Andrew Reid

I would get a Z8 now, it has all the same advantages but a smaller and lighter body! I am also interested in the 35-150mm but in the past have usually always come back to a bunch of smaller and lighter primes. The main concern about the zooms is they don't really have the character and beautiful rendering of the best primes. That will give you another 23 years to consider camera choices then 🙂

That's not bad, the 14-140mm is very handy, certainly smaller than the 28-280mm full frame equivalent 😉 The only other alternative is to go all out with the GFX 100 and put some cheap Sigma from 1976 on it! If the GH7 turns up whilst you're over there, can you give that a go. And my lens tip of the month is the Olympus OM 50mm F1.4 G.Zukio which has the rendering of the Canon Dream Lens. Really is the closest you can get without getting the real thing.

Did he give you the same look the Berlin camera store gives me when I go in to rummage through their 5 euro trash lenses bucket? If you come across any red or gold GH1 in map camera I would encourage you to splash out!! They are fun, especially with an F0.95 Voigtlander You can recreate my Tokyo film with it, just be sure to apply the hack to make it true 24p and English menus!

I relinquished my EOS R3 due to the lenses situation. Couldn't justify the expense for RF stuff which had no discernible advantage over my EF lenses in terms of character or size / weight. The problem is that the R3 didn't work particularly well with adapters either. The IBIS doesn't like it, and there are fewer choices of adapters compared to Sony E-mount. No Leica autofocus adapter, no C-mount. These two I use even more than my EF adapters these days. (You may wonder about C-mount Super 16mm on full frame as in why bother, but the Z9 has a 2.3x crop mode in 120fps and the Sony a1 has 4K 2x crop mode, and Sigma Fp-L 2.5x 4K or 2x 4.8K Cinema DNG RAW whereas none of these things exist on any Canon R camera). The Z9 was the next stop but that too fails on the native lenses front. Too big, too expensive, too charmless. Z-mount is however more flexible than RF and it has the lovely Megadap E-mount adapter for Sony E-mount native lenses. So the lack of third party Sigma/Tamron lenses on RF is not the only problem, it is the lack of adapters and piss poor IBIS performance with my Leica M / Canon FD / Contax Zeiss collection too.

This came out in April 2023 so after The Creator had finished shooting. Also you can already do the desqueeze on the Atomos. There is no 4:3 or 3:2 mode on the FX3, and using a 2x anamorphic on DCI 17:9 or 16:9 doesn't give you the correct aspect ratio for IMAX. So did they crop the sides off, I wonder. The other thing which doesn't stack up is that the FX3 shoots 23.976p, and not true 24p until that April firmware update. Another thing which makes it unsuited to IMAX or cinema. So maybe they had 'special' units from Sony which did all this and more, way before any firmware update. I bet Timecode was a struggle as well.

Something just doesn't stack up about the anamorphic The FX3 has no anamorphic aspect ratios compatible with the use of 2x cinema anamorphic lenses. It is only DCI and 16:9. From https://www.newsshooter.com/2021/02/24/sony-fx3-announced/ "No anamorphic" Just like the FX9, FX6, and a7S III, the FX3 isn’t capable of recording in any anamorphic modes. That is reserved for the VENICE. "Below is what the camera is capable of outputting over HDMI:" Raw 16-Bit 4.2K (4264 x 2408) up to 59.94p 4:2:2 10-Bit UHD 4K (3840 x 2160) at 23.976p/25p/29.97p/50p/59.94p Full HD (1920 x 1080) at 23.976p/50p/59.94p Full HD (1920 x 1080) at 50i/59.94i 4:2:0 8-Bit UHD 4K (3840 x 2160) at 23.976p/25p/29.97p/50p/59.94p Full HD (1920 x 1080) at 23.976p/50p/59.94p Full HD (1920 x 1080) at 50i/59.94i Did something change and I missed it? Firmware update? Maybe Sony gave them one early?

I'm interested to see it too, will probably go this week in Berlin. The camera did have the advantage of clean ISO 12,800 which allowed them to use more natural light on location and keep everything looking quite real, without huge lighting rigs needing to follow them around like a ball on chain. How did the lenses hold up? Everything from shampoo commercials to music videos seem to be shot on anamorphic these days, and seemingly by people who don't know what they're doing, because a smudgy anamorphic often doesn't suit the advertising content they're making, it should look much cleaner. I'm beginning to feel the look is being devalued by overuse (and wrong use) so hopefully in The Creator they're going for the Blade Runner look and not just using them for fashion purposes!

16bit RAW -> ProRes RAW then? That is probably one of the main reasons it holds up so well with decent colour science as the RAW will pretty much bypass Sony's colour science in-camera. Do you know if the FX3 supported open gate or 4:3 anamorphic mode (AFAIK they added anamorphic mode, desqueeze only later) https://www.dpreview.com/news/2260102234/sony-adds-dci-4k-24-and-anamorphic-support-to-fx3-and-fx30 Yeah maybe, although Canon has plenty of traction in rental, broadcast and in videography they're not up there with Sony, ARRI and RED at the top end of filmmaking. C700 was a big failure.

