jhnkng

http://www.fujifilm.com/support/digital_cameras/software/lut/

My dear erstwhile member can you please stop attacking John Brawley now.
I have long since given up on camera forum arguments so might not be completely up on who is right and who is wrong-evil / killed-a-kitten, but can we tone it down a bit. It's JB! We could be learning so much and having such interesting cameras talks with a film industry guy and I am sure one of the only people with a Blackmagic Pocket 2 prototype yet instead a handful of you are just bitching. It's pointless. Even if you disagree with him on certain matters, hold your tongue a bit for the benefit of the rest of us who are interested in what he has to tell.

I'm not really worried about what someone calls me.  I've sure heard worse.
I don't really care what you think of me either, but thanks for taking the time to let me know.
I don't wish to derail this thread any more than it already has been.  Don't bother reading below if you don't wish to.
I accept the way I use a camera isn't the way others use a camera.  I love a robust, informed and respectful discussion about features and approaches to workflow.   I'm happy to argue the pros and cons till the cows come home and I love being proven wrong. 
But some users posting here seem to want this argument to be more than that. They are specifically trying to look for contradictory quotes from me for the purposes of muddying the issues being discussed.  I'm happy to chat about that too.
With regards to use of language, I'm going to respond in kind when I perceive that someone is vilifying someone else with language that absolutely has a problematic past.  All I actually did was ask the poster to re-consider the language being used.  The poster then argued he didn't use the word in contention.
Language is highly subjective and contextual.  I merely pointed out that I don't think it's an appropriate way to describe another user of this forum because it's akin to saying you're the equal of someone that's effeminate ( you're the SAME as a woman ) or gay because of how often they change battery.
That's what sissy means.  You may have thought he meant something else.  But I didn't have to look it up to understand he was saying.  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sissy
"Sissy (derived from sister), also sissy baby, sissy boy, sissy man, sissy pants, etc., is a pejorative term for a boy or man who does not conform to male gender stereotypes. Generally, sissy implies a lack of courage, strength, athleticism, coordination, testosterone, male libido, and stoic calm, all of which have traditionally been associated with masculinity and considered important to the male role in Western society. A man might also be considered a sissy for being interested in traditionally feminine hobbies or employment (e.g., being fond of fashion), displaying effeminate behavior (e.g., using hair products or displaying limp wrists), being unathletic, or being homosexual."
I guess you're OK with that choice of language or you genuinely thought it meant something else by wanting to argue it,  but I'm going to call it out if I don't think it's appropriate and invite the poster to edit their post in case they don't realise that some may find it offensive. It's just decent courtesy on a public forum like this.  We're not at the pub with your mates.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that not a single one of you posting here is a woman.   And actually I would love to be surprised if there was someone lurking who wanted to out themselves and weigh in with their views.
I don't think you get to decide if it's offensive or not. You can still call me names for pointing out though if you like ?
While you may not care about such language because you can take a joke, it's not you that's being vilified.
Why do you think women don't post in forums like this ?  Because they are out there.  They read these forums and choose not to engage because of the boys club that this place can be.  Especially when talking about the very kind of issue that makes them not feel comfortable and welcomed in a forum like this.
This is not about being PC . It's about us as men calling out language like this because it does matter.  You're wrong if you think those who are vilified aren't here lurking and choosing not to post.  Maybe it doesn't matter to you, but to those one describes by using this language, it matters a great deal.
Maybe you can try asking them.
JB
EDIT . Oh and by the way, in the ACS, the Australian Cinematographers Guild, female members make up about 10% of the membership and only 2% of the accredited members.  I can't think of many other fields where the gender disparity is so high, can you ?
 
 

Sir. You used the word in a way that everyone undstands to mean gay or effiminate.
JB

It sounds like you’re threatened by this camera so you’re making sure you point out any and all shortcomings you can. Isn’t sissy a bit emotional ? You’re reaching.
Some people will be happy with 10bit 422 as their maximum image quality as long as they have a tilt able screen and autofocus. 
Most serious image makers know that 12bit raw and 10 bit ProRes for half the price trumps the MILC features you’re desperately trying to remind everyone your precious GH5s has. Mostly because “filmmakers” don’t tend to use those features anyway. I don’t use AF.  But I shoot narrative drama.  What I need isn’t what others need.
For the majority, they will prefer the utility of the form factor, longer battery life, AF and IBIS on the GH5 and will find the bare minimum for serious work 400Mbps codec to be good enough. 
People who care about image fidelity will likely prefer what a Pocket 2 produces side by side and will also decide that they can work around the shortcomings that pertain to the way they work.
The same way others will prefer to work around the shortcomings of a lower bit depth more compressed and sub sampled image because other features are important to them. 
On board batteries on an Alexa mini on my last show were lasting about 40 mins by the way.  I guess you’re calling me a sissy. 
JB
EDIT  by the way, I don’t think it’s at all appropriate to use sissy, a word that means effeminate man or homosexual. Maybe you want to change that.

