KnightsFan

I thought it was obvious reasoning, I was clarifying my stance on the image as being "meh" compared to cameras half that cost. I'm not saying it looks bad, just that you really have to need the compact gimbal for it to be worth buying over cheaper options with better images. I'm not talking about hybrids. Considering used prices for all models referenced, C70's, Komodos, and 4.6K G2's are considerably cheaper than 4D 6K's. C300 MkIII's are slightly cheaper. Z Cam F6 (which imo is a similar kind of good-but-not-great-image) is a fraction of the cost, and that one in particular is high value since it includes wireless monitoring and control. I do disagree that after rigging it "won't be as modular," since I think it's more straightforward to rig a Komodo on a gimbal than it is to rig a Ronin 4D on a traditional tripod setup with heavy lenses and matte box. You can also go fairly extreme and get a I totally agree with this statement. It's just not the right bargain for me.

I had an E2 which I traded for an M4 when the flagship came out. Unfortunately my film group fell apart shortly after, so I didn't get to use it much. I always wanted an f6 but I just haven't shot much the last few years. I'm getting back into it this year though! Absolutely, and I've watched a couple sell used for under $1800. Wild value. My next few projects are very action and vfx heavy. A global shutter would make our virtual sets a little easier. Maybe if used komodo prices drop a bit more I'll get that. But I'm in no hurry, no big projects are imminent yet unfortunately.

That's what I mean. The 6k is a $6800 camera that to my eyes doesn't offer an image above cameras half its price. And I fully understand that it's valid to look at it like a $2k camera with a $4.8k lidar, gimbal, and wireless kit, and that it's a great deal in that sense. For some people, this is the best camera for their job. It will absolutely make good images, same as everything that uses that sensor and has decent codecs and log recording. In my opinion, the footage I have seen out of several of Canon and Blackmagic's cameras looks better or is easier to work with than DJI's. So if I need stabilized shots, I'd rather spend less on the camera, put extra cash into rigging, and retain my non-vendor-locked upgrade path than commit fully to DJI and hope that someday they have a different camera (for example, one with faster readout). Downside is of course that my rigs are less integrated and convenient, but that's a tradeoff I'll take. Now if DJI's sensor and image pipeline was closer to the top of my list already, then the pros/cons would change. That is of course a personal weighing regarding my budget and shoots. Others will land in a different place.

For sure, and I definitely agree about applying that to every company. I never buy new products anyway, so they're pretty visible before I shop haha. With Z Cam I'm not worried about dishonest vaporware, so much as the company going under or being bought up and discarded. I really hope they make the M5G and that it sells well, I do like that company a lot. A used F6 is still high on my radar, for sheer price/performance value. I hope they continue the Flagship style body and don't go all in on the Pro.

Interesting. I don't check the FB group anymore. Considering it was announced a year ago, and then Z Cam quietly stopped talking about it, and made no update or announcement, I'm definitely in the "believe it when I see it" category.

Not surprising. It's hard to sell cameras at long-term-investment prices when no one knows what the new owners will do with that product and there are so many other brands on the horizon. As much as I would love a global shutter box camera, I don't know that I would spend half those prices on Red cameras, unless Nikon releases a product or two that proves their commitment to those lines. Also, I made a mental note early this year that 2024 would be a uniquely poor time to buy a camera. At that time we knew Nikon had bought Red, and there were rumors of a new Canon C-camera. Here we are a few months later, and on top of both of those, Blackmagic announced a truckload of cameras, Z Cam has presumably cancelled the M5G, and rumors are swirling about successors to the FX6 and S1H. It's quite the year for low-to-mid cinema cams.

I meant the visual image quality coming out of the camera, specifically the Ronin 4D's. I totally understand that you're paying for the unique gimbal, focus, and monitoring solution, but for $6800 I'm not taken with the image quality. Without having done any research, it seems like the 6K uses roughly the same sensor found in all the modern 24MP consumer cameras. So what I meant was that if that's the level of their image in a high end camera, they might find it difficult to enter the hybrid market unless they're (once again) leveraging unique peripherals. Which is not a bad thing. I'm just musing out loud that if they make a generic Panasonc-S5-clone with DJI branding, I don't know that I see the point. For comparison, I think the C70/C300III/C500II, anything recent from Blackmagic, and the Komodo have good images. I'm not unfairly comparing to really expensive images.

