ade towell

seems legit from their thread at bmcuser

http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?22226-P4K-Footage-quot-Seoul-Zoo-quot

^^ lovely colours

10 bit can definitely help if you want to maximise dynamic range and shoot in log mode - most versions of log (other than the original clog1) tend to fall apart in 8 bit as soon as you start grading. 

this is great for us in 25p land, tried it with a friends GH5 and it is a huge improvement. Doesn't work in 24p though apparently 

As always it seems everyone has different needs in a camera.

There is quite a difference when grading 10 bit log compared with 8 bit, and with the C200 you are giving up dynamic range sticking to their 8 bit codec. For me the fs7 seems to have spoilt many of the production companies at least in my world, and so they are now asking more for 10 bit not 8 bit. You can argue they should instead just leap to dealing with RAW but that is not where they seem to be at, for better or worse...

There is a lot to like about the c200 and even though I do prefer the EVA1's image, the c200 ticks most of the boxes for me, I come from the c100 so it would seem like a natural step - but for that pesky 8 bit (or RAW). Canon are trying to push me towards the C300 mk2 but that's another jump in price (and has its own niggles for me)  - am swinging towards the EVA1 with GH5 or GH5s  as b cam, a lot to be said for having cameras that can easily be graded to match

5 hours ago, jonpais said:

I’m all about options - other cameras with great low light performance, IBIS and blazing fast autofocus with no hunting also exist. What good is lowlight ability if your camera’s af keeps pulsing?  Concerning gimbals, in conjunction with IBIS, it has been shown time and again to be superior to no IBIS, at least on single-handed gimbals. At $2500, the GH5s is already $700 USD more dear than what I paid for my GH5 (40% more expensive!) and loses one of the camera’s most beloved features. A few of the camera’s quirks aside, I find Andrew makes a compelling case for the a7rIII over the GH5*.

Yeah we get it - your needs are different to others, isn't choice a great thing, move on, keep your camera and be happy instead of trying to think up other spurious reasons why not to get this one. Life can be simple...

And that is a big deal for many - that the GH5s retains the 12 stops of DR at iso 2500 whereas by then the GH5 has dropped to about 9.5 stops

5 hours ago, noone said:

That is pretty much exactly what I expected.

I see some are not happy that it isn't the match of the better FF cameras in low light but I would say it looks amazing in low light FOR an M43 sensor.

The other stuff for video is why you should buy the camera, that it is competing with some better APSC sensors for low light is the bonus.      I can see some adding a GH5s to a GH5 for lower light (than the GH5) instead of a A7sii with a GH5. 

That DP Review chart is comparing photos, this is a video centric forum - when you compare the video of GH5s and the A7s from what I've seen up to iso 12800 maybe even 25000 the GH5s is a cleaner image and the colour doesn't fall apart in the same way the Sony does. From 25000 iso and above the Sony clearly takes over but how many people shoot at those crazy high isos? The Gh5s is better at iso levels where 99% of users will be using it  

On 10/25/2017 at 11:21 AM, cojocaru27 said:

I can only imagine how a 10 bits better codec low light full frame image would look like, just saying.

that's the problem, you can only imagine

the Sony 35mm 1.8 oss is a great lens for the a6300 .Use the kit lens for the wide and use the image zoom on the 35mm to get a pseudo 50mm field of view

yawn - are you also user Satoshi who has just repeated the same fanboy talk on another thread....

Here's a link to the VENICE shot film they showed at the presentation

http://ps.sony.co.kr/pro/article/broadcast-products-venice-videos

what looks like more than 14 stops DR has gota count for something

It is a meaty camera spec wise and $7345, £6215 plus VAT here in the UK

No - I'm a Canon c100 and Sony a6300 user. Just a bit frustrated with what Canon offers up as a dslr b camera - and not sure the 5d mk4s mushy 1080 cuts it these day

yes it's 2x crop, not too far from 5d mk4 with its 1.7x crop that Django seems to recommend...at least the gh5 has lenses suited to its crop

the a6300 4k exported as 1080 to me looks nicer than the a7s but then I really didn't like the colour science of the a7s and sold it pretty quickly. The colour is much improved I think with the a6300 and it is great in low light up until about iso 6400 - then the a7s pulls ahead. 

I think the colour is much nicer with the a6300, the 4k is pretty spectacular, but rolling shutter is really bad 

sorry should have mentioned that's not my footage - maybe ask on Vimeo

The SLR Anamorphot-40 1.33x, mounted on a very cheap Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 looks pretty sharp for the money

That this is all hanheld is testimony to Panasonics implimentation of IBIS

I tried the 16-70 on the a6300 - problem is if you're wanting to go handheld or just move the camera, anything above 50mm is going to induce pretty severe rolling shutter. Because of this I went for the cheapy kit lens 16-50 for wide shots and predominantly use 35mm 1.8 oss for everything else - and as mentioned the clear image zoom function at 2x makes the 35mm a 70mm with less rolling shutter than the Zeiss 16-70 at 70mm would be. There is a little noise at higher iso but in video mode at least it is quite remarkable how little sharpness is lost with the clear image zoom

Also if you're going to use lenses with image stabiliser I'd save your pennies and get a lightly used a6300

I like the 17-55 more than the 24-105, more pleasing image overall for me, nicer bokeh, obviously better in low light and the 24-105 loses light as you zoom unless you have it wide open. 

6 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

I've only tried the lens indoors with poor light so maybe it gets better outside. But it seems to flicker exactly like in the videos above (less than some lenses, more than you want) unless you zoom in wide open, in which case the aperture racks just over a stop between 18mm and 135mm.

It doesn't seem like that much, though. This is pretty acceptable.

At a consistent f5.6, it flickers noticeably but subtly. Both On my SL1 and C100.

Even in auto ISO. I think? Auto ISO pulses for some reason or another. And the C100 doesn't have it.

Isn't there a setting on the c100 where you tell it not to compensate for iris stepping when zooming - sorry not got the camera with me and can't remember the actual terminology

am not sure it's an unrealistic standard to expect a camera costing £7,700 to have a 4k 10 bit codec. It's also my only major  grumble with what is otherwise looking a fantastic camera

that af does look good. Canon please put 4k 10 bit in the XF-AVC firmware update