independent

Why, how much do they pay at a Wendy's these days?

In comparing the two, I think the Canon focal reducer/ speed booster needs to be added to the equation. Not only would that make it more equal in price, but it makes the c70 essentially full frame. There is a technical difference of course; while the focal reducer increases field of view and brightness, it doesn't change the DOF. Personally, I think that's a plus. I'd prefer the unique flexibility in gaining a stop in light without the accompanying razor-thin plane of focus. Just more practical.

I don't have experience w/ the Fx6, but the noise difference between log v. non-log (Cinetone) in low-light is a phenomenon clearly described by Sony Ambassador Alister Chapman: This isn't just a phenomenon with Sony log, this is across the board. Here are some tests that I did with the Canon 8K Raw, shot log v. non-log. These shots were pushed from 800 to 6400, as I was actually testing latitude, but you get the idea (click on the images to see it more clearly). When you have to shoot low light and don't need the dynamic range, shoot non-log for lower noise.

Lectros and Zaxcom are industry standards for bigger productions. But the OP was asking about Sony UWP vs Sennheiser G3/G4. For that class of gear, the Sennheiser is much more" pro" than the Sonys in terms of adoption, availability, and actual use in the industry. Go call the rental houses in New York City. I guarantee you that all of them rent out the Sennheisers along with Lectros and Zaxcoms. Ask them whether the Sennheiser or Sony is more "pro," and most will tell you they don't carry the Sonys. That should tell you something. That's not to say the Sonys are bad! Just be careful listening to some poster on the internet who culls info from jwsoundgroup.net and goes around on other forums as some self-styled expert.

There's always that contrast between mainstream and niche. Boring is subjective and relative, across culture and throughout time. As a child, you found cartoons interesting and the news boring; the inverse is (generally) true as an adult. The difference is that the internet has just exponentially increased the amount of media to a wider audience. Of course, the resulting popular media that emerges is quite vanilla--but many people like vanilla. If you're looking for the meaning of life in TikTok videos—that's a you problem. You're looking in the wrong place. The number of innovative or experimental movies has increased as well. It just takes work to discover them. As it should. As it always has. Some remember what it was like reach into the unexplored shelves of independent video stores. That was sometimes the best part.

Yes these are just your opinions. The majority of which don’t jibe with the industry.

No, it’s the type of logic that get the job done. Reliability, compatibility, availability, etc., all matter more, especially on larger sets with bigger casts and crew. All rental houses carry boatloads of Sennheiser G3s/G4s, for good reason. But if you’re by yourself, and you’re wiring up your mom and the mailman, then sure, you can choose whatever toy to tell your story. Except for the Sennheiser 416. That’s a tool. Leave that for the pros.

Huh, yeah interesting, I guess people have different tolerances. I often shoot in a sound-controlled environment so the AF noise is pretty important to me. Especially with smaller crews now, it's good to have another usable audio track from the camera. STMs aren't uniformly quiet. USMs are also not all the same. I have a 24 f2.8 IS USM that is much quieter than the 35 f2 IS USM or RF 50 1.2. The Nano USM models are all great, virtually undetectable. I just wish Canon would make fast primes w/ Nano USM. Anybody have experience with quiet, fast Sigmas?

Check the site? https://en-us.sennheiser.com/sifa Anyways, get the Sennheiser. They're extremely common, everybody is familiar with them, and warranty/repair service is excellent.

How loud is the autofocus on that STM lens? Would an external mic pick that up? I use the EF 35 IS version to take advantage of the ND filter adapter, but the autofocus noise on that USM lens is definitely noticeable.

