BenEricson

Even though, I don't refer exactly to the cinematography department but, why so much lovely pictures (at times)? If the content is repeatedly a continuous never ending déjà-vu of more the same, ad nauseam, to almost invariably make an intelligent guy or gal sleep?
Blockbusters aka Hollywood barely get success to be beyond than a wider audience they need to be up. And this means to shorten the diversity of time and space the cinema is to be able to be understood by as many as possible. Seems a contradiction but it is rather the opposite ; ) This difficulty leads to nowhere or anything really valuable and... new. (EAG :- )

Don't underestimate yourselves guys, the most part of hollywood stuff is plainly garbage (EAG :- )

Right, but the word cinematographer or DP is really just a fancy name for a camera person. Saying it is “nice videography” sounds like an effort was made to sound condensing.
All labels aside. Great camera work. Some of those shots could easily be throw into a feature. 

I think the Komodo does well with the color depth. It reminds me of the richness nighttime scenes have with 35mm. The A7 Sony stuff didn’t look as good to me.
 

Right, but the word cinematographer or DP is really just a fancy name for a camera person. Saying it is “nice videography” sounds like an effort was made to sound condensing.
All labels aside. Great camera work. Some of those shots could easily be throw into a feature. 

I think the Komodo does well with the color depth. It reminds me of the richness nighttime scenes have with 35mm. The A7 Sony stuff didn’t look as good to me.
 

I don’t think anyone ever said that... I would have to say this is cinematography, though. She’s using a particular vintage lens, camera, filtration, image processing, and shooting at particular time of day and weather conditions all to get that look.
Everyone acting like this is super easy. You’re all literally sleeping and she’s out shooting. 🤷🏼‍♂️
“Oh I could do this for sure. It’s not that good. Nice video.” Weird.

I don’t think anyone ever said that... I would have to say this is cinematography, though. She’s using a particular vintage lens, camera, filtration, image processing, and shooting at particular time of day and weather conditions all to get that look.
Everyone acting like this is super easy. You’re all literally sleeping and she’s out shooting. 🤷🏼‍♂️
“Oh I could do this for sure. It’s not that good. Nice video.” Weird.

I consider myself to becoming one. I have a lot of respect for the footage and its DP above. As a gaffer I have been an integral part contributing my lights to different DPs cinematography over the last couple of years. We all work hard for the art and dont get paid well often in the microcosm outside the general tv industry. But recognizing the average quality some well paid people produce, I won' t hesitate anymore to call myself becoming a cinematographer. By heart, effort and work ethic. 😊 And regarding framing, lensing and feeling and seeing I would consider you the same:) @mercer
I hope to get to post more in the future and to enjoy the effects of exchange and inspiration. Well all could do more of that and remember what it takes to produce material like the og post shares.

I don’t think anyone ever said that... I would have to say this is cinematography, though. She’s using a particular vintage lens, camera, filtration, image processing, and shooting at particular time of day and weather conditions all to get that look.
Everyone acting like this is super easy. You’re all literally sleeping and she’s out shooting. 🤷🏼‍♂️
“Oh I could do this for sure. It’s not that good. Nice video.” Weird.

How to with John Wilson is shot with that camera. It definitely has a video look, especially in that show. It is certainly a deal. Sony cameras depreciate like no other.

I just like the color. The halation and especially the grain aren't really my thing.

Really cinematic stuff. I own the Red Komodo and the Canon C70. This camera honestly produces a nicer image in a lot of ways. It's really wild.

Some nice family beach footage shot recently by the cinematographer Tiago Pimentel on original BMPCC on a Crane3s gimbal with a Zeiss 21mm ZF.2 lens; he graded it in Resolve and used one of Resolve's built-in Kodak emulations.
 

Again thanks for the input. I love the 4k but again rigging it out for outdoor use paired with hiking is brutal. I could run without a Vmount but the battery is horrid as you know. 
I picked up the HDMI, expansion port, rosette mount from Shijans. I was planning on using my FD speed booster with micro and 17,24,35,50 with it. It would be nice to have a remote for other lens down the road. 
Storage as well is a big thing for me. Some personal projects taking up ungodly amounts of room on the 4K. 
Lastly I am going to use the micro in a custom underwater housing I a building. For the time being I will use a Outex housing with a Laiwa 7.5mm. 
Some examples of photography that I am aiming for with the micro. 
Untitled by Dave Fason, on Flickr
BelizeLow-135 by Dave Fason, on Flickr
-Dave

If anyone is curious, I just finished up a piece shot about 50 percent with the pocket. This was graded by a colorist. 
The other half is Super 8 and there's maybe 4/5 shots with the GH5.
This might not make sense if you don't live in Seattle but maybe relatable. Anyway. Shot with the OG bmpcc.
"An experiental piece about a population coming to terms with a rapidly changing city."
 

