this lens (so I could have manual aperture control). and As a contrast, here's some footage of the geese taken with a Helios 44-2; I don't use a speedbooster with that lens so it becomes a telephoto on the Pocket or Micro:

Ah...so maybe breaking it and covering it in barrel grease is the secret. I need to do a YouTube video about it immediately with a thumbnail of me holding it at arms length in front of the camera whilst doing an open mouthed shocked face

That is the best images I've seen from that adapter, everything else I've seen has been hot garbage.

I played with Xtal Express and Technovision Cookes at my previous job. They have nothing in common with the new Cooke Anamorphics. The Cookes have pin-cushion distortion. The vertical lines bend inward. The older lenses have classic barrel distortion. Also, they were converted from spherical lenses, whereas the modern Cooke Anamorphics are purpose-built. And some of the cylinders are rotated 90 degrees which stretches the image out vertically, in addition to it being squeezed horizontally. They are also fairly consistent from focal length to focal length and color matched. JDCs were notoriously inconsistent. Top one is Zeiss SS. Bottom one is Speed Panchro.

Haha great stuff. Liked the video a lot @jgharding It's true, you reach a point where you have so many tools you don't use any of them. The EOSHD blog adds an even more warped motivation for me. I have no choice but to keep buying cameras and lenses!!! I enjoy it like a crack addict enjoys coke. I never wanted to become an obsolete camera collector or lens museum though, and even less want to become a shop. So the things just kind of sit there like the void staring back at me. Buying fancy stuff is only part of what inspired me to start shooting. I do enjoy it, but I enjoy a good shoot even more. It is something that doesn't just apply to creatives.... much of how we've organised our civilisations all boils down to this constant cycle of acquisitions and never settling with what we have or pausing progress long enough to taste it. The other paradox of this syndrome is that it instantly devalues what you already have. You can spend a fortune and lots of time on effort researching a tool, only to get it, love it, use it for a week, and then feel the urge for the NEXT adventure straight after before you've even scratched the surface of the creative possibilities that just opened up before you. A prime example of this for me was when I got the Fuji X-H1. The A7 III came along on the same first proper shoot as that, so half the time was spent wondering which shot to do with which camera. Very distracting. Then after the A7 III up pops the Panasonic S1 and Fuji X-T3. By this point the X-H1 was sat on the shelf for weeks on end while I dabbled with 4K/60p, and the A7 III wasn't coming out on any shoots at all. So why did I bother spending all that money on either of them only to upstage both of them within months? This constant churn of gear is basically one long syndrome of addiction, brief enlightenment and disappointment. I don't know how to stop it. I liked it best when everything was either rubbish or expensive, apart from a GH2. I stuck with that for ages and actually created something.

"The business has changed ever since Jim Jannard announced the RED One camera in April 2006" You can read all the interviews in FDTimes here [PDF] NEW BLOG POST

It arrived today and sits proudly on the Sigma Fp. An absolute gem. It seems parfocal to me as well! The shots of the GFX 100 are at 35mm and 70mm, both wide open. It's not exactly lacking for sharpness but is more gentle than a modern cut your throat sharp lens.

Darn! Great light. Great captures! Thanks for showing. No 2 and 3 are especially beautiful.

Love it!

One thing I don't get (and I've seen it on a few videos recently) is how the S1/S1H render some reds as a vivid orange, but only certain shades (other reds don't get affected at all). It doesn't look like it's sensor related as a recent test with RAW showed the effect vanished! One's the Pocket 6k, the other the S1H.

