hmcindie

This is a decision someone else can't really answer for you. There are pro's and cons for both. If you just list the specs, the A7s II goes far ahead. But if you use them yourself, you will really got to know them and find a preference. I would personally probably go for the 1Dc knowing it's limitations but I think (reading your first post) that you should go with the A7s ii.

Lineskipping affects resolution. Nex 5 shooting at 25p resolves more detail than a Nex 5 shooting 50p. The more resolution you resolve = less amount aliasing/moire. Problem happens when there is more detail in the scene than the resolution the camera resolves. That's why most camera manufacturers are taking out the AA filters. When you have over 30 megapixels you can do that and you won't create that much more aliasing. You do that with 2mp cameras and the aliasing will be severe.

It's way too small! The A7S2 also has the record button in a horrible place, you do documentary shooting and I will assure you that you will hit that button several times accidentally. Any sane person would rather shoot with a 1dxII than the a7s ii, ergonomics wise and if price was no object. I have no idea why you have so twisted ideas of ergonomics. Well lets list the bonuses of the ergonomics. 1dx II + Good size! Not too small, not too large. You can grab that beast like a man! + A good placement for record button (looking at you a7s) + Actually, all the buttons are placed great + You can throw it on the ground! a7s II + ehm, it doesn't have a mirror? Wooptidoo.

Well look at sample videos for the Alexa or actually the movies they shoot with it. They are all "carefully shot". No one is wielding the Alexa like a madman with a DSLR. And you actually can't. There is no way to hold the Alexa like a DSLR, true. But that's also a downfall. The Alexa needs a bunch of space, it's not a "small cam". Even the Amira that is easier is still a ... shall we say, considerably more of a box. Looks real easy doesn't it? Stick that inside a car and shoot a closeup of the driver. Look at that thing! That's poor ergonomics. People need to rig Alexa's too, mostly because the director needs to see the image so sets are full of SDI- cables running everywhere. Focus accuracy? There's a reason Alexa users have separate focus pullers with separate monitors. With a 1dX II you can JUST PRESS THE LCD and it will focus where you press! And you call that "poor ergonomics". I call "Jack the focus puller" a poor ergonomic decision who also takes a human sized space from the van. He also needs to be fed! I have shot with an Amira (not with an Alexa though) and even that effing thing is far from being an "easy and ergonomic" camera that doesn't need rigging. EVERY camera needs rigging depending on the shoot and you can forget about small doc- projects with the Alexa. People are propagating bs myths about "designed for video/film"- cams that are supposedly easier than DSLR's.They are "easier" (and slower) on a multiperson shoot where you need to have the director see the material on a big screen. But shooting alone? Oh no. It's actually easier to change the shutter/iso on the 5d/1d any dslr than on the Amira. Funny.

So you are basically saying that the Nex-5 has more resolution than the XC10. That's so wrong it's funny.

Ewww. Guys, all of those examples look horrible.

Nice! The a7rII is considerably better color wise than the first a7s (I wonder how it compares to the a7sii?). Though I did get goodish a7s colors by using someone's custom profile. Slog was always a huge drag for me. When I opened your first comparison, I liked the left image more. Assumed it was the 1Dc and it was. I guess it's the slight amount of more magenta on the a7r that gives it away? I'd also love an s-log to c-log comparison. There should be a huge amount of more color information in the 1dc file being 4:2:2 jpegs.

That's not true, the Arri Alexa is WAY better in the blue channel than Red Epic. And it has way less pixels too. We did a test and compared similar shots for VFX usage, the blue channel in the Epic was considerably worse than the Alexa. Also comparing sharpness is quite odd, both 12mp and 36mp fit a 4k image quite well and will show no sharpness difference (all else being equal) scaled to 4k. The difference comes if you add sharpening (which you must if you want a "sharp-looking" shot) or scale in a bad algorithm that adds aliasing. Why do you think camera makers choose a certain amount of pixels (alexa is at 2.8k and looks several magnitudes better than it's competition)

Yup. I was shocked by how bad the lcd was on the A7s compared straight to the 5d3. Just in image quality. Even the LCD on the goddamn Amira is worse! I shot with that thing in the snow and it was ghosting like craaaazy. The 5d was chugging along, no problem. https://www.dropbox.com/s/n423v8w64khndhs/_BK_8220_small.jpg?dl=0

Well what camera is "optimum" for filmmaking in your eyes? An Alexa needs several people to operate, so does a Red Epic. (If you want to use follow focuses and a proper monitoring for the director). You will get back strain with every damn camera out there if a DSLR kills you! Are you gonna hold the Alexa up your face all day?

