Lars Steenhoff

A monitor causes extra moire effects because of the pixel grid

Ffordes have got a few.
This one described as being "ALMOST AS NEW" for £239
https://www.ffordes.com/p/SH-18-016844/lenses-contax-slr/28-70mm-f35-45-mm
 

In practice, you can switch forth and back between full frame 4K raw and APS-C 4K raw video recording without great image quality penalty. (The difference in noise and resolution is IMHO invisible if you master in 1080p). And you can put the full frame vs. APS-C crop switch on the camera's quick access menu.
That effectively turns any prime lens into a dual-focal length lens - or virtual dual lens turret. Often, this makes a zoom lens unnecessary in the field.
It's a neat (and often overlooked) little feature of the camera.

I am very interested in the new L mount Sigma lenses, that's the newly designed 24-70mm F2.8 in the Japanese video. Will definitely try and pick up one of those when it's available in the UK!

Well, seems this time Snoppa fights back when DJI did the same with their precedent Atom gimbal...
Here's a few footage taken from their revenge now:
 

Thanks for the slim raw update, @cpc 

As promised, the Sigma fp centered release of slimRAW is now out, so make sure to update. SlimRAW now works around Resolve's lack of affection for 8-bit compressed CinemaDNG, and slimRAW compressed Sigma fp CinemaDNG will work in Premiere even though the uncompressed originals don't.
There is also another peculiar use: even though Sigma fp raw stills are compressed, you can still (losslessly) shrink them significantly through slimRAW. It discards the huge embedded previews and re-compresses the raw data, shaving off around 30% of the original size. (Of course, don't do this if you want the embedded previews.)

Thanks for Clarifying officially!
If you actually do this then the settings are Color Space: Blackmagic Design, Gamma: Blackmagic Design Film. The gamma curve brings all the range in and the colourspace is BMD.
What does that actually mean though, you say that it won't touch gamut?
To try and understand i use the CIE diagram scope. And setting the DNG to P3 vs BMD Film 1 (in a P3 timeline) i see the first two diagrams. First is BMD Film into a P3 Timeline and the second is debayering P3 into a P3 timeline.
Now this is basically a point of confusion in Resolve for me - to understand what resolve is actually doing in this case. A saturated Red in sensor space in the DNG is transformed into 709/P3/BMD Film - but is that saturated Red actually mapped into the target space or is it placed at the right point. I cannot work it out. So for example if that sensor Red is outside of 709 space then IMHO Resolve could either clip the values or remap them. But if you switched to P3 and that Red lay within it then no mapping has to happen.
But on the CIE diagram i do not see this. I would expect to switch between 709 and P3 and the colours inside the triangles not move. In other words in a sufficiently large colourspace on that CIE diagram i ought to be able to see what the camera space is (ish).
So when i do this and choose BMD Film and set the timeline to that as well i get the 3rd diagram - which is beyond visible colours
so i have to assume i just don't understand what Resolve is doing here or that CIE diagram is not working?
Any light shed (pun intended) would be super nice!
cheers
Paul
 

Okay, made another test with the setup you proposed:
Pocket 4K with 0.64x Metabones Speed Booster & Tokina 28-70mm/2.8 at 50mm and f2.8 [=actually at 32mm + f1.8], with camera exposed at ISO 128,000 versus the Sigma fp with the conventionally adapted, non-speedboosted Tokina 28-70mm/2.8 at 70mm and f2.8 and ISO 256,000 Images:

Pocket 4K BRAW (= with some in-camera noise reduction), ISO 128,000 + 0.64x Speed Booster

Pocket 4K DNG, ISO 128,000 + 0.64x Speed Booster

Sigma fp CinemaDNG, ISO 256,000
1:1 crops:

Pocket 4K BRAW  (= with some in-camera noise reduction), ISO 128,000 + 0.64x Speed Booster

Pocket 4K DNG, ISO 128,000 + 0.64x Speed Booster

Sigma CinemaDNG, ISO 256,000
 
The result is pretty much as to be expected, with the speedboosted Pocket 4K vs. the Sigma fp performing more like an APS-C camera vs. a full frame camera in low light with high ISO. As soon you expose on native ISO (without pushing gain), you however will back to MFT vs. full frame sensor performance in regards to noise levels.

I made a series of exposures, by gradually opening the shutter and thus exposing beyond the clipping point indicated by the zebras.
So far, the zebras both on the Pocket 4K and the Sigma fp have been 100% reliable indicators of clipping. (At least with white light where RGB clipping is uniform.) Whenever zebras became visible on the camera display, I ended up having clipped waveforms in Resolve.
(Of course, "highlight reconstruction" needs to be switched off in Resolve in order to see sensor clipping.)
 

