Wulf

Nikon did the same. They are optical engineers. The whole photo branche started only because they weren't allowed to produce their most infamous stuff any longer ...

Yes. ​Don't forget, their decline started in analog film days.

@ j.f.r. and gh4students thx for sharing; great work, no doubt. nothing to complain, even the colours are really good - for a sony that is. :-) seriously, the skin tones have these clinical and shiny, perfect just-a-liitle-bit-too-sterile-look, which works perfectly for commercials, no doubt as said before. but some people still prefere a little bit more reality, this dirty rock-n-roll feeling of reality... a liitle bit more punk/grunge... character and personality. everyone is right here. a friend of mine is a wedding pro and she returns her A7s, too. And she tried really hard, spending several nights in front of the screen, but no love...

thx for sharing! we need to re-evaluate this little cam as a special purpose tool and not as an A-cam, more like a GoPro... for certain situations ans some shot, were you did not want a bigger body and a tripod/Ronin for example...

Well, got this way and switched my D800 to a D750 last week, as stills are sometimes very important for me. It looks like a very captable b-cam for my video stuff, too. Still too early for giving detailed feedback as my PC is down atm. But careful about the DX cropmode, I think it may suffer on the smaller D750, while perfect only with the D810. That said, I would have preferred the traditional semi-pro bodydesign instead of this more enthusiastic plasticfantastic. Otherwise I am very satisfied atm, even ISO 12,000 didn't look too bad. DR is fine, sharpness is ok'ish, but Colours... are g r e a t (as usual with Nikon I might add). Lack of focus peaking is cured with a loupe, with helps also for stable shots. Aliasing? Never ever. Moiré? hm, only when you really want to produce failures, but you have to try quite hard, like shooting jeans with a macro lense, so in RL no problem, too :-) IQ in stills is hard to beat... state of the art. btw, this is only personal, but while I have serveral pound of fast AFD und AFS glas in primes and zooms, I prefere more and more the look and the handling of ol' AI-S lenses for my moving pictures (mostly slower, but dirty cheap and with a lot of mojo; I did not shoot video 'crazy wide open' anymore). edit @ .DigiEd: Do it!! the d700 was a very very fine cam in it's days, buuuut ... you will be suprised, I promise you.

oh no, pls - he will be back ... LOL Olympinatis everywhere

​http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?334239-a7s-skin-tones-slog2-vs-pp-off-(shogun-4k) what would be your advise on this topic?

​ Very easy: Imagine your house is burning. Which is the one you would grap? For shooting of course, not only for saving. :-)

​ Solomonic :-)

​ok, but why the same settings, Ebrahim? On the contrary I would wish an experienced shooter would demonstrate us what the cams are really capable. I want them to shine in their best light, the normal crap comes early enough with the first 'test' clips, LOL We have seen enough of this pseudo objective multi cam tests before and to be honest, most of them have been quite worthless. You would handle a Nikon completely different than a Canon during a portrait session for example, because the sensors have different capabilities, which could work sometimes against you if you didn't tweak the finetuning a little bit. But this wouldn't work without experience... Tests and reviews are allways biased, sometimes deliberately... and sometimes simply by personal preference. You didn't want me shooting that comparision for example, just because I strongly dislike this crazy colour issues with the Sony, it makes me really sick... :-) @ TO two suggestions: Never ever buy a cam without testing it before: Only you could decide if it's the right for YOU. Rent it before. Been there, too, lost a heap of money, too. While testing the NX, I would advise to share some footage, maybe another user has found an easy solution? I assume you have allready read the 4,876 threats on dvxuser.com? :-)

​me, joking? the whole affair is a joke it's all part of the big plan btw, talking about pictures is the biggest joke; this is an amateur cam and unfortunely missing (edit:) _sharp_, moirefree footage at least without IBIS, which nevertheless makes it quite perfect for simple family stuff in the hand of amateurs or sometimes maybe even in productions, when ever camera movement is asked for. A stealthy B-cam in pocket size, marvelous. in the other pocket you could put your GH oder NX or whatever, perfect. edit Bob, did you have a photography background? Compare for example the teaser for the new Canon C100 MKII and from the Oly and you will have a chance to understand that 'sharpness and detail' is only one asspect in story telling by motion pictures...

