Leaderboard

Cined just published their tests of the DJI OSMO Pocket 4P camera, with the new LOFIC sensor, and oh boy does it deliver! Highlights from their testing (of the wide camera): 16 stops at SNR=2, and 17.2 stops at SNR=1, with no internal NR (better than the Alexa 35 and any other camera they've ever tested) 10+ stops of latitude (second only to the Alexa 35) and potentially limited by the 10-bit codec and maybe not the sensor 11ms rolling shutter (not bad, and better than DGO designs) Their studio lights weren't powerful enough to clip the sensor, it has that much DR! The telephoto camera from the DJI isn't a LOFIC sensor and despite testing very well it's not at the same level of performance. The full test: https://www.cined.com/dji-osmo-pocket-4p-lab-test-rolling-shutter-dynamic-range-and-exposure-latitude/ In watching their podcast presentation they revealed a bunch of other interesting info: This is the first of these (tiny consumer) devices that isn't trying to adapt itself to the scene, so it's a "real camera" in the sense that it's not heavily processing things They mentioned they had the iPhone 17 Pro in for testing and even when it was in full manual mode, just by moving the focus point it would change the test results etc As the main DJI camera is ~20mm FOV, they had to develop a new testing setup so the bright patches of the Xyla didn't reflect from the camera onto the dim patches etc LOFIC sensors are likely to be coming into smartphones soon, as this is where the money is in the R&D Sony are working on a smaller version of a LOFIC sensor which would be suitable for smartphones and also for the telephoto camera on the DJI Also, the OG BMPCC got a mention, as they were talking about how it would be great to have such a sensor in a "real" camera body and with interchangeable lenses etc, but MFT sensor size isn't that far away from this, so that could also happen too. Panasonic went DGO and maybe would do this too.. I'm stoked for the GH8!! Just incredible, and I second the idea of fitting one of these to a body like the OG BMPCC! Images. Waveform plot for the DJI OSMO Pocket 4P 20mm wide D-Log2 ISO1600 Imatest result for the 20mm wide camera, D-Log2 at ISO1600 Latitude tests of the wide camera: The 4-stop over, which due to their lighting restrictions was still probably 1-2 stops from clipping:

I’m getting a Pocket 4p in hand in the coming days. Looking forward to seeing how it matches up with the S1ii and Pyxis 12K. The videos I’ve seen truly are remarkable.

I'm already shooting 2x anamorphic open-gate on my $30 Charmera keychain camera, so nothing new for me here. Nice to see that Sony has finally caught up though!

@Emanuelhaha well, you know, life gets in the way. Since posting that, I've stayed plenty busy growing my little Utah-based production company — we did documentary and commercial projects in 10 different countries last year — while juggling getting married, having a little baby son, with another on the way now, so becoming a YouTuber on the side never quite worked out. Thanks for checking it out five some odd years later though, lol. I always intended to get back to it, maybe I will at some point.

AFAIK Panasonic don't use Sony for all of their sensors - they've implied the GH6/GH7/G9ii sensor is not from Sony (I think the words were 'it's not made by who you think it is' in response to a question at a launch event). OmniVision are also in the LOFIC game - the OV50X50 is a 50MP 1" sensor with both dual-gain and LOFIC - https://www.ovt.com/products/ov50x50/ 'TheiaCel® technology' is their version of HDR capture including LOFIC - https://www.ovt.com/technologies/theiacel-technology/

The GM1 is long gone, but here's the tiny a110 lens: FWIW, my wife and I made a doc 10 years ago using the GX7 and the GM1 (with a different lens). It was fun. I did use the a110 primes I have for a short film. Finally, I also have the a110 Pentax film camera and have started shooting with it just for kicks.

Sorry if I misread! I have! And it's TOO smooth for my tastes. It's very impressive, but I still want some natural handheld movement. It helps with the immersion. It's why I have never used a gimbal for the ringside action. The biggest issue with action cameras, even the new ones, is the low light just isn't great in most of these venues that don't have professional lighting rigs set up.

