KnightsFan

I haven't seen anything specifically about rolling shutter on the NX500. So take this with a grain of salt... The NX500 4K is a 1:1 crop, unlike the NX1's full pixel readout. Rolling shutter is likely proportional to the crop size, since it's the same sensor. That would estimate to be ~19.3ms for UHD. (NX1 reads 3650 vertical lines in 32.6ms, NX500 reads 2160 vertical lines. 2160/3650 * 32.6 = 19.3).

The HDMI spec has no control over whether the data it carries will be perceived as a color image by human viewers. You put HDMI formatted data in one end, and get HDMI formatted data out the other. So you're right, you can take 3 UHD 12 bit raw frames, and package them as the Y, U, V channels of a single 4:4:4 color frame. It wouldn't look right if it was plugged into a TV, but as long as the Atomos end knows what to expect, they simply need to interpret each HDMI frame as 3 Raw frames, and processes accordingly. (Apertus has been doing just that for years to get higher frame rates out of their cameras.)

The e2c (and the e2, to some extent) has features aimed at live streaming. They have ethernet ports on the back, and the e2c even supports POE. Much simpler to stream with than any dslr or cinema camera. No accessories required.

You should always expect that beta software has bugs, and will crash at times. "Beta" usually means that there are serious bugs that the developers know about, but have not completely fixed yet. If you use it, make sure you have backups of all your projects from Resolve 15 so that you can roll back in case of disaster. You have only yourself to blame if you lose work after relying on beta software. That said, the Resolve beta 6 has been stable for me so far.

The E2C has a completely different sensor. It has less DR, worse RS, more noise, and lacks higher frame rates. No mention of ProRes on the website, so if it isn't available yet it's pending Apple's approval. And it uses Canon batteries instead of Sony ones.

Same here, I want a future where everyone works a tiny bit, and spends the rest of their time of stuff they love. Problem is, a company would rather hide 1 person working 60 hrs/wk than 4 people working 15 hrs/wk. If you're that 1 person, great, you'll get a raise. But the other 3 are out of luck. On our current path in the US, automation and efficiency will hurt a lot of people while driving up GDP and corporate profits. The irony is that in the long run, this will be bad for those same companies, because people won't have money to pay for their products. The economy requires that money circulate. If it collects in one place, everything collapses, even the person holding all the money.

Fair. The P4K and XT3 are significantly cheaper as well.

That's half the issue. Of course people don't like subscription models in general, but if you are paying that much money, you expect it to be reliable--or at least more reliable than the significantly cheaper competition. Premiere is still slightly faster to edit than Resolve. It's as if Resolve's UI has a few milliseconds of lag, and overall the UI is a bit clunkier with less customization. But the time saved from not crashing makes up for it, and Resolve is still improving at an enormous pace at no extra cost. Exactly! A lot of people use Adobe because clients require it. Rewriting muscle memory is doable. Convincing clients is not so easy. It's slower to change the paradigm than to make a better product, and hopefully Blackmagic realizes this, and is in for the long haul.

The E2 has ProRes as well (and 8 bit H.264, fwiw). ProRes is either pending Apple's approval or already available on the other models as well. Raw should come at some point. I don't think all the specs are finalized for the upcoming models, true. The E2 itself has no forced crop in any mode. You can turn on a Super 16 crop if you want, though I'm not sure all the framerate and resolution options for that mode. Are you sure the FF and APS-C Sony sensors they are using have those capabilities?

I'm pretty sure the E2g is already available, you can order on their website, and several people on the fb page already have it.

Those results are certainly against conventional wisdom. However, the A5100 is HD, whereas the GH5 is UHD. The GH5 should gain another ~stop of DR if it was downscaled to HD, putting it above the A5100 in this test. Noise reduction and/or sharpening could play a role as well. The article says "[the a5100] performs slightly worse than the GH4." Not idea what picture profile, nor could I find any measurements of the GH4 on its own that weren't taken down after the method change. Perhaps noise reduction gives the XT2 a lower value also? Interestingly, the XT2 and XT3 match when downscaled to HD, maybe equalizing the NR done on the 4k image. I'm sure tweaking camera settings would make different values, on all the tests done. I wish they were more rigorous in documenting what settings were used, though in recent articles it's been better. Certainly true! That's why I'm in this topic in the first place, to get a crack at the non-test chart footage you have so kindly uploaded Anyway, apologies for going off topic.

That's what I've been saying: someone should make a camera that records audio from a USB audio interface. Lossless multi channel digital audio directly from the quality preamps of your choice, no post-syncing required.

As long as they say how they are measuring, changing the method is more confusing than inaccurate. I don't know of any other site that has nearly as extensive a list of "objective" DR measurements for video mode (and I say "objective" with quotes since we are trying to verify to what extent they are accurate). It would be great if we had a couple other sources to compare against. I appreciate it Taking down the old figures is a good thing. Pushing forward with inconsistent, uncontrolled tests would have been the bigger mistake. Downsampling increases SNR. That's what they are measuring: the contrast ration between signal clipping in whites, and SNR = 2 in the shadows. So while you can argue that SNR isn't a "true measure" of dynamic range, it's what C5D decided to document. Downsampling and noise reduction could both give falsely high ratings using C5D's method (depending on how you look at it), which is something you have to keep in mind for sure. But both would come at the expense of resolution and detail, which is something we can judge from other tests. Again, it would be nice if more people did lab tests, maybe even measuring in different ways, so we could compare results.

