Leaderboard

Script and partial shortlist written. Ready for action tomorrow night when wife is out, so hopefully no interruptions!

We all know that cameras produce (sometimes dramatically) different images and image quality, and yet we also know that within a given price range those same cameras typically use the same sensors from Sony and are recording to the same codecs in basically the same bitrates. It's maddening! So, WTF is going on? Well, I just came upon this talk below, which goes through and demonstrates some of the inner workings in greater detail than I had previously seen: It's long, but here's my notes... Firstly, how you de-mosaic / de-bayer the image really matters, with some algorithms being higher quality and require higher processing power: (Click on the images to zoom in - quality isn't the best but the effects are visible) If you're not shooting RAW then this will be done in-camera, and if your manufacturer skimped on the processor they put in there, this will be happening to your footage. If the camera is scaling the image, then the quality of this matters too: and if the scaling even gets done in the wrong colour space then it can really screw things up: There's more discussions in there, especially around colour science which has been discussed to death, but I thought these might be illuminating as it's not something we get to see that much because it's buried in the camera and typically it's not something we can easily play with in the NLE. All these add up to a fundamental principle that I have been gradually gravitating towards. If you're shooting non-RAW then shoot in the highest resolution you can shoot in, and just un-sharpen (blur) the image in post. Shooting in the highest resolution means that your camera will be doing the least downscaling (or none), and most glitches and bad processing will be at the pixel-level, which means that the higher the resolution the smaller those glitches and errors compared to the size of the image, and un-sharpening de-emphasises these in the footage. You might notice that all of these shortcomings make the footage sharper, not duller, so the errors have made your footage sharp but in a way that it never was - it's fictional sharpness. Also, the more modern displays are also themselves becoming sharper, so it's no wonder that footage all now looks like those glitch websites from the late 90s that were trying to be cool but looked like a graphic designer threw up into them... FilmLight (who make BaseLight which is the Resolve competitor that costs as much as a house) seem to be on a mission to get deeper into the image and bring along the industry on that journey, and I'm really appreciative of their efforts as they're providing more insight into things we can do to get better images and get more value from our limited budgets.

Improbable predictions: BMD will announce that they have been acquired by Ricoh/Pentax Resolve will be fully dropping support for BRAW and adopting ProRes RAW New DaVinci Resolve Nano Panel with only a single trackball and no sliders/knobs/buttons New DaVinci Resolve Pico Panel with just a single small button that can only order pizza from Dominos. What flavor of pizza? It'll be a surprise every time. Black Magic Cloud is merging with frame.io so that customers will only have to pay one subscription fee to share with people on either system Based on strong sales of the UM12K, there will now be a UM36K which uses a beam splitter and 3 copies of the UM12K sensor for each of the R, G, and B channels similar to 3-chip camcorders of the past New AI assist camera module that detects if you aren't recording in BM raw - and if not, a small robot version of Grant Petty jumps out and punches the user in the groin until the camera settings are updated

In other news, I finally had a chance to get out and shoot some stuff yesterday with the FP. For this outing I brought along an oldie, but a goodie... the Super Multi-Coated Takumar 50mm 1.4. Here are a couple shots that didn't turn out terrible... I'm still using my old MB Air from 2014, so I can't always say the image posted looks exactly like my graded image. I hope to upgrade my computer soon enough. That said, I'm in the middle of a test for a short film I am hoping to make this summer. But to stay on topic, I forgot how amazing the Tak 50mm is and I really like it with the FP.

I'd try a range of things, and I'm sure others will have more to add, but I would: Check the camera physically to make sure the screen works, buttons, EVF, etc I'd update the firmware straight away to the latest Put on several lenses and test that they're recognised correctly and the AF and OIS are working After putting in a new battery and formatting a memory card in it, I'd pick the best quality normal mode (24/25/30p) and do a long recording on it of something that has a lot of movement in it (a great test is putting three still images on a timeline each at 1 frame and then loop the video).. if it records without issue for 20+ minutes without anything odd happening that's good, but if you have time I'd test until the card fills up or the battery dies I'd also do the same but on the highest frame rate mode Check the files are playable in the camera and work on the computer If it passes all of the above then it's unlikely that it has some lingering issue that isn't also present on new copies as well.

PS... order placed with cvp so we'll see how it works out!