I thought it were a hose pipe at first

If I only had to keep one camera at the moment... Let's see. I like grading LOG but don't like monitoring with it. Needs a good view assist. Or a really good standard picture profile. I am addicted to Classic Negative at the moment on the X-T4 and the Teal & Orange on Fp for something even more stylised. But doesn't suite everything like Classic Negative. Let's say X-T4 makes a good case for itself here and the Pana S1 with it's in-camera LUT support. Next, only having one lens is a challenge, because I've jettisoned the rest into the skip and can only keep one. If it's the X-T4, it'll have to be the Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 C (newest one) or Fuji 18-135mm. These do everything. Think I'd choose the Sigma for the macro and faster aperture. If it's the Panasonic S1, I'd go with a prime and forget about the terrible AF. A good 35mm F2 so at least you have wide angle and 50mm in Super 35mm mode. F2 to keep the size down. Let's call it Voigtlander 35mm F1.8 Ultron or Zeiss ZM 35mm F2. Unless close focus is needed, then it'd have to be the small Minolta AF 35mm F2.0, lovely rendering and simple to manually focus. If I am truly going to box myself in, I'd have to choose between S1 with the prime and X-T4 now. Tricky one. Don't think I'd pick either actually. Sigma Fp with Canon 28-70mm F2.8 EF (old version). It's parfocal. Good manual focus. Full frame. S35 crop gives you more reach. Can shoot RAW internal. No IBIS stops you being lazy and getting nicer shots on a tripod instead. Great colour and codec options. Just no EVF or articulated screen, which could be tricky sometimes. Nope having just one camera is impossible. I'd keep all 3 and then turn the internet off and use the GFX 100 instead.

Fuji's own 18-55mm F2.8-4 is a great lens for the money but the Sigma is even better and more versatile in my book. A nice bit longer at the telephoto end. A bit wider too. Much better macro. More versatile. Fits more cameras. Goes on a Micro Four Thirds Speed Booster as well, where it just about has 1.3x crop covered. I would keep it on the X-T4 though and not the older Fuji cameras as the AF seems FAR better on X-T4 vs my X-Pro 2. On the older ones I'd use Fuji's own lenses. Also you need the Fringer adapter. The cheaper ones don't do it for me. So far anyway. Firmware may change things later. Speaking of zooms... The Sigma Fp got married today To a Russian She is 37-140 dress size. F=fit. Ex husband is Tarkovsky. And she loves the Fp because IBIS is useless with manual focus zoom lenses. So here it will be a case of the lost art of sticking it on a tripod like Tarkovsky.

Beautiful video, best stuff I've seen so far out of the XT4 (particularly handheld) really. His shots don't appear to make the IBIS issues (jumpiness is there) look so terrible. I have the camera a few days now, I use it only with manual lenses. I've been pretty sickened with the IBIS issues, having come from a GH5, it's a lot worse. Very close to returning it and just saving money with an XT3 or XH1 but still undecided... I do own a gimbal (which makes the XT3 even more viable). I think the best tactic I've found so far is to (avoid DIS at all costs), set the focal mount length to about x0.64 to x0.71 of the real focal length. The sticky, stepping, grabbiness of the IBIS is still there I guess but it's downscaled, mitigated to something pretty usable that, crucially, still is enough that it smooths out your actual UN-intentional hand shakiness. Its ugly little quantised steps in sensor movement are smaller, but there's still enough IBIS to look smoother than pure handheld without IBIS. The huge catch here is that I guess Fuji doesn't allow you to set the focal mount length yourself when any lens is attached with electronic communication. So I don't know what the hell I'll be able to do then to improve the stabilisation stickiness. An EASY band-aid for the video IBIS imo would be to always allow the user to set a downscaled focal mount length like this to mitigate the over zealous IBIS. Anyone else found similar stuff when testing the IBIS? I know the DIS is bad (except for purely static 'tripod-like') shots, but I'm still unsure if IS Boost is helping or harming. Results seem to vary with it all the time. Haven't used any OIS lenses with Fuji yet but I'm pretty sure I'm not really interested in them. For video the lens OIS always causes grabby stepping jitters imo and anyway it just reduces the glass options, so, so much.

I found the hairspray trick to work quite well

That is a very interesting look, and definitely usable. It would be quite a cheap exercise to make a 'set' with some having less passes through the paint, and perhaps trying a variation with a clear varnish instead of black paint or perhaps other types of spray products.

Certainly is worth persevering with judging by the atmosphere in those shots. I think the Sigma 45mm is really well suited to anamorphic. I tried it on my Fp with the Bolex Moller and it's almost as if Rachel herself comes climbing out the picture. Another one of these lenses where the entrance pupil is very close to the anamorphic elements. It's got a lot more contrast than the Nikon E-series 50mm pancake I was using as well. I just wish for the dual focus lenses, that the front variable diopters were a bit smaller and lighter. They are all 72mm+ monsters!

