jonpais

No disagreement there. Now we’re back on the same page.

Since we evidently had different schooling, all else being equal means the codec, lighting conditions, processing and everything else remain the same, the only difference being the physical size of the sensor. And Adam Wilt does not mention dynamic range or noise in his otherwise interesting test. At this point, you are just offering anecdotal evidence, which is of little practical value.

All else being equal - I’m sure you’re familiar with that term from high school - a ff sensor has less noise and greater DR. Provide proof before just spreading misinformation in the forums. Your own tests. Not Adam Wilt’s or someone else’s.

Glad you pointed it out. Now why don’t you start a new topic, since this isn’t the Blackmagic thread.

You are sorely mistaken on all counts - and if the Sony shot RAW like the BMPCC, I can assure you, it would take over the world. Anyhow, you asked what the advantages of FF were, not which codec. You are not making any sense.

Right - the advantages of FF are better low light sensitivity, shallower DOF, less noise, more detailed 4K and wider dynamic range.

There’s no reason to believe the video was fabricated. Time to ship it back.

When it comes to the current crop of mirrorless cameras, the advantages of full frame include better low light sensitivity, less noise, more detailed 4K, wider dynamic range, shallower depth of field and better autofocus than their crop sensor counterparts. Of course, some of these advantages vary from camera to camera.

synchronous?

I received the X-mounts a little while back and felt a tinge of regret at not having ordered E-mounts instead, thinking I might switch over to Sony with the announcement of the a7 III. But it looks like Veydra will be around for a while, so no hurry. I’d been tossing around the idea of getting X-mounts ever since buying the Veydras, and with the release of the Fuji X-H1, I figured some filmmakers might be interested in seeing how they performed on an APS-C sensor. I might do a couple tests with the X-T2 in the next couple of months.

It’s not the camera - that’s just how people walk in Japan.

@darrellcraig The Veydras kick some butt. Interesting that Roger says they’re only available in E-mount and micro 4/3... hehe High resolution, low field curvature, low sample variance, crisper on micro 4/3 than Zeiss CPs. Good to know they’re renting a lot of these.

and 40 dead pixels in a row at that! Sounds dubious. Has anyone ever seen a dead pixel resembling a flickering rainbow colored bar? And all in the same place on every sensor? Color me skeptical.

excellent. but it’s not fair - they were real filmmakers and actors, they incorporated set design and costumes, had a stylist and used lighting to shape the space and create mood and atmosphere.?

Yeah, for 3840 x 2160 24p, they say 707 Mb/s, not 1900.

Firstly, I never made disparaging remarks about your work, like you just did mine. Secondly, Fuji's got numerous issues and you never said 'epic fail!'. Sounds like bias to me. So yeah, perhaps I've got a pattern of reacting to people who insult me.

Thanks, Lux Shots.

I thought Prores HQ had a data rate of 734 Mbit/s, not 1900 Mbit/s.

Looking at Google images, all the dead pixel pictures are a single dot. I can't find any with a row of rainbow colors. A stuck pixel wouldn't appear like that I don't believe. Apparently, Sony cameras do pixel re-mapping once a month. What the fix does is accelerate the process, if it is indeed hot pixels.

whatever mr superman.

And has that been found to be just a temporary fix or long lasting? Because it looks like a lot more than just one pixel. It's a small regular row, not a small speck.

Yeah, epic fail. It took all of one minute to fix the issue. Let's not be drama queens. Evidently a firmware issue, not the sensor.

We know you think Panasonic and Sony suck, Matt, which is why you can always be counted on for an objective opinion. Thanks for your input, it's always refreshing to hear. I already said several times, this is not about who makes better cameras: it's about Canon abandoning DSLR filmmakers. This isn't about sports photography either. But you do like to derail topics, it's your specialty.

Panasonic provided the AV equipment and dozens of broadcast cameras that covered the opening and closing ceremonies and the competitions at the 2018 Winter Olympics that were watched by twenty million people a night. so what? Most consumers rate all camera brands very highly when it comes to reliability anyway. If your camera needs repair these days, there's a 40% chance that it was was involved in an accident, not a malfunction. The point is that, unlike Sony, Panasonic and Fuji, Canon is pushing filmmakers to buy their expensive cinema cameras by withholding features found on practically every other hybrid camera on the market today. Essentially what you're saying is that Canon cripples its cameras so they're more reliable, which I don't buy for a minute. But you did put a smile on my face when you said the 1.74x crop of the Canon was no worse than the GH5. hehe

Wrong. Olympic sponsorships have got little to do with reliability and everything to do with signing lucrative contracts that are mutually beneficial to both parties. Panasonic, which by the way also makes extremely reliable cameras, has been sponsoring the Olympic Games for three decades.