PTRush

As someone who actually tested this in person. The a7s was only slightly worse than the Canon 6d I had on hand. While that's not amazing, it's far from a deal breaker. Sony reps said that the firmware was in the very early stages and that the rolling shutter would be better than the 5d mark III by the time it was released. They pointed specifically at 12mb sensor versus the 5d mark III's much larger sensor and total read times. 

I think Filmbrute is misunderstood here.
 
From what he wrote, I think he's saying that professionals are making great work on cameras that may not be the best... however they're pushed to their limits to achieve awesome results. Some hobbyists may never use features that cost thousands of dollars, yet complain bitterly how these camera are inadequate. Its a true irony that in no way is done to offend hobbyists. Most of the time the enthusiastic hobbyists become professionals, or at least produce work of a pro quality.
 
Its more of a comment on this materialist trend in consumerism to always have the best, regardless of whether its worth it, needed or even used at all. It becomes more an industry of appearances than actual artistry. This is evident by many clients who see the smaller gh2 or gh3 and assume that the filmmaker is not as pro as one who uses the 5D Mark ii. 
 
I don't think its anything to get too defensive about. If you test cars, travel or have a beautiful family, you have incredible inspiration for some amazing footage. However sometimes purchasing the best camera with all of the bells and whistles starts to become the inspiration, which is sad.

While that may be true, don't tar all amateurs with that brush - I love film making and yes, I make films about my kid, my dog and a tonne of other stuff you're not going to enjoy watching - but then, you're not the intended audience. When I make a movie about an incredible bridge I saw, just remember, when you sneer at it, you're sneering at my holiday album - I put it on vimeo so that I can share it with the other people who were on holiday with me by sharing a link. Do I rack focus, well actually I do, but do you make you family wait for golden hour to make sure your holiday snaps of bridges are "professional" quality?
 
I'm not a professional, I don't want to be and if you know you can make better than me by virtue of doing it for your living, that's just fine, but I'm a test driver for a living. I get to drive exotic cars every day of my life, fast around amazing roads. Is it fair of me to sneer at what car you drive, offer professional level "critique" when you need a second stab at parking straight, chortle at you in internet forums as you can't change a wheel in 30 seconds? I understand what it's like to be so good at something that you can make a living out of it while being surrounded by everyone else who can only just function, I really do, but I promise you, it's not necessary to be a bellend about it.

This shot looked zoomed in correct? Most CMOS sensors look like a Waffle House waitress's thigh when you whip them side to side like that zoomed in.

It appears that Sony shifted the neutral gray point within the useable DR range so that there was more room in highlights, and slightly less in shadow. This is not that good for still but for film it is wonderful as highlight roll off is key to making films seem fix as opposed to video like with blown highlights. This is because when a image goes by quickly we can seen blown highlights more than we see shadow detail. The is opposed to still pictures where we have the time to examine shadow detail, Therefore still cameras are tuned so that there is more DR below neutral gray, and true cinema cameras have more above neutral gray. This is why DSLRs are tuned to blow out highlights in order to preserve shadow, and why DSLR videos suffer. And videos from video cameras tuned the same way, as a video camera. While it seems that the DR of the RX10 has been tuned to make it more cinema like. Strong move SONY. I am shocked and thrilled.

Lmao. Never drink and blog man:)

Hello,
Thought I'd take a stab at it.  Just a grade in adobe camera raw.
Noise reduced and added. Sharpened a bit as well.
Comments?? 

lol I'm following you at the rate of a snail, but yes, we're getting there~!

Hey man. I totally understand that. The 5D Mark III is the perfect cinema camera in my opinion. It produces the best RAW images I've seen out of any camera. There is not question about that. I guess my point I was trying to make failed to resonate about the GH3. I've worked with RAW, Blackmagic, and RED, and for the price, the functionality, and lack of needed accessories - the GH3 holds up fairly well. 
 
But I guess I don't know what I'm talking about. I just create images that look like they had been molested by Trey Ratcliff. :P

oh man...
lets face it, the GH3 has no place next to raw out of any camera that we've seen to date. i'm not here to slam your grade either.
i'm not saying i don't see a niche for G cameras, they're great and cost effective.
i have shot with many cameras, and just had the opportunity to shoot with some Schneider-Kreuznach Xenon FF-Prime's on a C300. lovely image.
but for me, nothing comes close to the 5D3 for the cost. unbelievable image coming out of that camera. even if I had all the money in the world, i would still be looking through the Canon 5D3.

oh man...
lets face it, the GH3 has no place next to raw out of any camera that we've seen to date. i'm not here to slam your grade either.
i'm not saying i don't see a niche for G cameras, they're great and cost effective.
i have shot with many cameras, and just had the opportunity to shoot with some Schneider-Kreuznach Xenon FF-Prime's on a C300. lovely image.
but for me, nothing comes close to the 5D3 for the cost. unbelievable image coming out of that camera. even if I had all the money in the world, i would still be looking through the Canon 5D3.

This doesn't exactly give you the "cinematic" look.... It looks like a .jpg that's been molested by Trey Ratcliff in Photomatix.

this footage is actually quite nice. i was seeing some of the grades out there and they've looked atrocious. and some of the stuff i was hearing really had me going for a minute. 
for me, the camera seemed to grade just fine imo. and i bet could do very well with a few nodes in resolve. i was able to recoup highlights easily with tonalizer. and much sharper than most 5D3 stuff i've edited at the wide end of the lens anyway-
 
https://vimeo.com/71781899

Just so you all know, I just spent all day with a Canon rep yesterday who let us test a C100, C300, and the 1Dc (we also shot some 5D3, and mushy FS100 footage). He assured me that with the 5D firmware update this spring, we will have uncompressed video that is the EXACT same as the 1Dc in it's "super 35" cropped sensor mode. This was HUGE news to me. Also, from what I saw- The 1Dc even at 4K didn't hold up as well as the C100 with Sound Devices external recorder under controlled light. I'm definitely not poo pooing the 1Dc, but for my needs the C100 is the camera for me at that price.