IronFilm

SAVED! Dpreview now acquired by GearPatrol. Will continue business as usual!
 
https://www.dpreview.com/site-news/8298318614/dpreview-com-looks-forward-to-a-new-chapter-with-gear-patrol 

SAVED! Dpreview now acquired by GearPatrol. Will continue business as usual!
 
https://www.dpreview.com/site-news/8298318614/dpreview-com-looks-forward-to-a-new-chapter-with-gear-patrol 

SAVED! Dpreview now acquired by GearPatrol. Will continue business as usual!
 
https://www.dpreview.com/site-news/8298318614/dpreview-com-looks-forward-to-a-new-chapter-with-gear-patrol 

My Connect and AtomX Cast bundle has shown up so I'm going to have a play with it over the next couple of days with a couple of Zoom products.
It only supporting two BLE devices (via a new firmware update no less!) is a bit of a nonsense though.
If they are going to move forward with it then they could definitely do with a new version of either the Blue or the One that has both BLE and LTC and I'm also hoping Atomos can persuade the likes of Panasonic to add support for the BLE timecode into their cameras as Nikon have done.

From John Brawley:
"No. Canon, like Sony won't license their mount. It's an open secret that Red did an IP swap for the ability to use RF mount on some of their cameras and in exchange, Canon can make their own internal raw codec that can be used in-camera.

It's easy to test the theory. Name a single camera (not lens) with E mount that isn't made by Sony? Same for Canon with RF (excluding Red)?"
https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=173840&start=450#p956719 

Also from that thread, a nice mod of the Blackmagic Pocket:
https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=173840&sid=d607770c079289f57c9615ae7e34fa1c&start=500#p957558 

From John Brawley:
"No. Canon, like Sony won't license their mount. It's an open secret that Red did an IP swap for the ability to use RF mount on some of their cameras and in exchange, Canon can make their own internal raw codec that can be used in-camera.

It's easy to test the theory. Name a single camera (not lens) with E mount that isn't made by Sony? Same for Canon with RF (excluding Red)?"
https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=173840&start=450#p956719 

Either Tentacle Sync E or Deity TC1 is what I'd recommend buying into. 
But honestly, any good secondhand deal you see online is fine to jump onto. 

From John Brawley:
"No. Canon, like Sony won't license their mount. It's an open secret that Red did an IP swap for the ability to use RF mount on some of their cameras and in exchange, Canon can make their own internal raw codec that can be used in-camera.

It's easy to test the theory. Name a single camera (not lens) with E mount that isn't made by Sony? Same for Canon with RF (excluding Red)?"
https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=173840&start=450#p956719 

Was very worried when he typed in "pearl necklace" 

By the way there is a long thread on BM forums on the subject started in January this year. Last post from John Brawley explains in details why Blackmagic would not go or even cannot go with Sony E mount. Previous posts from him explain what L mount alliance is and how it differs from m43 one, why developing FF camera using EF mount doesn't make sense for BM, etc. He basically makes the same argument in details that L mount is the one that makes sense for BM. Worth reading for those who are interested:
https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=173840&start=450
John Brawley of course is not BM but he has a good relationship with the company. I doubt he knows something from inside but his argumentation IMHO is solid

They already are with the Ronin 4D that now can be had in L Mount but is limited to 5 Panny and 2 Sigma lenses.
Intriguing camera actually and surprised it’s not discussed more than it is…

I guess if I look at it from the perspective of BM then perhaps it makes slightly more sense.  BM has made cameras with S16 and MFT sensors and they used the MFT mount, and they made cameras with S35 sensors and used the EF mount.  Assuming they then wanted to make a FF camera, what mount would they choose?
EF mount
They have used it before, and their users already have lenses that use it, but the crop factor would change between the S35 and FF sensors, and the EF mount has pretty much been abandoned by Canon, so maybe BM want something that's still in active support RF mount
Canon have been quite restrictive with third-party use of the mount, so maybe Canon is blocking BM from licensing it, or maybe it's prohibitively expensive, or maybe the flange distance is too little for things like internal NDs PL mount
Seems like a logical choice with lots of existing lenses and support from other manufacturers, but maybe it's a step too far for their existing customer base, or maybe they want AF support (does PL support AF?) Nikon mounts
Not a lot of cine lenses for Nikon I wouldn't have thought, focus direction is the other way to EF lenses, which might be troublesome to their existing customers Fujifilm X-mount
No AF lenses available that cover FF and only 5 third-party lenses that do (on B&H) MFT mount
Wouldn't cover FF sensor Sony
A logical choice, but like Canon RF, Sony might not want to help BM compete with their cine-cameras so might be charging a lot for the license or might be refusing outright From this perspective I think L-mount makes more sense, and sort-of aligns with their previous use of MFT and EF mounts, which were both "semi-open" systems with lots of existing glass from original and third-parties.

