Arikhan

@kidzrevil Here is a quick screengrab from a 4.2.0 8bit 4K video done with a Zeiss Otus 28mm f/1 4 at F8.0. No color correction, no grading in post - only natural light (shot between golden and blue hour in Frankfurt - as I just wanted to capture the characteristics of the NX1 + Otus. The A6500 is also TOP NOTCH with the Otus on it when shooting architecture, etc. When shooting people, the A6500 is very "special" with the Otus on it, it will take some testing to get the right balance in regard to skin structure... I know, you are very picky with the look of your videos, especially with skin tones and structure. The A6500 looks great with 35mm 1.8 Nikon + Pro mist, when it comes to skin tonality and structure. You have to treat it very carefully, when it comes to WB! I wouldn't worry about 4.2.0|8bit.... *Please consider, that's my personal POV. I never shot IMAX cinema theater films and will never do it....I am simply a visual story teller...

@kidzrevil My mom owns a A6500 and I shoot video with it. GREAT dynamic range and imaging (great for portrait photography too)...But - in my eyes - a love & hate camera. Great for decent street shootings, but still very small - even my mom (about 1,63m high and small hands) has the best feeling only with an additional grip. Menus are a pain and if you want to shoot longer takes, put the hot shoe protection down, open the flash and put the LCD away from the camera - if not, it could probably overheat (warning). It dims when shooting 4K, so on a sunny day, it will get hard to shoot.... But still, I use it for street photography and for 4K footage (street shooting) and low light....great to use with the 35mm 1.8 (OSS) and 12mm 2.0 Samyang/Rokinon (manual). With the 18-105 4.0, you will get almost all you need, considering that the 50mm 1.8 OSS can be bought now for about 250,- Euro... Great to usew with adapted lenses, I could imagine that some fast Nikon primes could be your taste, as they give this camera some great characteristics... I call this device "my little piece of plastic garbage" - as I love solid, reliable cameras I could beat to death...But sttill, it's very special and a wonderful piece of technology. My POV: NO ONE will complain about 4.2.0 8bit, excepting you mostly need 4.2.2 10bit or even RAW for heavy grading or simply for your personal post processing pleasure...

External recording options for XF40x line (SDI only XF405): 1080p (HDMI + SDI) --> 4.2.2 10bit (50p and 25p FullHD) 4K (HDMI) --> 4.2.0 8bit for 50p 4K, 4.2.2 8bit for 25p 4K --> https://www.canon.de/images/xf405_and_xf400_specifications_em_tcm83-1609491.pdf Now Canon has in the 1" sensor area XC10/XC15 and the XF40x for broadcast ready footage requirements. Does the giant move finally?

Full ACK...This is a great article @Andrew Reid because it not only shows Canon's failures with the 1DC, but their arrogance and incompetence when it comes to use great market share (their photo DSLRs) to get more people into "Canon based" video production. This knowledge would be crucial to estimate coming market development.Personally, I think that a good camera business is only possible in mass markets. Top notch cameras are a small niche market, hard to survive for a manufacturer with a camera centric business only.

Thanks @jonpais ! I am an enthusiast horse sports shooter and I am riding too - not so much at the moment, because of lack of time. My family breeded show jumping horses for years (now retired) and my mom was years ago local champion in show jumping..."Family enthusiasm", like photography...

