A7RV announced

[newfoundmass]

2 hours ago, kye said:

The major issue with cameras these days is the cripple hammer / technical limitations they put in them which aren't in the marketing.  Sure, a camera might be 8K, 240p, 10-bit, but the fact that it's not all of them at the same time is the information that isn't mentioned, and which combinations are available are hard to find out.  Gerald is useful because he seems to systematically find many of those gotchas whereas other people don't go that deeply.

In terms of Sony and his opinions, to put it bluntly, who gives a crap?  If you're spending thousands of dollars then you should be making your own decisions rather than simply listening to other peoples conclusions.  Gerald is good because his videos are full of facts about the tech details...  just ignore his opinions and you're fine.

Most other camera reviews are ONLY opinions.  That's where we should be getting annoyed..

I've defended Gerald a lot on this forum, but when you do those analyses and then completely downplay the results or say they're not important because you're in the bag for Sony, you do more harm misleading people than the reviewers that just gush about how great every camera that is sent to them is. He built a reputation for his technical, long form reviews that were neutral and even-handed. Now that reputation is used to shill a company. It's dishonest, far more so than those that just give their opinions. And whether we like it or not, these people DO influence a lot of people's purchasing decisions. Whether you're one of those people or not, his move from being objective to significantly less so should be disappointing.

[TomTheDP]

1 hour ago, newfoundmass said:

I've defended Gerald a lot on this forum, but when you do those analyses and then completely downplay the results or say they're not important because you're in the bag for Sony, you do more harm misleading people than the reviewers that just gush about how great every camera that is sent to them is. He built a reputation for his technical, long form reviews that were neutral and even-handed. Now that reputation is used to shill a company. It's dishonest, far more so than those that just give their opinions. And whether we like it or not, these people DO influence a lot of people's purchasing decisions. Whether you're one of those people or not, his move from being objective to significantly less so should be disappointing.

I guess I don't care a ton because I only really look at the technical side of his reviews. He is sometimes the first person to post dynamic range and rolling shutter tests, although he doesn't use a measurement for RS so its not super useful. 

[MrSMW]

Agreed. 

I’m not really bothered about people ‘telling me stuff’ and even less, parroting what someone else has said, but people who ‘show me stuff’.

If I look at the stuff I am being shown, I can decide whether I like it no matter what sizzle anyone puts on it.

The worst ‘reviews’ are someone waving an older model camera that isn’t even the one in question and if you haven’t used the thing, it’s not a review but a highly dubious opinion. That might be total BS.

But as we always say, none of this stuff being released is actually bad. Artificially crippled in some cases and often frustratingly so, but more a case of how well or whether it meets your needs. Or not.

[TomTheDP]

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

Agreed. 

I’m not really bothered about people ‘telling me stuff’ and even less, parroting what someone else has said, but people who ‘show me stuff’.

If I look at the stuff I am being shown, I can decide whether I like it no matter what sizzle anyone puts on it.

The worst ‘reviews’ are someone waving an older model camera that isn’t even the one in question and if you haven’t used the thing, it’s not a review but a highly dubious opinion. That might be total BS.

But as we always say, none of this stuff being released is actually bad. Artificially crippled in some cases and often frustratingly so, but more a case of how well or whether it meets your needs. Or not.

I agree. It is definitely also important to hold companies accountable for what they make. That probably sounds privileged as we are so spoiled when it comes to cameras now. They are raking in the cash though so why not keep them on their toes. 

I have always been a Panasonic guy as I felt they always pushed forward when it came to image quality and new features. I have felt the same with Fuji. Sony and Canon have always felt more strategic in what they put out, in a bad way. Hard to escape from their state of the art auto focus. 

Nikon's current in camera RAW release is exciting though and overdue. Hopefully that pushes Sony, Panasonic, and Canon to include RAW in all their models. 

[kye]

6 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

I've defended Gerald a lot on this forum, but when you do those analyses and then completely downplay the results or say they're not important because you're in the bag for Sony, you do more harm misleading people than the reviewers that just gush about how great every camera that is sent to them is. He built a reputation for his technical, long form reviews that were neutral and even-handed. Now that reputation is used to shill a company. It's dishonest, far more so than those that just give their opinions. And whether we like it or not, these people DO influence a lot of people's purchasing decisions. Whether you're one of those people or not, his move from being objective to significantly less so should be disappointing.

I guess I never trusted him, so was never betrayed.  In terms of being neutral and even-handed, facts are always neutral and even-handed, so that part hasn't changed - unless he's outright lying of course.

To me, reviews contain facts and fluff, with the facts being the only useful things.  The challenge was always what facts were missing, which is always a problem because it doesn't matter how deeply a camera is reviewed, they're never going to cover every aspect.

