Andrew Reid

More like Japanese needs are often vasty different to the mainstream. EOS M sales flunked everywhere else.

The pinch of salt comes in handy because the Japanese market is so different to the rest of the world. Nice to see Olympus doing well back at home though!

The problem with these charts and scores is that they don't take into account subjectivity by their very nature, they are only about technical dynamics and figures. The Leica M9 full frame CCD sensor is a case in point. Different tonal response, colour, noise pattern, more filmic to my eye to CMOS - subjectively so. Loses badly to a lot of crop sensor crap on the DXOMark charts. So you need to be careful, there are a lot of people taking DXOMark as gospel and the RED Helium sensor, which I am sure is incredible, will also have a look that either subjectively you like to dislike, that only a real world test can show... yet because it got a high score on DXOMark the internet went wild and a consensus grew that this could be one of the best sensors ever created. Personally, a sensor cannot be judged independently of the lenses you use on it and the format of the sensor - i.e. Super 16mm, 35mm, 65mm. And as we see from the Leica M9, how the dynamic range is subjectively handled is more important than the number of stops on a test chart, which may not even all be usable any way.

What Fuji is good at is value for money by comparison to Leica. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. Yes the lenses are sharp, decently made - for what they are. But the reality is - Fuji is cheap cut price crop glass compared to Leica. Very cheap to make, APS-C, not full frame. The system is good but a pale imitation of what the Leica M and SL range offers optically. Fuji have been inspired by Leica in terms of design, sure... Right down to the rangefinder style Hybrid VF. But technically they are not at the same level. Also Leica glass has that artisan, painterly look that the clinical modern mirrorless Panasonic, Fuji and Sony lenses don't usually have as much of. Fuji are not into the medium format market with GFX - very good sensor in that camera but again the optics are a bit uninspired compared to Leica. Medium format apertures tend to be slow. I'd rather use a fast F1 or F1.4 Leica lens on full frame than go medium format right now, if we're talking £8000+ for the Fuji GFX or Hasselblad X1D.

Leica Noctilux F1 would be F0.64 brightness on this puppy... I am going to try it out.

You broke the skintones entirely. Back to the drawing board with that one.

Here's what I don't get though - the 5D Mk IV is a noisy as hell camera with 30MP, yet have you seen the ISO score on Bill's chart and at DXOMark? Makes no sense for it to be so high.

Just shows how much room there is to expand the sensor if they wanted to.

Come on reveal all. The image is a bit lacking! Some aliasing, a bit soft 1080p, is it the Canon 80D?

Then there is the curious case of the missing Pentax 645Z score http://pentaxrumors.com/2015/12/25/pentax-645z-scored-101-at-dxomark/ Missing in action! Yes it is. I want all my cameras to be IMAX white from now on.

Take a look at this... GH5's sensor seems to fill out the entire inner circular part of the mount with no black border. Is it really bigger?

The RED Helium 8K camera (approx. APS-H size sensor) just leapt to the top of the DXOMark charts with a score of 108. Read the full article

DXOMark have some questions to answer... How can they put a score out for a sensor which applies high ISO noise reduction to the RAW files and benchmark it against sensors which don't do noise reduction on the raw files? I seriously doubt the RED's Super 35mm chip with those densely packed small pixels beats an A7S II for noise. The DR score also comes from heavy processing. The sensor probably has twin A/D converters and other tricks going on for dynamic range. The back end processing is necessary as well.

Are their any step-changes in quality as you go down from 180fps with the variable frame rate option? Say 120fps or 96fps - any more detailed and less aliasing?

Dave has done a great job matching colour in this. 1D X Mark II is a bit softer out of the box, as it doesn't have any digital sharpening in-camera when it is turned all the way down.

Can't really confirm it. The chart is open to interpretation with the yellow shading. The camera is only still in pre-production, nothing is locked down yet. On second glance at the chart it looks like the DCI 4096 x 2160 at 48p is 150Mbit 8bit 4:2:0 if you follow the row and boxing lines, whilst 24p is 10bit 400Mbit

180fps looks like it does suffer aliasing and moire to quite a severe level but it's great as a creative bonus.... NX1 120fps probably a bit better but that still has aliasing and moire.

Of course it's enough for H.264 at 400Mbit (4K 48p) - it may be half the bitrate of MJPEG for 60p 4K on the 1D X Mark II, but H.264 is a much more efficient codec so will maintain image quality at half the bitrate.

Well remember with the GH3, the ALL-I mode didn't quite have a high enough bitrate to maintain quality per-frame, for all those individual frames, so IPB looked a bit better. Now 400Mbit/s is another story, it should be better than 150Mbit IPB, in same way 500Mbit MJPEG on the 1D C looks better - not a huge difference but there will be one. Big files sizes though! Motion cadence should be the main thing that benefits in terms of image quality with ALL-I. But IPB is perfectly good at giving you individual frames with little compression, even at 150Mbit - and it's a nice big step up from 100Mbit on the GH4. 400Mbit ALL-I on the GH5 will be 4K 48p 10bit 4:2:2 and 30/24p. 4K 60p remains capped at 8bit 4:2:0 / 150Mbit IPB. As it is IPB, 150Mbit is reasonably enough.

You should really never shoot with auto-aperture, it's bad technique even for auto. If you're going to use auto then it's less of a trade off to have the shutter speed and ISO control exposure, rather than the aperture. Who wants to have the camera ride the aperture all the way down to F16 in some instances? Even the staccato look of 1/4000 is less noticeable than using yukky slow apertures on a scene which really demands some composition in-depth. Only scenes that need a deep DOF should be shot at F8 or slower.

I talked to Panasonic's Matt Frazer to clarify the use of H.265 on the Panasonic GH5. Read the full article

I really hope Panasonic can do a de-squeeze in camera... and remember to crop the edges from 2.66:1 to 2.39:1 with the 2x glass

Scorsese said cinema's now officially dead. May as well be a theme park ride. Event a good director can't save the system... Duncan Jones on Warcraft. Peter Jackson on The Hobbit Part 10. Looking to Netflix to save cinema... They have picked up the Blade Runner style sci-fi shot by Bowie's son Duncan Jones, set in Berlin in 2050 called Mute. And more stuff good coming out soon. As for 2016... I am voting 5D Mark IV!

Exactly. One could be an absolutely brilliant filmmaker but produce dreadful colour from LOG footage, it takes years to learn how to be a good colourist. It's really a separate job altogether OR another thing to learn and to hope and pray you have talent for. Then there's the fact that all displays are different and you could be getting one thing on yours and people will be seeing quite another thing. I cannot believe for example that one of the guys on this thread really wanted to put saturation to the levels he did!! Must be something else going on. This is partly why I came up with EOSHD Pro Color to sort things out so that they only require tiny, simple changes in post to get the most out of the sensor. V-LOG is nice and all that but it so often goes horribly wrong - just like S-LOG.

This shot was the exception... very nice. Not seeing much detail in the shadows but the colour is great.