Andrew Reid

Questions for EOS R5C users... Can it shoot a full range of codecs and video in stills mode, like an EOS R5, or do you always have to be in the Cinema EOS mode to get 8K, 4K, etc.? Do you miss IBIS, or not so much and how's the electronic stabilisation? Does it have 10bit H.265 at 50Mbit/s in 4K for tiny file sizes? I've never used one but the more it comes down in price the more tempted I am

We are too harsh on the little S9, it has very good dynamic range in V-LOG and the RAW stills only have 1 stop less dynamic range which you only notice if you're grading for the HDR puke look. The technical facts are interesting in themselves but the creative look of a camera is another matter, and the S9 is like a shrunk down S1H for cheap... A lot to like creatively about it. The most interesting thing for me about these results is to look at what sensor designs were most clever. Samsung with that NX1 was so far ahead of 2014 when it came out, to have such wide DR and clean shadows on a 28 megapixel crop sensor from the earlier 2010s is just an amazing achievement.

Not really with CMOS. There is with CCD though. This is showing the raw sensor performance.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr144_0=panasonic_dcs9&attr144_1=sony_a9&attr146_0=100_5&attr146_1=100_5&attr177_0=on&attr177_1=efc&attr404_1=1&normalization=full&widget=938&x=0.3283158193694973&y=0.27216529765433156 Some interesting results in DPReview's chart which is tucked away at this URL and not spoken about very often There's also an ISO invariance one but the RAW dynamic range is the most interesting Some fun results can be had... The Samsung NX1 has more dynamic range than a Sony a9. (Look at +5ev!) The GH6 was a big step back for RAW dynamic range in stills, vs GH5 The humble A7 III is surprisingly good, up there with the best (Nikon D850 and Pentax K-1 Mark II) And check out the Nikon Zf C vs X-H2S... Which would you think would win out of those, the cheap piece of crap that inherited the D500's sensor or the state of the art X-H2S designed for low light and latest sensor fabrication tech? The gap is massive!! Zf C wins by a mile! Obviously the cameras which have a faster sensor readout suffer, and so do ones which only have an E-shutter like the Lumix S9. Still... Interesting to see how huge the differences are when you really go digging. Finally... Look at the GFX 100 and it's fixed pattern noise in shadows at +5 stops compared to the clean and detailed Zf C. APS-C beating a medium format camera for dynamic range? Yep

Some good reviews by Connor here... Sold his R6 II for the a7R V... I've yet to try the Zf... Time to get one might be when they put the Z6 III internals in it?

A7RV is an interesting one. It has the new screen design which is fantastic. Gets it out the way of the ports too. Fantastic EVF, very good IBIS and latest AI AF The ergonomics are superior to the a1 and a7 iv, and I really rate that 60mp sensor (similar to Sigma Fp-L and Leica SL3). You could argue it is superior to the a1 if you don't need 4K120fps, as the binned 4K quality is actually a tad better than the a1 with less moire! Where it is lacking by comparison to that beast is rolling shutter performance especially in 8K, and the top-bitrate 500Mbit 10bit 422 8K mode which the a1 got with a firmware update. But for 4K, stills, 60p and ergonomics it's a winner.

I've never been a cinema camera shooter, I am mirrorless all the way and stills too.

Really the images are all very similar, you're just getting different ergonomics and mounts. Even at just 50Mbit/s or 100Mbit/s H265 (like a Samsung NX1!), the image on these modern cameras in 10bit LOG holds up well against RAW at many many times the data rate. We underestimate H.265 A7 IV for most people is the ultimate 4K image for the price (and oversampled from 7K!), if you don't mind the rolling shutter. The S1H is smoother looking on fine detail thanks to the AA filter, but it's a chonky boy in comparison and of course for those who need autofocus a complete no-go. The C70, I would not be as interested in... purely because it isn't full frame, but 90% of my lenses are. Shout out to the humble Sigma FP-L... If you want the smallest possible thing to plonk on a tripod and do its best Alexa imitation, you can't beat the 4K Cinema DNG goodness on that... Just make sure you put it in oversampling mode (1.3x crop) and if you plan on digging deep into the shadows, use an SSD.

