Dimitris Stasinos

Oh plenty did  
Well, they should at least add 10bit output for those who need it, cause slog2/3 with 8bits/channel sucks. 

I think the reason people are asking for 10 bit in the next A7 series is just because Pana gave it In GH5. It is the "take that" factor of the prosumer market. That doesn't necessarily means that A7S need absolutely 10 bit to be a fine all around camera. No one asked for it before gh5's announcement. But people asked for other thinks, like better economics, usable screen and better autofocus for gimbal work. As Axel said XAVC codec is badass and the only reason for a prosumer camera to have 10 bit codec is to have room in post for correcting color issues. You can easily correct the "zombie" effect on the skin tones that a7 series give in post, but good luck with orange flat skin tones of a g7 ( this is exactly where a 10 bit codec shines). Overall I think that in this specific market it is wiser to provide a nice 8bit codec with pleasing skin tones than a 10 bit codec to save your camera's bad rendition of color. How many of the Pana fanboys out there have actually tried to work on a 10bit file really? I wouldn't be so excited, especially after trying to work with Luke's files on an IMac.....(dude THANKS for these...). Don't get me wrong, I am really considering gh5, but dear Pana...fix those colors please, cause everything else is perfect....

I think the reason people are asking for 10 bit in the next A7 series is just because Pana gave it In GH5. It is the "take that" factor of the prosumer market. That doesn't necessarily means that A7S need absolutely 10 bit to be a fine all around camera. No one asked for it before gh5's announcement. But people asked for other thinks, like better economics, usable screen and better autofocus for gimbal work. As Axel said XAVC codec is badass and the only reason for a prosumer camera to have 10 bit codec is to have room in post for correcting color issues. You can easily correct the "zombie" effect on the skin tones that a7 series give in post, but good luck with orange flat skin tones of a g7 ( this is exactly where a 10 bit codec shines). Overall I think that in this specific market it is wiser to provide a nice 8bit codec with pleasing skin tones than a 10 bit codec to save your camera's bad rendition of color. How many of the Pana fanboys out there have actually tried to work on a 10bit file really? I wouldn't be so excited, especially after trying to work with Luke's files on an IMac.....(dude THANKS for these...). Don't get me wrong, I am really considering gh5, but dear Pana...fix those colors please, cause everything else is perfect....

@Dimitris Stasinos
You are right of course. As I see it, Philip Bloom didn't do us a favour by shooting "night for day" in his Now I See or later in the weird lake-shot that was only lit by the moon. Lowlight capabilities allow you to scale down the amount of light necessary to light a scene (but they shouldn't save you from lighting!), but to shoot in practically no light is a misconception. I also know the GH5 will never come close to the cleanness of the A7Rii/A7Sii (I use both sometimes). The DR also is very good with the Sony's. Be it as it may, they are terrible in terms of video usability. It starts with tiny, dim and not fully articulated displays. I like the images, I absolutely dislike to shoot with it. On a check list with a comparison of Sony vs. Pana the GH5 would probably get a "con" for lowlight.

I really liked his point of view and couldn't agree more. Yes, cameras have evolved since then and high noise issues gradually get off our way. But it's not always a matter of perspective or philosophy. From my point of view, A7S has raised the bar so much and opened new creative possibilities that are hard to ignore when an m43 camera with a good lens is getting really close to it´s price...I really liked "The Rock" by the way, but it is not that simple as "it was good for them back then, so stop asking for better SN ratio and do your job", because I personally have not a lighting crew with a van full of lighting gear to save my shot every time my camera tends to screw it...So if you ask me, yes the A7S has more than enough DR and low light capabilities, at least for me, but gh4 would ruin my day. And as for gh5 I am hoping for a usable 3200 iso, which I consider as "a very BASIC feature" for a camera which is 2x the price of a6300.

I really liked his point of view and couldn't agree more. Yes, cameras have evolved since then and high noise issues gradually get off our way. But it's not always a matter of perspective or philosophy. From my point of view, A7S has raised the bar so much and opened new creative possibilities that are hard to ignore when an m43 camera with a good lens is getting really close to it´s price...I really liked "The Rock" by the way, but it is not that simple as "it was good for them back then, so stop asking for better SN ratio and do your job", because I personally have not a lighting crew with a van full of lighting gear to save my shot every time my camera tends to screw it...So if you ask me, yes the A7S has more than enough DR and low light capabilities, at least for me, but gh4 would ruin my day. And as for gh5 I am hoping for a usable 3200 iso, which I consider as "a very BASIC feature" for a camera which is 2x the price of a6300.

I can see only 2 dark spots regarding this camera till now. One is the auto focus performance, as mentioned above, and the other is what panasonic calls Three-Dimensional Color Control. If AF is indeed 2 times faster than gh4 and 3DCC actually helps the user to get rid off that ugly orange skintones, even with tweaking, this will be a dream video camera. Again, fingers crossed....

I can see only 2 dark spots regarding this camera till now. One is the auto focus performance, as mentioned above, and the other is what panasonic calls Three-Dimensional Color Control. If AF is indeed 2 times faster than gh4 and 3DCC actually helps the user to get rid off that ugly orange skintones, even with tweaking, this will be a dream video camera. Again, fingers crossed....

I consider G7's footage acceptable at both iso 800 & 1600. What i am waiting for is a m43 camera with acceptable performance at 3200 iso. And as many here have already mentioned not every pro shooter uses lights. 

