anonim

Unfortunately I tend to believe that future of m43 as looks dictated with position in Panasonic's plans is pretty bad. Panasonic team simply don't wish - or don't dare - to offer m43 camera that is far above in--the-field capabilities of their FF line, let alone EVA line... but moment of technology is quite such. All that FF line still severely struggle to bring even at lower (I mean mostly mostly capable LSI and codec and bit/bitrate wise) level, m43 already matured. Simply, Panasonic team IMO is also captivated in some sort of market autism that today is common for all Japanese manufacturer.
There's simply no wide place for 4000+ euros prized photo-body cameras. There also was no place for highly restrictive GH5s for 2500e without daring to give RAW but with daring to cut off IBIS because of task of gluing camera to moving car - and even more for such long keeping price at that level. Population of younger and aspiring dreamers or even more ambition travelers (even at Western countries that rapidly lose their previous standard) has no money for overheated price lust - they don't want to endlessly dispute about specs, salivate about sensor size, 10% more or less Bokeh, DOF, etc. - but to learn, create and promote themselves as distinctive creative individuals.
And at the moment when Japanese manufacturer finally are forced to drop their lust for more than 200% profit margin, BM's clever, more spec wise friendly and more honest in offering products already eat up most of the wider circle (out of die-hard AF users) market. 
Also unfortunately, after several misleading states about GH5s (totally false or deliberately misleading quoting of true usable DR, about cheap reason for omit of IBIS, misery of argument for stubborn keeping destructive NR algorithm etc) by mr Frazer, I concluded that he is just logically and predictable boastful front man without any decision relevance.

Some comparison vids starting to come out. The Canon has great IBIS whilst walking, im really impressed. It also to my taste has better colour but I would say the Sony is much closer than before. I mean at least sky is blue instead of teal now. I think the skin would only need minor adjustments compared to before. Personally I'm still a little bit traumatised from my time with the Panasonic GX7 and G85 which had really big issues with blotchy skin that wasn't easy to fix, so nearly anything is a huge improvement to me 😛 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgcp8wXAUZY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aC39Z6vZgHw



 

So, with all this talk about 8k RAW, it's got me thinking, and I'm contemplating going back to 1080p.
I've been thinking about all these cameras with high resolutions and ferocious data rates, and why they don't implement higher bitrates and bit-depths on the lower resolution modes.  
Noam Kroll just shot a low budget feature in 2K Prores HQ on his Alexa Classic.  In 4:3 no less!  https://noamkroll.com/playing-against-filmmaking-trends-on-our-feature-with-arri-alexa-classic-2k-prores-hq-43-aspect-ratio/
His pipeline was RAW -> Prores HQ -> storage.  Prores HQ in 1080 is around 176Mbps, is All-I, and is 10-bit.  It sounds lovely.  Uncompressed 1080 10-bit is a whopping 1490Mbps, so the 176Mbps of HQ is quite a saving of data rates.  
But what do I actually want?
So I made a list:
I want more bit-depth than 10-bit
10-bit is fine if you're on a controlled set or have time to get your WB broadly right in camera, but for some of the horrendous situations I find myself in, having more bit-depth would help (remember how with RAW you can WB in post - well, bit depth is what enables that) I want high bit-rates for a good quality image
A good quality image means that every portion of the screen gets a decent amount of data, so this is about bit-rate.  It's not about resolution, because a 100Mbps 4K file will still have half the data available for each square cm of the screen than a 200Mbps 1080 file I want files that are easy to edit in post
It doesn't matter if my 8K smartphone files are only 100Mbps, the computer still has to decode, process, display, and encode 16 times as many pixels as 1080 So, do I want 1080p RAW?
Yes, and no.  RAW has great bit-depth, much larger bit-rates than I care for, but also isn't the best that 1080 can get because it is lower resolution after debayering.  Do I want 2.5K RAW?  Maybe.  Problem is that RAW and IBIS are very rarely found together.  What I really want is some kind of compressed, but not too compressed, intermediary file.  
What I really want is 1080 Prores 4444 (which is 264Mbps) or Prores 4444 XQ (which is 396Mbps), because these are 12-bit.  12-bit would do me very nicely.
So, what do we get from the manufacturers?  We get ridiculous bitrates on the higher resolutions, and paltry token efforts on the lower ones.  My XC10 is a classic case - 305Mbps 4K but 35Mbps 1080p.  The 4K has 2.5 times the amount of data per pixel than the 1080p, and 10 times the amount of data per square cm of screen.
But I have a GH5, which is one of the exceptions, as Panasonic went for the jugular on the lower resolution modes as well as the higher ones, and so I'm down to the three "best" modes that will work on a UHS-I SD card:
5K 4:3 200Mbps Long-GOP h265 4K 16:9 150Mbps Long-GOP h264 1080p 16:9 200Mbps All-I h264 So I shot a test.  That test showed me that the 5K mode is far superior, even on a 1080p timeline, but uploaded to YT is a different story.  Considering I have partnered with YT for distribution share my videos on YT, that's what my friends and family end up seeing.
This lead me to the question about what is actually visible after it's been minced by YT?
Luckily I had done a previous test where I took an 8K RAW file, and rendered out various resolution Prores HQ intermediaries, then exported each of them from a 4K timeline.  That video is here:
So, I downloaded the above video in 4K, 2K, and 1080p resolutions, took screen grabs, and put them side-by-side for comparison.  Here they are - you're welcome.