The LX10/LX15 is a solid little camera. The big differentiator (aside from price) over the Sony 1” cameras is the f1.4 aperture at the wide end. That comes with a couple of caveats in that it doesn’t stay f1.4 very far into the range and shooting in 4K there is a bit of a crop. It takes my cinelike-D hack and I also put a magnetic filter thread on mine that enables you to put ND on it and/or in my case a Sony 2x TC that you can quickly pop on and off to extend the range. These are some grabs from mine. The top panel is lens at it’s widest, the middle is maximum zoom and bottom is maximum zoom with the TC on. If you want to have one with a natural long zoom range on it then their other 1” from the time the TZ100 has a 10x optical zoom. Can also take the cinelile-d hack.

For fast action sports where you're moving quickly it's just not sufficient from what I've seen. If you're largely standing still I imagine it's sufficient but when you're running around a wrestling ring, not so much. My use case though is admittedly unique.

That would not surprise me a bit and although I have not watched a single review other than the CVP one…and even that, not all the way through, I have noticed a while recent bunch of LUMIX converts posted they have one. I imagine a bunch of them at least will shortly be posting a piece regarding why they flopped back to Sony, soon enough… I’d have no problem flipping back to Sony myself, but it would be the FX3A and FX30’s plus A7RV, all used, because all of that kit is more than good enough for me. The A7RV is still the best stills camera I have owned, though my S1Rii’s are better hybrid and as that is my bread & butter… It’s an unlikely scenario though as my LUMIX gear just works and shiny new stuff for the sake of shiny new stuff, is not enough of a draw for me personally. Still, no harm in looking and pondering from time to time!

This is a beast of a camera for sure, but man, almost $5K??? I mean, I get it, it's almost a cinema camera, but no internal ND, SDI etc.... I guess I'm just grateful you can pick up a used A7SIII for around 2K and get basically the same image at the end of the pipeline. Or even an old F5 at $1k for that matter... It's funny because I'm at the stage in my career where I can kind of choose to shoot with whatever cameras we want within reason. More often than not though, I end up going with older cameras because we get basically the same image at end of the pipeline, and they are like 10x cheaper. The budget saved can be invested into cooler on camera stuff. Spoiled for choice I guess

I’m developing a video recorder that can capture both uncompressed and compressed RAW, while also recording a flat H.265 stream with minimal ISP processing. The application can process RAW data and encode the result to H.265. It adjusts the saturation vectors in the linear domain to preserve accurate color relationships and supports color targets for calculating a 3×3 color correction matrix and TRCs. It also includes USM and MTF-based filtering in a mildly nonlinear domain, allowing either sharpening or attenuation of high spatial frequencies. I’m also planning to add film simulations after calibrating the camera using manufacturers’ spectral sensitivity curves. I’m open to suggestions regarding additional features worth implementing. At the moment, my main problem is dropped frames during compressed RAW recording. Below is an example from a Motorola Edge 50 Pro: the brighter image is produced by the phone’s ISP, while the other image is processed from RAW. ISP: RAW: RAW:

Well it’s been a while but, as they say in their trailer for the launch, the wait for a refreshed RX10 is almost over. A lot has changed in the nine years since the last version so it should have a significant bump in features but, equally, it will likely get a significant bump in price (from an already pricey base point) that we’ve seen everywhere else in that intervening period. It certainly has the potential to be more than enough camera for more than enough people otherwise they wouldn’t bother bringing a new version out but equally it could also just be a grab for them. The internal ND of the Panasonic FZ2000/2500 gave it the edge for me over the RX10 so that’s one area where Sony might have come back at it but, then again, Panasonic show little sign of refreshing the FZ2000/2500 so there may be no need. All in all it might be something interesting or a head scratcher.

