Papiskokuji

I'm in love with the colors, the softness, the grain, the blooming highlights and the chromatic aberration. Is this straight out of the camera ? Did you do some post on it ? Anyway, I can't wait to know which camera you shot it with ! And the composition and edit are equally nice ! Well done !

Specwise it's a bit disappointing. I'm sure the image out of it is spectacular (like most of the cameras nowadays), the tilting screen is a great evolution, the evf and IBIS are topnotch : sure it's a great camera. But when I read Andrew's article, I can't help remembering his rant about those biased youtubers under Canon's influence, because they were flown under the sun of Hawai, etc.
Now I read about Andrew at Panasonic's headquarters, and all I can read is praise about the camera, not even a single remark/critic about anything, eventhough there should be a few, in my humble opinion. I fully understand that when you are invited somewhere, treated well, etc. You don't want to be rude and say bad things about the product you had the chance to shoot with before everybody, even more so when it's a good camera like the S1H seems to be.
But come on, no word on NO Full Frame 4K 60p (what would you have said if it had been Sony), codec and bitrate very good but not revolutionary (especially for the added resolution of 6K), no ND, no PDAF (why not, but suddenly AF is not important, it varies from camera to camera...?). I can't even tell the difference with the S1 (I'll have to check it) but the fact you can have manual controls in HFR. I understand your rants, it's good sometimes, it might even be productive if heard by the brands. What I don't like is that it's so variable and relative. You should make an article about Panasonic crippling the S1 not allowing manual controls in HFR. It's as puzzling as canon not giving 24p...
And finally, the price. It's very very expansive. A very few people will be able to afford it. 4 000$ is in the realm of a real cinema camera with proper ergonomics, ND filters... That's why I think, you could ask for a bit more from this camera. The Fuji X-T3 has almost the same offering, (in aps-c) with crops between framerates a lot more manageable. The codec's bitrates are even better. There's no IBIS, EVF and build quality not as good, but the price difference is huge. Well that's only my take on it

Specwise it's a bit disappointing. I'm sure the image out of it is spectacular (like most of the cameras nowadays), the tilting screen is a great evolution, the evf and IBIS are topnotch : sure it's a great camera. But when I read Andrew's article, I can't help remembering his rant about those biased youtubers under Canon's influence, because they were flown under the sun of Hawai, etc.
Now I read about Andrew at Panasonic's headquarters, and all I can read is praise about the camera, not even a single remark/critic about anything, eventhough there should be a few, in my humble opinion. I fully understand that when you are invited somewhere, treated well, etc. You don't want to be rude and say bad things about the product you had the chance to shoot with before everybody, even more so when it's a good camera like the S1H seems to be.
But come on, no word on NO Full Frame 4K 60p (what would you have said if it had been Sony), codec and bitrate very good but not revolutionary (especially for the added resolution of 6K), no ND, no PDAF (why not, but suddenly AF is not important, it varies from camera to camera...?). I can't even tell the difference with the S1 (I'll have to check it) but the fact you can have manual controls in HFR. I understand your rants, it's good sometimes, it might even be productive if heard by the brands. What I don't like is that it's so variable and relative. You should make an article about Panasonic crippling the S1 not allowing manual controls in HFR. It's as puzzling as canon not giving 24p...
And finally, the price. It's very very expansive. A very few people will be able to afford it. 4 000$ is in the realm of a real cinema camera with proper ergonomics, ND filters... That's why I think, you could ask for a bit more from this camera. The Fuji X-T3 has almost the same offering, (in aps-c) with crops between framerates a lot more manageable. The codec's bitrates are even better. There's no IBIS, EVF and build quality not as good, but the price difference is huge. Well that's only my take on it