That "someone" was me. I compiled a list of every DR rating I could find on C5D, and found the only inconsistency was with one Sony camera. I contacted C5D about it, and they said that the measurement differences were due to one being UHD and the other UHD downscaled to 1080p. The discrepancy was consistent with the difference you'd expect from downscaling. In my list, I included links to the articles I got the DR ratings from. I encourage anyone to look over the list and double check--that's why I posted it in the first place. I'm happy to post it again. Until you check my work, saying "he claimed were consistent, which it probably wasn't" isn't justified. I asked people to help me expand the list, and am still happy to do so if anyone is interested in actually figuring out the degree to which we can trust those DR results, rather than say "it probably wasn't" without looking. A few years ago, C5D changed their test methodology, and edited their past articles to remove the numbers that reflected their old methodology. However, other sites (such as NFS) still quote the old methodology and have old chart images, but if you follow NFS's links you will see that the C5D articles have been edited and those charts have been removed.

You shouldn't be getting duplicated frames unless your shutter speed is actually slower than your frame rate. You should be able to shoot 1/38 shutter with 24p just fine. So that's probably not it. You didn't transcode the footage at any stage, did you? If you are 100% sure of the camera settings, 23.976 fps with 1/38 shutter, then my guess is that there is something wrong with your computer playing the files. If you can upload an original clip from the camera, we can verify. Edit: Is your footage interlaced? Could it be a problem with deinterlacing?

Is your timeline frame rate also 23.976?

Yeah, I didn't mean to imply it necessarily wasn't a DC connector separate to the battery, I literally just meant it looked like a dummy battery, and I assumed that little port on the side was for a dummy battery wire when I initially saw the camera.

That looks like a dummy battery to me. Hopefully it takes a range of voltages.

I have absolutely 0 issue with a company making markups or only allowing proprietary media. I personally do not buy into closed ecosystems, but I respect their decisions. What I have a problem with is if Red makes false claims, both about their own products, and the third party alternatives. Here's Land's quotes: From the video, it appears that Jinni Tech simply used micron drives with standard micron firmware downloaded from micron's website. No duplication of Red IP or firmware, and no hacking. Furthermore, Jinni claims that Red never had any custom firmware on their drives in the first place, and that RED itself simply uses micron drives and firmware. I think most readers would assume that the quote "For our media, we developed our own IP and Firmware" refers to developing the firmware of the drive itself. So if it turns out that Red uses standard micron firmware, as Jinni claims, then Red lied on both counts. Using approved, RED-brand media will be worth it to some people, no matter the cost, and no matter the firmware used. And for other people, cheaper alternatives will be worth the risk. But both parties need to be honest about what they are selling. If it turns out that Jinni "hacked and duplicated" Red IP, then they should be shut down and/or fined. If, on the other hand, Red has slandered Jinni and lied about the quality of their own products, then Red should face consequences as well.

I was primarily joking in my post. But to clarify, the posts by RED in the past have implied that the millions in R&D went into designing and optimizing custom firmware on the minimag drives, whereas the video argues (quite convincingly, imho) that they are ordinary micron drives running micron firmware. After the video was released, RED's statements subtly switch to saying the millions was actually for camera firmware, not custom minimag firmware.

I dont think there is enough financial investment in foveon technology to make it compete with cmos yet for sensitivity and speed. However, iirc, one obstacle was that foveon images required a lot of processing power to make images. If sigma sticks with Raw video, perhaps they could make a decent video camera by offloading that processing to post. That really depends on how you measure. Sigma says 12.5 "usable" stops, which is where many current DSLMs stand now. We will have to wait and see the tests I guess.

From that image from @ntblowz, it looks like the non-Raw recordings are 8 bit both internally and externally? That's a shame.

Sigma's prior cameras have been photo-only Foveon cameras. They are pretty much the only cameras out there that don't use a CFA. The images always looked good to me, but have always been sort of a special purpose/novelty product. I always wanted one, but the SA mount put me off. I am looking forward to Sigma's Foveon cameras in L mount next year, as well as this new FP.

Hopefully. 24.00 isn't even a greyed out option at the moment. I highly doubt it, but it would be nice of course. With that enormous data rate, I don't think you would be able to do uncompressed Raw to SD or USB C at 4k120, even if the processor could handle it (which I don't think it can). If anything, I would say there's a slim, outside chance that Sigma could possibly drop a bombshell firmware update with 4k60 in a crop mode to counter new announcements from their competition. If they were pushing the envelope on specs to FF 4k60, I think they'd come out swinging with that as a headline. Awesome! I totally missed that, but that's a HUGE bonus for usability imo. Or maybe the "DC connector" is actually just a dummy battery itself? I don't really see any ports on the body, though it may not be final design I suppose.

@mkabi All framerates are greyed out except 23.976 when in UHD CDNG, you can see it at 2:06 in the video above. And now that I think about it, they really should have 24.00 in addition to 23.976 if they want to call it a cinema camera.