I'll chime in with my usual advice about colour grading. The simple fact is that colour grading has a much more significant role in getting great looking images than the camera does. I'll also re-enforce the points above that what you point the camera at is more important than anything else. When we look at something shot on ARRI or RED or the high end Sony cameras, the reason they look great are 70% the scene, 25% the colour grading and 5% the camera. I know this is a bold statement, but I stand by it. Colour grading is the elephant in the room of all online discussions about cameras. Everyone is looking at sample videos and going "wow, this looks great - I want to get that look without doing any colour grading or work in post at all!" and it's just not true. If you need more convincing, here are a few things to look at: The BMPCC 4K can match the Alexa almost perfectly... So, why don't all P4K videos look as good as Netflix shows? It's not the camera! The image from the GX85 is more flexible in post than you think... @John Matthews I haven't forgotten about doing a follow-up with skin-tones in it. Simple colour grading > Camera colour science... I compare a few examples of the 709 version of some professional grade images with the final colour graded image, and it's pretty obvious that the 709 version looks quite plain - a lot like the images we get when us mere mortals shoot The best film-making advice I ever got was to do with colour grading, but it helped me improve my shooting, editing, sound design, etc etc, the whole lot. Here are a bunch of GX85 shots SOOC that I took in Korea last year.. this just goes to show you that not only is the GX85 a very capable camera, but that it's the subject that you put in front of it that really makes the difference. Of course, colour grading will elevate these beyond that level. High-end TV shows and movies look nothing like the standard images out of a camera... In this thread I compare some standard images from ARRI with real images from TV shows and movies and it's pretty obvious that not only are the colours significantly changed, the real images aren't sharp and clean like the videos that camera YT seems to idolise. The goal isn't technical purity, the goal is creativity, and this means taking your sharp and clean images and giving them some character. I could go on (many will wholeheartedly agree on this!) but long story short... the camera is a minor part of the journey that the image takes from finding / creating something cool to point it at, to all the work done in post. Also, learn to edit. Well edited bad-quality clips are better than boring high-quality images every time.

So an update, if anyone's interested. I shot the first scene, which was made up of 5 distinct shots. They came out OK. They were... competent, but only that. The lighting was good - nice contrast, nice colours, well-motivated, but that's all. Can you tell I'm dissatisfied? I was so focussed on getting everything 'right' that I didn't pay enough attention to getting it good or interesting. So I'm going to reshoot and one of the things I'm going to do is lean in to the limitations I have - first among which is that I'm doing this almost completely alone. I am both crew and talent! The biggest limitation caused by that is that camera movement while I'm on screen is not going to happen, which means that to create interest I need to make my angles and composition more interesting. Also, the lighting as I did it the other night looked, basically, like a commercial, not a movie, so now I'm happy with my ability to get decent levels etc, I'm going to really try to push the envelope with ratios and temperatures and try to have some fun with it. Once I've reshot I may post both versions for comment before I continue with the remaining scenes (it's going to take a while to complete the whole project given that I work full-time and my main set is our kitchen, which is in near-constant use as my 3 children attempt to bankrupt me purely through food costs!).

But objects in the footage from both cameras are the same size. If one camera is APS-C and the other is full-frame, and they were using the same lenses, those objects would not be the same size. So maybe the differences you're seeing are due to different lenses being used (or the same zoom lens on both cameras but at different focal lengths), or something was done in post. The person who did this comparison is introducing too many variables for it to be an informative test.

B&H and Adorama are my most trusted vendors for used stuff. Fun thing about Adorama is that almost all their used stuff on their site is also listed in their eBay store with a “Make offer” option so you’re able to buy things under list price. They’re pretty good about actually accepting offers, too. I’ve had very good luck buying and selling with MPB in the past, but you need to reallyyyy stress test stuff from them IMO. I’ve returned a couple items that I didn’t feel were listed correctly. Like, things I bought at “Excellent” that I would characterize as “Poor” or “Acceptable”. Still, there are some great deals there.

Reasonably well thanks - will write it up soon!

Since one of the stated reasons for documenting the journey was accountability, how did your first night of shooting go?

I have a similar unbranded lens that's f1.6. With the 2.5K crop mode, it's almost perfectly usable throughout the range. It's a fun little lens, and very versatile. The only downsides are the rotating filter threads, slight vignette at certain focal lengths, the zooming mechanisms/runners showing up in bokeh when shooting wide open, and spikey party-favor bokeh when closed down. So, there are some compromises. I was looking around the ZLKC storefront on AliExpress and there are lots of neat 1.1" c-mount lenses on offer. I would imagine that they would cover S16, but I can't find any reviews. Have you installed Crop Mood yet? The M becomes a whole new camera. Ah, yes. I remember that mod. It was one of my favorite threads on this site. Once you start getting into 1/2" lenses and smaller, it really is uncharted territory. Too bad there aren't many interchangeable lens cameras that can work with them.

