Leaderboard

Here's a preview, very early days yet but the idea is to have a wiki page for every camera that draws together all the trusted resources for that model onto one single page with a clean design, no spam, no tracking malware banners, and no clickbait. Within each page: A ranking system In-depth detailed info and specs at a glance. LUTs and downloads, such as links to firmware updates, colour profiles, etc. A box with only "trusted" high quality YouTube reviews sourced per camera. Links to the top 5 best quality written reviews, manually sourced by me per camera. That will replace DPReview and Google search results for camera models, both enshitified to the point of unusable now, with so much AI and clickbait.

I have experimented with the Beastgrip 1.33x and 1.55x adapters using full frame cameras and wide/normal to short telephoto lenses (35/40/50/75). I have tried with my slow Leica M lenses, which are usually pretty forgiving on coverage. These Anamorphics will cover full frame and are easy enough to attach to the M mount lenses with a 39 to 37 step down ring. the 1.33x is definitely a better fit for the 35 & 40mm lenses, as the 1.55x has a pretty wide FOV. Results are similar to the above samples, with soft edges and major distortion. But definitely plenty of character. Next time I take a stab at it, I'll post some samples.

On a phone the purpose of RAW video for me ideally would not to actually capture to storage in RAW but use the RAW10 uncompressed output of the sensor without Apple's processing, as a way to bypass the stock look and bake that uncompressed "Digital Bolex" look into an H.265 recording with the raw data just a temporary thing held in a buffer for the LUT and H.265 to work it's magic on in realtime. Sure LOG and ProRes RAW is great if you enjoy spending hours in Resolve and want the ultimate in flexibility but then the question is why choose a smartphone at all for that purpose when so many better options exist. What I want from a phone is the RAW look without the storage and grading hassle, and it's needed more on a phone than on any other type of camera because the stock Android and Apple looks are consumer-looking dialed-up HDR TV soap opera hell. I am working on a few iPhone apps at the moment and actually one way to bypass the stock video look is to apply a LUT to the rec.709 in realtime that adds back the tonality and character... a little like EOSHD Pro Color for Panasonic back in the day. Raw would be more ideal for this as the high digital sharpness isn't baked in.

Funny that sony raises prices and blackmagic cuts prices. Allthough for me with the storage space costs at the moment. Braw isnt cutting it. It is better then h265, sure. But I just cant justify the storage costs. I wished they included compressed prores again. Love blackmagic though, it has an amazing look. I think I owned lost of their cameras until the pyxis. But its shitty on gimbals, and storage adds up, not as much as the nikon zr though. I hope nikon announces good news on IBC in a couple of weeks. My c500ii will do for now.

Yeah - sounds almost as good as Fuji already. 😅

Quick review after the shoot this morning. I used the Pyxis as a roaming camera for a lecture hall presentation, so it was basically a 4th angle... which is a good thing. Face detect is a no-go for this situation; too many faces. I normally use the wide area AFC window on my Panasonics with great success panning across people in their rows, shots of hands writing and typing, group discussions, etc. I tried to replicate shooting this way with the 12K... no good. Pretty unpredictable. Sometimes it would perform exactly as I'd expect, other times it would refuse to change focus, other times it would hesitate, other times it would stutter back and forth between points. I used the Sigma 28-105mm f/2.8 today. I tested across a range of focal lengths and focus sensitivity settings. I stuck with a reasonable aperture of f/4.5 as well. It actually did better when zoomed in >85mm. Maybe the compression or blur helps it. I don't know. Overall, I'm not discouraged by this, though. This is a great first effort and I fully believe it will only get better.

It took a minute to find a link to what you're talking about. Doesn't seem to have made it to many of the usual suspect forums yet. Hopefully AF on Pyxis 12K means that the same is coming to Ursa LF sooner rather than later! https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=239482

Well it’s happened! Blackmagic released a beta firmware adding PDAF to the Pyxis 12K. I’ve been playing around with it a bit tonight. It’s really impressive for a first effort. The face detection mode is superb for a standard solo interview. AFC is pretty great but takes a bit to get used to, because it operates a bit differently than my Panasonics. The object tracking mode is its weakest at the moment. That needs some real work. The other nice feature with this update enabling linear focus throws and the ability to set rotation degrees on focus by wire lenses. If this firmware will work with Tilta’s upcoming PL to L adapter, I’ll be veryyyyyyy happy. Going to try it out on an actual shoot tomorrow.