@Mattias Burling I shoot horse sports (including World Cup events) for years now...NEVER seen a mirrorles camera in the hands of a press or horse photographer. The German market in horse sports event area is clearly dominated by Canon. Considering this fact, I have to agree @Andrew Reid, saying Canon missed some good chances...It did...Though they offer one of the most reliable video AF methods at the moment, they missed the opportunity to get the Canon photographers - using their DSLRs - into their "video boat". OK, there is a big separation in Germany between photo and video journalism, but still...Canon did nothing to inspire or to educate Canon DSLR owners to shoot video. The MJPEG codec is for 99,9 % of my colleagues BS, they simply don't have the computering power to edit this kind of footage and most of them simply refuse to handle this big amount of data... @Andrew Reid Yes, there is a separation between "pro" journalism and prosumer/enthusiasts oriented market. But - as I already said - even the video journalism is in Germany completely in hands of small sensor cameras (broadcast standard, 3CCD, etc.). Canon XF200 --> 305, etc. rule with their overpriced devices and mushy image quality. During the last three months, I've even seen some Sony EX1... BUT: These facts show too, that the "mirrorless/DSLR video revolution" is more a parallel universe created by loud first movers than a reality nowadays. Dedicated video cameras rule - probably.at max. 3 percent of video market. Rest of video market is ruled by smartphones...

@Andrew Reid Very interesting, as I take a look on this aspect since beginning of 2017: 11 big events (big political press conferences with 50+ Journalists and filming/broacasting teams, "Bundesliga" - games of the first German soccer league, etc.) on my screen, 99% all dominated mainly by Canon and Nikon on second place. Sony was TWO times in the bag of photo journalists...But in the bag only, the owners didn't want "to rely on them". Therefore I talked on each event with 30-35 journalists owning a camera about Sony. Even now - as the A9 is released some months and it is without doubt a great camera - German speaking journalists don't use or trust Sony cameras. Interesting: 53 % didn't ever know, that Sony had a new camera for photo journalism (A9)... As of video, Sony and Pana (small sensor) camcorders or pro broadcasting cameras are leading. I just took a look to my statistic records and I counted 2 C100, three 5D m3 from January 2017 till now for filming...Above this I saw four times people filming with a 1DX m2 or 5D m4. When asked, they told me to film 1080p with their devices.

I don't do it voluntarily. Let me explain, it's very simple: Super tele primes 300 / 400 F2.8 stablizied lenses for Nikon/Canon are unrivaled - there is NO third party alternative. No option to consider...You have just to pay the price the manufacturer / seller asks for it...And these lenses are not cheap. For sound recording, there are quite many options and a great competition, giving us users the possibility - depending on personal needs and requirements - to make a choice... Nope. Never. Sound recording is for sure not the area, I will ever specialize in...I admire sound experts and sound designers. If best possible sound needed, just have to hire an expert, someone who knows what he does and beeing knowledgeable and passioned about that. The best I can do, is getting some more advanced education in this area... Yes, you are right - touché...Probably because sound (aka higher end audio handling),is for me something like pain in the stomach... I am very stingy too, when buying photo zoom lenses. I don't like them, but I buy them because of realism and necessity (mainly the need for versatility in fast paced shooting situations). Other then buying primes, I simply don't want want to spend too much money for zoom lenses. So when buying photo zooms, I am mostly ready to compromise - not so, when looking for primes. At the end of the day, it's a matter of personal priority setting...

@IronFilm Thanks for sharing your experience and giving advice to an "audio noob"! After taking a closer look (and get some very basic audio education) to the F4/Tascam for one or two days, I will make a definite buy decision... @BTM_Pix Yes, it seems to fit my needs for an affordable price. The F4 seems to be a much more advanced device, but it's much more expensive too...The final question will be: Do I really need the advanced functionality of the F4 for my usage?

@IronFilm Thanks for advice! Your article was very informative and the base for my beginning research. It seems (@Kisaha confirmed it too), the Zoom F4 is best "bang for the buck" quality wise, but the DR-70D could be an alternative. I am aware of the importance of sound, but at the moment I have to buy the Nikon 300mm and 400mm F2.8 and they are not cheap, so I have to save money...I know, buying cheap is not the best solution, but the Tascam would probably be a "frugal" solution for video journalism and an acceptable point to start with. Please consider, I don't shoot IMAX films for cinema theater and I am not an experienced audio guy and will probably never be a sound expert, I just aim a solid/good sound quality within my shots.... Not always with a shoulder mount, but when filming, mostly with a cage. I use the Varavon cage for my NX1, the SmallRig Cage for the A6500 and the Proaim 6" DSLR Video Camera Cage for my Nikons - when needed. When shooting "simplistic", I mount the mic/receiver directly on the hot shoe, but mostly attached to the cage.... BTW: Is some here experienced with the Saramonic SR-AX101 Universal Audio-Adapter (https://www.amazon.de/dp/B00N2G3JUC) as "simple and puristic" preamp solution to bypass the poor internal DSLR preamps and making it possible to get a headphone for the Sony plastic garbage A6500?

