Laurier

Not really, Arri never lied about their sensor, they still lead technological developments, from light, to lenses, to camera, to gimbals. I m a blackmagic user (ursa mini G2), but it took almost 10 years for other companies to do something almost as good as Arri. I don t think they are overrated, they are just not accessible to the mass.

I think I read that the Ursa mini 4.6/pro/G2 use the same approach but with two 11 bits signals rather than 14 from the Alexa, but I m no expert. I would not be surprised if the power consumption/heat is greater, or if the cost of the sensor is not higher. But modern Dual gain architecture is something different if I understand it properly, it was developed by a third party company, and they licence the technology to sensor manufacturer and I think it s both a software and a hardware thing, it I think it map the dynamic range in a different way, you loose in the highlight but gain in the shadows. I think the sensor only do a single readout with this technology.

I found that video not very impressive to sell a 10k camera , it could have been shoot a A7iii, the colors and the DR look very similar from what I got from the A7iii I had. Since I switched to a ursa G2 I realized that sony not only have issue with colors, but also with contrast, the skin color range have a lot more of contrast on sony camera, that create a harsh impression of sharpness and make the structures of the facial features more visible, that rarely faltering to anyone. I get the trend/push for full frame, I like the look, but in restricted professional use it is more of an issue than a bonus, It s much harder to keep things in focus, you need to close more your aperture, so then you either need more light or push your iso....the autofocus will help in some case but still, when it jump focus your take is ruined, I found a subject going slightly in and out of focus less disturbing than a jumpy autofocus. I find those mid-range full frame pro camera odd, for super high end production why not ( but then you go for a venice/C700/Alexa LF) but for a small crew I have more doubts.

I find the price reasonable for what you get.

Dng are only on external recording, and no 60fps. Once you buy and attach an external recorder it s not that small or (probably) cheap anymore. If the Dng are 4K ( they also mention electronic stabilization) that mean a crop anyway. I think a pocket 4K or a Xt-3 will still give you more value for money. The only benefit I could see is if they include a anamorphic 4:3 s35 mode as a recording option.

Blackmagic already use a sony sensor on the pocket 4k I believe. But honestly what more can people want ? I just ordered a G2, spec and IQ wise it sit between a red and an alexa mini , all for a lot less money. JVC can buy a sony sensor, but that do not mean you will get good motion performance, a good raw codec , internal ND or colors and all the connections. If you look at what they are doing with the 8k M4/3 camera, that still very far from a Pocket 4k in term of potential professional use.

He probably don t pay for the cameras and Red do custom builds for him ( also for Michael Bay), but David Fincher fit really well with the overall red branding, doing tools for bad boys. You don t name a camera dragon/weapon and use indi/arthouse movies to promote it. For the FS7 and C300, from decent size commercials sets, to well produced MV to people run and gunning in the street of London, interviews/corporate ect, on the top end I see mostly Alexa mini and some reds. But yeah , a lot of Fs7 here in london.

I would not be surprise if they also use the A7iii sensor, like the mavo LF and the next Z cam, the specs sound similar to those camera, they already use a sony sensor for the GH5s.

Yes but Arri is also renting equipement itself to large productions, They are able to offer complete seamless solutions. Red is selling luxury marketing, including David Fincher who they sponsor . Nothing wrong with that, it s a business after all, but I feel red is in a awkward position now, I think that netflix trend with red is going to fade now that Arri have the LF and the LF mini, those camera are still very recent and that article don t reflect that. Canon and sony have a more define cine/broadcast department that I believe is profitable overall ( I see FS7 and C300 everywhere) Panasonic is more blurry with that I find. Blackmagic are outputting cinema gear at consumer price and also sell a full post production system to go with it, I think their approach is different , people buy because it s cheap and they are willing to try the product, so whether the client is satisfied or not they still make sales.

Well yeah, they are slowly getting in trouble, they are partnering with foxcon to bring cheaper 8k camera, that a sign that they can t keep up with the market. Almost everything that made RED special can now be find in competitors products for a much cheaper price. Arri have a complete ecosystem of products, from camera to lenses, to follow focus, to stabilizer, to crane, to light ect. Everything they manufacture is made to endure, that a very different approach from a lot of other manufacturer, and that what high level production are paying for as well.

If they expect to sell a Aps-c camera for 5 to 6k, they are mental, you can get a URSA mini G2 for that price. 2k would be a competitive pricing indeed .

If you want something sharp I will go zeiss I think, the russian 28mm is slow , and I did not try the FD.

in video mode with extraction for 2.39, I quickly tested in photo mode and I should also be able to extract 2.39 from it . Basically the cinelux cover up to 42.5mm for 35mm, 4 perf anamorphic ( that a larger area than most super 35mm sensors), once you add a single focus solution in from you mostly cover up to 45mm . https://www.pointsinfocus.com/tools/depth-of-field-and-equivalent-lens-calculator/#{"c":[{"av":"2","fl":42.5,"d":3048,"cm":"0"}],"m":0} I did a data input there so you can see the equivalency per format. That still theoretical as the lens design of the taking prime influence the values as well, but that a good ballpark.

I don t think that true, I can go 55mm with a cinelux 2x + rectilux on full frame . You should be able to use a 28mm if you don t use a speedbooster.

