HockeyFan12

The Alexa obviously is great. Great underexposed, pleasant noise pattern. RED Komodo is really nice as well, as long as you are blackshaded. Though I think there is a bit more color cast when underexposed.

 
Yeah there may be something about rolling shutter that makes motion feel organic. Its so minimal on the Alexa, barely even noticeable when whip panning on longer lenses. The motion on the Komodo feels less organic, maybe global shutter is too perfect? or maybe the global shutter has nothing to do with the "feel" of the motion.

Of course you can't beat global shutter if you are shooting camera strobe lights.

RED's do tend to be nice underexposed. Noise gets heavy but they retain so much info so it doesn't looked crushed like cheaper cameras. Though the color does certainly shift, the OLPF you have in can help(depending what model you have?). Gets confusing with all the different models. I kind of like the Komodo maybe more then all their other models. It's not ARRI tho....

There's one file from the Komodo on REDs sample footage page..  https://www.red.com/sample-r3d-files
Download links in description of this video:
I'm sure there will be others around, just google "red komodo download footage" and see what's out there.

You can download sample Alexa footage here and here in raw and in ProRes:
https://www.arri.com/en/learn-help/learn-help-camera-system/camera-sample-footage
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs1dS8pMvRw
I can't think of a softer digital camera in use today.
I suspect this is because Arri was originally looking to emulate a 2K film scan. Which is pretty soft.
But they've since discontinued the film emulation matrix.
And added the 3.2k mode, the LF, etc. Each iteration feels less and less like "film."
And with each iteration, Canon and Sony and Red (and lately Panasonic and Black Magic) look more and more like Alexa. Everything looks the same now!

I don't think there's as much difference between what pros and amateurs are doing as you'd think. But upgrading an entire "pro" workflow takes a lot longer and costs a lot more than an owner-op upgrading one computer and camera. 
The platforms are converging too. I don't think you need that much resolution for cinemas or normal sized tvs – film prints were I think around 720p. For stills you need more resolution, for anything on a computer too with retina displays since it's close to your eyes. On retina screens you need more resolution whether you're on Netflix or YouTube.
Where I would go, if I were a manufacturer, is not hybrid but special-purpose cameras. I think the S1 is the best deal on the market because it does everything well. But it doesn't do anything THAT well. Sony seems to be doing the best job of this with the A7 line but I don't think there's enough differentiation even there. Or maybe convenience wins. I dunno.
I suspect we'll get more and more and better and better "faux" vintage lenses. And better and better LUTs. Consumer-priced Tribe7-style lenses, I think, might find a market. I think we'll probably just get sharper and sharper images with more and more exaggerated "film look" characteristics everywhere else.
I do think if you have a lot of talent and money you can get away with being more subtle. Like Deakins. Or Steve Yedlin. And for long-form content you don't want the image to be distractingly aestheticized anyway imo. But I dunno.
 
 

You can download sample Alexa footage here and here in raw and in ProRes:
https://www.arri.com/en/learn-help/learn-help-camera-system/camera-sample-footage
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs1dS8pMvRw
I can't think of a softer digital camera in use today.
I suspect this is because Arri was originally looking to emulate a 2K film scan. Which is pretty soft.
But they've since discontinued the film emulation matrix.
And added the 3.2k mode, the LF, etc. Each iteration feels less and less like "film."
And with each iteration, Canon and Sony and Red (and lately Panasonic and Black Magic) look more and more like Alexa. Everything looks the same now!

For those interested here is a Spec Ad I shot with my colleague Greg Latham last year. A mix of S1/S5 with canon FD primes, the Lumix 24-105 as well as some Sigma 70-200 EF long lens stuff. Still amazed the quality these cameras produces for the price.
 
 

I don't have any information about what happened in this instance, but a very common behavioural pattern is where "bad faith actors" pursue a continued campaign of behaviour that gradually builds up pressure on someone and then that person explodes.
The tricky part is that the campaign that pushed that person to explode will likely be a combination of:
things done in public that are only very slightly over the line of acceptable behaviour and aren't "worthy" of making a serious complaint about because each on in isolation looks harmless things done in private that are definitely over the line but for various reasons are either inappropriate to share or where sharing them would come at a significant cost Perhaps a third factor in play here is directing (or not discouraging) other people from attacking the person as well.  Kind of like being bullied by someones entire friendship group rather than that person on their own.
So these things gradually build up over time, and the cumulative effects get under the skin of the target, and then they explode, and from the outside it looks completely inappropriate, like a huge over-reaction, and as it is a very emotional moment will probably not be expressed rationally or calmly.  
This explosion is the goal of the people doing the targeting and provides the perfect excuse for them to hold up their hands and say both "wow - where did that come from - I had nothing to do with that" and also "see - that person is crazy - you don't know how they've been treating me in private - this explains those times you saw me being mean to them".
I've seen lots of people seriously damage their careers because of workplace bullying that plays out like this.  It's very common.
I get the impression that anyone with any public following has to learn to deal with this.  YouTubers routinely talk about how they got big and then the hate started and that it took them a while to learn how to deal with it.