This guy didn't really do it in post, but I didn't want to create another thread. First time ever I've seen someone trying to actually recreate what Pro Mist filters are about. And he did it with a spray paint, lol. Side note: I knew Sony give yellowish skin tones, but I didn't expect a Simpson-ish jaundice.

Yeah, this is an important point...

Instructions unclear. Bought two more cameras using stimulus cheque.

Well this stopped me buying something. So mission accomplished sir. I thank you.

Expecting the worst shooting into a light source after some of the ( few) posts about this lens around the internet, I was pleasantly surprised and it seems no worse than most lenses in that regard (and if i am shooting right into a very bright light up close, it is not going to be pretty regardless of the lens). It also seems ok as a general purpose lens at longer distances. For close in at 2.8, it does seem to have some magic and much more than i expected. A couple at 60mm at a distance 2.8 and f8 and a couple into a light at 2.8 and f22 (another surprise, this lens produces pretty much ZERO sun stars). I really can not wait to use this for both video and stills at a gig (indoor pub or outdoor concert) though with the current climate that might be a while. Portraits hopefully will be a lot earlier.

A video from a professional DP. He also reports "some weird IBIS issues".

Hello. Here is the official answer from Sigma about 0.1 second shutter lag: ”We are so sorry that your fp is showing a lag between the moment of release and the actual picture. We are aware of this, and unfortunately, this is how fp works at this point. This is a display lag happening between the sensor and LCD. I will forward your message to our engineer team, and they will check if there is something they can do to fix this. However, at this moment, we have to ask you to accept that this is how fp works.” So maybe they will come up with something...

Question made and coming from here: Here's a workaround for Skydio 2 night footage: Disclaimer provided by the brand itself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zm8sZoIseTc&lc=UgxPi6AiqlZoMdghykd4AaABAg Still valid and worthy to try IMHO : -)

To spare the expense of buying one, I think you could use a single GH2 if you wanted a video challenge with it. Start with someone who doesn't mind being parted with it for a while, they make a film over two days with it and then they post it on to the next person who does the same over two days and then sends it on etc until it gets back to the original owner. Even for people who don't own any MFT lenses there are plenty of adapters on eBay for under £10 so its not going to break the bank to take part. As forum members are spread out all over the world, it would be quite an interesting project even if the subject was just "one day where I live". If no one fancies parting with their own GH2, it wouldn't exactly be difficult to throw £10 each into the PayPal account of someone trusted to group buy one off eBay. I know of a cheap one for sale in Cairo.

I do too... I also remember how hard people were on the RED camera person. Apparently, if you: 1. Know how to get the most out of your camera. 2. Are in a controlled studio environment so you can compensate for weaknesses in your camera’s dynamic range with lighting. 3. Have color grading skills so you can further compensate for weakness in your camera’s dynamic range with power windows. There is the distinct possibility that you can evoke an emotional response out of your audience that competes with the response to cameras that cost 10 times as much or more. I think this is equally true today if some were skilled with a pocket 6k or GH5, lighting and color grading vs someone less skilled with a RED.

The new firmware (v0.95) enables ProRes RAW over HDMI to Atomos recorders on all E2 models. This includes the $800 E2c. This means that the E2 series now has not one, but two different Raw formats. I'm sort of surprised the Z Cam is still barely talked about here. It checks a lot of boxes that people complain about with the P4K. The entire series now has H.264, H.265, ProRes, ZRAW, and ProRes RAW recording capabilities, plus incredible frame rate options at full sensor width on the E2, multiple crop options and aspect ratios, low rolling shutter, long battery life, and incredible build quality. I recently got one, though probably won't have any projects to use it on for a few months.

