Mmmbeats

Over / under tests are not just literally about over and underexposing, they also give you information about what is happening at the various extremes of your normally exposed image.
For example, if a camera performs badly in over tests with colour degradation, you can reasonably surmise it is going to have difficulty retaining highlight information in a properly exposed shot. 

Over / under tests are not just literally about over and underexposing, they also give you information about what is happening at the various extremes of your normally exposed image.
For example, if a camera performs badly in over tests with colour degradation, you can reasonably surmise it is going to have difficulty retaining highlight information in a properly exposed shot. 

Over / under tests are not just literally about over and underexposing, they also give you information about what is happening at the various extremes of your normally exposed image.
For example, if a camera performs badly in over tests with colour degradation, you can reasonably surmise it is going to have difficulty retaining highlight information in a properly exposed shot. 

Ok I see, makes sense now.

Over / under tests are not just literally about over and underexposing, they also give you information about what is happening at the various extremes of your normally exposed image.
For example, if a camera performs badly in over tests with colour degradation, you can reasonably surmise it is going to have difficulty retaining highlight information in a properly exposed shot. 

Well quite.  To use this camera I think you're going to need to buy a big stopper photographers ND filter because variable ND usually looks awful at high levels. 

I'm basing it on Sunny 16: f16, 1/100s, ISO 100 then counting the stops to f2.8, 1/50s, ISO 2000
It's 10.33 😭

Shooting video at f22 is gonna be a thing.
Yup, that shallow DOF is sooooooo 2021.

I'm not the biggest fan of the GH5 colour science either.
Which makes me happy that Panasonic seem to be chasing a better image with the GH6 instead of just chasing endless resolution at the expense of everything else.
The colour from the more recent Panasonic cameras has all been incremental improvements over the GH5, so I'm optimistic about what they'll do with a new sensor.
The other aspect to making images pop is lenses, which there are more and more available all the time now with third-party manufacturers like 7artisans, TTartisans, Meike, Mikaton, etc making interesting offerings.  To me they're interesting because they are a perfect-combination of features - they have simpler optical designs and simpler coatings that are reminiscent of vintage lenses that are now climbing radically in price, but due to cheap Chinese manufacturing are both low-cost and also relatively high-quality.  
Unlike modern high-resolution high-precision zero-distortion lenses which have a very dull and lifeless rendering, these third-party primes tend to exhibit the aberrations that make lenses like the "Zeiss 28mm f2 'Hollywood'" lens famous, plus with MFT or APS-C lenses you're seeing more of the edges of the image circle than you do from FF lenses and so you're getting more of those character-providing flaws.  I'll be talking more about this in coming weeks, but there's a lot to talk about, let's just say that.
 

Yes, I was just looking it up myself.  I had C4K 30p at 943 mbps, so I guess the figure given is feasible.  Strewth!

Yes, I was just looking it up myself.  I had C4K 30p at 943 mbps, so I guess the figure given is feasible.  Strewth!

It looks limited to 5.7K 30p. So 1900 mbps is about right... Prores 6K 422 HQ at 30p is 2121mpbs.

@herein2020 I think you're looking at this the wrong way.  Even if right now Canon only has FF RF lenses, I am pretty sure they will soon develop S35 cine glass as they are phasing out EF mount in favor of RF. Besides you already have a growing list of third-party S35 cine lenses in RF mount:
https://filmdaft.com/rf-mount-lenses-cinema-list/
The BIG attraction of the RF mount is also that it opens up all types of lens adaptation choices, not just EF, and with speed boosting it gives you the FF FoV option. It's best of both worlds. Especially if you compare the C70 to its biggest competitor FX6 that can only do FF 4K.
Another big plus of the C70's S35 sensor is it is the DGO sensor from the $11K C300 mk2, whereas the FX6 FF sensor is the same as the $3.5K A7S3. 
A FF "C50" could be in the works but would probably utilize the FF sensor from R5/R6/R3. Of which you'll never get the DR benefits of the DGO sensor. 
And if Canon develop a FF DGO sensor, you can be certain that will be for a flagship C500 mk3, not an entry-level C50.
With Canon RAW coming to the C70 I wouldn't hesitate to upgrade to it from C200.
I loved the C200 body & build-quality but the 8-bit compressed mp4 IQ was pretty awful and CRL files not compressed enough. Result was it gathered dust while I always favored FS7, BMD Raw or 10-bit mirrorless bodies.
C70 just seems to me like the perfect compromise with a chunky compact DSLR form-factor but with ND's, I/Os on the body, RF mount with speed booster, CRL LT option, affordable SD media with 10-bit proxies on RAW and the mighty DGO sensor.
The FX6 is also very tempting despite the $6K price tag for alpha line sensor and no 4K S35 mode.

