Emanuel

Nothing against YT. Exactly the opposite. OP post added his contribution for the subject matter. When the most fav button is the fast-forward and rewind button today, I guess this tells a bit how ad rem this discussion is actual connected and well-timed.

I have the same impression on downvotes as hinted from my disclaimer up there, so I will probably not forget it when granted one from yours... LOL ; ) This laugh made my late night over here now : -) In any case, for same order of thinking or ideology (I tend to put my vote on this latter one), I have nothing against freedom of expression, on the contrary, for some reason my disclaimer includes the useful choice of search button there. As much as freely express my opinion over here. Son, you're not the only one to have strong opinions : -D EDIT -- I see now you've edited your post and didn't forget to add that last line there to follow my post... haha ; -)

One is visual and sound communication, the other one merely written media. Much different to begin with. That's it. Glad he wrote it. Some youtubbers are killing the medium. Never noticed? YT has become the most boring virtual place to follow FB news feed. Ignore list aka blocking feature along search button to each one of them is our savior. I don't even remember to ever downvoted one, also because I found them pretty disgusting when lack of arguments applies. Except now with this one here from yours to anyhow end in another harmless funny post after all, no doubt, but quite unfair to the pertinent post and topic published by the OP BTW Just my two cents anyways : -)

To prove resolution is and is not anything to be focus about, just a tool as many other variables no less crucial: From YT page: << Footage shot with the Canon EOSM in early March 2019. First of three videos - this one uses the Pentax SMC 50mm f1.7 lens. Used Image Stabilisation in post - I prefer not to as it gives some of the footage that usual warbling effect, but it gets pretty windy on exposed mountain sides and this is nicer than shaky footage. IS lens on the way soon! mv 1080p MCM rewire 16:9 Ratio Recorded 1736 x 976 Upscaled in MLV app to 1920 x 1080 Rendered and uploaded in 4K 14 bit Lossless 24 fps Variable ND Filter Standard EF - EOSM Mount Adapter (Non-Speedboosted) Cinematic LUT applied along with grading in Final Cut. >> ~ John Wallace

To be fair yet, this is not even straightly addressed to the resolution topic in a literal sense or shouldn't exclusively be. Human view has its own limits, obviously, a bit like our stomach : D You can go shopping to your local supermarket before or after lunch. Your bill will surely vary, count on it! LOL : ) You'll end there for shopping food in a way or another ; -) When I mention details up there, not exactly related to picture resolution in stricto sensu but the potentiality of their existence in your hand(s) as finest tool. We live exciting times nowadays in the realm of computational photography. Smartphones of today are only the peak of the iceberg. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_stacking

For sure : ) That was strictly a resolution test, let's be fair : -) Which actually hints you don't need resolution at all to make some interesting to pop up. As we all know I guess, it depends on so many other variables. There's the only discussion to be worthy here, really. That said, certain details can just shine if you have resolution, though. So, the higher number of pixels the larger sensor size format makes then the necessary sense to be in order to fit the task. That's the whole point, as matter of fact. I can be a happy MFT camper, I am indeed. But I don't think anything wrong with the colour of someone's else T-shirt... : D I think the general problem with the human kind is the B&W approach and bias. 'My dick is bigger than yours' attitude flaws any intelligent discussion. Unfortunately, it is the closest scope we'll find in reality from so many people, more often than it should.

by Phil Holland: " (...) rigged the system with 3X RED Weapon Monstro 8K VV cameras, which once processed creates stunning 100 megapixel motion picture images with a sensor size of approximately 645 Medium Format Film "

We've arrived to a certain point where the logic behind the bigger screen the higher resolution is pretty irrelevant when latitude/DR, higher ISOs performance and last but not least, to mainly add gamut, color depth and competent bit rate are the only things a serious shooter can focus on what's really important to a better outcome. For this triviality resolution-wise, 4K has somehow contributed with. Consumer world is a whole different market anyway... ; ) Horses for courses. This is what we're talking about. Not else.

