Leaderboard

Yes I'm talking shooting in 8 bit 709. When I mentioned log I meant 10-12 bit. I was saying even though the master is 709 you can potentially make 10 bit log better looking than a baked in 709 profile. For instance the emotive color lut looks nicer than the 709 profiles out of most cameras straight off the card.

I'll answer it for you and I've used the A7s3 and FX6 but not the A7IV. Both cameras have heavily processed shadows that ruin the image. The A7s3 and FX3 are superior because you can shoot RAW externally and bypass the processing. Dynamic range isn't useful when it's being ruined by noise reduction. The fx30 has much less processing at the lower native ISOs and would be my choice over either of those cameras. Or get a Nikon Z8.

This strategy might've worked at the onset of the DSLR revolution when there was still a lot of room for cam improvement around essential features. But given where we're at with cam tech and needing for very little to tell a fantastic story - that is no longer the case. Right now, we actually seem to be arriving at a point where AI will disrupt our dependency - not just on using cameras to capture the world - but on the idea that we ALWAYS need cams/audio devices to tell visual/auditory stories that can 'authentically' capture our real world. That last part to me is one of the big things being blurred/contested. Either way, if you play it out, this particular type of subscription-based strategy will likely only work/make sense for large media companies, who for legal/tax reasons, do not buy gear from the used market. As someone who works for a large media corporation, what I am seeing/hearing first/second hand, is an increased interest in PTZ cams, along with AI apps that can cover multi-cam switching duties (a quick google search showed me one by CognitiveMill). In that case I can definitely see the subscription model working, bcuz PTZ's (from what I can tell) require no camera people per se - moreso tech support people who make sure these PTZ's are ready to go for any given multi-platform show, on any given day, and are on standby to troubleshoot any daily issues that come up. So in a case like that I definitely see the subscription model working - albeit at the expense of the loss/shrinking of jobs/shifts for camera people, etc.

I think this entire line of thinking is a product of the online camera ecosystem - it is based on the idea that cameras can be evaluated separately to them being used. It's designed to make you buy the latest stuff. It makes as much sense as having forums devoted to discussing hammers, evaluating their shapes, the materials in the handle, the hardness of the metal, etc, but without talking about using them to build something.

All good points, but perhaps most significantly, it has a cooling fan..... in something approaching the size of an action camera. Sony, etc, have no excuses.

It's partly a theoretical point, but I'm not actually sure this has to be the case. It's definitely not the case if you're comparing 709 8-bit vs LOG 8-bit, as LOG 8-bit can be so fragile that you can't even make nice images if you don't need to change WB or exposure at all. The missing piece (and why I said "I'm not sure this has to be the case") is having the colour management to convert back from 709 into something where WB and Exposure adjustments will be made proportionally to the image (ie, like they were done in-camera). I've done a lot of work with the GX85, as I'm sure you've seen, and am still planning on doing more, and I got quite good results with the Gamma wheel when the image was in 709, and using the WB and Offset controls when I'd done a CST to a LOG space (in my case using DWG/DI in Resolve). The reasons that I suggest this are that: when shooting 8-bit there is far more data in the saturation, so the impacts of quantisation are much less when grading the final image to have a normal level of saturation when shooting 8-bit the image SOOC is much closer to the final image in terms of the gamma curve, so you're not stretching those bits that much further apart than they already are, whereas 8-bit LOG needs a lot of additional contrast to be added Of course, the ultimate is having 10-bit HLG, which has full 709 levels of saturation, has a gamma curve much closer to a 709-style output but still retains all the DR from the camera, and it has all the benefits of 10-bit. Once again, HLG isn't a standard so the conversion is a challenge, but I've found that interpreting it as either Rec2020 or Rec2100 works pretty well. I'm currently programming my own grading tool in DCTL for Resolve and my main aim is to incorporate the tools that I'll need to grade 709 images, considering that the GX85 is now my main focus and it's the one that is hardest to get right with the existing tools. Once I have a working prototype I'll be filming my rec709 WB/exposure tests again (with skintones this time) and will update the other thread.

The reality is if you lift the shadows in both Z9 and A1 "uncompressed" raw images, at base ISO, you get different results. If you do demosaicing on A1 images, and apply temporal NR, you get even more different result. If Nikon ditch the NRAW, its probably related to license costs, not the quality of the codec.

True latitude tests are the best indicator. With firmware 3.0 the Z9/Z8 does peform incredibly well and like you said bests the Venice 2 which is crazy. The Venice 2 captures 16 bit linear RAW which I would imagine gives you a much beefier file to work with. That said 8.2k 12 bit RAW with that kind of latitude is more than enough for any application. One of the biggest draws of the Z8/Z9 for me is the NRAW, Prores RAW, Prores, and H265 options all in camera. Pretty much can fit to any workflow in any NLE without needing to transcode. If they actually put REDraw that would be awesome for possible compression options. No Opengate square aspect ratio options for anamorphic but hey you can't get everything. I appreciate Nikon's new move of not holding back. Feels like Lumix until recently where they seem to put out the same thing over and over again.

