EthanAlexander

I took one of these on a remote as a B cam and I couldn't be more impressed with it. Incredibly detailed with huge dynamic range and a great audio preamp. The autofocus undeniably the best in the price range. In well-lit scenarios it's better than or equal to some cameras up to ~$3000 (I'm looking at you, Canon), and when you factor in the portability and 24-200mm... Bottom line it helped me get shots I wouldn't have otherwise but blended in perfectly with the rest, and helped me deliver a much better product.

Guy starts thread about gear, ends up being told to slow down and learn from mistakes?? Iron and Kisaha I really appreciate all your contributions but I don't think he's looking for this. Shooting anything other than staged narratives is reason enough for cameras that are built first and foremost to be video cameras, or at least have built in zebras and ND, etc. And even in slow situations, I'd pick practically any camera over a Canon DSLR. I'd say it's always a worry when switching between stills and video - it makes every lens different and increases the number of lenses that have to be taken on location and the time to switch back and forth. Anyway - I'm a vote for a C200 unless it's just way out of your budget.

Subscribed. Really enjoyed it. Visually intriguing and informative as well. LOVE how the drone shots were graded - like that one at 2:15... ?? Mavic 2 Pro in 10 big log or...? My only suggestion, if you want it, would be showing the people talking on screen a little bit and adding a lower third about them so I know who is talking and can put it into context of the whole story. I think it would help me understand better. Going to take a look at your other vids on the channel now!

There are so few limitations to the lenses you can mount to Sony E. I left Canon video in 2014 and was using adapted EF lenses. Now I'm transitioning to native E glass because it's generally much lighter and smaller (and according to DXO, much sharper), especially since IBIS means there's no need for huge IS glass. I do find the new RF glass intriguing but there's no way I'm going back to Canon. I'd literally rather try any other company at this point. Nikon, Panasonic, Blackmagic, Fuji...

You know, Sony Pictures... the studio responsible for great works of art such as Pixels, Paul Blart Mall Cop, the new Ghostbusters... Sounds like that same crack team is holding back the good sensors. It's a joke.

Sounds like Sony Pictures is making the decisions ?

Thank you for the calm, thought-out response. That makes sense. It definitely seems expensive compared to other options. Don't get me wrong, 10 bit and 4K60 would make me happy, but you'd think Sony decided to make the camera bodies out of asbestos the way people are reacting ?

I don't understand why everyone is rushing to call Sony the new Canon less than a year and a half after the A7III. Is Sony supposed to blow our minds with every new release for the rest of eternity? Nobody is forcing anybody to upgrade... The amount of energy spent complaining about not having a $500 camera that can cure cancer and predict winning lottery numbers is reaching crazy levels. At least on the Canon thread people are funny about it all.

Yes but it's Canon getting away with the theft

Dang. More than just great looking it's inspirational. This is a reel where I really don't care about the camera because the overall concepts, art direction, camera movement, etc. are so great. Thanks for sharing I hope you're ok with me hitting you up with questions from time to time ? Especially fond of:

If you think about it, it's surprising these can print a whole page and not just the center 60% ?

The biggest difference is that the 1.74x crop is on a FF sensor that doesn't allow EF-S lenses (at least not native Canon) so that's a substantial difference that is extremely hard to combat.

You understand how inherently flawed a poll like this is, right? If anything this just proves that the other fan boys are more fanatic - why would Sony people vote for themselves in this poll? It's like asking for a vote on which political party is the most out-of-touch - you think people are going to vote for their own party? See what I mean?

Chances of this having 6.7K full sensor down-sampling 4K: 100% Oh, wait... Seriously though, don't see how anyone can expect full-frame video quality to be nearly as detailed as the A7III.

For 4K30 h.264 is plenty for anything besides D-Log IMHO. It's really quite beautiful on the P4P if you just do a "regular" flat setting... Lots of detail and plenty of dynamic range and color info. The 10 bit 1080p is 50Mbps on the FS5, so it should be fine for 4K with 100Mbps h.265 (equivalent of 200Mbps h.264) since it's 4x the equivalent bitrate for 4x the pixels. The fact that the bitrate is the only leaked spec and that it doesn't mention HEVC/h.265 really worries me, though. If it's left off then I won't be able to replace my P4P with it ?