Specwise it's a bit disappointing. I'm sure the image out of it is spectacular (like most of the cameras nowadays), the tilting screen is a great evolution, the evf and IBIS are topnotch : sure it's a great camera. But when I read Andrew's article, I can't help remembering his rant about those biased youtubers under Canon's influence, because they were flown under the sun of Hawai, etc.
Now I read about Andrew at Panasonic's headquarters, and all I can read is praise about the camera, not even a single remark/critic about anything, eventhough there should be a few, in my humble opinion. I fully understand that when you are invited somewhere, treated well, etc. You don't want to be rude and say bad things about the product you had the chance to shoot with before everybody, even more so when it's a good camera like the S1H seems to be.
But come on, no word on NO Full Frame 4K 60p (what would you have said if it had been Sony), codec and bitrate very good but not revolutionary (especially for the added resolution of 6K), no ND, no PDAF (why not, but suddenly AF is not important, it varies from camera to camera...?). I can't even tell the difference with the S1 (I'll have to check it) but the fact you can have manual controls in HFR. I understand your rants, it's good sometimes, it might even be productive if heard by the brands. What I don't like is that it's so variable and relative. You should make an article about Panasonic crippling the S1 not allowing manual controls in HFR. It's as puzzling as canon not giving 24p...
And finally, the price. It's very very expansive. A very few people will be able to afford it. 4 000$ is in the realm of a real cinema camera with proper ergonomics, ND filters... That's why I think, you could ask for a bit more from this camera. The Fuji X-T3 has almost the same offering, (in aps-c) with crops between framerates a lot more manageable. The codec's bitrates are even better. There's no IBIS, EVF and build quality not as good, but the price difference is huge. Well that's only my take on it

Specwise it's a bit disappointing. I'm sure the image out of it is spectacular (like most of the cameras nowadays), the tilting screen is a great evolution, the evf and IBIS are topnotch : sure it's a great camera. But when I read Andrew's article, I can't help remembering his rant about those biased youtubers under Canon's influence, because they were flown under the sun of Hawai, etc.
Now I read about Andrew at Panasonic's headquarters, and all I can read is praise about the camera, not even a single remark/critic about anything, eventhough there should be a few, in my humble opinion. I fully understand that when you are invited somewhere, treated well, etc. You don't want to be rude and say bad things about the product you had the chance to shoot with before everybody, even more so when it's a good camera like the S1H seems to be.
But come on, no word on NO Full Frame 4K 60p (what would you have said if it had been Sony), codec and bitrate very good but not revolutionary (especially for the added resolution of 6K), no ND, no PDAF (why not, but suddenly AF is not important, it varies from camera to camera...?). I can't even tell the difference with the S1 (I'll have to check it) but the fact you can have manual controls in HFR. I understand your rants, it's good sometimes, it might even be productive if heard by the brands. What I don't like is that it's so variable and relative. You should make an article about Panasonic crippling the S1 not allowing manual controls in HFR. It's as puzzling as canon not giving 24p...
And finally, the price. It's very very expansive. A very few people will be able to afford it. 4 000$ is in the realm of a real cinema camera with proper ergonomics, ND filters... That's why I think, you could ask for a bit more from this camera. The Fuji X-T3 has almost the same offering, (in aps-c) with crops between framerates a lot more manageable. The codec's bitrates are even better. There's no IBIS, EVF and build quality not as good, but the price difference is huge. Well that's only my take on it

Specwise it's a bit disappointing. I'm sure the image out of it is spectacular (like most of the cameras nowadays), the tilting screen is a great evolution, the evf and IBIS are topnotch : sure it's a great camera. But when I read Andrew's article, I can't help remembering his rant about those biased youtubers under Canon's influence, because they were flown under the sun of Hawai, etc.
Now I read about Andrew at Panasonic's headquarters, and all I can read is praise about the camera, not even a single remark/critic about anything, eventhough there should be a few, in my humble opinion. I fully understand that when you are invited somewhere, treated well, etc. You don't want to be rude and say bad things about the product you had the chance to shoot with before everybody, even more so when it's a good camera like the S1H seems to be.
But come on, no word on NO Full Frame 4K 60p (what would you have said if it had been Sony), codec and bitrate very good but not revolutionary (especially for the added resolution of 6K), no ND, no PDAF (why not, but suddenly AF is not important, it varies from camera to camera...?). I can't even tell the difference with the S1 (I'll have to check it) but the fact you can have manual controls in HFR. I understand your rants, it's good sometimes, it might even be productive if heard by the brands. What I don't like is that it's so variable and relative. You should make an article about Panasonic crippling the S1 not allowing manual controls in HFR. It's as puzzling as canon not giving 24p...
And finally, the price. It's very very expansive. A very few people will be able to afford it. 4 000$ is in the realm of a real cinema camera with proper ergonomics, ND filters... That's why I think, you could ask for a bit more from this camera. The Fuji X-T3 has almost the same offering, (in aps-c) with crops between framerates a lot more manageable. The codec's bitrates are even better. There's no IBIS, EVF and build quality not as good, but the price difference is huge. Well that's only my take on it