Well, as expected, it’s an incremental release that reflects developments of the intervening nine years. Not listed there but included is S-Cinetone, Slog-3 and custom user LUTs. Not much that it doesn’t have really. More details here https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1985961-REG/sony_rx10_v_digital_camera.html Price is £2K which in the overall scheme of things is about what I expected because previous versions weren’t particularly cheap. Might not be for a camera for everyone but for someone it could be the everything camera.

I see a tons people complaining about the marketing/hype machine that is the "filmmaking sector" of YouTube, and I hate a lot of those clichés too. That being said, it has been in the back of my mind to try out for a while, so yesterday I had some free time and I finally decided to give it a go! Turns out it's actually a lot harder to film yourself and talk right to camera than I anticipated (I very quickly abandoned my plans to shoot it anamorphic, focusing on my S1, all by myself, was just way too difficult) and the whole process took me far longer to shoot and edit than I expected. Anyway, here's my (first ever) attempt at this kind of video: I'm assuming a good number of users on here consume as much YouTube as I (sometimes regretfully) do? I've always considered Eoshd as a cut above the rest of the internet filmmaking-afficcionado crowd. I'd love to see anything anyone else on here is making in this space too, and/or see if we can start a discussion about good, lesser-known channels to follow that aren't specifically about shoving gear/affiliate links and clickbait sensation down our throats.

Had the OG…or was it the II back in the day and quite liked it as I’m quite partial to a fixed zoom camera. Changed it for a camcorder with the same sensor in the end but that was about 117 cameras ago or something…

Now, about using it in summer... are we talking about a mild summer, or an actual summer that isn’t even properly hot, where the camera doesn’t need to suddenly remember it has thermal limits? Here’s a useful 45-minute guide: And last but not least, one of the best comparison tests I've found so far, if not the most interesting with a unique range of pros and cons is here, as well as probably the smartest use of a fine example for low light is there (serves as tutorial too). To those who still think this unique accessory called the POV Head Tracker is merely pointless/meaningless, take a look at what Insta360’s CEO Insta360’s CEO said on the matter, when he said he hopes “that one day everyone will forget cameras even exist” : o EDIT — Worth adding too: the new Pocket 4P/Pro filters are already starting to appear, alongside the brand-new D-Log 2 enabled by an equally new next-generation LOFIC image sensor. And what about noise texture or quality of the grain in D-Log and D-Log 2 when testing the ISO range? A 2nd test, colour included, plus a comparative analysis between the two and against S-Log3 no less*, from another reviewer here. BTW... Also not to forget the bitrate difference likewise highlighted by this old-school written comparison/review: Pocket 4P/Pro goes up to 180 Mbps versus Luna Ultra’s 120 Mbps, exactly 50% higher. The question is: what will be the real-world impact of that extra compression headroom in demanding scenes and heavier Log grading? * A 5-stop difference in D-Log 2 and a full stop in D-Log... a 4-stop gap between the two! Well, who would have guessed? ; ) + another test: compared with the full-frame a7 V [LINK] : X

Most people will probably end up buying both and using them with two different focal lengths, as in the case of the filmmaker you referred to. That level of flexibility is hard to beat. After all, they’re portable and easy to carry around. The footage matches pretty well too. I wouldn’t even mind making a few minor tweaks, if any are needed.

Real 1080p on compacts is a unicorn. None of them do it, they are all pixel binning the 1080p and 720p. There's a wide variance in binned image quality though - some pixel binning techniques get close to native res 1080p. Pixel binning works well on the RX100 M1/M2, these use a good sampling method. Cleanest 1080p for the price, with the fast aperture zoom and the size is as small as it gets. The RX100 M4 or newer got the fast stacked sensor, so they CAN do a full pixel readout for 4K, no crop, but the 1080p is still binned. LX15 I can recommend as an all-round stills compact with 4K, but it still cannot sample the full width for a full pixel readout, the 4K is a crop and the 1080p is binned. I never used it for 1080p so can't vouch for the binning quality. I always 4K'ed it.