Here's another dynamic range shootout between the Sigma fp and the Pocket 4K, this time with the LED fresnel at full power to create maximum contrast and a hard shadow, and an X-Rite Color Chart Pocket Video in the shadow to have a better indicator of shadow dynamic range. 
Cameras were set to 11.2 degrees shutter, ISO 100 (Sigma fp) respectively ISO 400 (Pocket 4K). With this harsh light, I needed to set the Pocket 4K to f5.6 for ETTR exposure (i.e. exposure just below the clipping point) while the Sigma fp clipped at f5.6 and needed to be stopped down to f8 for correct ETTR exposure. (This is an indicator for camera's native ISO being 800 in log. In other words, the Sigma fp is about one stop more light sensitive at ISO 100 than the Pocket 4K at ISO 400.)
This resulted in the following pictures, with DCI-P3 color space + Rec709 gamma interpretation in Resolve and Color Temp/Tint and exposure sliders adjusted to have the two camera images visually match:

Sigma fp

Pocket 4K
 
And extreme lift of the shadows with the following curve...

...reveals the following:
 

Sigma fp

Pocket 4K
1:1 crops of the upper left color patches:
 
Sigma fp

Pocket 4K

I'd say that on the Sigma fp, three of the dark grey color patches can still be differentiated whereas on the Pocket 4K, they are undifferentiated. Since I don't have a precise-enough meter to measure the difference of the reflected light, I'd say in a completely unscientific way that the fp has probably one stop more dynamic range in the shadows when the picture is exposed ETTR.
It also seems as if in the extreme shadows, the temporal noise filter of the Pocket 4K's BRAW really kicks in, since single pixels on the fp's CinemaDNG are clearly differentiated whereas on the Pocket 4K's image, they are blurred. (This is why in this scenario/grade, the Pocket 4K's image is [surprisingly] less noisy than the fp's.)  - EDIT: indeed, if you compare it to the DNG still from the Pocket 4K where BRAW's processing isn't applied:

 
- This time, I created a complete zip archive (91 MB) with one frame of the Sigma fp's CinemaDNG recording, the Pocket 4K's original BRAW file (consisting of just 3 frames) + a DNG shot with the Pocket 4K, plus the full-resolution UHD 16bit tiff of all above images: 
 
 

Sure, here are 4 single DNG frames (35 MB zip archive) shot with both cameras in the two different light setups. The two DNGs of the Sigma fp were taken from the CinemaDNG folder, the two DNGs of the Blackmagic RAW were shot with the still function of the camera directly after shooting BRAW, with the same camera settings. (The BRAW files are too big to share here.)
To better judge tonality and dynamic range, I applied another 'extreme grade' solarisation curve which, this time, doesn't clip parts of the image and also compresses the dynamic range a bit so that highlight and shadow rendition become better visible:




Sigma fp

Pocket 4K
Full-resolution, 16bit TIFFs can be downloaded here (48 MB zip archive).
 
Highlight rendition is pretty identical with both cameras since they were both exposed to the right. So any difference in dynamic range should be visible in the shadows. A good indicator are the color gradations and red stripe on the lamp in the foreground that (still) can be seen in the low-light, low-contrast image:


In the high contrast light, neither the Sigma fp nor the Pocket 4K render these details anymore, but turn the lamp into one dark monchrome blob (with more image noise in the case of the Pocket 4K). So I think it's fair to say that both cameras have about the same dynamic range at optimal ISO settings, only that the Sigma fp renders smoother color gradations because of its lower sensor noise, as visible in the extreme grade above.

 

Looks good! 

So i said i'd post some stills, these are basically ungraded.
This frame is in a sequence with car lights, i like the tonality of this very subdued moment. Shot 12bit to manage shadow tonality.

From a different point above. All shot on a 50mm M Summicron probably wide open.

I think i hit the saturation slider here in Resolve. But this had car rolling over camera. It's a 21mm CV lens and i see some CA aberrations from the lens that i would deal with in post. But i'd never let a car run over a Red!

shot on an 85mm APO off a monopod. Nice tonality again and it's day light from windows with some small panel lights bouncing and filling in

A reverse of the above.

Some fun shots.
I think the true benefit of something like the fp is the speed at which you can see something and grab it. Using it just with an SSD plugged in and manual M lenses gives a more spontaneous feel. Now most of the film will be shot on Red, in controlled conditions with a crew and that's the right approach for multiple dialogue scenes and careful blocking. But the fp has it's place and i may hand it too someone and just say grab stuff.

 
cheers
Paul

I just import with blackmagic film in resolve and try to get it look good from there. works well enough for me.

