DBounce

7 minutes ago, Snowfun said:

A

But I don’t know if I could justify that. 

Let me help... Chinese made car vs Japanese car... same money... Pick?

I’m really not sure what has happened that so few are willing to speak the truth. It’s quite pathetic honestly.

1 minute ago, MrSMW said:

Also C, none of the above. Last time I checked , it was 2019.

So another vote for ‘A’ for those that can read the rules.

A or B folks... like the Highlander... there can be only one. Failing to choose merely shows attempts to hide bias. If you don’t want to answer... DON’T. 

I’ll make one more rule for this survey... any answer that is not Singular and not as specified is an automatic “A”. This means answers such as “Both” or Neither are counted as “A”. If this is not your intention... vote “B”.

3 hours ago, androidlad said:

This is normal and happens in X-T1 and X-T2 as well. It occurs only when you tilt the camera back and forth, not side to side (from portrait to landscape). It's part of the viewfinder diopter mechanism. As long as the camera functions well, no need to be concerned.

I knew you'd jump on that made in China BS. Isolated QC incidents can happen anywhere, so please put your stereotype away.

Well I doubt I'm alone in this position. And stereotypes exist for a reason. Let's see how Chinese quality vs Japanese quality is perceived by the rest of the forum... take the one question survey.

I'm curious to learn how perceptions have changed... or if they have changed. To that end I have posted the following question.

Which of the following statements more closely reflects yours feelings? Choose A or B.

A. Made in Japan, is synonymous with Craftmanship, Precision and Reliability. Where "Made In China" means Cheap, Mass-produced, Junk.

B. Made in China, is synonymous with Craftmanship, Precision and Reliability. Where "Made In Japan" means Cheap, Mass-produced, Junk.

3 hours ago, Papiskokuji said:

Hi guys !

Quick question, I just got myself a Fuji X-T3. I noticed that when I gently shake the body (I didn't do it on purpose in the first place), I hear something wobbling inside. I can't remember having that feeling with the previous X-T3 I had the chance to try a few weeks ago. I tried to block the back lcd screen, but it wasn't it. Can you also hear something moving a bit when you shake your camera ? No lens attached, body turned on or off. (maybe I have the first XT series with IBIS, and that's the sensor moving !)

And also, what are the shortcomings I should be wary about ? I remember a few members of this forum having quality control issues with theirs, especially @DBounce if I'm not mistaken.

Thank you guys !

I got my two X-T3s early on and assumed I was just unlucky. I do know that the X-T3s are made in China not Japan... which is usually not a good thing.

Here it is:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7x12cionrc6dhj9/2018-01-07 21.29.30.jpg?dl=0

Just wanted to post this up here in remembrance of my faithful friend Hildy (my Hildoogans). It's probably not shot well and I'm sure the dynamic range is poor,... but I'll miss her anyway. She kept me company and was a good soul. She gave all the love she could to us and she was a beloved member of our family. We will always miss you Hildy. 

There is generally a pretty big difference in file size from 4K to 1080 to 720... but is the actual difference that much?

1 hour ago, Mokara said:

Actually there is. It is called intellectual property.

There are lots of things a company could do and would like to do, but can't, due to the IP position on the technology involved. If the IP is owned by someone else you can't just use it. 

Probably they have to license something to implement that, hence the fee for the upgrade.

All the tech is protected by IP... if Fuji and Nikon can implement it on their Sony based sensors, so can Panasonic. The S1 is almost twice the cost as the X-T3. 

And as was already pointed out, bundling an audio codec firmware with a picture profile makes no sense. It should be free with the $400 DMW-XLR1 audio adapter.