I also found this video below, which combines a cheap adapter from Aliexpress with 17mm rear-filter and the Viltrox 28mm F4.5 lens. He just sticks the mounting plate from the smartphone clamp for the anamorphic directly onto the Viltrox lens with tape, so hardly and ideal situation, but it is more proof of concept, and it covers FF too! Test image: Video:

Yes, the Beastgrip might well be a better candidate - not only due to having a filter thread I can convert to but also potentially with a larger rear aperture for better coverage! I found this comparison between the Moment M-series (left) and Beastgrip (right) which shows the rear openings: Some rough measurements of the Beastgrip suggest that the rectangular opening is almost exactly 17mm across, which would make the image circle significantly larger than my Neewer, which uses a 17mm threaded mount. The rectangular opening looks to be on a separate plate - I wonder if that could be removed somehow to really open up the rear element? Wow - full frame coverage! I really didn't expect that, and it's very encouraging to hear! I also realised the 1.55x makes everything pretty wide, and have been contemplating what FOVs I'd want to get and what focal length taking lenses I'd need to use to get them. You reminded me of my ultra-cheap Risepray 35mm F1.6 C-mount lens, which has a 37mm filter thread. Assuming it doesn't vignette (and therefore doesn't need any cropping) that would give me a 45mm F2.1 equivalent lens, which would be pretty good for shooting street and run-n-gun like I do.

I'd be happy to help you test it, I'll join the group later today. Have about 25 android phones!!! I can imagine how difficult it is on Android to test on so many OS and hardware combos, the number is just insane. I am actually working on a stills camera app for Android and iPhone at the moment. So have been learning the ropes for just over a year now

Do a ‘spec’ job for a non-profit that has board members with deep pockets and active businesses. Do something simple and over deliver. Make a great first impression. It’s just networking and word of mouth.

A short from Filippo Chiesa Thanks to Sony Italy, I had the opportunity to put the new FX5 through its paces on a real project I’m currently working on. I shot everything in X-OCN LT 5K open gate, using spherical lenses. The FX5’s sensor is truly wonderful, and I believe its performance sets a new benchmark for cameras of this type—and beyond.

On iPhone I’d see the practical route as DNG/ProRAW or RAW burst → custom linear/Metal pipeline → H.265/HEVC, with a much flatter, less processed look than the stock camera. Not ProRes RAW. The limitation is that iOS does not expose continuous Bayer RAW video in the same way Android Camera2 can expose RAW streams, so an iPhone version would likely be AVFoundation + Metal: RAW/DNG stills or bursts, plus a controlled HEVC mode with custom tone, colour, highlight rolloff and IT8/LUT calibration. I don’t have an iPhone to test on right now, so I can’t promise it yet. But the idea is definitely interesting. First I want to finish and publish the Android version and see if people find it useful. If the feedback is positive, I’ll try to look into an iPhone version — probably DNG/ProRAW or RAW burst into a custom Metal colour pipeline and then H.265/HEVC, rather than ProRes RAW. For me the goal is to do as much as possible directly on the phone — capture, colour, calibration, encoding, maybe even basic editing/export, Davinci style. On the PC I’d rather have a voice-driven movie editor, where you can just say what you want to cut, move, translate, subtitle, shorten or colour-match, instead of digging through endless panels. I’m also working on PocketCAD for Android and a customised WearOS/Android smartwatch project, so it’s all part of the same direction: practical tools on small devices, with more voice control and less dependence on big desktop workflows.