Sharing my notes... If I were to consolidate a few cameras (I'm selling 3-4 of them) into one newer one, which would it be? My current main cameras are Fuji GFX 100 and Sony a7 IV. I sold the a1 as wasn't really using the extra resolution or speed, but mainly because of the risk of crazy depreciation now the new one is out... We'll come back to that in a moment though. I see the EOS R6 Mark II is currently on sale for 1800 euros brand new, which seems like a good deal but then you realise a used EOS R5 costs about the same now as it's 4 years old. Given the R5 does 4K/120p, internal 8K RAW, higher resolution stills, oversampled 4K from 8K, whereas the R6 Mark II is... erm... newer, maybe less overheating issues, the R5 starts to look like a better buy.... Although the R6 II has a much more convenient movie/stills switch and a proper mode dial. Main drawback of RF cameras for me is the poor performance of IBIS when used with adapters and manual focus lenses. It almost stops working entirely. Same goes for EOS R3, and the R5C lacks IBIS entirely. Now let's compare to Nikon Z6 III is 2500 euros / dollars. It is very similar to the EOS R6 Mark II in most regards but the lens mount is more flexible and you get better IBIS no matter the lens. 6K, 4K120fps (cropped?), but is it better than an EOS R5? Z8 would make more sense for me... but now we're in the 3500 euro range. It's an exciting camera but at that price, we're back at looking at a used a1 surely? E-mount for me has more going than Z. Problem is the Sony a1 used is still £3200/3800euro/dollar, so it hasn't come down much yet since the a1 II announcement... Better to wait until it has reached the 2500-3000 range, at which stage it's a no-brainer and would be my choice over everything else mentioned so far. The 8K codec internally, is a match for Canon RAW and N-RAW in my experience. The a7 IV is best bang for buck... 1400 used, for a camera with very little missing... No 4K120fps of course, and rolling shutter is higher than something like the Z6 III. 4K/60p is a crop, but I'm still more of a 24fps guy and it does that very well. A9, the original one... is about the same price. If you don't mind the lack of LOG, 10bit codec, H.265, new colour profiles and 4K/60p, the a9 is very capable especially for stills. It's the only one that has a fast enough electronic shutter for under $1500 to truly be a silent stills camera like the Z8 and Z9. Now to the latest and greatest, and we have to go to $5k-$7K realm... Doesn't seem worth it to me? The mid-range is just so good now. EOS R5 Mark II is an evolutionary update. EOS R3 doesn't do as much as a Z8 when it comes to video + IBIS issues. Z9 is trumped by the smaller and cheaper Z8 for the same spec. The A1 II and a9 III are just too crazy expensive, although really cutting edge. Which would you choose between $2k-3.5K? A7R V gets a shout?

