Emanuel

LOL Good one, Ebrahim! I am a bit done to see people whining of sky bandings but never tested it with a fancy HDMI recorder to compare the differences... ;-)
 
PS: From a previous discussion on dvxuser: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?335344-New-PIX-E-recorders-monitors-from-Sound-Devices&p=1986537988&viewfull=1#post1986537988

sample extracted from (minute 28:30):
https://vimeo.com/114978513

Who said 4:2:2 is more important than 10-bit? The difference between 8-bit 4:2:2 and 8-bit 4:2:0, it is more significant for your grading. Much different statement. Of course, for certain type of grading. No mention of raw or alike where even 10-bit is short by default. People too much focused on the 10-bit holy grail tend to forget ; ) But, banding was the topic (hence my "the-real-difference" of my post; numbers help but like machines need i-n-t-e-r-p-r-e-t-a-t-i-o-n :-D) :
http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/9390-sony-a7s-ii-is-out/?do=findComment&comment=106562
Speaking of math, let's see with a very simple case: 1) 100,000; 2) 1,000,000; 3) 10,000,000. Where's the bigger difference? Now, take these figures as bucks and your single expense as any number between 100,000 and 1,000,000. Which step will make the whole difference?
Here goes your single example on pictures, posted and reposted more than once:
http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/9355-canon-announces-development-of-8k-cinema-eos-camera-and-120mp-dslr/?do=findComment&comment=105935

Don't push it, man of the renaissance... LOL Don't try to take advantage because some other poster said yes in some other topic as the only way to make a point on yours ;-)
This test (not mine) is "my contribution" to this thread:
http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/9390-sony-a7s-ii-is-out/?do=findComment&comment=106693

sample extracted from (minute 28:30):
https://vimeo.com/114978513

How will you upgrade to 10-bit when:
a) the manufacturers have their high-end to protect?
b) compact size on large format is unable to go higher bit depth when internal 4K 8-bit 4:2:0 by Sony is out there to pop up full of overheating issues?
The fact 4:2:2 recorded externally brings higher bitrate to you is the only viable choice you have going with a large sensor. Other than that, 10-bit also means a higher bitrate (irrelevant the degree for certain tasks; there's the point), hardly to see internally in these small "toys" whether we cry or not. And for some reason ; ) you have it on GH4 but not on Sonys via HDMI. Why hasn't Blackmagic released yet 4K in a compact package? Because they are too focused on the new Ursas (reason a) above-mentioned) is short to explain it... And when they will, don't count on a large sensor size. The best you can dream about will be the SpeedBooster route. Other than that, you're stuck on 8-bit.
Whining for 10-bit or higher for this market segment is a futile exercise and meaningless. That test proves we have now a solution to help you out with banding. Not really significant for much other (banding as topic), but a way better than 4:2:0 (again, for banding). The comparison speaks by itself, the variables to second it only testify the grace. There's a difference between to dream with and following the t(r)ip. Reality-wise, of course ;-)
No one here is against 'the higher', the point is the way those several existent differences (RELATIVE variations, certain gaps, jumps as you call them can weigh much more than absolute values) and variables can have an impact in our tools for real in order to comply some goal. Those you can use in the field. Not mere wishful thinking for a bunch of geeks we are here :-)

I am not engineer either. No need to be one nor a businessman to figure out a La Palice truth.
That one on 10-bit 4:2:2 lighter than 8-bit 4:2:0 is the first time I've heard. That is, if same codec, same parameters... To be frank and straightforward with you. No, I won't show off and call you stupid in a public place. Nor thinking and writing you are this or that. Read your post again, you'll likely find inaccuracies in your post. I have no need to write the other side is wrong (you say) anyway. But I can tell you very straight using your lexicon, stupid is when we see real tests proving something and we insist this or that theory is the one valid and keep going what experience proves the contrary.
Hey, the lady is not mine. The test is not mine, no need to send me the check. The results are there. Very explicit ones, to say the truth.
A few others much prefer to praise their dolls. Yes, you and others here are also missing the point over there. Apart the fact, brands like to sell expensive toys and whishful thinking has a place but happens to be far away of reality most part of time, you are able to say 8-bit 4:2:0 is not favourable for banding (I've read lots of things over here but this one is new... LOL). OK, let's try to decode your saying, even though, you don't make the necessary effort to decode mine.
Still on the variables? Who said bitrate/codec don't count?!
So (no, not necessarily your saying, take it as sarcasm indeed), let's fulfill the 4:2:0 recipient with empty data and try to see if matches 4:2:2, why not? It reminds me those who think they actually record 10-bit in their external recorder only because they read the specs on the paper they're using a 10-bit codec, even when they stream a 8-bit output from camera.
I only read blah blah but... C'mon, give me, you and everyone a break. This is not a contest to pick up the best smartass ready for. Neither a kindergarten.
(your) point taken, thanks for the link, nice reading :-)
 
PS: Last but not least, speaking of accuracies ; ) the overheating issues seem to come from processing, not sensor. Or you wouldn't be likely to overcome the trouble triggering from the external recorder.

