rainbowmerlin

On this topic of wide crops, I've got an example here which is a still photo of mine (Fuji XT3) rather than a film. It was originally a fairly boring standard ratio photo  of a field, which I was about to discard as not worth printing. But I noticed that if I just took a relatively small proportion of this as a wide crop lower to the ground, it was more visually interesting (and made a nice print in A4 width). No reason this perspective couldn't work as an occasional shot in a film also, with the radical shift in perspective jolting the viewer's attention. Though hopefully done in a way that the crop shows integrity as an image, that it's being done for an authentic visual reason, rather than as a gimmick. As here -  the crop focusing the viewer's attention on the world of the rich abundance of small flowers just a foot or two above the ground.

I did indeed manage to pick one up from Camarthan Cameras in Wales! Only retailer in entire UK to have a couple of units. Glad I did though as the camera is a miracle in itself. Punches well above expectations.
I am only scratching the surface compared to you Simon, but will get to know it better in coming days. Brought it to Berlin with me. Not even shot any C4K with it yet but in UHD I did play with it a bit and love that you can punch in 1.4x in the middle of a shot with little to no loss in detail. No need to stop recording, you can just punch in and out on the fly.
The IBIS was out of this world brilliant. 1 second handheld photo PIN SHARP
The menus and ergonomics are in top 1% of all cameras. Love the way it feels to use and that they didn't go crazy abandoning the small size advantage with fans and stuff.
I have GH6 with me as well so will be interesting to compare the two. They are very different. GH6 has the edge for high frame rates and overall video specs. OM-1 has a significant advantage in terms of size, weight, ergonomics, stills features and a few unique abilities in video mode as well. The EVF on the OM-1 is superior to the GH6. Out of this world big and immersive, especially impressive for such a small body.
Can confirm the lovely Olympus colours are still present and correct!

Compared to X-T4 although it is certainly the better camera, it's also much more expensive. When it comes out, inevitably in short stock at £2500 or so in the UK, you will be able to pick up a mint X-T4 on eBay for about £1000.
Main differences are 4K/120p (cropped), anamorphic modes and the ProRes. For me ProRes LT should be in there as it stands up really well. ProRes 422 and HQ have enormous file sizes so are less practical. LT is just as fluid to edit and grade.  If I want 700Mbit/s file sizes I'd probably just shoot BRAW instead. On the other hand, if main selling point is the 4k/120p and one has £2500 to spend then for not a huge amount more you could get a full frame 4K/120 camera or even an EPIC-X (5K 120fps). If you need an anamorphic mode, 4K/120p (given the 4K/120p is similar crop on both) and ProRes all in same camera then GH6 is cheaper at £1999 and has the lovely HDR sensor readout too.
The 6K open gate and anamorphic mode is probably what I am interested in most, really glad Fuji put that in.
But iffy AF, sticky IBIS and still no real progress with things that matter (exposure, NDs, larger screens) mean there are compelling alternatives.
OM-1 I am really impressed with. The image is SUPERB. The IBIS is really natural. AF is Sony/Canon level bullet proof. It is currently one of the best all-round shooting experiences for the money!

My review is up at Petapixel for those interested. Been using the camera for the past month and a half and I love it. Video quality is really very good. Amazing color.
https://petapixel.com/2022/03/29/om-digital-om-1-review-the-best-micro-four-thirds-camera-ever-made/

The two new X-H cameras both use Sony Semicon sensors, they incoporate some of the latest technology from IMX610 (A1) including DBI and Sigma-Delta ADC.

