ac6000cw

Now released:
A7C ii - https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a7c-ii-initial-review-not-so-small-improvements
A7CR - https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a7cr-initial-review-high-resolution-in-a-small-package
Sony certainly seems keen on filling every niche they can with a camera...

Well, quick test, very unscientific one, but here we go:

6.2k 30p, Long Gop 10bit 4:2:2 360mbps. Camera on Boost mode, filming a TV screen with a movie playing to give a harder time for the codec (if you test in a static shot, in theory the encoding work could be pretty minimal in a long gop).  Face detect running too, getting faces on the tv screen.

Temperature set on the menus to "High", back LCD in open position.

Extreme Pro V30 200 Mbps card. Room temperature, 24 deg celsius, 70% humidity.

First overheating warning (yellow) appeared around the 25 minutes mark. The red warning appeared very soon after, around 29 minutes. But the camera never shutdown, ran for 45 minutes until the 128gb card was full.

Camera hot to touch, much than usual, but not close to cause a burn. With an infrared thermometer (not a very precise one) marked around 38 degrees on the back, where the fan could attach. The bottom plate was hotter, arounf 42 degrees, but you can hold the camera on the bottom without disconfort. The grip was hot too, around 40 degrees - removed the battery and card right after, battery hot but no so much, card was hotter.

Was expecting worse, since the red warning appeared so soon. Since the battery was a source of heat, probably feeding energy with a PD charger could extend the run times (and probably mandatory if you want continuous takes bigger than this, albeit the battery just dropped one bar).

Will do the same test in a hotter day under the sun (probably some months from now, it's winter here). Guess that yeah , a shutdown is a possibility under hot sun.

I settled on using the A7iii for video and will leave my Blackmagic cams at home. I did a lot of tests with the Sony, including one at a concert Tuesday night, all of which came out better than I expected.
Now my only quandary is lenses. Ideally I'd shoot all the video on one lens for consistency/continuity, but I only have one zoom, the Tokina ATX Pro 28-70 f2.6-2.8 (the Angénieux design) and while I love it in daylight I've been less than thrilled with the images I get from it at concerts. I have that lens in Nikon mount, and the other Nikon mount lens I have is the Zeiss ZF.2 Distagon 35mm/1.4, which is an amazing lens but won't match well with the Tokina. On the rangefinder prime side I have three Sonnar lenses (50mm, 73mm, and 105mm) but nothing wider than 35mm.
The first dance is tonight, but the headline acts are tomorrow night so I'll be able to try out a few different lens strategies tonight to see what works best in this location and under this lighting.

I've worn varifocals (every day) for longer than I can remember - at least 10 years.
As MrSMW said, the first time you wear them it takes a few days - at least - to adapt to them (and some people don't like/can't adapt to them). 
Personally I really like them and wouldn't have anything else now.
I always buy the varifocal lenses with the largest usable lens areas (near, mid, far) the optician offers - it  makes a big difference to the usability. They are often the most expensive but for something I use all day, every day I think it's worth it. Much better to spend the money on the lenses than expensive fancy frames, IMHO. It's like buying pro-grade camera zoom lenses versus kit zooms - the performance is less compromised.
Like MrSMW, I use the Specsavers chain in the UK - this is their guide to varifocals - https://www.specsavers.co.uk/glasses/glasses-lenses/varifocals (I use their 'Tailor-made' lenses)
Note it's more critical for varifocal lenses to be positioned correctly in relation to the eye pupil than single-vision lenses, so make sure the optician adjusts the frames to suit you when you get them.

I've worn varifocals (every day) for longer than I can remember - at least 10 years.
As MrSMW said, the first time you wear them it takes a few days - at least - to adapt to them (and some people don't like/can't adapt to them). 
Personally I really like them and wouldn't have anything else now.
I always buy the varifocal lenses with the largest usable lens areas (near, mid, far) the optician offers - it  makes a big difference to the usability. They are often the most expensive but for something I use all day, every day I think it's worth it. Much better to spend the money on the lenses than expensive fancy frames, IMHO. It's like buying pro-grade camera zoom lenses versus kit zooms - the performance is less compromised.
Like MrSMW, I use the Specsavers chain in the UK - this is their guide to varifocals - https://www.specsavers.co.uk/glasses/glasses-lenses/varifocals (I use their 'Tailor-made' lenses)
Note it's more critical for varifocal lenses to be positioned correctly in relation to the eye pupil than single-vision lenses, so make sure the optician adjusts the frames to suit you when you get them.