Don't push it, man of the renaissance... LOL Don't try to take advantage because some other poster said yes in some other topic as the only way to make a point on yours ;-)
This test (not mine) is "my contribution" to this thread:
http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/9390-sony-a7s-ii-is-out/?do=findComment&comment=106693

sample extracted from (minute 28:30):
https://vimeo.com/114978513

How will you upgrade to 10-bit when:
a) the manufacturers have their high-end to protect?
b) compact size on large format is unable to go higher bit depth when internal 4K 8-bit 4:2:0 by Sony is out there to pop up full of overheating issues?
The fact 4:2:2 recorded externally brings higher bitrate to you is the only viable choice you have going with a large sensor. Other than that, 10-bit also means a higher bitrate (irrelevant the degree for certain tasks; there's the point), hardly to see internally in these small "toys" whether we cry or not. And for some reason ; ) you have it on GH4 but not on Sonys via HDMI. Why hasn't Blackmagic released yet 4K in a compact package? Because they are too focused on the new Ursas (reason a) above-mentioned) is short to explain it... And when they will, don't count on a large sensor size. The best you can dream about will be the SpeedBooster route. Other than that, you're stuck on 8-bit.
Whining for 10-bit or higher for this market segment is a futile exercise and meaningless. That test proves we have now a solution to help you out with banding. Not really significant for much other (banding as topic), but a way better than 4:2:0 (again, for banding). The comparison speaks by itself, the variables to second it only testify the grace. There's a difference between to dream with and following the t(r)ip. Reality-wise, of course ;-)
No one here is against 'the higher', the point is the way those several existent differences (RELATIVE variations, certain gaps, jumps as you call them can weigh much more than absolute values) and variables can have an impact in our tools for real in order to comply some goal. Those you can use in the field. Not mere wishful thinking for a bunch of geeks we are here :-)

I am not engineer either. No need to be one nor a businessman to figure out a La Palice truth.
That one on 10-bit 4:2:2 lighter than 8-bit 4:2:0 is the first time I've heard. That is, if same codec, same parameters... To be frank and straightforward with you. No, I won't show off and call you stupid in a public place. Nor thinking and writing you are this or that. Read your post again, you'll likely find inaccuracies in your post. I have no need to write the other side is wrong (you say) anyway. But I can tell you very straight using your lexicon, stupid is when we see real tests proving something and we insist this or that theory is the one valid and keep going what experience proves the contrary.
Hey, the lady is not mine. The test is not mine, no need to send me the check. The results are there. Very explicit ones, to say the truth.
A few others much prefer to praise their dolls. Yes, you and others here are also missing the point over there. Apart the fact, brands like to sell expensive toys and whishful thinking has a place but happens to be far away of reality most part of time, you are able to say 8-bit 4:2:0 is not favourable for banding (I've read lots of things over here but this one is new... LOL). OK, let's try to decode your saying, even though, you don't make the necessary effort to decode mine.
Still on the variables? Who said bitrate/codec don't count?!
So (no, not necessarily your saying, take it as sarcasm indeed), let's fulfill the 4:2:0 recipient with empty data and try to see if matches 4:2:2, why not? It reminds me those who think they actually record 10-bit in their external recorder only because they read the specs on the paper they're using a 10-bit codec, even when they stream a 8-bit output from camera.
I only read blah blah but... C'mon, give me, you and everyone a break. This is not a contest to pick up the best smartass ready for. Neither a kindergarten.
(your) point taken, thanks for the link, nice reading :-)
 
PS: Last but not least, speaking of accuracies ; ) the overheating issues seem to come from processing, not sensor. Or you wouldn't be likely to overcome the trouble triggering from the external recorder.

The difference can be another one depending on our setup choices, as for instance where 500gr can make a whole difference:
http://www.red.com/store/products/redvolt-xl
http://www.red.com/store/products/redvolt
 
On the leftover, this is the philosophy:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?67366-Is-it-possible-to-use-Scarlet-EPIC-without-any-Red-LCD-or-EVF
 
Yes, no reason on contrary.
:-)

I think you'll find up there the answer you're looking for:
http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/9467-ursa-mini-vs-raven/?do=findComment&comment=107970

I agree. 
This camera would be much better with an MFT mount - the original EF mount BMCC was a nightmare for this reason. (crop factor with EF lenses). 
 