So, what can I see in these images?
The 4K download is better than the 2K, which is better than the 1080p.  This is hardly news, each of these is more than double the bit-rate of the next one and they're all using the same compression algorithm, that's how mathematics works. Watching in 4K each lower resolution is subtly worse than the previous, except for 1.2k (720p) which is way worse.  That's to be expected, 2k - 1.2k is a bigger percentage drop than the other resolutions.  However, things don't get "bad" until in the 2.5k - 1.2k range, depending on your tolerance for IQ. Moving to the other extreme, watching in 1080 they are all very similar, except for the 1.2k version, which is interesting. Some of these grabs also have a lower resolution one looking better than the higher one next to it.  That's not an accident on my part (I checked), it really is like that.  As the original video has the resolutions all in sequence in the one video, I suspect that the frame I chose was differing distances from the previous keyframe in the stream, so that will introduce some variation. So, what does this mean?
Well, firstly, no point shooting in 8K RAW if your viewers are watching in 1080p on YT.  I doubt that's news to anyone, but maybe it is to some R5 pre-orders lol.
More importantly, if your audience is watching in 1080 then they're not going to notice if you used 2K intermediaries or 3.2k ones.
How can we apply this to our situations?
This is more complex.  In this pipeline we had 8K RAW -> X Prores -> timeline.  This meant that the Prores was by far the weakest link, and Prores HQ is pretty high-bitrate compared to most consumer formats.  1080 Prores HQ is 176Mbps, but UHD Prores HQ is 707Mbps.  I don't know of any cameras that shoot h264 in anything even approaching those data rates for those resolutions, so good luck with that.  
If you're shooting 4K 100Mbps h264 then that's the same bitrate per square pixel of screen as 1.4K Prores HQ, which is pretty darn close to that 1.2k that looks awful in all the above.  
Obviously if your viewers are watching in 4K then it's worth shooting in the highest bit-rate you can find.
What does this mean for me?  Not sure yet, I need to do more tests on the GH5 modes, and I need to think more about things like tracking and stabilisation which can use extra resolution in the edit.
But I won't rule out going back to 1080p.

Typical bait & switch salesman tactic. Oldest trick in the book.
Listen, I’m no conspiracist. But you people are so naive.
Gerald isn’t your friend. He’s running a business. A YouTube gear review business.
I wanna be there when his three A7S3s brick out on assignment in the field. But oh wait, that’s not his concern, he’s not a filmmaker, he’s a YouTube lab tester. Never leaves his temp controlled studio.
Basically the vidéo gear equivalent of Unbox Therapy. Good, we need people like them testing gear. But take their clickbait catch phrases with a grain of salt.
C300 MK3 review: « This is going to be my new daily driver. »
A7S3 review week later: « This is going to be my new daily driver. » Tweet: « Here is proof, I’m buying 3! »
..and hence the hype train carries on around the blogosphere/forums and sponsored links bring in the revenue.
Perfect technical masterpiece my a**.
 
By the way, I’m saying all this as a Sony user interested in the A7S3.
I won’t however give it a free pass in the overheat department, nor will I let Gerald off the hook for not taking his review unit outside and tweeting folks to ignore other people’s  overheat testings.
End rant.