the king is dead, long live the king in other words: if you deliver mostly for YT, you have a marvelous tool by now - much smaller and cheaper as a 24-70/2,8, and at least as good as a GH2

​Exactly. Selfpromoting could easily put yourself in a bad light, I'm afraid, no matter how good your work is, it's simply the wrong attitude or behaviour for communication nowadays as so many wannabees advertising their own crap as auracaria said and you did not want to be mistaken for one of them. This has nothing to do with your content per se, but what did you think: How many tweets did she get daily? And how many are just a waste of time? OTOH, she could have had a very bad day in the molloch... LOL So, the trick is as Zach said to make other people talk about you. Did you have thought about asking the editors for a little series about interesting aspects of 'Gotham' nobody has covered before in their opinion?

what looks really great in a single frame could easily become disturbing for the eye in longer shots. we've have all seen much too often how nice footage get ruined by too ambitious grading...

andrgl vs. the rest of world. :-) don't invest too much in a body just now, there's a lot more to come and nothing is for eternity or even better: don't buy anything, before you know what you are doing rent it/borrow it/steal it first PS: let's see and wait if he could get two BMs for the of price of one in three/six months...

​ make sure only to activate the cross sections in low light :-)

but... no change of aperture of g-lenses in lv (source: slashcam) really, nikon? in which world they are living? they think still about optimising fx-sells, but in reality it could be very soon a question of ... surviving?

btw, the D800/810 has proven quite tough and some friendly D3x owners have degraded their pro bodies as b-cams, because the pictures of the small one are really really better, especially in the shadows. So, if there's no need for AF while filming, you could think about the D810 instead? Picture quality of the movies would be muuuch better, of course only as long as you could keep things in focus. :-) That said, you would have to invest several weeks of training... filming with a DSLR and long lenses is a pain, that's true.

I would look for a rain cover at least, but that said our hired pros were quite hasty to save their camcorders back in peli cases, when we get hitten offshore in a small fishing boat by nice waves some years ago - they stopped recording just in time when the real fun began. Their results were ... so boring, we fired them... waste of money and time. Or a motivation... :-) Good luck!

I would be careful. Nikons are tough nowadays, even I did not manage to break one in hours of rain, on the beaches, offshore etc. But my Sennheiser Micro dies. :-) So, I would not take a pro body as a reference for plastic camcorders... What about an insurance?

excellent points, G'men. Another aspect, which deserves a closer look imho by an insider are the profit margins for middlemen. Product A is well known and trusted, but has only a profit margin of say some 7,5%. The rival B is a newcomer, has some technical gimmicks, is a little bit cheaper but gives a profit of 20%. Which one gets boosted in the internet?

... or for viewing in cam.

​I would not switch either. You would be a fool! I have to admit that I'm a Nikon shooter by heart (the simple reason behind: that the stuff was cheap on the used market looong time ago, when everyone switched to Canon) and I've been with with my Nikon stuff in the really dark ages (noise, AF - the Canons were allways better) just because I could not afford a switch... And then I forget cursing about all this technical stuff and concentrate about my pictures. And when I could afford the change, there was no need any longer - why should I chance systems, when I just started to earn real money? And the reason behind this was not the D3... Guys, this are tools, and nobody - no one on earth - will become a better photog just by switching brands. This Canon bashing went to far for my mind, it shows no respect, of course Nikons are superior as every child knows, but to compare Canon's Colour Science with a xyz, this is were it became really ridiculous forum talk by noobs.

​In the end, this is purely subjective. I would agree by comparing standard settings. But switch the Nikons to Portrait modus and they are nearly the same same for skintones. For landscapes the Nikons are allready superior. :-)

One of the most harmful and devastating errors in civilisation is based on the assumption that there must be a correlation between wise contents and the use of an elaborated codec in communication. wtf.