Emanuel

"Why do people always want to defend cameras until death?" Indeed! But that one you should ask to Sony fanboys instead :-D You see me to praise the Lord of cameras, not to denigrate with their eventual shortcomings. As far as myself, I am not here defending an investment I didn't comply... yet ; ) Battery performance means nothing, close to the best IQ Fujifilm cameras produce...

So, no excuse if that fits all the kind of buyers... LOL ;-)

If you only count with a single battery, you're not a professional neither an amateur but probably just a camera collector. No user will save in any way other than as a few spare batteries inside the photo bag. Could be a video bag, no matter the size of the bag :-)

The grip comes cheaper with the kit. A bit more than €200 excl.VAT.

Sure, there is. Neither she is the same blonde for every scene or single shot as we could tend to think ; ) People tend to expect nowadays auto-anything-everything, AE, AF and so on... Minimal work and that's it :X

C'mon, now when the warm-up is almost done...?! LOL ;-)

Nothing related to the camera, I bet. As you inferred by your own post Dave @DaveAltizer, it is the color processing of that film simulation mode, that's some sort of LUT anyhow and anyway, not much. Who said there's no need for good CC anymore? :-D

Have you seen that Portuguese clip? I find the highlight rolloff of this camera (and eventually from other Fujis) particularly above the hybrids average! Much better than Panny to my eyes (E :-) PS: Kudos to Mattias (among others); the young fellow has been on spot ;-)

Pardon me, Chris and Jon, but it is too little to be disappointed. As Jon wisely pointed out earlier above: Cinematographers or DoPs use light meters! :-)

They should all also listen our Jon! I must be much clear on it... If I'd be any manufacturer, I would hire our good fellow Jon. He is one of the best critics of cameras I've ever read : ) And this doesn't mean I don't notice when for some reason there's something he isn't aware about (like it happened with his recent one on the OLED he had just bought vs some detail he let away from his own attention in the UHD projector's thread when compared with another one of similar resolution instead anyway :-D) BTW speaking of the usual devils over here, where have you been today, Don? @webrunner5

Fair point, yours, Jon @jonpais (for some valuable points yet on Panny side...) Here goes anyways, without mention such beautiful monochromatic: DPReview input from different glass options and IBIS samples: And yet from my native country where the European press event (with FUJIFILM to follow DJI choosing Lisbon once again) has taken place for that unique color rendering of the remarkable Portuguese 'Azulejo' (who knows the Portuguese painted tin-glazed ceramic tilework knows what I'm talking about*): * https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azulejo Can anyone guess how would end those blues if as for instance shot with any Sony mirrorless camera...?

No valid though... : ) Spill the beans! ;-) Meanwhile:

This camera is much more interesting than apparently seems by the initial reactions from outsiders. Do you want a video camera really cinematic straight out the box? Buy FUJIFILM; IBIS + 200Mbps matches a unique combo, is actually something coupled there and truly tops.

Yeah, I've always found Johnnie's reviews pretty honest BTW as much as a Fuji's camera is invariably a unique tool to say the least... Hard to not fall in love! (E :-)

Can you do one of those of your tests with native lenses at least? Don't you feel tempted to buy a Viltrox?

Metabones, I suppose? What about native lenses? Or then the Viltrox adapter.

@Mattias Burling More moire than the a7...?! I really don't think so :-) BTW @Charlie how much did you pay for? In Spain? (Going below FF I'd have chosen 4/3" instead: cheaper glass, more options and sweet spot in-between the G7 and GX85 without mention the potential use of affordable adapters towards to mimic larger formats)

Are you sure it isn't manufactured by Sony?! :-D (Only a joke from rumor on Starvis sensor eventually used but promptly denied by Panasonic on their new born GH5S)

Funny, ended duplicated... LOL It looks like we need to say the same for both halves ;-)

Part II still on topic to @mkabi People tend to misshape 4:2:0 in a intuitive reading from there. Adam Wilt gives a fair explanation on it: https://www.adamwilt.com/DV-FAQ-tech.html#colorSampling So, actually what do we mainly have here? Color is sampled at half in both ways (horizontal & vertical). And on 3:1:1? 3:1:1 is a third (1440 / 3 = 480) but keeps the full vertical resolution as much as: 4:1:1 where only a quarter and horizontally the chroma is subsampled; and 4:2:2 for the double half of that quarter above-mentioned in the previous line instead, that is, in a half of the horizontal resolution. So, we still have a midway from 4:2:0 (25%) to 4.2:2 (50%) -- color information in parenthesis for half of that value now without parenthesis: 33% to my math; but don't forget, like Italians say, math is not opinion ;-)

I stand corrected for 66,6% if we'd take the native HDCAM 1440x1080 resolution (using non-square pixels with 4:3 storage aspect ratio, reason why there's the same 16:9 display aspect ratio) and my calculation is correct: Y' 1440x1080 = 1,555,200 Cb 480x1080 = 518,400 Cr 480x1080 = 518,400 1,555,200 / 1,036,800 I bet for some reason Sony wanted to beat the competitor Panasonic used to implement 4:2:2 in their alternative DVCPRO HD system based on 1280x1080 anyways. What do I know though?! ; ) Maybe that 1920 quarter -- that is, 1440 / 3 = 480 (without mention some sources mention some other 640 value as a third of full HD/1920 for HDCAM chroma subsampling), may convert all the math in some other numbers... :D But in one line, better than 4:2:0 indeed.

Apparently the same --- 25% of the color information available*. But I don't take those numbers as accurate: 3:1:1 is a middle way towards the 4:2:2 from 40% ratio instead. HDCAM 3:1:1 format is actually 75% from horizontally 1920 pixels (so 1440) and a third chroma sampled (480 for a quarter of 1920), but it is full vertical resolution (1080) rather than a half for 4:2:0 on chroma side, even though with chroma subsampling going with half from full horizontal HD (aka 1920), so here you have for your maths now ;-) In a line? :D Take a look on this article by Barry Green: http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/colorspace/ * https://wolfcrow.com/blog/chroma-subsampling-numbers-explained/ https://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/chroma-subsampling

OK, now the BS/hype is 8K for 8K LOL :D Nice to read you over here BTW (Salut! : ) I guess you may have spot it. Players need expensive tech to keeping their fees on high as already recently written (E :-) I think he's doing his business to end in a camera module for their marketing sake.

Yeah, chill out guys : ) Both sides' scopes have their merit by their own :-) No need to going extreme here. We are all a family under Reid's umbrella. Yeah, chill out guys : ) Both sides' scopes have their merit by their own :-) No need to going extreme here. We are all a family under Reid's umbrella.