Thanks but the compliments must be addressed to Kenjo McCurtain to begin with. "The man" behind this piece of work. I've just tried to serve of a little help : ) There's team work, of course. So, everyone also has a role to play there for sure. This is the outgrowth of a collective effort without doubt. To each their own, anyways :- )

If your looking at used S1, make sure it has the vlog upgrade or you'll need to figure that into the cost. Between the S1 and S5 I have both and prefer the S1, the full size HDMI will one day serve you well if you want to shoot RAW. If you haven't held either then visit somewhere that will let you experience the difference, the S1 is solid and feels reassuring but it is heavier which for me is a preference. The S1 viewfinder is more than twice the resolution and a joy to use. Both are great cameras but for me the S1 stands out. Good luck.

I think this is about the sum of it, at least from the ‘quality’ side of things. I think raw only came to iPhone with the 12, but could be wrong and for me as someone who only shoots raw, probably part of my personal ‘disconnect’ from photography using my phone as in I have not been using it’s full potential. Also, whilst I don’t need to be in ‘full on pro mode’ all the time (when not actually working), I probably need to get out of ‘point & click phone mode’ when using my phone and use it more like a camera. If that makes sense? Something I probably need to explore…

All good points, but perhaps most significantly, it has a cooling fan..... in something approaching the size of an action camera. Sony, etc, have no excuses.

True latitude tests are the best indicator. With firmware 3.0 the Z9/Z8 does peform incredibly well and like you said bests the Venice 2 which is crazy. The Venice 2 captures 16 bit linear RAW which I would imagine gives you a much beefier file to work with. That said 8.2k 12 bit RAW with that kind of latitude is more than enough for any application. One of the biggest draws of the Z8/Z9 for me is the NRAW, Prores RAW, Prores, and H265 options all in camera. Pretty much can fit to any workflow in any NLE without needing to transcode. If they actually put REDraw that would be awesome for possible compression options. No Opengate square aspect ratio options for anamorphic but hey you can't get everything. I appreciate Nikon's new move of not holding back. Feels like Lumix until recently where they seem to put out the same thing over and over again.

Dunno what tests those were, but I've shot in all formats on my Z9s, and N-RAW is definitely better than H265. More latitude, less/no NR, less/no sharpening, etc. Not to mention, of course, the freedom to change WB and exposure in Resolve in post.

They pretty clearly didn't- "fx3/a7s3 sensor vs. A7iv sensor" obviously acknowledges the FX3 and A7sIII are the same.

I legitimately think that the consumers will eventually abandon any manufacturer that tries this. And, if they all try it together, I see a mass revolt against new models and perhaps even a movement to “older” cameras.

I don't know what's going on in your world, but I can tell you it doesn't matter how you fiddle the menu on a camera that leads to good shots. All the real work that happens with a good shot starts outside of the camera. The camera is honestly one of the LAST things you should fret about. I swear to God, you can be a better shooter by visiting a museum full of Romanticism Artistic movement paintings. Study how light affects a scene, and you'll become a more sophisticated videograper that way. If you can't train yourself to "see light" you're always gonna struggle. I'm not being flippant here. It's the cheat-code. Skip all the tech BS and learn light. Take a classic art appreciation class. Learn composition skills. These are the things that actually make a difference. Train your eye to be a shooter and a person that can paint with light. Sure, you can be a pixel nerd, but that has a low ceiling of accomplishment and, honestly, advanced tech makes those acomplishments not a big deal to begin with. And look, when you study art, you'll learn more about the human condition along the way, maybe even some philosophy. Win-win.

I'm thinking about replacing my old Pana 20mm F1.7 (with slow and noisy AF) with the Oly 17mm F1.8. I find I commonly use around 18mm as a focal length on zoom lenses, so having a fast (and quiet) prime at that length makes sense for me.

S5 is definitely "better" image quality than GH5 imo, and that certainly factors into my choices, but technology is at a point where pretty much everything looks pretty good. So if all my lenses were MFT, or if GH5 had some other feature that I really needed, I'd be happy with GH5 as well. Better photographers than I might have a more nuanced look at photo ergonomics, but to me all hybrids are roughly the same amount of pain when rigged for a narrative shoot. For my amateur photography, every camera I touch reminds me that the NX1 was more comfortable 😞 The S5 has a great APS-C crop mode, which will pair nicely with your Sigma 18-35. You're already in the system, no pressure at all!