Specwise it's a bit disappointing. I'm sure the image out of it is spectacular (like most of the cameras nowadays), the tilting screen is a great evolution, the evf and IBIS are topnotch : sure it's a great camera. But when I read Andrew's article, I can't help remembering his rant about those biased youtubers under Canon's influence, because they were flown under the sun of Hawai, etc.
Now I read about Andrew at Panasonic's headquarters, and all I can read is praise about the camera, not even a single remark/critic about anything, eventhough there should be a few, in my humble opinion. I fully understand that when you are invited somewhere, treated well, etc. You don't want to be rude and say bad things about the product you had the chance to shoot with before everybody, even more so when it's a good camera like the S1H seems to be.
But come on, no word on NO Full Frame 4K 60p (what would you have said if it had been Sony), codec and bitrate very good but not revolutionary (especially for the added resolution of 6K), no ND, no PDAF (why not, but suddenly AF is not important, it varies from camera to camera...?). I can't even tell the difference with the S1 (I'll have to check it) but the fact you can have manual controls in HFR. I understand your rants, it's good sometimes, it might even be productive if heard by the brands. What I don't like is that it's so variable and relative. You should make an article about Panasonic crippling the S1 not allowing manual controls in HFR. It's as puzzling as canon not giving 24p...
And finally, the price. It's very very expansive. A very few people will be able to afford it. 4 000$ is in the realm of a real cinema camera with proper ergonomics, ND filters... That's why I think, you could ask for a bit more from this camera. The Fuji X-T3 has almost the same offering, (in aps-c) with crops between framerates a lot more manageable. The codec's bitrates are even better. There's no IBIS, EVF and build quality not as good, but the price difference is huge. Well that's only my take on it

Specwise it's a bit disappointing. I'm sure the image out of it is spectacular (like most of the cameras nowadays), the tilting screen is a great evolution, the evf and IBIS are topnotch : sure it's a great camera. But when I read Andrew's article, I can't help remembering his rant about those biased youtubers under Canon's influence, because they were flown under the sun of Hawai, etc.
Now I read about Andrew at Panasonic's headquarters, and all I can read is praise about the camera, not even a single remark/critic about anything, eventhough there should be a few, in my humble opinion. I fully understand that when you are invited somewhere, treated well, etc. You don't want to be rude and say bad things about the product you had the chance to shoot with before everybody, even more so when it's a good camera like the S1H seems to be.
But come on, no word on NO Full Frame 4K 60p (what would you have said if it had been Sony), codec and bitrate very good but not revolutionary (especially for the added resolution of 6K), no ND, no PDAF (why not, but suddenly AF is not important, it varies from camera to camera...?). I can't even tell the difference with the S1 (I'll have to check it) but the fact you can have manual controls in HFR. I understand your rants, it's good sometimes, it might even be productive if heard by the brands. What I don't like is that it's so variable and relative. You should make an article about Panasonic crippling the S1 not allowing manual controls in HFR. It's as puzzling as canon not giving 24p...
And finally, the price. It's very very expansive. A very few people will be able to afford it. 4 000$ is in the realm of a real cinema camera with proper ergonomics, ND filters... That's why I think, you could ask for a bit more from this camera. The Fuji X-T3 has almost the same offering, (in aps-c) with crops between framerates a lot more manageable. The codec's bitrates are even better. There's no IBIS, EVF and build quality not as good, but the price difference is huge. Well that's only my take on it