 
We'll find out more on Friday.
The big feature is the 4k 120fps, but I still think the URSA Mini 4.6k is very hard to beat because of the value you get with the package. Once you add ergonomics, the Raven will likely cost double, if not more. 
I'm very curious though because I'm in the market for a major new camera to film a combination of commercial and music video stuff. 

Don't push it, man of the renaissance... LOL Don't try to take advantage because some other poster said yes in some other topic as the only way to make a point on yours ;-)
This test (not mine) is "my contribution" to this thread:
http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/9390-sony-a7s-ii-is-out/?do=findComment&comment=106693

sample extracted from (minute 28:30):
https://vimeo.com/114978513

The difference can be another one depending on our setup choices, as for instance where 500gr can make a whole difference:
http://www.red.com/store/products/redvolt-xl
http://www.red.com/store/products/redvolt
 
On the leftover, this is the philosophy:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?67366-Is-it-possible-to-use-Scarlet-EPIC-without-any-Red-LCD-or-EVF
 
Yes, no reason on contrary.
:-)

http://eriknaso.com/2015/09/22/how-does-the-new-red-raven-stack-up-to-other-4k-cameras-a-price-comparison/

Your CFast media price seems a little wonky.
Cursory search reveals that the approved Lexard 3400x cards cost:
128GB = USD 341.99
256GB = USD 677.80
And I mean, those are B&H prices. Guaranteed you can find a better deal.
 
That said, this stuff (media prices) changes by the second, so I respect your compiling effort.
I await the published Raven specs. Hoping for some real awesome DR and possibly even HDRx capability.

From what I have read at REDuser, the thinking is that these sensors are a quarter cut of the 8K sensor... If that is the case, then 4K will be the max. If true, it is a concern, as RED is quite soft (compared to BM with no OLFP)

Hi, Thanks for getting back to me.
Well, the RX10II cost as much as the AX1000 and it is as bulky as the GH4...  What will make the RX10II superior to the AX1000 beside the S-Log? Better AF like Handycam experience? 

URSA Mini 4.6K can switch between rolling and global shutter(but lose some DR) so really it should have an advantage in that department.

ursa mini weight is 5lbs, red weapon is 3.3lbs and it is said that the Raven will be lighter
weapons bare body is much smaller than the ursa mini bare body, much more compact and better suited for movi type stabilizers.
image quality wise I would be surprised if the new 4.6k ursa sensor performs better than the red dragon sensor but wait and see.
but the price of a working red raven package will likely be at least twice that of a ursa mini 4.6k though.

But, for that, they shall run it in much higher bitrate...
Upcoming post-focus feature will happen.
And I hope for 4K/60p as same as DVX-200.
 
S35 won't happen, I bet. But, have you used the speedbooster going with the GH series? You'll reach the same optically.

8-bit 4:2:2 and I would buy it.
(I will buy pretty much the first DSLR/Mirrorless that does, maybe the 5Div)

This guy is a pathological lier. 
Even for a second don't believe what he claims. He was the one behind the E-M1 4K fiasko. 
Keep your camera safe and away from any of his hacks. 
 

I didn't see the need since I am using old nikon lenses with it.
Maybe a lower setting might be better with very sharp lenses. 

After spending enough time with the camera this is the profile that I have settled with. Very pleasing skin tones, minimal banding and easy for slight grading. 
Gamma: Cine 4, but I switch to Cine 2 in low light. Sometimes I also use S-log in very strong light people far away but I try to avoid it. With a face close up Cine 3 is very good too. 
Color mode: Cinema. Pro gave me too saturated colors. Maybe it will be nice in nature. Avoid s-gamut unless you are using an external recorder and you are very confident with your color grading abilities. Also keep in mind that colors change depending on the exposure so make sure you are exposing consistenly (very hard to do with the LCD in s-log more). 
Black level: 0. Black is black. 
Black gamma: middle. 
Knee: Manual 97.5% -1. This is optimized for a slight highlight roll off. Set the percentage lower for strong contrasts. 
Saturation: 0. Lower this if you plan to play with the colors later.  
Color Phase: 0. I trust sony on this one.
Color Depth: 3,0,0,0,0,0. Just a touch of red. 
Detail: -3.  A bit more organic. 
 

Canon clearly mentioned that 4k is not coming any time soon due to "Cost" issues.
MM: Well, historically, I think that Canon was the first in the world to come out with a 4K product. In 2011, we had the Canon EOS 1D C, and then we had the Canon Cinema EOS C500 for professional use. For the consumer models, I think that we still need to work a little bit more on the balance between the cost and the sensor sensitivity before we can come out in the market. As you may know, Canon's main point of difficulty is to reduce costs.
[Ed. note: This is interesting, in that Canon views cost competitiveness as their main point of challenge in the market. It's also interesting in that it sounds like we won't see much in the way of 4K video in their SLR lineup for a little while yet.]