IronFilm

I reckon BMD's approach of offering the user a LOT for very little $$, is indeed a desirable behavior. Any one who pays 100% with the pre order is foolishly taking on the risk. So now we've got that out of the way, BMD never promised the Micro would get a Global Shutter once they'd already started shipping the Micro. This seems like a very unreasonable point to bring up against BMD.

Zoom has another new product out today: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1419884-REG/zoom_livetrak_l_20_20_channel.html

"Normal shooting conditions" to you, but not to them.

Oh yes, a tonne of the negative complaints about low end equipment is just due to low end folks who don't know their right from their left. (then there is a minority who high end snobs who are willfully spreading FUD, I'm seeing a fair amount of that with the Zoom F series...)

And you won't even need to cook it first!

And I'm sure if he had used RED then they'd have also helped him out as well, that is part of their job at RED to deliver top notch service. Just the same as at name other companies.

Thanks, you just made my point that choosing a C500 (over say a RED) wasn't due to the lower cost.

But he won't be filming in that aspect ratio. Although there is still a little vignetting at 16:9, but might be kinda livable? Would need to test, and depends on the person. I'd guess though at 2.39:1 it would be fine however. (edit: although the point about GH5 vs GH5S will negate all that)

I can't recall the details or be bothered looking it up, but from memory the base body for the RED Scarlet was sub $10K so even once adding in thousands more dollars of extras that is still probably less than a C500. But even if I give you the benefit of the doubt here (Happy to do so!), and say a RED Scarlet package is going to cost thousands of dollars more than the C500, that still doesn't matter as the rental price difference I'm sure would be so small it would be chump change for a blockbuster film like he was using it on. And that is my point.

Did you mean the 18-85? haha, yeah at $64K it is a little pricey! https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/840523-REG/Fujinon_hk4_7x18_f_18_85mm_T2_0_Premier_PL.html Why not the Fujion MK18-55mm T2.9? A fraction of the cost! Much much lighter. And gives you an extra 55mm of reach vs the 35mm max of the Sigma. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1321239-REG/fujinon_fujinon_mk18_55mm_t2_9_lens.html Easy to use it on a GH5: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1374553-REG/mtf_services_ltd_mtfujim43_micro_4_3_mount_for.html

I have no doubt that for the time and for him (that is, his particular project/needs he was on then) that the C500 was the right choice. Of course it doesn't mean it would be right now, or for everyone else for everything else. When issues are only found in edge cases then yes these too are "bugs", and not unreasonable/unexpected in a shipping product. And it is unfortunately quite easy for bugs to creep back in when you shift from very small production runs (often just hand built prototypes) to large scale mass production. As the changeover introduces new unknown variables and complexities (which is a common problem we've seen bite BMD and other brands) When the C500 first came out it was a $20K camera, not really that different to a RED Scarlet, certainly the price difference would be chump change to a Hollywood production

Very well put

I guess he might be referring to the very high odds Canikon are launching their pro mirrorless then.

Well that is odd, but in the specs they're on the money: For the BMPCC4K? Got to keep ourselves busy somehow while we wait!

Which Kinefinity model? VS Terra 4K? Crop factor is 1.0x

Yes, I wrote that back before we knew the details so it was sheer pure wild guesstimates from me (in hindsight, obviously way too high) as to what the time delay might actually be.

So you're only arguing over degrees here, splitting hairs, that BMD where up front "enough" but Kinefinity is not? Seems clear enough to me what Kinefinity is doing. But you still didn't answer my question before, is the BMCC MFT a MFT camera or not, and if not, what is it?

That logic makes no sense at all. Are you going to claim the BMCC MFT is not a Micro Four Thirds camera? And if it isn't, what is it?!

Focus peaking is calculated from the image, nothing whatsoever to do with the lens connection, that is why even external monitors can have the focus -peaking functionality built into the monitor.

Depends a lot on the person buying it, for me who is using it every day and for paid work, then the extra cost of its life span per use is nothing at all. But if a person is using it much less often, then it could be smarter to get the cheaper F4

There are a few things I prefer about the F4, but at exactly the same price that would mean it is hard to not buy the F8 instead. But why get the F8? When the F8n is only a little more...

