Andrew Reid

Wonder what APS-C L mount camera is coming next? Panasonic?

It's a massive risk to invest in a film. Well done to him. I'm going to watch it tonight.

Brave to spend $700k of your own money on a movie that could disappear without trace. Wonder if he had a contract in the bag with Amazon before starting? If not, then wow... very brave move.

Nice. Is it same optics as Contax Yashica version, or different altogether?

I am wondering how serious the A7 series IBIS fractures are. Whether these are a result of extreme mishandling and falls or just general wear and tear?

Maybe Brian can chime in here, but I can't see such glass would fit FE-mount! Even for a micro four thirds sensor the 0.58x BMPCC Speed Booster glass extends a long way into the camera and almost touches the sensor. This was the first thought that went through my mind when Bo-Ming mentioned it. There are none on eBay apart from in Japan at the moment. And they're not cheap Will have a look in my Berlin haunts and see if one turns up. Contax N glass is generally quite rare.

Metabones recently announced the long-awaited Canon EF mount Speed Booster Ultra for Fuji X, which will be one of the must-have accessories for X-T4 owners. This will have support for phase-detect AF and incorporates Caldwell Optics advanced 5-element ultra-high index tantalum optics. The Caldwell Optics focal reducer remains the best you can get. In this New blog post: https://www.eoshd.com/news/the-big-eoshd-interview-metabones-lens-adapters/

Nothing particular in the specs or on paper is better about it, just personal preferences really, and I have more lenses and adapters for Fuji X-mount. Also, feels really ergonomic with the SmallRig wooden grip to beef it up a bit. X-Pro 2 used on eBay is also worth a look with the 4K firmware update. X-H1 too. A snip at $650 if you're lucky

I don't know if it's digitally enhanced or just very clever acoustics. It isn't applying a DSP to USB or line out. That would be suicide! Here's a pro audio bent review of it: https://medium.com/binary-quavers/a-review-of-apples-16-inch-macbook-pro-for-musicians-audio-engineers-4f92f8da4b82 The benchmarks suggest the thermal issues are fixed. The 15.6" i9 model did get throttled but not the 16"

Contact me here https://www.eoshd.com/contact/

I haven't tested it with the Z50. Drop me an email and you can have it for free as long as you tell me whether it works or whether there are any issues? The Z50 is a fine camera indeed for the price. Body design reminds me of the Nikon V2 though, or a cheaper Z7. Not my taste in handling, I think Fuji X-T30 is a bit better overall but no doubting the Z50 is a bargain too

It doesn't. Critical mixing should be done on reference monitors, then once the audio is out there in the wild, a gazillion different variables are at play and you shouldn't even waste a second of time trying to tune something for "a small laptop speaker"... Because it makes it sound bad on 90% of the other speakers, including some very good systems. Believe me when I say, make your audio mixes, grading as good as they can be on the best monitors and screens you can lay your hands on, and call it job done. I agree it feels to me like a sound stage expander, and extended treble is being added to the mix on a MB16, so you have to use USB DAC but the issue of balance isn't specific to the MacBook 16" - it makes no sense to trust any laptop speaker at all even one without digital FX. All ultra thin or portable speakers colour the sound heavily, whether acoustically or digitally. They are just not designed to be used for professional recording or mixing work. The marketing will of course try and spin it the other way.

You used laptop speakers for critical reference audio? Doesn't make sense sorry man.

4K/120p almost definitely won't be a regular recording mode for people, more an occasional shot. 4K/60p has to hold up well though, if they is also pixel binning, it depends on the standard of binning and methods used. 4K/24p from 8K readout will have rolling shutter issues, or else will have pixel binning like the higher frame rates, detrimental to image quality. Optimal sensor for today is in the 24 megapixel region / 6K. We are not yet at 8K without heavy compromises. Don't get me wrong, I want this camera to be great. At $4000 and with Sony A7S 3 on the horizon it has to be.

I can confirm Canon did not give me one In my opinion they are hiding something and probably the usual shills will gloss over the shortcomings. Rolling shutter, pixel binning, over heating, the lot probably.

To be fair you can't trust any small speaker for "critical mixing". You've got reference desktop studio monitors for that and can get quality for a very good price these days. Small speakers colour the sound too much. Does seem Apple is applying some digital enhancement to the internal audio. The answer is to use a high quality USB DAC and external speakers for everything serious and leave it to the internal speakers to entertain you, for casual use.