How to with John Wilson is shot with that camera. It definitely has a video look, especially in that show. It is certainly a deal. Sony cameras depreciate like no other.

Now I actually think that Phil has a great eye, but I fully support the rest of your comment. I went out yesterday, inspired by MK, trying to find shots like hers - beautifully composed, inviting, rewarding of prolonged viewing - and it's really, really fucking hard. My admiration for her goes way beyond the technical - she strikes me as a true artist. And I'll take a moment to say that if I was shooting a scene in a city nightscape I would for sure let some of those LEDs flicker, because it immediately provokes an emotional reaction that says 'city'.
Here's her latest and I'd be interested to see any work shot with the A7IV that comes anywhere close: 
 

I disagree. Average for who? A experienced filmmaker? YouTuber?
Give 100 people the same camera setup and have them shoot locked off shots, I promise you it won't look this good. At least half of those 100 would be shooting ducks in a park like Philip Bloom.

The videos uploaded by L.A. cinematographer M. K. Rhodes are, in my opinion, utterly mesmerising. Shooting mainly on the Komodo, she captures the city at night in a truly beautiful way. This is my favourite, so far.
 
 

This is true. The noise issue in extreme situations on the C300 Mkii can be really bad. You can avoid by shooting at ISO 500 and avoid C-LOG 2 in those types of situations.
You're right, the C500 Mkii is an incredible work horse camera. It's disappointing that there is no light weight 6k codec.
My point was that the C300 Mk2 and the C70 are not worlds apart. In 95 percent of situations, they will look nearly identical. 
I was also disappointed that they removed a lot of the picture profiles in the C70. A lot of the baked in profiles that I had used in the past, (rarely,) have been removed. There is no Cinema EOS Original, no BT.709 in Clog2, they also removed the 12 bit 444 2k codec.
Interesting enough, when I compared both cameras in the Wide DR codec, there was more noise on the C70 than the C300Mkii in ISOs over 1600. I kind of expected the opposite. 
https://vimeo.com/543915327/c8c6ad9ce9
I guess my main point was that the Komodo clearly has a significant leap in quality (to my eyes.) The C500ii, C70, and C300iii all kind of look similar.
The main reason the C300ii is better ergonomically is the viewfinder, the natural weight of the camera, the full sized XLR ports, the connections being on the back rather than the side, the relocatable grip, the movable monitor. The C70 needs a cage and monitor to even get close. The lack of an EVF in the C70 really sucks tbh. Again, this all depends on what you're doing. If you're shooting with a gimbal, monopod, or locked off, the C70 is better. If you're shooting handheld run and gun with something like the 24-105, then the C300ii is likely better.
The speed booster is awesome. There is vignetting when shooting wide open on some lenses. (this is related to the speed booster, not the lenses.)
Yes, you can magnify during recording. 
Speaking of anamorphic. I did rent an Atlas 32mm over the summer. The aspect was pretty crazy because the lenses are 2x, but they did kind of remove the typical Canon look. Still kind of soft compared to the Komodo imo.
 

I think I’ve seen aliasing on a brick wall shooting 60p to an external recorder. Real world use, not sure I’ve ever seen it.

Being able to import view LUTs and bake one in would be spectacular, on any camera.  
I really see the C70 as a Get It Done camera for people who are quietly pumping out projects one after another.

Anamorphic flares - built in!
Suggest it's deliberate, charge the client more, and declare victory!!
When I got the XC10 I read about the various colour profiles and WideDR seemed to be the profile with the best reputation so I was excited to use it, especially with the 8-bit codec of the camera, but yeah, it had huge noise problems and wasn't up to it.
Sounds like you're across the saturation situations then.  I think it's one of those things that's really personal, and there's no doubt that RAW has more potential for sharpness than compressed codecs.  Or, at least, for sharpness that doesn't just look like emphasised compression artefacts.  
You're right about the operator being the limiting factor in most camera content that's posted online.  I've been hammering away at this stuff for years now and I know enough to know that I may never know enough to be "better" than my GH5, OG BMPCC or BMMCC - even as long as I live.
Enjoy your Komodo when it arrives 🙂 