Certainly came out of the blue, did this from Craig. I wish him all the best. Sounds like he needs a break like me. If he sold the site to a good home, and took a good pay cheque from it I hope he can build something fresh and new out of that and use the money to take a good photographic adventure.
Social media brings out the worst instincts in human beings.
Tribal behaviours. Epidemic misinformation and lies.
I didn't see what has been going on with Craig, but he seems to have completely deleted his Twitter and closed up shop there.
The internet is fucked.
Facebook can go out of business as far as I'm concerned, and they've ruined Instagram / WhatsApp too, so they can go in the bin along with the whole Meta group. Fuck VR as well. Nobody wants this shit. It's a distraction at best, at worst it can takes lives or destroys democratic political system.
Facebook and social media has sucked so much life out of my own business - this forum would be busier too, if it weren't for the distraction of Facebook groups and Twitter. Thankfully $200 billion shaved off FB's share price this week so couldn't happen to a nicer company.
I haven't always seen eye to eye with any of the rumours sites. But I genuinely do wish Craig well in what he does next

I believe the point OP is trying to make is: "A part of the people who are shooting video have specific ideas about what a good image is but I think they are wrong. These people often have their origin in photography more so then cinematography which would explain their preference for specific visual attributes. Cinematographers however have very different criteria to judge an image and should not take their cues from these people."
I do think that photography and cinema do each have their own language. Being a good photographer doesn't make you a good cinematographer or vice versa. An image which works as a photo might not work as part of a narrative sequence and a great scene from a movie might very well fall flat as a still. However I think this distinction has nothing to do with a particular aesthetic. A good photographer may just as well "dirty-up" the image as part of his work. The significant distinction is intent. Professional photographers and cinematographers first think about what they want to achieve with their images and then use anything in their toolbox to achieve that, be it softening, sharpening, fish-eye distortion, rectilinear (distortion), vintage aberrations etc. The not so professional doesn't think it through that much and uses what he has, or simply uses what he saw others using because it worked really well or looked cool without thinking about how appropriate it is for what he is trying to do.
The starting point should be intent, why do I shoot this image? Everything else should follow from that.
And then there is the distinction between those who want to lock a look in camera (so it becomes harder to mess with your intent during post-production) and those who prefer to capture it all as neutral and pristine as possible to allow for maximum flexibility in post (so you can change your intent I guess?).
 

Has Arri confirmed it's 4K or "4K+"?
I remember the EVA1 is 5.6k or the Alexa is 2.8k because that's around 4K or 2K after debayering. So it could be more.
I used to hate on Netflix and their 4K requirement, but I had the chance to work with some footage that I then saw projected in 2K in a theater and the truth is I'm pretty sure you need more resolution for YouTube (maybe because of compression, maybe because you're so close to the screen) than you do for theatrical films (or tv)
So I guess I get the Netflix requirement.
But yeah I think bigger photo sites means more highlight dynamic range. So Arri will need some new tricks up its sleeve to match the OG Alexa's highlight detail – but I am sure they will.
The Alexa also has a "soft" feel to it. Rumor is from the OLPF. Will be interesting to see if they maintain that.
I always felt my t2i had the best colors, the C100 was a close second, Alexa third.

Contax-Zeiss Sonnar 135mm f2.8 on Sigma FP
Shot about 25 mins apart on a very changeable weather wander!

My favorite short film:
And a bunch of other favorites:
Darkness/Light/Darkness by Jan Svankmajer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1THMc9g5SaU&t=2s
Also Antoine and Collette by Francois Truffaut. Not on youtube it seems but I believe is on the Criterion Channel.