I have the Crane 2 (the bigger one) and I just got the new mechanical focus motor, and it’s a revelation. Being able to pull focus using the Crane 2 wheel without having rig and power a bunch of different stuff is amazing. And they’re selling the gimbal and follow focus together for like 1000 bucks AUD!  Seriously, if you’re in the market for a gimbal you really need to look at the Crane 2. 

So far I’ve only tried  follow focus with my X-T2, but I’ve previously mounted a C100mk2 (with a 24 pancake) and a D750 as well. The C100 is too tall to go into inverted mode, but it worked great otherwise. 

I've used the 18-135 which also has OIS and I was pleasantly surprised by how well it stabilised my shots. I didn't use it for that long, but I generally don't like the weird movement that OIS generates especially at long focal lengths, but this seems to be a little bit better than some of the others I've seen. If the 18-55 is as good as the 18-135 then it should be more than workable. 

@Kisaha A broken record player is not funny  

Good grief, your attitude is pathetic.
I've changed camera systems once since 2014 but then I don't use these cameras for work. The Fuji is my personal camera that I use for taking photos of the kids, travel etc. The video function is secondary. 
For work, we use Arri, Red, BM Ursa Mini Pro, F55 etc. And that's the thing, professionals and filmakers don't get all hung up on one system. Can you categorically say that you have produced better images than anyone using an XT2 because you had 240fps four years ago? 
It doesn't really matter which camera had 120fps first or that you might  have one that does 240fps. To XT-2 owners this is a great, free upgrade. All cameras are different. Does your 240fps camera have Fujifilm colour science? I'll take Fuji colour science and 120fps over something like Sonys or even Samsung's colour science and 240fps. I'll also take Fuji lenses over ANY Sony or Samsung lenses..... Either way though, who cares who did what first. Choose the tool that you like using. Why should anyone care that you had a camera that did 240fps last year if that's not a feature I'm interested or have the need in using. 
The sum of a camera is all if it's parts, not just one spec. 
I bet you can't wait for the NX2 so you can brag to us all how far ahead of its time it is.....tell me, when are Samsung releasing the NX2 ? 
Finally, if Sumsung land is so fantastic what are you doing in the Fuji Land thread anyway. You obviosly have nothing constructive to add. Did you really just come here to gloat? 

EOSHD: come for the camera discussion, stay for the suffocating toxicity 

Well the thread was originally meant to be a simple post that a new firmware was out and hopefully for people to discuss how good or flawed it is. But Kisaha just has to take any opportunity to gloat about his beloved camera. I see it in so many threads and its just getting annoying.

Getting very tired of reading this over and over and over

http://www.fujifilm.com/support/digital_cameras/software/firmware/x/xt2/index.html

Just upgrading now, looking forward to playing with 120fps!

No way, Nikon will absolutely have backwards compatibility with all existing F mount lenses. Nikon F mount has been around since the early 50s, and every F mount lens still mounts on modern day cameras (you might lose metering and stuff but the lens still works.) The only reason Nikon shooters (me included) haven't completely jumped ship is because of lenses -- if Nikon doesn't ship an F mount adaptor that works perfectly with their mirrorless system then they might as well give up now. Seriously, if you need/want FF mirrorless why wouldn't you go to Sony if you have to buy all your lenses again? 

I've already half moved to Fuji, so really if 2019 is how long I have to wait it makes the decision to sell all my Nikons and get a GFX that much easier...

No way, Nikon will absolutely have backwards compatibility with all existing F mount lenses. Nikon F mount has been around since the early 50s, and every F mount lens still mounts on modern day cameras (you might lose metering and stuff but the lens still works.) The only reason Nikon shooters (me included) haven't completely jumped ship is because of lenses -- if Nikon doesn't ship an F mount adaptor that works perfectly with their mirrorless system then they might as well give up now. Seriously, if you need/want FF mirrorless why wouldn't you go to Sony if you have to buy all your lenses again? 

I've already half moved to Fuji, so really if 2019 is how long I have to wait it makes the decision to sell all my Nikons and get a GFX that much easier...

Yeah I think almost anyone that shoots personal stuff & really wants to enjoy the process, adopts a style like this. So I wouldn't describe it as a "guerrilla style" cause it implies harsh conditions but more like a banal or casual style  
@jhnkng  Great colors at your site. Especially with your son and the 53years. 
@HockeyFan12 Just out of curiosity what forums are these? 

One of the most insightful non-technical things I've ever learnt is that you hire crew to make you look good. And if you're hired as crew, your job is to make the boss look good. That's it -- your technical specialty and how good you are at it is just the barrier to entry, your actual job is to make the producer/director/whoever-your-boss-is look like they know what they're doing by hiring you and not someone else. So as crew, if the client is around you should know better than to have your phone out on set. If it's urgent, let someone know and walk off set. I mean how does anyone make it as regular crew anywhere unless they have a sense for what's appropriate or not appropriate on set? And if you're a producer hiring people you can't trust to have that kind of sense, then you need to hire better people, full stop. The buck stops with the person holding the cash.
 
That's Shane Hurlbut, and Christian Bale spent quite a bit of time apologising for that outburst. Regardless of what crew did or didn't do, Bale's reaction was deeply unprofessional and has no place in any workplace.
 