The most frustrating thing with all this crippling is that any one of these cameras could have been the complete package. As it is we are all sort of waiting for gen 2 products. I originally intended two buy two mirrorless bodies as B and C cams. But as it is, I figured I would hold off on the second body until the "Pro" gen 2 body was released. The Panasonic comes pretty close, but it falls short in some very obvious and needless ways. There was no technological reason Panasonic could not have added a flip screen, like the GH series. There were no hurdles preventing them from implementing PDAF. Those two addition would have netted Panasonic's L-MOUNT ALLIANCE a neat $12,420 from my purchases of two DC-S1 bodies, with Panasonic Lumix S Pro 50 F1.4 and the Leica Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-90mm f/2.8-4 ASPH... along with two spare DMW-BLJ31 batteries. It's their loss. This foolish crippling is just one way that Panasonic missed out. I can tell you this, Canon had better not pull any silliness with the 1DXMk2 replacement. 

I really think it may fall to Fuji and Nikon to deliver the ultimate hybrid camera. There are no Chinese players in this space, so those two companies have an opportunity to really show the world how it should be done. I'll be curious to see what the new GFX-100 brings along with Nikon's pro body. 

10 hours ago, Skip77 said:

How is this merely speculation? This would mean any announcement from any camera company is merely speculation. 

The evidence is from Nikon and Atomos. 

https://www.redsharknews.com/production/item/6159-nikon-adds-12-bit-raw-output-to-z-7-and-z-6

The C200 is not a hybrid camera and it's price tag and what you get from the BM Ursa Min 4.6 and EVA-1, some would say this puts the C200 behind those camera.

My bad, I didn't realise Nikon had announced the offical specs. But it also doesn't change the fact that more than a few would have preferred "real" raw,  instead of prores raw. Braw would have been a better choice... at least until Red makes BMD pay up and forces them to remove it from all their cameras. 

C200 is quick to get up and running,  reliable and shoots a great image. For the money I could have opted for any of the others... hell I sill could... they are still selling them,  but I won't.  They just don't do it for me. 

1 hour ago, Skip77 said:

Most people have been hostile in response to Nikon Z6 and it doing 12 bit Raw external. Why? That should be a good thing for everyone. 

I know for a fact the Z6 4K video even at 8 bit is better then the A7III's video and I know for a fact that it compares to the C200 that was used at the same place with the same talent.  That's not saying the Z6 is better or even as good but just what I can tell you based on footage between the two cameras. 

I think the hostility is not so much directed at the Nikon Z6, but more towards the choice of prores raw. Which many view as psuedo raw. 

I believe the Z6 is a good effort from Nikon,  but I wouldn't trade my C200 for it. Also,  we've had no confirmation that it will output 12 bit... that is merely speculation at this point. 

The omission of a battery grip with controls was a big miss for many shooters.  

Like I said,  none of these first gen efforts are checking all the boxes. 

There are a ton of features that could be added to cinema cameras to differentiate them from MILCs. How about wireless timecode with auto sync? It’s not even like the tech needs to be invented. 

This protectionist nonsense is killing sales and stifling innovation.

Bad market aside, I believe a lot of buyers find it hard to justify buying into any of the new systems because all of them have been released handicapped in some way or another. For 90% of users, they would do better to wait until the second generation products are released.

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Kinda defeats the purpose of a 4K camera if you're buying it to shoot in 1080 all the time?

I think the thing everyone is missing is that if you are judging this camera on specs alone you will miss the point entirely. We all understand that spec wise the competition may seem to hold the upper hand. But specs be dammed, most people that have used both side by side end up preferring the EOS R... frustrating as that may be.

@Skip77 it may not seem like much, but you will notice the drop in resolution from 30MP to 24MP... at least I did. 

I think @DaveAltizer sums up how I feel about the Canon. Yes, I’ll concede no crop would be great, but crop or no, there is just something about the Canon’s image that makes it more filmic, organic... just plainly more appealing. On paper it loses. But the audience does check the dam spec sheet.