Ah yes the democratic filmmaking movement of an $80m budget! The FX3 on this film is interesting but no revolution. His main innovation (Edwards) is in CGI, he was doing it for a long time in TV at the BBC and knows how to get decent results with less people, less money. I will be interested to see how the FX3 image holds up on an IMAX screen as well. I can't seem to find anywhere confirmation of whether they shot 16bit raw to the Atomos or the internal codec? As the form factor of the FX3 as they rigged it up with wireless FF, big battery, external recorder, cine lens, matte box is a moot point. Smallest body they could find, but for no real utility. In terms of the image, a number of alternatives to the FX3 exist too. The S1H has better colour science and better resolution. The Sony a1 has better resolution and is better for run & gun bare bones indie filmmaking due to the built in EVF and the 8K 520Mb/s internal codec. The GFX 100 II would have got closer to the aesthetics of 65mm for IMAX and the Nikon Z9 would have looked great with internal RAW and again more resolution to play with than the 12 megapixel 4K on the FX3. Was the movie shot anamorphic? How did they cope with the FX3's lack of anamorphic / open gate mode prior to the April 2023 firmware update?

I am kinda trying to do the opposite. Want it to display as LOG, not HDR with tone mapping. It does look washed out in terms of colour space, but not in terms of gamma. Remember the Panasonic S1 and it had Hybrid LOG Gamma but no V-LOG? You could simply grade the Hybrid LOG Gamma as if it were C-LOG or something. Now you can't because all the NLEs pick up the metadata and handle it as HDR at 1000 nits! Must be a way to handle it as LOG instead?

Nice results Does anyone know what the right combination of settings are in Resolve to get Dolby Vision HDR 4K footage from the older iPhones from 12 through 14 to display as HLG in Resolve without the Dolby Vision metadata, or tone mapping applied? Just want to grade the HGL like S-LOG. Everything I've tried so far doesn't work, including setting custom colour spaces in Resolve set to Rec 2100 and Hybrid Log Gamma.

Venice II has a similar sensor but apparently not the same, as it lacks phase-detect AF pixels, and has less rolling shutter than the a1. It might be a very similar sensor just without PDAF and clocked higher for a faster readout.

No, Venice is 6K. They have apparently used the A1 sensor in the BURRITO.

Do you know what the logic is behind the A7 IV bucking the IMX naming convention with "IS"?

The ALEXA 35 is a bit more expensive. And I am sure it has Foxconn / Chinese components in there too. As do RED.

It might clear it on a Cfexpress type A card, as they are rather speedy. Unfortunately I ain't got one as they are also rather pricey. I think it can fill the buffer at such a high rate of data, 50MP 30fps RAW, due to the buffer pretty much being onboard the sensor in a 3D circuit pattern. But that does mean things slow down after so many GB of data works it way off the buffer, and through to the card. It is also rather heavy on the battery. A fun trick though and something to play with.

Just been playing with the H+ mode on the a1. This gives an open gate 8.6K compressed RAW (13bit) at 30fps for approximately 6 seconds before the buffer fills up. This is begging for a hack to turn it into an internal RAW video mode isn't it? As it stands, my hack is to simply use this mode and combine the RAW frames in Resolve. Should be an interesting thing to play with though. And it doesn't need a CFe type A card to do the 6 seconds, any half decent UHS-II SD does the job although it does take longer for the buffer to clear (around 30 seconds!) Wish it had the option for Medium and Small RAW sizes (i.e. 2K or 4K) not just the full res, then it could roll for quite a bit more than 6 seconds.

Do we need 8K? Find out why I have changed my mind here. https://www.eoshd.com/news/the-great-8k-debate-why-i-have-changed-my-mind And yes the Sigma Fp-L and Sony a1 have something to do with it 🙂

Straight off the camera, no further crop. It has the resolution to do it justice. Will shoot some Cinema DNG with it tomorrow

Leica M F1.4 lenses are small, and not soft. So they can and should be making much smaller, sharper, fast F1.4 primes!

I would target it it primarily at photographers, to get the sales going strong and wait for video people to catch on! Get the basics right... PDAF, IBIS, ND, colour, codec. Put the ND in a nice EF adapter with a clear setting, if it costs too much to put it in the camera body. Make sure it does Cinema DNG raw in 2.8K 10bit for fun (SD card) Make the LOG profile as easy to grade as C-LOG. Put a larger than 3" screen on the back, and make it 16:9 Built the body out of silver alloy, so it shines, with a wooden grip. Don't bother with the black anodising or whatever. That should separate it from the crowd!!

The RF 28-70 2.0 looks interesting, in a kind of outlier way, but it isn't really designed to replace your primes otherwise Canon would sell less primes, and we can't have that. It is much larger and heavier for example vs 50mm f1.2 EF and is not F1.2, so looks rather different. The 35mm F1.8 is a cheap asshat lens, can't really compare it. So RF is good for EF sales. I see!

F1.2 was the maximum, or F1.0 if you count the EF 50mm F1.0 F1.4 was the norm, a balanced option much smaller than F1.2 Look at the size of an EF 50 1.4 vs the F1.2, much smaller, or smaller still the Canon FD or Olympus OM 50mm F1.4 It's tiny F1.8 or F2 was for sharpness, F1.4 for portraits, softer skin, more ethereal look. Now in the mirrorless day, there's not many RF lenses at F1.4. They're either enormous F1.2, or cheap shit.

They downgraded the Billy bookcase version to an F7.1! I remember a rumour a while ago about Canon trying to buy Sigma, but being rejected. Maybe the sour grapes stem from that? Or perhaps Canon make all their money in lenses, and don't mind selling fewer cameras, if it means selling more Canon RF lenses vs Sigma RF lenses. Someone, somewhere, with a calculator, has done a sum. Unfortunately for Canon, calculators are often the death of a product line.

Some thoughts on RF lenses https://www.eoshd.com/news/leading-for-now-but-have-canon-got-it-wrong-with-rf-lenses/ Everyone loved EF, I am not sure the RF range is going down as well?