But but but but the Z6iii doesn't have a 4 inch rear LCD 😜

N-RAW Normal at 25 fps should be below 1000 Mbps. If I calculated correctly, N-RAW High Quality (which is similar to R3D NE) has a compression ratio of approximately 1:4 compared to uncompressed raw video (which is not available on the ZR, for obvious reasons). N-RAW Normal is about 1:8. RED's own codecs (not TicoRAW) in the (not Nikon) RED cameras range from 1:2 to 1:22 depending on settings. I suspect Nikon didn't implement the lower quality TicoRAW in the R3D NE codec (although both Normal and High Quality are available in N-RAW) because of the additional quality loss, and as a matter of protecting the quality expectations associated with the RED brand. They could be simply trying to impress. The ZR body is quite lightweight and slim, and adding more heat sink materials, a fan etc. to enable better quality compressed codecs would have made it larger and heavier, as would adding more hinges and mechanics to make the back LCD screen more flexible in the angles that are offered. I can imagine a bunch of things that could be wanted, such as full size HDMI, SDI, XLR, etc. connectors. THe ZR is probably as small and light as Nikon could make while enabling long recording times and R3D NE recording. Rather than focus on the data rates, I am puzzled at the lack of fully featured software support for the raw video formats. Some formats (R3D NE) reportedly offer a good visual match between what you see on the camera LCD with LUT applied but if you want to apply distortion corrections, a separate transcoding utility need to be applied to convert the footage to Prores. With N-RAW you can get lens profiles applied in Davinci Resolve, but the color doesn't apparently look like how it was on the camera display (?). If you use Premiere, N-RAW is shown with RED's Log profile, which then is different from what you see on camera in the view assist mode. People complain that you cannot cut the R3D NE and remove parts and rewrite the edited footage in the R3D NE format, instead it has to be transcoded into something else before the trimmed footage can be stored (if it is stored in R3D NE format the file does not get smaller). With N-RAW you can cut parts out and store it in N-RAW, so why is this different for R3D NE? Or did I get I could have gotten some parts wrong but to me it seems the software support is as much missing as the camera firmware, and the raw video is sort of an experimental feature at this point. Some comment and seem to think that to get the maximum quality is essential but then complain that the resulting files are too large, even though they are compressed at 25% of original data size, and further compression visibly reduces the image fidelity. I think for video there has to be a realization that you cannot get still-camera like detail and expect small file sizes. A compromise needs to be made. I like using Prores 422 HQ 4K on the Z8 as it allows the distortion profiles to be applied based on lens type and still looks fantastic to my eye, while avoiding the 8K. I can immediately tell the h.265 (which in Nikon's case is always 4:2:0) does not have as rich color on textured, colorful clothes as the 422 codec. Absurd in-camera file sizes, almost as big as 6K RAW? Yes, but it just looks gorgeous and is easy to edit. I delete the original files once I'm done with editing. I can't imagine shooting 8K RAW but with a 6K camera the RAW option is a possibility, once storage costs go down. At the moment the cost of a fast external SSD I got 3 years ago is three times as high as it was in 2023! Hard drives seem less affected and are a possibility for long-term storage, but for editing the SSDs are better. About your lens preferences, the 50-150/2.0 is 4599€ here, quite pricey! Although a set of f/2.0 primes would also be expensive, and together would be heavier, I still would choose the primes for their smaller size in hand, or use the 70-200/2.8 as a classic choice which is available on all major mounts. But I can see that a portrait and event-oriented photographer might prefer the f/2.0 zooms over primes or the f/2.8. I don't think the f/2.0 zooms will become mainstream though, as the f/2.8 are very high quality, lower priced, and have greater range.

I’ve come close to pushing the ZR button a few times now and there are really only 3 things that have prevented me doing so… 1. The file sizes of that Red Raw codec. Apparently N raw is the next best option and there are of course some ‘workarounds’, but until there is a compressed version that maxes out at no more than 1000 mbps, it’s just too much and one of the principal draws of this camera is the Red codec. 2. I’m not unhappy with L Mount. In fact the opposite except for one factor and that is the absence IMO of equivalent lenses to Sony’s: 28-70 f2, 50-150 f2 and Tamron’s 35-100 f2.8. It’s ‘almost’ worth switching just for these lenses alone, but that last word, ‘alone’, but alone is not enough and lenses aside, everything else that L Mount, specifically Lumix offers, beats that of Nikon & Sony. 3. I still have hope that from within the L Mount Alliance, over the coming Winter and next Spring, either (or even both) a rangefinderesque camera will appear from either Lumix or Sigma and at least one rival for one of the lenses above, will appear. Unlikely to be a Leica, but next gen FP a possibility and even more likely, an S9ii? 4. Bonus reason, - switching not only costs money, but there is always a settling in period with any new system that frustrates. So my set up now just works, I have it and I like it and as above, my only real crit is with regard to certain lenses, but the ZR body style just appeals to me and I would like that rear LCD, but ideally as a fully articulated unit which is a bit of a missed opportunity IMO.

I agree. I had an EOS-M when it was first hacked, sold it, and then broke my own rule and bought it again when Crop Mood hit. Now I have two of them: one built up, and one bare bones. And the developers are improving it all the time -- especially lately. Have you checked out Amit's new builds? They are based on Bilal/Danne's last release so they are seemingly just as stable, if not a little more-so. But the new UI is great, and he seems to be unlocking a new feature every day!

Canon EOS-M with Magic Lantern in 1:1 mode. These are the resolutions currently available: 3072 × 1308 2880 × 1226 2560 × 1440 2520 × 1080 2160 × 1620 (doesn't work with a monitor plugged in) 1920 × 1280 Yes, there's a major crop. And yes, it is possible to overload the buffer with the 3K and 2.8K modes when shooting 12-bit. And rolling shutter is pretty terrible. But it's a digital 16mm camera with 1:1 readout that shoots raw. Practically no moire or aliasing. And a beautiful image (one of my favorites right now, bar none). Plus, one developer has been making major updates to the UI and simplifying the menus in the past 2-3 weeks. It's like a whole new camera.

As a person who is waiting for used ZR prices to drop a bit more before picking one up, this all sounds good to me. 😅

At least so it seems https://www.dpreview.com/news/panasonic-did-what-apple-sony-and-nikon-couldnt-overturn-a-red-raw-video-patent/

The ZR is a smaller and lighter body and thermal management could be the issue. The Z8 and especially Z9 have a lot of mass that includes heat sinks that help keep components cool. None of them have cooling fans. The Zf (the one with the dials) is another smaller and lighter body (compared to Z8; it is not nearly light as the ZR) and it's actually quite easy to get it to get hot in stills shooting. Nikon made a choice to keep the ZR design quite thin without a built-in fan, and to make long recording times available, they seem to have compromised on the shadow noise reduction algorithm to reduce processor load, the result is a h.265 codec which in log mode is soft. They have indicated that they are working on a firmware update with a higher quality h.265 in mind.