@Skip77 I wouldn't say the EOS R is better... just different. The Nikon is imo a great camera. I think Nikon put out a camera with about as much spec wise as they could. That said while one can complain about the crop of the R, one could just as easily make a case against the lower pixel count of the Nikon vs the R in stills mode. These are hybrid cameras after-all. There is plenty to like and plenty that could be better. As to sharpness, you cannot completely turn if off. Not from my experience. It's always there to some degree.

IBIS, I fully understand it's usefulness in stills mode, but I hate with a passion how it can randomly ruin video shots with jello. Granted the Nikon has something I wish all cameras with IBIS had... the ability to lock the sensor so that IBIS is fully disabled. When Canon does introduce IBIS, I hope they follow Nikon's example and offer this feature. Likewise, the ability to shield the sensor when switching lenses is a true innovation for mirrorless cameras... Nikon, Sony, Panasonic and Fuji take note. 

If I'm to be frank about what I would love to see in a hybrid... 

1. Pixel level ND

2. 14 + stops of Dynamic range

3. Internal 10 bit 422

4. Electronic stabilization ala GoPro

5. Quad pixel AF

6. Lastly, all cameras in this space should have a clean image at 12,800 ISO. Some do already.

I think this list is going to be real in the near future.

Let's face the facts... all of the major players held back, save for Nikon, who I think genuinely tried their best. Where is the A7S3? That's going to be one to watch... and if it isn't there are going to be a lot of pissed off customers. Hopefully it has no issues with overheating, and is blessed with good color science. Fuji has sworn to forgo full frame, favoring medium format. We will have to see how that pans out. Panasonic, where is that organic sensor? Canon can we get a sensor that can do 14 stops of DR... just asking. 

Yes, the entire batch of current cameras are destined for resale on ebay sooner than later.

@Video Hummus Canon makes a EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM Lens that works great with the EOS R adapted. It plenty wide. But that said actually too wide for my taste most of the time. My goto for the R when going wide is the 16-35mm F4. 

The Nikon vs Canon was a hard decision for me. But ultimately, I just preferred the image from the Canon. Put it on sharpness level 2 and it's perfect. I like that flexibility. That said I look forward to the follow ups of all of these cameras. They are already pretty good overall.

1 hour ago, Skip77 said:

The Z cameras do 10 bit external and 12 bit RAW is on it's way.  When another mirrorles camera besides the S1 can do 12 bit Raw comes along then I'll agree that the Z lineup is "desperation attempt by them." (Nikon).  

The EOS - R is a joke for video and the S1 is almost a clone of the Z6.  And don't come back with "if" the Z6 get Raw or no one wants Raw. ProRes Raw is no the data hog of other Raw codecs. 

What would have made the Z6 a breakthrough in your mind ? 4K60FPS pr two card slots? Because we all know the FS7 has two card slots. 

Nikon has the advantage of all the users that have Nikon glass coming over to the Z line up. Nikon owners are not switching to Canon or Panasonic.

I owned both... the Nikon is not a bad camera. But the AF is far behind the Canon, the preamps are inferior... enough so that it is quite noticeable and the image is over-sharpened. And while it's easy to sharpen a soft image, it's near impossible to soften a sharp image without turning it to mush. If the EOS R is a joke because it is cropped in 4k, then so are most cinema cameras. As they are almost all cropped when compared to full frame. You might try using one. I think you might find the joke is on you, because from my experience, there is no camera made today at this level, that cannot be used to create compelling work.

8 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

The EOS R is not a terrible camera. It’s has some serious handicaps that can be lived with depending on what you use your gear for. It’s not my cup of tea. It leans heavily on it being the only mirrorless camera with dual pixel AF. I mean, I am now seeing people comparing 720p to 4K and 1080p on YouTube saying you can’t tell a difference. 720p is the new 4K guys. This just smacks of people wanting the EOR R to do what they want, but it not having the specs to do it and convincing themselves it doesn’t matter anyway.

However, given the fact that we haven’t seen a pro level mirrorless camera from canon makes it a bad value at the current moment.

