deezid

Could work. Mine works better than ever before, after calibration. Had some Roll axis problems before, now they're gone.

Looks like the Recorder does some light grading lol The posterization and banding in dark areas is problematic though.

Love it so far. Maybe just make the right side a bit dark, then it would be perfect.

Pictures look impressive. Seems like no strong sharpening and nr are used. Tons of detail. If it's too noisy (I think it looks really organic) you can still apply NR.

@jonpais I'm currently changing my workflow to ACES in davinci resolve. One of the benefits is a finer black level separation. So I can still crush blacks without satisfying too many details and strange gamma changes. I love it!

I don't see anything which can't be done with a GH5 or even 4 (external V-Log) in these clips tbh. Crushed blacks are almost standard in every movie since the beginning of cinema and honestly - I like it. The Highlightrolloff in the third clip isn't that great, her skins turns yellow in some scenes with direct sunlight.

Choose the GH5. Buy V-Log as well. Turn down sharpening and NR to -5. Add some blur to the footage. It will still show way more detail than the Micro and almost no artifacts (even in 1080p).

Ohhh, that's bad. Nvm, will be fixed in the Vimeo version... Yh, that was Mount Bonnell in Austin. Went there at 5:30AM lol. Since cinematic is quite different from oversharpened/denoised and realistic colors but skintones with red channel clipping (yellowish highlights) anyway...

- Every movement shot was done using a gimbal (besides the drone shots) - I pulled focus on camera(the Zhiyun crane is pretty sturdy, lol) - That was shot on a kitchen table with green fabric as well as on the kitchen floor - Using the integrated lut, exposed until skintones looked good (most of the shots are slightly underexposed) - I only like the easy operation. The codec is terrible and you can either decide between way too oversharpened or blurred footage. Color science using D-Log isn't bad though...

interesting screenshot. Doesn't look like that here (not on the TV, nor my calibrated REC709 screen, nor my iPad, nor my Galaxy S8 etc...). Seems like your videoplayback levels are wrong (check your gpu settings, change to REC709 or 16-235) or try another browser. It is definitely not crushed. Interesting enough, it looks crushed after being uploaded here, lol...

The choice of "crushed" shadows (not really crushed, check waveform, but strong compression and pulled down to 0-3 IRE range) was an artistic one to achieve a very vibrant, dark and colorful look. I honestly would love to work with a Varicam LT instead, or a GH5 with the Varicam sensor and processing, lol... A bigger camera would limit me in many situations, but would be a great option for a way bigger budget (with assistance, another operator etc...). 3 times better wouldn't be the case, some images would profit (way better color science, better DR, better lowlight, no noisereduction nor sharpening etc...) others would be worse (this camera is just big and heavy and would therefore limit my work I guess). I didn't have any worries about doing extreme colorgrading on the internal 10 bit GH5 footage, grades like butter without introducing any artifacts. The codec is just great and miles better than my GH4/V-Log experience tbh.

Shot on the GH5 in 3 days. A concept trailer done having a zero budget for our upcoming first feature film. I really like what I can squeeze out of the internal 10 bit V-Log footage. DR, lowlight and colors are really good. Everything was shot with sharpening and nr set to -5 and a Tiffen Black Pro Mist filter applied in front of the lens (12-35mm 2.8 V1, 20mm 1.7, 42.5mm 1.7) to make it smoother. Colorgrading done in Davinci Resolve. Drone shots by the DJI Mavic (the internal sharpening is hideous tbh...).

Well they say 4k or 18MP. But the lens doesn't seem to resolve any more than 1-2MP...

You never saw Varicam skintones I guess?

You can attach it to an external recorder and record ProRes 444, it will look the same. The problem is the "enhanced" processing of the GH5 and there's no way to bypass it. You can only try to minimize the symptoms. And look at the Digital Bolex (Quite Low DR and small sensor). Beautiful and cinematic, thanks to great color science and the lack of processing. You can even convert it to 10 bit H264 and it will stay beautiful. The main reasons for the kinda videoish amateur look are: - strong sharpening (even at -5) - lens corrections (only with native lenses though) - noise reduction (even at -5) - red channel clipping (even in V-log) - green/magenta blocks (even recording in ProRes 444, though harder to make visible) The Varicam has exactly 0 of these issues. (Actually the GH5 does a very similar downsampling from 5.4k to 4k, I hope that's not a bad indicator...) Dynamic Range: The shot with the flower (shadow areas) and especially the shot with the vertical light (C300 MKII really struggles here, at least one stop less, both bright and shadow areas look bad) Color: Every shot to me. Reds look way better on the Varicam (reds are very difficult on the GH5/GH4 though, turn into yellow quite fast before they clip, greens are kinda nuclear on the GH5 as well and beautiful on varicams, I really hope the Vgamut claim is true)

Sorry to hurt your feelings. The GH5 looks like homevideo unless you filter it a lot in production and post production. If the EVA1 looks like the GH5 I will buy the C200 with it's unprocessed RAW codec, which won't look like video since it's unprocessed. If the EVA1 looks like the Varicam LT/35/HS I will buy the EVA1, since the Varicam LT/35/HS look like organic film since their lack of internal processing like sharpening, NR and what so ever, and of course it's 10 bit internal codec which will make editing and storage easy. And I agree, if this is the case, no manufacturer, not even Blackmagic, can compete. You can easily see the ugly processing the C300 MKII does in the ungraded footage. The Varicam looks like organic film while the C300 MKII looks cheap and processed (the original C300 was way more filmic). The C200 will provide internal RAW, which hopefully will be unprocessed. I see no issue here honestly. And we still don't know how many parts of GH5 technology the EVA1 will be made of. I honestly hope, none. After watching the full comparison I can say: - Canon color science doesn't even come close - DR on Varicam as well as highlight rolloff is amazing, shadows are way cleaner, the C300 MKII looks almost like the GH5 in highlights... - Ghosting and electronic grain on the C300 MKII in dark and low contrast areas.

I just don't like it. Very inconsistent skintones and nuclear greens were a big problem in 13 Reasons Why. Other shows even looked videoish. But based on the the RAW MXF footage you can download everywhere, it's not the camera's fault. Tried to colorgrade some footage (quick and dirty) from the Varicam LT:

Actually didn't like the look in any of Netflix's Varicam shot shows. The color grading isn't mine. But you can download varicam MXF files everywhere, they're lovely and look wonderful after grading.

Maybe that's why I love the C300 MKII motion cadence so much. :D

My old GH4 finally. GH5 doesn't really impress me. Too videoish. If EVA looks like Varicam (organic film), that will be mine.

Yh, that was quite promising. Let's hope they don't add any of the "advanced" GH5 processing. lol

Both the GH4 and GH5 need lot's of filtering (diffusion filters and post blur actually) so they don't look like cheap video anymore. The Varicam on the other side looks amazing without any filtering. Like an ARRI Alexa.

I mean the Varicam is very close to ARRI Alexa, while the GH5 footage online reminds me of my smartphone... (not kidding)

I'll take two of these if it has the real Varicam (LT) look. That would be amazing. If footage looks like shot with a GH5 (processed, homevideo like) I buy the C200 instead.

If they don't use any of the ugly processing (sharpening, nr, ghosting) from the GH5, I'm all in. Obviously Canon RAW won't have any of these flaws.