j_one

The first thing OP mentioned was quality above all else. The other crucial information needed would the type of production setting/workflow the camera will be used in. OP also mentioned being prepared to manual focus, so this has me believe the shoots are more methodical and can allow for lighting around camera EI between takes, extensive grading, etc. For that, yes, get the Blackmagic 6k or Zcam offerings. Absolutely. These models are made for controlled sets and crew support. But if that assumption is wrong, and you need anything that is even remotely related to the nature of snapshot shooting, you'd be better off with a sub ~$4k mirrorless system that offers usability perks (AF, IBIS, dual gain/ISO performance, battery life, form factor, and so on).

I was a big fan of Sigma quattro sd images. Obviously their ART lenses have been a huge success. So they were the company I was rooting for to change the game with the fp. But like Panny pointed out, I'm just not feeling the images I see. I love the color depth I'm seeing, but that's it. There's something weird going on with the gamma curve, DR seems limited. From all the footage I've seen either the highlights clip hard (like GH5 footage) or the blacks crush abruptly. If they're working on a Foveon camera I'm still here for it's arrival. I want them to win.

A solid indie budget A-cam and a viable b-cam to other workhorse cameras. The improvements to the image alone get it in the territory of being taken seriously, especially the DR and color improvements. That's what folks have to pay attention to. I believe the veydra/meike lenses were absolutely made for this camera and its design/function ethos. No other mount has cinema glass that small. For the fluid small body run-n-gun style of shooting that benefits from phase detect af, pick up the OM-1 or earlier Olympus releases instead.

Me neither. I think both of the products are relatively new as of the date of this post. The 350 fits my budget/needs though. Someone in the comment section of that video claimed the 500 was little more than a stop brighter than the 350 but who knows. I think I might just go for it. I just don't want to be wrong if the godox/nanlite is a better bet. Talk me out of it man..

Apparently they changed the design of the 350 by combining those units, so it isn’t AS cumbersome in theory. I do hear you though. I mostly intended to run it from walls. I appreciate the reduced power draw and running temps LEDs bring

Hey there 👋 So I’m personally deciding between a few units, the Nanlite included. Adorama has their new Clar 350 with supposedly quieter fans (in contrast to the 300w model) listed at $450. I also have a deal for a lightly used Godox VL300 for $540 after tax/shipping. I was about to order the Godox before I saw the Nanlite and Clar. Now I’m leaning towards the Clar. The power unit setup seems similar to the aputure 600d pro, but I may be mistaken. I really only care for the bare bulb output, color accuracy, and fan noise. Opinions?

I'm also excited for the D750 price drops. It's hard to believe it came out in 2014, it's still a very capable stills camera. I actually missed the timecode out bit. That actually is very interesting..

I'm surprised to read you state that about the 1DC. Was the image just not doing it for you? Did you enjoy 5D3 RAW more? I believe Canon works for those that just want an image "that just works" without thinking of the 8bit limitations. I guess you could argue the same for Nikon video since D810/D750. I see it like this: Panny/Oly/Fuji/Sony mirrorless video can def render images that are staggering for the money. It's fun times for the enthusiast avoiding the cost of entry for cinema realm equipment and workflow. But unless you are consistently nailing your exposure and color, making sure your scene elements fit the limited DR and codec constraints of these cameras, you'll probably get stunning results 30-50% of the time and need stupid hours of post work fixing the rest of the 8bit mess, while Canon (and perhaps Nikon) dslrs/mirrorless are quite foolproof in operation to produce a result that viewers care about. Operate a 5D4 or EOSR , I'd bet you'd get more usable shots on average in run-gun situations than the other superior spec 4k mirrorless offerings. I just think Canon/Nikon images are more forgiving about screw-ups in white balance and exposure errors in 8bit h264 realm than the others, though the gap is now closing (Sony/Panny color/WB has improved, Fuji/Oly take video more seriously, etc).

If you aren't shooting for autofocus settings, or need 10bit or 4k24/60, both newer cameras can't warrant the upgrade until after you've made investments in other areas you mentioned. I'd imagine light and glass will go a long way with the D750. It's too bulletproof of a camera even for full HD. Expose and record externally though FHD recorders are cheap.. Nail that exposure for now and dress your set, then buy a beefy cinema camera later even better than the options named here! Or even Panasonics full frame offerings coming up! I vote light, audio, and set first. Again, it's only if you don't need autofocus or super detailed 4k renderings of your work. If you don't need technology "pop". Maybe it could depend on your genre. My philosophy is this: few prosumer full frame 4k cameras are as bulletproof as the D750 or 5D RAW for image. But if you truly want that digital pop, 5D/D750 will start to feel like a bottleneck at the same time. XT3 for post push and HFR, Z6 to stay with Nikon, but 4K IBIS upgrade. Your call man! D750 is plenty camera for 2k delivery if you can control your sets, think about it

I think it will turn more heads once it gets raytracing and bug fixes. It has great potential, the developer has tons of cool content showcasing previs work on his IG

Those stops y'all are debating over are going to fall apart fast in any real attempt to recover highlights/shadows, let alone gamut remapping and color pushing. The science is there to make it possible (Canon does well enough to with 8 bit in C series, d750 was nice enough) but as long as they're dropped in these heavily compressed mirrorless codecs...you might as well keep that noise floor crushed to blacks imo. Trade color for stretched thin DR? On you

Are you sure they were taking stills? Not video?