There is no pixel binning, not sure where you got that from - the 4K is a full pixel readout from 6K sensor. The 8bit RAW is not a major flaw, it's a major bonus. Try getting that out of an A7 III type for same price. No doesn't exist. The results are incredible. You just need to look beyond the bit-depth and trying to break the image. The fixed screen, lack of EVF and no mechanical shutter make the Fp the size it is. If these features are important to you, then you may be better off with a larger camera. You can add the loupe to the Fp LCD to make it into an EVF though. Who is the camera for? Anybody who wants a small affordable full frame camera with superb video features and image quality.

https://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/20260-how-i-got-scammed-through-ebrahim-saadawi/

Do you agree that the fp was not in focus? (like camera 9)? If we make the assumption that the fp is using the IMX410 sensor, as is the A7III, Nikon and perhaps the Panasonic then we can see that there is no way that sensor can deliver more than 12 bits in motion. Although there is a crop mode at 14 bits. If you look at the specs for all these other cameras then you can see that 12 bits in motion is pretty much a universal given - Canon say the same for their sensors too. So the container from the sensor to the camera is a fixed 12 bit bucket. If we also assume that all sensors are linear (physics and hardware wise this is the case) so the native signal off the sensor is going to be linear for all of these. Now: either the sensor response in some cases is non-linear (it's possible but i don't think it is the case) or each of these companies is doing something to get these claimed stops beyond 12. In the case of this Sony sensor, is it logarithmically compressing 14 bits down to 12? I think not, there may be a bit of non linearity in the results (there are) but i think that's a function of the sensor itself. In my testing the difference between stills and cine shows that. But i think that goes for any of these sensors. The latest BMD don't output DNGs anymore? But the old ones compressed 12 bit linear into a 10 bit container with a 1D LUT lookup table (great approach) but the source was no more than 12 bit) What other cameras currently output DNG? Because it is very easy to look inside those at the RAW data. And IMHO some of these companies are using techniques like highlight reconstruction to deliver > 12 stops. If you understand that each of the RGB filters has a different sensitivity then you can see how you can take advantage of that and extend the overall range beyond that 12 bit fixed linear container. With the fp, and being RAW, it is up to you to do that reconstruction work. With other systems that are outputting their own RAW then that work can happen automagically internally. It is true that the reconstruction work is as simple as checking a box in resolve, or as complicated as doing the math yourself. Applications like Lightroom do it whether you want it to or not - it's fundamentally part of the lightroom debayer for stills as well. So the irony is a lot of skies done through lightroom are reconstructed highlights... (ever noticed that the blues can be somewhat off?) The only time this doesn't count is when you have a cinema camera style sensor which is designed for greater bandwidth inside the sensor itself, 14, 16+ bits are common. So IMHO i think the fp has a similar range as the other (prosumer) cameras but the data you get off the sensor is 'RAWer' and it's up to you to make the best of it. This is my assumption. I have no insight into what the manufacturers are doing. I know i sound like a fanboy, i'm not really, my fp is a stop gap until Komodo ships. But i do think it's a wonderful little camera! I like what sigma are doing and they don't have any cinema camera lines to protect. I think they're really well positioned to do something quite special in this market segment and i'd hate for anyone thinking about getting an fp to not do it because of these kinds of conversations! cheers Paul

Okay, i downloaded the 'source' file and looked through it. IMHO the sigma stuff is a touch out of focus. If you compare to the under test you'll see the chart is sharper there. The normal studio test feels the focus is forward (his watch is in better focus) Even at f2.8 on full frame the DOF is pretty shallow. If you're not running the camera out to an external monitor critical focus is difficult. Number 9 is well out of focus as well on the chart and the suggestion is that's 8K red. Im not saying for a moment that the fp is in the same league as the others (my red is 10 times the cost) or that the scaling couldn't be better. But it isn't that bad. I've shot full frame UHD and can be obsessive about things and i have no issue with the footage in real life. Yes, the scaling could be better and hopefully it will be. But if you want pixel for pixel sharpness then use DC mode. You have the choice. I'd rather people petition sigma to push this forward - more crop choices, better scaling and so on. The sensor is there, the camera is capable but i feel sigma need to know this is what we want... Cheers Paul

In practice, you can switch forth and back between full frame 4K raw and APS-C 4K raw video recording without great image quality penalty. (The difference in noise and resolution is IMHO invisible if you master in 1080p). And you can put the full frame vs. APS-C crop switch on the camera's quick access menu. That effectively turns any prime lens into a dual-focal length lens - or virtual dual lens turret. Often, this makes a zoom lens unnecessary in the field. It's a neat (and often overlooked) little feature of the camera.