Great! Thank you! This is one of the most important features needed practicing press conferences. Not only sound quality of the person answering questions (because these ones mostly have mics going to the mixing console), but also usable audio for the person/journalist asking questions...You know what you talk about...

@BTM_Pix Does this mean, that when attaching a DR-70D to the XLR of a mixing console (of a band OR within a press room) I could get and mix A. the original sound (of a speaker or band) and B. the ambient sound when recording with a second mic the ambient sound? And if it understood it right, could I record A. Original sound and B. Ambient sound on two different channels, so I could work on it separetely in post and mix it to meet my requirements? Thanks for input Kisaha. Is that a such big difference between the F4 and a DR-70D concerning sound quality and processing features and possibilities? I just ask because my sound knowledge is rudimental till now, but the price difference between the two mentionned devices is significant.... Thank you guys for help!

It seems, I misunderstand this...Could you please explain why do you act like this (with TWO recorders at same time) ? To be more precise for my personal use: I want to use the DR-70D MAINLY to bypass the poor internal preamp of the DSLR...So the sound will be recorded IN THE DSLR with the Tascam as preamp (Mic --> Tascam (feed recording - Feed1) --> DSLR (feed recording - Feed2)), AND - at same time - in the Tascam for sound backup....I want to use this workflow, because recording sound on the DSLR (after bypassing the camera preamp with the Tascam), would speed up my workflow for journalistic use AND at same time I get a sound backup by recording sound feed in the Tascam... Thanks for sharing your experience and explaining!

It's mainly needed, when doing interviews (therefore the Saramonic wireless lav mics) but I want to use it for ambient and exterior (eg. wildlife / nature footage) with a shotgun too... BTW (as I am not a sound expert): Could a DR-70D be use a recording device for sound feed capturing on concerts/press conferences - attached to the XLR of the central sound mixer of the presenter/music band - too? If so, I would not ncessarly need to buy a second device like a Tascam DR-40 V2 and a Zoom H5 / H4N Pro? For DSLR-usage I could attach it under my DSLR/DSLM cage...

Thanks @scotchtape and @Orangenz ! To clarify: I need TWO devices. One for mobile DSLR shooting (used to capture quality sound, mainly for bypassing internal (mostly poor) DSLR preamp, but sound will be recorded internally...So, it seems, the DR70D should be a good and affordable choice for this purpose. The second device should capture a quality sound feed, eg. on press conferences or concerts, as they are mixer devices with XLR output there, so I could capture the best possible sound directly in a H5 / H4N Pro directly and synchronize in post (sound will be captured in camera too, but only for check and sync purposes). As @scotchtape says, it seems, a Tascam DR-40 V2 would be an option too. So, what about the choice between Tascam DR-40 V2 and a Zoom H5 / H4N Pro? What's the recommendation of sound experts, based on own experience?

1. I want to improve sound quality for my video journalistic work, especially when shooting with DSLRs/DSLMs. After some research (it seems @IronFilm is a sound expert), I found out the Tascam DR70D would be a very nice and affordable device to do this. For DSLR work, Mics I use mostly are the Sennheiser MKE 400 and Saramonic UWMIC9. I would use the Tascam with cages / rigs. Your thoughts? 2. For concert or press conference shooting, I need a sound recording device to be attached to the "central" sound capture device of the room, so I could get directly my sound from the central device through XLR. After some research, I think, the Zoom H5 would be a small and practical sound recorder, even capable to do some audio (only) interviews) with it. Your thoughts / ideas? Thank you!