 
**edit** Removed some unnecessary snark.

One of the most insightful non-technical things I've ever learnt is that you hire crew to make you look good. And if you're hired as crew, your job is to make the boss look good. That's it -- your technical specialty and how good you are at it is just the barrier to entry, your actual job is to make the producer/director/whoever-your-boss-is look like they know what they're doing by hiring you and not someone else. So as crew, if the client is around you should know better than to have your phone out on set. If it's urgent, let someone know and walk off set. I mean how does anyone make it as regular crew anywhere unless they have a sense for what's appropriate or not appropriate on set? And if you're a producer hiring people you can't trust to have that kind of sense, then you need to hire better people, full stop. The buck stops with the person holding the cash.
 
That's Shane Hurlbut, and Christian Bale spent quite a bit of time apologising for that outburst. Regardless of what crew did or didn't do, Bale's reaction was deeply unprofessional and has no place in any workplace.
 
 
**edit** Removed some unnecessary snark.

If you're hiring people who you can't trust to keep their phones from ruining takes, then you need to ask yourself why -- not to treat crew like school kids. If I've caught up on what I need to do and I'm ready to roll at a moments notice, but we're just waiting for one thing or another, I see no reason why I shouldn't check my email. Besides the fact that quick responses to emails gets you more work, I wouldn't work for a producer who can't trust me to know when I should look at my phone or not. 

Also, if you see the time you pay as "your time", then it's your responsibility to make sure that there is as little down time as possible. If you can't keep your crew occupied, then that's your fault, and it's frankly unreasonable to demand your crew not check in on the state of their own business when they have nothing else to do.

If you're hiring people who you can't trust to keep their phones from ruining takes, then you need to ask yourself why -- not to treat crew like school kids. If I've caught up on what I need to do and I'm ready to roll at a moments notice, but we're just waiting for one thing or another, I see no reason why I shouldn't check my email. Besides the fact that quick responses to emails gets you more work, I wouldn't work for a producer who can't trust me to know when I should look at my phone or not. 

Also, if you see the time you pay as "your time", then it's your responsibility to make sure that there is as little down time as possible. If you can't keep your crew occupied, then that's your fault, and it's frankly unreasonable to demand your crew not check in on the state of their own business when they have nothing else to do.

Not getting into the ins and outs of legal responsibilities, but this is such an edge case scenario -- he took it apart and broke it. If you knocked an iMac Pro off a table and took it back to Apple for paid repairs they wouldn't bat an eye (you might, once you see the parts bill!) If the roof of your office leaked water onto your iMac Pro you would be able to claim that on insurance (assuming you had the right insurance). There are just so few occasions where you would be refused insurance or repairs, I don't see how his specific circumstance can be translated across to anyone who doesn't take computers apart for a fun and profit.
As an aside, the SSD on my MacBook Pro failed after 2 years and 1 week, and Apple repaired it under warranty. I didn't have Apple Care on it, and I didn't have to fight for it -- the guy just ran diagnostics, saw the failure, booked in the service. So anecdotal evidence goes both ways.

Maybe Nikon should build a robot with enough AI to work out how to take mirrors out of their cameras

I see a lot of "why didn't they have this at release" or "with Fuji you're buying a half-baked camera" comments across all forums. That's complete bunk. The XT2 was a great camera when I bought it shortly after release. It is much better than the a6300 it replaced. It got a Dpreview Gold award, and lots of praise from other reviewers that weren't on Fuji's dime. Fuji is never going to be cutting edge - especially on the video side. They've addressed bugs in a timely manner. Even without the feature updates its still a great camera. The fact that we're getting stuff like continued AF improvements, 120p and focus stacking without having to buy a new body like Sony is a bonus.
Every camera I've owned in recent years had issues, including the Blackmagic Pocket, 5d2, 5d3, Samsung NX1, a7r2, a7s2 and XT2. Samsung fixed some of the problems and then abandoned the NX before sorting the obnoxious noise at 1600 and above. Blackmagic took too long to issue fixes so I sold it. Canon issued bug fixes and added 24p to the 5d2. Sony did a bug fix update on the a7's, but fixed everything else in the a7r3. Fuji has done the most, and its not close. You know damn well Sony could add PP's to the a9, improve the AF algorithms of all its cameras, or add features to its other cameras - but they do nothing except release new bodies. My a7r2 is now worth barely more than my XT2, despite costing twice as much. 
The continued refinement is one reason I'm in the Fuji camp. I buy what works for my needs, but its nice to have the camera get better over time.
Chris

Well, if you think of it like a smartphone, where the phone ships with one set of features and new features are added with new OS revisions, then you get a roughly comparable situation. When the X-T2 came out 120fps wasn't standard amongst cameras of its type, so they develop what they can in the time that they have and they put it on the market to make the profits to plow back into making it better. As the development process goes on for new models, new software/techniques/efficiencies are created, and the company is at a crossroads -- do you keep new features it for new models (as almost every other camera company does) or do you release it to existing devices (as a lot of smartphone companies do). Fuji is probably the most "honest" about what a camera is these days -- an imaging computer. Computers can be improved with software, and unlike Sony, they actually follow up with feature updates.