spinkscapes

The lens mount options are beyond infuriating makes the offerings dead in the water for me (and I get that this is primarily on Canon, I'm frustrated at the situation not Blackmagic). Maybe if I hadn't converted so many of my EF options I'd be interested.

Plus it doubles as an exceptional stills camera (which is great for me as a backup as a wedding photography camera). Also Josh is quickly becoming one of my favourite Youtubers with his in-depth discussions which aren't dry or boring.

Nikon are doing some fantastic things with their cameras, which is great from a Canon perspective. I expect that the R5 mkII and R1 next year will have to ensure that they surpass the competitive offerings from Nikon and Sony. For a brand that is supposed to be trailing the others in innovation I've been particularly impressed by Canon's lens offerings. Obviously they've got the without-peer 28-70mm f/2 lens (still) but recently they've added the Canon 135mm f/1.8 IS (which I've been using this year and it is absolutely phenomenal, especially for video). Then the ultra expensive 100-300mm f/2.8L IS and in the last couple of months they've added the 10-20mm f/4, the 24-105mm f/2.8 IS and the 200-800mm f/6.3 - 9 IS. Each of these are pushing the boundaries of what was previously thought was achievable in a lens. That's not to say that the other brands don't have good offerings. However, each of the above lenses I've mentioned is keeping me firmly in the Canon camp. Coupled with the likely improvements on the already exceptional Canon R5 and I honestly can't believe how far we've come with camera offerings in the 15 years since I've been using professional camera gear.

Hold that thought.

Kinda reminds me of this scene:

Just so readers can decide themselves how the cameras match together I'll give you a breakdown of the setups: Shot 1 - invitation - Blackmagic Pocket 4K with Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 (ordinarily shot at f/1.4-2.0); Shot 2 - dress zipping - BMPCC 4K & V 25mm f/0.95; Shot 3 - engagement ring macro - Canon C200 with Canon 100mm f/2.8L with a Rotolight; Shot 4 - bride putting on ring - - BMPCC 4K & V 25mm f/0.95 shot wide open; Shot 5 - bride reflection - BMPCC 4K & V 25mm f/0.95; Shot 6 - groom tie (close up) - Canon C200 with Canon 85mm f1.4L IS; Shot 7 - bride and groom against vines - BMPCC 4K & V 25mm f/0.95; Shot 8 - bride getting out of car - XT-3 & 18-55mm; Shot 9 - dance shot - Fuji XT-3 with Fuji 18-55mm f/2.8-4.0 OIS (shot close to 18mm and wide open at f/2.8); Shot 10 - silhouette - Canon C200 with Canon 35mm f/2.0 IS; Shot 11 - bridesmaids - Blackmagic Pocket 4K with Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95; Shot 12 - dance shot - All dance shots are as per shot 9; Shot 13 - groom kissing bride in field - BMPCC 4K & V 25mm f/0.95; Shot 14 - walking - XT-3 & 18-55mm; Shot 15 - dance shot - see shot 9; Shot 16 - groomsman doing Toyota - XT-3 & 18-55mm; Shot 17 - silhouette - BMPCC 4K & V 25mm f/0.95 shot wide open; Shot 18 - bride and groom close up - XT-3 & 18-55mm; Shot 19 - aerial - DJI Phantom 4; Shot 20 - bride and groom in field from low angle - BMPCC 4K & V 25mm f/0.95; Shot 21 - bride and groom and veil - XT-3 & 18-55mm; Shot 22 - bridal party confetti bang - C200 & 85mm f/1.4L IS wide open; Shot 23 - bride and groom walking towards camera - XT-3 & 18-55mm; Shot 24 - bride and groom leaving ceremony with confetti - XT-3 & 18-55mm; Shot 25 - bride staring over groom's shoulder at camera - BMPCC 4K & V 25mm f/0.95; Shot 26 - bride and groom walking through long grass - XT-3 & 18-55mm; Shot 27 - bride and groom resting against vineyard post - XT-3 & 18-55mm; Shot 28 - ditto Shot 29 - ceremony kiss - Canon 5D mkIV with Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II; Shot 30 - veil shot - XT-3 & 18-55mm; Shot 31 - dance shot - see shot 9; Shot 32 - bride and groom walking between vines - C200 & 85mm f/1.4L IS wide open; Shot 33 - bride and groom dancing on hill - BMPCC 4K & V 25mm f/0.95; Shot 34 - dance shot - see shot 9; Shot 35 - bride holding veil - BMPCC 4K & V 25mm f/0.95; Shot 36 - bride doing gladiator - XT-3 & 18-55mm; Shot 37 - bride glancing down at window - BMPCC 4K & V 25mm f/0.95; Shot 38 - hand holding - C200 & 85mm f/1.4L IS wide open; Shot 39 - groom swinging bride - XT-3 & 18-55mm; Shot 40 - sparkler exit - XT-3 & 18-55mm shot at 2000 ISO; Shot 41 - dip - XT-3 & 18-55mm; and Shot 42 - final - XT-3 & 18-55mm. Basically all of them had on Southall which is a Delut by James Miller (https://sellfy.com/p/KUuV/).