When I first got into video, I did a bunch of reading and came to (what I thought) were reasonable conclusions.  Those were that 4K, bitrate and AF were the most important things, oh how little I knew!  Could I have saved myself from going down that particular dead-end road by trusting the right person?  No.  No reviewer was saying what I needed to hear, and the ones that I later found that were pointing in (at least) partially the right direction would have been waaaay out of the realm of what I was ready for (Steve Yedlin for instance).

It's a process, you have to learn for yourself, and unless you're a YouTuber making camera reviews, then the YouTubers making camera reviews couldn't possibly steer you in the right direction, even if they were squeaky clean.

3 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

That probably sounds privileged as we are so spoiled when it comes to cameras now. They are raking in the cash though so why not keep them on their toes. 

I don't think we are spoiled.

Cameras have gotten more and more features, but the manufacturers aren't giving people what they want, they're improving the specs that drive TV sales and then marketing the crap out of them in order to brainwash the customers into thinking the new features are actually desirable.

Did you see the two recent videos by Crimson Engine about cinema cameras?  I thought he did a great job.  The first one is what the manufacturers are pushing, and the second is what people actually want.  Spoiler, there's very very little overlap.

 

[TomTheDP]

45 minutes ago, kye said:

I guess I never trusted him, so was never betrayed.  In terms of being neutral and even-handed, facts are always neutral and even-handed, so that part hasn't changed - unless he's outright lying of course.

To me, reviews contain facts and fluff, with the facts being the only useful things.  The challenge was always what facts were missing, which is always a problem because it doesn't matter how deeply a camera is reviewed, they're never going to cover every aspect.

When I first got into video, I did a bunch of reading and came to (what I thought) were reasonable conclusions.  Those were that 4K, bitrate and AF were the most important things, oh how little I knew!  Could I have saved myself from going down that particular dead-end road by trusting the right person?  No.  No reviewer was saying what I needed to hear, and the ones that I later found that were pointing in (at least) partially the right direction would have been waaaay out of the realm of what I was ready for (Steve Yedlin for instance).

It's a process, you have to learn for yourself, and unless you're a YouTuber making camera reviews, then the YouTubers making camera reviews couldn't possibly steer you in the right direction, even if they were squeaky clean.

I don't think we are spoiled.

Cameras have gotten more and more features, but the manufacturers aren't giving people what they want, they're improving the specs that drive TV sales and then marketing the crap out of them in order to brainwash the customers into thinking the new features are actually desirable.

Did you see the two recent videos by Crimson Engine about cinema cameras?  I thought he did a great job.  The first one is what the manufacturers are pushing, and the second is what people actually want.  Spoiler, there's very very little overlap.

 

Spoiled in regards to what people had to work with not too long ago in this price bracket. I grew up with VHS home video, which is barely watchable now. I now own probably the best digital cinema camera ever made and also have a myrid of hybrid cameras that shoot videos that are remarkably close in quality to that said camera, at least to the untrained eye. Couldn't say that when I first got into this, at least not without a lot more money. 

[Andrew Reid]

Gerald is one of the only long-form reviewers on YouTube, he doesn't have much competition.

Someone like Kai is not going to be much competition

The thing is Gerald is a box and spec sheet reader, the presentable face of a specs sheet.

It is useful for finding out info although you could find it out a lot quicker by reading a web page instead.

He is a tester of what it says on the box. If it shoots 8K he is probably going to show you what the wall of his studio looks like in 8K versus all the other modes.

Without wanting to get rude, or personal, What's missing is any kind of real world creativity. This was apparent in the Sigma Fp and especially Fp-L review where he dismisses it for not having IBIS and fancy AF.

That was yet more proof if you needed it that he doesn't shoot anything. Those Sigma cameras have a unique look, a unique form factor, and Cinema DNG.

I think Gerald has an imaginary user in his his mind whenever he does a reviews. His imaginary user is always turning up for work for an online advert shoot, rather than on a street to shoot some poetic cinematography, or showing up at an indie film that he wrote himself.

So it is always going to be heavily biased towards "getting a job done" based on having all the boxes checks... AF, IBIS, 120fps, and so on.

It is a pity that in so many years he hasn't developed a craft, because he's had the perfect opportunity - so much spare time, money and freedom to put these tools to good use - but seemingly no actual interest in cinematography.

Anyway, that's just my opinion of Gerald.

A bit like as was the case with Bloom, these people get put on a pedestal because of internet fame and their work just doesn't justify it.

[newfoundmass]

Gerald does do some stuff that goes beyond just showing what's on a spec sheet, but I agree with a lot of what you said @Andrew Reid.

For me, it's just disappointing to see someone that was so even handed become a Sony apologist. He was a bright spot amongst shills and influencers for a while there. 

Do you have any channels you're enjoying these days? 

