wolf33d

I was speaking about stills so calm down dude

Oh yeah, the industrial shooters...

Do people shoot JPG? Lol

Well, when I say I think M43 will die I am of course not speaking for myself. This is my thought based on market. When you are at the point when superior sensor size offer better and in a lighter camera package I do not see point for M43 anymore. No I don't make 10 grand a year with the D5500 : I never ever shoot video with it. I make 10 grand a year by selling a couple of the clips taken from my personal shoots I make while traveling/mountaineering. Those are shot with whatever cameras I have in hand at the moment for video (GH5, A7III, ...).

MMhhhh no. Never had a contrasty hard look in RAW in my Nikon stills, don't know what you are talking about. Nothing to love or hate just a flat RAW image with lots of DR and flexibility. Not much difference with the Canon FF and Sony FF I have had. In video, I can't say but the Flat profile does not look to hard contrasty from what I have seen. What you refer to looks a lot more like user gradings and shooting than the camera.

Even though this comment was not for me, it also applies to me so let me answer. First of all you are a bit wrong: "When it comes to a new purchase, we buy to solve a problem." To be honest with you this is probably true 10% of the cases. Most people today buy new cameras not to solve a real problem but because: - They have GAS syndrome - They want the latest tech for whatever reason (from valid technical reason to no reason at all) - They think people with newer cameras will achieve things they can't with theirs - They think their work would be better with a better camera - They like to play with new toys ... ... ... For many of us it is a combination of small real problems and some of the above examples. And let me be honest : I am one of those. I like new tech, I have a job that allows me to afford cameras I could probably not afford if I was an average pro videographer (which says a lot on this industry lol)... I have older equipment that I feel is good enough like a 2014 macbook pro or a D5500 for landscape stills (it does what I need: good DR for tripod landscapes, and very light camera), but for many of my gear I do not keep it for long. Secondly, I also have some "problems". For example I need 4K because with the work I do for myself : I end up selling some of the clips, this give me $10K a year and it needs to be 4K. Now I enjoy a lot shooting slowmo because I do mainly sport/mountaineer stuff. So I need 4K slowmo and this is why I desperately chase a 4K60p camera. The mountain also dictate the camera size and weight, and the sport dictate the fact I need good AF for on gimbal use. Proof: I have needed good DR in a light package for stills. D5500 offers me that and I use it for 2 years. I shoot 90% of my landscapes (see link below) with it. I do not see the difference with my A7III for a landscape use, and the A7III does not even allow me to do timelapse which I need and do with the D5500. For video it's another story has what I need does not exist yet in one body. So in conclusion you see: if I was careless about tech and new gear I would be happy with all my limitations even in the mountain and would still get good footage. But those problems are still real objectively. So the combination of both makes me set up an objective of what I want/need and I am chasing this camera since couple of years. In the meantime I enjoy using different cameras that I buy and sell after weeks or months or couple years. I see no problem at all in changing gear. The real problem is people who spend their time online speaking about cameras they will never use and do all of this instead of shooting. When they do go shooting, they shoot their cat with a 3000$ lens. One would argue this is still not a problem and that's true : to each his own. But I can't help but thinking those people are more pollution for the web than anything else. If you want to see my cat pictures (spoiler, I have no cat), here is my instagram: https://www.instagram.com/landscapturer/

This. @Mattias Burling see, with this simple fact it's easy to understand why the Z6 will be as good or better than the Z7. We have seen this with the A7 series anyway.

This is because this is shallow DoF. Any recent camera doing 120p (appart from the EOS R crap of course) looks great filming portraits with thin DoF. It makes it very easy for the codec and bitrate. In the video I sent earlier the whole scene is busy with movements and everything in focus. This is the most challenging scene for slow mo and the only true test to make. Until I do not see a similar scene with good quality, the 120p on Z7 looks poor to me.

You said it. Well, I said as you quoted "who buys GH5 vs XT3" which means now. I also said that the GH5 was a good option before so you were not included in the comment. The fact that the GH5 was good when you bought it does not make it any less good today even if there is a 8K240p 10 bit camera released. It's just that today, there are much much better options. I personally owned the GH5 a couple weeks and sent it back. Did not like it at all. The slow mo is not so good, the AF was a joke, overall I got better results before with an RX100 for slow mo which says a lot. Flip screen is nice but I don't vlog so far from an absolute must for me. As for the 4K image I actually preferred the A7III outcome. With Sonny not releasing the A7S III and the Pana S1 not coming before march, I might get an XT3 for a few months. Last Fuji I had was an XE1 years ago. Let's see But I don't see a better option on the market today.

If I want to put a lot of time as you say and have the very best quality this means video is my main business in this case I justify a proper $10K camera, with a decent sensor.

