Chris Santucci

Because it's completely normal to achieve clipped highlight level X a thousand percent. Yep.

I'd rather have the better color and 10 bit color depth. Sony color and skintones especially are less accurate. But if you need to shoot in the dark, Sony is great.

I'd rather have the better color and 10 bit color depth. Sony color and skintones especially are less accurate. But if you need to shoot in the dark, Sony is great.

I'd rather have the better color and 10 bit color depth. Sony color and skintones especially are less accurate. But if you need to shoot in the dark, Sony is great.

I'd rather have the better color and 10 bit color depth. Sony color and skintones especially are less accurate. But if you need to shoot in the dark, Sony is great.

I'd rather have the better color and 10 bit color depth. Sony color and skintones especially are less accurate. But if you need to shoot in the dark, Sony is great.

I'd rather have the better color and 10 bit color depth. Sony color and skintones especially are less accurate. But if you need to shoot in the dark, Sony is great.

Impressive on paper, but I see no skintones in the demo.

I'm going to go ahead and say that the average consumer actually doesn't really care. They buy based on numbers because in their mind higher megapixel = better. They have no understanding of why, or how - but that's the thought process.
If you showed an average consumer a picture taken with a $100 kit lens, next to the same picture taken on the same body at the same focal length with a $1200 lens - they may or may not see much difference.
But they're unlikely to go out and spend an extra $1100 on a lens. Most consumers are baffled when you tell them a single lens can cost $100,000. 
Professionals buy expensive lenses because they appreciate and understand the very reason they're expensive. Professionals (and even enthusiasts, I guess) care about the quality of all the components, because they know the difference it makes to the picture.
Consumers don't get it. Realistically, someone who's just picked up a camera is unlikely to take amazing photos even if they have a $1200 lens on it.  

I would wager that some of you are on PC and others are on Mac.
 
I will share that on a calibrated PC monitor, the OP's image appears washed-out (elevated gamma).
 
I have quietly thought this since the inception of this thread -- but it is now worth pointing it out. 

I never touched saturation just so you know. All I did was remove all that GREEN and add a tad bit of blackness.
 
ALL the still frames associated with this post look excessively green (and a bit flat) to me. When I download the doggy image and open it in photoshop, the big reflected highlight under the Beagle shows a pronounced amount of green.
 
And I keep my 32 bit monitor calibrated and do all my (considerable amount of) grading on it.

Does anyone else think the color science in this camera is still complete crap? I haven't seen anything to make me think otherwise. 

His technique is very good except for the forced camera motion...
 
I am used to seeing the lazy eye high inertia motion that you get from a 15Kg shoulder cam 
 
His motion is more like a fly. For this I think it would improve if he strapped a 2kg training weight to the cam

Funny how *sharpness* elicits oohs and aahs from certain people who then put 40 or 50 year old (sometimes uncoated) lenses on these cameras. 
 
Nobody wants to see ultra sharp footage of people's faces, especially when the skin tones are produced by a GH series camera. 

Funny how *sharpness* elicits oohs and aahs from certain people who then put 40 or 50 year old (sometimes uncoated) lenses on these cameras. 
 
Nobody wants to see ultra sharp footage of people's faces, especially when the skin tones are produced by a GH series camera. 

Wow, people are still whining about stills cameras that have added video functions? And an 800 dollar model at that!?!?!
 
What's next? A scathing critique of a Flip UltraHD camera?
 

Two weeks ago, a client asked me to shoot some nice photos of her employees. I told her that this would be a job for a photographer with his own studio and proper flash lights, things that I don´t have as I´m not a photographer at all. To be honest, I actually told her so because I really didn´t like the idea of driving 400 kilometers just to take portrait pictures of employees. But her answer was, well, shaking up. She told me that she wasn´t interested in high-polished, perfectly lit ultra high resolution photos, but rather something special and charming. I know she´s got the money and access to professional photographers, but she explicidly wanted me, because she appreciates my ideas. So I bought a "green screen" (actually a green carpet) from IKEA, grabbed some LED lights and my GH3 and took these pictures downstairs her company building. The end of the story: She and her employees couldn´t have been more happy, because the pictures looked exactly what they were hoping for. They are not perfectly lit, they are not perfectly sharp, but they have a special look and feel and thus represent the spirit of that specific company. Mission accomplished.
 
This was an example, that can apply to all of my creative work. As long as I´m a self-employed and creative person providing a service, my clients pay for the whole package, including my own nature. They don´t pay solely for resolution or pro-looking equipment.
Even in the future, some people will be able to sell precious 720p suff, while some highly graded, moiré-free 4K work of others won´t be worh a penny to anybody. Like I said, it´s the whole package and your knowledge of how and whom to sell it, it´s not your camera´s codec alone.
 
Anyway, I will be pleased with all these 4K test videos on youtube and vimeo. Thousands of self-appointed filmmakers will show us thousands of arty video shots of flowers, dogs, cats, grain fields, dancing people and cars. Everything accompanied by gentle music from Ludovico Einaudi. Description: Testing my new GH4/Canon C50/Sony FS4K/Blackmagic Production Camera with lens XYZ...
 
Testing, testing, testing, testing, testing, testing, comparing, testing, testing.... Oh look, there´s 8K on the horizon. This time it won´t allow us to make any excuses because of bad equipment. Finally we can tell our stories. With 8K we can. Finally.
 
But seriously, while all these predictable and influencable "I can´t because of bad equipment"-guys kept on excusing, complaining and distracting from their own incapability, my good old GH2 turned out to be a cash cow. The only thing my clients complaint about was the form factor of my GH2. The couldn´t imagine, how this tiny box would be capable of producing such a nice image. But it did. I`m self-employed since 2010 and I started with nothing but a GH2, some Canon FD lenses, an old Macbook Pro and ingenuity. As of this writing, I haven´t lost one single client, despite rolling shutter.
 
Today, it´s not the money anymore that keeps me from buying a RED or a Canon C whatever, it´s the experience that you can do so many things with the tools that you already have. Most of the time, it´s your lack of skills and imagination that seperates you and your clients from being satisfied.
 
The easiest thing to do is putting the blame on anything and anyone but yourself.

This changes everything. People will be shooting awesome films, getting into Sundance, and getting 3 picture deals left and right.

This changes everything. People will be shooting awesome films, getting into Sundance, and getting 3 picture deals left and right.