I think I prefer the GH5 colors too, but I like the S1's highlight detail. I saw these comparisons, which I think are interesting:
Since the "color science" target is presumably set, I think this comparison reveals that the sensors themselves must be quite different. The P4K and P6K I think have somewhat different color, too, which is interesting.
In general the Alexa has a very green/warm bias and imo other cameras less so. The EVA1 feels a little greener and warmer than the S1, so that might be why I prefer its color rendering. More Alexa-like. The 150Mbps S1 codec is fine I think but the ALL-I EVA1 codec has a nice noise texture and a bit more noise, more organic.
I had to deal with IR pollution and moire with the 4.6K and decided to stay away but the P4K and P6K have images that really impress me for the money. But I suspect you need to figure out the right NDs to use (Hoya Solas I bet) with them etc.
I was ready to move to a P4K and speedbooster and sell everything else – I thought the less I owned the more I'd use it. But the S1 is so easy to use and the image is fine if not great that I think I'll stick with that for work and a "b cam." I own some higher end gear for personal use primarily. I rarely shoot professionally anymore or I'd probably own something else.

I've only used the Varicam LT (or 35, I forget) in post but the image is really nice. There's a lot less skew and imo significantly better color than the S1 if I remember right and a better texture to the ProRes files too. It also has a bit more highlight dynamic range, it's really good and has a really good image. Back in the day when it was between that and the F55 for 4K for Netflix or whatever – I preferred the image from the Varicam LT. 
However the color is not similar to Alexa, it's kind of more its own thing, punchier and more vibrant. Also the skin tones tend more magenta (same issue I have with the S1 I suppose), which can be unflattering on pale caucasian skin. Lately imo Sony has caught up – never used an A7S3 but worked a bit with Venice footage and it's fantastic.
I do think the Varicam's image is better than the S1 – the EVA1 occupies a middle ground for me (I prefer the EVA1 color and noise texture to the S1 and S1H for sure) and I have had mixed experience with Black Magic cameras in terms of reliability and IR pollution and moire etc. Great images for the money but less robust in some respects.
All of these differences in image quality pale in comparison with ergonomic and workflow differences, which sadly imo probably matter much more. I bought too much and am selling stuff soon. I'm hoping I use more if I own less.

Yeah its definitely a bit easier to get a clean image on the S1 with the dual native ISO, at least in situations with little control of lighting, which is increasingly common.

I agree. I like a little more grain but clients might not.

I'm inclined to agree. But I have a vested interest both in "vintage" gear and lower res, softer footage. 
Vintage lenses I suspect are now so popular in part because of how sharp digital feels compared with film. Maybe sharp digital projection is a factor here too. I suspect for art design and vfx lower res helps too because the softer image and grain help cover up the artifice. Curious if gaffers light differently for film and for digital. I suspect they do.
I also notice that the Alexa has a softer, grainier image than most other digital cameras do. I prefer the grainy Red Dragon image to newer Red cameras (to some extent), I like the Alexa image enough to wonder if I'll prefer it to the next generation Alexa, and I preferred the C300's image to the C300 Mk 2's and F3 to F5 – at least from what I have seen online.
On the other hand, the Wachowskis did such a fun job embracing the digital/fake look with Speed Racer (in terms of cinematography, vfx, and set design alike) that I want to give Resurrections the benefit of the doubt (Still haven't seen it but really looking forward to it.) But whether the look is intentional or not (I'm fairly sure it is), that doesn't mean it looks good.... Lord of the Rings (and Gemini Man) did not have great receptions for HFR. I suspect the new Avatar movies, if they are HFR, will buck this trend, and am look forward to seeing those, too.

Hello to everyone on the forum!
A Merry Christmas from me!
I hope you're looking forward to having a good break over the holidays and are ready to welcome in 2022. Talking of holidays - I have been having a break from EOSHD for a few months. I went and sat on a hill and finally had time to reflect on my work which is this blog and the community around it. The last video had a lot of support, it's made me really appreciate what I have in a more positive light. I'm mega appreciative of the people who took the time to say how EOSHD has helped them over the years and that they want it to continue.
So that's what we'll do! EOSHD is back.
Read the full blog post here

By the way, there is a real need for someone like you with your skills.  There is a dearth of real mentors in the video world bringing information to enthusiasts.  The most memorable post on EOSHD for me was "Kendy Ty and the T2i – one guy doing amazing things with a 5 year old DSLR" back in 2014.  
https://www.eoshd.com/creative-filmmaking/kendy-ty-t2i-one-guy-amazing-things-5-year-old-dslr/
This kind of review is so hard to find these days.  It was less about what the gear can do for you, and more about what you can do with the gear. 