[IronFilm]

7 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

So it is always going to be heavily biased towards "getting a job done"

To be fair, that's the situation with most professional users, perhaps 90%+

Is why I'm still using Lectrosonics Digital Hybrid. 

Is Sony Axient Digital better? Sure!

But my trusty old Lectrosonics "get the job done". 

So I'm upgrading my booms to digital (well, Sony DXW, rather than Axient), after many years of a Sound Devices MM1 preamp into a Lectrosonics Digital Hybrid transmitter being what I used with my Boom Ops. 

But if I was strictly honest with myself, did I need to do this "upgrade" and spend thousands and thousands of dollars? Nope, not at all. Is really just for myself, because I'm very pedantic and perfectionist about my audio quality. 

That's why heaps of people are still shooting with old cameras like even an ancient Canon C100, because it "gets the job done". 

I understand why people put practical pragmatism ahead of perfectionism. 

[Django]

Gerald started shilling around A7S3 release. He's not the only one: Matti, Armando, Potato Jet.. all formerly Canon apologists suddenly switched sides overnight. I know some will claim Sony > Canon but I suspect something else is at play. Too many sales at play through influencers. Remember all those luxury first-hand trips to exotic locations pre-COVID? all that budget gotta be thrown elsewhere. Don't wanna sound like a camera conspiracist and I'm sure Sony aren't alone in this but they really seem to have a strong grapple on the YouTube scene. 

[Andrew Reid]

Maybe a sign Sony are overtaking Canon & Nikon in sales figures.

A YouTuber's favourite camera is the one that generates the most affiliate commission with B&H.

[kye]

4 hours ago, IronFilm said:

I understand why people put practical pragmatism ahead of perfectionism. 

Also, if you're looking to up your quality of final edits, it basically doesn't matter what type of videos you make, upgrading your camera is probably pretty far down the list of what will actually move the needle in terms of outputs.

I've seen inexperienced folks shoot with an Alexa and it looked like a poor quality student film 🙂 

[kye]

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

Maybe a sign Sony are overtaking Canon & Nikon in sales figures.

A YouTuber's favourite camera is the one that generates the most affiliate commission with B&H.

I wonder how many videos it takes for a new camera to pay for itself in extra revenue.  ie, where the YouTubers purchase price (whatever that might be for those with large sub counts) is overtaken by extra clicks that their videos get from having a new camera vs filming with the one they were using before.  

One of the things I've noticed in quite a lot of situations is that they (McKinnon, Matti, etc) often seem to have several of the new camera bodies on their shelves rather than just one that they'd need to buy to make the review videos.  If It's an R5, let's say, and they had three of them, and a few nicer lenses, then that's a serious investment!

[MrSMW]

2 hours ago, kye said:

One of the things I've noticed in quite a lot of situations is that they (McKinnon, Matti, etc) often seem to have several of the new camera bodies on their shelves rather than just one that they'd need to buy to make the review videos.  If It's an R5, let's say, and they had three of them, and a few nicer lenses, then that's a serious investment!

Unless anyone states that they paid for anything with their own cold hard-earned, I assume it’s either on loan or been gifted.

Not that I much care either way because I’ll do research in a number of areas, am not much prone to ‘influencers’ (a word very similar to influenza) and make up my own mind.

It’s rare anything I have purchased has been a disappointment. Probably as a result of the above.

[newfoundmass]

16 hours ago, kye said:

I wonder how many videos it takes for a new camera to pay for itself in extra revenue.  ie, where the YouTubers purchase price (whatever that might be for those with large sub counts) is overtaken by extra clicks that their videos get from having a new camera vs filming with the one they were using before.  

One of the things I've noticed in quite a lot of situations is that they (McKinnon, Matti, etc) often seem to have several of the new camera bodies on their shelves rather than just one that they'd need to buy to make the review videos.  If It's an R5, let's say, and they had three of them, and a few nicer lenses, then that's a serious investment!

I know that a lot of YouTubers have relationships with B & H and Camera Canada to get loaners. I suspect thats one of the reasons it feels like some of these folks have immediate access to every camera. 

I imagine, depending on the YouTuber, they can pay off these cameras via advertising, sponsorship, and affiliate links pretty quickly. At one point Gerald's "studio" was a room in his old apartment that he continued to rent for that purpose even after moving out. He films using an A1 and A7sIII, which is over $10,000 in cameras. So he's probably doing really well. 

[kye]

47 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

I know that a lot of YouTubers have relationships with B & H and Camera Canada to get loaners. I suspect thats one of the reasons it feels like some of these folks have immediate access to every camera. 

I imagine, depending on the YouTuber, they can pay off these cameras via advertising, sponsorship, and affiliate links pretty quickly. At one point Gerald's "studio" was a room in his old apartment that he continued to rent for that purpose even after moving out. He films using an A1 and A7sIII, which is over $10,000 in cameras. So he's probably doing really well. 