There is one important point here : ) A Japanese decision invalidating the Japanese patent does not, by itself, kill equivalent patents in the US, Europe or anywhere else (even if they belong to the same patent family). Patent rights are territorial and each national right has, legally speaking, its own existence within its own jurisdiction. So no, compressed RAW has not suddenly become free for everyone everywhere : ) What is interesting is something else: if the claims are substantially equivalent (and that is obviously the important bit), the reasoning used in Japan may well become useful ammunition in other validity challenges. That is why, for me, the really interesting question is what Panasonic (or anyone else) does next. If equivalent RED claims start falling elsewhere too (particularly in the US), then yes, we may be looking at a very different landscape. - E. :- )

Why does nobody talk about the FX2? Much better value for money!

Unless you desperatly need build-in NDs, internal prores or EF lenses without an adapter. I would have retired my 6kPro a few years ago if the FF camera had ProRes, or even a good h265 codec.

They’ve managed to put themselves in a position where their full frame 6K is significantly cheaper than their Super 35 6K version so the latter will hit that sub $1000 point when they clear it out as it makes zero sense at this point.

Yes, you should title them with as many poophemisms as you can find that sound like footage they’d like to steal. Building a log cabin Clearing the pipes Cutting a cigar Decorating the White House Downloading some software Feeding the fish Laying some cable Stocking the lake with brown trout Etc etc

I'll be sure to fill up any cloud storage they give me, then. Maybe I could treat them to a retrospective of my year in toilet flushes, but give it a bunch of other labels like "Doing a sick jump on my bike"

Last time you did it, I bought one! : D

Great hack for the filter holder! I'd somehow missed how obnoxious they made the camera bump on the 17. Sheesh. I'll have to look to see if my Magsafe filter holder fits over my case (the standard iPhone 16 Pro soft plastic case from Apple). I think I eventually found one, but it's been a bit since I used it. But that is also my preference - just let me use the normal case and a normal screw-in filter and not some weird one with a proprietary filter system that won't work with my next phone. And yeah, Magsafe is definitely the way to go for filters - and if your filter adapter passes through the magnet, you can also get a magsafe CF Express reader/writer. That's really useful when shooting ProRes on the 16 - and presumably for shooting raw on the 17 series.

So by my man mathematics, DJI must have given away 10x X2Dii units for every one they have actually sold. I get the marketing strategy behind getting maybe 10 or so units out to some key Photo World 'influensters', but holy macaroni, just how many of these things have they given away? Who knew that DJI were such a philanthropic company... Jealous? Moi? Insanely, - it's a dream camera for me, but at ballpark '12k' for the body and 35-100 zoom lens, I cannot make the financials work in my favour. Even if it also did video. Which it doesn't. Not even slightly. Why is it peak camera for me? It's looks, the brand heritage, the build, the feel, the handing, the menus and of course the image quality. Except not quite the image quality. I have downloaded files from a number of sources and expected to be blown away and drink some of that readily available on-line Kool Aid, except I wasn't. Yes, they are great and super-detailed...but so are those from my whatshouldbevastlyinferior LUMIX S1Rii. I have not been able to shoot the exact same scenes side by side, or any of my own stills with the Hasselblad because I don't have access to one, so can only go on similar type shots...and as above, I'm not blown away or seeing any magic. In fact, quite a few of the shots I have downloaded with human subjects, the focus has been slightly off which suggests to me 2 things: Thing A: The focus is slightly off. Thing B: What muppet was given this camera to test and why has said muppet not pixel-peeped their own images they have put out into the world to be pixel-peeped by other (lesser) muppets like me? I was also considering something Leica. Not as well as, but instead of as in something 'more' than my LUMIX's but maybe not quite Fuji GFX/Hasselblad 100mp level. But based on my findings, I've dropped the whole idea. Are there some extra-fine details or other such mojo coming out of these bodies? Possibly, but nothing real world to my eyes. Are they better designs, better built and have more brand prestige? For sure. Does it (the pics) all look the same on social media? Of course they do, but that actually isn't the point unless your sole intention is content creation and the tools are just tools, but for some of us creatives, the tools are part of the creative process. Anyway, the point is, I'm not sure whether the shark has been jumped here, but I suspect there is a maximum amount of shilling going on because come on, you received a 12k gift and you know full well that unless you sing it's praises and go light on the criticism, you are never going to be gifted the next model to 'try out' when that comes along. Nope, you will be off the Christmas Card list faster than writing to Santa and addressing him as You Fat Fucker. I think I only came across 2 or maybe 3 reviews out of about 30 that I have seen that had bought the thing with their own money and those reviews seemed a bit more balanced, but still almost exclusively positive...but then maybe some of those folks needed to validate their own purchase and also hope to be noticed by Mount Hasselblad and be in the next model gift club... My answer to all of this? I went out and bought a pair of f1.4 Sigma lenses to replace my LUMIX f1.8's, ie, another of the most marginal upgrades. But it's my money so... ... PS: Unless Hasselblad are reading this, in which case, you fucking rock 🤘and of course I'd love to receive one and here's my address.