In comparison with few days ago posted newer promo clip for UMP12K by John Brawley - IMO this one looks ridicule at every level  picture wise. Judging solely regarding provided content, promotional Peter MC's short R5 film looks far better, actually as work of seriously capable tool.
I admit that is out of my grasp how and why Sony PR boаrd may approve such material as promotional for 4000+e video camera.  But I have no the least amount of doubt that. say, Brandon Lee will make some masterpieces with a7sIII.

IMO Komodo has strangely  strong blue color cast in this comparison besides less DR and great absence of RS.

Yeah, though my work horse lens is all in EF so not really concerned about it yet.
 
 
Here is a compare between bmpcc6k vs komodo i saw online
 

John Brawley has said they are still tweaking the IR filter and it will be a different one on the final camera release
From.dvxuser.com
IR filtering is still being tweaked. My comments wouldn’t mean much because I had a prototype camera that had a different IR filter than what will ship so that’s a bit difficult to draw conclusions from.

I used all internal ND’s on my shoot. There was also a calibration difference with my camera that wasn’t picked up till recently. Most of the RAW files are shot at the default WB of 5600K +10, which is the “standard” BMD daylight default.

BUT

When you start to go into he RAW tab you’ll find it’s really about -500K to -1000K (Less warm) and -5 to -10 tint (less magenta)

I didn’t change these on my initial clips, but I have on these ones...

https://vimeo.com/440479199

Which also by the way show the 8K and 4K modes 🙂

For those that aren't visiting BM forum, here is quote of Juan Melara's cheer and ask about gen 5 color science - as mentioned earlier, also with further playing with gen 5, similarity with P4KAlexa lut is astonishing - it seems as that BM engineers took his achievement as pattern to replicate in effect:
"Just spent an hour or so checking out the new Gen5 colour science. The new gamma curve is great. Pretty much exactly what I’ve always wanted from BMD. Top work.
But Captainhook, Blackmagic Design, any chance you could include an option to disable the Gen5 gamut mapping/limiting? Or include a colour space that has it disabled?
A lot of grading workflows require access to the full unconstrained gamut. For example negative film emulation. Currently neg film emulation works so well on BMD cameras as they see and hold onto extremely saturated colours. The results I’m getting on the P6K in Gen4 are as good as any other camera I’ve shot and profiled.
I’ve got extremely saturated test charts shot on the P6K and on Vision3 film and what the P6K sees in Gen4 is pretty amazing. On the Vision3 charts I can see a gradient of red values getting deeper as they saturate, then organically curving towards orange as they reach peak saturation. On the P6K in Gen4 I can see the same smooth gradient of reds as they reach the same end point but with less of the curve towards orange.
In a profiled LUT based match, that organic curve towards orange is easy to achieve. In a procedural Yedlin style match that curve is easy enough to recreate.
But in Gen5, that gradient of deep red values doesn’t exist, as they’ve been constrained and homogenised into a light pink tone. All the amazing colour separation is gone, which makes it difficult if not impossible to accurately emulate neg film. As you can imagine this is slightly disappointing.
If the URSA 12k and the other BMD cameras are expected to integrate into high end workflows when shooting Gen5, make some colourists and colour scientists happy and please allow access to the full unconstrained gamut."

Sorry for delay, I've found that the best price/quality ratio have Rocolax filters, say
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ROCOLAX-77mm-Optical-UV-IR-CUT-filter-UV-IR-Blocking-Filter-for-camera-lens/173253274325?hash=item2856b32ad5:g:AhsAAMXQUShQ8nk1