Which version of FCPX are you using? Your disk's speed doesn't affect render times, only editing speed. Rendering is mainly a processor task. Also I saw a massive boost in render times when I updated my FCPX in 10.2.3 version. If you are running an older version try this.

Nice piece of work! Excellent color, framing & editing. I will agree with bunk though regarding audio. I have a pair of near field studio monitors in front of me & can't hear what she is saying. Music is too loud and her voice needs more aggresive compression and volume to cut through. Cheers!

Process? You seem to have found the expert mode. I used to calibrate my old display that way. Looked good then, looks terrible now. Perhaps because our own expectations are higher after a few years. The whole grading hype educates us to be unhappy with what we've got. I think the built-in monitor calibration never was exactly brilliant.

I use X-Rite ColorMunki. It seems to work well on my 2015 iMac 27: http://a.co/hQbm2VL

I had a Spyder Pro, now a X-rite i1Display Pro, used with the free software DisplayCAL. Takes a long time, but is very precise.
Why is Yosemite's calibration process a "total mess"? Missed the old "expert mode"? It appears only if you hold "alt" while clicking in >system preferences >monitors >colors  and there >calibrate.

The a6500 will definitely loose 1/3 of it's current price anyway, just as a6300 did. By the time GH5 is out (Feb-March maybe?), Sony will have the a6700 (or something like that) ready for production. This has nothing to do with gh5 or what the average consumer wants. It's just Sony's strategy. When something new pops up from their R&D departments, it's instantly incorporated into the next design in a 6 month cycle, just the opposite from what Canon does. This leads to innovative BUT immature & untested products & brings huge sales after targeted marketing campaigns. This is how Sony choosed to move on, sadly. A side effect to this strategy is the shrinking value of these products, every time the next model is out (which is 6 months from now). Panasonic doesn't do this, nor Canon, nor Fuji, nor Nikon. This is why SONY SUCKS and not because of their skintones which i personally like :).

Nice piece of work! Excellent color, framing & editing. I will agree with bunk though regarding audio. I have a pair of near field studio monitors in front of me & can't hear what she is saying. Music is too loud and her voice needs more aggresive compression and volume to cut through. Cheers!

Yeah,since canon has the best colour in the world,why some guys even bother worry there is not log ,not ibis,not FF view 4k, not bsi sensor, even the codec from 90s work out just fine！
Good work canon,sony sucks;)

As soon as the first 4K camera came on the market that interested me, the GH4, I stopped caring about sharpness any more.
We have more detail than anybody can possibly notice when watching the film.
Sharpness has become a pixel peeping tech spec curiosity rather than a really noticeable differentiator as it was with the 1080p cams.
In fact too much sharpness is bad... high detail should be softer like on the 1D C in Canon LOG, with the option to dial it up with a sharpness filter in post.
Yes there are still minor differences - some like the Samsung NX1 and A6500 over-sample from 6K sensors to 4K. Some from 5K-ish to 4K like the A7R II Super 35mm mode and X-T2.
But seriously nobody notices when they see your footage.

So, after seeing that video it's an easy decision for me...The "camera IQ pixel peeping" thing has no point when "one" of the compared devices doesn't work as advertised. GoPro will probably adress some of these bugs through firmware updates but you can't turn a potato into a strawberry with software quirks... The bad thing though, that makes me kinda sad, is that there is still no company that can compete with DJI. Monopoly is never a "good" thing. When software updates will get messy in many ways (as it happened many many times before with Phantoms), which company will give us an alternative?

So, after seeing that video it's an easy decision for me...The "camera IQ pixel peeping" thing has no point when "one" of the compared devices doesn't work as advertised. GoPro will probably adress some of these bugs through firmware updates but you can't turn a potato into a strawberry with software quirks... The bad thing though, that makes me kinda sad, is that there is still no company that can compete with DJI. Monopoly is never a "good" thing. When software updates will get messy in many ways (as it happened many many times before with Phantoms), which company will give us an alternative?

I believe that a 1/2.3 sensor can produce pleasing images if you bump up the datarate to at least 100 mbps. I can understand the reason why dji doesn't do this, obviously to protect it's more expensive solutions (even X5 has a ridiculous bitrate, to force you buy x5r if you want a grade friendly image but in a ridiculous price...).
What has GoPro to protect? And how we can find the latest IMX sensors on bloody smartphones like Google Pixel XL and the latest GoPro, a "dedicated video device" has an older sensor? Have you seen footage from Pixel XL (i think the latest one on YT are legit)? Is this the way for them to recover? Voice commands, cmon really? And that "improved encoding algorithm" fairytale is getting old now...
Another paradox: Dji's drones with tiny 1/2.3 sensors have cameras for precision indoor flying.....Indoors.....with a 1/2.3 sensor.....And more expensive platforms have MFT sensors but not VPS...These things could replace cranes in many many scenarios if they had tripod mode and VPS. This reminds me Sony's marketing. You purchase a 8000 e. camera and 6 months later, a 1000 e. consumer piece of s..t comes up with Slog, 6k oversampling and slow motion....

Actually this is the best footage i have seen so far from the mavic pro. These images have the right amount of sharpness to my eyes. Also in the statue shot we can finally see the advantage of bigger focal length / shallower depth of field, as selective focus is not an option for a P4 owner. This is an example of how an experienced user can show the true potential of a product.

Actually this is the best footage i have seen so far from the mavic pro. These images have the right amount of sharpness to my eyes. Also in the statue shot we can finally see the advantage of bigger focal length / shallower depth of field, as selective focus is not an option for a P4 owner. This is an example of how an experienced user can show the true potential of a product.