mercer

Somebody needs to tell Sigma that if you are FORCED to add components to the camera to make it usable, then it is no longer the "smallest full frame camera." Now if the 2.5K ProRes Raw can be recorded internally, that will be a little interesting, but not for the same price as the ZR. And definitely not without IBIS.

Sigma could have released this camera with the updated screen, a slightly larger body to accommodate CF Express for internal 4K raw, added IBIS, and literally changed nothing else and it would have been a good update. Instead they give us ProRes Raw and it isn't clear if it's internal or to SSD only and then gave us a full hdmi?! Why do we need a full hdmi if they're giving us internal, or usb ssd, ProRes Raw?! They could have omitted any HDMI and gave us a CFX slot. You can save $800 and buy the Z5iiC and have internal n-raw to sd card, af and ibis.

I did something wrong when trying to quote you... either way DGO sensor makes a little more sense with those ISO numbers. My GH6 has one... I don't like it on that camera, but I assume the full frame versions are better. In 2019, I was the perfect customer for the OGFP... this one... no thanks. Maybe at $1500 but for the same price as the ZR?! No thanks. Of course, I'm thinking about making a camcorder my next camera purchase, so what do I know.

But B&H specs are wrong sometimes, and since they list the Dual ISO as 320 and 500, they could be wrong. I did notice they listed L-Log as a video format... Honestly Sigma could have given us internal ProRes 4444 to CF Express and included IBIS and it would have been a home run. I wonder if the 2.5K raw can be recorded internally?

Not according to the specs on B&H, I only see h.264, h.265 and ProRes Raw HQ. It also says they included 70GB of internal memory... but according to DP Review, you need an SSD to record ProRes Raw... so I seriously do not understand this camera. They keep all of the annoying issues, take away the one good spec (cDNG) and then don't give us IBIS either?! So you still need to rig out the small camera with an SSD to get a higher resolution that nobody asked for? I mean at least make the internal card slot CFExpress... hell give me regular CF. The FP was frustrating in a lot of ways, but it was released in 2019, so I still feel it was a pretty great release. This is just stupid.

Why? The raw files will still be pretty huge. No IBIS. No PDAF? What exactly is appealing about this for weddings?

Wow... so they gave us 6K ProRes Raw and got rid of cDNG? And then they didn't even give us ProRes as their internal regular 10bit codec. No IBIS?! But they gave us the ability to access a 32bit audio handle, if we have the extra viewfinder attached? The only interesting spec on this camera is the internal 2.5K in ProRes Raw. ZR for the win.

This is probably a good workaround, especially for business owners that sell their services based upon a specific, signature look.

I don't know if it's overbearing as much as it's an exercise in futility for at least 60-70% of the shots. But my biggest issue is that the utility LUTs just make everybody's footage look the same. Now I don't necessarily mean anyone on this site, but if you go on YT and watch 90% of the reviewers, their footage all looks the same and a majority of those guys have their own businesses separate from their YT channel. So to eek out an extra stop or maybe two, depending on the shot, let's shoot Log, slap a LUT on there and call it a day... or do a CST... now it's like I shot with an Alexa... and call it a day. That just doesn't really interest me anymore. I'd rather have DR limitations I'm forced to work around and get more interesting images. Just a thought I've been wrestling with. It's not like I'll never shoot in Log, I'm just opening up other options and exploring different color profiles now there's 10bit video in almost any camera.

The GH6 is odd because they introduced the Dynamic Range Boost setting that supposedly does a dual iso meld like the Alexa does but it stretches the already stretched image so much that it introduces horrific chroma noise in the shadows and the low mids. So it's basically unusable without post noise reduction... well to be fair, the in camera noise reduction might fix it but I always dial it down. They fixed the function in the GH7 supposedly. But for an open box GH6 for $900, I can't complain. That said, I do think there's a hair more DR with the Arri Log than vLog and probably +1-2 stops compared to CineLikeD or my new favorite Flat profile. I must say the ProResHQ in every resolution is such a great codec. The files are thick and juicy. If you're ever looking for an upgrade without paying GH7 prices, the GH6 is a weird, yet fun camera. The screen mechanism is a dream.

Probably not. I had a love hate relationship with that camera. I think I owned 3 of them, and the best I got out of it was on the first day I shot with it... it was all downhill from there.