For me and my use the XT3 blows the Pocket: - Great 10 bit codec yet not too heavy. RAW is a PITA. - APSC sensor - video AF: this alone would make me choose the XT3 vs the Pocket even if the pocket was $200 - lighter and smaller Back in the days the GH5 was an option as it was the only decently hybrid specced camera for video. Today's we have good FF and APSC specs equivalent or better than GH5. So WHY on earth would I ever buy a M43 tiny sensor again? 0 reason. APSC is the new M43, FF is the real deal and a few years from now MF will probably be. As for portability arguments, the only thing standing for M43, well it does not work with the pocket considering its size. And with the GH5 neither cause the XT3 is better and as portable so this argument is dead. In fact I believe M43 is absolutely dead. People still believing in M43 are the same people who believed in Sony A-Mount being not dead the last 5 years, with Sony keep repeating they are fully committed to it (LOL). 0 reason to use a tiny sensor if it is not more portable. RX100 with 1" sensor is so portable it actually is great and make sense. GH5, Pocket 4K, all M43 cameras bigger than XT3 are dead. When the XH2 is here with IBIS and even better spec and ergonomic, I know of no camera in the world below $6K and below FF that will touch it. Then A7S III and Pana S1 as well as future FF will blow anything in the FF territory. Anyone buying a GH5 vs a XT3 is out of his mind. The pocket has RAW so that's one thing but if you need real RAW stuff for business and work with big equipment just get a proper camera and if it's too expensive change your job. Seriously, who is gonna spend $2000 in a GH5 now?

I am afraid 120p looks poor.

Calm down guys, even SAR doesnt relay those rumors lol so probability of this is low. Good questions indeed. But the answer is always the same and we learn nothing.

The fantastical colors you know. The guy repeated that 250 times in the video and you can see for yourself how incredibly amazing it is. The guy on the A7 looks like an alien zoombie (some say it's not even him but he filmed an animal instead). On the EOS R he looks like the real guy with amazing color 3D pop skin tones. And the XT3 looks so RED it's unusable.

Use common sense and A7III vs A7RIII documentation and facts and you will know. What Z7 can do in video Z6 will and might even do better because 24mpx works better for video. Z7 blows the EOS R in most video aspects so will the Z6.

@Andrew Reid, did you actually buy this thing?!?

Comparison footage please with 120p too and XT3

Hilarious. Learned a lot with that EOS R youtube test actually. Learned with my own eyes that 108060p is super soft, 720p120 is so awful I actually checked my youtube settings cause I thought auto quality dropped to 480p or something. Also learned that AF does not work in 120p which is as hilarious as it gets. This camera is the joke of the year. And this guy who got it for free repeating approximately 250 times in the video that the colors are amazing. Lol... The Z6 is cheaper, way better 4K with no crop, as good AF and colors, better slowmo, IBIS, better Dynamic range. The only pros of the EOS R vs the Nikon is the flippy screen. Not even the lenses, they are so big heavy and expensive and you can adapt all Nikon stuff to the Z anyway. For me it looks like the best Hybrid today for FF is 1- Nikon 2- Sony 3- (far behind) Canon When Sony releases A7SIII, for videocentric people it will go above Nikon for sure. For people mainly into photo, Nikon will remain king. Panasonic, well it depends, we don't know the sensor quality for stills, we don't know the AF, and we know nothing about video except 4K60p. If the AF is improved over GH5 it might well be in 1st position for videocentric, and 1st or 2nd for photo centric. Let's see.

Precisely

So the A7S will interface with a F5 recorder ? What for...? It's totally different lines of equipment both in term of price and size and so on. External pro module for A7S ok, but interfacing with this thing? 4K120p, that would be nice for sure. No IBIS would be a big big deal breaker so I hope you are wrong. In fact I would rather have 4K60p "only" + IBIS than 4K120p. And if this camera only does 8 bits and need those expensive big recorders to do 10bit that's a pity too yet not a deal breaker for me.

Lol yeah. Had the MKIV too, but I think they improved the AF from the V. I have a Crane Plus gimbal which is the smallest weight they have that still accepts an A7III like body + lens. The M + RX100 combo must be much more light for sure.

Proof that these rumors are BS. What this has to do with A7S...

Lol at 4:30, For me quite far from real use 98% of people will make for this camera

How was the RX100 AF tracking in video and which version did you have? In Cuba I had the older one with same slow mo but before they put the improved AF. I remember it was a big pain. At this time the A7 R II (considered shit for AF today) was better even though it still was a pain. Also, I agree the RX100 is a cool setup. But since I need anyway a proper sensor for stills, I would rather have an A7S III type of camera which is still decently light for travel.

I wished. But getting tired of changing system and this mk2 will come in 2-4y. Wish I could stay with one brand and be done with it a few years. Latest rumors say no IBIS on A7SIII. It is starting to become a joke. We will have S1 with no video AF, A7S with no IBIS and rest of the world with no 4K60p. A joke that nobody wants to combine 4K60p FF with ibis with good AF...