@Trek of Joy I'm ordering through Amazon since I'm using the store card so unfortunately I'm just waiting. I ordered back in June ? I need at least the 24MP since I'm planning to actually use this as a hybrid (still have my FS5 for the bulk of my work). Any indication whether the SIII will have a resolution bump from 12MP? This doesn't answer my question in any way and adds nothing to the discussion. I don't want this to end up being a debate about competing camera systems.

Haven't found a clear and concise answer from a source I trust - Is the RIII lacking any features that are essential or very helpful for video? From what I can tell the FF is better detailed on the III and it has better autofocus - are either of these reasons to hold out? Anything else to consider?

Bitrate being equal, yes they are very hard to spot differences in, but if you're delivering to web the platform will only stream at the bitrate they've chosen for each resolution. For instance, YT plays UHD at about 35Mbps and 1080 at 8Mbps, so you'd definitely see the difference there.

Thanks Andrew for this great resource and community!

Andrew, I think this has more to do with the P3 display on your iMac than the OS or camera. I've got one and it's been very frustrating because of the inconsistency: Sometimes even inside of FCPX itself, the footage will be displayed differently whether on a timeline or in the browser, even when the project and library are set the same. Your first example is definitely an instance where the video is not being properly remapped to the display gamut, but it could be because of the mismatch with rec709 which doesn't traditionally go with HLG. So I think what it's doing is treating it like 10 bit footage on a rec709 display with no remapping. (Just like an RGB JPEG displayed on an sRGB display looks washed out.) The second example I think is actually an instance where VLC is the one getting it wrong and preview is getting it right, since 10 bit footage should look really good on a P3 display. I don't think it's converting it to rec709 without telling you: I'm not sure though - that's just my take. I find the whole thing frustrating though, I'll tell you that. We've got this incredible 5K display that's capable of displaying insane color and contrast and we're left dealing with unreasonable inconsistency and headache!

You're like 90% of the way there. See if this doesn't help: The following examples would provide the exact same image, and therefore are "equivalent" assuming the camera is always in the same spot. On a M34 sensor: A 25mm 1.4 lens (and it doesn't matter if the lens was made for FF, APSC, or M43 - this is important) On a M43 sensor: A 50mm 2.8 lens, speedboosted (pretend it's a 0.5X speedbooster). (This is because you're now actually putting a 25mm 1.4 lens on the M43 once you've added the speedbooster, just like #1) On a FF sensor: A 50mm 2.8 lens - - - For #3 the ISO will have to be multiplied by the crop factor squared to get the same exposure. - - - I ran out of likes for today but this is very important for new filmmakers to know I used to think this but focal length has nothing to do with perspective, only the location of the camera and the relation to the objects in frame. The easiest way to test this is to shoot a camera at a chosen focal length, say 50mm, and then shoot from the exact same place with a lens with 2X the focal length (a 100mm lens in this example). Go into an editor and compare the full shot at 100mm to a 2X crop of the shot at 50mm. They will be the exact same image. This is no different from shooting a FF camera at 100mm and a M43 camera at 50mm. This shows how the perspective never changes if you don't move the camera, no matter what lens you're using. Seriously, try it out.

This is one of those deals where you don't need one but keep the mouse hovering over add to cart anyway... I agree these are great. Better than the Senny's in the price range for sure.

I've had a bad headache tonight and messing around with this provided some nice distraction Glenn so thanks. In no particular order we have- The quarter pounder with cheese: Didley Scott: Let's kick some ice: My only attempt at subtle: Mr Anderson: Aaaaand finally, "Michael get-out-of-my-edit Bay"

Pretty sure any camera can do SCROTography if you just point it in the right direction

So where do I claim my prize @Benjamin Hilton? Do I just send you my address or how does this work?