padam

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Did you miss out on all the news of the 4K 10bit output then raw video from the Nikon Z6??? Not sure how an EOSHD reader could be unaware of that 

 

Personally I see there is no chance whatsoever that the surely more expensive and possibly mythical (I have my doubts we'll see it in 2019) Sony a7Smk3 will have this 

 

I am aware of that, mentioned it in another thread, I just don't see it as such a useful feature for most of the users (yes the have announced it for their newer DSLRs, is that really useful?), rather than bragging about: oh yes, it does (or rather will) have this 'game-changing' feature and it 'completely owns' the competition. I am also aware that so far, the AF does not seem to work well with N-Log.

The sensor capabilities like 4k60p may be more important for the future for some, at least that's surely going to be the things the Sony users will start to brag about.

Using an external record costs a lot more money and also defeats the purpose of a small camera (the Z6 can also overheat with an external recorder if 10-bit output is selected, 8-bit is fine, is prores RAW going to be better)

Everyone trashes on the Panasonic size and that 10-bit 4:2:2 codec is a paid update (but it does have 10-bit 4:2:0 internal) and yet it was probably more thoughtfully designed for these kinds of uses from the get go.

While there is a huge enthusiatic crowd looking at potentially the ultimate photo/video camera ever since the 5DMk2 or earlier, it looks like there is always something that's just not right to the point where I start to think it is almost little bit like a dead end and it is better to have at least one device specifically focused on each purpose, at least anybody who has switched to something like a C200 says how much more liberating it is to use, despite its inherent limitations.

4 hours ago, Laser Blue said:

Hmmm. Z6 sidelined for video... I have a huge Pelican case of vintage and modern Nikon-F glass that begs to differ. And Minolta MD. And Exacta. I can mount virtually any lens I want. B4, PL... Any look I want in terms of contrast, flare, lack of flare, glass-cutting sharpness of Nikon S glass.

Having shot professionally with: Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, Nikon and Canon, I’m not a fanboy of any brand. In a gen-1 camera, Nikon gives us: Full-width 4K readout. IBIS. Nikon color. Most legacy F mount Nikon/Sigma AF glass 10-bit 4:2:2 and soon ProRes RAW HDMI out. Eye AF (in May.) Atomos development collaboration. Weather sealing. Good battery life. Nikon build quality. An excellent touch interface. Nikon menu structure and customization. XQD/CFExpress speed, capacity and reliability (May.) Robust low light recording. Good tracking AF in 1.0 firmware...

Canon gives us crazy expensive glass (again), crippled features and weird fn slidy bar thingy “innovation.”

Panasonic gives us questionable DFD CDAF. The S1 is cool, until your bitrate is too low and your AF hunts and breathes constantly. Hmmm.

Sony gives us little robotic squares that do the job in 8-bit 4:2:0 like Mr. Spock, with all the associated charm.

I’m really more of a Captain Kirk guy. Gets shit done with flair and style. Reliable. Fun at parties.

Nikon has no cinema line to “protect” by making their RF/EF bodies suck. Nikon is free to innovate. More so than Sony, Panasonic—maybe all save Fuji. Canon. Meh. Idiots. Nice color science. Still, idiots to me.

Maybe once Sigma makes native Z glass and a smart adapter. Maybe one for EF glass too. People will look at the future and see Canon continuing to fall behind as B/C cams to Cxxx bodies. Maybe Sony heads in the same direction to protect Cinema cams.

My money is on Nikon Z. Literally.

Again, this is just reading off a spec sheet, yes there are plenty of positive but only some things are definitely distorted here.

For instance, with the paid upgrade the internal codec of the S1 is definitely stronger (but XQD/CFExpress seems totally wasteful at this point, why not use it when it becomes less expensive and more useful, 1st gen adopters I guess...), and let's not ignore the cropped 4k60p either

With internal recording the Sony really isn't that much different (the Canon does have way less internal compression, also ignored) and they will offer more in their next camera.

And that's all just specs, actual impressions aren't as common, especially directly against competitors, and they can differ:

I can only say that I can't put it into words, but I see it similarly, the BMPCC4k is the other one besides Canon, which looks much less like video to me (but with less rolling shutter) and I also like the concept of EF glass(how many were produced, 130,140 million?), AF capable but also no silly electronic focusing, you attach it to your ND-filter RF-mount adapter, and you're done. Of course once has to pay more for a higher-end camera to unlock more of what this system is capable of, but in some aspects, there is actually more there as well(but definitely not everything, like FF video or raw recording)

2 hours ago, wind1414 said:

Yes padam, but not everyone needs the big video ecosystem -f.e. small / indie productions- and since Z has shortest flange distance you can adapt almost any FF / S35 lens. EOSHD is a lot about hybrid cameras for enthusiasts and semipros, right? So Nikon got very interesting in the last 2 years. By the way, professional i am more in the environment of ARRI, RED or Sony Venice- but for "private" tasks I am happy with Nikon (D850/Z6) for photography and video.