EMBRACE being middle of nowhere!

https://www.aja.com/news/top-stories/304 Hmmm... their press release say shipping was in December, but a quick google suggests others are saying it might have been later in March (or even April) that Cion was actually properly shipping. So maybe it was only a teeny trickle of cameras in December and it took them a few months to properly ramp up production to fulfill orders. Anyway.... point was it took a while after they announced it before they shipped the Cion, which made its success an even tougher prospect against the competition. https://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/is-the-aja-cion-the-biggest-bust-in-modern-filmmaking/ That is a little summary which repeats some of what I just said.

Digital Bolex was $3299 initially for their cheapest model (with another version which cost $4K! And another model positioned between them). Price is what made DB16 struggle to succeed in the market against sub $1K (and later only $500!! Is why I bought it) BMPCC. That price difference is a heck of massive hurdle to ask a low budget buyer to overlook. And there were other factors too, like BMPCC had ProRes, greater dynamic range, lighter weight, active MFT mount, better lowlight, the support of a bigger company (even though BMD is small fish compared to Canon/Panasonic/Sony/etc, they're massive compared to DB! And that helps when it comes to having a retail presence, CS, firmware development, marketing, etc). I dunno, as I think even at the same price (which the DB16 is not, it is a long way off from that!) then the DB16 would be a hard sell for many average buyers of the BMPCC. AJA Cion failed for the exact same reasons I just mentioned beforehand: PRICE! AJA was asking $9K for the AJA Cion. The original BMD URSA 4K was I think $5K? That is an awfully big difference, nearly half the price! Plus there were other factors too, as while the URSA 4K was using the worst sensor BMD ever used, they at least still managed to get more out of their 4K sensor and fixed more of its issues than AJA who struggled with the same 4K sensor in their camera. Additionally at first the AJA Cion *only* was available in PL mount (later on AJA had an EF option, but by then it was too little too late), which is another negative for the low budget indie filmmaker the Cion and URSA 4K was targeted at. Things only got much much much worse for the AJA Cion when not that long after it started shipping we had BMD announce the URSA Mini 4K and URSA Mini 4.6K, so here then was the new URSA Mini 4.6K with a better sensor at still a lower price than the AJA Cion (even *after* the massive price drop! That the Cion got nearer the end of its life cycle) or the BMD URSA Mini 4K with the same sensor as the Cion (but better implemented in the BMD camera) for sub $3K! The AJA Cion was never going to beat such stiff competition (and I'm only comparing directly against BMD, not going deeply into discussing the other competition such as the dominant FS7 in the market at that price point). At best maybe the Cion could have found a smaller niche for itself to thrive in until it could make another attempt at comeback with a v2.0, maybe. AJA really was trying though, with deep discounts and offering free trials to filmmakers, but it just was too little too late. There were other factors as well than just simply price which lead to AJA's demise (like the PL only mount at launch which I touched on before), such as requiring AJA's own propertity media which further drived up the Total Cost of Ownership of an AJA Cion. But fundamentally I'll say its failure was due to its price. If the AJA Cion had been announced (and then immediately shipped, not the delays it had) much much earlier than when it was, prior to the URSA 4K (or FS7) existing then I'm sure it would have seen massively greater success than what happened. (rather than its December 2014 shipping, which lead to a nearly half price slash in price less than six months later)

If being a supplier falls under the "two hard basket" (I doubt it... plus all that manufacturing equipment which used to make point and shoots might at least be partially used for smartphone sensors and optics instead) then they could just license their name and tech knowledge instead. (also like Zeiss & Leica are doing with smartphones) Yes with the new 400mm lens then Sony is going deep into Nikon/Canon territory and attacking them. Still feel that Nikon doesn't need to make a mirrorless D5/D500 just yet, and should concentrate instead on bringing out the core mirrorless models first (something like a D850/D750/D7500 equivalent). However Nikon needs to get these first mirrorless models out soon as there will be a time not far away (I suspect within 5yrs) when that need to have a response to Sony's mirrorless attack on their sports/birding/wildlife market will mean that Nikon must put out a mirrorless response rather than keep on relying upon their D5/D6 top tier DSLRs.