I'm at a point where I ALMOST see no point in shooting log profiles. There are a few good ones, but most require more grading after a utility LUT is applied and/or creates scenarios where everybody's footage looks pretty much exactly the same. So if you're just slapping on a LUT and calling it a day, for 9 out of 10 shots, you could just use a standard rec709 picture profile and get similar results. With the advent of 10bit video, in recent years, most standard picture profiles look even better than they ever have with thicker color and near perfect skintones. Sure there are instances when you may need the extra stop or two of dynamic range a Log profile offers, or a specific LUT gets you a relatively quick look by shooting Log, but again... 9 out of 10 times, a slightly tweaked Rec709 picture profile will end up looking better and get you there so much easier without worrying about CSTs and color pipelines... especially since damn near ever Log profile is just trying to emulate Arri LogC which in turn was designed to emulate film. Speaking of, I have the Arri LogC3 software key on my GH6 and it's pretty good... better than vLog but it's still noisy as hell with ugly chroma noise in the midtones and shadows so I recently went back to CineLikeD and V and I am back to making a couple contrast and saturation adjustments and being happy with it. I'm sure there is a slight hit in DR, but nothing so drastic that I'm surprised or wish I shot in Log instead. So Log is cool, I'm glad it's available, but it's fairly unnecessary in most situations and can cause a bigger headache.

Very cool! I'm so glad you are keeping this thread alive. One of my first interchangeable lens cameras was the eos-m and I loved that camera. The last time I used it, almost 10 years ago, was when I tested Magic Lanter on it... I did test the raw but it was pretty abysmal back then... so I was more interested in the bitrate bump. Shortly afterwards, my camera path led me through BM and into my 5D iii, so the the eos-m just sat in the closet for years. A couple years ago I was thinking I'd take it out and mess with it again. Hadn't really thought about using it in years, so I grabbed it from the closet, charged one of my old batteries and pushed the on button... and nothing. I just figured it died... so back into the closet it went. I recently realized it may need a card with ML boot flag (or whatever it's called) on it. I ordered some new batteries and I'm going to figure out which cards are good for the new builds and cross my fingers. Anyway @QuickHitRecord thanks again for keeping this topic alive. No disrespect to the other forum members, but basic camera chat about new releases is fun and all, but the reason I started posting on EOS HD was because of posts like this.

I actually kinda like it. Don't think it needs it, but you could easily add some sprocket holes to one side and some hair/dust/grain and I think it would pass for a bad digital 8mm film look... the micro shakes just adds to it. Could use those shots as transitions in your edits.

Hey Panny, hope all is well! Yeah that was shot on Arri LogC, but I have been kinda anti-log lately so the next time I take her out, I think I'm going to mess around with CineLikeD/V. Log is kinda boring and the noise in the shadows is just atrocious. I'm thinking of selling the GH6 and FP to fund a Nikon. N-Raw with SDR Tone sounds like an amazing concept to me. All of the benefits of raw and 12bit color with a rec709 picture profile like Nikon Flat or one of the new Red Picture Profiles really interests me. That said, the GH6 is a great camera and overall I much prefer Arri LogC to vLog!

That's really cool! Wish someone would update the 5D3 with that UI! I see on the GitHub, it says stable build. How stable is it? The only time I ever had an issue with my 5D3 was when I ran the experimental 4K builds or the compressed MLVs. The last nightly build I used worked just as well as any camera I ever purchased.

@eatstoomuchjam by "Pro" version, I meant the $10,000 Ronin 4D cinema camera, not the Pocket 4 Pro.

I have very simple needs and if I was forced, I could shoot ML Raw in 1080p on my 5Diii for the foreseeable future. I posted a video here a while ago from some Nordic guy that mixed 5Diii/ML Raw with Osmo Raw drone footage and I was blown away by the Osmo Raw. At the time, the camera by itself was too rich for my blood, but I couldn't deny the image. On the complete opposite scale, I recently used my friend's Pocket 3 and I must say that it reminded me of my camcorder days, where you just collect footage in as interesting ways as possible to tell the most important thing... the story. That said, I would be an instant buyer of a $2000 raw video version of the Osmo Pocket camera... preferably with a larger sensor, but I would be okay with the 1" too if need be. I can only imagine how much fun the pro version is... even with its headaches?