Thanks so much guys! I really dig that image quality isn't really a factor in your answers - can't really go wrong either way so that takes off the pressure. I will ofc compare recording time limits and see what works better for me and have a thought about ergonomics as you pointed out! Definitely! I work in post-production and it's mainly unscripted TV run and gun...natural light all the way expect for interviews. So if I were to talk my way into a shoot MFT would not be the way to go. Can't believe I didn't even think about this! The GH5 was only because I already had the sigma+metabones but when I saw the S line price I was like hold up now might be the time to jump to the S line. Specially because I am only shooting for myself now so I can ease my way into the system without too much pressure 🤑 and for my personal work which is the plan for the next couple of months, I like to use the Super Takumars, Helios and I just got a Canon FD so there's really nothing stopping me from making the change. Thanks a lot guys!!

My combo is usually the 14-140mm plus 25mm F1.8. On my last 'serious' trip (almost two weeks of railway video/stills photography in Southern California), I took a G9 + 14-140mm + 25mm F1.8 (for low light), used hand-held, with G80 + 12-32mm used as an occasional tripod-mounted 'B' cam. I took the G80 instead of the (smaller) GX80 because it has a mic jack. If I were doing a similar trip now I think it would be OM-1 (main) and ZV-1 (B-cam), but lens choice for the OM-1 would be harder as I recently bought a used Oly 12-100mm F4 IS Pro. It's much larger and heavier than the 14-140mm Pana, but it supports Sync-IS on Oly/OMDS bodies and the overall stabilisation performance is fantastic. If you buy a used Pana 14-140mm F3.5-F5.6, be careful about which version you are getting. Panasonic sold the Mk 1 version (H-FS14140) in two different markings - white, gold and red 'HD' lettering (earlier lenses) or all white lettering (later lenses). Then they updated it to the Mk 2 (H-FSA14140) with weather sealing and all white lettering. AFAIK all are optically the same, and support Dual-IS and Dual-IS2. I've come across dealers who've mixed up the white-lettered later Mk 1 and the Mk 2 versions in their used listings...

My friend takes stills of his family holidays and has an ancient relic (IIRC it's a Canon 30D?) that he would always take with him. He is a minimalist and was sick of hauling it around so did his first overseas trip without it and used his iPhone 5 (current at the time). He took a bunch of photos on the trip, but when I asked him about it his thinking wasn't clear. On his next trip he took an updated iPhone (maybe an 8?) and took lots of photos again, but still didn't have clear thinking about it. It was only several years later that he had a good reply, he said "The photos look fine but I realised that I never felt compelled to print and hang any of the photos from it". He still can't define what it is, but something is missing for him. I've looked at the prints he's got hanging in his house and the difference isn't obvious - it's not like his prints have shallow DOF or anything, they just have this timeless sort of look about them, and his iPhone pics all look like iPhone pics (unsurprisingly). Even the RAW stills from my GF3 from 2011 don't look like iPhone pics, even the current ones. It might be a matter of blurring the iPhone images a bit, and toning down the strong saturation and contrast, who knows, but maybe they'll get over that hurdle soon. Maybe they already have - I still have an iPhone 12 mini and don't use the stills in my creative work. TBH it's probably the "everything is awesome!!" processing that Apple do to their images. Maybe the RAW images off the sensor are fine.

I took my GF3 around Europe and into the US and shot using only the kit lens and the 14/2.5, mostly on full-auto, and with RAW images I was basically never disappointed. The only thing that I missed was the look of Canon colour science, so I bought a 700D after that and really liked the images from it, but the additional size would have made me question if I would take it travelling. The best images I took were enabled almost exclusively because I was shooting fast, thinking creatively, and going mostly un-noticed - which are all direct results of having a small automatic camera. When I was first learning video I was absolutely stunned by how fragile and, frankly, crap the video from mega-dollar prosumer cameras was in comparison to the RAW still images from an ultra-budget pocket camera. If I was still shooting stills I would have on from discussing equipment probably a decade ago.