https://vimeo.com/402726264 Very telling also

From Slashcam / DeepL translated: Observations The Mavo LF still offers the best performance in low light. Its handling is a bit difficult to get used to, but the camera seems to work reliably even under adverse conditions (after experience in the team). It was tested here again, as the 2019 test with the Sigma Cine Primes and DNG-RAW showed strong aliasing. However, in this test with Prores4444 recording and 6K we could not observe this artifact any more. The development of the DNG recording is not yet finished. Sony FS7II clearly falls behind in the test field. The comparable EVA1 remains the more modern alternative. Also in the S35 segment, the Amira still shows its superior dynamic range and convincing color reproduction. It has at least two f-stops more dynamic range than the other cameras. Even the latest FX9 and C500II full-format cameras are still unable to catch up here, despite the sensor development of the last ten years in Japan. With the higher native ISO of 4000, the FX9 offers better, low-light images with less noise than FS7. Further ISO levels do not amplify the image signal in Cine-EI mode, but only affect the viewfinder image. The autofocus works very reliably in clearly defined situations when the face is clearly visible, e.g. for interviews or when someone walks towards the camera. However, when the camera is moving in documentary situations, despite various menu options, you cannot rely on the camera to select the correct plane of focus, here this can only be used to support manual focus adjustment. Disappointingly, the autofocus does not work in S+Q mode (SloMo). From the ergonomics, operation and menu navigation, the relationship to the FS7 is obvious. Fortunately, there are TC and genlock inputs on the housing, so that the purchase of the Extension Unit is not absolutely necessary for professional work. The old XAVC-I codec, known from the FS7, has a limiting effect. Striking is the yellowish tone of the FX9 (with s709 LUT) and its relatively soft picture. Both Sony and Panasonic generally have a somewhat casual approach to LUTs. Panasonic offers a "Varicam LUT", which hasn't been changed for years and is also used for EVA1, S1H and even S1, although different sensors have been installed here. So even Sony's 709 LUT, originally offered for the Venice, doesn't seem ideal for the FX9. It looks as if the developers are giving up on the last few meters here. It also remains unclear how the colors were intended by the engineers, or if at all, beyond the technical parameters of the sensor, individual aesthetics play a role. Arri has been using the same sensor since 2010, and can afford to use practically the same LUT. The C500II shows a particularly sharp image with good exposure, but loses detail with increasing underexposure. Canon's "Light-RAW" codec generates a strong, coloured noise, reminiscent of the C200 and C700 images. Canon doesn't specify a native ISO for the camera, we chose 800 ISO because Canon recommends 800 ISO at log-gamma "to obtain the recommended Dynamic Range" (400 ISO at HLG or Wide DR, 160 ISO at Rec709). The autofocus works reliably after you understand the complicated menu navigation in this respect, helped by the fact that you can select the focal plane via touch screen. This requires, however, that the viewfinder screen is not used with an eyepiece as a viewfinder, which is limited in that it is not possible to connect the Canon monitor and the Canon external viewfinder at the same time, but a third-party viewfinder. However, the developers would work on the problem. By keeping the well-known ergonomics, operation and menu navigation of the C300/C500 series, the changeover is uncomplicated for Canon users. The sound inputs are integrated into the housing. This allows the camera to be made more compact after removing the handle. In contrast to the previous models, the camera is equipped with an interchangeable mount. You are no longer limited to EF-mount lenses, but can now take advantage of the wide range of lenses with PL-mount. The Blackmagic Pocket CC 6K competes with the older and more expensive Ursa G2 from the same company. This latest Pocket is more sparsely equipped than the Ursa, but pleases with a slightly improved dydydamic range and, thanks to its dual native ISO, copes much better with low light situations. The Ursa also shows a clear drift into the green in the shadows. In low light the performance of S1/S1H is hardly inferior to the Mavo LF. However, the Mavo LF offers more resolution, even compared to the S1H in 6k. The reason for the difference will partly be the codec: Prores4444 with almost 2GBit/s of the Mavo LF compared to the 200Mbit/s h265 of the S1H. An S1 or S1H with an external recorder would be an interesting retest. In our tests the 400Mbit UHD codec did not offer any advantage over the 150 so far. An S1 or S1H with external recorder would be an interesting setting for a further test. In fact, a new firmware from May 2020 should also enable external recording in RAW in connection with the Atomos Ninja V Recorder. Thus the camera closes the gap to professional LF cameras in technical terms and extends its range of application. Overall, S1 embodies the best ratio of image quality and price and is suitable for free camera work with its sensor stabilizer. The GH5, especially with focal reducer, is still the cheaper and lighter alternative, with known limitations due to the much smaller sensor. This is reflected in lower dynamic range and a poorer image in low light. Eva1, S1, S1H, GH5, GH5s owe their attractiveness among other things to the efficient 10bit 422 150Mbit-h264-based codec, which we have already praised in the past. The Fuji XT3 in the same price range, but with a slightly larger APS-C sensor, pleases with good colors in sufficient exposure, but records with a cut-unfriendly 265/HEVC codec that requires hardware decoding. Similarly compressed is the 6K h265 200Mbit codec of the S1H.

The eye video is extremely revealing. I encourage everyone to give this a pixel peep. Had expected Blackmagic URSA G2 to do a lot better in the shadows at -9 stops. It's one of the worst in the test for dynamic range. Worse than Sony's codec. MAVO does really well... Proper RAW look to it. Arri is a bit iffy in the highlights. S1 definitely best bang for buck. X-T3 seems to outperform C500 II

I took a look - Absolutely top article and very interesting results! https://vimeo.com/402727266 https://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Test/AG-DOK-Kameratest-2020---u-a--mit--Blackmagic-6K--Canon-C500-MkII--Panasonic-S1-H--und-Sony-FX9--Videos----Beo.html

When you enable electronic shutter on an A7 III picture profiles are disabled So that could be why they didn't get implemented on A9 where the electronic shutter is such a big part of the deal. Still very much a glaring oversight. I know a lot of A7 III users who'd happily upgrade to an A9 or A9 II if they got the same features but a few extras and the better AF / e-shutter / burst rates.

Blummin heck. So you can begin to see what roadblocks the manufacturers face when it comes to RAW codecs. If BRAW is tied to Blackmagic FPGA that is a completely 360 degree turn away from ASIC and your power economy goes out the window. If ProRes RAW encoding also needs FPGA hardware, the heat management and battery life problems again scupper that. If RED's patent prevents decent compression, then we have a situation where costs increase or a licensing / patent transfer takes place. Canon RAW is compressed but file sizes still huge. And RF mount on Komodo suggests that compression wasn't free of charge. Sigma Fp uses uncompressed Cinema DNG, so again file sizes are an issue there too. H.265 ALL-I 10bit is a good solution if you look at it that way. And is good enough for 99% of cases. Maybe RAW is overrated when you actually compare the graded end results.

No issues here yet. What's the gist of the cause? Electronic / GPU noise interference or is it software / codec related?

Who's on yours?

What's to stop BRAW being used by Panasonic internally?