That's the C200 with the 85mm f1.4L IS. Which, as I said, was designated to third camera as we tried out the new toys on Saturday.

ser from Saturday's wedding. The predominant camera is the X-T3 on the gimbal. There's also quite a few shots in there from the Pocket 4K, a couple of from our trusty C200 (taking a back seat to the other cameras) and one from the 5D mkIV. Impressions of the two cameras after two weddings: 1. The X-T3 is the perfect camera for the Zhiyun Crane 2. It is perfectly balanced even before turning the gimbal on. This wedding I used it entirely with my new 18-55mm at the wide end as I wanted the IS. The 2. The Blackmagic Pocket 4K is something else. Utterly magnificent. With the Voigtlander 25mm constantly on this camera it produces an image that is unmatched by any of the other cameras I own. You just need to be in a position that allows you time to compose and focus. Thankfully the Voigtlander is great for quick manual focusing. The menu system is intuitive and easy and the touch screen makes changing settings a dream. The one chief drawback is that the battery life is awful. You shouldn't expect more than 40 minutes on constantly shooting. So I have about 15 LP-E6 batteries handy just in case. They both compliment the other very well and I will be keeping both for my uses. Fergus & Rachel Teaser.mp4 Fergus & Rachel Teaser.mp4 Fergus & Rachel Teaser.mp4

Modern vs retro. Already I love the intuitive menu system and the 5 inch screen of the Pocket 4K. The current data rates on any slow motion 4K footage however....

Just received my Pocket 4K, incidentally the day following receiving my XT-3. Got a wedding to shoot on Saturday so good timing.

What speedbooster did you land on? Don't worry. Answered above.

Then they have to be prepared to lose out big time for sales to Panasonic and Blackmagic.

I much prefer the build of my Micro rather than the build of my GH4.

Weird, after watching the video I decided that the skin tones were way too unnatural and unflattering to me.

Premiere have updated their support for Cinema RAW Lite so I really have little use for a "middle" codec anymore.

Either Sony releases a comparable camera form factor that delivers UHD at 60p or they have conceded that they can't compete with the GH5. Doubt that they will make such a concession.

Probably not the person to ask as: a. I've never shot with the C100; and b. I've always shot the C200 at UHD. I know the "no middle codec" makes the C200 dead in the water for many but I preferred the C200 for a variety of reasons, not least of which: 1. better autofocus; 2. internal RAW; 3. the EVF; 4. the Canon skin tones; and 5. my familiarity with the Canon menu system. I find that the size difference between a HQ Pro-res file and the Cinema RAW lite is negligible and the post-production workflow issues I currently contribute to Adobe's incompetence rather than the codec. I am happy to edit in Resolve in the meantime.

I have a C200. Absolutely stunning camera. Didn't even consider the EVA1 or watch any reviews so can't compare.

Much happier using the C200 than I ever was using the FS7, but each to their own.

It's been a while since I've seen such brilliant acting associated with the BBC.

Pound for pound the Canon 5D mkIV has lovely video. Better, IMO, than the Sony offerings as a B-camera. It's just that it is not purpose-built for video, has an intense codec and doesn't have a slow motion UHD option which seems out of place compared to cameras like the Panasonic GH5. Isn't the Ursa Mini Pro (when properly kitted out) a very similar price to the C200?

I am not proposing to keep the original footage for a year. I shoot weddings so I only need to retain the raw footage for 3 months tops. Currently I convert my Blackmagic raw footage via Da Vinci Resolve and archive the rendered compressed video from that. Thus, a 1TB wedding shoot becomes a 50GB archived folder. I think that's pretty manageable to retain for 12 months.

Well I, for one, will be using the raw codec almost exclusively on this camera. Thus I am not really concerned about what you perceive as this camera's biggest weakness.

I need DPAF and want raw, so my decision is made. The Panasonic (on paper) looks good.