kye

Great stuff! This is what happens when more attention is paid to the non-camera things rather than the camera body 🙂 Especially good production design and hair/makeup. It must be really satisfying working with a team of talented people who are all bringing their different areas of expertise into the finished production!

The red being pushed up was a trend, IIRC it was made popular by this video: Outside of camera forums, no-one gives a shit about getting natural looking colour - they want colour that will do something for them - to support the aesthetic and vision of the film - to bring the film success and popularity so it reaches a good audience and makes the effort of making it worthwhile. We discuss cameras colour on these forums in some sort of strange parallel universe where making a camera neutral and accurate and nice is this kind of goal in itself, but it's really not. If you guys have a challenge with that level of pushing/pulling colours then you'll have a heart attack when you start watching movies and other music videos..... plus, you know, check out the terribly inaccurate colour on these little-known films that failed due to their poor colour.... What awfully inaccurate colours - I guess the cameras were rubbish! Looks like those were shot on Alexas - man must those cameras be overrated!

Nice! Anything is usable as long as it's aligned to the creative aesthetic. Footage from any camera can also be a disaster, regardless of how technically good it is, if it's not a good fit for the aesthetic.

Actually, something that apparently used to happen quite a lot but was kind of hidden by you tubers was that they used the Sony FF cameras in manual focus mode when vlogging because they didn't have flippy screens and couldn't be sure that the AF was getting them in focus. I saw it mentioned once in a video by Matti Haapoja and he laughed and said that everyone does it but doesn't talk about it and then had a passing dig at Sony about flippy screens. IIRC it was when the A7s2 was the best Sony camera that all the YT vloggers who jump brands all the time were using. The technique was that you held your arm straight out and bent your fingers up, held your camera at your chest and manually focused on your fingers. He showed it in the video. In terms of poor AF ruining video - yes it absolutely does. This "AF is necessary" sentiment is what is making people use AF when they shouldn't. Your comments about "Panasonic needs to give users AF" just makes me think that you don't know when to use the right mode for the job. I mean, AF is useful, but it's not the end of the world like the AF zealots make it out to be. The fact they can be useful doesn't mean they're not a complete PITA when they're compulsory when not wanted. It's like if a piece of kitchen equipment put strawberry sauce into everything it made, someone complaining about it, and then the rebuttal being that strawberry sauce can be useful. Sure, but get it out of my pizza dough! At this point it's like people are trying to cancel Panasonic because they're not skilled enough to work around a particular limitation that Panasonic has. I understand that it's a bit of a significant limitation, but cameras are chock full of limitations that we all have to work around all the time. It's like people have developed a fetish about it or something.

We have to be careful here. Comparing a GX85 to film and implying that the GX85 is better than film is simply flat out wrong. The GX85 is better than film in terms of: camera size resolution (for cameras of remotely the same size - 8mm or 16mm) artificial sharpness lower-noise Film is better than the GX85 in terms of: dynamic range / highlight rolloff colour natural rendering of details rolling shutter motion cadence film is "raw" - ie zero compression artefacts cinematic image rendering slow-motion (film can be as slow-motion as you like and doesn't decrease in quality) While the size of the GX85 is definitely a huge point (it's why I bought one), everything I care about in images is better with film.

No idea about FCPX.

Good thing it's not a Panasonic camera - otherwise people would be sharpening their knives ready to tear it apart....

I like him and his channel. I think what I really like about him is that he's a pragmatist who understands the end-to-end process and that the camera is not the limiting factor. If he was a little more up-front I think his message of "this camera is good enough" would turn into "this camera is not the limiting factor in your results - your lack of skill is" but of course he's too nice to say such a thing 🙂 The thinking is good, just because I don't agree with his conclusions doesn't mean I don't agree with his thinking - it's far more sound than the un-spoken thinking behind most other channels in the space!

As a GH5 user, I find the whole crop thing to be a highly bizarre topic that makes basically zero sense. When I hear everyone being all apologist about it, I just think you all have Stockholm Syndrome. When I look at my 17.5mm lens, I know it has a 35mm FF FOV. It has that FOV in 24p, 60p, 120p, in 4K, in 1080p, in 5K, in 3.3k, on Wednesday AND Fridays, when the Moon is in Aquarius and Pisces, and with absolutely no reliance on who has the majority of government in the lower chamber of whatever-the-f*ck-country I'm in. The GH5 does have crop modes though - they're FEATURES, not obstacles in a minefield that is different on every camera. The S35 and S16 crops are actually extremely useful on a mirrorless camera because of the lens choices that they open up. S16 especially as there are so few cameras that effectively do it. The GH5, which seems to be copping some heat here, does S16 in native 4K. I agree that it might not have a great feel, but it also doesn't get emotional and irrational and create random issues that will ruin your shoot 🙂 If you insist! You said it first, but I did the math and thought of it before I read your comment 🙂 I wouldn't believe anyone until you see a time-lapse shot of the camera in a temperature-controlled cabinet with a thermometer and a clock, where they keep replacing the battery and memory card until it overheats or they get bored. It's not that I don't think Canon can make a camera that manages heat, it's that we've seen we can't trust them not to lie to us about it.

