TheRenaissanceMan

"Good solid lowlight" was part of his list, and the Digital Bolex is an ISO 800 camera at most. It also isn't 4K. So it only ticks 3 of 5 boxes.

F3 seems to tick the most of your boxes. 10-bit 4:4:4, insane DR, excellent in low light, 60p, great motion cadence, impressive battery life, XLRs, and can be had for ~$1500. 

Otherwise, the Kinemini with 4K upgrade will fulfill most of your wish list, although its low light performance isn't up to the F3's standard.

15 hours ago, Django said:

Tne other thing to consider however for video is that A6500 has super35 (1.5x) mode in 24p/25p 4K whereas XT2 has that odd 1.7x crop factor in 4K which can be a bummer for prime shooters...

Not really. If you're using native lenses, it's only an extra 1.17x crop. Instead of a 35mm, your 23mm turns into a 40. Oh no, what a tragedy.  If you're using adapted lenses, a simple speed booster takes your crop factor to a badass 1.25x. Either way, it's nothing I'd cry over.

1 hour ago, jasonmillard81 said:

I'm seeing lots of love for the X-T2 and A6500.  If you were looking for a main stills camera to edit and print with as well as want the ability to record b-roll or video on small excursions how would you determine which best fits?

X-T2 has better lens selection, menus, build quality, and SOOC color, as well as less RS and overheating. It also has a battery grip option that nets you 3 batteries, an AC adapter, and a headphone jack.

A6500 has IBIS, sharper 4K, 120fps 1080p, internal LOG, more powered adapter options, and is smaller/cheaper. Sony also makes an XLR adapter for the hotshoe so you can get professional quality audio inputs on board.

Both have terrific high ISO performance, killer DR, great overall IQ, adaptable lens mounts, and big EVFs. Pick what matters to you.

Damn...that's gorgeous.

Only $60K for the new RED Helium.

PUT IT IN MY VEINS

21 hours ago, hyalinejim said:

Ok, so "clickbait" is too strong a term, but "waste of my time" isn't quite as snappy.

My point is that in cases where it's difficult to discern a difference, people will choose the camera with preferable colour. So if you're going to do it, do it right and do a white balance. If not, expect to get called on it.

Maybe, but that wasn't really the point of the test, and it's aimed at people with keen enough eyes to judge only on the relevant metric.

I actually think that's the best highlight roll-off I've seen out of the camera yet. They clip, but it's got some nice bloom to it and no weird color stuff going on. This camera ticks pretty much all my boxes, but highlight rendering and overall video DR are holding me back.

On 11/24/2016 at 2:25 PM, hyalinejim said:

It's click bait BS. He couldn't even match WB between the two.

Click bait would've been "$500 G7 Crushes $3500 5D IV for 4K Video!!!" Max is just doing an honest, thorough, blind test of two very different cameras to give people an objective idea of how they perform for the money. The 5D IV is better in some areas, but the G7 remains an excellent value for $447 (or whatever the Black Friday sale was).

There were some posted in the other X-T2 topic.

$1500 vs $6000 is a very different price proposition.

Indeed. There's already tons of manual adapters, and the video market should drive demand for powered adapters soon enough. My main question is if the same excellent video quality will trickle down to the new X-T20/X-E3 models.

I think it's a little spurious to say the 1DX II is "game over" for the A7S II when the latter is half the price. A $3000 price difference is no small matter, and puts the Canon in a very different price bracket.

That said, it's a rock-solid and very powerful tool. Those with the budget for it would be hard-pressed to do worse. Then again, you could get an F3/Red One MX/C300/C100 II and a 1DC used for the same or less.

7 hours ago, cpc said:

The Odyssey records in Canon's .rmf raw format.

Huh...I'm not familiar with that. Is it possible to get an uncompressed frame of that to play with? I think most of us have never had the privilege, and it'd be interesting to see what that sensor can do in RAW.

Any chance you can share a DNG from the C500?

Doesn't really help if the light source is in frame.

Basics on what HDR means in terms of display spec:

https://www.cnet.com/news/what-is-hdr-for-tvs-and-why-should-you-care/
https://www.cnet.com/news/how-hdr-works/

https://blog.mingthein.com/2016/11/02/review-olympus-e-m1-mark-ii/

Yep. And none of this could be confused for scaling artefacts, either. It's not aliasing or moire, it's genuine overprocessing.

Man, that footage looks processed to death. Shouldn't be surprised, as Olympus JPEGs are heavily tweaked, but look how much sharpening there is on the birds' feathers. Look how the noise reduction turns all the grass into mush. Look how most colors have little or no variation across the object, just a wash of one single color.

There's definitely a place for a small camera with IBIS, solid AF, low rolling shutter, and nice colors out of the box; in fact, it seems like the perfect run and gun/travel/gimbal companion. But I don't think it could be my only camera, and probably not my A-cam on a narrative.

I haven't seen a bad video out of this camera yet...which either means 100% expert operators/colorists, or a camera that makes it simple to get excellent results. The latter seems much more likely, and honestly pretty damn exciting.

These are good times for low-budget filmmaking.

Damn, look at those colors! <3

The one thing I'd like to see is externally recorded F-Log compared to the other color profiles for DR. The shadows in the internal profiles seem to block up really fast.

5 hours ago, Don Kotlos said:

Yes, for tripod use it makes more sense. But for a camera that is supposed to be used handheld...

I've never owned a camera I've only used one way. Like it or not, fully articulating screens are more versatile. Besides, even when just viewing from above, the screen can be seen more clearly and from more angles when it's out away from the camera body.

2 hours ago, mercer said:

Some good suggestions in here. I learned a ton from this post. Do you have a Vimeo page? I'd love to see your work. 

Unfortunately, my Vimeo page doesn't have anything good on it right now, as most of my work is either still being shopped to festivals, corporate work I can't release, and/or class projects I don't feel represent me. I have a few passion projects in the works I'll hopefully be able to put up soon.