The big difference is that when Nikon Nraw came out, their was no real good workflow. Their is actually a big DR difference between Nikon h265 and Nraw, because Nikon has been very conservative in the Nlog which is quite contrasty. CINED today has a nice set of DR test of the different cameras. And as Nikon featured very low in the Synthetic DR test with Xyla chart and Imatest. It shines in the truer real life latitude test. In their the Z9 is the better than every Sony camera by at least half if not 1 stop better DR. +4 stop above and - 5 stop lower. Even better than the Venice 2!!! Which is at least 1 stop lower. I think Sony perhaps focused on speed of the sensor, 3 ms. Because their are other Sony cameras that look better. The VV Red Raptor was half to a stop better and this test really show how the Alexa's are better, with at least 1,5 stop higher for the traditional Alexa and at least 3!!! for the Alexa 35.

https://www.eoshd.com/news/is-n-raw-real-raw-nikon-z9-under-the-spotlight-at-eoshd/ Generelly when greatly underexposed RAW looks better than H265. You usually get weird compression artifacts and blotchy looking texture with more compressed codecs. Noise Reduction can reduce noise but nice texture is usually a sign of a better sensor with more dynamic range. That said there are other reasons to shooting RAW like color information which would be the main draw for me. The Z8/Z9 also have Prores which looks quite nice.

Dunno what tests those were, but I've shot in all formats on my Z9s, and N-RAW is definitely better than H265. More latitude, less/no NR, less/no sharpening, etc. Not to mention, of course, the freedom to change WB and exposure in Resolve in post.

I agree - Sony will be doing image processing before the H.265 encoding (e.g. noise suppression, de-Bayering, sharpening etc.), whereas you might expect less of that happening with N-RAW - isn't it meant to be raw sensor data, warts and all? H.265 is a sophisticated codec, so I'm not that surprised 4:2:2 10-bit 8k video at 500Mbps from the A1 looks really good, especially on a static image like Andrew used in the N-RAW vs H.265 vs CDNG comparison article.

Half of the shots in this video I shot are in 8-bit rec709 but graded in post. Learn your gear and 8 bit is just fine.

Kinda, sorta, but not really. Those are examples of one-off costs to unlock features permanently within the product, whether it stays with the original owner is sold off. Imagine having to pay monthly to have V-log in your GH5. Or pay Sony monthly to have shutter angle in your FX3. I'm actually OK sometimes paying for a firmware update past a certain point in the development cycle. It's logically how some manufacturers can recoup development costs on older tech they've moved on from. But, a subscription??? No way for me.

I legitimately think that the consumers will eventually abandon any manufacturer that tries this. And, if they all try it together, I see a mass revolt against new models and perhaps even a movement to “older” cameras.

I recently bought a new treadmill and was amazed that the high-end ones required a subscription model. I wouldn't be averse to buying a GX85 updated firmware, but to buy and re-buy the damned thing over and over again is ridiculous. Yet another reason to snap out of the specifications trance that everyone seems to be in and focus on making better videos, rather than making the same videos with better spec'd equipment.

You can't really go wrong with both systems. Today Z8 is probably the best bang for the bucks. I shoot with R5 and R5c since the release I'm very happy, you can search my posts here tons of discussion. R5 overheating is a thing of the past, this summer I was shooting under the sun 8k 25 RAW with on top an iphone 13 pro max in 4k... and the iphone shut down due to overheating and the R5 kept going... Having said this I think we will se a new R5 early next year as is now more than 3.5 years old.... so not the best moment to buy it. I think R1 will also show up in first half but who knows. R3 is an amazing camera but I don't want to go back to 24mpix and non 8k video. My preferred one is the R5c but once you decide Nikon vs Canon we can go deeper in the differences. Canon has some unique zooms that you may find interesting for your job: RF 24-105 2.8 (optional power zoom) with one lens you maybe able to cover most of your need. RF 28-70 2.0, I love this lens, no more primes to carry around, switching lens, etc. Sold all my primes other than a el cheapo 16 2.8. RF 70-200 2.8, some love it some not due that is an extending design, but is super small and light weight, I use mine on gimbal quite a bit. RF 100-300 2.8 cost a fortune but is great for sports. With two super expensive lenses and a 1 TC you can cover almost everything 24-105 2.8 100-300 2.8 If you even plan to acquire or rent cinema cameras, canon RF mount lenses may be a better choice than Z lenses as both Canon and RED have, and will have cinema camera with this mount.