veraguth

I think a Super 16 mm crop mode (around 3x) yielding approximately 5ms read-out speed (same as film) would be a good addition as a firmware update and it could possible as the full sensor read-out speed is claimed to be 15ms. Please Panasonic do that.

Yes, I was referring to the screengrab above.

This 10 bit footage looks really bad. Do you think it is worth the hassle compared to a 8 bit log?

I think it will be internal compressed raw. Sony announced that they were working on that. It would be a decisive step above Canon's cameras (FS7 is already more popular in some segments than the C300) and into RED's territory.

I am thinking about going raw. Used C500 or FS5? What of you think? I have an A7rII and will be keeping it as a b cam and stills cam. I want to move to raw in order to keep getting the high dynamic range of s-log2 without the banding issue.

I agree. A7rii owner and I am very satisfied with the came. But I believe that FF is more like real 4K except when you get moire (but if you avoid cityscapes you should be fine). The aps-c mode is like almost 5k.

"False" means that he is not telling the "truth" now. It has no necessary relation with his previous posts. What is strange is that people were pushing him to get to the "truth". And what they got is this "confession", which seems to be very far from the "truth". It was even given when he was willing to refund the money anyway. OP asked to wait a few days. This "confession" is only what people wanted to hear to close this whole saga in their heads. Given the circumstances, I will refrain from posting here any longer. I actually regret I did. I hope Andrew gets back soon. He semmed to be reasonable to deal with the situation.

If he was saying he did not do the scam as he was, but a person was going to his friends to humiliate and shame him. And he asks this person what he has to do to stop the shaming. And the person replies, "a confession". And the person confesses. This is a false confession in my opinion.

I had understood Ebrahim had confessed because Andrew had got in and said he will check the IPs and contact the police in Germany (which is reasonable as he is the owner of the forum). I did not imagine that he had falsely confessed because he was being pushed by Ed in such a manner. The whole thing is very said. Given the events, I need to retract my previous statement and apologize to Ebrahim.

Go with the c100 and the 35mm f2 IS. Everything you need, really. Most people will not care about the dynamic range difference. And a 5D: you will later have to buy a rig, a xlr audio solution, expensive cards, nd filters, and have time to transcode everything. And also, consider an used c300. People made features with the beast, and they won the Palme d'Or.

I am glad you are going to refund the people involved in the scam. I hope you keep your word. And my advice is that after you pay these people, you go and get a good therapist. You can use your intelligence in a less self-destructive way and you should try the most not to hurt other people in this way. I believe the money was not the worst part of it, but that message sent to the buyers on facebook, which was very sad. That was the reason I initially believed your account was hacked. But I am even more glad for seeing the reaction of members from the forum after his statement, a demonstration of emphatic openness, which is ever more necessary nowadays.

I agree, Sony's lens development could be much better. The 55, 35 and 28 are great for the system. The good zooms are heavy and expensive. However, as I do not use zooms (the last one I bought came with my Chinon film camera), I use 35mm and 50mm equivalents for 95% of what I do, it makes easier for me to go with a Sony. I bought my A7rii used (500 clicks) with a 3-month seller warranty for $2600. This is $670 more than a XT2 with the battery grip (which you need to shoot proper 4k). I bought my zeiss 55mm 1.8 for $700 (grey market, 1 year warrant), which is $100 more than a new fuji 35mm 1.4. Of course, I can buy a grey market fuji lens and wait a few months for a used XT2 and get the different back to the $1000 gap. However, I will not trade those $1000 plus film profiles for 42mp, unlimited video recording (with the open memories app), usable full frame 4k in some situations, and image stabilization on my prime. Besides, I found out that I can get beautiful jpegs straight out of the A7rii with some tweaking, and the grading of the video footage is not so bad as you are made to believe, perhaps the A7rii has better colors than the A7sii. It would be wonderful if Fuji makes a video camera. Which sensor will they put on the camera though? I don't believe that Sony would allow Fuji to use its sensors in video cameras. But who knows...

I would be glad to give the medals if he had not brought the discussion to this topic. My point was that people are very critical of Sony (sometimes with a good amount of reason) but when I see Fuji putting that huge battery grip to make the camera record proper 4k (and to have a headphone jack), I feel impressed by what Sony did with their A7 cameras. Same size, full frame and very controlled overheating after they updated the firmware. Don't get me wrong. I find their film emulation great and their cameras beautiful, however as I am not rich, I cannot justify buying a Fuji camera when one has the a7 around. And you can even bring your lenses to a proper video camera, like a fs5 or fs7 if you want to step up in the future. Or just buy a $550 a6000 if you want a very good, second body photo camera that Fuji could only catch up in some aspects with the $1700 x-pro2.

Who said the a7rii recorded 4k in a full sensor read out? I said both cameras record full frame 4k, which they do. Of course A7rii does not do a full pixel read out in full frame. But I prefer to have it on my camera rather than no full frame at all. I have one, I find it very useful for close ups, when I am in tight spaces and when I want to shoot photos in order to take advantage of the 42mp. OK. According to the specs, it is 2cm shorter. Mentally I thought it would not make much diference, that is the reason I said "about the same size", thanks for taking the "about" out. However, the image you showed says otherwise. The 35mm 1.4 feels much smaller. But I still think that one would need a fuji 35mm f1.2 to make a proper comparison.

And you end up with a smaller image, which translates as a lower megapixel count... which is a form of performance compensation.