Specwise it's a bit disappointing. I'm sure the image out of it is spectacular (like most of the cameras nowadays), the tilting screen is a great evolution, the evf and IBIS are topnotch : sure it's a great camera. But when I read Andrew's article, I can't help remembering his rant about those biased youtubers under Canon's influence, because they were flown under the sun of Hawai, etc.
Now I read about Andrew at Panasonic's headquarters, and all I can read is praise about the camera, not even a single remark/critic about anything, eventhough there should be a few, in my humble opinion. I fully understand that when you are invited somewhere, treated well, etc. You don't want to be rude and say bad things about the product you had the chance to shoot with before everybody, even more so when it's a good camera like the S1H seems to be.
But come on, no word on NO Full Frame 4K 60p (what would you have said if it had been Sony), codec and bitrate very good but not revolutionary (especially for the added resolution of 6K), no ND, no PDAF (why not, but suddenly AF is not important, it varies from camera to camera...?). I can't even tell the difference with the S1 (I'll have to check it) but the fact you can have manual controls in HFR. I understand your rants, it's good sometimes, it might even be productive if heard by the brands. What I don't like is that it's so variable and relative. You should make an article about Panasonic crippling the S1 not allowing manual controls in HFR. It's as puzzling as canon not giving 24p...
And finally, the price. It's very very expansive. A very few people will be able to afford it. 4 000$ is in the realm of a real cinema camera with proper ergonomics, ND filters... That's why I think, you could ask for a bit more from this camera. The Fuji X-T3 has almost the same offering, (in aps-c) with crops between framerates a lot more manageable. The codec's bitrates are even better. There's no IBIS, EVF and build quality not as good, but the price difference is huge. Well that's only my take on it

And Reims - Strasbourg gave us a boring 0 - 0, like pretty much all ligue 1 matches

Union Berlin are currently 3-0 down at home to RB Leipzig and Chelsea are leading 1-0 at home to Leicester City.

I've got two responses to this topic
Consider that in terms of resolution, for stills, a 6 Mp CCD camera equaled 35mm film 10 years ago in terms of resolution. Not in terms of colour..
It seems to me modern 100mbs super 35 at 1080p from a prosumer camera is equal to 35mm film stock in terms of resolution. I've shot quality 4k and displayed it 4k on a big screen and it looks impressive. However, I'm happy with quality 1080p. I've heard annocdotally that for major studios VFX is done at 2k and rezzed up. It wouldn't surprise me.
Also, what's the point of 6k if it's broadcast at 8Mbs? I mean really..
The limitation is not in the number of pixels but the size of the pipe.
it's just a case of give me MOARRR!

I'm submitting this 50 mins after the deadline, I don't know if I'm in or if I'm out... Damn, I know that this thread has been open since around a month, but didn't had time, didn't thought on participate, and last week I thought about it and said "let's give it a try".. unfortunately didn't had any time, and just today I was able to sit in front of the computer to edit.. so sorry for the quality, I tried to do the best I could on the image part but didn't even had time to normalize and do something with the audio ?‍♂️
I hope it's good enough. The camera used can be bought used from $124 very used, and all the way up to $200 in mint condition.
I aded a BONUS SHOTS part where I put some unrelated and random shots with different lighting conditions to see how the camera performs on those situations.
Here is the link, it's still uploading:
 

Hallo friends,
here is my contribution. I hope you like my final film. Looking forward to the great pleasure of exchanging experiences and technical odditities and tricks once Andrew gives the signal for releasing info next week. Thank you for your beautiful films, discussion and the awesome spirit. Thanks Andrew and everyone for inspiring us to film something personal. Here is my labour of love, shot last week and edited over night until just now cheers!
 
Thank you very much!

Yeah, I was careful not to add the "but you probably wouldn't want to" so that I could retain the technical win

Oh yes, those ones  I forgot about them. But they reduce the light transmission and have a "crop factor". They are reversed speedboosters. But technically you can, you're right

You are not right. The majority of Hollywood produced TV shows and films are shot on an Alexa Mini... which shoots 2.7K.
Netflix Originals account for a very small percentage of Hollywood Productions and BTW... almost everybody on this site knows about Netflix’s requirements for their original productions because there are about a half a dozen threads about it over the past couple of years. But thanks for playing.
Good Lord... how old are you? By your name, I would think you were born in 1977 but by your responses, it’s like talking to a teenager.
I’m sure you’ll reply by cherry picking one of my sentences and distorting it but please don’t bother wasting your time... this is boring. 

