Yurolov

Ye but then they have the fuji logo at the end of the film. Not sure what they are thinking here. Get it to some professionals for review. Here is one shot with the new film profile, which can do 12 stops. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUcKd8HNqvc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhvY721BB7c lowlight test for good measure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W06cc9PB49M wtf lol - thats a weird way to advertise your new camera just saying fuji. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaAJ0FWlNrw This one looks good though.

That's your assumption unless you can provide a link :). Actually before he switched he had a try of the GH5s and I guess it wasn't to his liking. The fact that he didn't promote the 6d makes me think he wasn't paid, but I could be wrong. Does anyone know what the specs are for HDMI out? Haven't seen them listed anywhere.

Not sure what your post is meant to mean but just to clarify the autofocus section - I am not saying cinema cameras should have autofocus. In consumer cameras, it is more important to have autofocus than 10 bit because of their intended use. Just like Casey Nesitat left the GH5 for the Canon 6d Mark II (which is much worse than the XH-1), so too will others for the XH-1 because it will give you the things you need at this level - not at the cinema level. If I am doing cinema, I will not choose the 10 bit GH5, and indeed nobody seriously has. That's why the XH-1 is better placed in the market to dominate than the other cameras out there. I sued to own a a6500 and I have heard so many people who owned it complain about the things that Fuji has an answer to. It is really a no brainer.

I think there is a bit of confusion here. I am arguing for the xh-1 over other consumer cameras like the gh5 and the a6500 on the basis that people who are purchasing these products will experience no discernible difference between the 8 bit and 10 bit codec, which is something you appear to be confirming. I didn't say 8 bit is not enough, but if you are going to produce a movie and if you have a decent amount of financial backing, then there is no discernible reason to choose an 8 bit camera, short of aesthetics, and certainly none for high-paying client work, which is more exacting. For the purposes these cameras will be used, which does not mean they are not good enough for cinema, the 8 bit or 10 bit is really irrelevant. In fact, if I have great Fuji color SOC then why would I need 10 bit to get it to the same end point, except for some unique situations where I have missed exposure. More important is autofocus and good color. That's partly why canon outsells anyone. 8 bit cameras can be used in cinema but in practicality they won't be. Tangerine was shot on an iphone. But the director has just followed it up with Florida Project, which had a bigger production value and was shot on an Arri. Last year, the winner of the Golden Lion at Venice, the woman who left, was shot on a as7ii and in 2012 the winner pieta was shot on a 5d mark ii. It is possible in indie narrative work, but given the choice people will pick the raw cinema camera, because there are distinct advantages and it does look better. There is no question about it, and it isn't just that one is raw and the other is 8 bit - there are many more factors as you know. So I am saying at this level the xh-1 is the most appealing, and will be more appealing to a wider audience than the gh5 or a6500 if the color and the autofocus are as good as the rumours are saying. Face detect autofocus coupled with ibis - it's the only camera on market that would do that. Think about the possibilities with that combo and with the fuji colors. 10 bit on a small m4/3 camera pales in comparison. If I am using my cinema camera I don't need this, but for these types of cameras and for their intended use, the fuji wins hands down, and I think this will be reflected in the sales numbers if they can market it properly.

You didnt read my post properly - I said that at the level these cameras are at there is no real difference between 10bit and 8bit as the people using them won't see any discernible difference, and I can point you to numerous example of this on youtube. I didn't say that there is no difference between 8 bit and 10 bit. The sort of people using these consumer cameras are more willing to focus on (pardon the pun) is autofocus. I never said cinema cameras should have autofocus. Of course you can say, but I use 10 bit and know how to use it - but then again neither are you shooting cinema. Because anyone shooting cinema isn't using these cameras. Ok, so you are saying slog 2 from their cinema camera range intercuts with the a6500 then? I just want to make sure I understand your argument here, cause that's what you said. I have owned the a6500 and I know what slog does to the camera. I also own cinema cameras and understand the difference between the two. To suggest that the difference between the two is stubbornness on the part of the end user is quite funny. And you can grade the a6500 as much as you want, it will still look like the consumer camera that it is.

Slog was designed for their cinema camera range and slapped into these consumer cameras, which is why you will get some pretty funky colors SOC if you use the profiles and why many people eschew them. Can they be graded? Sure. But are they designed for these cameras - definitely not. Why do you think no one uses slog3 - if it was intended for their alpha range, don't you think it would be useable? Flog was designed around the xt-2 and the sensor. I don't need to make assumptions as I have owned the sony cameras which I sold for the fuji, so I know it will have better IQ period. The 8 bit v 10 bit argument is redundant at the level these cameras are playing at - none of them are cinema cameras nor are they designed to be. If you are going to be shooting for cinema you won't be using these cameras. For their intended purpose, having 10 bit v 8 bit is so minuscule that it is more down to user competency. If this thing has face detect autofocus in video mode as they are saying, a la canon, then that will be a lot more important than anything even the panasonic cameras have managed.

You can do it, but is it worthwhile doing it? Not an expert here, but slog sgamut does some funky things to the colors in the Alpha cameras. Clog on the other hand is effective on an 8 bit camera. True you might save in clipping but what are the tradeoffs in most circumstances.

Flog will be native to the sensor so the image quality should be leagues ahead of the a6500, 10 bit or not. Then there is the better ergonomics, the lenses and the price point. I think this should directly compete with the GH5 and is much better than anything Sony has offered up.