Mmmbeats

Noise experience can be very subjective because 1) people expose using different strategies, 2) cameras get pointed at different things, 3) what one person deems 'noisy' might be tolerable for someone else. I will say - I've been fine using the C70 in the higher ISO ranges. I think it will be interesting to see how the two sensors (with their different approaches to low-light) compare at different ISO values. I think its going to be closer than people think (though not at 12,800 or so, obviously!).~ I do agree with you about the C70 to an extent. I've said it myself before that it can sometimes be a bit too soft. Thing is though, I think the speedbooster and EF lenses add to the issue with the C70. I've been using the RF 24 - 105 a lot recently and it has really made me re-evaluate the sharpness of the C70. Basically it responds well if you pair it with really sharp glass. Dunno what to say about your exposure experiences between models. There are variations in how camera systems respond to exposure standards, but there shouldn't ever be a stop deviation. So many factors to consider though - adaptors, settings, etc. I'm not sure what's up there.

Full video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGYQQgybiXk

I'm pretty dubious about all of that! I'm not so sure about the low light 'big advantage'. Yes, the 12,800 ISO base is going to be a fantastic feature, but the C70 is already a fantastic camera in low light because of the rich inky blacks you get with DGO. You're essentially getting an additional exposure at the shadow level and (with the great dynamic range) you get fantastic low-light imagery. This was actually a key factor that made me buy the camera in the first place. I film in subterranean poorly-lit locations with the C70 all the time, and it is brilliant for those kind of scenarios. Unlike the cameras that have to crank up ISO (like the A7S derived Sonys) you get great highlight control alongside rich shadows. The C400 (albeit pre-production at this stage) looks noisy and thin by comparison. Also - when do you ever actually shoot at 12,800 ISO? Like I say, I shoot in dark spaces very often, but never require that kind of facility. Don't get me wrong - it's a nice feature to have, and might come in handy here and there. But it isn't a key feature in my books, almost always makes things look unnatural, and you are going to be better off with DGO in most situations. I'm talking here as someone who is likely to buy the C400 and is excited by it, so I'm not trying to rubbish the sensor tech and implimentation (which is the same as the C80). C70 is soft by design, just like many high-end cinema cameras. Its a point of preference really, and not something that needs to 'fixed' in my view. I'm looking forward to being able to choose between softer (doc and fiction) and sharper (corporate / client work). You don't lose a stop of light between sensor sizes. Speedboosters work in a unique way to refocus light, which is where the stop gain comes from. I notice that the C80 has SDI though - that is another differentiator from the C70 (HDMI only).

Makes sense if you are a C400 owner looking for a companion cam. But otherwise the C70 is going to be a better camera in my view. The DGO sensor is magnificent. I'm planning to pair the C400 with my existing C70, which will create matching issues (sharpness, sensor size), but will give me a lot of flexibility.

Basically, if you have an endorsement for the first option, you need to also have an option for people with informed opinions who don't endorse the workflow. Like having an option for both 'Yes' and 'No'. Therein lies the bias in my opinion. Seen all the Golden Heart trilogy stuff, thanks. Not sure the relevancy, but cheers anyway. I'm enjoying the thread. More so than the poll.

The first option is for people who endorse the workflow. The second option is for people who haven't used the workflow (which implies they don't know, one way or the other). The third option is also for people who don't know. The fourth item makes no grammatical sense whatsoever. I get that English is likely a second language, and I'm not trying to call that aspect of things out here - but if you want an unbiased poll, you need to present fairly-weighted options.

Badly designed poll.

Well, they are Reds now, so it makes sense.

Aputure are bigger than Nikon at this point 😜.

The 3D animation stuff looks the scariest. Not my industry, but it looks like it's seriously coming to get that sector in the near future. They are first. The realism and uncanny valley issues are not so important. It's a really technically demanding field, so this will smash down barriers. Be interesting to see how people mitigate. For what it's worth, I think there will still be plenty of stuff for people to develop expertise in, it's just going to be quite a different load of stuff.

I think people brushing this aside are being a bit short-sighted, bordering on naive. I'd say that what we've seen so far from text-to-image from machine learning has been - Quick developing. One month it's all fuzzy, the next month it's all smoothed out. One month there are 11 fingers on each hand, a year later there are only 6.😅 In other words - it iterates fast. Unpredictable. As even a tech-savvy person, it is really hard to predict what 'AI' (I don't like using that term) is going to be good at, and bad at - 🖐️! Far reaching. Useful. I'm not a particular enthusiast, but I have used Adobe's AI tools on around 75% of the projects I have delivered as a freelancer over the past 6 months or so. And that's just casually discovering things that make my life *tons* easier. I also believe them to be reasonably ethical, or I wouldn't be using them. Similarly, I think the impact of this will be quick developing and unpredictable. The biggest threat I think, may be that unpredictability itself. It's going to be very difficult developing a workflow, without knowing whether it will become undermined by a much easier AI pathway at some not-so-distant point. Example - I recently decided to really lean into doing 2.5d and true 3d animations from flat artworks as a client offering (for context, a lot of my clients are museums). To really develop skills in this using tools like Cinema 4D, Projection 3D, DUIK, etc. will take a couple of years of learning as I go. I very much doubt that AI will explode into use in that time, but certainly at some point just beyond that horizon I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a turnkey AI tool that offers very professional bespoke 3D animation from still images. That's very up AI's street. Aside from some very obvious things, like news gathering, I don't see anything that machine learning could not potentially impact within the foreseeable future. This includes - editing a corporate film from start to finish from supplied footage almost instantly, with several versions to choose from; writing a compelling and original television series (yes, I honestly believe that machines will be doing this); creating photo-realistic footage of any location in the world that has been photographed more than 3 times, etc., etc. Of the course the nature of unpredictability is that just as equally, none of this might happen. But I think the main point to make is that the scale of the threat (to professional livelihoods) is so profound, that anybody just blithely ignoring it has their head in the sand to my reckoning.

I can only imagine the colorist was told 'show how much the colours can be pushed with RAW' and took the brief a bit too literally!

Strangely garish promo video:

12-bit ProRes RAW external too!

Ooooh, tasty new firmware update announced today! ProRes internal at lower resolutions (C4K and 1080). Win!