Apples to oranges. What 1080p? P4K? ; ) In a 2019 compact camera for almost one grand doesn't make sense to not include it. Without mention, it is specs-wise, not quality-wise, such mention. Last November, I bought a GX80 practically brand new without visible signs of wear for 150 euros. From then on, 4x Canon M units for less than that. It doesn't make sense to go 4x-6x the price for 4x resolution less for video. We are not half-dozen years ago. 4K is the standard for any home display to buy nowadays. You even struggle to find anything only 1080p if any... : -D

1080p makes that a combo underfeatured and overpriced : ) Precedes their reliability fame, though : -)

haha I see you're done, your coming clientele won't leave your ankles : -)

Bump ; -)

For one simple reason based on several premises: - poor DR; - too light codec bit rate to offer limited color depth; - no chroma subsampling will save the grace. Other than that, skilled hands will be able to make it an interesting tool though. Resolution will make a hybrid made in heaven. Surprising low light performance to close the deal beyond any initial prejudice. E : -)

C'mon, day for night or nuit américaine as known in French through Truffaut's movie is far to be 'the solution' there. Not so easy ; ) not so sensorless technique, let's also give the right credits as due ; -)

I found it perfectly well designed. Very filmic, B movie, the 80s score to match the whole feeling. Those true events inspired by the movie happened in 1981, so I guess everything had a reason to happen. On the contrary of the killers' characters motivation, the essence of the horror success there BTW. My earliest wondering was why the RED ONE MX there? Intriguing until you get the whole thing : ) And yes, there's place for good old digital technology in clever hands : -)

David, I firmly wrote low light photography. For some reason I called it "superb"! ; ) Absence of tools could never be described like that : D Thus, not necessarily low light sensor technology nor even lack of lighting as you wish. This means the set of skills to gather technology available to somehow include: - lights of course, - sensor qualities / range, i.e., its properties and potentiality; to match the necessary technique (let's not forget post either) to provide a certain goal required by the narrative in such case where a low light design is mandatory. You actually had no need for anything else. That is, nothing about no lights approach here. 10-years old sensor technology was enough for the result intended. That's what counts in the end. Without talent and know-how, pal, nothing happens for sure : ) I guess people on these boards tend to overestimate their geek soul rather than art and craft(s) techniques... and see anything fiercely committed with innovation. My point. E : -)

Indeed.

Odd the fact these guys have completely been ignored by a new vague of shooters... TAKE A LOOK

Does 2018 couple to a RED ONE camera make any sense in a movie practically shot on superb low light photography? Shot on RED ONE Camera (Mysterium-X if my eye serves to its signature) with Kowa Anamorphic Lenses.

I guess the removal thing will truly mark this edition from April 8 on.

I am glad they'd rather have to take the word Fusion in a more literal way ; -)

Well, perfectly natural your point but to strictly call it crash cam range is absolutely lame. Without mention how someone who loves art tends to see the most part of the pictures produced there, actually : ) That's invariably their outcome to frequently discard instead. Much more often. History tells that. Not enough number of adverbs to express my revolt on the way gear is categorized according to the(ir) price list. BMD as for instance has proved such nonsense. It is only a matter of numbers. Bucks. Not bit rate nor pixels. The box office numbers or its potentiality, not even the effective cost price of manufacturing. Let alone R&D. A capitalist thing. Nothing against. But call it the name it has. No other. Crash cam is a shame. Just my two cents, though (E : -)

We can't subscribe all of us the yellow, isn't it? There's land of fact and room for opinion on the other hand. Nothing wrong on it : -)

Your in your own. I just disagree : -)

Here's an interesting compilation related to Davinci Resolve 16 from and on reduser! : D http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?175540-Davinci-Resolve-16-Beta&p=1850280#post1850280 Scroll up the page because I couldn't resist to point to that exact post there... LOL : -)