mercer

Cool topic! I look forward to seeing what you come up with. As you probably know, I have both the 5D Mark iii and the FP. In a lot of ways, they're redundant. I even use the same process and settings to render the 4K cDNG files to ProRes for editing/color in FCPX. The 4K helps with the FP. Some vintage lenses, most of what I own, are just too soft on the 5D.
But I agree that there's some kind of funkiness with the FP's image. I think it's processed a little in camera with NR and/or sharpness. No way to know that for sure, though. I tried using the 800 ISO trick, but I really didn't notice that much of a difference... I guess a stop or so in the highlights. I think the main benefit of the FP over the 5D3, for me, are the two ISOs for night/indoor shoots and due to the 4K it's sharper, so it has a more "modern cinematic" video look compared to the 5D3 which has more of a filmic look. 
I heard the s35 crop is actually better on the FP, but I didn't really notice much of a difference there either. I've been tempted to pick up a Canon 24mm 2.8 IS and the Sigma adapter and put it in s35 for a better handheld solution, but I haven't gotten around to it.
I completely agree about the 8bit 4K in camera raw!!! There's actually something so unique about the image.
Anyway, I look forward to some of your tests with the FP-L and c-mounts. I just sold my BMMCC, so I need to find a new camera for my c-mount lenses. I don't have anything too fancy like you do, but I do like them very much.

All this needs is an old Ninja 2 to make an interesting DIY CCD ProRes shooting cine camera with a smaller sensor 😉 

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005003731513738.html
 

It’s likely way too niche for them but I’d love to see the Chinese lens manufacturers like 7Artisans etc do some C mount Super 16mm lenses.
It would avoid the eBay crapshoot and based on their Super35 prices they could probably produce some good stuff for circa £150 a pop or even less.
 

Locked off shots and not using ISO One Billion to make night time look like broad daylight, what sort of heresy is this ?

Visuals, music and sound design are all original.

Oneplus 8 pro modded with Vega 20mm wide open with custom  anamorphic lens, Motioncam pro app.

I thought the same thing but with the A7CR. Despite its compromises, it’s smaller and more compact like the FP L. It does raw out to the Ninja but the main conversation here seems to be the chunky and filmic CDNG files. That’s the mojo.
A7CR is now $2,000  and would make a nice little high mp travel companion for my other video spec’d bodies. But I don’t think we would come anywhere close to that filmic image of the Sigma FP/L.

This guy has talent...
This is shot on the Sony a1 and an RX100, and it's very nice.
But then a funny thing happened...
I discovered his Super 16mm stuff and liked it even better, although you have to appreciate it on a big screen for the texture, and not a phone.
Film, being film has an imperfect nature.
So more emotive.
Now in the current digital camera landscape, full frame is king. And for a good reason.
But what if you could have both Kodak Vision3 Super 16mm and full frame in one camera...
Now, I considered the OM-1 as a Super 16mm 4K camera, because I very much liked the E-M1 Mark II since forever. The OM-1's OM-LOG however has a bit of a thin tonality, and is it a bit tricky to get looking right. Lovely ergonomics and EVF though.
Now the Sony a1, has the resolution to do a 4K Super 16mm crop (close to, it's actually Micro Four Thirds at 2x-ish which is good enough for most c-mount lenses longer than 25mm like the Kern Switar 26mm F1.1, work of art that it is).
The a1 I had but ended up selling to somebody far richer, because I feared it would depreciate from 5 grand to something like £1. This hasn't happened yet, as the new one is 7 grand. Anyway, sod Sony and their pricing... Doesn't shoot internal RAW anyway.
Now N-RAW, BRAW, Canon RAW, I have tried them all, and to my eye at least they all look like H.265.
There is just something so smooth and perfect about the modern faux RAW that it kinda defies the point, RAW should be raw and not processed. Those codecs are heavily processed and the file sizes are ridiculous.
There's only one RAW format that has come close to FILM to me and that has always been Cinema DNG.
Starting way back with the original BMCC and Ikonoskop, uncompressed 2K Cinema DNG.
Following on from that the miracle of Magic Lantern RAW video, with the 5D II going from some very dodgy 1080p H264 to the best ever looking 1080p Cinema DNG RAW which still stands up today for tonality, grain, texture, micro contrast, motion cadence and colour... you know, all that stuff which gets chucked away in N-RAW!
Then the 5D Mark III upped the ante to 3.5K RAW eventually, at 24fps in 10bit. The drop to 10bit didn't hurt it much. A little noisier in the shadows, but worth it for the huge resolution bump from a 1:1 sensor readout, which did away with the moire or aliasing without the need for a Mosaic Engineering AA filter.
Then the Sigma Fp came along, but the first model has two drawbacks. The first is that it doesn't have the resolution for Super 16mm crop in 4K. The second is that the 4K RAW appears to be binned. It's a bit funky looking.
Now the Sigma Fp-L has a 9K sensor instead... a whopping 60 megapixel. But I have not used it much... the reason being, I haven't quite found a lens that really suits it...
Then I thought, well it has the best crop modes of any camera, and stays in those modes when you cycle the power or switch between stills and cine... Perfect for C-mount, Super 16mm stuff?
It has a nice oversampling in these modes, from 1.3x crop to 2x... Sampling upwards of 7K down to 4.8K, which makes for some very finely textured UHD Cinema DNG footage, superior indeed to that of the first model.
(It also adds into the mix phase-detect AF but it doesn't work very well)
Now the Fp-L I thought could work well with my C-mount stuff and indeed, it fucking does.
But I also think of adding a Panasonic OIS lens to the mix, for handheld run and gun Cinema DNG.
So the 28-200mm looks attractive and yes, slow aperture but it's absolutely tiny.
This tiny-ness is very important for the Fp-L, as it feels naff with big heavy lenses.
And the Fp-L is very good in low light, because the sensor is enormous - the high megapixel count doesn't really hurt it, same with the Sony a1.
The 28-200mm also adds OIS... the all-important missing stabilisation on a non-IBIS camera.
So I think I have found the best full frame proper RAW camera that is best able to emulate the look of proper Super 16mm film and work with c-mount lenses, and offers you a full-frame walk-round zoom camera as well... And that means best of both worlds in one small affordable tool. Pop a 28mm F1.4 on there and it will also do a very good Leica Q3 impression.
We may moan about the lack of IBIS and LOG, but then a Bolex doesn't have these either.
And just think about the absolute massive pain it is to shoot with a Bolex and the expense you save going with a trusty Fp-L!
Food for thought.
....
The 8bit Cinema DNG to SD card is actually really good BTW