Gray lipstick on a pig

I had a scarlet too when it came out- can't argue with the image when properly exposed. But I compared it with the original BM 2.5K, which completely crushed the scarlet in low light. At least a couple stops. I see the same trade off with the Komodo. But when properly exposed, Red is hard to beat. The c70 does seem to have an issue w/ AF on darker skin tones; Brandon Washington and Griffin Conway demonstrated this issue. Might be able to be fixed w/ a firmware update, but it's pretty disappointing regardless. That being said, the fx6 has its own autofocus issues w/ a lack of touch af tracking. I do think the c70 and fx6 are the two best affordable pro cameras out there, but they're definitely not perfect. The Blackmagic P6K Pro is just a pure cinema camera. Manual focus, s35, pro monitoring tools, etc. Slap on an Sirui anamorphic and shoot your movie the old fashioned way.

What is it, laziness or incompetence? Watch the GU videos of the c70 and Fx6, which he compares with the a7s3. The cineD article can also be googled: "c300 iii dynamic range." Anything beyond that, you'll have to compensate me for my efforts. PM me, I'm affordable

Autofocus is not necessary for many reasons. It's also necessary for many reasons.

Well, you didn't click on the link that I posted, which would take you exactly to the iso tests. So that tells me you're lazy, and I did all that work for nothing. Pay me!

As a former pocket 6k owner, I loved that camera. That image can go head-to-head with any camera today. All these upgrades are incredible for $500 more. Lack of autofocus does hurt it relative to the competition. But if you shoot anamorphic, this is the cheapest way to get the best image.

God forbid unsubstantiated opinions! GU, CVP have done some rigorous testing—up to 12800 is clean and usable. Above that, the Fx6 is the way to go with the higher iso kicking in at 12800, with NR controls to avoid the heavy artifacts in the a7s3. As far as dynamic range, GU, deep in Sony's pocket at this point, nonetheless acknowledges that the c70 has better dynamic range than either a7s or fx6, which is quite remarkable because the c70 has a super35 sensor. CineD also corroborated this w/ the c300iii, using the same sensor and codec as the c70. That somewhat makes it even more exciting, because the focal reducer transforms the c70 into another camera really.

what are you talking about?

The a7s3 gets its dynamic range number w/ noise reduction - artificially boosting the S/R of 2, which CineD (and Gerald later adopted). The c70 is 13+ stops at that S/R if I recall correctly, better than the a7s3--or the fx6 (below 13), which makes sense because of the c70's dual gain sensor. Only the Alexa is better.

The Sony fx3 will definitely justify its existence if it offers: noise reduction control Pro monitoring tools including false color, which would help avoid needing an external monitor. That would save you the money, preserve the small form factor, and of course, audio on the top handle leaves no room for external monitor. eNDs v. IBIS...I'm guessing IBIS would be more important to counter the jitters on a small body If it has better AF features like touchscreen tracking and an audio input, that would certainly be an advantage over the fx6

You're seeing smartphones eating shitty digital camera market. Nothing wrong with that. Pro camera markets are fine; if anything, prices have come down: compare the prices of the Canon C300 series; the C300iii was released $4K lower compared to its predecessors. The introduction of C200, C70. Sony with their FX6. Red has trended cheaper as well, from the scarlet to the Komodo. For hybrids, I haven't looked into the financials, but goodness, Canon did well during a pandemic w/ the R5 and R6. Also, I don't think hybrid prices have necessarily risen, relatively speaking (not even accounting for inflation) Canon 5Dii: 2699 Canon 5Diii: 3499 Canon 5DIV: 3499 Canon R5: 3999, Canon R6: 2499 Well some manufacturers have: Sony A7s: $2500 Sony A7s2: $3000 Sony A7s3: $3499

Yeah, the $6K A1 is targeted at coal miners

Fuji and Sony bringing back 420 recording like it's 2019

Sony's on fire. Love how they're putting random hot trash out on the curb while nobody can get a PS5.

Via Phil Holland: difference in sensor area between the R5 and Sony A1 for 8K UHD. R5 is a bit larger, 33.75x18.98 (38.72mm image circle) vs. Sony's 31.91mm x 17.95mm (36.61mm). So the Sony has a 1.06 crop compared to the R5. That might not seem like a lot, but I've shot in tight spaces like cars, bathrooms, closets, etc. and every mm counts that's what she said