jpleong

Thanks for those additional insights! I have a love/hate relationship with BM products going back over a decade (some winners and some really bad clunkers). So far, it looks like a 2v2 toss-up... I think I can wait to drop a $1000 USD to be sure I make the "right" choice.

Thanks thebrothersthre3 and EphraimP! Elsewhere on EOSHD there were observations about flaky connections to the Atomos Ninja -have either of you found that to be the case? JP

What's the consensus on external recorder for the X-T3? Looking for most reliable capturing the full 10-bit 4:2:2 4K 60P output with monitor (other value-add features, great, but not necessary) Editing on a Mac in Premiere Pro. Atomos Ninja V? Blackmagic Video Assist?

Great topic! My two-camera (APS-C/S35 sensor) documentary kit is always 35mm and 50mm f/2 lenses for interviews. I bring along a standard-zoom with OIS in case I need to do handheld shots (18-55mm f/2.8-4 on Fuji or 24-70mm f/4 L IS on Canon). Music video work handheld is always OIS-equipped zooms (mostly standard zooms, occasionally the UWA zooms all at f/4) and usually Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mk2s on sticks. Gimbal is usually 35mm or 50mm prime depending on framing needs, though I used the Fuji 18-55mm f/2.8-4 almost exclusively for my most recent work because the director needed quick framing changes.

No. The SL2 can shoot 1080/24p. ?

What are you actually videotaping? I couldn't find it skimming through this thread.

Wow. dvxuser -that just reminds me of the last time we had fanboy debates over 24P... and to think, I thought that was settled when everyone saw the success of the DVX100 and put it into their cameras... Even Canon added it to the XL-line ?

This whole past year's release cycle for Canon makes me sad. From the mirrorless 5D4 & 6D2 reissues to the crippling of the enthusiast-line Canon no longer makes a competitive modern body I want to own. I WANT to come back to Canon. I WANT to add to my collection of Canon bodies. But not only is Canon not improving on areas they're deficient they're actively removing what makes them appealing to me.

I've not used HLG. I ETTR when I have time. Zebras can tell you more as they tell you WHAT is overexposed (same with Waveform vs Historgram). Traditionally, zebras are set between 70-100 IRE (which I believe correlates to 70%-100% on the X-T3). I have "My Menu" setup so that Zebra On/Off and Zebra settings are a quick few button presses away. I use 100% to see if anything is completely overexposed and then between 40-80% to light skin tones.

50mm f/2 and 56mm f/1.2 when I have a plan. 18-55mm f2.8-4 when I don't have one. Honestly, the other two I have (35mm f/2 and 23mm f/2) are great, too. It's all a matter of choosing the right focal length for the subject. I don't feel any are optically superior to the others.

Is it my imagination or are the "FHD" clips reporting back as 2048x1080? EDIT: duh. didn't realize the X-T3 records 2048x1080, too.

Also, what's your NLE and OS? I use Premiere on a Mac and had to turn off hardware acceleration as it was introducing artifacts in my 4K F-LOG h.265 footage. I haven't looked back at my HD footage from the X-T3 but you never know?

Dumb question: did you update to the latest firmware?

And then I saw this thread... All my previous comments need to have the asterisk that they do not take into account the wrong flag on the file.

The reason I recommend ProNeg Std is that it's a little closer starting point to Canon color than Eterna (especially the red/magenta in skin tones) in my (very limited) experience trying to match footage from my 5D4 and 80D to my X-Ts; the caveat being that I use Andrew's EOSHD C-LOG on my Canons. Try both profiles and try F-LOG+LUTs to see what you like. Also, to go back to your original question... I didn't realize the screengrab was actually your work. In that specific setting, I would probably have stopped-down more to reveal the background -I can't quite tell what it is and it's (probably?) important to your storytelling. Lighting looks lovely, though! JP

I would try a few things: 1) Depending on what was clipped, I would be tempted to keep it in F-LOG and ETTR. 2) Change the distance of the key light to the subject. 3) Shoot in Pro-Neg Std rather than F-LOG to access the lower ISO options (if you wanted to keep some grading flexibility). 4) Use the X-T3 as the A-cam, shoot in 4K so you can crop and use it as the B-cam, too. Light for the X-T3. Use the 5D3 as the backup.

