newfoundmass

I think we're already seeing that, re: 8K. But I also think 8K is more of a gimmick than anything; it's a way to sell more TVs. Heck, I think 4K was largely the same thing, given those of us with 4K televisions still mostly watch Full HD video probably 95+% of the time. The push for higher and higher resolution has diminishing returns with each increase. The difference between SD and Full HD was massive, the difference between Full HD and 4K wasn't nearly as great given the size of screens most people have, and 4K to 8K is even smaller. If it was going to be adopted we'd have started seeing an influx of 6K televisions and monitors. It's a bridge, at best, between 4K and 8K. Yeah, those people are silly. Worse case you upscale and hardly anyone notices. Honestly even at 4K the data requirements are huge for wedding/event shooting. I wish my GH5 shot 2K! ?

While true, when we got the chance to use a RED it was our opportunity to work on something that was used on Hollywood sets. That was a really huge deal. Of course now we're able to do incredible things with the GH5, Pocket 4K, etc. but in 2012 and 2013 it was huge for us. And it helped lead the way to companies like ZCam and BMD to further disrupt the market.

It's not how I'd react, but I kinda get it. Those folks have invested a lot of money into RED cameras and accessories, and I'm sure they're overall very happy with them, so it's probably kind of difficult for them to accept these allegations. That the RED community has spent a decade plus interacting with the people at RED on a personal level probably doesn't help. Ultimately one of the things that kinda bums me out about all of this is, RED really did do incredible things. When you take away all the allegations, the premium charged for off the shelf tech, etc. you still have a series of cameras that helped democratize cinema cameras, moving the tech forward while also opening it up to a whole different class of people. Until Blackmagic got into the game RED was the only cinema camera people like my friends and me could afford to work with. And it was awesome! It's disappointing that it's legacy has changed in many ways. Regardless of the outcome it didn't need to be like this.

Honestly the more I see the more I like. I was very skeptical about ZCam but I'm glad they've made me eat some crow. I'm glad they exist, at the very least they're pushing things forward!

But those are Canon lenses. Does Sony have that kind of reputation?

I still don't see much of a market for these outside of the YouTube generation of filmmakers that think they need auto focus, but even then is there much of a reason for those people to pay a premium for them when capable stills lenses are available?

One of the ways to invalidate the patent is by poking holes into or completely destroying the sequence of events.

The timeline is a significant part of the case, re: the patent. Establishing the correct timeline, and showing RED allegedly lied repeatedly, including possibly in court documents and/or during court testimony, is key to the case. Jinni did a good job detailing the information but didn't do a good job at all in showing how it all relates to RED's patent and how it allegedly undermines RED's claims, re: compressed RAW. It needs that context to resonate and show why this information is relevant outside of showing major inconsistencies.

The only market for these are the YouTube generation of filmmakers that value auto focus over everything.

It's very interesting. There are a lot of contradictions. I'm not sure if there are enough to say for sure one way or the other, but it's certainly curious, at the very least. The conclusions are not at all unreasonable.

I feel like I saw videos that showed there was very little difference optically between the regular cine and the Xeen lenses. Am I imagining this? Nope!

The quality looks awful. Looks like 720p scaled up. And it records only 10 second clips?

I can see both sides on this one. It provides a stellar image, but that really is a premium price tag for a bridge camera. That you can get the a6500 or the a6600 for close to the same price makes it seem like it's priced too high, though if you need that incredible slow mo it's a great pick.

Yeah, with your needs you could literally use any camera you want. Pretty much every camera released in the last 2 years, minus Canon, has what you're looking for!

That's the weirdest logic I've ever read. You've set your standards too high if that's how you judge the quality of a lens or camera.

He's an accomplished cinematographer. If they're good enough for him then they can't be that bad, not because he's God but because he certainly has more experience / credits than either of us have. I've found his work with them to look pretty decent personally.

Tom Antos has used them quite a bit, so they can't be that bad.

A lot hinges on what kind of events you're talking about. If you need to be able to record for longer than 30 minutes you've pretty much only have Panasonic to chose from. While Sony says their cameras, starting with the a6400, have unlimited record times, they will overheat if you go much longer than 30 minutes. The a6600 might be better though? The GH5 with the 12-35 f/2.8 is an excellent combination. It's what I generally use for event coverage, unless I know I'll need more reach. I don't even bother with a gimbal most of the time unless I absolutely need to, instead opting for a cheap shoulder rig that helps stabilize and make longer shoots easier.

Not to mention for a little more you can get the GH5! You can get a Panasonic G7 for under $500 now. It arguably has a better image than the GH4! There are quite a few Panny cameras under the $500 range at this point that are excellent value! I'm trying really hard not to get one, because I don't need one, but that's how good a value those are! ?

I mean it's easy to crap on Canon but it's true. I'd have to say they'd take up most of the list. I'd also put the Panasonic G95 on there, as though it's a great camera it's a marginal upgrade over the G85 and you can get the G85 for so little now that there's not a lot of reasons to get the G95. Probably not a worse value than any of the Canons in that price range, but it was a disappointing release and I've heard almost nothing about it since release, which isn't a good sign given how popular the G85 ended up being.

Not to knock Aputure, cause they clearly make incredible lights, but you can get Neewer or YONGNUO lights in the $25 range that have a CRI greater than 90. I think the YONGNUO YN-300 lights I have are in the 94 to 95 range? The options for affordable, decent lighting in the last 5 years have increased dramatically. Caleb Pike did a video covering like 10 lights under $50 and it's wild what you're able to get these days. Obviously if you're able to afford Aputure they're one of the best choices, but if you can't don't get discouraged, there's tons of options.

The GH4 obviously isn't a great low light camera, but it's weakness there has always been overblown. If you're relying on only available light you'll run into problems, but anyone should be able to get fine results doing even minimal lighting. $7 dollar clamp lights with CFL bulbs or $25 LED lights from one of the many Chinese manufacturers will go a long ways in lighting a "low light" scene. Even in 2019 the GH4 is more than capable for that kind of work. My friend's production house still uses the GH4 for most of their work, opting to rent if necessary. I still occasionally work with one when helping him out. If the bulk of my work wasn't event related I'd have bought one, but ibis is a huge help for my work. What lenses do you have? The Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 is really cheap new or used. There's also a lot of fast vintage glass out there: you can get the Minolta Rokkor-X 50mm f/1.7 for well under $50, or the 50mm f/1.4 for around $50-75. I am just getting my feet wet in some narrative work and I love my Minolta primes; they have such great character. Just lovely glass. Tl;dr: rock n roll with that GH4 girl!

Adorama is selling the Godox Sl-60w for $109.00, which is a steal since you're dealing with a reputable company and not a random eBay seller. It's a great light, and while it's not the Aputure 120D killer that people use for click bait YouTube titles, it has great output and high CRI. I built a kit out of em and they're great! https://www.adorama.com/gosl60w.html?origterm=sl-60w&searchredirect=true

Sometimes it feels like some people will never be happy. This is great news, whether you buy it or not. That affordable anamorphic lenses are hitting the market is a big deal and a sign of things to come.

I really wish I'd waited to update to DR16.