Andrew Reid

  And you are doing the reverse which is the same thing.

Some great guesses in here. Some of you are spot on. Nearly time to reveal which is which...

Damn I think I've forgotten which is which ;)   This would have been much easier had it been Canon 5D Mark III H.264 video vs 22MP raw!!!   Results and blog coming in the afternoon of the 3rd Dec, Berlin time.

Why do you think that? :)

  All will be revealed tomorrow. Until now have your guess on the forum.   I am using a special grading technique here for the first time which is giving beautiful results on the NX1. There will be a full blog post about this when the result is revealed. Camera settings were all on default. Picture profile turned off. Sharpening on default level for video and in Adobe Camera Raw for the still. Video was shot in 3840 x 2160 Ultra HD mode at 25p and the still in raw at 28MP. H.265 video converted to ProRes LT then graded in Premiere. Raw still graded in Photoshop (Adobe Camera Raw). Focus point is on colour 28.   Read the full article here

  Before DSLRs die out for photography, manufacturers have to sort the mirrorless lenses, AF and offer more full frame stuff (looking at you Panasonic & Fuji). Otherwise DSLRs will trundle on forever.   AF is still not good enough and nobody has a full frame mirrorless range of lenses to match Canon or Nikon.   Until that happens, it is easier to "get shit done" as a working photographer on Canon & Nikon gear professionally, unless you are using manual focus lenses and adapters - in that situation then mirrorless is better because you can focus more precisely through the viewfinder.   For video it's a no-contest at the moment... not just in terms of specs or performance... but what use does a mirror have for video? It is a hinderance. 1D C was worst camera ergonomically I ever used for shooting video with. Worse than their low end DSLRs and much worse than the 5D Mark III with Magic Lantern.   Despite that I still hold out hope that one day Magic Lantern will be brave and dive into the 1D X, unlocking 4K & adding focus peaking, etc. Because we all know it's essentially a 1D C underneath. The 1D X with 4K if it drops below $3000 used would be a lot more in league with the others... NX1, GH4 and A7S in particular.   ---   It baffles me why Canon's success seems a mystery to some of the trailing manufacturers sales-wise like Panasonic and Olympus. This isn't hard to fix guys. You need a full frame sensor, plenty of fast primes, a couple of fast zooms, AF needs to be as good and that really is about it. The rest they're already very strong at. Photographers are not going to all suddenly dump full frame Canon stuff and go to Panasonic or Olympus when they have so much smaller sensors. If Panasonic wants to lead, they have to follow what Sony have been doing and do it better. Takes a lot of resources but it can be done. Micro Four Thirds is a great system... it's also been a waste of time... they should keep just the GH4 and LX100, then focus on bringing out a new full frame system - Lumix FX. Then the serious doors will start opening, pros will adopt it and the micro four thirds stuff can continue to provide for the niches like GH4 is doing so well with video.

Now we are on page 9, by the same token I'm wondering how I ended up with someone with 459 posts on my own site (like a virus on each page) berating me every-time he reads something he doesn't agree with. It doesn't seem like a fair deal does it!? I give him a platform as a filmmaker and 459 posts of server bandwidth, and in return he says I am flogging a dead horse! Canon may be a dead horse but I have nothing to flog!

    And yet here you are on page 8.

The FZ1000 initially lacked 24p. It has it now with the latest firmware update.   To answer those Qs above...   1. LX100 is better in low light by quite some margin 2. LX100 has the better overall video quality, but they have the same codec and at ISO 200 hard to tell apart 3. LX100 again better picture quality because of larger sensor and it's less noisy. The lens plays a part. The LX100 is simply lovely at wide angle, F1.7 4. Lens quality is similar in terms of sharpness, contrast, etc. But LX100 doesn't flare too well - green splurge 5. Both are "clean" but LX100 is less noisy

Fair enough! Now let's get back to talking about why there is no high spec video on Canon cameras under $5000.

Francis Ford Coppola liked the GH2 best in the Zacuto shootout. Are some subjective opinions more important than others in the opinion soup? I do believe they are.

When does a big sample of subjective opinions turn into an objective opinion?