I think Pana versus Oly/OMDS lenses having zoom rings that operate in opposite directions is really annoying... Anyway, here are pics of the Pana 12-32, 14-42 PZ, 14-42 kit and Oly 14-42 EZ on my GX80 (all with filters on the front), with the zoom set to give maximum lens length (which was max wide on the Pana and max tele on the Oly - minimum lens length was in the mid zoom range). Also the ZV-1 set to maximum lens length, and a GX80+Oly14-42 and ZV-1 side-by-side. Note the 10cm mark on the ruler is approx. aligned to the front of the body, so the all the lens lengths are between 55mm and 60mm i.e. around the same... (The ZV-1 has a JJC filter adaptor stuck to the front of the lens tube - https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B07GWQ6CXL )

I've got the Pana 12-32, 14-42 (non-pancake) and 14-42 PZ lenses, plus the Oly 14-42 EZ (power zoom) lens. No LX10 (or GX800 anymore), but my ZV-1 might be an interesting size comparison. I'll take some photos of the extended lenses on my GX80 with a ruler alongside. Note that of the pancake lenses, only the Oly has a focus ring, but it doesn't have any OIS - swings and roundabouts...

I just bought the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 for my Fujifilm, but it's also available in E-Mount. I'd rather sacrifice some range and have a smaller lens. Else there is also the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8

Yes I'm talking shooting in 8 bit 709. When I mentioned log I meant 10-12 bit. I was saying even though the master is 709 you can potentially make 10 bit log better looking than a baked in 709 profile. For instance the emotive color lut looks nicer than the 709 profiles out of most cameras straight off the card.

I'll answer it for you and I've used the A7s3 and FX6 but not the A7IV. Both cameras have heavily processed shadows that ruin the image. The A7s3 and FX3 are superior because you can shoot RAW externally and bypass the processing. Dynamic range isn't useful when it's being ruined by noise reduction. The fx30 has much less processing at the lower native ISOs and would be my choice over either of those cameras. Or get a Nikon Z8.

Picked this up second hand at a good price as my introduction to anamorphics. Here's some tests shot last night.

Sonys were overheating well before IBIS became a thing 🤣🤣🤣 Also the kind of Card used, sensor and body size, heatsinks used, processors used, body type etc should decide how much a camera overheats. Some Canons have improved heat management after firmware updates.

These threads do tend to descend into either-or types debates. I have a recent iPhone and, yes, I do use this for video. I also have a range of Blackmagics for a number of different purposes. But I still feel that the AX53 possibly has a place. The zoom. The internal gimbal. The compact size and ease of use. And possibly even the "retro" vibe and "invisible amateur tool" aspects. Coupled with the fact that if I drop it or it falls off a mount... it really doesn't matter. I am thinking of it as a GoPro/Insta alternative... yes, a niche, perhaps, but there will be a lot of people out there for whom a decent camcorder would definitely fill their niche. As @kye said - get a lot of different shots with an easy to use camera and focus on the edit.

The reality is if you lift the shadows in both Z9 and A1 "uncompressed" raw images, at base ISO, you get different results. If you do demosaicing on A1 images, and apply temporal NR, you get even more different result. If Nikon ditch the NRAW, its probably related to license costs, not the quality of the codec.

I really think Redraw is coming or at least a varient of it. I get market segmentation but Nikon already displayed its willingness to put internal RAW in their cameras with no caveats. REDraw is coming to Nikon mirrorless. I don't think this will kill sales for any of the "RED" cameras. They are made for a traditional on set workflow. No one is going to want to use a Z8 with HDMI on a large production unless its a crash cam. Plus the RED Komodo is priced the same as the Nikon Z9 to begin with. It's not like its ARRI where they don't sell any cameras lower than 50,000 usd. RED never had the capacity to put out a mirrorless body and compete with the likes of Nikon or Canon, now they don't need to. We shall see soon enough.

Makes sense. I think the main differences between these Sony cameras are rolling shutter and the ability or lack of ability to record RAW if that is a feature you want to use. Dynamic range is all very similiar in latitude tests and imatest measurements. My pick for Sony is the FX30 as it is the cheapest and has a damn good image and a lot of cheap 3rd party lenses for it too.

I'm confused... you obviously don't want one, so why are you in this thread about camcorders arguing that no-one wants them? I'm not interested in buying any cameras that exist right now, but I'm not sitting in all the threads arguing with people about them.