I started researching the 4D camera a little closer and I have to say it rally hits a lot of the points I want in a camera. I can't see how they are possibly breaking even on this stuff, but I really hope they continue to make more of those. I'd have to assume that if they enter the hybrid market, their angle will be these cool accessories, like wireless video and Lidar autofocus. Because the one thing they don't really have is a great image. I mean there's nothing wrong with their image, there's just nothing special about it.

I saw that rumor a while ago and forgot about it. That's definitely one to keep an eye on. The Ronin 4D is such a creative product. Wide lenses are very sensitive to back focus changes, I'm skeptical it would work to not have a clear option. Hopefully mechanical shutters are on the way out anyway, with sensors readouts increasing in speed. It may be another couple generations before we're there though.

Imo we've plateaued in what a camera can deliver, and I would prefer companies start looking at ecosystems instead of specs. There are so many ways we can creatively apply modern technology. And I'm not talking about AI or any of that crap, I just mean quality of life improvements. Look at Samyang's Cine AF lenses. I haven't used them so I don't know about their image or build quality (they are suspiciously cheap...), but the innovation of switching between normal fly-by-wire AF in a tiny form factor, and then popping a front piece on and having proper hard stops and a 300 degree throw is amazing. Imagine putting a wireless receiver in a front piece for a follow focus without a gear or rails or rigging. There's no reason that approach can't be used for expensive, high quality lenses. There's also no reason that can't be done completely in body either by companies that create both bodies and lenses. Panasonic has my respect for putting 32 bit into an XLR adapter for sure. They should make one that also has a wireless receiver and digital transmission of that recording from an XLR or lav module. Synced, clipless, wireless audio directly in the video file would be amazing. Obviously everyone talks about NDs. I don' think there's room in a FF hybrid to fit an ND module with a clear option. One thing that was an eye opener when I owned a Z Cam was how good their app was and how much I relied on it. Wireless low latency monitoring and control with no extra boxes or batteries. It's sort of unbelievable that they are the only camera company that nailed their app. None of those suggestions are all that difficult. None require any technological innovation. But I would personally find those much more useful than incremental AF or dynamic range improvements past the excellent offerings we already have.

I like the Panasonic S5, which I found used for about $800 (€717). If you keep an eye on used markets, you might get pretty close to your budget. Low light video was one of my considerations and I'm very happy with it. It will be easy to keep any existing EF lenses, too. I won't pretend to have used enough cameras to say its the best option, but if you'd like some night photos in Raw or Jpg so you can judge for yourself, I'm happy to grab some.

Fair. On narrative sets, swapping front filters isn't much more trouble than swapping rear filters imo. Most (all?) adapter-based options either have artifact-prone polarization-based ND adjustments, or require the physical filter to be swapped to change levels. So I don't think that gives me much benefit. I've lived without internal NDs for so long that it's not a huge deal to me. But it would be convenient to have them. On the other hand, every other project, I have bad rolling shutter artifacts in 1-2 shots...so not particularly common, but common enough that the Z6III's sensor looks pretty good to me right now.

It really looks like Panasonic is getting some momentum with improved AF. Hopefully their extended time between releases just means they don't want to bang out incremental upgrades. From my admittedly distant view, the S1->S5->S5II releases each brought a substantial upgrade, more so than many other product lines. With the new XLR2 module and 32 bit float, they entered a whole new realm of camera feature, and it would be odd if they didn't bring that to their FF L-mount line. I hope Panasonic adds 3 things to a new S1H or BS1H model. 1. Faster readout--this is the only image recording upgrade I care for, compared to the S5 2. Compatible with their 32 bit float XLR module. I assume any flagship cameras will support it going forward. 3. Internal NDs. I guess at this point I'm fine living without them, but we can always hope, right?

