TheRenaissanceMan

Because some dead French men of the XIX century and his pals made a bunch of experiments proyecting 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23 FPS.
Then they arrived at 24 FPS and went "yeah, that looks about right and there's no perceivable difference between 24,25,26,27,28,29 FPS and 24 is cheaper to roll".
That's the legacy.
Like the wheel, why try to change what is already damn near perfect?

As standalone cameras? Sure. As part of a pocket computer, aka smartphones? The market size will approach the human population.  
How many people buy a phone because of how well it makes phone calls? How many buy a phone based on the improving cameras? 4K 10-bit, IBIS, Lidar, Dolby vision. Sadly, some traditional camera companies have been having trouble putting these features in their flagship cameras.
Consumer digital cameras are simply being displaced and integrated into another product, which isn’t unusual, as seen in the case of cassette players, CD players, MP3 players, pagers, cell phones, blackberrys, watches, etc. 
Thus, those graphs are misleading. The market for better digital cameras has never been bigger. The problem, if there is one, is that some old camera companies haven’t been able to justify their existence. 
Never have consumers, hobbyists, and professionals had such access to creative video filmmaking tools as we all do now. Innovation hasn’t slowed, it’s accelerating—over the dead bodies of dinosaurs.  

I think with YouTube in general the problem is people are told to set their camera to 24fps because it's the movie standard. That is fine. But then they go on to record their video without thinking about their frame rate: camera pans that are too fast, subjects moving in the frame too fast, parallaxing shots that are too fast and look weird.
I see this commonly with drone shots with parallax shots. Maybe their shutter speed was off, or they filmed in 30fps and then forgot to conform it. I definitely notice it at the 0:28 mark in the video.
Maybe in the future the world will standardized on PAL (or something close) and we can just make 25fps the new cinema standard and do away with the weird (but genius) quirks with NTSC cathode ray tube jiggery they did.

I definitely think with 24fps you have to be very precise when panning or you get that jitter effect. 

Why not use the Manfrotto 2909 Super Clamp with 2907 Reversible Short Stud 2909 (bhphotovideo.com)
 I use them everywhere from Basket, Hockey Nets, Stadium rails to Balcony.

Long exposure mounted on a balcony rail:

Long exposure mounted on a wood pier:

Mounted on the hockey net

 

It's worth mentioning that with the right geometry you don't even need to tighten the clamp at all.
This hook, which is designed to sit on top of a door, works because all the force is applied to one side of the door, and because the force from gravity is down, which keeps the hook securely on top of the door:

Obviously the clamps we're talking about can easily rotate if kept loose, but I'm just saying that they don't need to be super tight because they're not fighting gravity, they're working with it.

@kye I'd suggest investing in some industry standard grip equipment.
As an example I put an overload loaded FS5MII (~10 lb) on single cardellini clamp. Wood adds rigidity and makes surface even, improving the clamping force.
Note: this is a totally unsafe rig, if it pivots kiss your camera goodbye, but if all you had was just a cardellini and gobo head... 😆

Standard mafer/cardellini clamps not doing it for you?

I had just received some FD lenses yesterday when  it started to snow so I took the F3 for a first stroll.

To my eye is looks very close. 
Right off the card, I'd say the C70 has a slight advantage in the shadows and the overall rolloff is a bit smoother and milkier. To match  - you need to play with the S-curve on the A7S3 a little to get the same look, and it isn't hard. 
A7S3 seems a bit sharper. 
There's no reason why you can't use this cameras together. Matching them is easy. People who say the A7S3 is still bad colour don't know what the are talking about. 

