Geoff CB

If its got 4k 60p 10 bit I'll be down. I am more onboard with Nikon colors and of course the usable auto focus. 

Ah don't need the explanation after all.
Better remember to log out of your shill account before posting with your main account next time @Hangs4Fun

After doing videos for three years, I've learned an expensive camera does not always equal to an expensive and beautiful image. Part of that "Arri" look or cinematic look as people call it, is created before the camera starts to capture. 
The videos now I can shoot with very cheap camera are so much better than what I used to shoot using a Sony A7S2. Give the best camera in the world to a newbie and he is going to still have bad result. Something I only learned after quite a few bad investments. 😅
What I want to say is, a thick image with great contrast and saturation has to be created on the set, and then enhanced with camera and post production. If you can fully control the set, you don't even need log profile or crazy high bitrate or raw most of the time, though they are certainly nice to have. 

Your terminology seems confused: image density refers to how well exposed a (film) image is. A well exposed negative will literally be denser/thicker than an underexposed one, which will be thin.

Damn you Caleb! 😂🤣😭

Sorry for the slight off topic but it's  funny you didn't describe the canon RP (1.6 crop) in such disparaging terms when you were bigging it up against the Fuji XT3 the other day.
I think the z50 has its place although I agree that it is going to have a hard time against its more established mirrorless competitors until the price goes down even if it does seem a better spec'd camera  

Canon EOS R if you are ok without 4K 10-bit out of the camera.
Honetly, for YouTube even 1080p that has been up scaled to 4K for YouTube looks good enough for what YouTube is at the moment.
Other than that its the waiting game.

Most digital projectors are 2K (Even digital IMAX is 2 2K projectors next to each other), compression and color win out over 4K every single time unless the audience is told the difference. I can spot it because I look at this stuff constantly. 
Your essentially correct on the VFX side for capture, though the 2K for visual effects has less to do with masking flaws than it takes 4 times as long to render a 4K frame than a 2K frame. It's a cost saving measure.

Feeble... 🤣🤣🤣
Most of what you said amounts to media storage costs and extra encoding.  Both of which I mentioned and neither of which are hidden.  Sure, you've given extra details of individual media needed and cases of encoding.
Batteries aren't a good argument.  Will my GH5 use more power recording HD downsampled from 6K rather than 4K downsampled...??  IBIS and screen will be a heavier draw.  
As for issues with effects, I mentioned that my worst experience editing was working with HD AVCHD files.  I was still working with them when I was also working with H264 4K files and I had an easier time with the 4K.  So its not resolution dependant. 
Now I film with BRAW onto a SSD drive directly from the camera.  No media change needed and no stress.  It copies much quicker and can also be used for editing directly.  BRAW edits much quicker than H264 HD as I found when I worked on am old project recently.  The HD files played back worse after grading than the BRAW which had even more grade nodes than HD including noise reduction and grain.  My cooling fan can kick in just as quickly with HD H264 over 4K BRAW.  I never work with proxys or caches.  I don’t need to.  I did get a new computer a few years back, but only as my old one packed up.  Sure it was higher spec, but not more expensive than the old one when I bought it new.  
As I render overnight, the length of time is often immaterial, but I would give the edge to HD over that.  Also storage costs.  But again, these aren't hidden costs.  
I'm having a much easier time editing these days than I ever did back when shooting HD.  Colour and detail is better and I get results I'm happier with much easier than before. 
When you factor in things like crop, stabilisation, selecting areas of the video for fine tuning colour; the benefits of 4K outweigh the few negatives it has.  Stress of file management is as much a case for HD as it is for 4K.  If I shoot 100 HD clips I still have the same concerns over copying them all successfully.  In fact, last year I lost some HD clips from a Guest Message booth I setup.  My 4K clips were fine.  
If anything 4K ensures I don't have too many projects on a hard drive should it fail.  😉
 