I’ll let you know once I’ve shot with them and done an edit. I can’t shoot these things side by side ie, Lumix 35/85 vs Sigma 35/85 because it’s work not a set up test so will have to go on feel & results but shooting essentially the same kinds of scenes week in week out, I have continuity in that regard. I’m not expecting any quantifiable night & day difference, but rather some subtle but worth it to me differences. The Sigma’s are going to be slightly larger and heavier. I don’t mind that and were only talking +200-250g so well short of say using a chonky zoom that would require a battery grip. That should be all good and I actually prefer something with a bit of heft for stability. I’m going to get actual aperture rings. Yay. My biggest criticism of the LUMIX f1.8 primes is their lack of aperture rings. Even the super expensive LEICA SL primes don’t have aperture rings. ALL lenses should have aperture rings on my planet! I’m expecting a fraction slower AF. I can live with that for the way I work and I could happily shoot manual focus 95% of the time so… The lower light capability (approx 2/3rd of a stop) is welcome, but I don’t really need it as f1.8/f2 is actually fine…and the Sigma f2 primes were another option, but the slower f2.8 90mm puts me off a bit for indoor work compared with the f1.4 85mm so I ruled them out on that basis. I actually had a set of them including the 90 a few years back and loved them, but I don’t think they are the right option for me right now. Finally, I think I am going to enjoy the shooting/ownership of metal vs plastic and there is that undefinable ‘I want to shoot with these’ rather than ‘I have to shoot with these’ factor. All in all, considering I am funding this 2 lens update by trading 5 lenses, it’s my ‘upgrade’ to something fractionally more ‘premium’ that makes up for not buying a Leica or a Hasselblad!

35mm f1.4 dg dn II plus the 85mm f1.4 dg dn ‘Used As New’ from MPB…except I also bought the MKI 35mm by mistake and have to send that back for a refund 🤦🏻‍♂️ They will get a run out this coming weekend at a 2 day job and then on a 3 day job the following weekend and then that’s me done until late next Spring. I did consider the f1.2 35 and the new 85 is due out any day, but bigger, heavier and when would I ever need f1.2 so nah.

I do Brandon, exif data! All the examples I downloaded were shot on the 35-100 with various apertures, shutter speeds and ISO, but otherwise yes, you are correct and I don’t know if it was camera or user error that the focus is slightly off…and it could be either. I’d really need to try one myself but here in France, rental is available, but only in big cities and only if you pick up and return in person and the pricing is pretty steep. When I am next back in the UK, I might try and convince a camera store to let me pop my own card in their demo model and shoot for 5 minutes out in the street, leaving one of my kidneys as security. Yes, printing is no longer part of my workflow and I’ve long since stopped offering books & albums for all kinds of reasons, mostly financial and I can only presume clients don’t really print either. They almost certainly intend to but almost certainly do not. I however don’t pixel-peep so much, but enjoy working with the best files I can work with. The edit is as much a part of the process for me as the capture. Less so for video where I prefer the capture and not so much the edit, probably because unless I start shooting raw, those files are not nearly as malleable. I know 99% of what I produce is going to end up on-line or social media whether it be my own or my clients, but I still want to work with and put out the best quality even if it is never realised by anyone bit me. I’ll find out this weekend as they will be waiting for me the morning of my next wedding with the planner who took delivery of them as I am on the road…

In general, I think FF is the sweet spot for a lot of stuff - not that the format is intrinsically better than anything, but because that's where most of the research/development goes. Lens makers and camera makers put the most work into those systems and lenses for those systems. S35 is just behind it with one vendor putting almost all their eggs in that basket and, as you said, it being the default for a number of video-focused things. Unless the gimbal is camera-integrated, they sort of end up being the worst for lots of stuff. Everything ends up being harder than it should be, including stuff that should be simple like accessing camera menus. I'm really enjoying the focus rat bag. It's a lot less involved than putting on my Ready Rig and if I have an image stabilized lens, I can get stable enough footage. If I were shooting Panasonic and lighter gear, I wouldn't even need/care about that!