As promised, the Sigma fp centered release of slimRAW is now out, so make sure to update. SlimRAW now works around Resolve's lack of affection for 8-bit compressed CinemaDNG, and slimRAW compressed Sigma fp CinemaDNG will work in Premiere even though the uncompressed originals don't. There is also another peculiar use: even though Sigma fp raw stills are compressed, you can still (losslessly) shrink them significantly through slimRAW. It discards the huge embedded previews and re-compresses the raw data, shaving off around 30% of the original size. (Of course, don't do this if you want the embedded previews.)

Since I found the YouTube comparison between the Sigma fp and the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K so worthless, I did a comparison test of my own. I wanted to compare the cameras in two respects: (1) dynamic range when shooting a high-contrast subject under optimal light/with optimal exposure + robustness in grading the resulting image; (2) low light/extreme high ISO image. My setup was as follows: Completely dark room; Both cameras with the same lens, Tokina 28-70mm/2.8 (Nikon mount adapted to L-mount and MFT respectively) at the same aperture setting (f4) on both cameras, but at 35mm focal length on the Pocket 4K and at 70mm on the Sigma fp to compensate for the different sensor sizes; Record settings: UHD 23.98p on both cameras, full frame CinemaDNG 12bit on the Sigma fp and BRAW Q0 on the Pocket 4K (= best quality codec settings on both cameras); For the high-contrast test: daylight-temperature LED fresnel with maximum focus/spotlight on a plastic appliance reflecting some of the light to create high contrast; both cameras at minimum/native ISOs exposed ETTR/to the right. Both cameras set to 11.25 degrees shutter angle (in lieu of an ND filter, since motion rendering is irrelevant in this test). (Note: Lowest, respectively native, ISOs on the two cameras are ISO 100 on the Sigma fp and ISO 400 on the Pocket 4K. Never mind that nominal difference, both cameras have almost identical clipping behavior at these settings, i.e. ISO 100 on the Sigma fp behaves like ISO 400 on the Pocket 4K. On both cameras, the zebras turned out to be reliable indicators for sensor clipping: To go absolutely sure that I would optimally expose the sensor, I also shot the scene at larger shutter angles - 22.5, 45, 90 and 172.5 degrees -, with zebras popping up as early as at 22.5 on both cameras. When looking at the material in Resolve, this was indeed where clipping had occurred and waveforms remained clipped in the RGB parade even when lowering exposure in Resolve's Raw control tab.) For the low-light test: same 'scene' as above, but with the LED fresnel turned off and only a practical light in the background turned on. Both cameras set to maximum ISO (256.000), at f4 and 172.5 degrees shutter angle. Treatment in Resolve: Basic image adjustments only in the Raw tab, interpretation in P3 color space with Rec. 709 gamma: adjustment of white balance/tint and exposure to make the Sigma fp and Pocket 4K footage match. (The raw material of the Blackmagic Pocket 4K was much warmer than that of the Sigma fp with the same Kelvin settings...) No highlight recovery. (Wasn't necessary anyway since there was no clipping in the images.) No noise filtering or sharpening, although the Pocket 4K's BRAW codec already has some baked-in temporal noise filtering. For the extreme grade, only a solarization-like custom curve was applied that pushed the shadows to the maximum and was meant to provoke banding in the material by pushing contrasts: I exported 16bit TIFF screengrabs which can be downloaded here (6 TIFF files in a zip archive, 133 MB). Here's how the well-exposed high-contrast scene looks like (25% downscaled images): Sigma fp Pocket 4K - Note that the difference in sharpness may be my user error, and is also influenced by the different depth-of-field between 35mm/f4 on MFT and 70mm/f4 on full frame. The manual focus aides on the Pocket 4K are much better with latest firmware, so nailing focus without an external monitor was easier. 1:1 crops of the above two images: Sigma fp (left) - Pocket 4K (right). Extreme grade, with the same curve (as posted above) applied to the two above images: Sigma fp Pocket 4K 1:1 crops of the above: Sigma fp Pocket 4K Low light, with both cameras at maximum (256,000) ISO, 172.5 degrees shutter and f4: Sigma fp Pocket 4K 1:1 crops of the above: Sigma fp Pocket 4K So, to summarize, I think it's fair to say that the full-frame 12bit CinemaDNG material of the Sigma fp simply shows the benefit of a larger sensor and its lower image noise (even at base ISO if you compare the full-size TIFFs). It's thus only logical that it holds up better in extreme grades and in low light. My likely user error in nailing the focus of Sigma fp also shows the strengths of the Pocket 4K, namely better camera assist functions and overally a better user interface/more practical user experience for video shooting. - But it's also nice to see that the Sigma fp has some genuine advantages over the Pocket 4K, especially for my own type of videomaking which revolves around event videos (concerts at indie/DIY venues) shot in extreme low light conditions.

