Tim Sewell

Here's some XP2 4K footage: And the blog post: https://blog.thomasfitzgeraldphotography.com/blog/2017/12/some-more-fuji-x-pro-2-4k-tests

Image quality is only half the story at most, surely. My understanding is that high end productions use Alexas because they rarely go wrong, but when they do there's an unrivalled international network of companies that can repair or replace them at extremely short notice. Also they are an integral part of an established professional workflow, from support and grip through to edit and grading, that's entirely familiar to industry professionals in every corner of the world.

FWIW, Photo Rumors just posted this: https://photorumors.com/2017/12/14/here-are-the-detailed-panasonic-gh5s-specifications/

That camera has a beautiful look to it from these quick shots - looking forward to seeing more (and have cut up my credit cards).

The video in the OP is one of the funniest things I've seen this year - I'm going to have to watch it all the way through this evening. Apparently Jim is now up to 'over 150' movies, according to IMDB.

There used to be a restriction whereby you could only edit raw files if you were paying - has that been removed?

So... we'll see. At the moment I'm using Lightroom for DAM and Alien Skin for processing, which is a pain.

I find it easier to get my kids to read than to watch 'old' movies. The visual entertainment made for them now gets them into a terrible habit of requiring a beat in every scene to keep them interested - even what seemed like fast paced movies when I was younger now seem interminably drawn out to them now. It's a terrible shame and I can't see it getting much better - I think as time goes on the enjoyment of 20th century cinema will become a micro-niche pursuit.

I'm sure Rupert Murdoch, Viscount Rothermere and Richard Desmond, who between them control the larger part of UK media (except the BBC) will be interested to know that they're lefties.

Yet even though growth slowed to 1% last year, 2016 was still the all-time record for global box office - in the UK it was far and away the best ever year. I think you're correct, though, in the case of films that aren't aimed at teenagers - for more thoughtful fare the trend is definitely towards home viewing. Who knows what will happen, but it will be a sad day when movies like BR2014, Dunkirk and so on can't be shown on the big screen, where their visual beauty can be properly appreciated.

I think we often see that massively-hyped films with great opening weekends often fail to sustain their momentum as word of mouth gets around that they're not actually that great! Hopefully BR2049 will do the opposite (I haven't actually seen it yet, but I'm salivating at what I've seen so far of Deakins's photography).

Unfortunately the lion's share of the money left in the private sector tends to end up behind an anonymous brass plate in some tax haven, not financing wonderful new discoveries. I read the other day that without any form of government subsidy the passenger aircraft industry, to name but one, couldn't exist. Why? A new airliner design can take decades to show a return on capital - timescales that no bank will lend on. The only bodies able to swallow billions in spending on 10, 20, 30 year timescales are governments. If it had been left to the private sector we would not have realised the myriad advances brought about by the space programme, we would probably have 'just slightly better enough to get people to upgrade' bakelite phones and steam-powered computers. Our current world would be unrecognisably different to what it is now.

The Inferno gives you the option of using what I presume is their own version of SLog3 when recording from the FS700.

I have the 85, 50, 35 and 24 - I had the 16 but sold it. I'm sure they do have high repair rates for a rental house - I mean, they're robust enough for general usage but I wouldn't want to subject them to much rough and tumble - they're clearly mainly plastic budget lenses. Nonetheless, for me, they perform really well. The 50, especially, I find to have a lovely character and almost a 3D quality in the way it separates subject from foreground. My set are also all fairly close in colour rendition. I've got a whole shelf full of older manual lenses that I like to use for both stills and video from time to time, but the Samyangs are what come out if I have the opportunity to put together something 'proper'.

For the money they can't be beat.

One of my first 'inspired by Edo' shots, from Friday just gone:

Due to my recent purchases I've been spending a fair bit of time on Fujifilm X-based forums and I've been pleasantly surprised by a larger percentage of women contributors than I'm used to. It's by no means 50/50, but is noticeably higher. The same goes for the numbers of women photographers featured on the various Fuji-watching blogs and sites. As to why this should be - I have absolutely no idea.

Rigjob's Hillbilly Grip Truck is entertaining and informative - he doesn't post very often as he only does stuff when he has time, but what he does put up there never fails to give one a giggle and some good on-the-job info: https://www.youtube.com/user/Hillbillygriptruck/videos

Check this guy out: http://www.edlondonphotography.co.uk/

@Ed_David - this is a very long thread, but there are lots of people experimenting with Portra 400 and 800 throughout the posts, together with quite an intense investigation of the best ways to rate those films for different purposes/effects: https://www.fujix-forum.com/threads/what-films-are-you-shooting-please-post-examples.48424/

The guy joins the forum, looking for pointers to clips that in the forums' users' opinions are cinematic-looking and he gets greeted like that by one of the moderators. Wow - I bet he'll be recommending EOSHD to his pals as a real friendly and helpful place.

By looking at pictures and deciding if we like them.

Some nice-looking X-Pro2 HD footage:

Sure - these are all technical aspects of image quality and they are technically meaningful - I take notice of them myself. In my original comment I was referring to @jcs's (who I admire greatly in most things) notion of setting up semi-scientific tests to determine compression and DOF differences between two sensor/film formats - essentially trying to quantify an aesthetic quality or preference. The essence is that no scientific test will ever determine why a medium format photograph appeals more to an individual than the same scene shot on full frame or micro four thirds, or vice versa. It seems a pointless exercise, which was the crux of my comment. I spend and have spent an inordinate amount of money on cameras and I like to have instruments that are as close to the best as I can't afford but can justify to myself (if not to my wife). That's not because I think they will make me a better photographer or film maker - if they do it will only be tangentially because they make the process easier. The best camera in the world can't make up for a lack of artistic sensibility or vision, while the worst camera in the world won't fully obscure the same qualities. I buy expensive cameras for the same reason that I rarely take photographs or videos on my phone - because I enjoy the sensual aspect of making images with a well-made tool designed for that purpose. Scientific tests have their place in determining the measures you mention, but I just can't see their value in determining immeasurable phenomena.