frontfocus

I love how he claims it's the iPads and everything else fault. 
So, if you can't watch it on an iPad, with factory calibrated screen, covering DCI P3, working with variable frame rate to match the content, offering over 500 nit brightness and extremely good contrast what should we get? 4000$ HDR Oled Screens? 

In the end it was just too dark and HBO made it even worse with their crappy compression. Get your content delivery sorted and then start blaming customers!

I love how he claims it's the iPads and everything else fault. 
So, if you can't watch it on an iPad, with factory calibrated screen, covering DCI P3, working with variable frame rate to match the content, offering over 500 nit brightness and extremely good contrast what should we get? 4000$ HDR Oled Screens? 

In the end it was just too dark and HBO made it even worse with their crappy compression. Get your content delivery sorted and then start blaming customers!

The cinematographer is defending his work.
https://www.theverge.com/tldr/2019/4/30/18524679/game-of-thrones-battle-of-winterfell-too-dark-fabian-wagner-response-cinematographer
"people don’t know how to tune their TVs properly” .... “We tried to give the viewers and fans a cool episode to watch,” he said. “I know it wasn’t too dark because I shot it.”
Well... I tried to give my wife a 4 course meal. I know it tasted great, because I cooked it. If she didn't like it, its because her tastebuds are wrong.

it doesn't make it parfocal, since that is, by definition, that the focus doesn't change when you zoom. But the focus does change and it is corrected by the focus. 
Sony got an interesting solution with the 18-110mm f/4.0 too, where the focus element is moved to correct. The problem with such electronic solutions is, that fast zoom movements can be too fast to correct and that you can't use those lenses on another non supported mount via adapter

take the "1" off and we can talk ?

The GH5 also totally destroys the A6500. I believe the A6500 is one of the main reasons there is a general negativity towards Sony. It has odd color (to be generous) and the worst possible rolling shutter.
I think we all know how big sensors are. Size does not necessarily mean more detail, or better image, a lot of that is determined by the processing done afterwards. And sensor size has nothing to do with the amount of data unless you keep pixel pitch the same. I think the GH5's 4:3 open gate mode records more pixels/data than the Z6 in 16:9 UHD, and certainly packs it into a beefier codec.
From what I have seen, the Z6 doesn't have a particularly good image, compared to a GH5 at native ISO. Maybe that's because I've actually worked with Gh5 footage on real projects, whereas I've only downloaded test clips of the Z6. But the GH5 holds up better to grading with high data rates. I haven't tried to work with any externally recorded Z6 footage yet, but, as soon as you require an external recorder attached with a feeble HDMI cable, you've really lost my interest. It's a workaround to the fact that many DSLR-style cameras don't come with the video codecs and tools we need.
That isn't to say the Z6 is bad. I'd rather have a Z6 than a GH5, but it's not because the video image fidelity is better at native ISO. Low light is much better, and full frame means I'd use vintage lenses at their native FOV. But I really think it's a trade off with the current batch of smaller sensor cameras that have more video-oriented features.

I own all of the f/1.4 /1.2 lenses. They got a significant boost in autofocus performance with the X-T3. They aren't silent and the 35mm f/1.4 is the loudest. Overall I like their rendering and think they offer good image quality for the money. But it shows, that Fuji wasn't thinking about video back when those lenses were designed
Do you think that's really necessary? At the moment we get 6.3K downsampled to 4K. And there are some, that already claim 4K is too sharp. 
The other point is, why stop at 8K? Why not future proof for 16K?

in the US it might be somewhat interesting, here in Europe it's 1050€. https://www.amazon.fr/Sony-ILCE-6400-Numérique-Autofocus-Ultra-Rapide/dp/B07MW8GTYD  
that's nearly 1200$. And for that you get an old sensor with very bad rolling shutter, 8bit only, 30p only and bitrates still stuck 100Mbps. That might have been interesting in 2016 when the A6300 was released, but in 2019 it's not. 

As above. We are not talking 1990's volume zoom's here, - no one will hear any Fuji lens focusing!
Camera clicks, yes and that's why I only use XH1 and X100f now for stills (and XT3 for video).
Off camera audio every time.