Good discussion and I think this cuts to the heart of how different the thought process really is. If I'm shooting in public with a single prime then this is how I am thinking about it: - I have a fixed FOV, but I can move around and closer/further and when I do that I change all of the following at once: - the size of the subject in the frame - the perspective I have on the subject - the size and position of the subject compared to the items in the foreground and background - my distance to the subject - my influence on what I am shooting - So I visualise the situation in 3D and estimate where I need to move to create the composition I want - I move there and refine the camera position and take the shot If I'm shooting in public with a zoom then this is how I am thinking about it: - I have a flexible FOV and I can move closer/further so when I do that I can: - zoom, which changes the size of the subject and foreground and background in the frame without changing their relationships, or my distance, or without changing my influence on the subjects - move, which changes the perspective I have on the subject and therefore the relationships of the objects in the scene to each other, and it changes the subject distance and my influence on what I am shooting - So I visualise the situation in 3D and estimate a line/cone of positions I can be in to create broadly the composition I want through varying combinations of focal length and my position - I weigh up my priorities, trading subject distance, my influence on the subject/scene, and composition against each other to work out what I think is the best balance - Depending on the layout, I also consider how fast I can get there compared to what is happening in the scene - I move there and refine the camera position and zoom simultaneously, and take the shot One is starting with a single FOV and working from there, the other is starting with an infinite number of FOVs. The thinking is completely different. When I'm using a prime the idea of zooming is completely alien and when I am using a zoom the idea of there being set focal lengths is completely alien. It's like I have two programs in my head, one for primes and one for zooms, and I just run the appropriate one for what lens I am using at the time. The idea of taking a zoom and limiting it to preset lengths might seem like a miracle compared to having a prime, but it's a disaster compared to having a zoom lens. I spoke more about this in my dedicated thread about it, and once you start thinking beyond composition and into aesthetics and tone the idea that a 35mm vs 50mm FOV are 'similar' is about as ridiculous as a photo editor only allowing you to crop the image by 0% or 30% (this is the difference in FOV between a 50mm and a 35mm). I'm sure you're aware of these fundamental differences from your own shooting and you'll have been doing all this consciously or unconsciously. If you start from a technical perspective then a zoom is just like a set of primes, but from a creative perspective it's nothing like a set of primes whatsoever.

It depends on the range really. A 24-70mm is definitely 3-4 primes for me but something like the Canon 35-350mm is a different animal. Leica used to do these two lenses They are referred to as MATE (Medium Angle Tri-Elmar) and WATE (Wide Angle Tri-Elmar) and are “zoom” lenses with fixed focal length stops. The MATE is stepped at 28-35-50mm and the WATE at 16-18-21mm which on their intended use (Rangefinders) were used with a specific ad on viewfinder that was so clunky it is known as the Frankenfinder. They are not fast but are compact and have focal length stops that make sense so are very much a bag of primes (and very much more useful adapted on to an EVF body). Some Panasonic fixed lens cameras (LX10 and LX100 spring to mind) emulate this by allowing you to use the zoom ring to increment to fixed focal lengths and it is a good feature especially on those with return to position on power on functionality. I *think* some of the Sony RX100 do this as well.

Apparently Sony is working on a smaller LOFIC sensor now, so swapping to LOFIC may well mean sticking with Sony, especially if you already have a deal of some kind worked out.

I suggested in the other group that Panasonic should put LOFIC sensors in their ILCsand someone went on about mythical organic sensor, which quite frankly may remain just that. Panasonic should just put LOFIC sensors in all their new cameras, and ditch Sony if it doesn't improve sensor tech enough. I would love to see an Even Smaller GX camera with a 20-50MP 1inch LOFIC sensor. The LX10 is frankly too large for most pockets.