Well the other part of the equation is that digital cameras last a long time for most consumers and semi-pro's. Unless you do timelapse with mechanical shutter beating your shutter to death, how many shots a year do you put on your camera ? 5K ? 10k ? with a shutter good for 150-200K releases you've got 15-25 years worth of life with that camera. Longer if you use it less. Couple that with minor improvements in resolution for mid to lower priced cameras, minor improvements in DR, those two big selling points just aren't . Most cameras are in the 20seomthing megapixel range and even the higher 36MP sensors aren't that much of a jump up for _most_ users when their current camera is perfectly good for their needs. Only 4K displays has pushed the res limitation a bit. Until we have mass market 6K (computer) or 8K screens will anyone feel any real need to push the pixel count up on the sensor. Current cameras produce really respectable DR and color for the most part. More than good enough for most people's needs now and for a while. 
 Maybe the only real thing that might push someone to get a new camera body is better AF. We have most of that with phase detect and face recognition thats pretty good, again for most people's needs most of the time.
with feature needs covered, the want to upgrade is low, esepecially when looking at the price of new cameras. Fuji has done well with good retro design in the bodies, great color that is their own, and kept pricing for the S35 cameras affordable enough what while its a decsion of thought to get a new one like a Xpro3, its not such a giant investment you really have to plan and think it out hard for a lot of people. indeed keeping it under $2k + APSC has proven a good combination.

I'm going to start a company making cameras that are purpose built for intrusive doorstep photography of autocratic leaders.
Hasslevlad.

D16 would do it!
The GX85 is definitely a small package, but the D16 would fit in much more convincingly on the set of the original Star Trek, and I suggest that perhaps that's the more important criteria 🙂 

New blog post:
https://www.eoshd.com/news/which-camera-websites-spy-on-you-each-site-ranked-for-privacy-and-trackers-in-safari-14/

I'm glad you're bringing attention to this, @Andrew Reid, as everyone should at least be aware of who is tracking them and why. I have two Firefox addons, one is uBlock Origin for blocking ads, and the other is Blur for blocking trackers. I can confirm that the EOSHD main site has those two Google trackers (which Blur blocks), and the forum has 0. Blur blocks 9 trackers on SonyAlphaRumors even after opting out of cookies, and 67 ads are blocked.
It's worth pointing out that even if you are okay with being tracked, the richest companies and people in the world make their money off analysis of your data. It's worth considering whether you want to freely donate your data (which YOU pay for with electricity and internet bills!) to the wealthiest people on earth.

None. 
I've discovered that for 90% of the shots I want to get, an incredibly modest EM10III does the trick.  If the other 10% is mission critical, I rent.  If not, I simply suffer not being able to do certain visual tricks.  So-mo, heavy grading, etc.  Which, as I've also discovered are just tricks, not really a big part of fundamental storytelling/production.  The burden of not being able to do something actually keeps me more visually "honest."
Weirdly, I just don't fret about tech limitations too much anymore.  Didn't think that was going to happen so suddenly, but for me it did.

So it's clear RISC / ARM architecture is going to be where the next-gen CPUs are, goodbye x86.
Would we like to place bets on who will come out top in next-gen CPUs...
NVidia Qualcomm Intel AMD Apple Microsoft Samsung Huawei Other Going only off what we know now, for me it has to be Apple due to the best chip designers and most experience with the architecture. Also their sheer competence has been market leading for a long time over Qualcomm. The benchmarks for the latest iPhone and iPad show this to be true.
Not only this but Apple have the most optimised OS for ARM. Windows will never be as well optimised or integrated with the range of upcoming ARM next-gen CPUs/GPUs, because it just can't be... it has to support so many different chip configurations and legacy software architectures like DirectX.
Samsung will enter the game with a supercharged Exynos chip. Huawei are already quite competitive with Kirin but have issues now due to the US blacklist, that could set them back a few years.
Nvidia - well Tegra was always pretty good, I have no doubt they can offer Apple some serious competition especially on the GPU side.
Qualcomm - plenty of experience but around 8 years now being beat by Apple. Doesn't look great, does it.
Microsoft - no. They will just outsource everything and not bother with proper vertical integration. Windows won't be very optimised, even for their own processors. SQ1 effort shows this to be the case. A ton of catching up to do.
Finally AMD and Intel - I rate AMD more highly, but I think both of them have too much investment in x86 architecture holding them back and splitting their focus. Windows will inevitably further slow down whatever they come up with vs Apple. I really cannot see Apple being beaten. MacBook Pro 16" with M1X or M2 may be one of the most future proof buys you will ever make. I am going to jump at it when it comes out.

M1 goes back to the ARM1 in 1985 which is a chip I brushed shoulders with as a young kid familiar with the Acorn / BBC Micro computers at the time (and in the early 90's) in British schools. RISC architecture was showing some serious strengths way back then.
When you take Moore's law and many years of Apple investment in efficient mobile silicon you get this...

An actual 64bit CPU core occupies a tiny part of the die, and the integrated GPU about one quarter. The DRAM is pretty much on the same die and is accessed extremely effectively by both CPU and GPU.
I took delivery of the MacBook Air M1 last week, from Amazon for £999...
It is an ultra thin / featherweight class affordable consumer laptop.

With a motherboard the size of a small TV remote control
And probably only a little larger than what's in the iPad Pro.
So I booted it up and put something very intensive and demanding on...

Top-end PC game designed for Nvidia RTX cards and Intel CPUs.
It runs via Steam, via an interpreter (Rosetta 2). Not even a native app.
First signs this is not a normal fanless ultra thin laptop is I easily get 60fps with good looking graphics, nothing turned down all the way. The resolution looks so good, as if there's either upscaling, some A.I involved or some new kind of display scaling magic going on. Yet this is with the performance hit of Rosetta (about 20%), on a PC game port running x86 code with integrated graphics!!
It smashes... demolishes... everything else in the same class.
Intel, Nvidia and AMD should be extremely worried.
When / if Apple scale up this architecture to 32 core high-end consumer territory with a fan and dedicated Apple GPU, the rest are in trouble.
There is so much custom silicon in the CPU... video editing, encoding, image editing, all buttery smooth so far and this is the least powerful Apple silicon machine they will ever make.

This is the aspect ratio I've decided to do for my next short. Wide is great! Oh and it's mobile platform only release!

A wonderful actor - and a perfect choice to play Gandhi, whose family had the same Gujerati background as Kingsley's (they originally even came from the same village as Gandhi, going back three generations). Kingsley's birth name was Gujerati: Krishna Bhanji. Though interestingly, Director Richard Attenborough didn't know anything about his Indian background when casting this relatively unknown (to film) English stage actor.
Kingsley's range is extraordinary, from the spiritual depths and moral integrity he shows in Gandhi (and even illuminates his small role in the comedy Dave with a similar moral quality as Vice-President), to the 'most savage mad-dog frothing gangster' (Roger Ebert's quote) in Sexy Beast .
Ebert's great review of Sexy Beast:
https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/sexy-beast-2001
Interesting New York Times article about Kingsley's journey from classical stage actor to Gandhi:
https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/packages/html/movies/bestpictures/gandhi-ar4.html?scp=4&sq=Midsummer&st=cse
Also fascinating in the video in Andrew's post to be reminded of what making an epic film was like in the era before CGI. When Attenborough wanted to portray 300,000 attendees at Gandhi's funeral, he actually had to film a scene with 300,000 extras.

I personally met him in Oporto along a film festival (Fantasporto) a couple of decades ago... lovely personality, polite, not vedette-diva type at all, human and attentive mate, my kudos to him. My personal perspective : ) Even though, I've heard the film festival organisation had (in 2004) some complaints on his hotel expenditures when he left... LOL :- )
- E.

A wonderful actor - and a perfect choice to play Gandhi, whose family had the same Gujerati background as Kingsley's (they originally even came from the same village as Gandhi, going back three generations). Kingsley's birth name was Gujerati: Krishna Bhanji. Though interestingly, Director Richard Attenborough didn't know anything about his Indian background when casting this relatively unknown (to film) English stage actor.
Kingsley's range is extraordinary, from the spiritual depths and moral integrity he shows in Gandhi (and even illuminates his small role in the comedy Dave with a similar moral quality as Vice-President), to the 'most savage mad-dog frothing gangster' (Roger Ebert's quote) in Sexy Beast .
Ebert's great review of Sexy Beast:
https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/sexy-beast-2001
Interesting New York Times article about Kingsley's journey from classical stage actor to Gandhi:
https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/packages/html/movies/bestpictures/gandhi-ar4.html?scp=4&sq=Midsummer&st=cse
Also fascinating in the video in Andrew's post to be reminded of what making an epic film was like in the era before CGI. When Attenborough wanted to portray 300,000 attendees at Gandhi's funeral, he actually had to film a scene with 300,000 extras.