Nope, that is exactly where I am; I've had more seasons than Kiefer Sutherland in 24 who only managed 9 seasons, - I'm closing up Season 26, the last 15 of which have steadily become increasingly hybrid with the last 5 being approx 90% hybrid packages. In 2027, it's 100%. The format of these events has barely changed in the last 26 years, - more fashion and annual fads, but the core of it is the same; two people get ready, meet for a ceremony, drinks & snacks after, then they eat, there's some talking stuff and then they dance. Having said that, the variety of things to capture is high with so many genres of capture required including; landscapes, architecture, still life, candid moments, food & kitchen, bands, formal elements... But aside from that, yes, my biggest driver kit-wise has been 'smaller & lighter = faster = better'. The compromise is always 'quality (of output) vs volume, size and weight of kit' and I could make a strong case for M43, APSC, FF or MF but the sweet spot for me is FF stills and either FF or APSC/Super 35 for video. M43 doesn't really have the ultimate low-light quality I need and MF doesn't really either, especially when we are looking at lenses such as Hassie's 35-100. Folks often suggest things to me that seem so obvious to them but my question back at them is, "do you do this week in week out, all season long, as a one man band, because if not, I appreciate the thought, but nah". I'm still exploring even after all this time. For example, I picked up my 4th gimbal recently after quickly returning every single one previously...and once again, absolute failure. It's not me, - it's the tool...and yes, well aware of the saying about blaming the tools, but sometimes it really is the tools, so selling the gimbal and a camera and doing something else instead because the simple reality is, the stability in LUMIX cameras is now so good, I can actually get better...or rather, more consistent footage, NOT using a gimbal, but using just the camera. (What's wrong with the gimbal? Simply having it and then having to operate it whilst not being able to do anything else is a fucking pain in the arse!). So yes, the tools are critical and am I at 'peak camera'? Absolutely, - I just need to be at 'peak operation' of said tools and I pretty much am with just a few niggles such as gimbal type work as in I don't want or need 'a gimbal', but have a need/want to be able to produce 'gimbal-like' footage at certain times, so it's a case of need/want driving choices, rather than buying tools and then trying to make them work/fit. My decisions are also not cost driven, ie, if the Hassie R2D2 actually made quantifiable sense, I'd find a way to fund it. In fact I had a plan and that was to take 2x more jobs in 2027 than I wanted plus the sale of some kit, which would fund it. We're talking an extra 2-3 weeks work in total, for something that would last years and maybe I could market & milk to death and be part of any future model launch, but my conclusion remains and that is it would not allow me to do anything I already cannot and therefore makes zero sense other than on a pure 'want it' factor.

Vintage anamorphic adapters are optically imperfect in very pleasing ways, but are large, expensive, difficult to find and setup, and can be slow to use (double focusing etc). Modern smartphone anamorphic adapters are optically imperfect too, but are small, cheap, easy to find and setup, and designed for AF cameras so should be incredibly fast and easy to use. Of course, the first question is about coverage, and this might surprise you, but modern smartphone sensors are approaching MFT sensor size. GX85 with 14mm F2.5 lens (no adapter) - I took a photo so this is open-gate MFT: GX85 with 14mm F2.5 lens and Neewer 1.55x anamorphic adapter in-front of the lens (de-squeezed): Full-sensor coverage and no vignetting visible. Can it cover S35? Who knows! Looking at this image it's much blurrier on the bottom than the top, but I was just holding the adapter in place so maybe I didn't have it exactly centred vertically, but it should give an idea of the image quality. It's obviously lens-dependent though, as this is the GX85 with the TTartisans 17mm F1.4 in 16:9 movie mode (no open gate)... Coverage.... isn't ideal! However, with the 2x digital zoom on the GX85 and de-squeezed you get this: This equates to about 44mm FF equivalent, and reminds me of some of the more funky vintage anamorphics. Perhaps the most impressive thing is the form factor. This is a 1.55x anamorphic setup probably more pocketable than a BMPCC4K, and that's literally got "pocket" in the name! Those just show the adapter leaning against the lens, as I am yet to work out how to mount it properly. The challenge is that this adapter has a 17mm rear thread which is smaller than any step-down ring I can find, so I'll probably have to go DIY to mount it. People have suggested I drill a hole in a metal lens cap, or get the smallest step-down ring I can find and glue a washer to it where the inner diameter of the washer matches the thread size. I'll have to experiment, but there are options. That whole rig weighs less than my Sirui 1.25x anamorphic adapter on its own.. 627g vs 744g!! It's early days for this idea, but the coverage surprised me and I think makes it a real option for shooting actual projects. The fact that the 14mm looks so clean and the 17mm so dirty means that buying one of these probably gives you as many looks as you have lenses, so potentially quite a few. I'm yet to play with how it looks at different apertures and focus distances, but they'll probably give some variety as well. The above were shot at F5.6 or so. If you stretch the 16:9 files from the GX85 you get 2.75:1 so super widescreen and you can crop the sides if you wanted to. On something like the GH7 with a 4:3 open-gate it would be almost exactly 2:1, a very useful format. It's not just MFT either. I've heard quite a number of instances where people want to go for an older look and will use a S35 cinema camera (like a RED) in a lower resolution mode and combine that with some vintage optics to get the look they want, or used the Alexa S16 mode and S16 lenses. Lots of cool stuff has been shot like that and when you have to de-squeeze in post then cropping a bit takes very little extra time on real projects. In a way these are perfect for low-budget anamorphic experimentation if you're interested in optics with some character and getting a range of looks from just one purchase.