Or put a Sigma ART lens on the Fuji GFX cameras

Yep, sort of... The older lenses got a boost by virtue of being on the more recent bodies, but the newer lenses generally perform better regardless, especially those f2's.

I think what he wanted to say is, that older lenses got a bigger boost in performance compared to newer lenses. The new f/2.0 primes and f/2.8 zooms are still faster, but the improvement from X-T2/X-H1 to X-T3 was by far not as big as with the older lenses. 
And I absolutely agree with that. 

some interesting clues in that interview.. i knew sony was going back to the drawing boards for A7S3 but it sounds like they are really trying to re-imagine the whole concept to gear it towards videographers. even more surprising, the VP giving praise to the BM P4K. it seems plausible Sony might go that direction with a bigger body/LCD. i think Sony took their current alpha form factor to its limits, especially as far as heat management and going forward with video specs means a new body paradigm.. hopefully some more clues during NAB..

I think the delay in the A7Siii is obvious: the expectations/market has moved in a direction that outpaced Sony's tech and they're playing catch up. Last year was a huge year. Panasonic was still riding that GH5 wave for most of the year, until they announced their full frame camera. The full frame mirrorless announcements from Nikon and Canon. Nikon and Fuji made HUGE steps in their video capabilities. At the beginning of the year the A7III looked like a real impressive camera (and it still is despite its flaws) but by the end of 2018, not so much. Heck, the GH5s, and all of the new full frame mirrorless cameras even made their low light performance look less impressive: maybe not as good, but definitely in the ballpark. 
In a sense, they're probably not lying by saying that it's simple to add 4K/60p but to DO 4k/60p with their current mirrorless tech probably isn't so simple without overheating. The longer they wait though the bigger the expectations are going to be. It's not an enviable position to be in. At this point they're going to need to release something ground breaking because they've got a lot of companies gunning for them, and they're all very capable foes. 

Right, I meant in terms of higher frame rates. I'm amused by the way Sony claims its "easy" to do 4k60, but has yet to do it, while other companies like Z Cam forge ahead into double that frame rate--using a Sony sensor, of all things. Strikes me as funny.

Crop or not, Sony had no dslr style camera that shoots 4k60. Panasonic has a number of them, and fuji has the xt3, and z cam went straight to 4k120.
And even Canon now has a camera with 10 bit hdmi. Sony really needs to make a massive leap forward at either ff or apsc, and keep abreasonable price. They really need 4k60 at 10 bit internally under $3k for me to be at all impressed.

No one has said anything about that. I suggest you ignore this thread because it's not about criticism. It's about the over representation of Sony users threatening, attacking and bullying anyone who doesn't blindly apologize for Sony's shortcomings and hate all other brands.
If you haven't experienced it, good for you. But many have and there is data supporting it. So we wish to discuss it

I wonder if it's some sort of over compensation for always playing catch up. Sony has no real "firsts". And even if that doesn't mean anything, because it doesn't. It seems important among spec hunters.

penis camera look like a serious product now

It would be interesting to see someone shoot a scene that includes a test chart, then apply NR in post to the XT3 and P4K until they match the level of detail and IQ from the A7III.  
If the A7III gives a certain resolution and noise level at some ISO but you can get the same noise level but with better resolution by applying NR in post to the other cameras then in the real-world they would beat the A7III.  
Far too many people are judging cameras like the entire post-production phase doesn't exist, when unfortunately half the image processing happens inside the camera these days.

there is none. You can switch between 25 and 30fps as you wish. No need to change any ntsc/pal settings

if it's 95MB/s UHS-I this means, that it's very likely not a V60 card which is recommended for 400Mbps. So it's likely a card problem. 

What are you talking about? @DjangoDoesn’t look better than any of the competent full frame mirrorless cameras today. I see blown out hightlights, micro jitters and a fixed focal length. For stills yes maybe it’s worth the price, for video it’s a fucking joke.

Tony Northrup is the worst. It's all about generating this or that in order to get views. It's cynical and horrible. Has nothing to do with cameras. 

Yeah, take your time testing. Different af-c settings for example. It’s nothing you should decide without really thinking about it