My thoughts here:
https://www.eoshd.com/news/the-genius-of-ben-kingsley/

I got the C70 last week as part of CVP’s first batch. 
Even though I have the A7SIII, I bought it because Canon obviously read a post on this forum about what my “perfect camera” looks like. So I just had to. I sold my EVA1. 
I put it in the deep end straight away on 2 professional shoots for fitness brands. The videos aren’t finished so can’t share any footage yet! 
My impressions: 
1. Body design is fantastic. Lovely in the hand and a joy to operate. Feels cheaper than other C-series for sure but still premium. Well built and easy to use. Very light too! 
2. The screen is flimsy and should be more robust. 
3. The joystick is drunk. You want to go left, but it goes up etc. Not sure if this is a “getting used to it” kinda thing, but it’s unusually tricky to get the hang of. 
4. Record button is also a bit stubborn. You have to press that thing very well to get it to record or stop. 
5. Quick touch screen menu is amazing. There’s no need to reboot the camera to change frame rates and codec like I did on the EVA1.
6. DIS is decent! Doesn’t feel overly robotic like other IBIS systems. But there’s a slight crop. 
7. DPAF with the Sigma 18-35mm is pretty good. My Sigma 50mm hunted quite a bit though. 
8. It has no tracking like the A7S3, only for faces. Seems the face tracking is disabled in 4k100fps. 
9. Footage in all modes is crisp and clean. Not overly sharp, but detailed.  It looks a bit more organic than the A7S3, which is clinical without a Promist. Noticed the A7S3 is a bit more contrasty in SLOG3 than CLOG3. The C70 has an edge in the shadows. 
10. You can use a V60 in 4k100fps but comes up with a warning  that it won’t work. It does, but sometimes cuts off due to a full buffer. Not often though. I’d still get a V90. 
11. H265 footage plays back better than the A7S3 on my 2025 iMac. Still a sludge though.
12. Footage can be easily matched to the A7S3. Took me about a minute. Amazing how much Sony have improved it. 
In conclusion, I had a good first experience and I’m looking forward to the next shoot. I currently prefer the A7S3 but it’s too early to decide that really. Both are great and can be used together very seamlessly due to the Sony’s improved colour and codecs. 
 
 
 

Read my take on it here...
https://www.eoshd.com/news/down-the-rabbit-hole-view-the-youtube-front-page-as-others-do/
View the YouTube front page as others do:
https://www.their.tube

True they do not have a dedicated video camera, though they do offer dedicated video lenses, but based on the OP's original question and further responses, this is someone looking to get into photography/video on a relatively low budget rather than expecting to shoot even an indie movie.
The Fuji XT3 produces excellent 4k, 10 bit internal video, full-frame quality matching stills and the XT4 ups the game further with IBIS and back up insurance of being able to write to both cards which few can do. As a starting out system or moving up from 4/3rds, it's excellent.
Weak point is the lack of video-orientated lenses with AF though several of them are more than good enough in this department, particularly the; 18-55, 16-55, 50-140, 23 f2 and 50 f2.
It's the system I have been used for 50+ jobs since the XT3 came out (and XH1 previously) but have just moved the Lumix S5 for a number of reasons that are not critical of the Fuji system.
There really is not a bad system though, whether it be Nikon, Canon, Sony, Panny or Fuji as each have strengths and weaknesses and will suit certain users better than others.