Out of all the mirrorless mounts it makes the most sense that they'd go with the L-mount due to its open nature. There aren't really many alternatives. 

After my close friend decided to upgrade to the Lumix S5 II X he gave me an incredible deal on his Lumix S5 that I couldn't pass up. As a result I just finished packing up my trusty GH5, 12-35mm mk II, 35-100mm mk I, 25mm, and 14mm to ship off to MPB. For the first time in nearly a decade I will no longer have any M43 cameras or lenses. I think my time in the system has finally come to an (unplanned) end. 😞
I'm feeling some kind of way about it right now, honestly. I still believe in the promise of M43, I just don't know that Panasonic will ever realize it or if the market will ever be there to make it viable. It's a damn shame, honestly. I'll be happy with my full frame cameras, and having three of the same bodies will make things a bit easier for me, but I still can't help but wish there was a professional level compact M43 camera that could fit my needs and fit in with my two S5 bodies. I just don't see it happening. 
I had planned to always have at least one M43 camera in my kit. Eventually I was going to upgrade to the GH6 in a couple years, once they were even more affordable on the used market, but I couldn't pass on another S5 with kit lens for $750, so plans changed. It just didn't make sense to keep the GH5 and follow through with my original plans anymore, as these three S5 bodies will get me through until I can snag some S5 II bodies in a couple years when people upgrade to the latest camera.
The GH5 was a total game changer for me and my work. I'm sad to see it go, because in many ways it did things that I never thought a camera would be able to do. It really cannot be overstated how much the IBIS changed things for people like me. I no longer had to set up a cumbersome shoulder rig, I could simply hold it and get steady shots even as I rushed around a wrestling ring and dodged people flying all over the place! Life goes on though, I guess.
 

Now is the time to buy a couch, just so that when he's homeless he's got somewhere to sleep....

Yet another reason to worship at the House of Nikon! ;-) 

Long may our Nikkor Overlords Rule. 
Maybe because the D850 is secretly a small medium format camera? :-P
 

A friend is currently writing an AI trading bot. 
(one of zillions of such people trying to do this I am sure) 

Didn't you know headphones only exist in 2023 as a fashion statement for you to wear? 
  
I see tonnes of youtubers/tiktokkers using their phone as an interview mic, to be synced with later on. 

A friend is currently writing an AI trading bot. 
(one of zillions of such people trying to do this I am sure) 

I'd say that's because vloggers don't want to vlog while wearing headphones, but.....

yeah to be fair firefly wont let you use the name of anyone in the public eye as far as i know... 
i love all this new ai stuff tho, several good twitter account to follow for updates if any of u guys are into that
generative fill in photoshop is gonna be awesome... but imagine when we have tools like this in AE, or premiere...!
in a few years ai will completely change the vfx industry

AI video just keeps on getting better and better:
 
The video to video feature is especially interesting, I could imagine a very rough video being made cheaply, then being heavily stylized to create a much more polished output for use in an advert.  
A longer look at AI tools for video: 
 

Thinking about this a little further, this won't change much at all.
The problem with CGI people is that they're fake..........  but so are a vast number of influencers so no change there.
The other problem with AI-generated scripts is that AI tends to "hallucinate" and be factually incorrect as well as potentially getting into the realms of bigotry..........  but so are a vast number of influencers so no change there either.
TBH this is true of lots of traditional media too.  Keeping Up With the Real-Life Leave-It-To-Beavers of Beverly Hills Who Wants A Wife was actually more typical of TV rather than an exception.  
It was blogging and then vlogging that actually started the trend of being authentic - TV and film never did it.

AI video just keeps on getting better and better:
 
The video to video feature is especially interesting, I could imagine a very rough video being made cheaply, then being heavily stylized to create a much more polished output for use in an advert.  
A longer look at AI tools for video: