Mattias Burling

IMO, It's not as accurate as MF, doesn't understand when you want to track something else, can't change speed without digging into the menu, doesn't work on manual lenses, messes up your grip, the list goes on. Again, no excuses, just don't care about it working or not. My workhorse is equiped with the best video AF there is. Never use it. I haven't seen anybody make such excuses. I know perfectly well how it works thank you. Btw, you don't get to dictate why others reason the way they do. No one said you weren't allowed to wish for good AF in the Panasonic. You can wish it to give you a golden shower for all I care. We just have our opinion on it.

Don't see it. Sounds like you aren't watching in full screen, that sometimes introduces false moire.

It probably will. Because it is easy on all Sony's imo. Just time consuming like you describe (minor desaturation of colors × 1000 images per day = gray hair).

I remember James Miller making a tutorial about that but now I couldn't find it. Sometimes I actually miss grading Raw video using After Effects just for the controls of Adobe Camera Raw. But I can't say the same about the time it usually took to export.

Many of us never use AF in video. So it's not "excuses". More like "not caring".

I always return to it and am equally blown away every time. The BMPCC4K however is a tricky one. I'm on my second and already have it up for sale. But every day I contemplate taking it down and keeping it.

I only ever use AF for macro. If I was interested in a camera that turned out to be MF only in video I wouldn't care even a little. In my mind, "automatic focus" is still no yet invented.

No they don't compare. They are way more suitable for 97% of the situations that the average pro photographer encounters.

I was talking to a local photographer who also flips cameras as much as I do (we meat every time one buys something of the other). We remenissed about cameras we had used, sold, loved and hated. But we both agreed on one thing, no matter what you buy or sell, you always keep a GR in your kit. It's the only thing that's constant.

Thanks, And I'm assuming that goes for HD as well since it's the only thing available higher than 60p? Bummer. The slowmo is what could have justified it for me. It's the only thing I wished my stills camera had. Found a S1 with a free lens at a good price but I guess it's not meant to be

@Geoff_L totally get it, I to see the glass as half full Would you mind clarifying how the slowmotion works? Google only serves me people who guess or start their sentence with "to my understanding".. What is the highest frame rate in HD, without crop, where you can still manually expose your image? This is something that actually could tip the scale for me.

Sony, Nikon, Canon and Fuji also include free Log in their cameras. These two are gorgeous.

Personally, the A7riv is the first interesting model since the original A7. So I'm not hating on it. I actually wish I could justify the cost.. ..But... Hilarious irony for someone who has been told a million times that I'm an idiot for shooting a camera with 2016 video specs.. only to see Philip Bloom of all people point out that the Sony flagship is using 2015 video specs.. I spilled my coffee laughing. (And to be fare to Canon, it at least has 400mbit and 10-bit out with it's 2016 specs.)

Very, very rarely in my experience.

Awesome!

I've seen a similar product about a year ago in marketing materials from one of the gimbal makers. It was a sensor in the hot shoe hooked up to a follow focus. But I never saw it on sale. It would have meant Autofokus on all cameras even with vintage lenses.

The camera has one job, process an image. If it needs 3-4 minutes work per image just to make people look normal.. that's not exactly awesome imo. It's like whith the white balance in Slog2. Defenders always claimed that setting the right WB needed extra time and effort and that is perfectly normal.. yeah no.. in every other camera on earth it's a basic setting that takes two seconds and always has. I love Sony cameras. I've bought many, way more than Canons. And I can get really nice looking images and colors out of them, no problem. But doing it fast, efficient and consistent compared to CaNikon, PanaOly, or even Pentax and Leica.. not so much.

On some Canons you can choose between the old and the new color in the menu for C-log. With Raw stills they have been very consistent. Shooting for example the 5D classic side by side with the 6Dmkii it's close enough that most wouldn't be able to tell them apart. BTW, you don't even have to be +70 to have been shooting ancient Canons professionally. Could be interesting to have an age poll because it seems to me that many here are old enough to remember the time before the DSLR revolution.

I wonder if for example Eddie who used to visit this forum and was in charge of the color science in the D16 would agree to changing the name of his job Same camera + different converter = different colors. Same converter + different camera = different colors. No matter how you turn it. Color science in camera raw files is a fact. Super easy to test, take photo of the same scene, adjust one using curves, Luna etc and then copy paste the adjustments and see if it's identical.

Correct, when you get fired for taking all day to color correct a couple of hundred images it is your fault.. That color science doesn't affect raw is an internet myth. But believe what you want. Yup, anyone that has used more than one camera will experience it first hand.

Good color science is equally important when shooting raw.

I've never been able to replicate the DNGs having lesser quality. They always looks great. I'm suspecting it's something many Foveon purists wants to be true and others are simply more used to using SPP.

I haven't received it yet. All the FF art lenses plus for example the 50-100 covers the APS-H so there are plenty of lenses. I to went regular Quattro because of the price. But now it's a different story. Found a mint H + 35mm/1.4 for $850.

Yes, good and "suck ass" is also a big difference. Ehhh... No... It's older CaNikon lenses that does NOT have focus by wire. Oly and Pana almost exclusively use focus by wire.

Seems like a really cool camera, would love one, but ain't gonna pay that much. Maybe in two-three years. Guess It's sensor might end up in Nikons next high end camera.