This is my primary question!
5DIII in RAW (esp with ML dual ISO to boost dynamic range by many stops) is something magical, to be sure.



However, the 5DIII JPEGS are also magnificent in their own way -- I keep one lying around just for the JPEGS. Somehow this camera has a miraculous ability to hold onto highlights, even in JPEG mode.


Nikon D200 CCD in RAW. It uses a Sony CCD so it's better in some ways (highlight retention and rolloff) versus the Kodak ones, but worse in others (less interesting colors). Still magical, though. I keep one lying around:

One that is often overlooked is the Ricoh GXR M-mount module. While it may share the same sensor as the X100 and Nikon D90, but it is geared a little differently.... more muted colors (except for reds), and somehow crazy good for B&W photography. Seriously, using any RAW converter (LR, rawtherapee, darktable, filmulator, all of which I've  used), you convert any RAW GXR images to B&W and it's... incredible!




Lastly, of course... the Leica M9, my primary camera for these last few years and to this day. Lately, I find that Darktable's recently introduced "Sigmoid" process is very tender with the M9's harsh highlight clipping issues, the sensor's greatest downfall. 



 
P.S. 
I think Andrew mentioned this, but the 5DII is SUPER magical, more so than the 5DIII, and right up there with the M9! I have a 5DII laying around too, but don't have any photos available. Once again, using ML's dualiso module to boost the dynamic range and this thing is just produces cinematic photos like nothing else I've ever seen! Focusing on the 5DII is and always will be an unreliable pain, though (even if just using the central point). 
P.P.S
Nikon D700 in RAW! What an incredible sensor! Delicate highlight rolloff (and lots of information there); great organic colors and lowlight performance.
 

Edit: it's actually 3K raw, not 2.7K with a 2.75x crop.

Merry Christmas and happy holiday to everyone.
 

Full width 4k 120p is a major difference of GH7 to S5 II X.
It's a much faster sensor.
It also has the dual readout circuit ala ALEXA in the High Dynamic Range mode.
And it is an improved, new sensor vs GH6 with new processor.
The S5II X has a lot of cropping going on the full sensor width to do anything higher than 30fps.
Also I think the EVF is better on the GH7?
So still a lot of advantages but people want full frame and can get it cheap, so that's what's hurting the GH7 the most rather than any defects in the spec sheet.
The S5II X is an odd one, it's not flagship material, it's an S5 II with a better ProRes license. They chose to split the cameras into two models to avoid having to pay Apple for what basic S5 II owners and photographers weren't using.
The GH7 is the flagship in Micro Four Thirds mount.
The S1H II would be the flagship if we're talking L-mount but of course it appears to be AWOL.
They would have had to decrease the profit margin or up-the-price on the S5 II had they not done this, for the ProRes licensing reasons mentioned earlier.
You can hardly accuse Panasonic of being bad value for money sub $2500 my friend.