As @Django said - you can't get colour like this without knowing how to properly expose and how to do at least basic colour work. These people are probably using a strong look LUT (it has that feel), but the saving grace for you is that they don't seem to really be that good at colour matching, so that seems to skew it in the direction of their look being more towards the LUT and less away from it being manually done in Resolve. A skilled colourist would probably be able to replicate this look in a few minutes by doing it manually. C-Log3 on your R6 is definitely the way to go, especially because you already have it and it's essentially free. When you're starting out in Resolve I suggest the following node tree to get you going: Node one: use this for manual adjustments to the clip like White Balance / exposure / contrast Node two: use an OFX plugin (which comes with Resolve) called Colour Space Transform (CST) and set it to Input of Canon C-Log 3 / Canon colour and output of Cineon gamma and rec709 colour Node three: use the one of the LUTs in the Film Emulation folder that come with Resolve - these all have different looks but you'll probably find one that you like enough to get you started (there are some Fuji film stock emulations in there you might like) Apply that node tree to every clip and then on each clip you need to adjust the first node so that each shot looks good. This process is called "grading under the LUT" and it's common to do things this way (pros do it this way) and unless you are manually exposing and lighting each shot (which you're not) then you'll need to adjust each shot separately to match. On that first node I'd suggest starting out with by adjusting the Contrast / Pivot / Offset / Temp / Tint / Saturation controls. These work as a set and should give you most of the control that you're looking for without being too complicated. The combination of the above technique (only using the controls I've mentioned) and your R6 in C-Log-3 is capable of creating world-class images, but will be limited to how well you are shooting the material. If you're not getting good results from that, work on your shooting (proper exposure and WB) and work on your technique. The internet is full of people selling you things, so they push the agenda that getting good results is complicated so that you'll buy the results from them instead of learning to do it yourself. This is BS. Getting good results is about mastering the fundamentals. Remember that 10,000 hour rule? Practice makes better.... Good luck.

In addition to previous comments, there's the potential for them to be doing something crazy that we haven't seen before... IIRC their original ALEV was revolutionary, so maybe this one will be as well. Maybe dual-layer or some other kind of change.

I thought the colour on that video was all over the place actually? Some shots green and faded, others with more contrast and more of the Canon reds. It all looked like Canon colours though, which you said you didn't like?

....and if they did their temperature tests in a freezer or in the real world. @mercer - here's the Canon S16 camera you always dreamed of! Don't be silly - everyone knows that shooting kids sports games just needs a lot of reach and high fps, while feature films require a significantly improved image, leaving cats to be the most demanding of all. Maybe a hybrid for the sports and films and the new Alexa for the cats? Sounds about right.. unless RAW it's soft, soft, soft. Overlays disappearing also sounds about right. I wonder if anyone at Canon has a full grasp of which features work in combination with each other feature and mode? It would have to be a 27-dimensional matrix of some kind. I don't think even quantum computing can keep up with the complexities....

Odd that my YT feed didn't have a few rows of time-released review videos... maybe Canon didn't hit the usual suspect camera reviewers? Interesting cameras though if they're able to give reasonable quality 4K footage for a reasonable price, as opposed to 8K60 RAW that basically no-one needs.

I'm having a vague recollection that we've had this conversation before? I remember someone saying that 1) colour was a very high priority for them, 2) canon colours weren't good enough, and 3) they weren't willing to learn to colour grade. I remember the thread went no-where because it's not a solvable problem. Interesting video. I'm reminded of the GoPro promo videos where each 10s section was shot by a 5+ person production team over the course of a week - highly highly highly cherry-picked shots. I think for someone who doesn't want to do any work in post, a phone will actually be less usable than a larger sensor camera. Yes, the footage can look great, but if you wave the camera around and then just apply a LUT in post then an Alexa will create the most usable shots, an ILC camera will create less, and the phone will create the least, just because it has a narrower set of circumstances where all factors are within its sweet spot where it creates a great looking image. If only they were limited to being a senior - I've been having them my whole life!

Very exiting news - probably the most excited I will ever be for a camera I would never use! It will be hugely interesting to see what they come up with. I know it's a "new sensor" but in a way so is the ALEV III, and the ALEV II before that. In terms of improvements, you only have to compare the later vs earlier versions of that to see that they really did improve the colour. I wonder what was holding them back?

Actually, there are a few vocal pros posting here of late, but the majority are not pros. You mentioned not wanting to learn colour, but @Djangos advice is right - shoot in LOG and just use a LUT. The reason that SOOC doesn't work with "cinematic" and "family" and "video" is that SOOC profiles have limited dynamic range and this has a very video look to it, which is the opposite of cinematic. It is possible to get great looking SOOC footage, but you have to control your lighting and guess what - that's not what you're doing when you shoot family stuff! Shoot LOG and use a LUT or transform. "learning colour" isn't what you think it is either. "learning colour" is kind of like saying "learning painting". It takes 2 minutes to learn to hold a brush and paint stick figures, and many lifetimes to learn to paint like Rembrandt. If you want your footage to look cinematic then you're going to at least have to learn how to adjust whitebalance in post. One of the least cinematic looking things I see is when people don't do that on their videos. What about video? OP said he's 70% video and 30% stills.

