ac6000cw

I agree. For me it's more often the Pana 14-140mm plus fast prime, but I have taken kit zoom+75-300mm+fast prime occasionally if I'm planning a bit of wildlife photography while on vacation. The combo of small/light lenses and great stabilisation in small bodies like the EM-5, EM-10, GX85 and GX9 is what makes M43 so good for travel. (I was at a major camera dealer's 'event' yesterday with reps from most of the major brands in attendance, and discussed the lack of a modern GX8/GX85/GX9 using the 25MP sensor etc. with the Panasonic rep. He wasn't disagreeing with me... I also had a quick play with an S9 - ergonomically I'm not impressed, it really needs a grip of some sort and the SmallRig baseplate+grip that was attached to it adds weight and height so you loose part of the point of the smaller body. I think it's a bit too much 'style over usability' for me to be interested in it anymore.)

I agree - including being made in wide-screen 'cinema' aspect ratios. I'm not so keen on some of the HDR stuff, though - even in subdued lighting, searing whites and crushed shadow detail isn't much of an improvement over SDR video. Now that almost everything is captured using video cameras (excepting the occasional actual 'film' production - but even those normally end up digitizing the negatives, so it basically becomes video with an embedded film-emulation LUT 😉), the only real difference is the size of the production budget. Way back when cinemas were the dominant form of recorded visual entertainment, they ran 'serials' as well (often as fillers between the main features) - for the same reason as TV does, to keep people coming back for the next episode... I'm just about old enough to remember when evening programs at my local cinema consisted of two different movies with an episode of a serial in-between (and adverts) - not so different to an evening watching TV really.

There are downsides to RGBW color filter arrays as well e.g. https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3804421 and https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117952 Engineering is full of compromises - you often have to trade improving one aspect of performance for degrading another. Which ones are the most important is often application dependent. It's not just about pure image quality either e.g. with RGBW you have four streams of 'color' data to initially process instead of three, so that might use more power - more heat to dissipate/shorter battery life. People have suggested or tried many variations of CFAs over the years - there's a list of some of them here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_filter_array#List_of_color_filter_arrays - but the near 50-year old Bayer array is still the most common, probably because it has a good balance of performance characteristics. At the end of the day, the DR of a sensor is limited by the thermal/electrical noise floor at the low-light end and saturation at the high-light end. Simultaneous dual-gain readout/conversion or higher bit-depth ADCs make more of that theoretical DR usable, but adds circuitry to the sensor which might add noise and heat (and probably cost).

Intel QuickSync has evolved a lot since its inception in 2011 - the various CPU generations have different decoding and encoding support. Basically it looks like you need an 11th or later generation CPU to get 10-bit 4:2:2 HEVC hardware decoding. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quick_Sync_Video and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Graphics_Technology#Capabilities_(GPU_video_acceleration)

Which OS are you running? In Windows 10/11 the 'Task Manager' Performance tab can display GPU load statistics: There are other utilities like GPU-Z that can display similar information.

A list of the R5 ii video specs (copied and re-formatted) from the Canon UK website: ...and yes, the only sub-100 Mbps rates are for 2K DCI and FHD. Possibly best quality 50 Mbps rate is oversampled-from-4K 'Fine' 'XF-HEVC S YCC422 10bit Standard LGOP' at 59.94p/50.00p/29.97p/25.00p/24.00p/23.98p

I suspect the heat generated when writing data to the cards at those high rates is a major reason why only one card is supported. Also the energy that is heating the cards is coming from the battery, which will cause that to get hotter - and of course the cards and battery are very close to each other, plus it's the part of the camera that is designed to be held in your right hand, so can't be allowed to get too hot. It's not really a fair/sensible comparison - the C70 is very much larger (with the battery on the outside as well), twice the weight and has integrated fan cooling:

Inside https://leica-camera.com/sites/default/files/leica-dlux_8-oss-sourcecode.zip are these compressed files, which appear to be basically just the Linux OS related files (and note the 2017 dates on them):

DPReview has published some R5 ii spec clarifications today (my bold):

Yes, or ZV-E10 ii for the smaller size/lower weight and probably better on-board mic system.