Yes of course, but in that case of adapting lenses, apart from a better HDMI and stabilization (although it is 3-axis only for non-Z-mount) out what does it acually offer in comparison to Sony and they will also release the the A7SIII in a few months, yes it will be pricey, but with even better focus on FF video, so no doubt it will get a lot of orders from existing A7SII or A7III users.
I can see why some people would choose Nikon in the same as they would choose a Panasonic, I just can't see any of them as a huge hit, when there are many more users with Rebel cameras hanging around taking videos, most of them might just stay within the brand.
Canon can simply put the M50 sensor in a 200D successor and it would probably still sell well.

6 minutes ago, Ivko Pivko said:

Canon R(I)P, good point and matches my feelings.

I'm sure they're trying to milk as much as they can but right now but it's the wrong strategy. With camera shipments dropping and computational photography still developing they're going to lose more customers.

Probably not, they are actually trying to convince new (amateur) or existing customers to step up to (or start with) FF.

It could become a lot more succesful than the EOS R.

Yes, the 4k is not really useable, but hey it is still an EOS and it shoots HD  

7 minutes ago, wind1414 said:

?

Nikon Z is underrated... It has a lot more to offer & curios about the coming firmware update and other z's like z5 or 9...  Imagine the shitstorm if Nikon had 4K crop!

It is not underrated, it is simply sidelined for video, because while it is much stronger on paper, it is not in an ecosystem that is being used extensively for video production - like Canon EF for that matter. The platform is not nearly as sturdy with lenses that were not designed for video and focus backwards. And maybe it is just me, but I don't think that the image looks that nice (maybe with heavy grading from raw it is completely different, but that's a whole different workflow).

I thought it wouldn't even come out with 4k video at all and pitching it completely as a stills camera, so they overdelivered ?

Just now, noplz said:

The optimist says Canon is milking every last bit of coin out of their old sensors to finance development of a new and modern sensor architecture to compete directly with Sony and Nikon.

The pessimist says Canon is milking every last coin out of their old sensors before they are finally forced to give up and move to Sony sensors just like everyone else.

That's BS, they have their own DPAF sensors and patented their own BSI (DPAF) sensors as well. And as I said earlier, they are not really behind, they can simply put whatever kind of sensor they want in their cameras to differentiate them.

Yes.

7 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

I personally like big bodies. But a hell of a nice LCD is a must have for anything above 2k. A mirrorless 1Dx mk2 with Clog and no crop in 4k will be a dream camera with 10 bit out.

It is unrealistic to expect no cropping at this stage, knowing how Canon works. Yes they are aware of customers' needs, but they don't necessarily pay full attention to it.

10-bit out and C-Log are a definite go, but in my opinion, they might actually increase the crop factor a bit further just to keep stills and video cameras separated, if for instance, they increase the megapixels to 24 on the 1DX Mark III and already put that into a mirrorless camera as well.

Well, at least it might not be 6k$ at launch, like the 1DX II

3 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

The body is outdated. I probably would not buy one even if I had the money. 

Well I think Canon will be sticking to the same formula, and the mirrorless equivalent is going to be big, too, but probably not as much. It may even use the same LP-E19 battery.

The S1 isn't particularly small either and yet the battery life isn't nearly as good, so there are pros and cons to each concept.

13 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Too bad the 1d body is heavy and outdated. But I guess if you're paying that much for a camera an external monitor isn't going to be a big issue

How can it be outdated (for video) if even without Canon Log, it still has the best looking image out of all the stills cameras?

2 minutes ago, Cliff Totten said:

Will Canon EVER figure out how to oversample a sensor, deBayer and downsample it to 4k? My God,...how long has Sony been doing their full pixel readout now? The GH5 (Sony IMX272) does a 5k full pixel readout too.

I guess Canon will need to buy Sony sensors to do this? Until then, Canon is still stuck in crude RGGB 1:1 deBayer land.

It makes no sense at all, even if heat is not a problem, the readout is already much slower on the sensor itself, it could break new records for jelloing.

 But the 1DX II sensor has a pretty decent readout, so it is not like that they are way behind in technology, you just have to pay much more for it or pay less and get an inferior sensor like this.

And you could say the same for "When Panasonic figures out AF, why the colors don't look nearly as good" etc. etc.

Maybe Canon is thinking: more drama -> more recognition -> more sales

Of the two, the EOS R simply looks much more appealing for photo/video with the feature set it offers, it just needs to come down in price. Maybe I haven't seen enough (and I hope that I am wrong), but it looks like the RP 1080p video is still only at the 6D II level.