Wow - hugely impressive results (as usual). I must admit that the allure of a zoom lens has entered my thoughts of late, just through the sheer convenience of being able to see something and then capture it without delaying so much that the composition has evaporated. The FZ2000 really is something! Yeah, first time I've seen an anamorphic offering with enough squeeze and low-enough weight that I'd even contemplate it for guerrilla hand-held work. I was hoping that the cheap Chinese manufacturing would eventually make anamorphic glass affordable and then accessible and it looks like it's finally happening. Super interesting!

Well spotted... The Komodo sure is an interesting piece of tech, especially so given the top screen and ability to mod it with a medium-format style loupe and get away with a cinema camera without needing an external monitor. ....and the image from the Komodo... well, not must else to be said really. Rigs are so interesting as they're a real glimpse into the logic and workflow someone is using. and they're especially difficult to do well when you're going with a small setup, rather than fully-featured but heavy. My pick would be just coffee, and in a double-walled cup to keep it hot longer. The problem with reading and eating/drinking is that the food gets cold! Yeah, I've been watching Caleb Pikes adventures with those older cinema cameras and been really surprised about how involved and demanding the accessories are - they're really entire ecosystems in a way that just isn't the case with DSLR/MILC cameras. The image though, is worth it if you can source the equipment and work around the limitations.

That's a real bummer (or as @PannySVHS says and I agree with - 6x the bummer!). I customised my lens set around that 2x feature on the GH5. I had a 17.5mm and 42.5mm, but the 17.5mm (which was the default lens and on the camera most of the time) with the 2x zoom was 35, which is very close to the 42.5, so I swapped from the 42.5 to a 50mm lens, giving me more reach and extending the useful range of my setup to include 17.5 / 35, and 50 / 100mm. Perhaps it will be coming with a future firmware update? I mean, they already have the architecture in there to downsample a given area of the sensor to a given resolution, so hopefully it just means coding up the feature, or (if the firmware is based on previous GH cameras) simply enabling it and customising it for the GH6 sensor. As you say, switching to 4K is an option, but it really defeats the purpose of filming with 1080p in the first place which is speed in post. Interesting. The 12K sensor isn't dual-gain is it? I don't recall reading that anywhere. Come to think of it, I also don't recall reading that it's dual native ISO either, and I do recall that it's low-light isn't that great compared to, say, the P6K sensor which is dual native ISO. When the rumours were flying around about a BM box camera I was torn between wanting the 12K sensor as it does look beautiful and when configured in lower resolution modes has great readout speeds etc, and wanting the P6K sensor as it has the dual native ISO which gives better low-light at higher ISOs.

To be fair, the GH6 noise is compressed (I'm assuming it's the Prores, but could be h26x) and the R5C RAW isn't, so the noise is likely to be sharper (for want of a better word). I'm not sure that compression alone could turn the R5C RAW noise into the GH6 noise though. Maybe some other processing is going on. Resolve has a nice ability to do NR on the chroma and luma independently, which can yield nice results if you reduce the chroma and leave the luma relatively in-tact. Of course, the R5C RAW gives you the full ability to do that in post however you would like. I really think that NR is an art that no-one seems to talk about online. I've experimented enough with NR / sharpening / adding grain (and seen what other people do with film-emulation etc) to know that it's not easy and that I'm really not good at it!

I had a vague recollection about the OG pocket / BMMCC being dual-gain, but didn't know the Ursa 4.6k ones were too. The Ursa's are S35 aren't they? I wonder how the DR compares to the ALEV.

No, that's Dual Native ISO, not Dual Gain like the GH6 is. Dual Native ISO is when the camera has two native ISO values that it can choose from and picks the best one to use at any given time. Dual Gain (in the sense of the ALEV, Canon DGO, and GH6) is when the sensor has two outputs that each have a different gain and those two outputs are used simultaneously and combined with each other to create a higher DR image, in-camera, in realtime. This is the info from ARRI - https://www.arri.com/en/learn-help/technology/alev-sensors It's something people get confused between, because it's so rare and.... innovative.

Great to hear - I'm also looking forward to any stills you're able to share. I did a lot of resolution testing on the GH5 and comparing the 5K / 4K / 1080p modes on a 4K timeline revealed almost no difference and while editing the test together I sometimes had to look at the resolution of each clip to determine which mode it was in. A bit of sharpening easily took care of the overall feel of the image, and once I had pixel-peed on the footage enough I learned where to look for the tiny little details that gave it away, but I there are so many things that are more important to an image that no-one would ever get to the point of having sorted them all out and get to this point. VFX is an exception of course. The pixel:pixel modes are always mushy because they're not oversampled, that's just the norm for any camera. It's a wonderful place we've gotten to when oversampled images are the norm - I remember when Andrew was writing about how much better oversampling was and doing comparisons.

I really hope that once you guys have figured it out you'll post a summary... you lost me a few pages ago!