Jump to content

JR Lipartito

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About JR Lipartito

Recent Profile Visitors

2,078 profile views

JR Lipartito's Achievements


Member (2/5)



  1. I do love the idea of a ninja star-like device, but the one big caveat is not being able to playback any shots without unplugging the media and connecting to a computer. I think that’s why monitor/recorders took over the external recording market. Now if it could wirelessly connect to a phone or tablet for playback...THAT would be a dream recorder.
  2. at fairly equal compression I think you’d be hard pressed to find much difference in quality between BRAW and Prores Raw. BRAW’s advantage is having several lower-bitrate options, with the lowest 12:1 @4K compression lightweight enough to be recorded to fast SD cards. Some people might have got higher modes to work with certain cards too. And 12:1 still holds up very well to post-production abuse, even chroma key. The real problem for BRAW though, are the BM Video Assists themselves. To the built-in SD card slots you’ll only be able to record that lowest bit rate option (as far as I know). For anything better you’ll have to connect an SSD to the Video Assist over USB c...that’s just one too many points of contact where things can go wrong. So I wouldn’t get too excited about this update until BM puts out a View Assist with better internal recording media.
  3. Don't forget raw, 6K, EVF, weather sealing, and the ability to toggle between Full-frame and APS-C at the push of a button rather than needing to swap out an adapter...overall I think the S1H speaks to different needs so it can still effectively compete with both the c70 and a7s III. In fact the only other camera that can offer all of the above features is Panasonic's own S5 (not going to count the R5 because it's such a mess...) The one extra thing I think Panasonic should have done to make the S1H a true "video-first" hybrid would be to replace the mechanical shutter with an ND filter. Hopefully enough people are asking for that and they'll deliver for the S1H mark II. Unlike Canon and Sony, Panasonic seems to listen to user feedback! Also there was a wild rumor some time ago that Panasonic was developing an "S1V" which would basically be a Sony A7S III-alike with a 12mp sensor and 4K 120fps. What is interesting though is that this rumor preceded any leaks of the a7S III specs, so now I really wonder if it may have had some substance... But on the other hand, Panasonic might be happy enough with their resolution advantage for now.
  4. Problem is the c70 didn't come out last year, and this is the year when raw quietly became a standard feature on professional hybrid cameras. So for a new camera to be announced as a bridge between hybrids and cinema cameras, and at a price point higher than many raw-shooting hybrids, one of which Canon actually makes (flawed as it is), raw is a glaring omission.
  5. This. There are a lot of users who benefit from raw, but Canon doesn't want YOU to buy a c70. What I hate about Canon is not that they segment their cameras, but they aggressively segment their users as well. "Here's the perfect run-and-gun camera equipped with our top-of-the-line sensor, but if you want raw, you should settle for the beefier C200 with an inferior sensor, or hey, if you want the best of both worlds, you can have the C300 mkIII for twice as much, but it's a big boi, so you'll probably still need a c70 for those gimbal shots, just not in raw." I find that kind of artificial segmentation which limits use-case very distasteful. Like Panasonic with the S1H and S5, they should pack every new camera with every technology it is capable of and let the users decide which one suits their needs. IMO if 90% of the C300 mkiii's features can be offered on the c70 at half the price, then raw doesn't cut it as the differentiating factor worth the extra 5 grand. Moving forward the focus on the C300 should be it's physical features like SDI and expandability through other modules for professional studio work. Is that really worth twice the cost? Let the market decide.
  6. Wouldn't it be just like Canon for this camera to have the DGO sensor and all the great 10 bit codecs but no raw, while the C50 gets internal raw, but with the old C200 sensor and no 10bit codecs? 😅
  7. I really hope it gets the anamorphic support from the C300 mkIII.
  8. What impresses me the most is how 5.9K ProRes RAW cuts like butter on my 2013 Mac Pro! All the 10bit internal codecs required transcoding, so please excuse the cliche, but this is a game changer. I don't have to upgrade my editing rig as long as this reliable little trashcan keeps sputtering along.
  9. Well there ya go. Maybe it will take Canon another ten years to get from “finally taking video seriously” to “able to deliver a usable product”...
  10. They could have made the R6 the video flagship with internal 5.5K raw (Like the 1DX mkIII) and marketed the R5 primarily as a stills camera that happens to be capable of short clips at 8K raw—more for frame grabs than making movies. If that were 8K’s purpose then the heat would be a non-issue and they could still keep the 8K badge on the box. Filmmakers would flock to the R6 in droves, and I’m sure a few would also pick up the R5 for the better stills and occasional 8K beauty shot. The R6 would have been a major threat to threat to the S1H and whatever the A7SIII works out to be. But Canon doesn’t think in that big picture kind of way. They just want to set the entry point for raw video at >$4,000, whether or not it actually works.
  11. Isn't internal/external recording more an issue with Prores Raw licensing than with the camera's ability to do so or not? Not sure if this has been officially stated anywhere but I highly suspect the reason Panasonic made a partnership with Atomos was because the latter carries the license burden. So I would imaging Fujifilm taking a similar approach or else it might have to be a paid upgrade to offset the cost of licensing. Canon, on the other hand, is able to offer internal raw on the R5 so matter-of-factly because they have their own Cinema Raw codecs.
  12. I read your article right before a Zoom meeting so I gave it a go and it connected just fine, but there are some caveats which I imagine may apply to other clients like Twitch as well. First the autofocus is quite atrocious and that alone limits its use as a webcam, probably for most people. With the 45mm Art it really struggled to track my face and I can't always be close enough to adjust it manually. Also once connected all the camera settings are locked. You have to disconnect the USB to change anything. On the 45mm I could at least change the aperture and toggle AF/MF using the lens controls so hopefully the lock on the camera side can be removed in a firmware update. My take on it is it's great in terms of plug&play--if nothing else then as a proof of concept, but not quite there yet in overall user experience.
  13. Same as X-T3 +240fps @3minutes.
  14. I seem to remember Fuji reps always sidestepping the H=Hybrid question and saying that it actually meant "High Performance". Then they would always bring up what a good match the body was for bigger telephoto lenses and sports shooting with its boost mode. So I wouldn't really expect an X-H2 to be all about the video specs. But yeah, I get the frustration, it was their first really serious hybrid camera until the X-T3 came along and stole it's thunder. But it would add insult to injury if the X-H2 were just an X-T3 with better ergonomics and IBIS, only to be upstaged again by a later X-T4 with IBIS and X-Trans 5 sensor. The X-H line should be the one that debuts their new sensors from now on.
  15. Problem is the XH line is primarily aimed at professional stills photographers like sports shooters, hence the improved ergonomics over the XT line. What you're describing would be a different product line altogether--and while I want them to make that cinema camera too, it's just not what I think the X-H2 will ever be.
  • Create New...