The problem with LOG is first of all that the gamma assists are a bit rubbish. (Aside from the Panasonic S9 and cameras where you can load on a LUT and monitor with it, without resorting to some shitty external monitor) But on the more common and better specced cameras you can't do that... Nikon Z9, Z8, Sony a1, a7 IV, GFX 100, Z6 III, EOS R6 II and so on. Secondly you should never really shoot it WITHOUT a gamma assist. Contrast, tonality and light are a really important judgement in cinematography and you can't really see any of that with a very flat display. Sure you can toggle LOG profile on/off quick in the menu and judge... but doing so is a PITA every time you want to see the real contrast and lighting. The gamma assists are all quite bland looking and flat with not very much pop, I find. Then we come to the LOG profiles themselves... EOS R6 Mark II / R5 / R3 all have C-LOG3, which a lot of people complain about but I don't mind. One of the better ones and easier to grade. C-LOG2 is reserved for the Cinema EOS line. C-LOG3 is closer to the original C-LOG on the 1D C, I seem to remember. Sony a7 IV has S-LOG2 and S-LOG3, they offer the widest dynamic range of the bunch but you still have to get exposure perfect for optimal image quality. Gets noisy really fast if you under expose. N-LOG on the Nikon cameras needs the most colour correction, otherwise you have very green-olive skin. By the way, there is a very small difference in image quality between 50Mbit/s 10bit 420 H265 on the Sony a7 IV and the higher bitrate LOG formats in range of 200-500Mbit... yes even in S-LOG3! So you can save a lot of money and card space there. With standard gamma picture profiles you don't need to shoot 10bit... 8bit will look the same. People tend to overestimate higher numbers on the specs sheet. So those tips in summary: Don't shoot from a flat image off the back screen Nail exposure to get the maximum dynamic range benefit from LOG With modern codecs like H.265 in 4K/24p - don't bother with the higher bitrates in most cases, the laws of diminishing returns apply big time (Although if you're shooting 8K or high frame rates then 200-500Mbit/s is recommended) C-LOG3 is easiest to handle, with N-LOG last Hope that in-camera LUTs/monitoring becomes a common thing, it's really bad that it isn't even 12 years since LOG first came on the mirrorless camera scene.

I agree with you on this... Field testing for Q4 announcement is too early. Whatever they might be doing is at the lab prototype stage and nowhere near finished. RED is a useful brand for Nikon and they have two choices... Scrap RED's own R&D completely and bring it all over to Japan, in-house Z-mount cinema cameras... Based entirely off the back of Nikon's existing Z9 tech platform. Rip up the RF mount contract, the current sensor supply, the current supply chain all probably is obsolete compared to what Nikon is already capable of. Second choice... They take a business as normal approach with a bit of technology transfer between the two separate teams... I can't see that happening. Far better would be to keep RED around merely as a brand for Nikon's cinema products, and of course the IP in relation to RAW recording. Which is probably worth 85 mil by itself!

Very optimistic article given the current reality of the cinema camera market (clue... It's shit) Also you can't democratise what's already been democratised. And in terms of the high-end, it's ARRI, ARRI and ARRI. If Nikon want to expand the market for RED, first thing they should do is dump N-RAW in the mirrorless camera lineup and replace with REDcode. They should then decide whether they want to go after Cinema EOS market or ARRI market, it's very unlikely they'll be able to do both!

I also despise it, the form factor is terrible. Poor balance, top heavy, overcomplicated, poor battery life, unreliable, wobbly cable, you name it... And the advantage is minimal, the main use case for a rig is to make it look more fancy... in front of clueless clients.

When it comes to Sony the question is what do they invent next that moves things forward. I can't think of much that's left. And even if we go back to the 2019 vintage S1H, there's nothing particular missing from the image quality department at 6K/24p. The problem for Panasonic is that they put all those resources into the S1, S1R and S1H and then just left the market basically. It's not the way you gain market share is it? A one off attempt... The cheaper cameras (S9, S5) are all well and good but they are mainly just killing Micro Four Thirds, not so much taking sales of the A7 IV. So we have to sadly conclude that Panasonic are idiots.

I absolutely agree that we should be seeing much more progress than we are there... Seems like a bit of a cartel thing with Sony stitching up the supply side of LCDs or something. Obviously there is a need to prioritise physical controls and body size, which means fitting in a big monitor isn't easy unless you change the design concept radically. And this is where the Japanese are very reluctant to innovate. The overall design concept of mirrorless cameras is extremely static and samey.

The talk around this camera is quite bonkers out there on the internet. Complaints of it being $6.5k with a 4 year old sensor and no 8k/60p It's designed to compete with the lowly EOS R1, and it outperforms it in just about every way. It's priced to compete with the existing $6k rivals, whilst being smaller and lighter than them. It's not designed to appeal to enthusiasts in the $3.5k range or a7s III users. In terms of the spec, it's the pinnacle of what a camera can do pre-generative fakery era. It will take a complete change of concept for the a1 II to be surpassed. The only mirrorless camera that out-does it in terms of ultimate image quality and resolution is the GFX 100 II. But not in terms of speed or autofocus or sports. Meanwhile the a1 does 95% of it as well... for soon to be $2.8k-ish on eBay. What's not to like about that? Panasonic need to get those new cameras out, otherwise Sony and Nikon will really kill the market for future high-end Lumix cameras.