For those that aren't visiting BM forum, here is quote of Juan Melara's cheer and ask about gen 5 color science - as mentioned earlier, also with further playing with gen 5, similarity with P4KAlexa lut is astonishing - it seems as that BM engineers took his achievement as pattern to replicate in effect:
"Just spent an hour or so checking out the new Gen5 colour science. The new gamma curve is great. Pretty much exactly what I’ve always wanted from BMD. Top work.
But Captainhook, Blackmagic Design, any chance you could include an option to disable the Gen5 gamut mapping/limiting? Or include a colour space that has it disabled?
A lot of grading workflows require access to the full unconstrained gamut. For example negative film emulation. Currently neg film emulation works so well on BMD cameras as they see and hold onto extremely saturated colours. The results I’m getting on the P6K in Gen4 are as good as any other camera I’ve shot and profiled.
I’ve got extremely saturated test charts shot on the P6K and on Vision3 film and what the P6K sees in Gen4 is pretty amazing. On the Vision3 charts I can see a gradient of red values getting deeper as they saturate, then organically curving towards orange as they reach peak saturation. On the P6K in Gen4 I can see the same smooth gradient of reds as they reach the same end point but with less of the curve towards orange.
In a profiled LUT based match, that organic curve towards orange is easy to achieve. In a procedural Yedlin style match that curve is easy enough to recreate.
But in Gen5, that gradient of deep red values doesn’t exist, as they’ve been constrained and homogenised into a light pink tone. All the amazing colour separation is gone, which makes it difficult if not impossible to accurately emulate neg film. As you can imagine this is slightly disappointing.
If the URSA 12k and the other BMD cameras are expected to integrate into high end workflows when shooting Gen5, make some colourists and colour scientists happy and please allow access to the full unconstrained gamut."

For those that aren't visiting BM forum, here is quote of Juan Melara's cheer and ask about gen 5 color science - as mentioned earlier, also with further playing with gen 5, similarity with P4KAlexa lut is astonishing - it seems as that BM engineers took his achievement as pattern to replicate in effect:
"Just spent an hour or so checking out the new Gen5 colour science. The new gamma curve is great. Pretty much exactly what I’ve always wanted from BMD. Top work.
But Captainhook, Blackmagic Design, any chance you could include an option to disable the Gen5 gamut mapping/limiting? Or include a colour space that has it disabled?
A lot of grading workflows require access to the full unconstrained gamut. For example negative film emulation. Currently neg film emulation works so well on BMD cameras as they see and hold onto extremely saturated colours. The results I’m getting on the P6K in Gen4 are as good as any other camera I’ve shot and profiled.
I’ve got extremely saturated test charts shot on the P6K and on Vision3 film and what the P6K sees in Gen4 is pretty amazing. On the Vision3 charts I can see a gradient of red values getting deeper as they saturate, then organically curving towards orange as they reach peak saturation. On the P6K in Gen4 I can see the same smooth gradient of reds as they reach the same end point but with less of the curve towards orange.
In a profiled LUT based match, that organic curve towards orange is easy to achieve. In a procedural Yedlin style match that curve is easy enough to recreate.
But in Gen5, that gradient of deep red values doesn’t exist, as they’ve been constrained and homogenised into a light pink tone. All the amazing colour separation is gone, which makes it difficult if not impossible to accurately emulate neg film. As you can imagine this is slightly disappointing.
If the URSA 12k and the other BMD cameras are expected to integrate into high end workflows when shooting Gen5, make some colourists and colour scientists happy and please allow access to the full unconstrained gamut."

Sshhh. we want people to upgrade from the G2 and drive 2nd hand prices down.

Most recent manual focus full frame film below, tiny crew, basically one DP.
I get what you're saying - AF makes things easily for a single operator.
But there are now a number of very high profile feature films with a single camera operator (even Oscar nominated) shot on small manual focus cameras like the GH2, 5D 3, and in similar manner to Sigma Fp in Sin-sin for instance (GH2 sometimes at F0.95 no less).
Not only are they artistically a successful cinematic achievement, the smaller camera and more direct hands-on control for the director and cinematographer was the primary reason for getting away from ARRI or a RED.
AF also has a tendency to do what the machine wants, rather than the human.
No AF is bullet proof.
If it wonders off, that's the entire take ruined and you have to go again without any guarantees it will be better.

This will make it quite expensive I'm afraid. But if they give the right combination at the right price, it should blow the competition out of the water. I have high hopes and might look to add one to my 6k, which is already camera enough for me! Really, if they just fixed the useability of the 6k for a little more price I think most people would be thrilled, seeing as that camera's image and workflow are soooo good. But at the same time, most people have figured out ways to overcome the 6ks deficiencies and don't need a FF sensor. The DR and low light for the pocket are already good enough.  

Oh, there's really no reason for childish fan generalization sort of like/dislike - most of us don't complain at all, nor anything here deserves any such emotion (at least from me). It is quit possible at the same time to enjoy in coming of advanced technology and to note some common sense problem in real world usage... what exactly motivated this thread, as far as I understand.
After all arguments, critics and applause for effort or step further in technology, the question, I believe, for most of us interested in matter will be simple: to spend sum of 4-5000 euro here or somewhere else? Judging from my humble criteria of projected opportunities (and zero interest in photography) - at the moment I'd spend this sum just for one really video/indiemovie workhorse, which R5 apparently is not if overheating danger/distraction exists even at base 4k raw shooting level. Someone else (probably with more free money at disposal) will greatly enjoy in different aspects of R5 offer, and it's apparently also well founded choice.