Not sure. Wide DR on the C300 or C70 is rad. It's basically the neutral profile on a DSLR. It looks good enough to hand off to the client but also saves some data on the top and the bottom of the image. There's no crazy digital sharpness or noise reduction applied. 
That being said, the DGO sensor is only promised to perform better at native ISO. This is documented on the Canon site.
I see what you're saying. I think the C70 would handle this better. The problem is that there's not any more DR in the highlights, so if you're trying to avoid clipping the window, you'll still be stuck with a noisy room unless you add more light. With the Alexa, you might be able to open up another stop or two, not only that the highlights would be so much softer even if they clipped. 
I think any of those cameras can create beautiful images. The C70 or C300 will just be less fuss and you'll probably have more fun operating the camera. 
I feel like I didn't mention this earlier... The battery life on the C70 is absolutely crazy. You can run that camera for around 5/6 hours of continuous recording with just one battery. I think the power draw is one half of the C300 Mkii and one quarter the draw of the C500 Mkii. These are little things that people don't really talk about but make a huge difference.
Thanks!
I definitely have. The sharpest images I could get were with the C70 is 4K in a 4K timeline with around 15 percent sharpness. There's just a level of sharpness that a camera like the Komodo can reach that any of the C series cameras in my experience do not reach. 
I'm going to agree with what you've said in the past though... The color grading and handling of the images in post will really determine the final quality. I would say that well shot C70 or C300 footage will be much better than 95 percent of the Komodo tests online. 
That being said, the same DP who did well with the C70 will likely do even better with a Komodo. 
That's just my personal observations. I own the C70. It was a great camera this year. I'm buying the Komodo in December and i'll be using those as my A and B cams for freelance jobs.

This is true. The noise issue in extreme situations on the C300 Mkii can be really bad. You can avoid by shooting at ISO 500 and avoid C-LOG 2 in those types of situations.
You're right, the C500 Mkii is an incredible work horse camera. It's disappointing that there is no light weight 6k codec.
My point was that the C300 Mk2 and the C70 are not worlds apart. In 95 percent of situations, they will look nearly identical. 
I was also disappointed that they removed a lot of the picture profiles in the C70. A lot of the baked in profiles that I had used in the past, (rarely,) have been removed. There is no Cinema EOS Original, no BT.709 in Clog2, they also removed the 12 bit 444 2k codec.
Interesting enough, when I compared both cameras in the Wide DR codec, there was more noise on the C70 than the C300Mkii in ISOs over 1600. I kind of expected the opposite. 
https://vimeo.com/543915327/c8c6ad9ce9
I guess my main point was that the Komodo clearly has a significant leap in quality (to my eyes.) The C500ii, C70, and C300iii all kind of look similar.
The main reason the C300ii is better ergonomically is the viewfinder, the natural weight of the camera, the full sized XLR ports, the connections being on the back rather than the side, the relocatable grip, the movable monitor. The C70 needs a cage and monitor to even get close. The lack of an EVF in the C70 really sucks tbh. Again, this all depends on what you're doing. If you're shooting with a gimbal, monopod, or locked off, the C70 is better. If you're shooting handheld run and gun with something like the 24-105, then the C300ii is likely better.
The speed booster is awesome. There is vignetting when shooting wide open on some lenses. (this is related to the speed booster, not the lenses.)
Yes, you can magnify during recording. 
Speaking of anamorphic. I did rent an Atlas 32mm over the summer. The aspect was pretty crazy because the lenses are 2x, but they did kind of remove the typical Canon look. Still kind of soft compared to the Komodo imo.
 

This is true. The noise issue in extreme situations on the C300 Mkii can be really bad. You can avoid by shooting at ISO 500 and avoid C-LOG 2 in those types of situations.
You're right, the C500 Mkii is an incredible work horse camera. It's disappointing that there is no light weight 6k codec.
My point was that the C300 Mk2 and the C70 are not worlds apart. In 95 percent of situations, they will look nearly identical. 
I was also disappointed that they removed a lot of the picture profiles in the C70. A lot of the baked in profiles that I had used in the past, (rarely,) have been removed. There is no Cinema EOS Original, no BT.709 in Clog2, they also removed the 12 bit 444 2k codec.
Interesting enough, when I compared both cameras in the Wide DR codec, there was more noise on the C70 than the C300Mkii in ISOs over 1600. I kind of expected the opposite. 
https://vimeo.com/543915327/c8c6ad9ce9
I guess my main point was that the Komodo clearly has a significant leap in quality (to my eyes.) The C500ii, C70, and C300iii all kind of look similar.
The main reason the C300ii is better ergonomically is the viewfinder, the natural weight of the camera, the full sized XLR ports, the connections being on the back rather than the side, the relocatable grip, the movable monitor. The C70 needs a cage and monitor to even get close. The lack of an EVF in the C70 really sucks tbh. Again, this all depends on what you're doing. If you're shooting with a gimbal, monopod, or locked off, the C70 is better. If you're shooting handheld run and gun with something like the 24-105, then the C300ii is likely better.
The speed booster is awesome. There is vignetting when shooting wide open on some lenses. (this is related to the speed booster, not the lenses.)
Yes, you can magnify during recording. 
Speaking of anamorphic. I did rent an Atlas 32mm over the summer. The aspect was pretty crazy because the lenses are 2x, but they did kind of remove the typical Canon look. Still kind of soft compared to the Komodo imo.