Finally got some time to navigate all the menu and do some quick tests. Call me impressed.

Surprise one: one little old desire (that nobody mentioned in the reviews) was that now the "3d" electronic level could be enabled pemanentely on the screen / EVF; in the X-S10 - and I guess in all the last generation's Fujis - only the horizontal level was permanent, the 3D version should be activated by a custom button, and disappeared after taking a shot.

Surprise two: a new focus assist tool, only in video mode - Focus Meter. Is a "needle gauge" that shows where to turn the focus ring to bring the image in focus, and that could be used in conjunction with peaking. Works very well and very accurately.

And finally, the AF. The face / eye AF interface and working mode was completely changed form the 4th gen Fuji's. In these (X-S10, X-T4, etc), when face / eye AF is on, the camera selects a face / eye and shows it on the screen in green, the other faces are marked with grey boxes, and you could change the face to focus with the joystick. In theory, a good system - until you hit record, and the camera goes haywire changing the face focused at will. For me, with more than one face on the frame, was unusable.

Now, you choose a area box (that you could resize), and the camera will focus on the closest face of the box. Period. And tends to stick quite a bit in that face before switching to other. Not a perfect system - did not tested the worst situation, with all other people standing in place and the focused person going to the edge of the frame, far from the box, which in theory will make the camera changing the face focused - but if you keep the subject in the same spot of the frame, or move the box with the joystick, works perfectly.

There are more subtleties to discover - one test was filming my wife's father, my wife and my daughter playing in our living room, tracking my daughter (an electric 4 year old), a case which the X-S10 failed completely; the focus point moved from person to person if they are close. With the X-S20, started tracking my daughter, and NEVER let her go. Focus spot on 100% of the time. And with an unexpected behaviour when my daughter got very close to my wife's father, instead of jumping faces, the old gray box appeared on his face, but the AF was kept on my daughter. One touch on the joystick, and then he was in focus - even with my daughter closer to the AF box. Another touch, returned to my daughter. Just as I wanted to be.

The detection is much improved too. In the X-S10, if the person turns and the face did not appear, the camera reverts to the original AF mode. The X-S20 recognizes the back of a head - when the person turns, it starts tracking the back of the head. The person turns back, it revert to the eyes again. And the face / eye detection works in much farther distances than before, and gathers eye / face instantly.

Is a completely new behaviour, much, much better than before.

I have had the Z8 since late May and have not experienced any heat-related warnings or other signs of overheating. I live in Finland so our weather is not like Florida but we've had 28 C days. When shooting video, I have used mostly Prores 422 HQ in 4K/25, 4K/50 or 1080p/50 but also tested 4K/120 h.265 and they all worked fine in and out of doors. The most I shot on a day was about 200 GB of video onto CFexpress type B (325 GB ProGrade Digital Cobalt). I've also used Sony 128 GB CFexpress and those didn't overheat in the time required to fill up the card in 4K/25 Prores 422 HQ but the card was very warm to the touch afterwards. 
 
Tests published on youtube by Ricci Chera (who works for Nikon School UK, so keep that in mind), Gerald Undone and others generally found that the Z8 can overheat in the most data-intensive video modes in about 30 min if using memory cards that tend to run hot, but using the right cards (Delkin Black is reported to run the coolest, Prograde Digital Cobalt is also good), the camera typically runs out of battery (2 hours on one charge of the EN-EL15c) before overheating, according to those reports. Both Delkin Black and Prograde Cobalt cards are sometimes significantly discounted at B&H, so if getting a Z8, one may want to look out for those deals. My own experience confirms that the Prograde Cobalt seems to run less hot than the Sony and I'm happy with the purchase although these cards aren't exactly cheap. For longer recording times I would likely go with Delkin Power as those are available in larger capacities.
 
I love the Prores 422 HQ; such amazing detail and color. I have no experience shooting 8K.