Actually, a correction: ARM is not making these chips for Apple. ARM actually doesn't make chips at all, they license their designs in two distinct ways.
The first way is licensing a full design of an actual chip, so all someone like HTC or LG has to do is pay the licensing rights, send the design to a Fab (where chips are built) and they are done.
The second (and much less common way) is that they license what's called an "ISA" (Instruction Set Architecture), which is basically (to put it simply) the words/instructions that the "language" of an ARM architecture speaks, and then someone like Apple can license this ISA and then design and implement its own chips designs *from scratch* implementing the ISA, and this is where things get interesting as Apple has world-class leading-edge engineers designing from ground zero its own chips. So although Apple's chips are "ARM-based", they are not the generic chips most other manufacturers buy, and this is where Apple shines. A great thing about this approach (which as you can imagine, is very expensive) is that Apple can modify the chip as fit, and add all the extra circuitry to it to optimize it for specific things (like macOS acceleration, encryption in real-time, video encoding and decoding, Machine Learning, etc).
Bottom line: Even if you try to compare two ARM-derived chips running at the same frequency between say a generic Android device and an Apple-designed one, it is highly-likely that Apple's chips will be more efficient in real-world terms.
For those interested in this topic I wrote a lengthly article about Apple Silicon. I offer below the original link (in Spanish) and the Google-translated version of it in english (the translation is surprisingly good):
http://eliax.com/index.cfm?post_id=11569
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Feliax.com%2Findex.cfm%3Fpost_id%3D11569
Hope that explains a bit what's going on here (as a Microprocessor Engineer and Computer Scientist I know a bit about these things and the industry as a whole, and love to share my knowledge in layman terms).
 
 

Thanks for sharing Andrew. 
I just don’t agree with these people who say the A7SIII is safe, boring and not exciting. It’s baffling to be honest. 
I took it on a 6 day trip to Turkey to film a trilogy of music videos. I almost rather effortlessly acquired an immense amount of footage, beautifully exposed in the sun with crisp, detailed imagery. The experience was extremely liberating. 
Now I’ve got the 1st video in edit, the footage is such a joy to grade. It’s easy to get a great image with any look you want. The only downside being the non- All-I codecs being impossible to edit natively. So I got a Ninja V. 
Back to my point. This is not a boring or safe camera. This is a camera that’s been tuned to precision with absolutely no handicaps for 4k shooting. None whatsoever. No gimmicks. No cripple. Nothing. And no other camera on the market can claim this. To me it’s the most exciting camera I’ve used in a long time, because it sets me completely free. 
Interestingly, I did pre-order a C70 which also looks great. I’m now debating whether to get another A7SIII and be done with it. 
 

Like I said in the article, I have approached everybody I know who works for Canon, and one of them is Michael Bravin, ex-ARRI, so we are not talking about the regional chinless wonder junior sales reps but people who have clout, who could make a difference and who I assume to be ethical people willing to help.
Let me tell you...
I have got nowhere fast.
The same with Canon UK.
I believe they are probably just sticking their heads in the sand or probably don't even understand the depth of customer anger there is about this.
Or maybe we are a niche who don't make them the extra billions they are targeting so fuck us.
Just one of the reason's we've a right to be very angry.
Everybody who has spent $4000 on this camera (or even more in many regions) has a right to an honest explanation, and an apology, and most certainly a fix.
I do agree that maybe a less harder, pro-corporate position would make for a more harmonious relationship between EOSHD and Canon.
But I cannot sacrifice my principals - The right strategy at the moment is to simply carry on speaking the truth to bullshit, with factual evidence to back it up and as many deep technical discoveries as possible ideally with the help of Magic Lantern. We must pool our knowledge.
Then Japan can do what the like to be quite honest.
The ball has been in their court since day one and will continue to be.
If we don't like what they have done, the onus is on us to stop being nice little easily-led consumers and to spend our money elsewhere! Perhaps even in the high end smartphone camera market instead.

Very much agree, it's a new tactic from Canon based on usability rather than limiting specs. They've realised limiting specs hurt sales and brand reputation. So it's the same thing in different clothing now. Make the high-end features unusable. Apparently $4000 is not enough for Canon and they want the full $15,000 from you if you want high-end specs AND usability.
And this is from a company who wants us all to rush out and buy $2K RF lenses for our crippled $4K bodies?! They can fuck off.