Oh, there's really no reason for childish fan generalization sort of like/dislike - most of us don't complain at all, nor anything here deserves any such emotion (at least from me). It is quit possible at the same time to enjoy in coming of advanced technology and to note some common sense problem in real world usage... what exactly motivated this thread, as far as I understand.
After all arguments, critics and applause for effort or step further in technology, the question, I believe, for most of us interested in matter will be simple: to spend sum of 4-5000 euro here or somewhere else? Judging from my humble criteria of projected opportunities (and zero interest in photography) - at the moment I'd spend this sum just for one really video/indiemovie workhorse, which R5 apparently is not if overheating danger/distraction exists even at base 4k raw shooting level. Someone else (probably with more free money at disposal) will greatly enjoy in different aspects of R5 offer, and it's apparently also well founded choice.

Oh, there's really no reason for childish fan generalization sort of like/dislike - most of us don't complain at all, nor anything here deserves any such emotion (at least from me). It is quit possible at the same time to enjoy in coming of advanced technology and to note some common sense problem in real world usage... what exactly motivated this thread, as far as I understand.
After all arguments, critics and applause for effort or step further in technology, the question, I believe, for most of us interested in matter will be simple: to spend sum of 4-5000 euro here or somewhere else? Judging from my humble criteria of projected opportunities (and zero interest in photography) - at the moment I'd spend this sum just for one really video/indiemovie workhorse, which R5 apparently is not if overheating danger/distraction exists even at base 4k raw shooting level. Someone else (probably with more free money at disposal) will greatly enjoy in different aspects of R5 offer, and it's apparently also well founded choice.

I think perhaps we’re missing the point. Just like their previous “hybrids” it’s a stills camera first and foremost. The difference now is that instead of video being an afterthought thrown on in case photographers *must* shoot a few clips, it is now “video for photographers.”
What I mean by that is the 8K video mode is basically a 30fps burst mode to pull stills from. It’s the first stills camera in what is probably going to be the near future of photography - no distinction between stills and video. 8K RAW is the first video mode that can really claim the image quality of a frame is equal to high-end photography (especially in combination with Canon’s AF making every frame perfect). I’m surprised they’re not offering an open gate mode to be honest. 

When it dies in the middle of a shot will the first thought be "I am glad Canon pushed the camera industry forward" or will it be "why did I spend £4000 on this thing which Peter McKinnon said was THE GRAIL CAMERA"?

"Crop factor" usage of cameras with obvious issue from DP's perspective... that found their way to different Cannes 2019 selection sections:
MAIN COMPETITION (Palme d’Or Contenders)
- “Sorry We Missed You”
      Dir: Ken Loach, DoP: Robbie Ryan
      Format:  Arri 16mm
      Camera: Arri416 16mm
DIRECTORS’ FORTNIGHT
- “The Halt”
       Dir: Lav Diaz, DoP: Daniel Uy
       Format: 4k
       Camera: GH5S Panasonic Camera
       Lens: 18mm-50mm zoom lens Panasonic, 70mm-100mm zoom lens Panasonic
- “Lillian”
       Dir/DoP: Andreas Horwath
       Format: Digital, 2K, Lossless CinemaDNG RAW — and 4K for the drone footage
      Camera: Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera
       Lens: Voigtländer Nokton Series
- “The Orphanage”
       Dir: Shahrbanoo Sadat, DoP: Virginie Surdej
       Format: Alexa Mini-S16 HD mode/ prores
       Camera: Alexa mini S16 HD mode
UN CERTAIN REGARD
- “A Brother’s Love”
        Dir: Monia Chokri, DoP: Josée Deshayes
        Format: Super 16mm, 7219 Kodak
        Camera: Arri 416
- “Liberte”
        Dir: Albert Serra, DoP: Artur Tort
        Format: 2K
        Camera: Canon C300 Mark ii (crop mode)
        Lens: Canon 11-138 (S16)
OUT OF COMPETITION
- “Let It Be Law”
         Dir/DoP: Juan Solanas
        Format: UHD 3840×2160
        Camera: Panasonic GH5
        Lens: Leica 12-60mm 2.8/4

I have! - look at this one touching beast with wide open Voigt eye  (Especially regarding sensor size issue, problem with lenses with etc... Sometimes Voigtlander 17.5 wide open indeed approve itself as miracle for indie movie making. Such subtle nuances in color rendition even at f0.95 that allows just natural light and still freely play with shadows... Shane Carruth was not at all naive choosing Voigts.)
 