Have both BMPCC 4K and Panasonic S1/S5. For me both are great cameras for video/cinema.  
Historically bought BMPCC 4K first 2-3 years ago and resisted buying Panasonic S5/S1 mainly because want to shoot in RAW. Image quality has the highest priority for me when choosing a camera. Panasonic cameras initially didn't have RAW video recording capability. Recently Panasonic added ProRes RAW and BRAW as external recording options. RAW video plus very good prices second hand tipped the scales for me.
Didn't test them extensively side by side. From the limited tests that did can say both BMPCC 4K and Panasonic S1/S5 for me have excellent image quality in BRAW. 10bit 4:2:2 h264 internal from Panasonic is probably a notch down but very close. 10bit internal is now OK for me to use in some projects. Initially that was not the case. My plan was to use only BRAW external from Panasonic.
When first reviews of Panasonic S1H started to appear, downloaded several clips in 10bit 4:2:2 V-Log and graded them. Was looking mostly for skin colors. Was not satisfied, they didn't look as good and as easy to grade as BMPCC 4K BRAW.
Log picture profile that both have is like negative. Until we develop the negative, color correct/grade it in post, it is not possible to talk about color. What kind of color you get in the end is more skills in color correction / grading then camera color science. Agree with Kye on this.
As said, I downloaded several clips shot with Panasonic S1/S5/S1H series of cameras internally in V-Log 10bit 4:2:2. Color corrected them in Davinci. Some shots and more specifically skin tones didn't look as good as they look on BMPCC 4K. It is all subjective we have to admit this, but that was my impression and assessment. For both cameras - BMPCC 4K and Panasonic S1/S1H/S5 used the same method (Color Space Transform) to convert from Log profile and their respective color spaces to REC 709. Since both BRAW and Davinci Resolve are Blackmagic products, getting great colors with simple CST is easy with BMPCC 4K. This method however does not gives always satisfying result and colors for Panasonic internal 10bit V-Log. So I tried Panasonic V-Log  to REC 709 conversion LUT and 3rd parties Color Space Conversion LUTs (55Media). They gave me better results and better starting point. Adding some simple corrections, contrast, saturation, balancing exposure etc. after the conversion LUT now gives me better colors and skin tones.
There are some test footage from both cameras on interenet. This one has downloadable source  BRAW (BMPCC 4K) and MP4 (Panasonic S1H) files.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Al-tIFXFuY
Among the sample footage there is one clip for checking skin tones. Lighting is quite challenging and constantly changing and shots are in different time, he shot with one camera then the other. Still it is a good exercise to try. When I tried it first almost a year ago with CST used for both cameras, didn't like the colors from Panasonic. Doing it now with conversion LUTs get better colors from Panasonic and can match closely both cameras.
More examples and tests here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rghbaHoVRsk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB2ZkRaPWjY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rU4eydFl1hM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJawO5eeWr8
While I agree with Kye that getting good colors is mostly skills in editing program of your choice, don't think that getting a good starting point, correct colors or pleasing colors is that difficult. Usually use 4-5 nodes maximum for this task. It takes a lot of time and skills to build a certain look, to finesse every take, emphasize some lighting etc. This requires a lot of knowledge and practice. But basic color grading/correction should not be that difficult. With Panasonic 10bit 4:2:2 V-log internal you have to try different methods, correction LUTS, etc. It may take some additional efforts and time. Once you have the new workflow, it will be easy to apply it and it will be more or less consistent so at the end you get colors  you like. I usually stop at this point and do not go for a specific look like teal / orange etc. One day maybe but for the moment it is OK. A good example of what am saying is Zeek. His videos shot on EOS M + ML RAW for the last 2 years have consistent and great colors. Yet his color correction / grading workflow in Resolve is very simple.
The difference and reason why we are saying we like colors from camera brand A better that Camera brand B is mainly because our workflow to develop colors from Log profile and camera color space to REC 709 is giving us colors we like. Once we change workflow or color correction/grading  is adjusted for camera B that we didn’t like, problem is solved. We can again get colors we like. Am not saying those are correct colors.
About LUTs mimicking Alexa. Of course, they are not 100% close and in some lighting condition may be off. It would be important only if you try to match Alexa footage with BMPCC 4K in one video for example. When we talk Alexa colors again we confront the problem how did we get those colors. Even if we download conversion LUTs from ARRI website (which I did), there are different LUTs for different Arri Camera models and color space transforms. Depending which one you use you get slightly different colors. So what are after all Alexa colors?
For me those LUTs simply are good starting point, a reference. That's it.
Advantages and disadvantages of BMPCC 4K over  Panasonic S1/S5/S1H is another topic. You have to try both in order to make the best decision for you. As said many times - it is personal; everybody should try himself or herself. For me Panasonic S1/S5/S1H have few advantages, so tend to use Pana S5/S1 more.
 
