squig

Makes sense Fuji not mentioning video, just an accidental market for them, a lot of photographers shooting video now however. Don't think 1080p raw is doable on that sensor without a huge crop though.

at 50 megapixels I bet the rolling shutter would be awesome too

Not photo IQ, just IQ. There's a photo icon too. A 4k video crop down to something like APS-H would be perfect.

RAW RECORDING UNCOMPRESSED

There's more to the IQ equation than just pixels. You have to factor in post processing; a compressed 8bit 4:2:2 image doesn't hold up as well as a 14bit raw image when it's denoised and graded. I see an IQ hit when I debayer raw files to 10bit ProRes4444; uncompressed 10bit RGB files look a lot better. Everybody's needs and expectations differ; I'm making features for theatrical release where a digital negative is the gold standard (after film of course). CF cards can and do fail on every camera. I use 64Mb Lexars and Toshibas, I've never had one fail on me, but if one does the most I'll lose is 15min.

1Dc MJPEG files are about the same size as 5D Mk3 raw 2.39:1 1080p files (62MB/s); even at full 1080p it's only around a 30% increase in disk space to shoot raw.

The noise difference against the D5500 at 6400 ISO is huge.

8bit and 25ms rolling shutter is no upgrade. If you need 4k delivery the Fujifilm X-T2 has really good color; the 4k rolling shutter is still high though. The A7s was a real disappointment vs the 5D MkIII, the A7sII has better color but it's still not even close to the 5D.

I've been doing some grading tests with X-T2 stuff I've found online; the DR is very good, with Flog it may even equal the 5D Mk3 raw, ie more graded DR than the BMMCC and the A7s. It's looking like the X-T2 is everything I was hoping the A7s would be. Have you done any black dot tests?

Yeah 1080p looks about as detailed as the A7s, except there's some aliasing. Not as detailed as the 5D Mk3 raw, but good enough for behind the scenes footage, the kind of stuff I don't have time to grade. I noticed there's some control over the shadow level.

Surely somebody can spare a couple of minutes to test the rolling shutter. I want to sell my A7s and get an X-T2 for stills and BTS video, but the rolling shutter is a concern. I know the 4k rolling shutter is high, but without an accurate test it could be anywhere between 25 and 40ms, and I have no idea how high the 1080p rolling shutter is. The OIS works well on the 18-55mm, no rolling shutter micro jitters like I've seen with longer lenses. Autofocus is nowhere near as smooth as Canon's DPAF, but maybe there's a control to slow it down a bit.

Without Magic Lantern it looks like a turd with a lens mount to me.

We can get some accurate rolling shutter figures if somebody can do a quick test and upload the footage for Samuel http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?303559-Measuring-rolling-shutter-put-a-number-on-this-issue! You can send me a link and I can pass it on to Samuel. A 1080p test would be good too. I've done these tests myself, only takes a couple of minutes, you just need a perfectly levelled tripod. I shot the edge of a tall black bookshelf beside a white wall. Thin things like poles don't work, they turn to mush when you do the whip pan.

With a <13ms rolling shutter, or ideally: a global shutter with 13+ stop DR. I wish they wouldn't, but I suspect BM will drop the sub 4k sensors.

I particularly like the bit where he bullshits about bullshit.

"Let's be honest" the guy is either full of shit or he's clueless. "Basically it's down to the codec". 1Dc? The C100 & C300 have even crappier codecs!

Epic fail Canon Romania. Could they make the model's skin any more muppet like? The micro jitters on the NYC clip made me feel physically ill. Gotta be at least 30ms rolling shutter.

The HD25s and the DT250s are old school, for sound quality you can't go wrong with either. The main difference (besides the cord) is the HD25 sits on your ear whereas the DT250 encapsulates your ear (smallish muffs). I used the HD25s in a club for 2 years back in the day, they were great.

I'm using an NTG3, much cheaper in Aus than the 416 and a bit more directional. Be warned the DT250s do have a spiral cord, but they are more comfortable than the HD25s. I recommend you go to a store and try both plus some Audio Technicas. Yeah luv the velour pads, fuck plastic. The DT250s have rich bottom end, way more than the ATs I replaced them with, but they're not muddy or fatiguing. The extra bass of the HD25s is good in a club, but I chose the DT250s for a more accurate sound in the studio and for location work. Heard good things about the 7xx series too. Sold my $3000 Mackies for a pair of Beyerdynamic Truths too.

My experience is you have to spend quite a bit more on the other brands to match the quality of the Beyerdynamics. I replaced a more expensive pair of Audio Technicas with the DT250s, and the DT250s blew the ATs away. The HD25s sound good, but I don't think the design (small ear muffs) gives enough isolation for location recording. DT250 cords and ear pads are replaceable too.

Beyerdynamic DT250s (80 ohm) are the best option for the money. I consider the HD25s more of a DJ headphone (I was a DJ/Producer for 15 years) a little bass heavy, and a bit prone to leakage. I've used HD25s, Sony, and Audio Technica headphones, but I prefer the DT250s for film work, as do many sound recordists.

If the F4 preamps are comparable to Sound Devices it's as good price. I use a Sound Devices MixPre-D as a front end for a Sony PCM D50.

Resolution looks about the same as the 5D MkIII, only with added aliasing https://***URL removed***/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr29_0=canon_eos80d&attr29_1=canon_eos5dmkiii&attr72_0=1080&attr72_1=1080&normalization=full&widget=341&x=-0.09620991&y=0.295104682. I've only shot with raw 3x crop on the 5D, the downside is the crop accentuates the noise.