Leaderboard

Wrong. There are plenty of examples of overclocking various sensors over the years. You can find them using a little-known research tool called "google." You might try that in the future before responding. Just like a computer, overclocking a sensor can lead to increased power consumption, increased heat (leading to more noise), and instability. Here's one example. https://wiki.edgertronic.com/wiki/Overclock Increased power consumption and heat are hard to deal with in a hybrid camera body which takes a single fairly small battery and has no fan. They're easier to deal with on a larger camera with integrated cooling fan and a v-mount battery (judging by the pictures, the camera uses them natively).

..or Gareth Edwrds who shot the Creator on an FX3. But I agree the cinema world is super conservative with ARRI sitting firmly on top. TV, docu & indie is a more crowded market but there are big players: RED, BM, Canon C & Sony FX. I'm not sure who the target of this Fuji Eterna will be, its gotta be super niche. It's kind of the camera nobody asked for. Medium format sounds great but if you're going to have poor rolling shutter with razor thin DoF plus huge lenses, I don't see many applications where this would warrant such an investment. I've said this a while ago, but my dream for Fuji is that they revive their old school Fujica system with hand grip a la Bolex. Modernise it with pro I/O and an EVF/flip screen but keep the form factor and essence. Place the XH2S sensor with built-in cooling and an E-ND. It could even be vertical sensor default and it would switch if you rotate 90 degrees. That might make people cringe but the camera would be a hit in wide segments (think X100 craze). And if anyone can go quirky/retro/legacy its Fuji X:

While I agree to an extant for Red, Arri is in a whole separate universe and pretty much untouchable in my opinion. For large productions they don’t even bother looking at other cameras. There are just so many other factors at play when making a movie so a lot of times they don’t want to mess with any untested new stuff. Playing it safe and choosing the tried and true camera system that “everyone else uses” is the norm. Once in a while someone will get creative and use something interesting for a specific look or to achieve a particular effect. Alex Garland in Civil War for example and his choice of the Ronin 4D for some of the shots…

Right wingers has X, liberals have Threads and BlueSky. Maybe we're heading for a situation where there is a film industry for conservatives and another film industry for liberals.

https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/11/final-cut-pro-11-begins-a-new-chapter-for-video-editing-on-mac/ Looks like it's a free update for FCPX users. It will be a while before I risk the upgrade, haha

Yeah. I have a feeling the next gen of BMD stuff will begin making the “big dogs” like Arri and Red more than a little concerned. Even simple iterations on the Pyxis and the new RGBW LF Ursa will be devastating. I’m primarily eyeing the impact on classic-type Alexa pricing though! If I can snag one with open gate for around $4k I’ll be a happy camper. The bottom has to drop out eventually!

The primary question in my mind is this: with extra attention to cooling, can they in any way get full sensor read-out at 24p? Rolling shutter will be what it will be, but if they can at least pull that off, it will have a sensor size leg-up on basically every digital cinema camera. If it’s still tapped out at the stills body’s readout options, it’s a bit underwhelming… unless the price is a surprise somewhere decently south of $10K. Either way, I have high hopes for a Fuji 44X33mm video mode in the next 2-3 years. I talked to a rep and was told “not this cycle” (aka the MKII,) but that they’re working on it. They know people want it. Peak cine camera for Fuji would undoubtedly be a 44X33mm full readout X-Trans sensor, but a lot of things would have to go correctly (first and foremost this Eterna) for that to ever happen. I’m just glad they’re in the cine game. We need more players, and I like their ethos. Arri-esque in some ways, with their film stock background always influencing their image flavor. The same cannot be said for Red, BMD, Canon, Sony, or Panasonic.

Not sure. I’m guessing the wheel might be a mirror of the servo zoom control or assignable to focus. Although, with the camera hidden inside a Perspex box and not exactly looking particularly finished, I could also equally speculate that it is the steam controller for an internal coffee machine hidden behind a secret cover! No, I didn’t see him. The Sigma booth was predominantly a very patient and polite man with a cart full of lenses putting them on cameras for people to test so I didn’t linger there long enough. The Nikon booth was very busy though with them doing presentations about the RED lut stuff whilst the RED booth next to them was a lot about using their cameras in broadcast situations with box lenses etc Nikon were showing their prototype servo zoom lens but also showing RED Kimodos with F Mount lenses. I was quite intrigued by the latter at first glance thinking they’d produced some sort of adapter but they were just using a dumb 3rd party F-RF adapter. You’d think that through the acquisition of RED they’d make their own smart adapter now they had both parts of the puzzle but who knows the legalities of the deal RED had with Canon that would prevent that. I doubt it sits well with Nikon to have that situation last longer than necessary and I wonder whether we might see the inevitable Z mount version of the Komodo be a Nikon branded product.