  Not really. You can make an EF mount mirrorless camera and still gain an EVF, smaller body, lighter, etc. It will just be 20mm deeper from screen to mount. Hardly a deal breaker! Samsung NX1 is the template. It's nice and chunky for a mirrorless camera, not toy-like - a DSLR form factor and handles like a 7D Mark II.   The Canon EF mount is actually rather adaptable...   Nikon Contax Zeiss Olympus OM Leica R M42 Pentax Pretty much every other SLR lens ever made.   And it gets even more adaptable without the mirror. No mirror hit on some Pentax lenses like the 45mm pancake.   When you have a native EF mount, you have a huge range of glass to choose from not least of all the actual EF stuff.   Canon are far too invested in optical viewfinders and apparently they're not even prepared to let us choose, because whatever they do will compete against their existing line, which they are also heavily invested in because they continue to sell well to people who don't realise that mirrorless is in many cases better technology.

The FZ1000 is all about the zoom range. If you need to go really long on the zoom then get the FZ1000. In all other respects the LX100 is better aside from the lack of slow-mo... and a few minor missing menu options. No CineLike D either. LX100 review part 1 http://www.eoshd.com/2014/11/shooting-4k-pocket-camera-exceptional-panasonic-lx100/ FZ1000 review http://www.eoshd.com/2014/11/panasonic-fz1000-review-bargain-4k-super-zoom/

At this rate Canon will catch up with a 2 year old Nikon sensor. 7D Mark II at DPReview on the studio scene is behind the D7100 (2 years old), 5D Mark III, Fuji X-T1 and Samsung NX1 for all aspects of image quality.   And the sensor in the G1 X Mark II is behind the Panasonic LX100 and Sony RX100 Mark III in all aspects of the image http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-LX100-sensor-review-Potent-point-and-shoot/Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-LX100-vs-Canon-PowerShot-G1-X-Mark-II-vs-Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-RX100-III-Tradeoff-in-performance-against-smaller-Sony-sensor   Canon are said to be working on a dual ISO sensor with alternating pixels at low and high ISOs to extend dynamic range. The 5D Mark III already has an alternating line technique for this but Canon didn't implement it. Magic Lantern did but only unofficially.   I think Canon will definitely take a step in 2015.   The question is... will it be a catch-up step or a revolution?

Nice look! How much does it vignette at 15mm?

All 4K cameras even the $12,000 1D C have more rolling shutter in 4K mode than in 1080p. That test makes the mistake of comparing the NX1 in 4K to the A7S in 1080p, without stating the frame rate. In 60p for instance the A7S doesn't do a 4K readout of the sensor, it pixel bins, so rolling shutter is less severe as the scan to read the sensor top to bottom is a lot quicker... drastically fewer pixels being read.   I find the A7S and 1D C to have similar rolling shutter.   The NX1 is similar, maybe a smidgeon better... yet to test it formally.   In terms of sensor scan speed the NX1 is very very high, best on the market. It's doing a 6.5K readout!!

  I should give up the reviews and just say that! Would be much easier!

Actually there's a setting in the menu to give constant exposure / DOF simulation in stills live-view on Canon and Sony cameras. No need to press the DOF preview button.

I'd get the A7S over the D750 overall.

I think to fully damp high frequency jitter you have to move the sensor extremely quickly and nimbly, maybe it just isn't possible yet with such a big one. Another issue is that maybe the sensor is too close to the edge of the lens mount so it doesn't move enough? The E-M1 has more room around the sensor, more margin. Anyway I'm not an engineer, but Sony need to fix it. Let's not write it off completely - it might do a hybrid IS when a Sony OIS lens is attached, using OIS for the high frequencies and IBIS for the larger ones on all 5 axis.   I just wish at the minimum they'd match the competition... Minimal moire like D750, nice and clean... And IBIS up to E-M1 standards. Oh well.

The Sony A7 II is the first full frame mirrorless camera with 5 axis stabilisation inside (sensor shift based). It also gets some ergonomic and video upgrades such as XAVC-S at 50Mbit/s, S-LOG and 120fps. But how does image quality compare to the Sony A7S and how effective exactly is the much anticipated "SteadyShot Inside" for video? Read the full article here

It's staying the same I can assure you of that.

No wonder Canons sell so well if their users think the 70D is full frame :)

Don't get the 70D unless you need the AF. Get a used 5D Mark II and shoot raw with Magic Lantern.   The Tamron 24-70 F2.8 is a great lens, I have it and it's better than the Canon L equivalent for less money... it's wasted on a 70D. You need to appreciate it on full frame so that's why I say go for the 5D Mark II... it's only a bit more than new 70D if you find an old one on eBay.