(multiple post deleted)

Not in mine (the UK) e.g. https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/product/sony-alpha-a6700 (between £1400 and £1500 used, which is almost the same as the new price, versus £924 for the ZV-E10 ii). Used FX30 - https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/product/sony-fx30 (actually higher than the new price with the current cashback promotion of £1699). The high used prices will just be a reflection of their popularity at the moment.

I think Fuji's camera division is one of the best managed of the major players.

Only in a very niche segment with the GH7 (that other major companies aren't interested in). The S5 ii is aimed at the 'high perceived value' segment by majoring on firmware features while keeping the hardware costs lower by using an older/slower sensor and sharing a body across multiple cameras. It would be interesting to know how profitable (or not) the Panasonic camera division actually is.

But the FX30 is almost twice the price, much heavier and larger - they're aimed at different users/market segments. A size comparison of the ZV-E10 ii, A6700 and FX30 which (AFAIK) all use the same APS-C sensor and battery - https://camerasize.com/compact/#927,910,895,ha,t I think as far as Sony is concerned, 'you pay your money and take your choice' (or consider the Fuji X-S20 instead).

From the DPReview initial review (my bold):

From Canon press release:

From DPReview: R1 - https://www.dpreview.com/news/5361436240/canon-announces-eos-r1-flagship-sports-photojournalism-camera R5 ii - https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r5-ii-initial-review

That's basically an amplified version of the sensor background noise (its 'noise floor') - it's not 'mosquito' noise. (And what's 'violent' about lifting the shadows in video? - 'dramatic' or 'drastic' might be a better term to use)

The Sony ZV-E1 is smaller and slightly lighter, has the same full-frame, video-orientated, fast readout 12MP sensor as the A7S iii & FX3, I assume records gyro data for post-stabilisation and has a much wider range of lenses available. It's more expensive than the S9 at the moment, but E-mount versus L-mount lens costs might reduce that difference.

Isn't the 'mosquito-noise' more likely to be the result of the high levels of compression used for the streaming? (Mosquito noise as defined here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compression_artifact#Mosquito_noise )

E-M1 iii hdmi RAW output uses a center crop - it's the inner rectangle in the graphic below (from the video at 4:39): AFAIK, Nikon also use sub-sampling for some frame sizes of N-raw video, and ProRes RAW, BRAW and N-raw use lossy compression - so you don't really get raw sensor data, it's always been processed. The main point of (pseudo) raw video is to give you files with higher bit depth and DR (than e.g. 10-bit log) plus probably metadata about the sensor characteristics to allow more latitude to adjust color balance, correction, exposure etc. in post. This is the same guy's general take on using OM-1 for video (which I'd mostly agree with): Not raw video, but this is DPReview's video test chart comparison of DCI 4K on the OM-1 (10-bit) and GH6 - they are very close in sharpness/resolution and having minimal aliasing/moire. That suggests to me that for internal UHD/C4K 10-bit video at 24/25/30p, the OM-1 is using over-sampling, not line-skipping.

Yep - it's exactly what you'd expect a major consumer electronics company to do (and Sony has been a pre-eminent one of those for many decades), and is pretty much what they've done in the full-frame MILC area - pushing out five generations of A7 cameras in a decade, including standard, high res (R), compact body (C) and video orientated (S) versions.

As BTM_Pix said in the first post, Sony will sell loads of ZV-E10 ii. Sony has deliberately created a video/content creation oriented camera line (ZV-1x, ZV-E10x, ZV-E1, FX30, FX3) to sit alongside their stills orientated line (RX100x, A6x, A7x, A9, A1), with a clear upgrade/upselling path from low end to high end in each case. I don't think any other camera company has that, so it makes Sony the obvious video/content creation go-to brand for people who want to move away from using a smartphone or action cam for it. Sony obviously set out to dominate that area of the market a few years ago and I think they're succeeding - their competitors are either playing catch-up or just not bothering/can't afford it and heading down their own niche rabbit hole. Not all of the ZV-line are brilliant cameras, but they don't have to be when there's a better/different/more expensive camera you can sell customers instead.

DPReview have changed/corrected their comment about crop levels in different modes: