iaremrsir

@mitdelay I'm not sure what you mean by weak debayer. It's very nice. Of course you don't have to use CineForm's debayer if you use Resolve to grade, but there's nothing inherently bad about the debayers. And DNG is raw and is not yet debayered, just like CineForm raw. It depends on what you use to debayer it with. Plus, I led the CineForm CTO to some more debayer algorithms to add and he said they could work with them. So I'd expect some new debayer options soon.

Sorry for waiting so long to reply. I didn't even know you had replied to me. Anyone know how to turn on notifications? Anyway. Right now DNG->CF Raw is not on Mac.

It works with FCP7 and edits smoother than ProRes depending on the settings you choose for raw. The only drawback is the compression, if you consider that a drawback. It requires much less computing power, it's an extremely resource efficient codec. Storage of raw is less storage than ProRes at a similar quality setting, because it's raw. 444 vs 422 depends on what you're trying to do with it. That's like trying to choose between ProRes 4444 and ProRes 422 HQ. But I'd just stick to CF Raw as you can change the debayer settings and everything for even smoother editing, then change to better debayers when doing compositing and grading. Even when not shooting raw it's great for upsampling 4:2:0 footage. It performs a chroma upsampling similar to 5DtoRGB.

"What I later found was that if I shot at the desired ISO in-camera the image is cleaner than shooting at what I assumed to be the native ISO and adjusting the exposure in post, so it is likely the native ISO is more like 2500 than 800!"   Does this mean that what's coming from raw2dng is like a sorta-raw? It sounds like the ISO is being baked in instead of being just metadata. Am I missing something? At least on my 600D and shooting in raw mode, raising the ISO in camera reduces the raw dynamic range by 3 - 4 stops and takes away the possibility of recovering highlights later on in ACR.