gatopardo

3K and 1200€ is for na used 5d mark III.

@Marco Tecno It was downsampled-. but the acquisition was 4k. For the rolling shutter test the downsampling is irrelevant

the answer is in front of you. "4k in video mode"

3k, full frame raw for around 1200€. If they manage to make ML work on a M5 or 80d that would be great too. Especially if a speedbooster for eos-m is made. There's one for nikon lens. but a full pass through EF electronic one would be amazing (already there i t seems - http://www.ebay.com/itm/EOS-EOSM-Focal-reducer-Auto-focus-adapter-EF-EFM-EF-to-EFM-EOS-to-EOSM-Booster-/302121416302?hash=item4657d6f66e:g:jj0AAOSwPhdVPkMd).

The rolling shutter free image is amazing. This puts this camera in another level. It's one of the specs that differentiates the pro cameras. And now we might have a consumer camera with good overall performance. The color are nice too IMHO.

This is nice! Where did you get that info?

You didin't ...

Isn't this post about "Full Frame Aesthetics" ? That's what I was addressing. It doesn't exist. I agree with you completely on your point though. You should choose the sensor size that is able to produce the desired image with simple cheap and straightforward lens, if you can afford the body of course.

Autofocus?

Put a Sony E Mount T Speed Booster ULTRA 0.71 and those lenses on a Sony A6300 (crop sensor camera) and you will have a hard time distinguishing between the photos taken with a full frame camera from the ones taken with this setup. In real world the difference is almost pointless.

Never said they are the same. But equivalence is possible and many times quite accurate. Here are the differences: - There are no equivalent lens yet for some full frame lens like a Canon 50mm 1.2 or some fast wide angles. - Equivalent lens for crop sensor are quite expensive and heavy, lots of glass... see last olympus 25mm 1.2 as an example - The render of the equivalent lens will be different but only because of each lens character. This difference type is the same as between Canon and Nikon 50mm 1.4 full frame lens - The exposure is different, as for the same position of shooting, angle of view, and DOF, the crop sensor lens has normally more transmission of light. But, as T-stop is different of F-stop, even for a joke, a lens could be done with same transmission for half the aperture (that would be stupid though). - The diffraction point is different but for the same DOF is the same so, use a ND when needed on crop sensors ( this is really a rare situation )

Yes, but you will have the same problem when comparing two different full frame bodies with two different lens having same focal length and aperture. They are theoretically equivalent, but the look will be different because of the particularities of each manufacturer lens for the same focal length and aperture.

Same findings here in VrayCam in 3DsMax. In real world images would always be somewhat different because we can't use the same lens in both bodies. So, the differences will be on the same level as the ones comparing a Canon 50mm 1.4 to the Nikon 50mm 1.4 one. It's each lens distortions and character making the difference rather than equivalence. But this is important because we may not be able to find a specific character of a full frame lens on a "equivalent" crop sensor lens.

I can see some motion artifacts in his face. I hope that happens because of the electronic stabilization added to the mechanical one. It can be turned off I believe. Impressive stabilization though.

And Phillip Bloom said in the live stream that rolling shutter effect is the same as a6300...

What a bad sequence and music btw. I don't like the colors. Too saturated in a bad way. And the car sequence maybe is 1080p because we can see large radius sharpening and that's annoying. I have to wait for better testers.

Bad footage actually..

With a speedbooster you are not far away from full frame looks either.

For Canon DSRLs, 1080P exists only on paper

Thanks for the footage. I've checked and the difference in latitude is no very big. The Classic Chrome colors are way more nicer IMHO though. Are both with the shadows and highlight dialed to maximize the DR as enabled by the latest firmware?

Can I ask you for 5 sec footage of Classic Chrome and Pro Neg Std in a situation like this photo to illustrate that dynamic range difference? Thanks

Colors are just fantastic. I agree with him that classic Chrome is a good profile for video, with the in camera highlights and shadows tweaks he suggested . Velvias are more for stills. Thank god he did not grade the footage. Lots of people destroy otherwise great footage because of this grade everything trend. Color and skin tone is one of the most important aspect of an image and will be the first thing a normal viewer will find as wrong, if poorly handled. Detail is far less important for a normal viewer. But XT-2 has plenty of it.

Colors are like the LX100. Everything too orange. skin tones are seriously off.

I guess rolling shutter effect will be similar to Fuji Xt-2. 3x faster but also 3x or more the pixels to read if full sensor is read vs prior pixel binning. For me, this camera is very good. But IQ will depend very much on the color profiles ( especially the the flat one and its DR ), how sharpness / detail is worked in camera and how the codec handles motion. This things don't come in the specs and are central for a good image. For that we just have to wait for good testing of the camera. Impossible to know earlier. I hope it's not as sharp (too sharp IMHO) , bad color, prone to motion artifact, and hot as the a6300. Makes moving images horrible and long recording times impossible. Hate that camera but good specs.

1080P is said to be good. But I think they didn't test artifacting issues I guess. But 4k is not too bad.