It lets them hit attractive spec points like 3x optical zoom and 12x zoom when using the digital shenanigans. Although the 3x optical zoom is actually 3x switch as the intermediate points are digital and if you are in D-Log2 then it’s a hard switch as there is no digital zoom. I think 45mm equivalent would’ve been better from a practical point of view but 2.25x optical zoom and 9x total zoom doesn’t look as good in the marketing. Even though 20-190mm equivalent is still not too shabby ! A good practical look at the challenges around shooting with it in this video.

There are already wide converters to put on the 20mm lens. How long until someone releases one for the 60mm tele. You could sell a set of 30 / 40 / 50mm attachments. Or a tele converter to turn the 20mm lens into 60mm and then you can keep D-Log2.

Hey ya'll! I was wondering if by any chance anyone knows a good site that reviews older DSLRs and MILCs? Yes, I know this is a bit of a strange petition, but nowadays reviews have gotten stale since every modern camera can perform 99% of what every other camera does. Specifically, I'm looking for a site that reviews older gear from 2026 perspective, a modern view of vintage gear, if you like.And no, parsing reviews from 2016 of Canon's 5D Mark IV is not very useful. I want the modern take, with today's technological ecosystem, of this older gear. IMO, the market for these slightly older cameras is ripe for the taking. Vintage sells and overall prices for these cameras is very respectable now that they have depreciated. Anyone?

Let the chat commence…

I agree about it being too smooth, especially because the position of the camera isn't stabilised so there can be huge parallax movement which clashes with there being no movement in the direction of the camera at all. I raised the topic because it would be interesting to see a combination of OIS + IBIS + Super EIS where the EIS smoothes the motion rather than locking the image completely. It's much harder to get the locked stabilisation than just smoothing it and leaving some of the motion in the image, so it's definitely possible to tone it down a lot. Perhaps this topic will be what people are arguing about when the GH10 and FX5 IV and R5 mk 5 are all being released on top of each other, so we've got to leave something on the table for then!

You could add the Sony ZV-1 to the list (original version, which has lens OIS) - it's basically the same size and weight as the RX100 V but more video orientated. I own both the ZV-1 and an HX99 (which is tiny, shoots 4k up to 30p, with a pop-up EVF and a fantastic zoom range for a camera that small - helped at the long end by only having a 1/2.3″ sensor, of course). Unless you really need the zoom range or EVF, the ZV-1 shoots better video (with a mic jack too) and very nice stills. You can also get a JJC stick-on 52mm filter adaptor for it - https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07GWQ6CXL (The Sony menu system will annoy you though if you're used to Panasonic cameras...)

Actually, I was making exactly the opposite point from the one you made it sound as though I was making : D when I mentioned Lumix alongside the Oly case ; ) The other point is simply that one lens isn’t necessarily the same as another ; )) While much also depends on the way the operator handles the camera, a lens with optical stabilisation can make a night-and-day difference... speaking as someone who uses glass with and without it every day on the FX series :- )

Sony RX0 is reasonably small. Not a zoom however and you might regard it as an “action cam” (albeit without stabilisation it isn’t!).

My user icon here on EOSHD is a GM1 with a tiny Pentax A110 24mm prime lens on it. Aside from using a flat-f8-body-cam-pancake-lens, this was as about as small as I ever got things. Which was pretty small!

Never tried it but I suspect the FX30 stab would be good enough for my handheld needs which are basically ‘static’. I move more and more however towards the combo of absolutely locked off or floating moving with nothing in between. Lumix are great in this regard because if you have everything dialled up to the max, albeit at the expense of some cropping, these things stay incredibly still. It’s really only if there is any static foreground that you notice any movement so wider establishing shots, I always use a tripod or something.

I bought one and ended up selling it. While the RED NE looks great, it's way to much data for what I shoot and the H265 is terrible, I can't understand how Nikon does not understand the urgency of fixing it.....

