Viet Bach Bui

Would you have done the same if it had been a Leica M9? Or something even more expensive? I suppose for everyone there is a point where the financial loss is unbearable just to return a lost item you paid for with your own money.

The A6300 has the better image, but you need to work around the overheating issue if you're shooting longish takes.

Could it be that they measured everything using the multi-frame high-resolution mode of the Olympus? They did it with their own camera, the DxO One, which has a Super mode which combines multiple exposures.

What is motion cadence anyway? Can someone describe it in quantifiable ways?

Some reasons: - Tiny grip, even compared to the A7 line, and especially compared to the GH line. - Stiff shutter dials that require a two-finger grip to turn. The dials on the A7 and GH line are easier to use. - Aperture ring on lens. This make it hard to change aperture on the fly without making the camera shake. And since you brought up the X-T2, where is the movie record button? I love being able to record video instantly in any mode. Edit: one more: the grip on the Fuji is covered in some kind of easy-to-slip semi-hard plastic, unlike the soft, grippy rubber on DSL

I'm sure everyone here knows that a good film is 90% talent and 10% equipment. We, being in these forums, are discussing within that 10%. So there is no need to downplay the technical aspects of a camera. Ergonomics isn't any less of must have than all the other stuff we regularly mention here like resolution, DR, color, bit rate, bit depth, RS because none of those have stopped great films from being made. And Jonpais, you are countering a point I did not make (assuming your reply was for me)

Not sure why you like those Fuji(s) so much. They are great still cameras, but the ergonomic is not good for video shooting.

I don't see a problem with sponsored/paid content (even here at eoshd), as long as it is clearly labelled as such and not being propped up by the host. The real problem is reviewers giving dishonest opinions to gain or retain benefits from the companies, so as long as their reviews remain honest, what's wrong with them getting side income for a service that you're getting for free?

Since you're owning an FS5 I suggest you go with Canon for their EF lens which adapt well to E-mount. Something like an 80D would do nicely with some L glasses. IQ is a bit average but for casual video shooting the DPAF is awesome.

At 10 bit that's 40% smaller size compared to 16 bit so you're looking at like 2.5K continuous max.

I looked at the video's thumbnail and saw the Karma fully extended sitting next to the Mavic completely folded so I can already guess which one the author is biased towards.

If you can please include an A/B test to eliminate biases. If you do, please match aperture, shutter, ISO and use the standard picture profile (or no pictute profile) on both to make it less obvious. You can then shoot a number of different scenes and label the cameras differently between them then let us decide which one we like more for each scene. That would be a fantastic test.

If you're a professional making money from stills photography then 5D4 because it has pro features like better build, deeper buffer, faster fps and dual card slots. If not then the A7RII is a more well rounded camera and will give you a better experience shooting both stills and video. Don't worry about color science too much because it's only hard to get right when working with slog, the image is already mighty fine in the other profiles.

Hmm you can get 4 Xeen primes for the price of the Sigma pair.

Why is it that the Fuji is doing better at close focusing distance while the Sony is faster to acquire focus at longer distance? Btw, the skin tone on the Fuji lacks tonality, is it because a film emulation profile is used?