Honestly, I am a little confused. Why buy the ZR if you want an h.265 codec camera? The ZR will probably be my next camera purchase but I am buying it for the RedCode Raw/n-raw and 32bit float audio. I wish there were better 4K raw options but that doesn't exist so I'm going to deal with it, I won't buy it and then say... Nikon needs to fix the lack of 4K raw options in the camera that I already knew didn't have good 4K raw options. If I decide to shoot 4K for "lesser" projects, I'll just use the ProResHQ with n-log or even Nikon Flat for certain things. I don't mean to be rude, but there are so many cameras on the market that shoot great full frame h.265. Raw video isn't for everybody, nor should it be.

I question the need for 8K for any use. I understand some people shoot in uncontrolled ways and would rather reframe in post than compose their shot during capture. I understand people like Fincher prefers working this way. I understand that it is great to have extra resolution for VFX. But how many users of these types of cameras need these features? We're not discussing sweeping Hollywood sci-fi epics. That said, I believe the next huge indie film, shot from some kid in the middle of nowhere, will probably use one of these cameras. So if having 8K slates helps the vision come to life... that's really great. For me, I'd rather have the extra DR and I'd love that Osmo Raw that @eatstoomuchjam referenced. Hell, I may be able to afford that now. Hmm.

I may be up for an 8bit challenge! Can I use the 8bit cDNG from the FP? 🤪

I really liked the mark II, but felt the camera jumped the shark with every subsequent release. And this one is no different. Although I appreciate the bump to 10bit video, I kinda hoped they would bring back internal NDs and the constant zoom. I would love a cine-bridge camera, and for a while, about 10 years ago, it seemed like a strong possibility with the RX10, FZ2500 and XC10, but they were all quickly abandoned... I suppose the market didn't agree with me. The really offensive aspect of this release is the price... $2300... I recently purchased a refurbished Canon V1 that has a larger sensor, and internal ND for $650. So far, it's been one of my favorite camera purchases to date. It's a shame, I really liked the image and form factor of the RX10 II and have been looking for a reason to try Cinetone. Right now, it seems like the ZV-E10ii is the cheapest way in.

Some kid will use that camera and make a short film and upload it to YT, then he'll get a Hollywood deal. A couple will buy 30 of them and put then on the wedding guest's tables for people to snap photos and take some video. The groom will edit them all together on his phone while sitting on the beach during his honeymoon. He will also upload it to YT and probably get a Hollywood deal. lol.

I assume some of you have heard this story... when Stanley Kubrick got his first Hollywood job directing a movie, he asked the cinematographer to switch to a different lens for the next shot. Instead, he moved the camera to get the shot. Kubrick asked him to put the camera back and switch the lens like he asked. The cinematographer told him it was the same shot if you moved the camera or changed the lens. Being a photographer in his previous life, Kubrick disagreed and said the perspective changed. Unless I'm remembering this story incorrectly, the man vehemently disagreed and refused to do what Kubrick asked, so Kubrick was forced to fire him and throw him off his set. Of course there's a lot to lensing than just FOV, the question becomes how important does the perspective, in this case, matter? Kubrick was right, the shot changed and it mattered to him because it was his film. Would the audience have felt the difference in what he was trying to communicate with that specific lens, from that specific distance? Possibly. The question becomes how much does it affect yours. I remember when I first got my 5Diii and the 24-70mm f/4. I was checking the light on the talent and lining up my shot and the image looked a little flat, so I zoomed in and stepped back and the talent popped. In that instance, I used a little bit of 1,2 and 3 I suppose. I can't lie and say I did this to emphasize any theme or symbolism, I was merely looking for a shot with a bit more dimension so I zoomed with the zoom and zoomed with my feet... it was that moment I knew I was a pro in my own mind.

Yeah there's definitely an "I don't care what you're doing" thought process in NYC but I think it's more of a survival instinct than anything else. It's actually quite odd. You can walk by someone, make eye contact and nod or smile and they will completely ignore you. I'd imagine if you lived there you'd get used to it, but it seems like you're alone in a sea of people. But for filmmaking on the sly, that's great. Without knowing the exact concept (I'm picturing a Before Sunrise kinda thing) I stand by the idea of keeping a small footprint and understanding the POV of the camera in the story. As @Bioskop.Inc said, if you can keep the dialogue minimal, by utilizing the mood and tone of your locations, then all the better. Also make sure to get clean dialogue takes so you can cut to a different take and use the dialogue over it... eventually people will look at you as they pass by. Otherwise stay small and nimble and flexible with your locations. If you can make a scene work on a park bench instead of walking... even better.