@newfoundmass@MrSMWFX30's stabilization is not necessarily bad at all... it requires a proper operator! : P Maybe @kye is serious up there, maybe not ; ) I am :- )

The FX30s are still really great values. I realistically could get away with three of those and be set for the next half decade at least. The biggest issue I'd have is just the poor IBIS. IBIS is hugely important for my work, even more than auto focus and all the other comforts people wanted over the years. That's what has kept me in the Lumix camp. I plan to switch out one or both of my S5s for a S5II or S5II X here soon. Amazing IBIS and really good auto focus... no real reason to switch.

It's funny, I'm pretty aligned with your thoughts, just like you, I'm on the back end of my commercial life (went full time in 1993) and have always been pragmatic with gear. I want to splash out once before it's not relevant anymore! I too am shooting on the S1R2 and love the files out of it. And yes if I ever get an SL3P, the first thing is to black out, sorry stealth out the white Logo 🙂

That's kind of the thing: today you can get as good of an image now from a sub $2000 camera, and that's not even including the used market. It's not a bad camera at all. It's just, $5000 is a lot right now in this economy. Outside of the Sony hardcores who are constantly upgrading to the latest Sony camera, this is a hard sell I think. Honestly, if I'm already shelling out over $5k, I'd probably go all the way and get the Sony FX6 for the more professional body and features, like internal ND, even if it is missing some of the other things the FX5 has. Plus I think you'll still get hired more having an FX6 than you will having an FX5. I will say, it's funny seeing all the YouTubers who jumped to Lumix with the S1II all the sudden jumping back. Guessing Sony cut a bigger check?

Hey gang, been a while. At first glance this FX5 felt a bit underwhelming but looking closer its a pretty substantial update. On paper the frame rate/resolution bump over FX3 looks small, 4K to 5K isn't a leap that sells itself, and I get why some are skeptical. But I don't think the gains are actually small once you look past resolution. Also want to bring the A7R VI into the conversation, since it was announced just recently and shares the same sensor, and does some clever things of its own. It varies its subsampling by mode: 8K comes from an 8.2K region (1.22x crop), while 4K is read from the full sensor width but subsampled from a 5K portion, roughly 2:1 binning, and rolling shutter scales almost exactly with that ratio between modes. That's actually smart sensor use for a hybrid body, flexible readout depending on what you need, high-res stills and video modes both on tap from one chip without a fixed binning scheme. Arguably a more versatile use of this sensor than the FX5's fixed video-only binning, if you need both stills and video from a single body. But for video-only work, FX5 still pulls ahead in what actually matters day to day. The RAW is the real story, 16-bit X-OCN, same bit depth as Burano/Venice 2, and the C1/C2 compression tiers are genuinely efficient, undercutting even the FX3's own compressed 10-bit codec at 4K24p. Triple base ISO and the selective dual-gain shadow cleanup add up to real, usable gains, albeit slower readout speeds a la S5ii. Oh and open gate, Sony finally caught up. On price, worth noting Sony's being smart splitting the handle and EVF out separately rather than bundling, it softens the sticker shock even though fully kitted you're still at a whopping €6,800 here, FX6 money for a mirrorless body with no NDs, SDI etc. That's the one thing hard to swallow. Went Canon with the C50 myself a couple months back, still very happy with it, dual OS is best of both worlds and the various crop modes and digi zoom punch-in flexibility over the 7K spec I rarely touch. For about 3K with the awesome XLR top handle included, it fit my wallet and needs, no regrets. Bottom line: For Sony hybrid users that need stills over RAW, do take a look at the A7R VI, smart camera with impressive specs. For video only, no real flaws on the FX5 and some serious upgrades: RAW, open gate, triple ISO, dual gain, tilt EVF option..all genuinely exciting if you can swing the price. Personally I wish they would have left a stills option (even 16MP e-shutter mode) but I have no doubts the FX5 will become industry standard for years to come. But I also don't think FX3 is going obsolete anytime soon either.