I will say that even though the Beastgrip adapters are made for phone use, they actually have very good build quality and the newest versions have pretty decent optics, with 1.33x being better corrected than the 1.55x. They also have good front filter threads - the 1.33 uses 58mm and the 1.55 is 62mm. Once you get them properly attached to your lens, they aren't going anywhere. The first versions are not as well corrected, but that may be what you are looking for. The build quality seems consistently good across all models and versions. I'm guessing you could find some on the used market for reasonable prices, as they aren't super expensive to begin with.

But speaking of ‘peak camera’, what would be a future, ‘next gen’ option for me, not because I needed it, but because I wanted it? A better built, chunkier, fully articulated rear 4 inch LCD, spec of the S1Rii, ‘S9ii’ body. Essentially take the whole internal spec and articulation of the S1Rii and pop it in and on a ZR/FX style body. Now that truly would be a Thanos with all the stones camera for me!

Well that was an easy decision… Put the battery grip on one of the S1Rii’s and then the 28-105 and… …immediately took both back off and put the prime back on. The battery grip is being returned and the 28-105 getting welded on to the S5ii with battery grip that lives on a chunky medium-weight tripod. NOT ever going back to any big zooms or anything that requires a battery grip. The best system (for me) at this current time is the one I’ve been running.

For anyone considering the R6V, Looks like this fairly new 'Subject Tracking IS' feature addresses the longstanding wobble issues Canon has had with its IBIS system. I think more testing needs to be done - but just caught this vid from YouTuber Q Maldonado talking about it via this Canon R6V FB group. Personally, I sold my R50V and picked an R6V up to be my new casual/travel/C-cam. If you barebones it with a wrist strap it isn't that much bigger than an R50V with a Smallrig cage. Haven't really had time to do much testing but so far the biggest issue for me has been using the LCD screen in broad daylight. My workaround will be to rebuy a Zacuto Z-Finder and slap a Z-Frame adhesive on the LCD screen. Sure it makes it impossible to put the LCD in the protective closed position but that is obvi not a new concern + if you slap on a screen protector below the adhesive you should be fine + because the Z-Frame adhesive has some thickness to it, it also acts as another layer of protection. Anyways, just an fyi!

They cannot have NOT looked at it as the older 18-35 had a 50-100 sibling, but maybe it’s a case of the longer lens didn’t sell well or they think it’s covered somehow with the 28-105 and Samyang’s 35-150? Or it’s on the pipeline… Up until just a few weeks ago, the pairing of their 28-45 1.8 and an ‘imagined’ 45-90 f1.8, was end game for me, but since I went back to the pairing of 2 primes, mostly the 35 & 85 f1.8’s, I’m moving more towards the opinion that I already have my ‘end game’ set up because I ask myself, what would I really gain with a chunky twin zoom set up over what I have now? A bit of range; 28-45 vs 35 and 50-100 vs 85 and yes, that would be welcome, but do I really want that weight & bulk? Probably not. I’m still interested, but I think it would only be on the basis of instead of working primarily with 2x hybrid units, going back to having 1x stills dedicated and 1x video dedicated, in which case the use of zooms would be a necessity or I really would lack any kind of range. On a single body, the 28-45 would be perfect for indoor and low-light work and something like a 45-90, perfect for outdoor. I’m talking stills or video because that pairing would work dedicated to either on a single body paired with my second S1Rii paired with either the 17-40 dedicated to video or the 28-105 dedicated to stills. We’ll see. Consistency is a massive factor and on my journey of shooting gigs solo hybrid with equal parity between stills and video, I haven’t had much stability until this year, the first I have had the same system from start to finish. OK a couple of necessary workarounds as in mid season, I broke my S9 and had to use the L10 in it’s place and juggle a few other bits of kit around and then broke my 70-200, plus playing with the set up within the set up, but consistency of familiarity with the overall tool set. Ideally, I don’t want to be doing any fiddling in 2027 and run a full season with the exact set up I start it with. If Sigma pop out something akin to this 45-90 f1.8 with internal non-extending zoom over the Winter or Spring, then that game is almost certainly on. If they don’t, I think it will be the primes locked in for the season and the 28-105 f2.8 goes into the static role which is really what I intended for, replacing the slower, unnecessarily long (and broken) 70-200 f4.