I actually have both of those issues, exactly as described. I'm assuming you're using nx lenses as well? Have you tried with any manual or adapted lenses? Why does color tint drift when white balance is set to Kelvin values? Why exposure drift on manual? The camera wants to do it's own thing lol This is a dead system, I don't blame you for immediately moving to a more reliable, supported system for professional work you can't afford to screw up. But it would be nice to fix, nx1 and it's S lenses are still pretty unique and relevant today. You know there's a nx subforum right?

I got the 4/3 panaleica 14-50mm f2.8-3.5 OIS with adapter on my bmpcc, for $300. Not quite LX100 spec but the lens peaked my interest, I was curious when I heard about the "leica rendering" and great IQ for a zoom. No speed booster glass in the way, super sharp, and OIS for my pocket via 4/3 adapter electronics, at least no more micro jitters Cons: it's big and heavy for m43 system, autofocus is useless, and the OIS is pretty dated in performance especially for video use. Otherwise...yeah. leica rendering indeed. Just good glass. Cheers

This is awesome work BTM, seriously nice job. It makes using the gx85 and lx100 more attractive to shoot with, being my choice for compact size cams with the bmpcc. Pocket-sized latitude for the grade! Can someone confirm if CineV settings also aren't working properly on lx100?

Oh yeah, if you're cool with hacks, the best option IQ wise, imo 5d mkiii RAW 10bit 60p Wedding example

My recommendations, as others have already stated: d750 - the body is dropping in price, keep an eye out for a deal. Full frame, super DR and color edge over a7s, but soft 1080p. nx1 - jack up the bitrate with the hack, invest in Luca's speed booster, and keep that ISO as low as possible...you have a excellent 120p performer. Best 120p full frame for the price (maybe the only). Great color and sharpness, lackluster DR and strange highlight/black levels when grading if you ever miss your mark on exposure. a7s - keep it in crop mode and speedboost. Best low light, great sharpness, DR and highlight roll off but, imo, terrible white balance and strange colors. Compression isn't the best either a5100 - super cheap, speed boost it and it's quite comparable to the a7s, a tad bit softer, a bit less dr and a bit more macroblocking/artifacts but for the price... And hear me out Bmmcc - if you can live with near apsc crop instead of full frame, bmmcc speedboosted would probably yield the most beautiful results. But that's subjective, as I value color information a bit more than compressed 60p. buy an rx100 iv as b cam for superior slow mo of any of the cams. Excellent sensor readout and result for a compressed image. 1 inch sensor though.

To be honest, my sights are currently on the XT-2 and fuji ecosystem, so I'm curious to know the same as OP

Wondering what that third one is. Seems soft and even, like I'd use for film projects. Is that second one the panny?

60p would go to the A7S mk1 cropped, then nikon d3300/d5500/d750 and 5D RAW ...I'll throw in that 120p would go to fs700 4k and rx100 iv/rx10 ii I'm sure I'd love the BMMCC 60p more than anything for the price, but I haven't tried the camera yet.

I'd recommend the a5100 or g7x if you want to keep it cheap. Selfie articulating screen and good 1080p. A bit of aliasing out of the a5100 but you have fast AF and choice of lenses.

I used to think noise reduction was the key and holy grail to professional standard delivery when I first started handling footage in post. It helps sometimes, but now I'm so used to making sure I'm exposing with base ISO and adequate light to avoid the need altogether. I can't stand the plastic look that sometimes comes from it, and it really bogs down post-time for all the system resources it eats up. I hate 'color noise' or the digital blotches that come from compressed video. Guess that's why I hate seeing rainbow moire but can live with simple aliasing. Desaturating shadows helps. And as you said, a little noise never hurt anyone.

Do you take many stills on a professional level? Do you not mind the h.265 codec, along with it's macroblocking artifacts and slightly limited ability to push in grade? Then the NX1 will perform will excellence. It has better rec709 colors popping right out the cam moreso than the G7. 'S' lenses are great to use. S35 sensor off the bat. Currently it's resolution is king. Use some kind of filter that can diffuse the image and cut down on the in-camera sharpening. OTHERWISE I'd say get the G7 and speedbooster. Options for lenses are overwhelming, considering the m43 native mount alongside all the speedbooster mounts. Codec holds up well when pushing the grade if you expose right and get white balance spot on! Getting rid of this 'plastic' yellow/green cast and skintone look I keep hearing about can be dealt with in seconds. Also mostly avoidable with proper white balance. But it's hard to save h.265 footage with strange milky blacks and limited color info coming from the NX1. TBH same goes for most cameras talked about on this forum even Sony. But again, as mentioned earlier, which one is a breeze to shoot with and get you the results you need? This is subjective. I'd say both cams are excellent in handle and usability. But in post, I'd feel more comfortable working with the h.264 panny files.

I do believe this is the only current workaround. Use presets for scenes where you know the camera's field of view will change, in an environment with mixed light, so that the NX1 won't guess green or magenta tint. Can someone confirm?

Solid review Andrew, thanks. I'll personally use this camera for creative shooting that requires wide-angle gimbal shots of short length (music videos, fashion films, etc)