I agree - Sony will be doing image processing before the H.265 encoding (e.g. noise suppression, de-Bayering, sharpening etc.), whereas you might expect less of that happening with N-RAW - isn't it meant to be raw sensor data, warts and all? H.265 is a sophisticated codec, so I'm not that surprised 4:2:2 10-bit 8k video at 500Mbps from the A1 looks really good, especially on a static image like Andrew used in the N-RAW vs H.265 vs CDNG comparison article.

Half of the shots in this video I shot are in 8-bit rec709 but graded in post. Learn your gear and 8 bit is just fine.

intoPIX and Fraunhofer IIS are the two major contributors to the JPEG XS patent pool - https://www.jpegxspool.com/ and https://www.jpegxspool.com/s/JPEG-XS-Patent-Pool-Licensed-Patents-01-Oct-2023.pdf and https://www.tinynews.be/jpeg-xs-intopix-belgique/ As JPEG XS uses a wavelet transform, there is a reasonable chance TicoRAW uses a wavelet transform in its implementation, especially as JPEG XS has built-in support for RAW Bayer/CFA images - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XS#Sensor_compression But as intoPIX is a developer of video compression technology, TicoRAW unlikely to be "just another branded version of something that someone else wrote."

I recently bought a new treadmill and was amazed that the high-end ones required a subscription model. I wouldn't be averse to buying a GX85 updated firmware, but to buy and re-buy the damned thing over and over again is ridiculous. Yet another reason to snap out of the specifications trance that everyone seems to be in and focus on making better videos, rather than making the same videos with better spec'd equipment.

I recently asked for book recommendations to learn about human vision and was given a link to a free PDF. It is incredible. I'm only a quarter of the way through, but I'm absolutely blown away. The human vision system looks like it was designed by committee and then re-imagined by Dali and Picasso, while on drugs. It is a wonder we can see anything at all! Did you know that the rods and cones (which detect light) are BEHIND a bunch of nerves and nerve cells and blood vessels, so the light has to go through a bunch of crap before you even sense it? The book is actually a mix of how the human vision system works and also what we have done with the tech to try and align to it, so it's a nice blend of biology and tech. It's also very readable and tries to be as non-technical as possible. This is a rare find compared to other books that are hugely tech heavy. Take the red pill with me... download it here: https://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/support/documents/colourbook/colourbook.php (download it by clicking on the box next to the file size).

The reason here is a bit different though. V-Log L clips at 80 IRE so my LUTs in the V-Log L LUT pack will push that to white. V-Log on the S1 clips at 88 IRE if I remember correctly so any information between 80-88 IRE will be lost, even if the interpretation of the clip is correct (full vs video range).

@kye Great. Thank you for adding that note. I'm quite protective of highlights generally at the point of capture (as long as I'm not compromising skin tones) as I find that clipping is the greatest remaining "digital tell" that can usually be avoided. But this is always good to keep in mind. @Attila Bakos I've never approached LUTs as a "click and done" solution, particularly wanting to preserve options for the further application of tone curves. Since moving on from (and now partially back to) Fujifilm, I have missed Eterna as a baseline for further work. To date, my best, neutral LUT for V-Log has been a 2021 LUT by Gamut applied at 80% - even then the shadows would generally be more crushed that I'd prefer for further grading. Your Eterna LC LUT! It's marvelous for how I like to work! I am now editing a piece that I filmed primarily last year. Replacing the Gamut with this low-contrast LUT - I really like the color interpretation (even in some challenging mixed-lighting) and a whole world of shadows is available to further work with, rather than to try and pull back in some fashion. Just so, so nice.

I thought the same, until I tested a bit the 4.1 K (pixel skipping) of my z9 as I calculated that it was about 350 mb/s bitrate (I dont know if it is capital M or small m), compared to about 200 mb/s the h.265. Another surprise was that it played better using Resolve than H.265. For me this has been my defacto standard for higher end work. I must do some more test about DR etc. to know what loss compared to 8k. Which I think is just too much. If I could get a 4k or 6k raw camera, I would be super happy or with the likes of Redraw higher compression.

I, for one, can say that I enjoy having internal raw available (even if I don't always use it) and that I have little or no use for 8kp120. I'd also say "Nikon won't enforce their new patent" and "they'll probably license it" are completely incompatible statements. If they don't enforce it, other companies would be stupid to pay for a license. Even if Nikon fought to invalidate the patent in the past, now that they own it, there's a decent chance that their opinions on the validity of the patent have evolved.

On my FS7 I set a ND filter that is reasonably correct then ride the aperture to fine-tune. A stop either way in aperture isn't going to significantly affect one's artistic intent.