Andrew Reid

2015 sensor in 2019. Well done Canon.

This is what I get... Is it Google playing silly buggers with MacBook Retina display users?

Don't bother, I won't be wasting time reading what you have to say... And if you hijack another discussion and make it about me, you will be out with no further warning.

You seem to have an axe to grind Castorp. Maybe a previously banned member who has rejoined. Don't make every one of your posts about me, otherwise you will be out of this place faster than you can type Anthropomorphising.

DPReview say the GFX 100 is giving the best image they've ever tested... I'd say the S1R does even better in Pixel Shift mode https://***URL removed***/news/6009498706/fujifilm-gfx100-sets-new-benchmark-in-our-studio-scene Impressive stuff from Panasonic to better the resolving power of 100 megapixel medium format.

Ok, right. Hopefully, we can be on the topic of a certain Blackmagic camera from this point onwards... Plenty to talk about!

I only had the option for 1080p for it on YouTube. Perhaps Gunpowder sabotaged it after we degendered him?

It's hard to tell a dog's gender from the face.

Sony will start a web store instead.

Sounds promising. China giving South Korea some real competition in display market...

Grant Petty has nothing to do with the decisions made in PR in Knutsford. And to be fair to Blackmagic, said PR team were apologetic afterwards and in favour of reaching out. I believe it would be a very constructive relationship if they genuinely put some effort in. JB's rudeness on here is legendary, but it's in the past as far as I'm concerned, we as a community moved on from him. Hook contributed straight forward answers and good info. There are far more viewers than contributors in this post. How about some more constructive contributors to satisfy that audience of 1 million who have tuned in? Those people who are posting good info is what this thread and indeed whole forum are about. The bitching should always take a backseat.

How's it better than OLED?

Yes it would. But main purpose is to have voters focusing on the image and cinematography, rather than voting for their favourite camera!

Smartphones are the worst thing that have ever happened to cinema... And 40% our audience! But I do recognise what this test was primarily about... The overall colours and look of the lens. These can be judged from a smartphone. But if the camera sensor and codec is levelled out by YouTube and tiny smartphones, it doesn't mean to say they don't matter! I think the Pocket 4K's advantages were levelled flat, raised to the ground in fact, by YouTube compression & smartphone viewers voting... But does that mean I will stop using it for the incredible images vs something less capable? Nah.

Yes so am I. Just remember to reveal just the VIDEO first. Then reveal the EQUIPMENT at the next stage of the competition after votes are counted.

So would I. Good job I make my films primarily for me, not for some sucker who can't be arsed to watch them properly I'd also say that the kind of compression and mush we see in the otherwise lovely lake scene, isn't what any of us go into this passion for. I'd go as far as to say everyone here loves the look of film and cinema. We all have our favourite movies and cinematographers. If someone on YouTube, or some client, or some audience members can't get off their smartphone to appreciate our art, why do we owe it to them to dumb down our love of images?Why should we start believing that none of what we love matters any more? Why should we stop demanding more from our equipment and dumb down our craft? Why should we think that none of this technological progress matters, just because of a lazy audience, or a clueless clientele? In the end we all had fun with this test and it reveals something very interesting, but I'll continue to revel in image quality for sake of my own interests and art, even if it doesn't matter to a smartphone viewer on YouTube.

What about the Retina display YT laptop audience? Try using a MacBook Pro for a month and then switch to a 1080p PC laptop. Difference is enormous. I'd say 4K matters more at these kind of close viewing distances than it does in the cinema.

Not really in the spirit of the rules, as it's still a $250 camera as far as the video quality goes and usual, normal price. If you find it fully working for under $200 then go for it.

The biggest mystery of all is how you got Gunpowder to sit still and look into the camera for 10 minutes

Just as humans evolved from the primeval swamp, our replacements have to start somewhere.

I've had my run-ins with RED I the past so can't even comment unfortunately!

The results are flat out hilarious I think YouTube compression killed the Blackmagic. It looked like a 2010 H.264 camera to me. I thought @Mattias Burling was actually testing some $200 cameras for the competition Amazed to see the Olympus PEN F do well. It's a good stills camera, I wouldn't have it as my main video one though... Codec is mush and so is the image! I think in this test people reacted to the light, colour grade, and lens, whereas the sensor and codec were all made to look equally bad. However in other lighting and lensing situations which people come up against in the real world all the time, a better sensor and codec would have taken a HUGE lead over the Olympus PEN F. Had one of the scenes been in low light for example, or made use of a full frame lens with particularly special rendering. In the end I totally agree with Mattias that the light and lens are the most important things, and that NDs can cause whacked colour issues, reflection issues and changes in colour temperature as well... But that seems to go against the "specs don't matter" message as clearly a lens matters and is part of the specs of your kit, and a good ND matters as well as colour science specs and how capable the white balance system is. Some of the shots were waaaay too cool looking vs others in the blind test which is partly why I voted against some and for others. I also agree with Mattias when it comes to the fact people have their own uses for kit, and reasons for preferring one image over another. It's very subjective, which is why pixel peeping and chart testing alone is a total waste of time... I find tests like this WAAAY more enjoyable, and it reminded me of the Zacuto Shootout from way back. Fun stuff. Whilst I wait for the $200 challenge videos to come in, I may do a similar blind test myself but I want to test a greater mix of gear in mine, including some REAL lemons that people long forgot about for video. I'd like to have each candidate a separate camera, and to show the results on Vimeo where compression isn't such a heavy leveller. PS... It surprised me J & I got the most votes even though it was quite an even spread. Wouldn't have chosen them myself and I don't think a single person on EOSHD forums did?! Maybe YouTube voters are just a bit weird. Here's another thought. When shown a sequence of images, people react to the differences between the images. So if you show a neutral looking colour grade after one which is really fucked up and orange, obviously people will pick the neutral one. But if you show the neutral one after a nice saturated but film like, slightly warm grade, people might think it was boring. So by placing same image after different images, the same image (neutral) would get different votes. Diving deep into The Matrix now, I know...

Correct! You can also use fixed lens or compact type cameras.

Some incorrect speculation there X-T3 is quite a bit better than the NX1 in low light but the NX1 has a lot of good information in an underexposed image. If you keep the ISO at 800 and rarely go higher then NX1 is ok (if you don't mind bringing up the underexposed image) but still not X-T3 level clean You should never shoot ISO 3200 or above on the NX1. Treat it like film. The X-T3 is happier at ISO 3200 and 6400, even 12,800. But the Z6 (and Panasonic S1) are another step up in low light. Also the Z mount is anything but ass backwards. It's actually one of the most versatile full frame mounts due to the very short flange of just 16mm and very large diameter. 16mm is incredibly short and it matters. Just 2mm is what make it even more adaptable than Sony E-mount, predominantly because E-mount adapters and lenses now go on Z mount. This will never happen with EOS R mount or L mount, or any other mount for that matter unless flange distance is less than 18mm

Closest direct replacement for NX1 is the Fuji X-H1 or X-T3 / X-T30. Very good AF on all especially the X-T3 and X-T30. AF on the Z6 is very good. Occasionally though, it trips up. But I rate it at least as good as NX1 overall, if not actually even better.