KnightsFan

Back in the day, people would use say a G3 to transmit TC. I wouldn't settle for anything less like using a bluetooth audio transmitter!

But this still makes no sense, why are you not taking TC from the BNC TC output of the F4???
And why use a bluetooth transmitter at all when a Tentacle Sync E is so very small / lightweight / cheap!
 
Which app exactly is this? Movie Slate Pro?

 
Ahhhhh.... I see now! 

Well, that isn't the usual usage for UB. 
Normally that is set to the day's date then left alone for the whole day's shoot, until the next day. 
I highly highly HIGHLY RECOMMEND you talk to the guys at Timecode Systems Ltd, get yourself an  Ultrasync BLUE
https://www.timecodesystems.com/products-home/ultrasyncblue/

Earlier in the thread I mentioned :Blink to you, and indeed now I know more about what you're doing I reckon this absolutely is the path you should investigate first because you're developing a new app. 

What you want to do is make sure your app can talk with TCS' gear, so a person could just velcro an Ultrasync BLUE to the pack of their phone/tablet (so that the Ultrasync BLUE is kept nearby in range always to the app device), then the rest of the cameras/recorders on set can all be on the :Blink network (using Ultrasync ONEs and a :Wave for instance).

Also check out very very thoroughly what Movie Slate Pro already does, you'll need to think about a few questions: are you going to be an additional tool alongside Movie Slate Pro? Or are you aiming to replace it completely with something better? Or is your goal completely different?

Shot this mood piece to show a bit of Nikon's low-light capabilities in video. No use of noise reduction at all, so doing so should get you some super clean video with not a lot of trouble---IF your lenses are fast enough in certain circumstances.
Also, you can get an idea of how well 420/8bit video grades--I did some fairly extreme things to get the looks I wanted.
 

Someone should tell Picasso that his art does not accurately reflect real people.
Art doesn't exist in a vacuum, it is always created and viewed in reference to previous work. Over time, film has deviated from being completely in reference to the real world, and has developed its own conventions, symbols, and nuances. New films are viewed in reference to other films, not the real world. In the same way, narrative storytelling, sound design, musical scores, and all other aspects of filmmaking are built on previous films, not just real life
You seem to be implying the color should be accurate to real life unless the artist specifically wants it to be different. This implies that using color as accurate to expected film convention is the work of a "hack." I think this is false.
Would you consider Max Richter's album Vivaldi Recomposed to be creative?

I'll have to take your word on it for "better optics." As far as extra contacts, extra lens ring, corrections, etc, all of that could have been done without changing the physical mount. Adding more pins and checking them for connectivity to determine what kind of thing is attached is essentially how USB OTG cables work.
It will be interesting to see if Canon actually follows through with much smaller lenses. Looking on Canon rumors, the RF 70-200 2.8 changes in length from 173mm to 243mm when zooming, whereas the EF version maintains a constant 199mm. So depending on your zoom level you are gaining or losing length, though it is nice that it can be stored in a slightly smaller package. I can't find any information comparing the weight.

Would be revolutionary, 10 bit 4k under $1000. I highly doubt it tho

It is going to happen! If not this year (with a X-T30 or Panasonic G90 or similar), then it will in 2020! I bet it

...that's because it isn't FF anymore...

What is Panasonic holding back from the S1? It's the first FF camera to shoot 10 bit internal and the first to do 4k60. The S1R even does the latter without any crop. Like the GH5 there's a paid upgrade, this time to full VLog instead of VLog-L.
I guess this was my question from earlier in the thread. What does RF bring that EF didn't?

Quite a prescient topic as I have just picked up one of these Skyzone TX5D transmitters.

It has an HDMI input and then converts it to analog transmission on 5.8GHz.
Your options to view it are then an integrated FPV monitor (or goggles if you are that way inclined) or via a receiver that connects to an android phone.
Transmitter is less than £50, a monitor can be had for under £100 or the android adapter is about £30.
You also need to budget another £20 for a lipo battery to run it on.
The benefit of doing it this way aside from the cost is that it is really low latency.
As this stuff literally only turned up a couple of days ago, I haven't had a chance to put it together but I'll post something up here in a few days about it.

...that's because it isn't FF anymore...

...that's because it isn't FF anymore...

Another thing to consider is that filters apply the effect to the actual light entering the lens. Post effects are added to the heavily compressed data you end up with in your edit codec. Even the most efficient codecs are massively compressed when you also consider chroma subsampling, debayer, etc. The physical filters have a considerably greater amount of 'data' to manipulate.