The cash rich working pros will buy the a1 ii and a9 iii is what I said. The not so rich working pros are better off not upgrading. As the existing models are so good, even the a7 iv.

No never tried that as don't like the Ninja hanging off a rig, you're better off just recording the 8K H265 internally as it's such a good codec, and resampling to a 4K timeline in post (with added ability to crop, etc.) The data rate is 500Mbit/s max, but it stands up to codecs in the 2500Mbit/s file size range including even Prores RAW.

Yeah possibly and they are also quite rare, seen in low quantities at the usual second hand places. The a1 prices will benefit though from the cash-rich section of the market - working pros - wanting latest and greatest a1 ii and a9 iii instead, whereas previously they had been focused on the a1 as the ultimate workhorse from Sony. I dare say they might also be migrating to the FX3 as well. And I say... buh bye, close the door behind ya 🙂

I agree best thing about the a1 II is the price of used a1, if it gets down to $2500 that is an end-game for less than the price of an a7r V. It has very few disadvantages compared to Z8... Only the 8k60fps is missing and oversampled 4K... The subsampling is ok just something to be aware of, because of the occasional moire and it changes the grain texture in low light. That 8K though... believe me when I say it's the BEST I've ever seen from any camera that small and soon to be affordable

Back to the Trump bashing... https://news.sky.com/story/prosecutors-file-to-drop-2020-presidential-election-interference-charges-against-trump-13260598 One rule for him, another for the ordinary guy of course!

A bit of Aubrey to lighten the mood

Indeed! And the reason they gave for voting... "To save democracy"

From my point of view I just think the "lesser of the two evils" stuff is an excuse. It excuses his abject lack of character and ethics, and downplays the danger of the people around him like Bannon and Musk, who was literally stoking racist riots in the UK on social media a few months back. These racists debase the highest office. Makes Nixon look like Mother Theresa. Then there's the really problematic Project 25 stuff as well and the unusually cozy relationship with anyone who happens to be a far right totalitarian mafia fallen ass-backwards into government. These - Putin and a certain Isreali leader have an international arrest warrant out for them. They are war criminals. Listen to what Robert De Niro has been saying. How angry he is... Why is it that so many people in the arts and film industry Democrats? It isn't because they're elites, it's because they have a fucking brain. Now I don't believe you lack a brain, but something has clearly gone wrong with it. So then you decide to vote for the MOST extremely morally corrupt set of them in US history. Makes sense to me! You know there's been a pandemic, right? Part of the reason Trump lost in 2020 was his handling of the early stages of the pandemic. Convincing people to drink bleach, etc. Fast forward into 21/22, the pandemic and lock downs rumble on and there's global inflation in every country, not only the US. All governments, whether liberal or right-wing had to pump trillions into the economy to prevent disaster, such as with furlough schemes (Trump-policy btw), and then there were supply shortages and cost of shipping and fuels went massively up especially as Russia withdrew from Western energy markets with the advent of their war in 2022-2023. This is not the fault of a politician or president, it is a global issue. You say your friends just want to afford food and gas, so do I. But let's correctly apportion the blame for the high prices, and the solution to lowering them. The solution to lowering them is to get inflation under control which the Biden administration has already done so, and then to increase supply and competition in the market so that these big companies cut prices. You know what won't help... Tariffs on imports, cost passed onto stores and consumers. Mass deportation especially in agricultural industries, cost passed onto stores and consumers. Economic policy that looks after the 1% and corporations and AI / tech companies = inflation in property / house prices, inflation in large cities, inflation in wages and further increases in interest rates. You want a fair economy and fair prices, but can't square the Trump policies with the economic consequences. You're also incorrectly associating the lower prices of 2016-2020 & lower interest rates with the fact that there was a Trump presidency. The prices were lower then and interest rates were lower then because A) it was a long time ago and B) it wasn't post-pandemic. You don't need the media to program you into believing this... You just have to be into facts. It isn't a case of "Andrew's opinion". It's what's actually happened. Silly media... trying to convince people a morally corrupt convict felon should be disqualified from running the US government. Batshit crazy if you ask me! I don't understand this obsession with the media. You can make your own mind up based on what Trump does and what he says.... direct from the horse's mouth. When he says he will get mass deportations going and concentrate women and children in concentration camps, does it not give you any pause for thought based on what we know about the history of fascism, at all? I agree there should have been a proper nomination process and earlier... The moral equivalency is not in the same league though. This is the problem with being a good person in today's world... you are judged on a totally different social contract to somebody like Trump. Look at Hilary in 2016 - emails! Yes emails. Not rape, not fraud, an email server was her downfall. Trump is somebody who sets the bar so low for ethics you don't expect any better from him... You have admitted this yourself. As well as that, he is authentic. Not fake or an upper-middle class hypocrite like Harris... Trump is an authentic disrupter crook, everyone knows it, everyone sees it, they want him to wreak the establishment of government which they no longer have any trust in, they're no longer surprised when he says something outrageous, he's normalised it, if any career politician had half the trouble he's had, they'd have been out long ago, same with any worker, any employee, any NORMAL PERSON on a fraud charge, out on your ear from the office the moment the guilty verdict comes in, difference is - YOU GO TO PRISON - HE DOESN'T. Why? Presidentially immune, you're not. Man of the people huh??