I would complain

I love trade shows because it provides a timeline for companies to announce, ship, and demonstrate products.
I love trade show because I can meet the engineers behind products and often the owners of small companies and start or reinforce business relationships.
I love trade shows because it is a time to network and gather with industry friends old and new.
I love trade shows because anyone can blog about a cool new product that I might not otherwise be aware of.
Large companies hate trade shows because they are an expensive budget line items that do not provide as much of a return on investment as compared to other marking activities.
Large companies hate trade shows because they do not always naturally align with product cycles, which cause inefficiency in product realization, release schedules and product marketing or worse it may mean there is nothing new to show or announce.
Large companies hate trade shows because they have a buy a booth that is large enough to compare with their competitors who also have to have to spend lot on a large booth to look equally well established and successful and also they have to sponsors different trade show related events, signage, panels, mixers etc. even more ways to get even more money from large companies who don't necessary want to be there in the first place.
Small startup companies love trade shows because they can release/show a new product and make as much noise as a large company for a fraction of the cost.
I understand why, if all of the large companies of an industry get together and collectively decide that they are not going to be the anchor tenets of a specific trade show, that they were, for many years forced to attend/sponsor and now they have an excuse (COVID) not to attend/sponsor and don't want to commit to attend in the future, why some of the trade shows I love and they hate are going to go away.

I've watched a few videos running down the new features, and I must say that I'm pretty excited for quite a few of the features.
The New Colour Wheels look awesome and I think i'll likely use them a lot.
I have a control surface so the Lift/Gamma/Gain controls are great for exposure corrections, but they are very 'macro' controls, not really having enough control over things like shadows vs blacks etc, especially for the naturally lit uncontrolled situations I shoot.  I can use curves, but they're a PITA to use with the control surface, so having the new colour wheels will be great, giving enough 'resolution' but still being fast enough to use quickly.
The Colour Warper (spiderweb) and luma/chroma warper will be quite handy too.
I often find myself wanting to quickly change the saturation, hue, and luma of certain colours (eg, foliage) and currently you have to bounce back and forwards between Hue v Hue, Hue v Sat, and Hue v Lum to do that.
Also, one of the things that I have played with in the past is a Saturation limiter.  The idea is that I want to up the saturation on clips, but when I do that sometimes theres a splash of colour in the background that goes nuclear in OTT saturation, so what you want is a curve that increases the saturation of colours under a certain threshold, but once a colour gets to a certain level of saturation it should encounter a 'knee' and the saturation boost should slow down at that point, limiting the most saturated elements of an image.  That's also possible easily with this tool.
I had previously used a Sat v Sat curve, but the risk of that is that you end up with overlaps where more saturated colours end up less than colours that started off less saturated to begin with, so I had to generate some test images to ensure I designed it correctly.
The new Sat vs Lum curve looks great too.
One of the things that I learned in investigating film is that emulating a subtractive colour model requires the darkening of more saturated colours, which currently has to be done in a relatively customised way, whereas this gives a nice curve.
I'm also curious about the new Temp and Tint controls.
I use Temp and Tint all the time to correct WB and apparently they've redesigned them to work in XYZ colour space (assuming I understood that correctly) which means they will be perceptually better, which is cool.

Well, yes, there is a point of contact at the rear of the camera, and it is...the rear of the camera ! Which you can apply on the top of your pectoral/clavicle, with your screen in your line of sight. And it is WAY more confortable than holding DSLR with a loupe to your eyes, which strains your arms so much.
The rotating handle is also incredibly versatile, confortable, ajustable. You can easyly handle your camera in "top shot" position very high, which is not possible with a fixed handle.
 

All YouTube video AI chains end the same- insane, violent, bizarre, and extreme. It doesn't even matter what you start with... eventually it goes there and you have to choose which road accident to watch, or you need to be more intentional on what you let yourself watch.
PS: I give this thread two days before it goes to crazy land and gets shut down.

Just going to weigh in here as someone who switched back to the 'camcorder' form factor with the FS5 (mark 2) after using mirrorless for years.  