.OK, I see...My POV: I agree with you but debating ideology doesn't get the shots. Canon cripples its products, yes. That's one of the reasons I lived Canon DSLRs for photography. BUT....Talking about the C200, I just need its features/capabilities "as it is", I never rely on promises or on future "functionality upgrades"...I just want to pay for features I get NOW... Again: Name me some devices meeting my listed needs...Please name me even just one, I will take a closer look...

It seems, you were not interested in reading my individual needs: I am brand agnostic. Please name Pana or Sony devices fitting all these needs for 7.000 EUR (European price, excl. VAT). It could be another brand too, even a Russian camera would be nice - it only has to correspond to my requirements and budget limitations...

There IS 422 8bit for UHD when recording via HDMI on an external recorder. And there IS 422 10bit for FullHD when recording on an external recorder (SDI + HDMI): Though I completely gave up my Canon photo gear (dozens of lenses and many cameras) and use mainly Nikon for photography now, I just wonder how many people hate Canon. Why? Too expensive for you? OK, buy a cheaper camera offering more features or exactly the features you need. Not including ALL specifications you'd like to see? There is no perfect "all in one" camera... That's why I will buy the C200 (for my personal requirements and my personal needs) for filming (main reasons only): I want to get into RAW shooting (only disadvantages from my personal POV is it takes time in post, when aiming to get the footage really beautiful and the huge amount of data, when archiving the footage) Canon cinema cams aren't spec champions but they offer a very solid 8bit codec, quite maleable/durable in post for quick post-pro Nice colour science in film cameras (personal taste) in baked in codecs Phantastic customer care and service (own experience as my whole family serviced many devices there) Reliable DPAF - great for small teams and one man bands Great ergonomics and usability Reliability and build quality (no plastic garbage compared with other devices) Sure, not offering a 422 10bit is a shame, but you can convert internal 4k 8bit to 422 10bit broadcast footage...Or internal RAW...Or shoot with an external recorder (costing used as much as a new speedbooster for a m43 camera...) directly FullHD in 422 10bit. In my eyes, the verbal "rebellion" against Canon products is simply useless. They will though sell a bunch of their C100, 200, 300 and so on, because these devices are simply great cameras, offering shooters great results and high reliability. Not for all needs and budgets, but they are very reputable and solid devices. It's not only about specs and endless specs debates... The DSLR / MILC "rebellion" is over guys: Appropriate film/video cameras got quite affordable and light weight, good DSLR and MILC got more expensive and heavy, when equiped with some great lenses. And then what about additional costs and weight of speedboosters? XLR? ND filters? Cages?... There are very many options out there now...If none of them matches exactly your expectations buy or rent a second or a third one, depending on your needs and requirements...

Hmm...I don't want to be a kill-joy for Canon haters and GH5 enthusiasts, but even the 8bit codec quality of the Canon C100 is not bad at all. It seems not much worse than the newer GH5 as seen here (very interesting blind test...): ...and now C-Log of the C100 vs V-Log of the GH5: It seems, the "old" 8bit codec it's not bad at all...