I liked the X-T3 so much that I bought an X-T2 when it went on flash sale last month. It's fine as b-cam but lacks the sheer number of video options (bit-rate control being one big one). Had the X-H1 been available at the price it is now, I would have gotten that instead of the X-T2 as its UI is far closer to that of the X-T3 (silent movie mode and fine bit-rate control being most important to me). That said, I own a stabilized gimbal and shoot 80% on a tripod so IBIS isn't as big a deal as having exposure peaking and the other advanced video features the X-T3 has over the X-H1.

That's where I kind-of land on this whole conversation. Even though my 5D4's rear LCD is demonstrably better it's only when I literally set it up next to an X-T3 that I actually notice. My bigger issue is that the LCD of my X-T3 doesn't match my X-T2. All my Canons (80D, 7D2, and 5D4) look pretty much the same in terms of brightness, color, and contrast which, I guess, is something I took for granted. At least every camera I own now is far superior to all the TN panels I used to use on ENG cameras -talk about awful screens...

I have not used it with an external monitor or recorder... I'm curious as to where you're bumping up the saturation and sharpness. Is that in the external monitor?

This topic is of GREAT interest to me as I'm also both a Canon and Fuji shooter. I'm not really trying to argue one way or the other but here are a couple thoughts for science's sake: 1) I never have really felt that the rear display on the X-T3 was lacking. In fact, it's only because of this thread that I've learned that the panel is lower res than my 5D4 (1.04 vs 1.6m dots). 2) The 5D4's rear LCD seems to have slightly more contrast. 3) On the Fuji X-T3, have you adjusted the level of zoom when you punch in for manual focus? When I zoom focus on both the X-T3 and the 5D4, neither seems overly pixelated. Unfortunately, their zoom levels are not comparable so it's hard for me to say that one is worse than the other. 4) I completely dialed back Sharpness on the X-T3. I wonder if what you're seeing is the result of Fuji's default sharpening? 5) Here's a very unscientific look at the back LCDs from both the X-T3 (top) and 5D4 (bottom). This was shot in RAW on an iPhone (6S+, ISO23, WB auto, 1/8 sec & 1/14sec correspondingly, autofocus tapped on model's face) with both LCD screens approximately the same distance from the iPhone (locked down on a tripod). The photo is from the same SD card (shot last night on the X-T3). The 5D4 rear panel is clearly showing a resolution advantage and punchier reds but the difference, to me, was insignificant enough that I had to look in the top-left corner (you can see the corner of the X-T3 flip screen) to confirm my opinion. Anywho, food for thought... JP

For clarity, are you experiencing degraded quality ONLY while zooming in for focus or overall?

Well, it's a Canon DSLR so 1080p video is always going to look soft comparatively. For reference, I own the 5D4 and it is marginally sharper than the 80D in 1080p but I relegate it to a B-camera role or extreme low-light as the 80D is, ergonomically speaking, a better camera and the output is comparable. (And in the interest of full disclosure, I've already made the transition to Fuji so, for me, Canon video sharpness is not really something I feel a need to defend) To the OP's ask: best camera for starting a video business. The most important things in video are: focus, composition, exposure, and audio. All three have DPAF which, as of this posting, is still the greatest-of-all-time for autofocus (waaaaay better than Sony or Fuji) BUT the m50 loses DPAF in 4K mode. Both the SL2 and M50 lack headphone jacks so there's no way to monitor audio -which is fine for a B-cam but the OP is still looking for an A-cam. Both the SL2 and M50 are decidedly smaller and lighter than the 80D but that's not really an advantage if used on a gimbal with most of the OP's lenses (the exception being the 10-18mm STM) as they will all shift the center of gravity forward which makes balancing a pain. If we added some lighter primes into the mix (say, the 50mm f/1.8 or 35mm f/2) that would make that less of a problem. JP

The solution is to not use camera-mounted microphones. Even STM lenses create enough noise to be picked-up. It's fine in a pinch or for sync audio but if you're trying to produce real content, it's time to move the microphone(s) off-mic.

The Canon 80D is your best bet. The ergonomics and feature-set are better than either the SL2 or M50 for video production. JP