I have! - look at this one touching beast with wide open Voigt eye  (Especially regarding sensor size issue, problem with lenses with etc... Sometimes Voigtlander 17.5 wide open indeed approve itself as miracle for indie movie making. Such subtle nuances in color rendition even at f0.95 that allows just natural light and still freely play with shadows... Shane Carruth was not at all naive choosing Voigts.)
 

"Crop factor" usage of cameras with obvious issue from DP's perspective... that found their way to different Cannes 2019 selection sections:
MAIN COMPETITION (Palme d’Or Contenders)
- “Sorry We Missed You”
      Dir: Ken Loach, DoP: Robbie Ryan
      Format:  Arri 16mm
      Camera: Arri416 16mm
DIRECTORS’ FORTNIGHT
- “The Halt”
       Dir: Lav Diaz, DoP: Daniel Uy
       Format: 4k
       Camera: GH5S Panasonic Camera
       Lens: 18mm-50mm zoom lens Panasonic, 70mm-100mm zoom lens Panasonic
- “Lillian”
       Dir/DoP: Andreas Horwath
       Format: Digital, 2K, Lossless CinemaDNG RAW — and 4K for the drone footage
      Camera: Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera
       Lens: Voigtländer Nokton Series
- “The Orphanage”
       Dir: Shahrbanoo Sadat, DoP: Virginie Surdej
       Format: Alexa Mini-S16 HD mode/ prores
       Camera: Alexa mini S16 HD mode
UN CERTAIN REGARD
- “A Brother’s Love”
        Dir: Monia Chokri, DoP: Josée Deshayes
        Format: Super 16mm, 7219 Kodak
        Camera: Arri 416
- “Liberte”
        Dir: Albert Serra, DoP: Artur Tort
        Format: 2K
        Camera: Canon C300 Mark ii (crop mode)
        Lens: Canon 11-138 (S16)
OUT OF COMPETITION
- “Let It Be Law”
         Dir/DoP: Juan Solanas
        Format: UHD 3840×2160
        Camera: Panasonic GH5
        Lens: Leica 12-60mm 2.8/4

"Crop factor" usage of cameras with obvious issue from DP's perspective... that found their way to different Cannes 2019 selection sections:
MAIN COMPETITION (Palme d’Or Contenders)
- “Sorry We Missed You”
      Dir: Ken Loach, DoP: Robbie Ryan
      Format:  Arri 16mm
      Camera: Arri416 16mm
DIRECTORS’ FORTNIGHT
- “The Halt”
       Dir: Lav Diaz, DoP: Daniel Uy
       Format: 4k
       Camera: GH5S Panasonic Camera
       Lens: 18mm-50mm zoom lens Panasonic, 70mm-100mm zoom lens Panasonic
- “Lillian”
       Dir/DoP: Andreas Horwath
       Format: Digital, 2K, Lossless CinemaDNG RAW — and 4K for the drone footage
      Camera: Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera
       Lens: Voigtländer Nokton Series
- “The Orphanage”
       Dir: Shahrbanoo Sadat, DoP: Virginie Surdej
       Format: Alexa Mini-S16 HD mode/ prores
       Camera: Alexa mini S16 HD mode
UN CERTAIN REGARD
- “A Brother’s Love”
        Dir: Monia Chokri, DoP: Josée Deshayes
        Format: Super 16mm, 7219 Kodak
        Camera: Arri 416
- “Liberte”
        Dir: Albert Serra, DoP: Artur Tort
        Format: 2K
        Camera: Canon C300 Mark ii (crop mode)
        Lens: Canon 11-138 (S16)
OUT OF COMPETITION
- “Let It Be Law”
         Dir/DoP: Juan Solanas
        Format: UHD 3840×2160
        Camera: Panasonic GH5
        Lens: Leica 12-60mm 2.8/4