In the overexposure test C70 & R5C seem to both clip around +4 stops. Seems like the highlight DR is about the same. It's in the underexposure test that we clearly see the DGO sensor doing its magic: at -4 stops both the R5C/FX3 are unusable with horizontal noise and color shifting whereas the C70 maintains a much more usable IQ with a more filmic noise, much less colorshift and no horizontal patterns that give that nasty digital video look.
Furthermore having now played with R5C (RAW & compressed) & C70 footage, I can only attest the incredible amount of shadow information that you can pull on the C70. On the R5C it gets noisy and ugly really quick.
This really limits the R5C to a crushed black, contrasty look when pushing in post, whereas the C70 has so much more latitude thanks to all that precious clean shadow information.
(by the way on a side-note the R6 stands somewhere in between, with much more pleasant shadow noise than R5/R5C but nowhere as good as C70)
Quite an eye-opener to verify this myself and I can now safely say my A cam choice would clearly lean towards C70.
 

I suppose that has always been a thing with digital cameras but it rings very true with the C70 more then others. I recently saw a comparison between the R5, C70, and FX6. The C70 had about two stops more in the shadows and about the same in the highlights as the other two with the R5 maybe a 1/3 stop ahead and the FX6 behind.

I do the opposite with the Panasonic S1 usually overexposing by 1 or two stops. The S1 has about 5 stops in the highlights and two in the shadows, though with RAW the shadows can be pushed way further.
 
 

I've not shot the C300 MKII and C70 side by side before. I feel the C70 has more dynamic range. Not so much in the highlights but you can really push the shadows far. I think the ticket is underexposing and boosting in post. Nothing beats ARRI in highlights, the C70 doesn't even come close. However ARRI is pretty noisy underexposed, though the colors hold up nicely even under a few stops.
It isn't a cheap camera so I am not in a hurry to buy it. It would also be nice if the 4k 120p mode utilized the DGO capability. ARRI is still the better choice for 120p for me, even though its only HD.

The C70 is a great image. In the right setting, it definitely looks great. Arri beat it in skin texture, color detail in the shadows, over exposure, color separation, etc.
I’ve shot very consistently with the Canon C300 Mk2 for the last 5 years. The C70 is such a close image. I’m sure the OG C300ii would feel very close to the Alexa as well. The DGO sensor is great and all, but the C300 Mk3 / C70 is also 5 years newer than the C300 Mk2. I’m honestly a bit underwhelmed if anything.  It’s just so similar. Cleaner... but again, it’s 5 years newer.
Things like false color, better auto focus, long GOP, cleaner C-Log2, 4K/60p are all things that impress me more than the DGO sensor. I’ve shot projects where I used the C70 and C300ii next to each other for interviews. For better or for worse, I very much doubt anyone could tell the difference, even when looking at the raw source material. 

The highlights are great on the C70, but anything pointed into the sun sucks. You get the clipping blob in really bright sources or the sun. Once you see it, you know what to look for and it is always there. Pocket 6K probably does it worse.  Komodo a little better. Film handles it by far the best.
Ive said this before... but the Long GOP 4k codec on the C70 is so great. You get a cleaner, sharper image than the older generation Canon cameras and it looks really great. The files are also almost 3x as small.
I’m interested to see what effect the CRL files will have on the image. If the files are even a little sharper and just a bit noisier / textured, that would be great.

Not bad but pretty hard to tell as not many shots with neutral lighting.
It is, however, an excellent video to play a game of "spot the shots they did noise reduction on".  YouTube LOVES footage without any noise, it has a party and you get fun things like this!

or this:

It makes sense that doing slow-motion in such an environment would give some noise, so no judgement there.  The secret is to do NR to all the shots in post, then apply some grain over the top so all the shots are even.  YT compression will clobber the texture of the grain, but it will prevent the banding.
It would be interesting to see some RAW vs compressed shots of skintones in a controlled environment with pristine CRI and exposures.

Yes, I'd say it's pretty significant. 12-bit Raw on the C300 just gives an added depth and richness to the image that 10-bit can't achieve. I was always amazed by the C200's raw and found it pretty stunning, but the DGO sensor adds a whole extra level of usability.
This update makes the C70 probably the finest cinema camera under $9k. I also love that it's an even lighter version of raw (645mbps), which will make it way more useful in a variety of situations.
Time and tests will tell, but I would think the 12-bit image should be a pretty big jump in IQ - and that's saying something coming from that sensor.

So RAW recording rumoured to be announced soon.  Do people think this will be a significant upgrade?  Any experience of C300iii RAW?

I think you might have some difficulty getting them to turn around their corporate policy on that basis.  But you can give it a go.  You just have to find the other seven people around the world that feel strongly about that particular facility.

I think you might have some difficulty getting them to turn around their corporate policy on that basis.  But you can give it a go.  You just have to find the other seven people around the world that feel strongly about that particular facility.

I think you might have some difficulty getting them to turn around their corporate policy on that basis.  But you can give it a go.  You just have to find the other seven people around the world that feel strongly about that particular facility.

I think you might have some difficulty getting them to turn around their corporate policy on that basis.  But you can give it a go.  You just have to find the other seven people around the world that feel strongly about that particular facility.

Ah, I see.
You need at least 2 hard drives and preferably 4 (or more).  The minimum recommended setup is:
Drive 1 - OS and NLE
Drive 2 - Project files, Scratch, & Media Cache
Drive 3 - Export and Storage
Some people further separate Project files and Scratch, etc.