It's the whole workflow.
Just off the top of my head:
Having to buy larger cards for capture Spending time changing media in the field Creative energy spent worrying about media management Extra batteries (if higher resolutions take extra power, not sure) and worrying about batteries going flat Having to wait longer for media to transfer to storage Having to transfer more cards to storage Having to pay for more storage Having to scale up when a drive gets full, eg, having to manage multiple drives and adjust backups and figure out extra media management protocols due to having more drives, or having to go to an expensive NAS style solution when you get more drives than the simple and cheaper docks can handle Having to buy larger editing SSDs for holding footage because the project is larger Having to buy a more powerful computer to play footage smoothly, or time spent waiting for proxies to render is longer Having to buy a more powerful computer / GPU to process the footage Having interruptions to your workflow when you max out your hardware with effects and transitions and the NLE can't play realtime anymore, or having to spend more time working with caches to pre-render those heavy computational sections of a project Having your creativity limited by sticking to processing options within your hardware performance (did you know Resolve has some time-stretching algorithms that use AI?  and that's just one effect, there will be more) Having to wait longer for projects to render Having to wait longer for files to transfer during delivery and/or having to buy better/more internet to cope with the increased sizes Having to wait longer for backup cycles and media management tasks further down the line There's even the minor stuff that probably isn't that much, but includes extra cost of electricity, extra cooling, extra effort or creative drain dealing with the extra noise in the studio due to more fans or faster spinning of fans required for cooling, etc etc etc
As a quick attempt at naming some stuff how was that?

I doubt Pentax will survive. Ricoh could probably justify (in a Japanese sort of way) keeping the business open while its core business was doing well. But now that its office equipment business has collapsed (and is likely to be difficult for several years) the camera business just becomes an obvious cost saving item.
I am not sure Canon and Nikon moving their focus to mirrorless really helps Pentax. You now just find that you can pick up Canon and Nikon DSLRs (and to some extent dslr lenses) dirt cheap, so there is no real advantage to moving or choosing Pentax.
My feeling is that Pentax's lack of move into mirrorless is a sign of weakness (Ricoh not committing to the investment) rather than a core strategic decision. (A bit like Olympus's decision not to join the L mount but stick to M43.)

The more I pull colour science apart, the more I realise that companies like BM and Nikon have colour science either just as good as Canon or within a tiny fraction, and also that ARRI colour science isn't perfect and there are things about it I don't care for.
I know that this will get me ejected from the 'colour science bro club' but I don't care about being popular and fitting in, I care about colour science and good images.

Post #100000000 on this.

 ARRI/Canon/Kodak will win the majority. People who know what they're doing can make ANY of these cameras look great and poor artists can make them look bad.

Talent/lighting/lenses/grading make more of a difference than the brand. 

If pentax want to continue as a niche product like Leica I think they might be able to pull it off. I think in general now camera sales now are driven by video specs. Because the photography side of things has been "good enough" for awhile.
Hell I occasionally miss my  DSLR, but I was never willing to give pentax a shot because I would not be able to use my nikon glass on it. Mirrorless, I can just adapt my glass so jumping systems is pretty easy. 

Love my Super Taks - all I'm gonna say.

So here's a simple story:  I was in the market to hire a guy about 4 years ago for a video shoot.  A shooter contacted me to inquire about the gig, but had almost no experience with motion pictures.  
He was just getting into video from photography and he asked me if his lowly Pentax, which only did 60p @720 would be okay.  His photos showed that he had a great eye for composition and when we talked about the assignment he explained that he was a video neophyte, but was willing and eager to learn.
Seemed like a bit of a risk to hire this dude. After all here was a guy shooting on a decidedly not video-centric DSLR and admitting that video wasn't his main thing.  After some coaching, both of us reviewing past examples of the job I was hiring him for, and collaborating about what I wanted to see in the footage, we decided to partner up, and off he went.
Meanwhile, I simultaneously hired another guy for the same sort of shoot on the opposite side of the country.  Dude made sure to tell me more than once what his list of gear included (would you also like to know about his C300 and PL mount lenses?  Apparently he was convinced I did) --and how he was a video professional with years of experience.  Sure, he knew what I wanted, not a problem; don't even need to discuss it.  After watching past examples of the job and assuring me he could do it, off he went.
With that narrative set-up you can probably imagine who delivered spot on incredible b-roll shots that were a bit IQ mushy, but captured great scenarios and emotion --and who gave me a pile of shit footage with no cohesiveness or creativity, (plus couldn't even get the horizon level) but sure looked super sharp with great colors.
I don't know if any of this is germane to the thread, but... Here's hoping that niche players like aspiring videographer Phil from North Carolina hang in there...and their camera gear supplier does too.

Poll: Which manufacturer generally delivers the most pleasing images - focusing on sensor 'mojo', colour science, etc ... disregarding lens mount, usability, etc.
Choose as many as you want.
If I haven't listed a manufacturer you'd like to see, mention it in the comments.
Might do a poll on specific models if this one is popular. Suggestions of favourite models welcomed (in the comments).

Wooooooooooooooooooo! Samsung NX1, baby!!!

