jindrich

the guy apparently says he shoots with gh4 or so, then i guess they shot the BTS with those?

That's a shot under the sun with a silver reflector on his face, it can't get harsher than that. A Canon or a Sony would show nasty specular highlights on the skin. Same with the other takes, nothing more revealing that a Fresnel and smoke to show what a sensor can do, or clippping the red or the green channel. Have you ever shot with an ALEXA? This is Youtube compression, but it looks promising, so far. Fuji engineers say with flog2 and 10bit Prores they got an extra stop above and below. The past X were under 12 stops. Let's see

I'm very excited about this camera, not just because I dropped Canon to go Fuji a few years ago, but because, apparently it FINALLY FIXES the issues the X series had vs the competitors in the PHOTO side: -AF and specially AF-C -Ergonomics, proper joystic, BULKY AF-ON button on both body AND grip. Then, there's the video side. IMO Fuji is the closest to an ALEXA among all mirrorless, because of how it handles Specular Highlights and clippped highlights roll off. But it still wasn't there, with its limited >12 stops. Now with FLOG2 and Prores 422.... are the REAL 14 stops finally there? If so, we finally have our 1st gen ALEXA. Scherlock was shot at 2k and Prores 422, not even RAW. The XH2s will add AF and some IBIS to that. Fingers crossed. It looks VERY promisig in this video, with HARSH sun, Clipped red and green, and FIRE, yet it still looks very organic !! (unlike sony, canon, red) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twI377KRwV4 look at 12:30, 7:30, and the end, those shots are brutal for any sensor

Netflix approves the S1H to shoot content for the platform... ... yet 100 out of 100 DP's would choose an ALEXA Mini rather than the S1H In fact, pretty much EVERY DP would choose an ARRI over everything else, not to mention a stupid DSLR/mirrorless (to shoot professionally, not that DLSRs are stupid). On a professional shoot, the cost of the cameral body rental is essentially NEGLIGIBLE. An ALEXA Mini is €500/day or €1.5k/week. A basic commercial costs typically €250k to make. Why are people still thinking pros/producers/directors/DPs would choose anything else than the tried and tested (ARRI), specially when their reputation is on the line, when it MAKES NO DIFFERENCE to the budget!!!

Right, poster says from Estonia, while the videos look from Hungary. I'll try to contact the people who shot that.

Wow, that looks stunning, really, very well shot and edited too. Skin tone looks gorgeous, really organic. Footage like this is what makes me believe XH1's log+Eterna is the closest you can get to ARRI color and highlight-rolloff under €10k, there's no harder test than a spot light and smoke to see how that works out. I'm currently testing Fuji/Sony before buying. Would you care to comment a bit about the shooting? -Was that source HMI, Tungsten or LED? -Did you use AF-C or was just MF -lens left at fixed focus point and keeping distance to maintain focus? -Which lens did you use the most, and how did they perform for video? I remember the 35mm f2 having A LOT of Breathing. Currently testing 56mm (on XT2), lens is stellar, but slow AF. Did you shot 3 (or more) passes, each with the different 23, 35, 56 ? -ISO 800? Did you close at f4 or more? -Was this shot at 50/60 or 100/120fps. -I presume Zhiyun with IBIS also on? -Shot in Flog and then Eterna applied, or anything else? Many thanx.

Thx for your answer. The MINI isn't like an ALEXA classic, which indeed weights a ton and slows everything down. If this production couldn't afford an additional £700 for a MINI (INCLUDING in the £700 a set of CP primes, tripod, follow focus and Mattebox), then that was really a micro-budget project. It's Sign O' times, I guess, when Producers think they can produce professional content for peanuts. For everything I know shot professionally, Camera rental cost is essentially negligible, as the bulk goes to crew, location, insurance, props, hotels, travels, etc etc, with LIGHTING being the solely technical item that might require quite some €€ (HMIs, 150kva trailer and crew).

The video looks really great, and to be shot and finished by a single person in such a short time is quite an achievement. But the image still looks "digital" to me, which is mostly the main problem with ANYTHING but ARRI, under artificial lighting. My question is, for such a professional project (and I know how cash trapped labels are these days), isn't there an additional 700 quid for the overall budget, to rent an ALEXA Mini (includes set of primes, MB, FF, Sticks etc) for one day? An AMIRA is even cheaper to rent. Thx.

another example of the IQ the XH1 is capable of:

Here's a long, somewhat professional, video-centric review of the XH1: And here what it can do under professional hands: I'm about to try out the camera soon, but I'm almost decided. Fuji+Flog+Eterna is the closest I've seen to an ALEXA under €10k, highlight rolloff, color, and motion. On top of that, lenses are superb, it's a perfect hybrid camera -it's great for photos-, the new Linear ManualFocus solves focus by wire issues, the High EVF with focus peaking is perfect for MF, and the XH1 along with the XT20 make a great A/B combo system -for peanuts.

Andrew, following your logic, this years' best camera BY FAR is Sony's F35, as there's some available s/h for the same amount you paid for your 1DC (£5000). So actually, you got a terrible deal. Therefore, the Rating should be: -1) Sony F35 (from a quarter of a million down to just £5000) and at a VERY long distance, everything else.

Ok, here's a reality bite on 4K from the real world. The first worldwide event broadcasted in HD was back in 1990, the FIFA World Cup (football/soccer) held in Italy. Sony's (defunct) HDVS system was used back then and it was big news all over the industry. Now fast forward more than 2 DECADES and simply take a look around: in 2012, while there's finally plenty of HD content, roughly 50% of TV networks are still broadcasting in SD. In SD, not 1080 not 720. This means that 22 years later, we're still NOT into a 100% HD world. And now people expect 4K to happen overnight? It takes decades for the world's (or USA+EU) entire infrastructure (networks, households, cinemas, satellites..) to change from one system to another AND for prices to come down notably, so the ordinary citizen can afford the appliances to take home. At this point in time, 4K is just a Marketing fad pushed by some manufacturers as a sales argument. Yes 4K is nice and will happen someday, but we're a decade, at the very least, away from it. I've never seen a producer request 4K and I don't expect this to happen for a looooooooooooong time. 4K is NOT required for High-End Commercials, or Broadcast or High-End TV drama or even for the typical Hollywood comedy/drama movie. 4K only has a place in the $100M+ blockbuster. And even then many just don't seem to care (Hugo, Avengers, etc) As for the the argument that 4K future-proofs content, well, tell a producer or production company that you'll use 4K (and notably increase the overall costs) because they'll able to sell the same product again in 10 years and they'll all have break up laughing. Productions must be amortized in a year or less. In a decade from now, everybody will work for another company, so who cares really? Besides, since when do people want to see a 10 year old movie or TV drama? Wellcome to the Real World.

In the Movie World NOTHING is certain. Remember the last flop, Disney's John Carter, $250M in production plus another $100M+ for marketing, and Sony is expecting a net loss of $200M. If people dislike 48p (I personally raise hand) this might be another flop. Simple as that.

The entire world population has been "trained" into 24p=fiction, 48/50/60= crude reality. This has been going on for over half a century. People won't "sooner or later get accustomed to" movies in 48p, because those 48p will simply cease to exist. Movies have production costs of $80M and over, a flop will cost a fortune to investors; a few blockbuster flops might cost a billion $ to the studios. If 48p won't work once, specially on a blockbuster, it's over.