I agree with Andrew about the S1. If they would have added PDAF it would be a much better value proposition, even with its high entry price with the new mount. I have a feeling even if they improved their DfD AF at this point it has such a stigma attached to it that people will still say the AF is no good. 

I also expect to see a lot of used second hand EOS Rs on the market when Canon releases the EOS RX pro model, or whatever they will call it.

All of the current cameras have some serious handicaps. The Sony has no 10 bit output, and subpar color science. Panasonic poor AF. Nikon poor preamps. And yes the EOS R has a crop. Of all of these issues IMO the one easiest to deal with is the crop. I can simply use wider lenses or re-frame; which I do, if the situation calls for it. With no 10 bit output, coupled to a weak codec and not great color science, well, I'm a bit stuck. Granted, the Nikon's poor preamps are easy enough to work around also. With the Panasonic's poor AF... again, a bit stuck. Most viewers will not notice the bump in DR, but ALL will notice out of focus shots. So you pick your poison. There is no perfect camera. And once there is... we will find new things to b!tch about. 

The last statement about "a lot of second hand EOS R's" once the pro model comes out can apply to all the rest of these cameras also. When Panasonic releases the 10 bit internal, flip screen, PDAF GH6 full frame camera, who here will give a toss about the S1? But truth is there may still not be a lot of them for sale used. Because honesty, I can't imagine Panasonic is moving a whole heap of them. You can't drop the ball on AF, because it matters not how good the image is, if it's out of focus. If your camera is a hybrid in 2019, the AF is expected to work. No excuses. Had the S1 been equipped with serviceable AF, I would have bought two bodies and matching glass. 

55 minutes ago, sanveer said:

 

Let's list out the Shortcomings of the EOS R

1. No 4k 60p and no DCI 4k. 

I don't shoot music videos... so could care less about slowmo.

2. 1080p only at 23.98/24/29.97/59.94fps. 

And?

3. No 120fps 1080p. It still has 720p for high speed video (in 2019???). 

This again?

4. MP4 video format instead of MOV

Potato potarto?

5. Internal codec limited to 4:2:0 8-bit internal recording despite that monstrous 480mbps codec MP4. Because there are other full frame cameras offering this?

6. Huge 1.7x crop factor with 4K (some even claim an imaginary 1.8x crop). Meaning low light would be an issue and the quality of sharpness may be debatable

Oh there's a crop in 4k... no one has mentioned this? 

Sharpness is fine. You can turn it completely off. Can't think of any of its contemporaries this is true for. 

 7. Recording time limited to 29:59 for continuous video recording. Guess I never noticed this as I record externally anyway for 10 bit.

8. No IBIS and many of it's new lenses don't have OIS meaning shake would be like a bad amateur after effects job. IBIS? Oh you mean the jello maker mode. Don't miss it. It's why I sold the GH5 for the S variant.

9. There was banding in photos, but it seems to have been improved substantially. Never experienced this.

9. One of the lowest rated full frame Mirrorless sensors (especially for dynamic range). 

10. Class leading rolling shutter (?) Whip pan king?

11. PDAF not as effective in 4k as it is in 1080p (only a few people seem to have noticed this, apparently). What?

12. Not the most impressive battery life. True, that honor goes to Voyager 1.

 

Ok, I got bored writing this. There are a few more points. Maybe you could fill them out when you read this. Hehehe. 

I'll add some more:

Coke not Pepsi 

I'd like to thank the academy.

Too late Luther... too late.

Let go my Eggo.

Have you actually used one... or are you a spec sheet warrior?? 

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

 

Price war on the G85 and X-T3 please 

I don’t think Fuji will feel pressured to drop the price on the X-T3 anytime soon . I understand it’s selling pretty well for them. Not sure about the G85 though.

The truth is that most filmmakers are doing fairly subtle zooms, so AF does work well enough in many cases to render the need for parfocal lenses redundant.