Another great bit of advice I got in my early days was to go study paintings.  Particularly Vermeer's and Caravaggio's.  
As an idiot that didn't understand what made a nice image work and a bad one fail, just analyzing and deconstructing the craft of painting helped a ton.  Absolutely brand-dead simple ideas like having your subject brighter than the background (contrast) confounded me as a newbie, but once I started seeing the techniques like that in practice I couldn't unsee it, and I got better.
Which is why I'm pretty camera agnostic these days.  There's so many fundamental techniques that need to be in place and exercised to create awesome images.  Grabbing the most expensive camera/lens doesn't accomplish that for you, it only assists.

Interesting..  I thought this was a good explainer:
TLDR; Nolan only mixes for the best theatres, and doesn't care about shittier ones.
I guess that arrogance has run its course, since you saw it on IMAX and still couldn't hear it!

Currently waiting for a gig to start tonight with my Pocket.
Fashionably early though !
Nice to have a stabilised anamorphic camera that raises absolutely zero eyebrows from security staff either on the way in or when you are using it.

Yes, I usually do that just to get decent looking 1080p when it's played, irrespective of the original source material.
In case anyone is interested, this is an example FFmpeg command line to process 4:3 PAL DV into 1440x1080p H.264 at 20Mbps using the Intel QSV encoder (command should be all on one line, input=PAL_DV.avi, output=PAL_DV_1080p.mp4):
ffmpeg.exe -i PAL_DV.avi -vf estdif,scale=1440x1080:flags=lanczos+accurate_rnd+full_chroma_int+full_chroma_inp,unsharp -c:v h264_qsv -preset veryslow -b:v 20M -c:a aac -b:a 256k PAL_DV_1080p.mp4
 

I also think the sensor matters a lot more than the codec. The Alexa looks great in Prores 422, but its still reading out at 14 bits and getting most of the dynamic range. 

One of the reasons I prefer prores to RAW is because you can downsample. This saves you data without losing much resolution. Downsampled 2k on the Alexa looks about as good as the full 3.2k resolution, but you use way less space. I have downsampled 6k to 2k on the S1H. The 2k side by side with 6k is almost indistinguishable unless you are really cropping in a lot. Shooting in 6k resolution is super data heavy. The last film I worked on we shot on the URSA 12K in 12k. Crazy data rates. I wish the Ursa 12k had an option to downsample from 12k to 4k prores. 

The in camera 4k RAW on the URSA 12K is noticeably less detailed than the 12k. Down sampled 12k Prores would look insanely sharp. 

Of course you can always shoot in whatever codec and transcode in post, but its just nice to get it in camera, throw it on your computer and it's ready to go. 

I don't think we should extrapolate that to decide what is best for the prosumer market.
If we compare RAW with Prores (especially Prores 4:4:4 which is sadly completely lacking from the prosumer market), then we see that:
Prores is compressed, but so are most forms of RAW
RAW has to be de-bayered but RAW is also frequently compressed in a lossy way as the bitrates are almost unmanageable otherwise - this is especially true considering that most implementations of RAW are at the sensors full resolution, or are a brutal crop into the sensor completely revising your whole lens package RAW is ALL-I, but so is Prores Prores is constant-bitrate per pixel, but so is RAW RAW is "professional" quality, but so is Prores The comparison even extends into licensing, where there's been frequent speculation about licensing fees being a barrier to why manufacturers are reluctant to include Prores, and with RAW the patents are also a barrier.
The more I think about this, the more that I think cameras should just implement the full-range of Prores codecs (LT, 422, HQ, and 444) and forget about RAW with all the BS that seems to go along with it...  the image quality, bit-depths, bit-rates, performance in post, support across platforms, and licensing all seems to be similar to RAW or in the favour of Prores.