Canon is the only major camera manufacturer that still develops its own sensors in-house. Just about every other camera brand goes to Sony, who have cutting-edge sensor technology.
So yes, Canon are behind in sensor tech which explains the recycling of old sensors in their current mirrorless cameras.
They have acknowledged the 4K crop limitation and are said to be actively working on it. 
We’re all hoping the new sensors will appear on the upcoming pro model later this year (1DX2 already being the Canon camera with the least crop & RS in 4K).

I dont know if anyone would seriously hate the eos r if it didnt crop. You get trolls and such in any case, but most people would forgive slightly lower frame rates and bit rates in exchange for reliability and great color, as they have been for years with canon. But the crop is an actual dealbreaker for a lot of people, and moreover it is just so silly. Its not like having poor autofocus, which is still evolving and pushing forward with competing technologies and software. Its a simple concept of having 60% of the sensor taking up dead space when shooting 4k. It would be like if blackmagic put that 5in screen on their camera, but only the middle 3in worked while shooting.
Is canon somehow the only major camera manufacturer who has not discovered the technology to make full frame 4k? Its hard to imagine, but the equally perplexing alternative is they slapped thousands of people in the face by witholding it.

I dont know if anyone would seriously hate the eos r if it didnt crop. You get trolls and such in any case, but most people would forgive slightly lower frame rates and bit rates in exchange for reliability and great color, as they have been for years with canon. But the crop is an actual dealbreaker for a lot of people, and moreover it is just so silly. Its not like having poor autofocus, which is still evolving and pushing forward with competing technologies and software. Its a simple concept of having 60% of the sensor taking up dead space when shooting 4k. It would be like if blackmagic put that 5in screen on their camera, but only the middle 3in worked while shooting.
Is canon somehow the only major camera manufacturer who has not discovered the technology to make full frame 4k? Its hard to imagine, but the equally perplexing alternative is they slapped thousands of people in the face by witholding it.

I do think that alone is a major reason many are hating on it.       I am too poor these days to afford anything but if I wanted a 4k camera, what Canon camera currently could I use this lens on to shoot 4k at 17mm FF angle of view?    I can use other brands FF or even use sub FF cameras with focal reducers from lots of makers but from Canon?       It will be some time before Canon has a full complement of RF lenses and even then many EF mount lenses will work just fine with adapters.

i completely agree. i thought that was what was taking so long – getting these new bodies to work natively with ef lenses ~as well as~ their new fancy ones
to be fair, im a huge critic of design
i own an Apple Pencil™ which needs a 1" white plastic adapter in order to be able to charge, an adapter which you store nowhere. likewise with the cap that you have to take off to do so, you lose that too
 

 

That's the funny thing. EF lenses were universal, so even if Canon didn't make great bodies, people still bought EF lenses. In the past 4 years, the vast majority of lenses that I've used--mine, friends', borrowed--have been EF. I've used them on Samsung, Blackmagic, Fuji, Panasonic, Sony, and even on a handful of Canon bodies. Despite never owning a Canon camera, I saw the EF format as a good investment. RF won't have that status.
How many people think that RF is superior, compared to a mirrorless EF camera with that vari-ND adapter built in? They could have updated the lens communication protocol to allow for that extra ring on the lens, while maintaining EF compatibility.

I hope they go all RF, then maybe the used market will get flooded with cheap second hand EF lenses.

Seems to me that a typical mirrorless body has no space for a filter to swing/slide out of the way of the sensor. So you either make the the body much bigger/thicker, or use a fixed filter, which then eats up at least a stop or two of your ISO performance (whatever the minimum power of the eND panel is). Either way you're affecting aspects (size/weight, ISO performance) of the camera that the camera makers consider much more important than a request from niche video-centric users.
And who knows if an ND and a physical shutter will both fit behind most modern mirrorless mounts. Sure, FS5 etc have NDs, but they don't have shutters. Global shutters that will work for photography (i.e. truly global, and don't affect sensor performance in DR/ISO) are still years off, so I wouldn't hold your breath about it.

I completely agree. However "one day" doesnt help anyone who is shooting now. So until then, many of us are stuck with smaller sensors as the best option.

We can both agree that most if not all of the features of today's M43 sensors will one day come to Full Frame... but the reverse is not true... and likely never will be.