pixelpreaching

Ah. I see how it is around here. Disagree with the leader and point out their (now admitted) biases, get booted. That's fine, then, Andrew. Have a nice career.

You've stated almost no facts, that's pretty much the issue. Saying it's a Sony clone is not a fact. Harping about uniqueness isn't facts. Responding "whatever" to me showing you why something you're complaining about is the way it is and being what they call objective is not facts. All you say is that it's not unique, so that means it sucks and no one would want to buy it. According to Thom Hogan, you could not be more wrong about that one. So you'd pay for the SL2-S - a $6000 camera missing about 90% of features that many photographers value and use - because it is nicely engineered and designed. For that much money, you could get a GFX 100S, medium format, 100 megapixels, Fuji colour science, very good codec. The bias in the Sigma Fp is that you bashed the hell out of the Blackmagic Pockets for not having an EVF, IBIS, a tilt screen, etc - because apparently cinema cameras are supposed to be identical to mirrorless cameras now - but didn't give a care about those things in the Fp. Not only are all those true, the Fp: only does 8 bit internal RAW, doesn't do compressed RAW, doesn't do Prores internally, has a UI that pales to the Pockets, and had a TON of bugs and downright unacceptable flaws upon release and even many months later. Anyone that reads your comments or posts about Blackmagic knows you have an extreme bias toward them because they didn't invite you to something one time or whatever. It's petty and unprofessional, man.

Again, are you serious? The Z9 EVF hump looks nothing like that. The sides of the 1 series EVF are literally straight up vertical. The Z9 is sloped The Z9 EVF looks like the Z6/Z7, but a little bit taller. There's a reason for that - first of all, it's clear the mode dial is taller as well because it has a sub-dial of some kind. Also, I guarantee they raised it up because they have buttons along the left side, unlike the Z7, which raise up the position of playback and delete to be in line with the EVF. Just like the D6. The less curved hump allows for the mode dial to be placed flatly, instead of angled like the D6. Which just happens to be.... how the Sony a1, every other Sony, all the Fujis, Panasonics, etc. Again, why is "uniqueness" a factor? Why is that a "problem" for you? Do you not just pick the right tool for the job - one that does what you need and has pleasing ergonomics and whatnot that allow you to more easily do the job? You say you'd have a problem with unique selling points or form factors. So I ask, if you want an integrated grip, D6/1DX styled FF mirrorless camera, where should you look? Someone else has one? Seems pretty damn unique to me. Lenses are also selling points, and they have many unique lenses for which there are no parallels in other systems. Color, menu UI, handling.... these are all selling points. One of the things that irks me about my X-T4 (and every other mirrorless camera it seems) is that I can't set the viewing mode to Eye Sensor EVF only with menu and playback on the LCD screen. I only use the EVF for shooting 99% of the time if I'm handheld, but I also don't want to go through a menu or playback in the EVF. No one else offers this option. And it's actually a big issue for me. It mirrors how DSLRs worked and it saves battery by not constantly running the EVF or LCD. When I'm not shooting, the EVF eye-sensor shuts it off. And the LCD remains off. Anyway, I'm tired of this conversation because you seem to want to be purposefully obtuse. This is a constant theme of yours to not apply things consistently across the board. Which is literally what bias is.

While I don't think the first sentence is true at all, Sony does a hell of a lot of unique things sensor-wise, it is true and worth remembering that many of their unique tech has come from others - camera manufacturers too, who design sensors or modifications to existing Sony sensors.

Nikon, the only mirrorless cameras with viewfinder humps. You know that's not like wasted space right? Almost all center-EVF mirrorless cameras have a hump, if not all. My X-T4 does. There's a reason for that.... This is what I mean about inconsistent complaints.

Wait. The SL2 is sexy German design, fine. But doesn't it use Sony parts (sensor, EVF, etc.). Your complaint about Nikon was that they're doing.... exactly that. Yeah, you have better video options on the Panasonic S cameras (at least we assume, we know nothing about the video specs of the Z9). But you have worse video specs on an a7III or any Sony that's not a7SIII or a9. Color science you mention. But they're the same sensor, I thought that was the issue? Your complaint was literally "rebadged Sony" is what Nikon makes now. Not interesting tech, which is a nebulous term anyway. So, from what I gather now... "uniqueness" is the problem. That's what you value. Many people - especially pro photographers and not gear heads - don't give a hoot. If they like Nikon's body, color, lenses, performance, whatever... then they'll use it. Uniqueness isn't a metric that working photographers ever use. Yes, it is your opinion. As this is mine. My issue is you consistently fail to apply the same standards across the board. For example, your love of the Sigma Fp but disdain toward Blackmagic and the Pocket 4K/6K, despite all of your complaints of the latter being true (and often even worse) on the Fp.

So.... explain it to me? Or is it just yet another example of not applying your standards equally across the board?