The verdict...
Mixed actually.
Keeping it, but putting it into a purely static role.
I have not yet edited the footage and created a finished production, but trawled through enough of the clips to get a solid idea.
I think if I was purely a videographer, I'd get a matte box and go with something like this or one of the modern cine zooms such as the Laowa 28-70 or the DZO 35-80. 
Probably the Laowa because from what I have seen in side by side comparison, I prefer the rendering which is a slightly more contrasty modern look.
The CZ40-80 is the exact opposite. Not completely softer, but much softer and less contrasty.
From what I have seen, the DZO is somewhere between but more towards the Laowa.
But I am a hybrid shooter and my overall conclusion is a pure manual focus lens does not have a place as my main roaming video lens.
Anyway, this lens...
IBIS was OK as was focusing most of the time.
Focus would have been easier/better on the S1H rather than the S5ii because it's a slightly bigger and brighter screen. 
Even better with a 5 or 7 inch monitor, but then we're getting into videographer territory rather than hybrid shooter so a no no for me and the S1H is my primary stills unit.
But the 40 + 80 mm focal lengths that I used it at were perfect for me.
Close focus was terrible at well over 1 metre/3 feet so not a good lens at all for any kind of detail work.
So as above, keeping it and welding it on to one of my S5ii's, (the injured one with a half press AF issue). Static duty only for ceremonies or speeches where it shines as switching on or off does not lose focus as it does with these modern fly by wire focus lenses where you have to reset it every time, even when set in manual mode.
I've decided that as much as I prefer shooting 6k 30p for the quality, it's a bit of a pain in the arse being able to shoot shutter angle outdoors, but indoors, having to switch to 1/50th in order to avoid or at least massively reduce, any flickering/banding. So back to 4k 50p it is.
Shooting 4k 50p means with my other S5ii, my roving video unit, I can use the tiny Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 (27-75) again, making for a nice compact unit that is not too heavy. Yes, weight has a certain quality for stability purposes, but it gets wearing, even for a fit bloke over a full day.
That just leaves the S1H which is still my favourite camera (that I have owned or used) in a primarily stills role, but hybrid during ceremony & speeches when both the S5ii's are pulling static duty.
Still toying what to do with this as there are pros and cons to keeping separate stills and video units or having them all hybrid.
It's the lenses that are causing me the biggest issue as they have done since embarking on this hybrid journey over a decade ago.
Right now, my top 3/4 bodies are; R3, Z9/Z8 and S1H.
The lenses I would like are all Sony fit however, though can be adapted or coming to Nikon.
L Mount/the S1H has only one lens that I'm really a fan of/suits my needs and that is the Sigma 28-70mm f2.8
It's a dilemma because there are 3 principle options:
A. Flip to Canon R3 for stills/hybrid, but it's 10k to do so, or 7k including trade in of S1H and a couple of lenses. For a single, not sideways, but marginal improvement, unit. The main appeal would be weight saving which is considerable. I could then explore shooting 6k 50p and pulling stills however which is a big future potential thing for me...
B. Flip to Nikon Z9 or Z8 for stills/hybrid and as with the Canon, a considerable cost to trade of around 6k. I prefer the weight savings with the Canon set up, but I could explore 8k 50p now for pulling those stills...
C. Stick with the S1H whose real only weaknesses are: bulk/weight (with grip and lens choices over the above options), lacks PDAF and battery grips annoy me as there is always slight movement in them. The big plus with this option though is what the S1H replacement might be...
I just can't make a decision one way or the other but I'm fairly confident the pair of S5ii's will remain as dedicated video units and ideally, the stills/hybrid unit would remain in the same ecosystem, but not opposed to having a 'next gen' pro unit in the mix and arguably the R3/Z9/Z8 are the current next gen units. OK, the Sony A1 also is, but additional battery grip and it doesn't work for me.
R3's, despite being more expensive new, are going for 500+ less than Z9's in equivalent condition... 
It's not simple. It never is.

Another thing with YouTube, if your source material is 25 or 50 fps, is that only 720p and higher playback resolutions support those frame rates, so to get a source-matching playback fps you have to upload at a minimum of 720p (but I'd suggest 1080p like Kye has).
For PAL DV, I normally use FFmpeg to de-interlace (using 'estdif'), upscale, sharpen and encode to H264 1080p 50fps files before I edit it. Because (by today's standards) DV tends to be horribly noisy, you need to use a decent bitrate to keep the H264 1080p quality decent - otherwise the noise creates too many compression artefacts.