$10,000 isn't much.  Lots of YouTubers will also have a dedicated cinema camera setup for their permanent 'newsreader' setups, like an FS7, FX6, or even FX9, in addition to their multiple R5 or A7S3 bodies that sit on a shelf and can be seen randomly in the background.  

One data point that stands out to me is Monica Church, who is a lifestyle influencer and also more recently a licensed real estate agent, and in this video actually spells out her income from each:

TLDR:

• She has ~1.5M YT subs, with mostly 50-150k views per video, about 35 videos in the last year
• She's also active on other platforms too, and likely has lots of followers there too, so revenue is likely to be from cross-platform posts and eyeballs
• She says she's signed brand deals up to $120K (although who knows how many videos/posts that would involve)
• She says that prior to starting in real estate (which seems to be a huge amount of work) she was making $500k/a as an influencer, but then that went down to $300k/a and the real estate made $200k that year (IIRC that was her first year doing it)
• I know she's used a modern BMPCC camera (not sure if it was 4K/6K) but she's not a tech YouTuber so doesn't talk about the gear

I suspect she's probably got a more monetisable audience than McKinnon etc, as she talks about all kinds of things that young twenty-something women are spending money on (rather than just cameras) but also this audience has greater lifetime value as if you can grab someone as your customer in early adulthood then you might have them as a daily/weekly customer for life, whereas that's not what happens with camera equipment which is only likely to be a few thousand a year.  

Influencers are (mostly) like old money - they don't want you to know how much money they make because you won't react well to it and there's no up-side for them if you do find out.  This is obviously different if you're an influencer trying to look rich in order to influence people, but most have influence these days due to how relatable they are, not how rich and elitist they are.

[BTM_Pix]

Apologies for going a bit off topic here as this post doesn't relate to Gerald Undone directly but Atomos are releasing a firmware update in the new year for the Ninja V/V+ to record 16 bit RAW output of the A7RV to ProRes RAW.

[FHDcrew]

Pretty cool but I wonder if it’s binned from the full-sensor?  Or cropped?

[BTM_Pix]

16 minutes ago, FHDcrew said:

Pretty cool but I wonder if it’s binned from the full-sensor?  Or cropped?

The internal 4K60 is, like the 8K mode, a 1.24x crop so expect something similar for external but it remains to be seen.

[MrSMW]

Well, it's not 100% final, but looks like I am going to be going all in on Sony...

The XH2 has been sitting on the shelf for 3 weeks. I have not touched it. Not shot a single frame or clip of video. It's going back. Return has been arranged.

After years and years and years (12 actually) of wrestling with trying to find the 'perfect' system, I have somewhat reluctantly come to the conclusion that I have little choice but to become part of The Borg Collective, AKA Sony.

Love Fuji, but I'd be juggling bodies and lenses all day.

Love Nikon and arguably, the Z9 is THE hybrid camera to have right now and ticks all of my boxes, but it only ticks all of my boxes as one unit of three...and Nikon themselves don't currently have anything else that works for me and multiple systems is not really an option.

L Mount. Oh L Mount. I wish you had what I need and in terms of outright image quality, you do, but what I actually need is a combo of the S5, the S1R and the S1H (in a single body, not 3 completely different ones) and maybe it's coming...and that is why my decision is not 100% made yet, because you still have 4 months to make it appear.

Canon. Not quite... Sony offer me more of what I need with less compromise so...

Isn't anyone else. I can't do M4/3 for stills and that is 50% of my work.

A7RV (100% stills + about 10% video) plus battery grip (for the big lens)

2x FX30 (100% video, one in hand, on Spider holster or tripod, the other gimbal)

Tamron 11-20mm f2.8

Tamron 20-40mm f2.8

Tamron 35-150mm f2/2.8

Ultimately, it's about the system and regarding the above, the compromises are about as minimal as they get...

Compromise 1: Flip out rather than tilt screens on the FX30's.

Compromise 2: Err, it's Sony and I'd rather champion the underdog?

It's a bit of a no-brainer for me. I hate change. I hate change for change sake for sure, but the system I currently have just has not been working for me. It's been getting in the way and I have been grappling with it for 2 seasons now.

As above, the clock is ticking Pannyboy. You still have a chance but it's really slipping away fast now. Maybe even one of your siblings, Leica or Sigma might slip something by and you know I would love an FP3 to 'my spec', but I can't pin my hopes on you as I have a business to run and a new season that starts in 5 months time... But then you don't have the lenses I desire and Tamron in E Mount does.

I don't hate Sony. I've never hated on Sony. I just don't love 'em like I do some other brands, but ultimately, I'm a fella trying to earn a living.