Eric Calabros

Ironically I need AF in 60fps more than I need it in 24fps.

They had no clue its possible through HDMI, or worth the effort. It was Atomos idea. And S1H was developed long AFTER Atomos shared the idea with Panasonic.

Adding a feature no other camera under $2000 has is not a disaster by any means. Because they did it finally: https://m.dpreview.com/news/3228623333/nikon-announces-z6-z7-raw-video-output-upgrade-new-firmware-adds-cfexpress-support Both the the delay and $200 fee is direct result of Apple-RED fight over that stupid patent, which didn't end up well for consumers. Bash Nikon for many mistakes they did that everything around was under their control. This one is not one of them.

Nope. The only advantage is that it doesn't need thick AA filter for native 4k, which is good thing. At 60mp, its not like real 60mp. HDR mode will look artifact free, but sacrifices resolution and noise performance.

They made this specs sheet cause there are customers for this sensor other than Sony Imaging. But who are they?

Is it your first day of visiting planet earth?

Its that HDp25?

Who are the judges? Can we ask them take an IQ test? Or maybe its too late for IQ test and we should consider MRI scan. I think some parts of their brain have serious issues.

CFL had actually broader spectrum, but the spike was in green region. You see the filtered light, not the light of backlit itself. What kye means is that if camera sensor doesn't see the gaps/low intensities in monitor white light spectrum, so it doesn't matter. What really matters is the regions it can see. And thats kind of right, our pixel sensitivity is also a combination of three relatively sharp spikes.

No reason for crop anxiety. They can do 4k60fps and 6k30fps. They're behind Sony in sensor tech, buy not as much as 3 years ago.

Too expensive for me, but I think thats fair price considering the capabilities.

Which is convincing me that the best sensor for capturing 4k is a native 4k sensor. Yes it comes with some aliasing and false color in some cases, but It would run faster (higher fps), cooler (less data traveling inside or outside the sensor), and as a bonus sees better in the dark.

Jim Kasson did a series of tests about this subject: does 6k or 8k or even 9k image downsampled to 4k look better than native 4k? Though he is a still guy but the test is relevant for video shooters. This is the last one but check the previous posts too. https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/camera-resolution-and-4k-viewing-a7s-a7iii-a7riii-a7riv-downsampled/ My take is that if you dont shoot texts or Siemens star or a chart, the difference is surprisingly unnoticeable! And keep in mind, Jim is doing this in post, using a powerful PC, using the best available software and algorithms. We know the downsample process happening inside the cameras are far from the best possible, they want to do it fast without using much power, it shouldn't be a very computationally expensive task.

What you take that half an hour is not enough?

The main problem is people want a heavily subsidized Fuji system inside Nikon body.