Another thing with YouTube, if your source material is 25 or 50 fps, is that only 720p and higher playback resolutions support those frame rates, so to get a source-matching playback fps you have to upload at a minimum of 720p (but I'd suggest 1080p like Kye has).
For PAL DV, I normally use FFmpeg to de-interlace (using 'estdif'), upscale, sharpen and encode to H264 1080p 50fps files before I edit it. Because (by today's standards) DV tends to be horribly noisy, you need to use a decent bitrate to keep the H264 1080p quality decent - otherwise the noise creates too many compression artefacts.

Bitrate is 100mbps fixed which is near as dammit the upper limit of the variable bitrate that my iPhone 12 uses (a typical comparator for what people would use a Pocket for) and I don't find it lacking for the purpose.
More important for me is that the Osmo Pockets have Cinelike D which is a good compromise and very easy to grade.
I had to do a little project at the weekend using the LX10/15 (with my Cinelike D hack activated) and the Pocket and they matched easily both in terms of colour and acceptably enough in image quality.
On the Pocket 2, it is derived from a 4.6K sensor which is giving about 1.2x lossless zoom when shooting in 4K and roughly 2x and 1.6x in 1080p and 2.7K respectively.
In the edit, I punched in to around 2x on a 4K file from my weekend project and was comfortable with the result so I wouldn't be bothered going up to say 1.5x as a safety and then adding the rest in the edit.
A big advantage of the Pocket is adding the control stick which will give you full pan/tilt/zoom controls right from the handle.
That usability trumps a small loss of image quality for the purposes I use it for.
 
The 24mm in that spec is coming from it being a drone camera though.
The actual lens on a Pocket 2 is 20mm f1.8.
On of the beauties of this camera though are the magnetic clip on wide angle adapters (which gives you 15mm) and of course the anamorphic versions too.
As well as also simultaneously being able to us magnetic ND filters too.
If DJI do bring a new version 3 out with an optical zoom and/or with 10 bit capture then that would be great but I have to say that even as it stands now the Pocket 2 is a very compelling camera for travel and, for me, it is a vastly superior proposition to my iPhone for that role.
Its not only because of the creative possibilities it has with having an integrated gimbal so you are not only stabilised but can do tracking etc or the anamorphic and NDs or the ability to have real hardware controls with the control stick.
Its that you can take it out of your pocket, hold the power button on and be ready to shoot 2 seconds later rather than titting about unlocking the phone, opening an app and making sure you are in the correct mode.
Another bonus is that if do have a need for remote shooting or self shooting with tracking then you can operate it from your phone which you can't do with your phone as you are already using it to film with 😉 

A6700 'Film mode' test now on optyczne.pl - https://www.optyczne.pl/79.1-Inne_testy-Sony_A6700_-_test_trybu_filmowego.html - with downloadable video samples
4k resolution test:
Full HD resolution test:
 

Of the Panasonic cameras I've owned:
The 1080p on the G9 is superb (GH5 standard AFAIK), as is the 4k. MIx 1080p and 4k on a 4k timeline and it's not that obvious which is which unless you pixel-peep (and that's 28Mbps long-GOP 1080 50p versus 150Mps 4k 50p too!).
The 1080p on the GX80/GX85 is a bit soft, the G80 is sharper but more prone to aliasing. Neither is in the same league as the G9 - but that's a rather larger and heavier camera, so there's swings and roundabouts and I really like the feel of the GX80 in the hand. Whereas the G80 just feels 'functional' and soul-less...
(A bit off-topic, but about a week ago I succumbed to a used OM-1 at a very good price - not had a lot of time to test it, but the video quality seems a big step up from the E-M1 iii - the 1080p in particular, which I wasn't expecting - it looks generally much cleaner and more detailed. An OM-1 versus G9 1080p comparison using the same lens might be interesting...).
 

