thebrothersthre3

Fuji had nicer skin and Sony had more accurate colors, which is pretty well known. When both in standard mode they look pretty close. When using the Fuji I am either shooting in Eterna or Flog. Classic Chrome is also a favorite. I think Flog colors would be a lot more pleasing than Slog as well. I like to set skin exposure a bit lower on the Fuji, like 60-65 ire.

Yeah the auto ISO unfortunately does not work well for video as its too jumpy. Try using a variable ND or adjusting the Aperture if you need to change exposure on the go. Has to be done manually though.

I want one haha, if they could do HDR plus stabilization it would be an instant buy.

CS is probably not as big of a worry though if you are shooting RAW. Too bad there isn't a magic lantern hack for the C100, that would be insane. The 70D seems like a really good choice right now. RAW with Canon DPAF for $300-$500 used.

You think its poor grading or just poorly lit?

I really like underexposed film though. Brings out the grain and looks really cool. Of course its a certain look that only works sometimes.

I'd be happy with just 4k 12bit.

F'ed up film looks nicer than F'ed up digital, can be a desirable look. To me well exposed film and well exposed digital look identical. Under or overexposed film looks really nice tho, depending on the type of film of course.

Video is definitely more complicated than photography. That said I am more confident in my video skills than my photography haha

I actually just got a 90s Nikon 35mm camera. Film really isn't that expensive and can be digitally processed pretty cheaply. Film cameras are pretty dirt cheap too(depending on the model), I am only going to shoot film for paid photography work now. Its just way more interesting IMHO, digital photography is just a bit boring to me. Why try to replicate the film look when you can just shoot on film.

I often shoot 4k as there is less moire and less noise if I am downscaling to 1080p. Depends on the camera though.

My God, how could they put a micro HDMI port rather than mini or full.

I just doubt its going to happen considering prores RAW has been 12 bit not 14. Nikon hasn't hinted at anything more.

That is true. I guess its just the difference from a camera that gives you a nice image easily vs something you have to work a bit more to get it. Maybe Canon vs Sony. Sometimes it might come down to something as simple as one camera having better auto white balance than another, at least when it comes to these quick tests you see online. That said there is no reason you can't get a good image out of the Zcam or really any other camera.

On the other hand if you can get good results from a camera with a quick test that probably means it is a pretty good camera. I know some people have looking at specs but it seems like any camera these days you can get good results with if you know what you are doing.

The funny thing is I don't think you can go wrong with almost any current camera nowadays. You'll kind of be set unless things change so much that people only watch things in 3D or something. Creativity is the biggest limit. Imagine 25 years ago when all you had to make a quality looking movie was shooting on film. We have it incredibly easy nowadays.

I am seeing the Z6 go for $1500 used now, making it a total of $2200, which is nuts for what you get.

Still those external recorders are battery hogs. My little 5 inch monitor doesn't use much power, could possibly just power it from the camera body. I really like the Z-cam form factor.

Its definitely on my watch list. Especially at that price. From what I've seen of Prores RAW it only yields slightly more dynamic range than native. So probably like 12.5 maybe 13 stops if the camera is doing 12 in H264. Still thats 12 bit 4K full frame.

From what I have seen of prores RAW it gives a bit more dynamic range but not a lot. Maybe a half stop more. The bigger advantage is the 12 bit color data. You'll probably be seeing a realistic 12.5 maybe 13 stops of dynamic range. Which is still very good. Regardless its a full frame camera that can record 12 bit RAW 4k externally. With the recorder it can be had for about $2000, that is crazy. I personally hate the idea of using an external recorder though which is why I am excited for the Z cam, as well as it having 4k 100fps of course.

If you need a camera now the GH5 certainly isn't a bad choice. That said if you don't really need a camera its always better to wait. GH5 prices will go down even further and maybe you'll fancy something else thats come out by then. Kind of depends on your needs I guess. For some people a GH5 could last one 5 years, if thats all the mojo you need there simply isn't a better tool.

So that's what audio guys do when they are drunk haha

Maybe they'll bring the price down to $1500, seems to make sense to me.

The cool thing about them is that they are making full use of the sensor. Where as other companies gimp their cameras for no good reason. At least we can use the 240fps lineskipping crap recording if we so choose. ?

Well full HD recordings on any camera have good rolling shutter. The A73 rolling shutter in 4k is also really good.