I disagree. Do you mean the soft and shitty Nex 5 is "resolving better" because it moires like hell? The XC10 beats all of those cams except the NX1 in resolution and the NX1 looks quite sharpened. Cameras are supposed to cut off the resolution just above the nyquist limit so that the moire doesn't appear. The slats are not supposed to be resolved! Sure but you are talking about color and the human eyesight is very shitty in discerning the sharpness of specific color channels. Luminance is the most important one and it definitely does not need to be sampled 200%. If a camera uses 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 color sampling, it will through away massive amounts of color information anyway and that's AFTER the oversamplings.

Dayum, the XC10 looks great. Probably the most organic image of them all with no sharpening artifacts and (probably?) a good gradeable image. NX1 has great resolution too. I'm almost having bad feelings about buying the RX10 ii instead of the XC10.

Did you use 50/60p? Those modes double the moire and aliasing from 24p/25p atleast on the nex5-7 range.

I thought peaking would be great. Until I used it myself with the A7s and it usually was a bit off. But the ML enabled sharpening of the output image (instead of peaking) is great! It shows where the focus actually is way better than some white or red lines. I usually take out the focus peaking so having it or not won't affect my shooting style. But I will miss the magic lantern sharpening for focus.

An ancient and "inefficient" codec can look better with a huge bitrate than a new and more advanced one with a smaller bitrate. Case in point the 1DC. The 4k image blows all of the AVCHD and XAVCS image qualities of the A7 series out of the water, compression wise (no macroblocking, no compression artifacts from movement, grain remains and doesn't get smoothed out etc)

Yup, stuck that thing onto a Ronin-M and you could shoot dancers with the face tracking pretty goddamn well! (I think).

I hear this being paraded around. Yeah. It's "inefficient". But it's also great quality. If being an All-Intra codec makes it inefficient, then "Prores 4444 XQ" is also inefficient as it's bitrate is 500 Mbit/s for HD and 30fps

Why are people saying MJPEG is processor intensive? MJPEG has never been a processor intensive codec. It's just a bunch of jpegs (so it's an all-intra codec) together. My CPU doesn't peak playing back mjpeg files. You guys sure it's not just your harddrive that can't read the files fast enough?

5d iii raw aliasing is a non-issue. BMCC aliases about 2x more and even moires which the 5d doesn't do. Most of the time the aliasing can be seen if using sharpening in the Adobe ACR module. If you don't use it, the aliasing mostly will never appear. Also just show a new music video for a local band. Used the FS7 and the 5d iii raw. Loved the 5d iii raw way more, what can I say? 14bit 1080p full frame stills. Goddamn. No other camera comes close (except Amira and I actually like the usability of the 5d iii more! Also the Amira has a really shitty lcd that ghostes like crazy when the temperature drops.)

That could be from almost anything. Looks heavily graded + noise added on top. If I had to guess it's a Sony shooting avchd or some other compressed format, aps-c sensor.

That colored aliasing might just be 4:2:0 artifacting.

Where do you find that setting?

For stills the A7R ii is better than the A7S ii even at 25600 iso. If you do stills, it's a no-brainer to go with the A7R ii.

As we can see... the 5d mark III is way better. And only because of moire.

I find the criticism this documentary receives very strange. Krantz comes out with unsubstantiated things (sweat on a hood latch?) afterwards to media and every one believes him? This doc has 10 hours of episodes. It is A LOT of material, way more than quick little recaps of scenes. The evidence is heard from the defence's standpoint but so what? Krantz didn't even want to participate in the doc but afterwards he wants to be heard? What kind off weird logic is that?