Otago

Before anyone gets too misty eyed remember this is the same person who bullied employees for whistle blowing against Lance Armstrong and threatened news sites with law suits for being critical. He is also the master of hype and could just as easily have stubbed his toe as be facing real medical problems.

Does anyone have some Canon C300 mark I footage they would be willing to share as the original XF file ? I want to see how my computer handles editing it ( I'm assuming it won't be anymore taxing than GH3 footage ? I just want to make sure incase I need to budget for a new computer too! ) I have had a google but all the files I have found are now long gone I think.

It might do full frame 4k 10-bit 422 and 6k RAW ?

It's also quite like MXF in video in that hit can hold metadata, if it is implemented well then all the edits can stay in the file as metadata. Unfortunately it is heavily patented so it might never take off as a universal file format.

Can you use hardware HEVC decoding to decode the 10-bit HEVC ? If so then doing that on the latest AMD or Intel hardware would probably be worth the price difference alone. Are these 1U/2U servers or workgroup servers in tower cases ? The 1U servers I have been around were not something I would want outside a data centre because they are LOUD, like really really loud and with a range of harmonics to set your teeth on edge. The other things like M.2 NVMe drives and space for PCIe cards are probably doable with a few riser and adapter cards though.

Internal RAW and really good autofocus, which is good because historically this is the spec for Canon cameras for the next 10 years ? I'm more excited that HEIC images are being adopted outside the Apple ecosystem. It can be half the size of JPEG for the same quality ( or lossless ) and can have alternate display versions so an sRGB file for general viewing and then a 10-bit flat file for editing and that edit data can be kept in the file rather than as a sidecar or in a database.

Interesting replies! I note that there are compromises for some people and some people are content with what they are currently shooting with. If you are satisfied then how did you come to that conclusion ? I am curious about how you know that you don't need anymore, because I know what I am happy with but I am finding it difficult to express how I came to that conclusion.

I've been looking at footage from various cameras, straight out of the camera if I can find it, and was curious about how other people evaluate cameras. I can see differences between them; resolution, dynamic range and colours. I can rank them in order of which image looks better to me ( in a subjective way ) and I can rank ergonomic and technical features that I want or need. I can push the footage to see where it breaks and how it looks after compressing for delivery. What I'm curious about is where is the point that it is good enough and anymore isn't necessary for you ? I think I know where my point is, it's somewhere around a C100, C300, F3 for features and image quality. I want the built in NDs and XLRs and I need the robustness of them and the image quality holds up to the little grading that I do and when it's compressed down higher resolution or bitrates don't jump out at me as being better, but I'm not pushing anything hard and my delivery is heavily compressed. Where is your point of adequacy and why is it there ? Is there ever a point where you will say that you don't need anymore ?

I'm envious of the concentration it takes for ENG and documentary shooters to think and edit in those conditions! Might be of interest to some people : https://www.live-production.tv/news/sports/gearhouse-broadcast-helps-take-sky-sports-f1-coverage-road.html https://www.svgeurope.org/blog/headlines/behind-the-scenes-sky-sports-coverage-of-the-british-grand-prix-at-silverstone/ https://www.wired.co.uk/article/formula-one-liberty-media-chase-carey-bernie-ecclestone It's mostly from the point of view of branding but it was still quite interesting to someone who has never thought about how outside broadcast works.

Perhaps it will become a huge success and a cult film making lens, but I think it's more likely to be the next Leica 50/1 Noctilux where a few people use it to it's full extents and many lust over it and sell it when the realities of using that lens hit and it ends up stopped down to 1.4 or 2.

I agree that it could be a 2/3 camera ( and according to android lad it is! ) I haven't watched live tv recently and I noticed that it looked very different to what I was used to - why the change now if they were always capable of it ?

I was watching the interview highlights on YouTube and was surprised to see high dynamic range and shallow depth of field in the drivers interviews after the race. Admittedly the last time I watched F1 it was 10 years ago ( they moved from free to view to Sky Sports and I didn't want a satellite dish just for F1! ) but it was definitely all clippy with deep depth of field. I can't find anything about the cameras and other broadcast stuff they use, anyone know ? The irony is that there's a camera man in the background of this video but I can't see because of the shallow depth of field :

I think that lens is designed for a very particular type of Japanese camera collector / user. The same ones who buy those mint cameras on eBay and the Leica collectors editions, and that I follow on Instagram. If you don't have much space, but a high disposable income and the urge to collect then £8k camera lenses might be just the thing for you! I wouldn't be surprised to see a beautiful leather bag for that lens and the Z7 that comes with its own cover bag to stop the bag getting damaged, they're not expecting professional users to buy it ?

Perhaps 4K 10-bit 422 or 420 30p with a codec too low to meet broadcast specs and remove the timecode ? I would hope it's not 8-bit in 4k, but 8-bit with great colours is better for me than 10-bit that I have to work on. Great autofocus, variable ND, XLR inputs and good out of the box colours would still make it a great camera for all the web delivered content being shot by single shooters ( me for instance! ). An upgraded FS5 II with the Venice colours available in more than one profile, full frame and great autofocus, I'm guessing about £6k ? What else could they cut down to make the A7s3 though ? Just the variable ND and XLR inputs ? Perhaps the A7S3 will be 8-bit 4k and the FX6 will be 10-bit ?

There does seem to be a low RAW for stills, so perhaps the 1080p RAW is based on that? Nikon do it by downsampling according to this https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/nikon-small-raw-internals but it could be pixel binning too. I think this makes sense for stills - jpeg is only 8-bit so anything better is useful but for video 10-bit and 12-bit are available so this style of partial RAW might only be useful for getting around patents and keeping the data rates lower vs uncompressed video if it is similar to the baked in sNEF.