1. modern glass, so native high quality M4/3 glass from Panasonic or Olympus or veydra. 2. cinelux ES 3. Rectilux HCDNA You will get oval bokeh and some corner distortion ,that will be very sharp but sterile . You should rather consider vintage primes as taking lenses, you will get less sharp results but something with more live in it.

The raven is horrible in low light I can tell you that , I graded a short shot with it recently and there was already Some noise at iso 500 , pass 800 it was really nasty.

You can already get most of the Venice color science using the venice Rec 709 lut if you shoot Slog2/3 or HLG Like for the Alexa and Reds a lot good amount of the color science is in their log to Rec 709 lut, I did a HLG to Venice 709 lut for my A7iii ,using LUTCalc, that work extremely well. But Z cam won t have auto-focus and sensor stabilization

They just introduced a 8k sensor with 4k 4.4.4 binning on sensor with fast readout. The sensor is 8k you output true 4k straight out of the sensor ready to encode. The A7iii already downsample 6k to 4k with reasonable rolling shutter. They also have 8k TV to sell I believe, so that would make sense. But I would take 4k 60fps without crop/line skipping over 8k . If you look at the XT3 and the GH5s , they don t have sensor stabilization, that make a big difference in heat dissipation, the GH5 is also larger than a A7 camera. But personally I won t mind if Sony make a bit bigger body to have better specs

Sony have the tech to do it on smaller sensors , they provide the sensors for the GH5s and the XT3. But the A7 have both autofocus and sensor stabilization, plus a larger sensor in a smaller body . If you look at the very last sensors they publicly released ( that are not yet in used in consumer grade cameras) the approach is to get a lot of the processing directly on sensor for faster readout and pixel binning . Beside you have the specs on paper, and what you get out of the camera, from my grading experience, the image out of a A7s (2014) externally in 8 bits is still more solid that a 10 bits images from a GH5/GH5s(2018) and that from a much older sensor. ( but the rolling shutter is still bad ...)

I think the 24-55-85 K35 are based on the FD but the versions before the L line was introduced. I did read that the Aspherical elements were hand polished, I guess the L version industrialized the process more and got more consistent. But then the K35 are a full and fast super 35 set, the 18mm 1.4 don t have a FD close equivalent. I don t know how much better the mechanics are on the original K35, compared to a FD, and I wonder what the initial cost of a set was, but I think the cost is over inflated today for what they are. I considered getting the 24-55-85 FD and convert them to e-mount but after watching a lot comparison I found them barely more interesting than a set of samyang . There is a lot of marketing BS for this kind of things, when the K35 are warm, low contrast and soft it s cool and fancy, but when you get the same thing with a cheaper option is a defect and its not desirable anymore.

I actually tested both because I was considering the P4k and was interested into the 120fps of the E2. But that really a matter of opinions at that point, I think you get more for your money with the P4k because its cheaper, already have a screen and better codec options and a resolve licence. But also, I personally think that the sensor is the most important part of a camera, I did download the samples from the Mavo LF and compared to what I get from a A7iii and in prores you get pretty much the same thing. Not many company sell full frame sensors , Zcam don t manufacture their own sensor, so I think that safe to assume they buy what is on the market , and at that price point there are not many options. Don t get me wrong , I support the idea of company like Zcam, but in a competitive market such as cameras, I think it s going to be tough to sell a camera at a 2kusd+ price point.

But the Z cameras have very little in common with A FS5 or a FS7. Just compare the P4k to the E2, they share the same sensor, the P4k is cheaper and have better features overall, ( the only thing going for the E2 is 120fps 4k , but the quality is horrible) Sony camera / Broadcast / sensors are 3 separate divisions, the camera order custom sensors to the sensor division. The Broadcast one have a lot less budget than the camera division, on the Venice for example they borrowed the a9 sensor . If you look at panasonic , the GH5s was made by a collaboration between the broadcast and the camera division. I m not saying that the A7siii is going to replace a FS7, they are in different segments of the market, but for me the E2 is closer to a A7 than a Venice in term of features and tech. I think sony is going to move the FS line to 8k and bump the specs for the A7siii, because otherwise what would it have over a A7iii that already have better features than a 7sii.

Technically neither the E2 6kFF But you can already compare it to a A7iii since it s probably going to be the same sensor.

Well , Sony said that they want to go over customer expectation, customer expectations are 10 bits out and 60fps in 4k that what the sony CEO said in the last interview. Looking at the tech and the last sensor released , we can also expect a stacked back lit sensor, so very low to no rolling shutter. On top, either the current eye AF in video or the new object tracking tech from the a9 . What the E2 6k FF is , is a A7iii sensor with 60fps/compressed raw for 5k usd , without monitor, which is still a good price don t get me wrong. But the A7siii will be cheaper with more recent tech, and similar specs. Better customer services, better resale value ect... That a pragmatic look . But really, video autofocus on FF was a game changer for me , shooting on a shoulder rig with a 135mm at 2.8 and having a perfect subject tracking is just mad.

And the quality I fairly bad, that could have been the main selling point for me, but after downloading the sample footage, the quality is horrible ( and so much fixed noise pattern)