I understand why higher resolutions are better, and where to see them, but here's my experience:
I know 0 people who own a 4k computer screen. I own a 4k TV but never use it in 4k because I have 0 4k movies, my blu ray player only supports 1080p, my internet won't handle a 4k stream, and for gaming it maxes out at 4k30 which is too low a frame rate. 100% of the Apple desktop computers that I have seen, were at universities or studios--Mac as an operating system has <4% market share, and a lot of those are laptops. The actual number of 4K+ iMacs out there in use is miniscule. Very few of my friends actually own desktop computers, for that matter, they just use laptops and phones with HD screens. They would benefit from the bitrate increase of streaming 4K on their devices, but for vast swathes of rural America, the internet bandwidth simply doesn't support 4k.
I get that a lot of pros need 4k or 6k to stay ahead of the competition. When making content, you make it high enough resolution that the top tier viewers are satisfied, even if only 10% see it in 4k. But the reality for me is, 4k is not a display format yet. My work has only ever been shown in local theaters, festivals, and bars, and none of those venues had 4K display capabilities.

Andrew, your test isn't fair. As the other forumer said, there's one photo shot with soft light in the shade and the other one with direct sunlight and green reflection from the grass. I totally agree with you about Canon (and Nikon, and even fuji) having better colors straight out of the camera than Sony, but the gap isn't as wide as those photos want it to be.
And now with presets in lightroom, you can easily turn any camera into anything. And applying it to series of photos takes one clic. I wasn't liking my RX100 V photos because of the colors. I purchased VSCO presets to try them out, and I was stunned at the results. With just a bit of fiddling, and a few clicks, my RX100 turned into a fuji camera ! With a classic chrome esthetic. And the latest sony cameras have tremendously improved their color science. But again, I prefer Canon jpegs. No actually I prefer Fuji jpegs :P

No they don't compare. They are way more suitable for 97% of the situations that the average pro photographer encounters. 

Thanks for the positive feedback.
Much appreciated.
Please buy it
I've run out of gaffer tape making this one so that integration will have to wait for a while.
 

I'm not that impressed with the S1 yet, considering you can get beautiful images out of any camera those days... I think the colors still have an orange tint (all panasonic seem to have that since the gh4, even though it got better with time).
The video of the woman dancing, I find it awful (sorry). And the Island video, is kind of nice (not jaw dropping), but drone+Island rarely give you bad results. I'm sure it's a good camera, with nice ergonomics. The image might have more to it thanks to its good codec, but I can't tell from youtube or vimeo. There was one video of the S1 of a man walking in a small town in the moutains that was nice. But again the colors weren't exactly to my taste.
Right now i'm shooting extensively with the X-T3 and the image is so good and easy to grade in flog. No artefacts, no nothing (just a small banding problem in the sky, but I think it is due to Resolve). It's very close to the bmpcc4K image without the aliasing and the moire. The codec is not easy to work with but it's a strong one. I had one small issue with fuji, the waxy skintones. And they seem to have disappeared. Anyway, back to the S1 !

Andrew, your test isn't fair. As the other forumer said, there's one photo shot with soft light in the shade and the other one with direct sunlight and green reflection from the grass. I totally agree with you about Canon (and Nikon, and even fuji) having better colors straight out of the camera than Sony, but the gap isn't as wide as those photos want it to be.
And now with presets in lightroom, you can easily turn any camera into anything. And applying it to series of photos takes one clic. I wasn't liking my RX100 V photos because of the colors. I purchased VSCO presets to try them out, and I was stunned at the results. With just a bit of fiddling, and a few clicks, my RX100 turned into a fuji camera ! With a classic chrome esthetic. And the latest sony cameras have tremendously improved their color science. But again, I prefer Canon jpegs. No actually I prefer Fuji jpegs :P

Andrew, your test isn't fair. As the other forumer said, there's one photo shot with soft light in the shade and the other one with direct sunlight and green reflection from the grass. I totally agree with you about Canon (and Nikon, and even fuji) having better colors straight out of the camera than Sony, but the gap isn't as wide as those photos want it to be.
And now with presets in lightroom, you can easily turn any camera into anything. And applying it to series of photos takes one clic. I wasn't liking my RX100 V photos because of the colors. I purchased VSCO presets to try them out, and I was stunned at the results. With just a bit of fiddling, and a few clicks, my RX100 turned into a fuji camera ! With a classic chrome esthetic. And the latest sony cameras have tremendously improved their color science. But again, I prefer Canon jpegs. No actually I prefer Fuji jpegs :P

Its better than Gerald Undone's sunset video