Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  1. Agree with the list. A7S III really is the ultimate camera to save up for and the defining feature for me (didn't expect it at all) was the 9ms rolling shutter and the amazing catalyst stab. The S5 is the next best thing although I wanted it to be Fuji. For 2021, I hope X-H2 (or maybe Sigma fp2) comes out with 12-bit 4k60p RAW CDNG out to a USB-C SSD. Don't like microHDMI/bulky atomos/no-proresraw-in-resolve shenanigan. Also, more unique camera tests from EOSHD! I miss the days when Andrew used to post music videos that he shot with the cameras he'd test...my fav being the Herdw
  2. h00b00

    Fuji X-T4

    X-T3 is already great for "normal" shoots but for better green screen work I'll take the 10bit HEVC long-GOP 6k24p 420 and 4k60p10bit 422 internally and a launch price of around $1500. I think the data rate should play well with a v90 UHS-II. In terms of a good key, the 4k RAW of BMPCC4K should tie with a 10bit 420 6k image. Oh and the faster processing should also help make autofocus on adapted lenses better. The EF-FX2 already does a decent job on current gen cameras.
  3. Lack of 24p doesn't affect me much as I do all my shoots in 25p. But the biggest feature that's missing from this camera's coverage is the support for clean, 10bit 422 HDMI out: https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/learn/education/topics/article/2019/august/4k-and-full-hd-video-with-the-eos-m6-mark-ii/4k-and-full-hd-video-with-the-eos-m6-mark-ii/!ut/p/z0/lZDBboMwDIZfpT1wjJxVqGqPHahqp6KqN8gFeSQFj9ShEMr29st4gEkcP-uTf_8GBTkoxhfV6Mkx2sCF2pbZ7bQ7nRN5kellL2_X63t6PCbn-BDDB6j_hbBh02dJVoPq0DeC-O4g38i3PeQ41uPgIY9bgazFfbRWNFq8SBsnJgq2b4wwbhCPrXhg3wqipTYU9PV8qgOoyrE33yGuQnZcspkm81nOU_aR1FSTR1
  4. Hey Andrew, forum noob here! This feature is quite interesting because it seems to use the entirety of GH5's 5184 x 3888 sensor. Now, I'm wondering whether using an 1.33x anamorphic adapter in 4:3 mode will give us a "wider" 16:9 footage (in addition to being 5K) than the internal 16:9 footage? My logic being that the internal 16:9 is obtained by cropping the height of the 4:3 sensor whereas the "anamorphic" 16:9 will be obtained by squeezing a wider image onto the whole-ish 4:3 sensor. 4:3 example: "Internal" 16:9 example (same setup/subject distance):
  • Create New...