Here we go... down the conspiracy rabbit hole. The one thing consistent in all of this I've noticed myself is that Trump voters are very distrustful of media, journalism, institutions... Yet some bloke on Facebook posting stuff = TRUTH! You can't take a moral position on Trump? Because thats blindly following the media? I'm sorry I just can't agree. Being a convicted fraudster and allegedly rapist is a pretty big character flaw for the leader of a country like the US. It shouldn't disqualify someone from being a sales rep perhaps, but leader of the free world definitely. It isn't my "mass media programming" that is convincing me of that by the way. It's the justice system that is. Which is why it is important to trust the experts and institutions because they do their jobs based on the FACTS, apolitically. You may not think it, to listen to social media bubbles, echo chambers and much of the right-leaning media though... Because they want to destroy the truth and the evidence, any to discredit the checks or balances on power. Sorry but in what particular ways is Trump going to serve your interests when he hikes inflation and deports key workers using the military and concentration camps? Is he also going to serve your interests when he puts 50% tariffs on Chinese imports or Japanese cameras? What about when he stitches up the judicial system to pardon himself and a bunch of other convicts? Stitching up the legal system so that his pals can stay in power for a generation? Polluting the environment with his promise to "drill baby drill"... bringing large scale industrial manufacturing back to the USA... more pollution. More lung cancer. People only see the jobs and economic benefit... not the widespread problems that China's environment and air quality has from all of their manufacturing of our cheap Amazon electronics. I think you have to be a bit careful what you wish for. This isn't true at all. There are facts and these are not a matter of opinion or "fake news". That's because they're backed by documented evidence. Like the fact that Trump had crate after crate of classified documents at home, with the intent to profit from it in some ways - most likely by selling the info, which could then find itself in the hands of hostile nations like Russia. And yet there has been no accountability, no punishment, and before you say "But what about Biden" it isn't a sport. It is about this specific fact of Trump with the documents and what his intent was in stealing so many from the secure enclaves of your fucking government. Complete nonsense. Some opinions DO have more value than others. The quality of source material, the quality of research, the objectivity of the discourse, and a lot else besides. I'd sooner listen to a trained, professional New York judge who has prosecuted thousands of people based on cold hard evidence, than to some Fox news twat. I hate the Matrix tbh, tired shite.