Balls. Sent the S1IIE back without even opening the box and picked up another S9 instead. My first 8 jobs of the year were 7 hybrid and 1 pure video. Of the next 7, I knew 1 was photo only but ‘assumed’ the other 6 were all hybrid. Nope, only 3/7 are hybrid and not worth spending that money for just 3 jobs when 2027 is a bit of an unknown… Unknown as in almost fully booked and every booked job is hybrid, but I am still hopeful for either a genuine S1H successor or an S9II. Or even some kind of Nikon/Sony mashup but that is as unlikely as my Hasselblad dreams… But then also still ‘waiting’ for Sigma to build a sibling to the 28-45mm f1.8 such as a 45-90mm f1.8 with internal non-extending zoom, but probably dreaming there also… And then there is my Leica fantasy, but let’s not go there either.

It's the best compact cine camera in the market, for NOW. But I'm not sure it can hold that position for long. Maybe they know this and keeping some features unavailable today to be unlocked at 2027. Firmware update these days are more a marketing policy (our product still competes) than an engineering challenge. I mean 4k240 is not some issue in the code you want to resolve. Its a switch.

nostalgic for the ergonomics of camcorders ;-)

Sony updates the model after so long, and its either still missing stuff, or the improvements aren't enough. They should have got a much better (LOFIC) sensor, internal storage of Atleast 100GB, dual card slot, way better autofocus, pre-burst perhaps since it can do wildlife etc. The major camera makers aren't really looking at the Smartphone and pocketable camera (DJI etc), to see what users are actually looking for.

About a week now the camera section of the internet has been harping around the latest FX5 rumors. A lot of people seem disappointed that it may not have a global shutter or even built in NDs. Whether those rumors end up being true or not isn’t really my point. My point is that everyone seems to forget Lumix. Does anyone remember in 2019, Panasonic announced its 8k organic sensor tech? 8K LUMIX Instead of having the sensor basically doing everything in one layer, the light capturing and the electronics are separated. What are the benefits? Well, higher dynamic range, global shutter without the usual hit in DR, and to me the most exciting part, electronic ND built into the freaking sensor. And in this 6 years old video a Panasonic rep specifically says this tech will trickle into LUMIX cameras. It’s now been close to 7 years since the original S1H. If Panasonic has been quietly refining this technology all this time, I wouldn’t be surprised if the next S1H or a new compact cinema camera is the one that finally delivers the combination of high dynamic range, global shutter, and built in ND filters that so many people have been asking for.

Amazing jump. One stop already means 2x light. Now imagine five stops!

Well, a bit hard to resist to 17-stops of dynamic range of the new D-Log 2, isn't it? ;- ) source More on that here, in the edit.

Do you think it’s time for a revival? I could blog about the mission 1 however it’s not a Nikon…

There were two highlights of IBC 2019 for me. The Sigma Fp, and the Z-CAM range. From the ground-up the Sigma Fp seems to be aimed at us, at artists. A small and incredibly light camera that hits the big full frame notes, some of the niche features like the digital director's viewfinder would be unheard of in a consumer full frame camera from a major manufacturer. This is clever and will get the camera a lot of use by top-flight talent. Most exciting for me is the focus on the video recording features - which are big leap for Sigma and indeed push the boundaries of whet we expect from a "prosumer" camera. Cinema DNG RAW 4K 12bit to USB C SSD media Internal 1080p 12bit internal RAW Cinema DNG uncompressed Internal 4K RAW uncompressed (bit-depth drops to 8bit at the moment) Read the full article

These two [1*] [2] Korean hands-on videos are probably among the most useful references I have seen so far on the Luna Ultra / Pocket 4P discussion. EDIT — plus this one from another reviewer elsewhere: [3] Not because they end the debate, on the contrary : ) but since they also help show the real operational trade-offs better than most spec-sheet comparisons, while still offering some fairly clear findings on the usual comparison points, such as outcome, colour or dynamic range, whenever those aspects are covered. source *In this 1st video, right from the start, you can see exactly that approach: using this kind of camera as a serious B-cam tool (Osmo Pocket 3) in commercial work, very close to the way I have also been using small capture devices in a similar role, as mentioned before.