Been away over the break and also shot a bunch of scenes for a longer form thing whilst at it, i'll post some frames later but now i've spent quite a bit of time with the sigma.
I'm liking it more as a stills now, i left a summicron 50mm on it mostly and that combination is lovely - the leica is better on it than the A7s - perhaps the lack of OLPF and filter stack has something to do with that. It's the perfect camera for M mount lenses for sure. I brought a limited lens set with me, just what i needed for shots - 21mm voightlander, 50mm summicron and 85mm APO HyperPrime. The 85 is an insanely good 85mm, one of the best i've used and the sigmafp works well, resolves everything the lens sees no problem.
In terms of footage i shot some MOS as 23.98 to get 12 bit, sped up to 25 in Resolve is usually not noticeable and i'm working with snow at times - so range with sun and everything is tough. The rest was 10 bit with sync audio. I shot some plates for vfx elements as well. I even ran the camera with a car going over it.
Overall it performed really well. The 12 bit cine vs 14 bit still is nigh unnoticeable and 10 bit is great so long as you don't push the shadows up too much.
I want to do a dynamic range test - i have a step wedge around here somewhere. I feel the range is the same as the a7sII which is also a 14 bit RAW container. I suspect the range is pretty much the same as all the current sensors like this and in fact 12 bit in cine mode seems very very common too.
Issues:
Well, i find myself hanging the SSD off a cable sometimes - when moving fast and rigging it's easier to leave it dangle and that's probably bad.
My screen exposure seems to change and flicker (in terms of the brightness of the LCD itself)
A RAW exposure tool is really vital IMHO
But shooting RAW is so damn simple, as filming should be. Just nail exposure and you're good to go.
I read in Film & Digital times that sigma themselves recommend interpreting this as Blackmagic Film - i think that's nuts - what does everyone else feel?
 
cheers
Paul

No I did not have any problems with dynamic range
And make sure you set the bit depth to 14 for stills and 12 for cinema if you want to get the max out the camera.
This is a frame from a 12 bit cdng graded in photoshop. its shot trough a window and with a 30 year old lens.
 

It does honor settings, and it is most useful when pointed at various parts of the scene to get a reading off different zones without changing exposure, pretty much the same as you'd use a traditional spot meter. The main difference is that the digital meter doesn't have (and need) a notion of mid grey: you get directly the average (raw) value of the spot region, while a traditional spot meter is always mid grey referenced. You can certainly use a light meter very successfully while shooting raw (I always have one on me), but the digital spotmeter gives you a spot reading directly off the sensor which is very convenient, cause you see what is being recorded. Since you'd normally aim to overexpose for dense skin when shooting raw, seeing the actual values is even more useful.
Originally, the ML spotmeter was only showing tone mapped values, but they could also be used for raw exposure once you knew the (approximate) mapping. Of course, showing either the linear raw values or EV below the clip point is optimal for raw.

Nikon 50-300 ED ais f4.5
Its my favorite zoom lens, nice manual focus ring and on the sigma I have two lenses at apc, it becomes a 75- 450mm
( this was shot at apc )
Only downside is the minimum focus distance that is a bit far

Well, it should be quite obvious that this camera is at its best (video) in 12-bit. The 8-bit image is probably derived from the 12-bit image anyway, so it can't be better than that.
I think any raw camera should utilize a digital spotmeter similar to Magic Lantern's. This is really the most simple to implement exposure tool and possibly the only thing one needs for consistent exposure. I don't need zebras, I don't need raw histograms, I don't need false color. It baffles me that ML had it 7+ years ago and it isn't ubiquitous yet. I mean, just steal the damn thing.

No I did not have any problems with dynamic range
And make sure you set the bit depth to 14 for stills and 12 for cinema if you want to get the max out the camera.
This is a frame from a 12 bit cdng graded in photoshop. its shot trough a window and with a 30 year old lens.
 

No I did not have any problems with dynamic range
And make sure you set the bit depth to 14 for stills and 12 for cinema if you want to get the max out the camera.
This is a frame from a 12 bit cdng graded in photoshop. its shot trough a window and with a 30 year old lens.
 

Nikon 50-300 ED ais f4.5
Its my favorite zoom lens, nice manual focus ring and on the sigma I have two lenses at apc, it becomes a 75- 450mm
( this was shot at apc )
Only downside is the minimum focus distance that is a bit far