50p on the S1Rii’s, S9 and L10 but don’t really do much slow mo these days. I shoot 25p on the S5ii as what I shoot with that I would never need to slow down. Supposedly better AF shooting 50p over 25p but not sure if it makes much difference? I suspect I will prefer the 28-105 more for stills than video and my favourite video lens is the 17-40mm f1.8 APSC crop lens. 25-60mm FF equivalent with a DOF wide open more line f2.7 but retaining the light gathering capability of the f1.8 it is, pretty compact and non-extending zoom. I did like the 28-45 f1.8 full frame lens but a bit of a limited range, especially for it’s size and weight and so replaced it with that 17-40 which I MUCH prefer, but you have to be happy to shoot cropped/S35…which I am and on the S1Rii allows you to shoot 4.7k 50p in a 4:3 ratio crop, so even ‘better’ than open gate. I would flip back to the full-frame 28-45 f1.8 and use it as an indoor/low-light lens, but ONLY if Sigma bring out a longer focal range sibling such as a 45-90mm f1.8 with internal non-extending zoom…but no signs of that so I’ll stick with what I have. One of my 4 set ups I am playing with is next weekend, S1Rii plus battery grip plus 28-105 dedicated purely to stills and the other S1Rii with the 17-40 which with e stab switched on gives a focal range equivalent to 36-84mm which is a preferred outdoor range for me. It’s the set up I am most interested in along with my twin S1Rii plus any choice of 4 primes including; 18/35/50/85. The former is bigger and heavier, but offers a bit more range at any time with the stills and the latter is pretty compact and low weight…and just works so the 28-105 will probably end up on my S5ii, but we’ll see…

Raw Log Camera Demo – looking for closed testers (Android) The first signed demo bundle is ready for closed testing on Google Play. I am looking for Android users who can test the app and report bugs or usability issues. Current focus: • RAW and RAWC recording • IT8 calibration and color profiles • Astro mode • Motorola Edge 50 Pro and other Android devices Google requires at least 12 testers to remain opted in for 14 days before Open testing becomes available for this new developer account. If you would like to help, please join the tester group: https://groups.google.com/g/rawlogcam-closed-testers After joining, please reply with the Google account email used for Play Store testing. I will share the Play opt-in link and test instructions with the group. Demo recording is limited to 20 seconds. Feedback about drops, exported H.265 playback, GPU preview, RAWC stability and IT8 behavior is especially welcome.

MotionCam Pro is apparently coming to iOS. I think they already offer private beta via TestFlight.

My attempts of modding a phone. I also went for the D mount on another phone with a smaller sensor.

I’m waiting for Google Play Store verification — they require an ID check before I can publish the demo version for beta testers.

I dream of having a tool of this magnitude. Being serious, as someone who really does not want to rig out his cameras as after all, I am a hybrid shooter, the larger, clearer and brighter the rear LCD is, the better because I shoot exclusively with the things. It’s also why I prefer a tilt over a flip out. Fully articulated works better for me for the stills side, but tilt for video. Hopefully all cameras in the future will increasingly work on having these physical features which probably benefit more folks than massive pixel counts or bloated codecs. Less grading is financial boon to the small business as time saved is time that can be put to use elsewhere, or increase profitability. That is what draws me to the Red codec, but as things stand, that storage costs defeats any savings for me, but the grading time is a draw…

It Was Just An Accident (2025) by Jafar Panahi is an amazing film with sequences shot in secret in Tehran...

It is interesting that Joe says in the video, they wanted the absolute character of the Kodak sensor to be preserved in-camera, without any noise reduction or introduction of any circuit noise. Just the natural grain from the sensor. So it got me thinking... With HVEC and modern sensors we have a squeaky clean look. It has a lot of noise reduction you can't turn off, and a lot of compression. So if we wanted the colour, character, uncompressed Cinema DNG and film grain of the Digital Bolex... We need to find a modern camera... Because the D16 on eBay now is $6K!! I think the closest I own is the Sigma Fp-L in crop mode. It has the resolution for 2x crop so works with Super 16mm lenses. But any crop from about 1.37x onward gives a very detailed texture to the uncompressed 4K raw.... as it is a 1:1 pixel readout. If you download the frame grab below, and look at the full 4K JPG conversion of my DNG, it is apparent at 1:1 that nothing is being lost and nothing is being added. Especially since this is at ISO 3200 behind a strong ND filter. At lower ISOs it looks a bit too clean to be a Digital Bolex-a-like. However at ISO 3200 it is perfectly on note. What other cameras could we wrangle (with a few tricks) to look like a Kodak CCD? GH5S? S1R 5K? Canon RAW? Nikon Z9? How about our smartphones in Motion Cam?