The traditional camcorder form factor with its side controls is noticeably easier to use on a tripod.  I never once used the viewfinder on my FS5 and would generally want to use a third party EVF if I went that route - the one on the camera is simply not that good and would be very difficult to judge focus on, and the positioning of the EVF I find fairly awkward for hand-holding (you'd have to lift the camera up to your face.  Generally with a small camera like this, I'd prefer to brace the camera against my chest, which feels more secure and results in less arm strain.  Using a C70 style body in a similar way seems like it would cause the controls to be squished up against the operator.
I know some folks on here are a bit dismissive of client perception, but I do a fair bit of corporate (not glamorous but hey) and doc work.  Client perception is super important to my bottom line and I've had clients specifically call out the video form factor in a positive way, saying things like "oh, what did that camera cost" and "That looks a lot better than my mirrorless that I have at home".  It's not (although specs aside I much prefer the SLOG 2 our of the FS5m2 than the A7s in an unquantifiable sort of way), but that perception goes a long way to justifying my day rate and the money that I spent on the camera.
I miss WAY fewer shots with the FS5 than I did with an A7s.  Don't underestimate the value of internal ND where the colour shift is compensated for automatically, being able to use large-capacity batteries that don't require swapping out every hour etc etc.  It makes shooting on primes much more viable in a quick moving situation and removing colour casts from an ND (any ND) filter from log footage in post is a huge pain, if it's even possible with the limited codecs on these cameras.
All that being said, I'm sure mirrorless ergonomics have come a long way in the last few years, so take my comparison to an aging Sony model with a grain of salt.  Happy shooting folks.
 
 
 

Y'all need to watch some Journey videos if you find this amusing.

Hello !
This is a pretty harsh  article. You are commenting on this camera as someone who wants dslr with all the extra pro camera things (xlr, nds...). But like you said, it will be the perfect camera for a lot of people. So when you say "What you see above is a monstrosity of stupid design.", you should say "I think".
I've had lots of DSLRs, and the FS5mkII, with the atomos on it. I also use RED cameras. The FS5 coupled with the atomos is a little beast. Really great to perform lots and lots of various jobs (mainly commercials/brand content). And i managed to assign one boutton which allow for VERY quick change to enter slowmo options (just one press for 4K100fps, and two press for 1080p 200fps)....). Actually quicker that on my A7SII. I guess there is the same possibility with the FX6, but as always, they did'nt give it away in their little video tutorial, they wanted people to see all the menus. Every user then has to enter the shortcuts they want.
I can see you never really used cinema cameras like red or alexa for instance. They are just boxes with lots of things missing. But you have to build around it. The FX6 provides everything except for the EVF, which is a bummer, for sure, but X70 is the same (with a screen that you cannot move a lot..). And having no XLR on the FX6 bugged me at first, but when i think about it, i always have the handle attached when shooting sound though XLR anyway. When doing gimbal work i usually don't record "pro" sound, i'm too occupied shooting, and a sound engineer is taking care of it. And scratch audio and/or TC is sufficient enough for synchronizing.
With it's full frame sensor, great DR, variND, full size XLRs, I think it just beats the X70, (which is also a very very convincing solution).
An when you think about a camera, you also have to think about the second camera. I thnik the FX6/A7S3 it a great combo, as well as the X70/R5. But we all know the implemented issues with the R5 to cripple it.... ;). And the A7S3 has the same sensor than the FX6, and colors are matching very closely.
One thing i dislike about sony are the lenses. I just hate them. I use old vintage manual lenses, but also canon lenses. I would love to have AF on the FX6 with canon lenses...but i guess that's not possible... 😞
Oh and FYI: for the moment, technology doesn't allow for IBIS to be implemented along internal NDs, so that's why. Cannot explain why though, but there is a physical problem. I guess it will come in the future... But no camera has it as for now, so we shouldn't complain about something not possible as of now !
 
Best, from france,
 
 

Well, that's a matter of opinion, as you say.

I think it makes sense and anyone who's worked in broadcast can instantly pick up one of these (or an FX9 or FS7), start shooting, and find most of the controls they're used to. Apart from setting the right res/codec for the project or formatting cards, you can often get through an entire days shooting without ever needing to enter the menu's with these cameras. And usually you can find the button you need without even looking.
 
You literally push one button. The video you linked shows you how to change your S&Q settings, but once that's done, it's a single push of a button to get into slow-motion mode.
 
It will be far from "less cluttered" once you have 2x xlr cables (+ adapters to full-size), headphones and HDMI cable coming out of the side with all those little rubber doors dangling around. Not everyone will need that, but it's just as easy to criticise the C70 design as the FX6 (even more so in this regard). The FX6 has the ports right where you need them on a set - on the dumb side. It even has the ports recessed enough so that you can avoid obstructions when using a battery plate.
 