The X-H2s is a beast. Going to finally build mine up this X-Mas into a mini Cine camera with a Cineback and some other goodies. X-H2s is $1,400 US now on the used market and it’s a lot of camera for that price.

There's the scan and then there's the film as has been noted above. I remember in the early thousands being told by an emeritus prof in astronomy that they were finding digital was sharper than film. These were low resolution dgital sensors but worked better in low photon capturing. Remember, digital doesn't suffer from failure of reciprocity. I was shocked at the time. My guess is today, above 100 iso, digital is better than s35 at 1080p for resolution on a sensor without an OLPF. However, digital colour is not as rich generally and much worse on a standard sony sensor. Dynamic range is better on film even if just because it has a proper toe and shoulder. There I said it.

Why not just get a used EOS R5 and keep using whatever lenses you already own? 45 megapixel stills and decent video, as long as you're not rolling super long takes. Pair it with some of the plastic Canon RF consumer lenses and you'll have something that's just about as pocketable as many other cameras. You can find them used for right around $2k now too.

Yeah the original film probably has more resolution than what you're seeing in the final production today. That being said, I think we're long past the argument that film has any technical advantage over digital. It's a look, one that can be nearly replicated in post with the right technicians to perfection, or a look that can be partially copied while still retaining some of the advantages of digital. I think that's the future right there for most projects personally. I really have very little interest in perfectly replicating the "film look" in many of my projects. I bring in some of the characteristics of film in my grading, but leave out others. This "hybrid" look is what we're seeing in a lot of modern films and such and I think it's working really well.

Live from the exhibition floor… Well, it’s here but as expected it’s in a Perspex case making touching it impossible and the reflections and dim environment not exactly easy to get a decent picture of it especially on my ageing iPhone. What I can confirm though which Is what everyone wants to know is that it does have internal ND.

Does anybody make the argument that film has higher resolution than digital? In full frame 35mm photo terms, I thought it was generally accepted that 24 megapixels or so was equal to (or greater than) the resolution of most film. That means 6k is closer to Vista Vision. There are a few exceptions that people will cherry pick to show it - but if using a high-quality film scanner with around 4,000dpi resolution (4000x6000 - 24 megapixels) - and if using a glass carrier to keep the negative perfectly flat, the grain on almost any film stock is easily visible at 100%. If using ISO 400 or above, it's even more obvious. With that in mind, the actual resolution of even a very modern 35mm film stock (academy) is about 8 megapixels at 4,000 dpi - so 4k. But even with a fully digital pipeline, I'll choose my C70 (4K S35) over my EOS R5 (8K FF) almost every time. Resolution is far from the most important quality of an image and there are plenty of reasons (including much better highlight rolloff) that people shoot on film. Plus if we're talking cinema, it might surprise you how many theaters are still using 2K projectors, rendering the capture resolution even more moot. 😄

I just re-bought one 🤑 I've had regrets ever since I sold mine because despite a couple of compromises (ergos not the best, especially without a grip and it could be smaller, but that is about it), it is one of my favourite cameras of all time. I have a policy which is if it does not have a place in my life/work, it doesn't exist. I originally bought it as both a personal camera and as a work workhorse with a trio of adapted e Mount zooms, but had too many niggly issues with the edit on the files due to the in camera corrections not being available as they are with a native Sony camera. So 'swapped' it for an A7RV which arguably is a more capable camera. It's just not as fun, or quite as good in low light, or for my video needs. The Sony I don't use for video anyway and my rationale to buy this back was: I like Sony for stills, but not for video. I like Lumix for video, but not for stills. The above has been my combo this year with 3x Lumix and 1x Sony. I just off-loaded 1x S5ii because it was overkill having 3x video units. I'm about to offload another and going for a 'hybrid' unit instead, ie, 1x pure stills = Sony A7RV + 1x pure video = Lumix S5ii + 1x hybrid = Nikon Zf. So the Zf will now offer me the following: A. Personal camera with 40mm f2 SE lens. Perfect combo but as above, ideally if the body was a little smaller, but it isn't but very well balanced and is an utter joy to otherwise use. B. Low light stills for work, ie, this combo is better than my 61mp Sony with f2.8 lens, so fills a need. C. Paired with adapted 70-180mm f2.8 compared with S5ii with Lumix 70-200mm f4, offers me a smaller and lighter static combo with better low light capability. I've always said I'd rather have everything within one brand but my 2 brand/zero cross-compatibility approach has been fine this year and the fact that the Nikon can lens share with the Sony whilst replacing a Lumix is a win for me. Ultimately, same number of bodies (3) and lenses (6) for next year, but more capable in so many ways. That's my justification anyway! Plus 37% off on Amazon UK and I snagged the last one 🤩

Maybe you are not searching enough 🙂 Not my video.