Yes. That's right. Announced, not released.

I'm pretty sure they were announced at the same time and their release dates were pretty close to one another... about 4 months or so. 

Yes you are right. 
I don't have a clear idea of why. It occurs to me that the basis is always the number of pieces produced. I don't have the numbers to state that, mine is just speculation.
Off the top of my head, S5XIIs sell more than a GH7, so the initial investment is spread out over more pieces. Perhaps the same is true between the Canon R7 and R8. 
 

I was referring more to the companies cannibalizing their own models. The pricing is out of control within their own camera lines.
Look at Canon... the R8 full frame camera is cheaper than the R7 aps-c. In this instance, the main feature difference seems to be FF vs IBIS... I'm sure there may be other differences as well but that seems to be the biggest.
Panasonic... S5iiX ($1999) vs GH7 ($2199). Full frame vs M4/3. The only other main difference is that the GH7 has internal ProRes Raw and 32bit float audio with the XLR handle and CF Express cards. That's not nothing but does it justify the GH7 costing $200 more? I guess you could argue that the GH7 is the flagship and the iix is not and I suppose the iix has been out for about a year longer. But even still? Maybe it's time that they consolidate their camera lines a little. Does Panasonic really need an S5ii and an S5iiX... released at the same time?
But I guess they know what they're doing... nickel and diming their sub-$2500 enthusiast customers generates a bunch of profits with the upsells.

.. Z9 just got the new firmware bringing shutter angle and some WFM & zebra enhancements:
 
..these will surely trickle down to Z8, Z6iii. So another plus point for Z mount!

market shrinks > costs shared among users > higher prices

You can get a brand new S5 for $995. This seems like Panasonic using old stock.
It's a shame what happened to m4/3. I was so floored to get the G7 back in 2015 for $500 and then the GX85 a little less than a year later for a little bit more and eventually a G85.
Other than a few Blackmagic cameras, I've also had a GH6 and used a friend's GH5 a bunch of times. I wish I had kept the GH6. The current deal on the GH7 at B&H is pretty amazing... $140 coupon and a free XLR handle (32bit float internal) but it's still overpriced for m4/3 when you consider you can get the S5iiX for less and also with a free XLR handle.
The pricing of Panasonic cameras are all over the place. I guess m4/3 sensor may cost more now? Or the cost of the sensor is one of the lowest costs of production and Panasonic is basing their pricing on features alone, adding X amount of dollars for every feature they add to the checklist.
To be fair to Panasonic, I think most manufacturers are all over the place. 

I'm definitely in the minority on this site, but I think the rush to mirrorless by the entire industry was a mistake and I wouldn't be surprised if Canon and maybe Nikon bring back a DSLR line.

I'm definitely in the minority on this site, but I think the rush to mirrorless by the entire industry was a mistake and I wouldn't be surprised if Canon and maybe Nikon bring back a DSLR line.

I'm definitely in the minority on this site, but I think the rush to mirrorless by the entire industry was a mistake and I wouldn't be surprised if Canon and maybe Nikon bring back a DSLR line.

Currently the camera market is stable and overall slowly growing. The amateur/enthusiast/professional market has been stable in size over a long time. What happened is regular consumers (to whom photography is not their spiritual or financial lifeline) stopped buying decated cameras. This caused some trouble to the traditional camera makers but they weathered this disruption.
 
Nikon and Canon haven't stopped making DSLRs and they will produce what the people buy. I happen to prefer the optical viewfinder but because of the need to be able to photograph silently in some situations, I also needed a mirrorless camera system. But I have great regret about the absence of the OVF which I prefer when timing shots one by one (which for me results in superior keeper rate over what I can get with high frame rate continuous and much less time spent on editing). However, for shorter focal length wide-aperture lenses, mirorrless produces usually better in-focus rates so the overall result is that I am divided. 
For the manufacturers selling entirely new lens lineups must be profitable. For the Earth's environment, it may be a disaster.

I'm definitely in the minority on this site, but I think the rush to mirrorless by the entire industry was a mistake and I wouldn't be surprised if Canon and maybe Nikon bring back a DSLR line.

Vega 22 UC 103mm enlarging lens