It is accurate that everything is just a look. Narrative film is about evoking an emotion by manipulating light and sound. I like to think of everything as a thread on a tapestry of interwoven emotional effects. Every choice we make -- spherical vs anamorphic lenses, levels and types of diffusion filters, lighting ratios, EQ profiles for dialog, etc -- is both a point on a gradient rather than a binary choice between extremes, and also works with all of the other choices to craft a specific look and sound. And every thread is interpreted by the audience based on their prior experiences. So yes, anamorphic is a look that carries both its denotative properties such as oval bokeh, flares, and distortions, and also its connotative properties that, depending on the audience, might evoke the feeling of big Hollywood action movies. Or for a different audience and in a different context, it might parody big Hollywood action movies. Haha I agree, I typically dislike lens flares in video. Sometimes I take photos with a cool flare because it was interesting at the time. I love the footage! And that's interesting about the cliffs falling into the sea. I've definitely thought about getting some of those Sirui anamorphics. I'd say that most shots in this test don't specifically highlight the anamorphic qualities, so for this particular content, I would be just as happy cropping a spherical lens. In that sense I agree that it's not specifically about resolution, and the choice of lenses is highly dependent on the type of shots in that particular project.

I've been on this forum a long time, and I've never seen any indicator in this thread or anywhere else that @Benjamin Hiltonis trolling, or is anything other than a decent guy. There are a couple ways to look at it imo. I'm a very procedural person, in that I conceptualize end result as a function of the inputs. If I know the inputs, I plan the output in my head, and that's how I approach a shoot. On the other hand, I know people who have no idea how big their sensor is, but also produce better films than I do. They look through the lens and know what they want. If the end result looks good, who cares if you're using 40% of the sensor? Neither approach is wrong. But I do believe that products should have accurate and complete specs.

Because when I shop for cameras I want to know what FOV my lens will have. And in general it's good to list basic specs of things, similar to how microphones list their max SPL (would I still buy it if the max SPL were 1 dB lower? Probably).

I agree. Crop in each mode is an easy thing to precisely measure and communicate to potential buyers. Even when the crop is specified by a manufacturer, it's almost never more than 2 significant figures, nor do they specify whether they are listing horizontal, vertical, or diagonal crop. Sensor readout speed is another one that is easy to measure, and should be on the spec sheet for every mode.

Anamorphic was used to project a wider aspect ratio onto existing film formats, thereby retaining full detail/resolution of the frame. Achieving the same ratio by cropping discarded surface area/resolution.

I use npf (pic on page 1) with usb power. Honestly if the battery door were more accessible I would just deal with swapping rechargeable AA's.

That's not a bad setup. I'd like to swap my setup with a plug on transmitter with 32 bit internal recording. That would be even better as a quick-swap between camera and boom pole, and provide easy battery access. So hopefully my bulky setup is temporary anyway.

I get a couple hours on the F3, max. Not enough to get through an 8-hour shoot without changing them. I mean it would be okay to use AA's exclusively, but considering the placement of the battery door, and my preference for completely solid rigging, it's sort of a pain to change them at all. I think I would be annoyed having to move things like @BTM_Pixshowed, and then tighten it back down and all (not to say it's worse, just that it's not for me). This is my setup now. The F3 and battery plate are bolted onto a bracket with a NATO clamp on the other side. For all-in-one setups, I slide it onto the camera cage. For separate audio, I also have a NATO rail on the boom pole, so we can quickly move the whole unit from camera to boom. It would be nice to shave the NPF's weight but the ease of use wins out for me at the moment.

@BTM_Pix how do you deal with the f3's short battery life? I have my f3 attached to an npf battery sled, but it's bulky. I wouldn't mind changing AA's every few hours, but the battery door isn't accessible when mounted like that.

You can. But you need to do it in linear color space for accurate results. Shoot a clip in a log format, download Da Vinci Resolve, and try it out!

2.5 MB/s is 20 Mbps

Oh yeah, please no one listen to me if you're doing event shooting. All of my experience is shooting narrative with a script, rehearsals, etc. No, I wouldn't say that. If you use a color managed workflow, you can absolutely change the white balance in post when shooting ProRes Raw or HQ--within reason. If you seriously mess up your white balance (shot at 150 Kelvin and need it to be 6500) it might not go well. But shooting 3000 and changing to 6000 usually looks fine, as mentioned in another comment. Do some tests to see whether it works for you. Note that it depends on a color managed workflow, because WB changes should be performed in linear gamma. Creative picture profiles typically don't have accurate transformations so they are less useful for changing WB in post. Common log formats typically have LUTs (or, even better, mathematical transformations) to change between gamuts and gammas. Small WB changes might look okay without being in linear space, but the larger the change, the more you'll wish it was done accurately.