The gyro control itself is not new, correct. But I don’t think the interesting part here is simply that “gyro control exists”. Of course it does. Larger gimbals, phone apps, remote monitors and systems such as the Ronin 4D have already explored that territory. The question for me is not whether the underlying idea existed before, but whether it becomes useful in a different way once the whole system becomes small enough, fast enough, integrated enough and unobtrusive enough. Many ideas in cinema technology existed before they became truly useful. Stabilised camera movement existed before Steadicam became the right combination of body, balance, operation and image. Small cameras existed before 16mm, and later DV, changed the way filmmakers could move through reality. Remote operation existed before it became practical in the hands of a one or two-person crew. So yes, if we reduce this to “a gyro controlling a gimbal”, then it may sound like nothing new. But if we look at it as a pocket-sized 1-inch 10-bit Log gimbal camera, with several focal lengths, proper monitoring, autonomous operation and a dedicated head-tracking accessory, then the proposition changes. It is not only the control method. It is the form factor plus the image pipeline plus the operating mode. And this is also where the remote / detachable screen side becomes important. If this is not a meaningful step forward, then how do we explain that DJI, despite all its experience in this category, still seems one step behind on this specific point? Not necessarily behind in image quality or engineering as a whole, but behind in this particular operational concept. The comparison makes that fairly easy to see. DJI can offer remote control through its ecosystem, apps and accessories, but Luna Ultra brings the detachable screen, remote monitoring and camera control directly into the body concept itself. To be fair, DJI still has a major advantage in ecosystem continuity. If, apart from the optical accessories, the Osmo Pocket 3 accessories remain compatible with the Osmo Pocket 4P/Pro, that is obviously a strong point. It means users are not forced to abandon an existing accessory ecosystem. But that is a different kind of strength. It is backward compatibility and ecosystem maturity, not necessarily a new operating concept. That matters because the remote is not just a convenience feature. It changes the way the camera can be used. There are also small operational trade-offs on the DJI side that are worth noticing. For instance, the dedicated low-light video mode tops out at 4K30p, while Luna Ultra records up to 4K120p in regular video mode and offers PureVideo low-light capture up to 4K60p. Not the whole story, of course, but another sign that Insta360 seems to be moving ahead of DJI* in a few practical areas here. And yes, we have already seen Insta360 explore part of this same logic with the GO line, namely the GO Ultra. With the GO Ultra, for instance, you already have that very useful modular idea of separating the camera unit from the monitoring/control/battery side of the system. In the Luna Ultra, this logic is taken into a different class of camera: the detachable touchscreen remote allows independent monitoring of battery information for both the main unit and the remote, and the system manages charging between both parts. Even if the remote does not appear to support fully independent USB-C charging while detached, the operational concept is still important. The monitoring/control side and the image-capturing side start to behave as distinct elements of the same camera system. That is precisely the point. The more the monitoring, battery handling and control are separated from the visible camera body, the easier it becomes for the device to disappear into the situation. And for documentary, BTS, production diaries or observational work, that can be a much bigger deal than it first appears. A phone strapped to your head controlling a larger gimbal is one thing. A compact dedicated device that can sit inside a BTS, documentary or walk-around setup, become boring after a while, and follow intention without the operator constantly raising, aiming and correcting the camera is another thing. That is where I think the usefulness may appear. Not necessarily for everyone. Not necessarily for controlled narrative setups. And probably not as a replacement for a skilled operator with a proper camera package. But for small crews, making-of work, observational documentary, rehearsals, production diaries, street work and situations where the act of operating the camera visibly changes the behaviour of the people being filmed, I can absolutely see the value. In that sense, I don’t see it as revolutionary because gyro control is new. I see it as potentially revolutionary because a previously awkward idea may finally be arriving in a form factor where it can become natural, invisible and operationally useful. *And not only when compared with DJI or another compact device... ; ) take a look at this higher-end comparison too : X