deezid

I do. Rolling shutter is terrible, dynamic range too. For the same price you have better options. Unless your only requirement is small body size. 

Is there anything stopping a company just adding compressed RAW recording into a battery grip.

Yes, I said 12 bit codec as BRAW isn't actually RAW which is why it doesn't conflict with RED's patent. I am perfectly fine with any type of 12 bit codec even if it doesn't have white balance control. The extra color information is what I am after. As long as the bitrate is high enough to support it. 

Clipping occurs when sensor photosites are saturated and can't collect any more photons. There is no "raw" on planet Earth that can "recover highlights" from a saturated photosite. The term "highlight recovery" that everybody throws around is not a real thing. You either clipped and saturated photosites on your sensor or you didnt. You either crossed that threshold or didnt. Neither Log video OR raw sensor data can save you from clipped sampling. Pure white....is always pure white. So is pure black. This goes for both log video and raw.

Probably just interpret as PQ/LINEAR in fcpx or Premiere. Dynamic range is exactly the same in ProRes Raw/Braw vs internal.
Only benefits are:
- no chroma denoising
- 12 bit 444
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Probably just interpret as PQ/LINEAR in fcpx or Premiere. Dynamic range is exactly the same in ProRes Raw/Braw vs internal.
Only benefits are:
- no chroma denoising
- 12 bit 444
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Just imagine if Atomos release a new Ninja Star for ProRes Raw - or BMD do something similar for Braw. I'd buy one, or both in an instant.

I like the look of the pocket 6k/ 6k Pro Sony sensor,  I don’t like the look of the Pocket 4K GH5s Sony sensor.
I compared the Pocket 4K to the original BMCC 2.5k and the difference in dynamic range and highlight roll off was obvious and significant.
I would take the Pocket 6k over the OG BMCC.
To me it’s not that it has a Sony sensor, but which Sony sensor it has and what file type and bit depth it is being recorded at.
I also like the look of the GH5 so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
Above all, the Ursa 12k looks the best to me sensor wise, so I am hoping that in the future there will be a more affordable version.

Panasonic announced the S1 will get internal 10 bit 4k 60p as well as RAW out. Better deal as it has full hdmi.

I always found Fuji to have pulsing issues as well as just moments of randomly losing focus. It works great sometimes just not reliable like Sony and Canon's best implementations.

Panasonic cameras don't come with good Rec709 conversions by their own manufacturer. Especially Gen 5 Film Extended is much superior over any Rec709 conversion Panasonic provides.
But all the color issues mentioned derive from that very problem and can be fixed with third-party conversions like these:
Color between both systems is an almost 100% match.

It became faster with firmware 2.0. Check the S5 readings.
Still has the best usable dynamic range though only beaten by the RED Komodo in the sub $10,000 class. FX3 and A7s3 are quite weak in that regard.

Ugh, the X-T3 and 4 have a nasty artificial and plastic looking image with strong temporal filtering on top of the excessive sharpening which gets thrown on the footage even when it's set to -4. Even the A7s3 performs better in that regard.
Really no comparison to the S1H with NR set to -1.

What annoys me the most is how some youtbers in those reviews are already saying how this camera is the best mirrorless option for serious filmmaking. Cinema camera my ass ! The S1H is still the king of professional video centric mirrorless ! It has everything that this Sony FX3 doesn't have as a proper cinema camera :
- 4K DCI (even 6K)
- Anamorphic modes
- Shutter angle
- Synchro Scan
- Possibility to import Luts in camera
- waveform, etc.
How those "reviewers" could forget how much the S1H is more suited to professional video shootings than this FX3 !

Ugh, the X-T3 and 4 have a nasty artificial and plastic looking image with strong temporal filtering on top of the excessive sharpening which gets thrown on the footage even when it's set to -4. Even the A7s3 performs better in that regard.
Really no comparison to the S1H with NR set to -1.

Not talking about color, which can be altered anyway or just by using better Rec709 conversions than the ones provided by Panasonic which quite frankly aren't great.
The processing is the culprit. Even with noise reduction and sharpening both set to -4 (lowest) and interframe NR OFF the X-T4 showed more sharpening artifacts than my GH5 even with lots of ghosting and smearing on top. Also color separation and tonality on Fuji cameras using F-Log both internally and externally is quite awful. Maybe the HLG workflow @Llaasseerr mentioned helps with both issues but didn't try that myself.

Ugh, the X-T3 and 4 have a nasty artificial and plastic looking image with strong temporal filtering on top of the excessive sharpening which gets thrown on the footage even when it's set to -4. Even the A7s3 performs better in that regard.
Really no comparison to the S1H with NR set to -1.

Actually that makes it even more sound like just an A7sIII in another housing since both may as well use exactly the same firmware now.

So you're still handicapped by horrible NR, oversharpening at -7 detail, no shutter angle, no 3D Lut support for output via HDMI, no scopes, no 48p, no true 24p, no DCI 4K etc. 

But yaaay Cinetone 🙄

Ugh, the X-T3 and 4 have a nasty artificial and plastic looking image with strong temporal filtering on top of the excessive sharpening which gets thrown on the footage even when it's set to -4. Even the A7s3 performs better in that regard.
Really no comparison to the S1H with NR set to -1.

Ugh, the X-T3 and 4 have a nasty artificial and plastic looking image with strong temporal filtering on top of the excessive sharpening which gets thrown on the footage even when it's set to -4. Even the A7s3 performs better in that regard.
Really no comparison to the S1H with NR set to -1.

What type of work do you do? Not trying to question your legitimacy or anything just curious. 

It is pretty crazy how far compressed codecs have come but yeah won't cut it for every job. I wish 12 bit codecs would become a standard in cameras tho. Panasonic has always impressed me with the image they put out for the price. 

Cool, I'll take a look if I get a chance. I'd also be interested to see more raw footage from the FX6. So far I've only downloaded the CVP clips.

We'll soon know what they are thinking. For interoperability with the FX line, at minimum true 24P and I suspect DCI will be required.

They have fixed a lot of problems of the pocket with this one. Allthough I wish it had the following
- Full frame sensor
- IBIS
- Screen that can turn sideways as well, so you can vlog with it(I wont use it for vlogging but I do find it nice for light setups where I use myself as the test subject to see/adjust lights on the fly.)
- CAF for the exact reason above (selfie vlog), Its hard to judge stuff in post when your focus is a bit off, and its hard to focus on yourself without an external screen.
 
 

Thank you for the explanation. That was my previous understanding though less technically minded.

What led to my confusion is dynamic range measurements. The Pocket 6k has considerably more shadow and highlight information than the URSA 4.6k even though the URSA is measured having more dynamic range by CineD and BM themselves. I know because I've tested both cameras and the difference not even debatable. The P6K killed the URSA. 

I've found the highlight recovery tool in Resolve to be very useful unless you are recovering skintones or really critical stuff. 

In regards to the FX3 I am definitely interested if they get rid of the nasty internal processing.