Unless you need to shoot any high or low angles, or on a shoulder mount, and can't use the non-rotating handle. In that situation you have exactly 0 nice dials.  FX6/FS7/FS5 style handle is very versatile and convenient.
 
Fair point, in some cases. But if you're stripping the camera down, say to shoot on a gimbal or to mount it in a car, are you really going to want audio in-camera? All those cables/mics/receivers would just get in the way and go against what you're trying to achieve. You'd probably be recording externally anyway. A deal-breaker for some, (eg if you MUST have in-cam audio on gimbal), but for most it's a problem that is easily solved when it arises.
 
This comment shows just how out of touch you are with most people who will actually use a camera like the FX6.

The reason people will build a rig is to improve ergonomics (for their particular preferences) and reduce fatigue. It also lets them use all the tools they'll need when they work in a crew with a 1AC, soundo, director, etc. It lets them go from tripod to handheld to shoulder faster. It lets them put the shoulder mount and top handle directly in line with the COG for perfect balance. It lets them put the camera down on unbalanced surfaces without getting damaged or falling over. It lets them power everything from a single battery. It also gives the camera more mass which reduces shake and gives a more natural feel to the images (and if done right, makes it easier to balance and operate too).

The only people building rigs to impress other people are those who care more about THEIR image than THE image.
 
Again, we're all entitled to opinions. But you're also making pretty outlandish statements that show how much understanding you lack about this product and the people who will use them.

It's the equivalent about me writing an article claiming the Isuzu N series is a "monstrosity of stupid design" because it doesn't fit into the average household garage.

 

Yes! This is exactly what I want. Handicam form factor with large sensor and interchangeable lenses. EVF on the back, flippy screen on the side, handstrap for comfort. Winning combo.

My biggest problem with modern cameras is the form factor. Besides the profusion of buttons all over the damn thing, there isn't really any way to comfortably handhold the camera for smooth shots without having to put it on a gimbal or a Frankenstein shoulder rig
The FX6 actually makes sense for me since the LCD is upfront on an arm. You press the camera to your chest and keep a hand on the lens. I hate shooting with cameras  that have the LCD on the back (i.e. all mirrorless cameras). You wind up hovering the camera in front of your face which makes it difficult to maintain a steady frame. IBIS is not a replacement for having multiple points of contact. Also, if you've ever shot a documentary, you would know that supporting a camera in your palms for hours at a time is very hard. A properly balanced shoulder-mounted camera is invaluable in these situations.
I just feel like there is no reason to cross-pollinate video camera design with mirrorless ergonomics. There needs to be a bit more consideration for how the camera fits the human body.  I wish that makers would revisit the way cameras looked twenty or thirty years ago. Yeah, I mean VHS camcorders and Super 8 cameras. Those were actually built to be used by humans, not vloggers. You held it up to your eye and moved it like it was attached to your head. 

Yeah and losses to 1400€ ryzen laptop. By a lot. Loses even for the cheap ryzen 4600U.

As soon as the FS7mk1 got released, that killed the resale value of the F5. 

Made many F5 owners pissed.
 
Have done that hack myself!

But would be a rare and unusual F5 for sale that hasn't had the normal paid update to do 4K. 
 
Yes, but no, depends on how much a person wants E Mount and lighter weight. 

In most other regards the F5 is better than the FS7.
At US$4K-ish secondhand, if you're a working professional in the right market segment to move up to an F5, then it could still be a good ROI for you.
(although yeah, the far more popular FS7 would likely do a better ROI for you)

First off, this is a great question, which I had not thought about from a cost benefit ratio.  
If the question was: would you purchase this camera to shoot a conference - I agree, it would not be my first choice.
Regarding the technical benefits of using this camera for shooting a conference,  The entire URSA mini pro line, due to b4 lens compatibility options, makes it a good choice for shooting a conference.  If I were purchasing a Blackmagic camera  on that basis alone, I would probably buy the URSA mini broadcast.
if I owned a 12k and it was not being used on another higher paying job, I would adapt a b4 lens to it and shoot the conference.
Seems like this would also be cool for shooting concerts or festivals, if shooing all day was a requirement, shooting at lower data rates may be just the ticket. (Pun intended.)