Mattias Burling

This.
Thats why I felt so confident that I even preordered. After using the 6Dmkii and XC-10 I knew I wasn't going to be disappointed. The only surprise so far is the vast improvement in control and handling making it even more efficient to operate. 
We say it over and over, but it seems it needs to be said over and over. Every persons needs and wants are different. There is no superior camera. It all depends on what you need. 

Very interesting test, imo. 
 
 

The same thing happened with the xc10. Specs were crap but the image was unmatched for a s16 look. It is the nature of canon. If u like good images then the Eos r will give u that. Talk about absolute sharpness in 4k is complete nonsense; its unimaginative and any artist worth anything could care less about it. 

Average Joe definitely looks to Canikon since they are so familiar names. But I also think for many of us brand has very little to do with it. All of these cameras where available when my EOS-R arrived and I still bought it, and so did others. Before that me and many with me choose the 6Dmkii well aware about the A7iii, GH5, etc. And I'm sure I'm not alone in being mostly a Panasonic and Sony shooter. So it was not because of the brand.
Nor was it for the side by side image quality. I was shooting both 2.5K and 4K Raw before 4K even took off. I've had most popular 4K hybrids to date as well as the BMD4K and RED 1MX with 4.5K Raw. In other words, none of the above is really blowing my mind. And still I went for the EOS-R. It wasn't in some naive believe that the Canon will have the most detailed video at 400% in some weird multi cam production.
All I know is that right in front of me on my desk sits a Panasonic G85, a Fuji X-H1 and an EOS-R. I have native and adapted glass plus speedboosters for the two crop cameras. Only adapted EF glass for the EOS-R. I have only a few hours of experience with the Canon but have shot several gigs with the other two.

On today's agenda is a video shoot. No stills, video only. Docu style with lots of handheld. There will be some interviews both "sitting down" and with a lav in action. A lot of fast action and rather large locations. The finished video will be shown at an award show on the big screen in front of a couple of hundred people and of course online.

I'm bringing the Canon. No question about it. Because believe it or not, it actually offers things that the others don't.
And it does it so well that I don't care about the risk of someone hacking the event and showing a similar video shot with a RED Epic side by side and then zooming in 400%  
(The X-H1 tags a long as backup and in case I feel the need for some 100fps instead of just 50.)
 

I will but give me a bit of time. As of today its not allowed to speak online about it without being an idiot, blind, paid, fanboy or "the problem and reason why Canon get away with things".
Im gonna let all this initial drama settle down some more. All I can say is that the camera have lived up to and in some respects exceeded my expectations. There are lots that the reviews I've seen doesn't mention.
(Yeah yeah I know the jokes, low expectations, 2008 camera, [insert drama queen comment], bla, bla blahh )

Yes I have, thats how I knew you where wrong when you said that they didn't make any. No need to see everything as a battle. You asked, I answered.
Your welcome btw.

Yes I have, thats how I knew you where wrong when you said that they didn't make any. No need to see everything as a battle. You asked, I answered.
Your welcome btw.

How does the nikkor noct compare to that lens? 

And with a lot of $$$$$$ spent on lights.

The butterling and cognitive disonance, very interesting, he should have his own thread and keep his divagations confined in there.
@Andrew Reid Is the review coming? Or should we look elswhere?

And with a lot of $$$$$$ spent on lights.

You know nothing, and you are blind ?

I didn't realize you were blind. Sorry for your loss. But boy at your age, hmm, sad.  Just kidding. I find it hard to believe you can't tell the difference. Even an old turd like me can see the difference between 2K and 4K. You Need a better monitor.

Let's agree to disagree.
I do. All the time. Its part of my job. But I rather not use a smartphone.

None really.

I don't care what you believe. If you want to shoot 4K go ahead. All I know is that in a blind test you would not be able to tell them apart.

In blue: valid argument even though with SD and storage price today, well.....
In red: sorry but this is simply not true at all... like this is the most untrue thing I have read this week online. 

I shoot HD mainly to save space on the SD as well as our server. The image quality is basically the same and I don't find myself ever cropping all that much. I would do a 20% crop on HD without hesitation. 

I shoot HD mainly to save space on the SD as well as our server. The image quality is basically the same and I don't find myself ever cropping all that much. I would do a 20% crop on HD without hesitation. 

I prefer Atilla’s real world test. 

Guys, @shooter and @greenscreen are obviously trolls in this thread. Andrew recently did a post about companies sending in people to the forum, it definitely could be these two he means.
I suggest not feediing them for a while and we will see what happens.Bots and paid trolls are usually an impatient bunch.

Youtube doesn't allow re uploads as far as I know. Its not like Vimeo. Unless they have changed it recently, when you take down a video it is down. As are the stats, comments, likes and dislikes.

I for one thought the test above was ok. I did my first 4K vs HD a couple of years ago and just like now, 4K vs HD on youtube is hardly visible, depending on the camera used.
In HD they don't have as much aliasing either.

Hadn't seen @Mattias Burling's video until just now, so sharing it for others as well:
 
 

Youtube doesn't allow re uploads as far as I know. Its not like Vimeo. Unless they have changed it recently, when you take down a video it is down. As are the stats, comments, likes and dislikes.

I for one thought the test above was ok. I did my first 4K vs HD a couple of years ago and just like now, 4K vs HD on youtube is hardly visible, depending on the camera used.
In HD they don't have as much aliasing either.

Mattias, I used to own the 16-55 and used it for about a year and a half with both the X-Pro2 and X-T2. It's a totally magnificent lens for the X-System. Shooting stills, I had shootings where I ended up using it exclusively, although I had 4-5 other Fujinon lenses in the bag. I sold it some time ago to finance some other stuff, but was regretting it terribly sometimes... 
As it happens, just today I received from the Greek Fujifilm dealer a brand new 16-55 along with a brand new X-T3. ? Just scratched the surface so far, but I'm blown away at how well they work together, especially for video AF (stills AF is a given; it's instant and accurate). 
Also keep in mind that, being a heavier lens, actually helps a lot while handholding it. In fact I did some shots at the wider end and, if care is taken, you would swear they are stabilized. You can usually find it in Europe at a little more than 800 euro new; through grey market importers. If you can buy tax exempt from a different EU country, it would be about the same (retail minus tax).  
A word for the Tamron: a colleague uses it mainly in weddings with the a7Sii. He tells me that, initially, he had some issues with AF, but my understanding is they were fixed by some firmware update. Apart from that he likes it a lot, and considers it a swiss-army knife type of lens. Quality wise though I think the Fujinon is in a different class, not to mention not being a "generic" zoom lens (it's "custom-made" for Fuji cameras, I mean).