As a compact stills camera though (or maybe as a backup manual focus 4k camera on sticks), its seems decently designed, and its price point seems to make Sony zealots a bit more anxious than usual

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7fQ9nD-bwQ

Interestingly, 1080p 60p in APS-C mode is downsampled from 4k so technically, the sensor is 4k60p capable in crop mode.

A9 with five stars without S-Log? Fanboys.

I think XEVC is something that they can use to sell their video cameras with, at least in the past it was a later, consumer variant, that made it into their smaller cameras (XAVC-S).

It will be interesting to see how the L-mount alliance will turn out.

If it turns out to be exciting, it could trigger m43 users once more. While m43 is anything but dead, it certainly won't be in the spotlight, which is a triggering effect on its own.

One only needs to look at the domestic price (it will be under 200k yen very soon, including 8% tax) to see how overpriced it is initially as usual.

The affiliate links are at full alert and YT is helping this camera and its particular set of features (mirrorless, 1080p FF, DPAF, flip-screen) in a big way.

I found a 1080p ISO comparison against the 6D II (which I already found to be quite good) and it seems to be at least half a stop better.

I found this review to be free of shilling (but the recommendation of skipping it for the next generation means another 2-3 years of waiting)

I wonder where they are going to price the next, 'entry-level' model (and how it will differ to the 6D II, no 4k and soft 1080p wouldn't be very nice in 2018 but maybe Canon can get away with anything), since this model will likely to drop in price by the time that will be presented.

Will Canon make an RF-mount XC-series camera for video to utilise the ND filter EF adapter? If something like that ever comes out, it might be unable to take still images though, something always remains limited. I think the 'Pro' series model will be much bigger and heavier, besides all the extra cost.

Looking at that A7III comparison, the EOS R looks rather good in HD overall, even with the softness.

On 10/28/2018 at 1:57 AM, TurboRat said:

Need some advice guys. Thinking of selling my Sony a6500 and a6300 gear since I only have the kit lens and Sigma 18-35+ Sigma MC-11 left for them. Went with GH5 and GH5s for video and now focused more on videography. Only have the Sonys because I have buddies who only use Sony and they give me gigs as a creative shooter / 2nd shooter just because we can easily match shots when grading. Now there are some photography and sports video gigs that I refuse because 1) I'm not confident with using the GH5 as a photography camera  2) Not confident with the focus with my Sony and 18-35 with the mc-11. I've been eyeing the A7III for some time now but not really sure about the cost vs business. What do you guys suggest? Sell my current Sony a6xx or stick with it and wait for the prices to go down? (Maybe when the A7Siii comes out ?)

The A7III is fairly cheap for what it is. But the cost of the lenses have to be factored in, in most cases you don't want to use adapters with AF-C.

4 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Canon have made their own bestsellers obsolete, which is probably why they put off doing this camera for so long in the first place. They didn't need to, as the previous obsolete cameras were still selling so well.

All is relative. In the end, if they manage to improve as much as expected towards the future, it might be the Sony system that can be considered as "obsolete", despite offering all the technology and features in the world, just not having the same "legacy" options for cheaper lenses. or the mount (adapter) and lens design for the "ultimate high-end" quality.

This first R model is a bit of everything but not enough of each particular part, at least at its current price, which I don't expect to drop, the promised firmware updates should keep it going for a while.

I am waiting for the cheaper model (around 1700$, maybe?) that will surely say goodbye to that touchbar, I wonder if they will leave 4k out as well or only the ALL-I codec and C-Log which are going to be left out.

The cheaper flip touch LCD seems fine for me. But, unfortunately I reckon the EVF will also be crippled down to M50 level, I wouldn't want that.

I think third top model will be the best for video, possibly 1DX II-like sensor with reduced rolling shutter, bigger battery and dual card slots, but it will cost a lot more, like 4000$ or more. I reckon that ND filter adapter will have its more serious uses for the future.

5 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

This is a bit like arguing over Mini DV tape has the best quality.

Mitch doesn't say what picture style settings he's using, so that video doesn't exactly help inform the World's Most Boring Debate, but if the 5D4 really is more detailed (as opposed to just more digitally sharpened) in the video above of bricks, then what little you are gaining is offset by the moire and aliasing - it seems to have more than the 5D3.

 

 

Again, it might be, but the initial assumption (no progress since the III) was still simply a misinformation, I would prefer not to waste time on trying to prove it wrong. That's like casually putting out that Canon dynamic range is as good as Sony or whatever.

In real world examples and also with Log, moiré is not going to be much of an issue, at least I haven't seen it.

I think for a lot of people 1080p is still relevant and of course it is the only option for FF coverage and the 4k rolling shutter is just very bad so there's that. As-is it seems not enough for the price, but going lower down it should be fine (for a Canon).

That may be, but the detail looks worse on the III in both examples...as well as this one.