 

I thought I wasn't going to do this, but I'm not 100% sold on the color out of the S1 and am thinking of getting something else to replace it. It's great, but feels better suited for corporate gigs than what I do.
The P6K footage I work with impresses me a lot. The lack of skew, smaller files, and option for a speed booster on the P4K (and the price) makes it more attractive to me personally though.
Anyone own both and shot with them side by side? The magenta tint on the S1, lack of grain in HEVC, etc. don't quite do it for me. I'm VERY biased toward the specific colors and texturing coming from Alexa. Even Red is too sharp and clean for me and I want the closest thing that's cheap. Am I just expecting too much at this price point?

I thought I wasn't going to do this, but I'm not 100% sold on the color out of the S1 and am thinking of getting something else to replace it. It's great, but feels better suited for corporate gigs than what I do.
The P6K footage I work with impresses me a lot. The lack of skew, smaller files, and option for a speed booster on the P4K (and the price) makes it more attractive to me personally though.
Anyone own both and shot with them side by side? The magenta tint on the S1, lack of grain in HEVC, etc. don't quite do it for me. I'm VERY biased toward the specific colors and texturing coming from Alexa. Even Red is too sharp and clean for me and I want the closest thing that's cheap. Am I just expecting too much at this price point?

I thought I wasn't going to do this, but I'm not 100% sold on the color out of the S1 and am thinking of getting something else to replace it. It's great, but feels better suited for corporate gigs than what I do.
The P6K footage I work with impresses me a lot. The lack of skew, smaller files, and option for a speed booster on the P4K (and the price) makes it more attractive to me personally though.
Anyone own both and shot with them side by side? The magenta tint on the S1, lack of grain in HEVC, etc. don't quite do it for me. I'm VERY biased toward the specific colors and texturing coming from Alexa. Even Red is too sharp and clean for me and I want the closest thing that's cheap. Am I just expecting too much at this price point?

I thought I wasn't going to do this, but I'm not 100% sold on the color out of the S1 and am thinking of getting something else to replace it. It's great, but feels better suited for corporate gigs than what I do.
The P6K footage I work with impresses me a lot. The lack of skew, smaller files, and option for a speed booster on the P4K (and the price) makes it more attractive to me personally though.
Anyone own both and shot with them side by side? The magenta tint on the S1, lack of grain in HEVC, etc. don't quite do it for me. I'm VERY biased toward the specific colors and texturing coming from Alexa. Even Red is too sharp and clean for me and I want the closest thing that's cheap. Am I just expecting too much at this price point?

I think I prefer the look of Sigma fp footage over the S1 but they seem like they couldn’t be much more different given they’re both L mount and have similar sensors.
S1 V Log dynamic range is outstanding imo and might as well be Alexa-level. The HEVC 6K codec is robust. At base ISO (640) there’s +6 stops of highlight dynamic range (dynamic range over 18% gray) to Arri’s +7.3.
Whereas at base 100 ISO I think the fp has about +2.5 stops of highlight dynamic range and 8 bit raw doesn't let you dig too deep into the shadows either. It also has more aliasing. And no IBIS or EVF.
But where the S1 falls short imo is in color and texture, where the fp seems to excel. I’m not saying the S1 is terrible here, but the color isn’t as nice to me subjectively and the HEVC codec smooths out the noise.
So to me the fp is the ideal A cam for someone (not me) and the S1 is the ideal B cam or low budget production cam for almost anyone. It’s technically on par with Venice or Alexa except for the skew imo and is wildly versatile. 
(At least with Resolve's highlight algorithm enabled, I think the P4K and P6K are almost on par with an Alexa technically, too, and have nice color and texture to the image. But ergonomically I worry they aren’t so hot. FX3 seems nice and maybe the best deal out there but somewhat expensive.)
I have found this to be true in post, too. The bigger the job, the better the resources, the easier it usually is. But one-man-band stuff can pay better I guess, and affords more flexibility I suppose.