This is very strange and bizarre post. Nikons are basically rebadged Sonys? Why would you shoot with a Nikon since Sony has a bigger (native mount) lens system? Are those serious questions? Like you don't understand why anyone would do that? Would you not say that of Canon since they don't use a sensor and EVF (maybe, I don't even know if they make the EVF, could be from Sony) from Sony? All you're talking about here is the sensor really. You could literally apply that whole thing to Panasonic, Leica, Fuji, etc. You do know that the manufacturer has a significant part in what the sensor will spit out and what ends up on your memory card even if they're using the same sensor, right? You like colors from Fuji? How did they do that with a Sony sensor?? You once praised the colors from the Leica SL2. I assume then the S1R has the same colors then? Why is the S1 so prone to aliasing compared to the Z6 and a73? The Z7 has a base ISO of 64 - a 2/3 stop difference from any Sony sensor (except the a7SIII). Also, elephant in the room.... the body of the Z9 is a world apart from the a1. Maybe that's not for you. Not everything has to be. Yeah, Sony has improved things on a couple models. I can still certainly level color, ergonomics, and UI complaints at the a1. But you don't see that anyone would (possibly very strongly) prefer Nikon's ergonomics over Sony? Even though the Z9 body is entirely different? Again, would you say these things about Panasonic, Leica, Fuji, etc.? Probably not. I don't get it at all.

I don't consider it one, it IS one. So is the Varicam, Sony FX9/Venice, EVA-1. Despite what people claim, the a7SIII and FX3 are NOT dual native ISO. They are dual gain. As is the RED Gemini. Basically, dual native ISO is that there are two actual circuits underpinning each photosite and it will switch between them. With dual gain, the process is happening in a second ADC, but each photosite still has only one circuit.

What cameras don't use Sony sensors? Arri, RED, obviously Canon, Sigma (Foveon, anyway, the Fp is a Sony sensor), and by all indications, the Blackmagic Ursa 12K. And I'm unclear about some older sensors, like the Panasonic Varicam/Varicam LT (guess that isn't "old" - it's still being made). That camera was the first true dual native ISO (vs. dual GAIN, which is what most cameras actually are despite being described as "dual native ISO") and predates anything Sony did with dual native ISO tech. So, my guess is they did not make that one - maybe Panasonic themselves or TowerJazz. Someone more internet savvy than I might be able to figure it out. I don't put much stock in this whole "did Sony make the sensor or not" as it relates to how the image looks. Sony makes multiple sensors used in Hasselblad, Nikon, Panasonic, Fuji, Olympus, Blackmagic, etc. And every single one yields completely different raw output in a number of different metrics. The processing pipeline that Nikon/Fuji/Panasonic/whoever implements matters infinitely more. Looking at images from, say, the original Blackmagic Pocket vs. the Pocket 4K/6K and preferring one over the other has far less to do with who made the sensor and more to do with what Blackmagic is doing (advancements from their Gen 1 color science to their new Gen 5, for example). Exceptions would be comparing CCD to CMOS; Hasselblad's Kodak CCD sensor clearly is very different from Sony's CMOS sensor, no matter what Hasselblad does. But that's a bit apples and oranges. Now, should someone (like a big company) start making sensors? Absolutely. Competition is f***ing great, and Sony is bulldozing the sensor market. Samsung is probably best poised to do something like that, and I hope they do.

That's for the DJI Osmo but that same idea is what I just posted - any hard case with foam that you can pluck out to fit your gear. Just make sure it's wide and deep enough for whatever you have. You can drive a truck over some of those Pelican cases.

Sorry, I did not thoroughly read your replies that you just want something for transport. I just use Nanuk or Pelican hard cases with foam for my lavs and audio recorder. I get custom foam cut, but that's pricy. There's cases like this all over amazon, just find one big enough with good reviews, you can't really go wrong. Nanuk and Pelican are my favorite brands, though. The foam you can pluck out and shape inserts however you want yourself. https://amzn.to/3bnwDDL

I have the Porta Brace AO-2XB which is great, costs $228 (pics below). Orca also makes great stuff, I have their OR-268 for my Zoom F6 when I just need something basic and small. But they have some very nice bigger bags, pricier than Portra Brace, though. Can't go wrong with either. I also have a Loudmouth Large Cable File Bag (on Amazon for $100: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07WW4HTLT/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_7?smid=A2D3DSPXQTS3U6&psc=1) which is great for organizing cables (audio or otherwise, I use it for all kinds of cables) when you're not using them.

von Trier's The House that Jack Built premiered at Cannes. He made himself persona non-grata. No one did that to him.

You're not wrong at all - though I disagree about the IQ of the BMPCC's. But, The X-T3 and X-T4 footage is VERY nice too. Not as much latitude for editing and h265 isn't as pleasant to work with, and there are some other differences, but I do love the footage they produce. I wasn't saying that people who don't like BM are ignorant about cinema cameras. I was saying people keep wanting stills camera features in cinema cameras, which *is* ignorant to what/how cinema cameras are meant to be used for. And I was pointing out Andrew's inconsistencies in his complaints against BM cameras (the Sigma Fp was FULL of reliability issues too). And I agree about the Fp - it felt like the beta version of a product, but it was a very unique and original product, and I too am very excited for the Fp II (or whatever it'll be called).