jonpais

Atomos has a close working relationship with many of the leading camera manufacturers, so anything is possible.

I’m not sure your argument is convincing, Rob. Paying someone so I can walk around in the buff is different from dozens of software engineers working together for months. If it’s just data off the sensor, then anyone should be able to cook it up in their kitchen, right? Anyhow, the only person I could find who thought it was a conspiracy is Vitaly at PV, and he’s a bit of an eccentric. I’ve seen lots of industry leaders and respected filmmakers who have nothing but great things to say about ProRes RAW, and none of them mention anything about deceptive marketing practices or say it should be free. But camera manufacturers and Atomos will be offering it in their products at no extra cost to the consumer. In fact, Atomos has already given free updates to owners of their recorders and the Panasonic EVA1 firmware update v.2.0 added it, along with a couple other companies. Anyhow, nobody’s forcing anyone to use ProRes RAW - you can shoot other RAW formats if you like. Just as I’m free not to buy a certain cinema camera because they intentionally leave out a middle codec.

Sure, Jeromy Young’s talk at NAB 2018.

Vignetting reaches as high as 59% and even stopping down to f/11 doén’t help matters much. Cropping to 2:39, there will still be huge light fall off toward the edges of the frame. Best to just embrace it as a feature.

80% of productions currently record in Prores, and we’ll soon see Prores RAW widely adopted in the industry, so good luck with that! If your argument is that Apple holds the rights, then by that logic, we should throw out all patents! Just out of curiosity - what precisely do you mean by ‘shamelessly so’? You mean like a woman of ill repute showing off her wares on 8 mile road? ?

I purchased two dry boxes to protect my investment. If not, in the space of a couple years, all my lenses would probably have fungus.

I beg to differ. If anyone so much as mentions a bug with Fuji, the entire community will be down their throat. And Fuji has got its share of them. Sometimes they’re solved with an update, sometimes not. Not picking on Fuji, but since you hold them up as the gold standard and all... And not to be rude, but having to buy battery grips sucks big time. At least Sony came out with a great battery with Mark III. Having to purchase a battery grip for the Fuji X-H1 when a newer battery would have been preferable... It’s gouging if you ask me. Exactly! My Sony is toast! ?

With all due respect, I fail to understand why anyone would want to ‘give the middle finger’ to Zeiss Otus. Otus lenses retail for $4,000; Nikon will be selling its Noct for 50% more - a whopping $6,000! Is that what you call ‘giving the middle finger’ to Otus? Will you be buying one? Or perhaps a whole set? But mostly I’m curious where the hostility for one of the oldest and most respected names in the business comes from.

In case you didn’t know, it was a joke. Guess you weren’t in on it.

oops.

1) Nobody in this thread said color science is BS. 2) Nobody said anything about Sony having Alexa color science. 3) Filmmakers have created LUTs for every camera imaginable. 4) Many photographers find Sony color science has improved significantly with the Mark III. 5) All manufacturers continually strive to deliver more pleasing color science with each new generation of camera. 6) Who here claimed Sony had unbeatable color anyhow?

Binary, black-or-white thinking doesn't allow for the many different variables, conditions, and contexts in which there would exist more than just the two possibilities put forth. It frames the argument misleadingly and obscures rational, honest debate. source

I guess I’m full of shit too, since Canon, Fuji, Olympus et al are supposed to have better color science than either Panasonic or Sony, yet I chose them for their combination of image quality, handling, features, ecosystem and performance, just as a great many others have. That’s an overwhelmingly compelling case you have there though - I find black or white arguments that categorize and label people according to which camera they choose to be incontrovertable. In fact, when I see someone shooting Fuji, I think to myself, ‘Ah, now there’s a true artist!’ ?

I don’t think there’s any question it can shoot fine video.

Let them boycott if after a7s III Prores RAW is announced at Photokina in September.

I’d like to see Prores RAW.

Either way your money’s going to an occidental country. ?

I would wait for the BM Video Assist update.

Why are we even discussing lenses? It's not in the topic's title.

And the GH5 continues to clobber the X-H1 in sales over at Amazon. X-H1: Best Sellers Rank, #12,063 in Camera & Photo GH5: Best Sellers Rank, #1,061 in Camera & Photo

Haven't you noticed that everyone here's already put their a7 III up for sale on eBay?

Has this photo been posted yet? NIKKOR Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S and 14-30mm f/4 S Lenses source

I know you're joking, but I've never once said any camera was any better than any other (except perhaps during my brief infatuation with the X-T2!) Individual features or specs, yes - as a whole system, no.

We can say this or that doesn't matter, it doesn't change the fact that the Nikon is $200 (25%) more: which is significant to me. Maybe it's loose change to you. And many Sony users find that OSS does make a difference. For example, I've seen many reviews of the Batis 85mm f/1.8 in which the reviewer has nothing but praise for the optical stabilization.

Django - take a deep breath. We aren't discussing bodies. The topic today is lenses. You said Nikon's lenses are weather sealed and worth every penny. (okay, slight exaggeration!) I contend that Sony's 24-70mm f/4 is not only more affordable, but has the very useful feature of optical image stabilization.