That's very kind of you, thank you. Post is minimal at the moment however i think one 'trick' is that i have this as a Resolve project which is YRGB Color Managed, my timeline is 709, output colourspace is 709 but my Timeline to Output Gamut Mapping is RED IPP2, with medium and medium. (Input colourspace is RedWideGamut but AFAIK when dealing with RAW and DNGs this is ignored) This is because most of the project is Red based. BUT the sigma fp footage is debayering into 709 (So in Camera RAW for DNG is it Colourspace 709 and Gamma 709 with highlight recovery by default). What happens is that the DNGs are debayered correctly, with full data. But that IPP2 mapping is handling the contrast and highlight rolloff for my project as a whole, including the DNGs. IMHO i do this all the time with various footage, not least because it's easier to match different cameras but mostly because that IPP2 mapping is really nice. Whilst i'm sure you can massage your highlights to roll off softly, it makes more sense for me to push footage through the same pipeline. Take some footage and try. When you push the exposure underneath IPP2 mapping the results look natural and the colours and saturation exposes 'properly' Turn it off and then you're in the land of saturated highlights and all sorts of oddness that you have to deal with manually. This is not a fault of the footage but the workflow. Running any baked codec makes this more difficult - the success of this approach is based on the source being linear and natural. As i say the fp is like an old cine camera, the bells and whistles are minimal but if you're happy manual everything i think it can produce lovely images and it's so quick to pull out of a bag. If the above doesn't make sense let me know and i'll try to put together a sample. Cheers Paul insta: paul.inventome

I succumbed and bought one. I will test more fully over the next week. Ergonomically from a stills view it's very much a urgh. No EVF makes life very difficult for me but i do have the VF on order so maybe that will change things. Cine mode. DNG. It's heaven. This is all you need from a camera. I've side by sided UHD 8bit onto SDXC vs A7sII UHD Slog2/Sgamut and there's no joke. It's almost comical. The low end and the highlights are literally playing in different ballparks. What crushes the A7sII footage is the compression. Simple as that. So that 8 bit UHD is remarkably good. I'm pushing and pulling it and comparing to the same thing shot FHD in 12 bit and it's incredibly robust - so much more than it should be. Over the next week i'll push and pull properly. I got it as I needed a lightweight B cam to my Red for a shoot - so i need to intercut and i'll be finding it's comfort zones side by side with everything. So far the best resolve post in in ACES. My fear with going into any 709 space is that the camera native spectral response will be outside of 709. All Sony sensors push red way out and it's easy to see with bright red subjects. If you don't debayer into a larger colourspace then those reds get clipped or mushed into gamut. I don't know enough about DNG support in Resolve but visually into ACES appears much better. The only other valid option i think is Linear in, certainly none of the BMD Presets as they're for very different sensors. Cheers Paul

I really rate the Sigma colour profiles. They have carried over some Foveon skills into this image processor. The standard profile looks very natural, and the main thing Vivid does is give you a warmer look, a more Canon-like look - rather than just increasing the saturation of standard. Uniquely you can dial up and down a profile overall from -5 to +5, blending with standard at -5 and increasing the difference at +5 The teal & orange "Hollywood" profile is not overdone and nicer than the cinema profile. The cinema profile suits very specific shots. The T&O looks good on almost everything. Beautiful. Although there is not yet a LOG profile, the Sigma Fp product manager is from Samsung - I don't expect their run of firmware updates to hold back on new features!! NX1 owners will know what I am talking about! The nod to Magic Lantern with 8bit Cinema DNG is as much a statement of intent, as it is a beautiful image. I am in love with this camera.