ALL Loaded up, ready to do a day hike and see if I can't get some footage.  I am going to try to get some 4K/120p using a Motorized Jib with pan/tilt, as well as some Dolly in and Dolly out shots, and Sliders.  There's a small water fall I have access to, I was going to use as the subject.
I'm also going to take the same shots but in 24P along with RAW output at the same time.  This way we can look at the difference between ProRes RAW 12bit and Internal All-I 10bit.
I can't believe it all fit in that Edelkrone backpack, here's everything that is loaded:
Sony A7SIII with 24GM f/1.4 Induro GIT304L carbon fiber w/ 75mm modular system to swap out heads/motion controllers fast Edelkrone JibONE (for motorized jib shots) Edelkrone Dual HeadONE setup (for motorized pan and tilt) Edelkrone SliderPLUS v5 Long Edelkrone Slide Module v3 Edelkrone FlexTilt 2 Edelkrone Backpack Cat hair on backpack provided by my youngest daughters Himalayan Simese, lol HEAVY as heck, but the backpack has decent waste and shoulder straps, and the weight is stable.
If all works out well, I will try to upload the footage to my vimeo site tonight and will share here.
 

NX1 still on the list 😉
 

$5500 for a Canon cine camera isn't high. Yes, you're paying the Canon tax, and yes there are cameras out there with better specs and for less, but there is a large group of folks that won't leave Canon and this is an incredibly enticing camera to get people to enter their cine lineup that haven't already. 

I know some people were interested in the reported in camera Highlights and Shadows adjustment in the Standard Creative Look and aren't plan on using SLog-3 or RAW.  For those, you will be pleasantly surprised at the adjustments you can make in camera (and these make a lot more sense than some of the concepts covered in Picture Profiles).  I still recommend trying SLog-3 with this camera. 
Here are the Standard Creative Look settings and the amount of adjustments you can do now.  Defaults are 0 on all of them except Sharpness defaults to 4 and Clarity to 1.
Contrast -9 to +9 Highlights -9 to +9 Shadows -9 to +9 Fade from 0 to +9 Saturation from -9 to +9 Sharpness from 0 to +9  (default is 4) Clarity from 0 to +9   (default is 1)

There are really no bad options among all the 10-bit FF hybrids, they all have warts, but they all are capable of producing an amazing image. Sometimes we get hung up on bickering over aspects that are dealbreakers for me but not an issue for you. I don’t have the time while I work or the eyesight for manual focus, so for me I need good AF and a few key primes. And I have no interest in a c300 size camera. Obviously others don’t have the same problem. But right now only Sony, Canon and Nikon cover the bases and despite a brief flirtation with the RF mount I’m sticking with Sony. My a7s3 is on the way, it’ll be my first camera that shoots decent 120fps and 10-bit after years of Sony’s 8-bit codec. Good times. 
cheers
chris

Here's the XLR-K3M running 4 channels into the A7SIII.  This way you inject 24bit/48khz digital signals straight into the media file and have dials and switches of control.  In the A7SIII screen shot you can see the 4 channels levels on the bottom left with a peak marker.  Once the XLR-K3M is plugged in, you can no longer control levels in the camera, it is all controlled on the outside dials of the XLR-K3M.
My typical setup and what I used in this example is a boomed MKH-416 on Channel 1, the XLR mic that came with the XLR-K3M as the on-camera mic (or could be a second boomed mic) as Channel 2, and 2 RODE Wireless Go setups using a splitter that runs one of the lav setups as the left channel (Channel 3) and the other as the right channel (Channel 4).
I verified that I can take the MP4 from the A7SIII with these 4 audio channels into Premiere and see each of the 4 channels and can control each one separately.  For me this is HUGE, because you are basically looking at the FX9 I could not afford (or justify this year) and I needed 4 channels of audio preferably not external, for doing in studio or on location interviews. 

Suddenly all cameras have to have raw?! 12 months ago that wasn't even the norm. 3 years ago? 5 years ago? and how much you needed for that?
This is a fast turn around camera. Buy the C300 or C200 if you need Canon raw so much, or a Pocket 4K for 1/4 of the money, or any other option. C200 especially will trickle down in price considerably, there will be dead cheap ones in the wild really soon.
As simple as that.
You hate to do transcoding to all your footage, but have plenty of time to work raw files? 
The huge success of the C100 cameras, were/is the fact that you didn't need much time in post, that was the greatest selling point of those cameras, and sold really good. This is the C100mkII of the new age, so that is the intended use, there are other products more suitable for your needs, I am certain. 
One product can't please everyone.
The 18-80 is a perfect fit but quite pricey some will say, the cheap solution is the 18-135mm, dead cheap and sufficient for most run and gun needs.