Probably you misunderstood my claim...Let me give you an example, of what I want to say: About 1,5 years ago, I did an (for me) very revelating experiment: I shot a comparison with the very good Canon EF 60mm F2.8 + NX1 under different lighting conditions during daylight for finding out image rendition. It was a kind of portrait shooting to get knowledge about color, detail and "sharpness" rendition (texture)... Without additional lighting, with soft lighting (A. increasing distance from light to subject and B. lighting through a diffusor), with harsh lighting, with 1,2 and 3 lights setups. The results were quite shocking: The image quality was VERY different from setup to setup, quality, softness and direction of light influenced tremendously the look of images (video AND photo)... This was from very soft to tack sharp (some guys would probably call it "oversharpened")...Completely different results, only with different lighting scenarios...I got softer skin textures with the right lighting setup than with a tiffen pro mist...Same camera, same lens - but completely different image characteristics...When harsh lighting (without overclipping) the skin structure was way too sharp for a "cinematic" look, but with soft lighting - wow, it was a revelation....And remember, it was an ADDITIONAL LIGHTING SETUP, as shot by daylight.... I learned very much by practicing street (people) photography (by night) - I learned to use EVERY (additional or natural) source of light and every lamp to get some source of lighting as great advantage for photographing my subjects... It's not about the amount of light - it's about quality, direction and Camera+Lens setup. A week ago, I shot 2 hours in Frankfurt - about 1 hour before and after sunset - to test my new Zeiss Otus vs. NX1 16-50mm S OIS (the NX1 is known as miserable failure in low light but as a resolution monster for S35) and there are huge diffrences in image quality for same lighting scenarios - there are differences in color and detail rendition, microcontrast, etc....VISIBLE differences, not pixel peeper and crybabe armchair talk... Test for yourself (even by daylight) different lighting setups with the same camera+lens combination and settings and you will see decissive differences...Digital "oversharpening" seems sometimes to be gone (even when using some of the sharpest and fastest lenses possible), only when doing a different light setup... Try even diffusors and reflectors whithout any additional artificial light and you will see important differences in image rendition, quality, look & feel, etc....

In my eyes, it's all about light - direction and quality of light, depending on the look & feel you want to get. Diffusors, reflectors etc. are not the most expensive, but they will make the difference. Sure, good low light capabilities are very important for a camera setup, when you don't want to miss a moment. But the light makes at the end of the day the difference. Most self proclaimed DP are too lazy, even for this...They call their work "available light photography/videography"...For "never miss a moment" style it's OK - but not generally. My mentors teached me to work with off camera flash (in photography) and to use sophisticated setups for getting great results - every little shadow and every even small movement of light and subject counts. Most "filming entuasiasts" don't care about light? Great for those who do.

As I plan to shoot and edit RAW (Canon) and "baked in" (Pana) 4K 50p in near future (max. 200 Mbps in FullHD ALL-Intra, 4K max 150 Mbps "baked in" MOV/MP4, max. 4K 50p in Canon's RAW Light), I will need for sure a new editing machine. I use Premiere & Davinci for editing. Windows only, no Apple. After looking at some options, I will probably build something like Max Yurev's proposal: My configuration idea (only the most important parts): AMD Ryzen 1700x, min. 32 GB RAM, 1. SSD for operating system and software (250GB), 2. drive = M.2 SSD (500GB cache/scratch), 3. drive SSD 1TB (data), Graphic card RX 580 Now my questions: as Max mentions in his video. 4K 25p works very nice - I would like to know, if 4K 50p editing / playback works without lags and frame drops too...(I am familiar with caching / proxy editing technique...) does RAW work really as good as claimed? Is someone out there using a similarly configured PC? Any proposals for proved and tested alternatives?

@BTM_Pix Just expecting to see some 4k low light footage and then hold it in my hands and do some test shots. Last week I've buyed a Zeiss Otus 28mm 1.4...with Nikon F - now I only wait for the proof of the D850 qualities. BTW: I shot the Zeiss with a cheap K&F Nikon2NX adapter on the NX 1 some days ago. Colors, contrast and detail are mindblowing - from edge to edge...Can hardly wait to see this exceptional lens on a D850...

@Don Kotlos Never seen such a horrible "video test" - it's really a pain. It shows all issues with Nikon video: horrible video AF, loud noise during focusing, lack of stabilization, flickering in questionnable light conditions, etc....If I were a fan of conspiracy theories, I would say, the competition paid the "tester" to show up how bad the D850 is for filming... BTW: I'm interested to see, how the D850 video performs in very low light scenes - would it be near A7S ii performance ?