Of the Panasonic cameras I've owned:
The 1080p on the G9 is superb (GH5 standard AFAIK), as is the 4k. MIx 1080p and 4k on a 4k timeline and it's not that obvious which is which unless you pixel-peep (and that's 28Mbps long-GOP 1080 50p versus 150Mps 4k 50p too!).
The 1080p on the GX80/GX85 is a bit soft, the G80 is sharper but more prone to aliasing. Neither is in the same league as the G9 - but that's a rather larger and heavier camera, so there's swings and roundabouts and I really like the feel of the GX80 in the hand. Whereas the G80 just feels 'functional' and soul-less...
(A bit off-topic, but about a week ago I succumbed to a used OM-1 at a very good price - not had a lot of time to test it, but the video quality seems a big step up from the E-M1 iii - the 1080p in particular, which I wasn't expecting - it looks generally much cleaner and more detailed. An OM-1 versus G9 1080p comparison using the same lens might be interesting...).
 

Yep, I'm a (each time less) "enthusiast" 🙂

If this is my work, for sure would be using FF too. But just want to get good images, document family and trips.
And when you're travelling and want to shoot on streets, nothing better than a "rangefinder" - noboy cares. You pull a DSLRish camera, everyone start to notice and get grumpy. And is perfect to record concerts, never was barred by security with a GX.

Already said that a GX10 with a decent EVF, 10 bit video (even with 30 min limit) and PDAF would be a perfect camera for me. But...each day becomes more clear that m43 for Panny looks like GH and (maybe) a G9 sucessor. No more GXs. For OM Digital, god only knows. Lenses - only big Pro ones. All that I don't want.

Waiting for my X-S20, arrives in a 2 or 3 weeks. Not rangefinderesque, but small enough to be perceived as a P&S. Solved or mitigate most of the problems that I have with the X-S10 (horrendous battery life, better af,  better IBIS, with 10-bit I finally could try F-log), but kept one of the worst problems, common to all Fuji: no old school object tracking in video. In which Sony is very good.

Than Sony releases a rangefinderesque camera with better ergos, amazing AF, probably the same sensor in a Bayer version...for sure not now, but in the future, could make me switch. Still hoping that Fuji hire some Olympus guy for IBIS and some Sony guys for AF, but is just hope.

Sony cameras have always overheated. I think it might be considered a feature at this point  
But I hear Panasonic's next camera is going to have a defrost setting for raw video and a popcorn button. Jiffy Pop in beautiful 6K anamorphic.

I'd agree with all of that, having gone from being a decade-long Panasonic user to now most often picking up an E-M1 iii when I take a camera out 🙂.
The video quality on the E-M1 iii isn't top-notch (although the 24p DCI 4k at nominally 237Mbs is pretty good), but as an all-round rugged 'outdoors' package it's great (as is the battery life). I normally use the 'Natural' profile with the sharpness set to minimum, contrast reduced and the shadows lifted/highlights reduced a little using the 'shadows & highlights' adjustment curves. The problem with the Flat and OM-Log400 profiles is that you lose the sharpness adjustment and I find the default sharpening too high for my taste.
(There seems to be plenty of used E-M1 iii and lenses like the 12-40 F2.8 around at good prices, if the budget is tight)

Having owned a mk ii then a mk iii (both bought used), I think the better AF for video and adjustable-strength video IBIS on the iii are worth the extra money. There is also better separation of settings between stills and video on the iii. Video quality is the same in both, as far as I can tell.
And Olympus/OMDS certainly seem to know how to design and build pro-grade lenses and cameras - my (used) 12-40mm F2.8 Pro has paint worn away in places plus a damaged (but usable) filter thread, but works fine and has the smoothest zoom and focus rings I've ever used. I'm getting a bit tempted by the 12-100mm F4 Pro as a consequence...

I'd agree with all of that, having gone from being a decade-long Panasonic user to now most often picking up an E-M1 iii when I take a camera out 🙂.
The video quality on the E-M1 iii isn't top-notch (although the 24p DCI 4k at nominally 237Mbs is pretty good), but as an all-round rugged 'outdoors' package it's great (as is the battery life). I normally use the 'Natural' profile with the sharpness set to minimum, contrast reduced and the shadows lifted/highlights reduced a little using the 'shadows & highlights' adjustment curves. The problem with the Flat and OM-Log400 profiles is that you lose the sharpness adjustment and I find the default sharpening too high for my taste.
(There seems to be plenty of used E-M1 iii and lenses like the 12-40 F2.8 around at good prices, if the budget is tight)