Leaderboard

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

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.

Thanks for watching! I've wanted to get into anamorphic right from the get-go for precisely the reasons you mention. One thing I like about this adapter is that the flares are pretty subtle.

The camera itself can’t be powered over USB but that hub does allow the zoom on demand to be used simultaneously with SSD recording so that is a positive, albeit that BM doesn’t specify it in the manual. He reports no issues with doing it so that’s all we have to go on and it might well be that BM doesn’t specify it because there are a LOT of USB hub/SSD combos that people could use that would make it a support nightmare. The zoom on demand handle is very much a sledgehammer to crack a nut to get that external control though as it certainly takes away the Micro element and its primary function is only compatible with a few very average lenses. The hub usability (difficult to refer to it as compatibility until BM official support it!) does open up the possibility of them making a more appropriate form factor interface for some external control. Or maybe someone else will if there is sufficient demand from people buying the Micro as a cinema camera…

Perhaps the premise of the question would be interpreted differently if the two cameras were more different to each other. For example, if I asked the same about the GH5 vs GH6, then there would be things to talk about, and spending time looking at the various specs and performance would be worthwhile. It's also helped by the likelihood that I'd own the GH5 and be questioning an upgrade - so it's a question that would have real-world implications and would be of value to discuss, rather than a purely theoretical question. In the case of the A7S3 vs A74, the strengths are very similar or don't really matter (both have enough DR for almost anything you might want to shoot) and the weaknesses are similar too.

The very question is flawed. You're asking which sensor produces the best image, but the sensor is only a part of the image pipeline. The same Sony sensors are sometimes used in cameras from Sony and several other vendors and the image that gets output differs radically. Each manufacturer is applying their own denoising algorithms, color interpretation, internal debaying algorithm, etc. I'd also say that @kye is fully correct that there's really no way to evaluate which camera produces the "best" image. What is "best?" Is it the most faithful reproduction of colors? Or is it the interpretation of colors that I like more? Is it preserving every single detail from corner to corner? Or is it producing an image where my actors like how their skin looks? How contrasty is best? Is the image being color graded in post? Or is it being given to somebody straight out of camera? If one camera has better DR and the other has more pleasing colors, which one wins? This kind of thing is also why, in the example above, industry professionals could end up preferring the image from a $1k GH4 to a $25k Red or a $70k Arri. Were the images straight out of camera? Red and Arri might not spend as much time with the SOOC image because almost any production that can afford to use their gear can also afford to have a colorist. Meanwhile, many people shooting with a GH4 don't. If the images were graded in post, was the colorist more familiar with the GH4 than the Red or Arri? Could be. Did that test result in any of those Hollywood DPs choosing the Panasonic GH4 as the A camera for their next feature film? Nope. It's not useful to obsess about the micro-differences between two cameras. It's far better to actually get (or rent) a camera and spend some time shooting with it.

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

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.

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 think you might be partly missing the point. 1) If Sony put a modern sensor in one of these things, it would have the same spec as a modern camera because it would BE a modern camera. There are a shit-ton of smartphone sensors that have excellent specs that are in the right size range. 2) When compared to a modern mirrorless camera and a superzoom lens and a gimbal, it would be positively tiny by comparison. Also, camcorders often have completely internal mechanisms (zoom and focus) potentially making them much easier to weather-seal. The benefits in terms of being less fragile in your bag etc might also be welcome. Also, also, for amateur use, a camcorder looks FAAAAAAAAR less threatening in public than a MILC and large lens... let alone when you add the gimbal. Put an A6700 with superzoom on an RS3 or Crane and you may as well have activated a homing beacon for all private security, toxic law enforcement, Karen's, etc to come out of the woodwork and hassle you. If you're holding something the shape of a camcorder, the fact that it's larger might even make you look less of a threat because buying a big camcorder might make you look a bit silly - the opposite look of a professional setup.