Jerome Chiu

Some of the features not mentioned during the press release but appeared in Chinese marketing material:
Multi-frame RAW noise-reduction (Combining up to 32 RAW burst stills for one noise-free RAW still) Custom LUT import for video Lens breathing compensation in video mode It's expected to ship in China around end of January 2024. Early testers commented on the dynamic range to have taken a "slight but noticeable" hit due to global shutter design, hence the limited native ISO range of 250 to 25600.

is at the final stages of development and will be announced soon.
One exciting feature I can share is that the dynamic range is rated at 16 stops (actual ARRI stops, so 2 stops higher than current ALEXA sensor).

I am the only one who can't read an online newspaper on my cellular?? They have so many ads that I see 10 words of an article at a time, and trying to scroll without clicking on an ad is nearly impossible!! 

Dear 2020,

 

Q: When will digital catch up to film?
A: When you learn to colour grade properly.
With a few notable exceptions (you know who you are), the colour grading skill level of the average film-maker talking about this topic online is terrible.  Worse still, is that people don't even know enough to know that they don't know how little they actually know.
I have been studying colour grading for years at this point, and I will be the first to admit that I know so little about colour grading that I have barely scratched the surface.  
Here's another question - Do you want your footage to look like a Super-8 home video from the 60s?  
I suspect not.  That's not what people are actually looking for.  Most people who want digital to look like film actually don't.  Sure, there are a few people on a few projects where they want to shoot digital and have the results look like it was shot on film in order to emulate old footage, but mostly the question is a proxy for wanting nice images.  Mostly they want to get results like Hollywood does.
Hollywood gets its high production value from spending money on production design.
Production design is about location choice, set design, costume / hair / makeup, lighting design, blocking, haze, camera movement, and other things like that.  If you point a film camera at a crappy looking scene then you will get a crappy looking scene.  There's a reason that student films are mostly so cringe and so cheap-looking.  They spent no money on production design because they had no money. 
Do you think that big budget films would spend so much money if it didn't contribute to the final images?
I suggest this:
Think about how much money you'd be willing to spend on a camera that created gorgeous images for you, and how much you'd spend on re-buying all your lenses, cages, monitors, and all the kit you would need to buy Think about how much time you would be willing to invest on doing all the research to work out what camera that was, how much time you would spend selling your existing equipment, how much time you would spend working out what to buy for the new setup, how much time you would spend learning how to use it, how much time you would spend learning to process the footage Take that money and spend half of it on training courses and take the other half and put it into shooting some test projects that you can learn from, so you can level-up your abilities Take that time you would have spent and do those courses and film those projects People love camera tests, but it's mostly a waste of time.  Stop thinking about camera tests and start thinking about production value tests.  Take a room in your house, get one or two actors, hire them if you have to (you have a budget for this remember) and get them to do a simple scene, perhaps only 3-6 lines of dialog per actor.  It should be super-short because you're going to dissect it dozens of times, maybe hundreds.  Now experiment with lighting design and haze.  Play with set design and set dressing.  Do blocking and camera movement tests.  Do focal length tests (not lens tests).  Now do costume design, hair and makeup tests.  
Take this progression into post and line them up and compare.  See which elements of the above added the most production value.  But you're not done yet - you've created a great looking scene but it is probably still dull.
Now you have to play with the relationship between things like focal length / blocking / camera movement and the dramatic content of the scene.  Most people know that we go closer to show important details, and when the drama is highest, but what about in those moments between those peaks?  Film the whole scene from every angle, every angle you can even think of, essentially getting 100% coverage. 
Now your journey into editing begins.  Start with continuity editing (if you don't know what that is then start by looking it up).  You now have the ability to work with shot selection and you should be using it to emphasise the dramatic content of the scene.  Create at least a dozen edits, trying to make each one as different as possible.  You can play with shot length, everything from the whole scene as one wide shot to a cut every 1s.  You can cut between close-ups for the whole scene, or go between wides and close-ups.  Go from wide to mid to close and go straight from wide to close without the mid shots in between.  What did you learn about the feel of these choices? 
What about choosing between the person talking and the person listening?  What does an edit look like where you only see the person talking, or just the person looking?  Which lines land better when you see the reaction-shot?  Play with L and J cuts.
Now we play with time.  You have every angle, so you can add reverse-angles to extend moments (like reality TV does), you can do L and J cuts and play with cutting to the reaction shot from some other line.  What about changing the sequence of the dialogue?  Can you tell a different story with your existing footage?  How many stories can you tell?  Try and make a film with the least dialogue possible - how much of the dialogue can you remove?  What about no dialogue at all - can you tell a story with just reaction shots?  Can you make a silent film that still tells a story - showing people talking but without being able to hear them?  Play with dialogue screens like the old silent films - now you can have the actors "say" whatever you like - what stories can you tell with your footage?
Then sound design....
Then coaching of actors....
Now you've learned how to shoot a scene.  What about combining two scenes?  Think of how many combinations are now available - you can now combine scenes together where there are different locations, actors, times of day, seasons, scenarios, etc.  Now three scenes.  
Now acts and story structure....
Great, now you're a good film-maker.  You haven't gotten paid yet, so career development, navigating the industry, business decisions and commercial acumen.  Do you know what films are saleable and which aren't?  Have you worked out why Michael Bay is successful despite most film-makers being very critical of him and his film-making approach and style?
There's a saying about continuity - "people only notice continuity errors if you film is crap".  Does it matter?  Sure, but it's not the main critical success factor.  Camera choice is the same.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
A CLASSIC.

Might give IsoBuster a try ... I have recovered a ton of stuff when the FAT was completely corrupted ... mainly from DVD/CDs
It will dump any information it finds and is usually able to tell the type of file from the structure.

I looked into what it might take to recover the lost/missing video file after a battery pull. I reproduced the R5 hack scenario on my Canon RP by recording a minute of video on a freshly-formatted SD card and then pulling the battery while the door-sensor was inhibited. Like what Andrew discovered on his R5 the file is not corrupt but actually completely missing, both when attempting to play the video on the camera and when mounting the card on a computer. I then tried running SanDisk's RescuePro Deluxe and after scanning the entire card it didn't find the video.
Here's what I think is happening. Obviously Canon has to write the video data to the card while recording, since it has no other place to retain it beyond the internal SDRAM buffer capacity. You can see easy evidence of this by watching the card access light continuously flicker. The strategy Canon is likely employing is to defer the writing of the official FAT metadata until the recording is orderly stopped. This would include elements such as the FAT directory entry, which anchors the file, and possibly also the linked FAT allocation tables. This would explain why RescuePro couldn't find the file, since there isn't enough or any recognizable metadata to reconstruct the orphaned data sectors associated with the video. Canon is either caching that information in memory until the file is closed or is writing it somewhere on the card that isn't linked to the official FAT structures. The benefit of this strategy, assuming they're using it, is that it prevents any potential filesystem-level corruption from incomplete metadata updates, since none of the official metadata structures are updated to link to the file until it's closed. The downside of this strategy is that it orphans all the data from the file and makes recovery more complicated.
There are a few strategies in devising a recovery app for this situation. The first would be to reverse-engineer exactly what if any metadata Canon is writing during the recording and to where. If that orphaned metadata is in the same format as actual FAT structures then it should be relatively straightforward to create a placeholder directory entry and link to it. If the format of that metadata is proprietary to Canon then the process of reverse-engineering its structure would be much more complex. This would all be done by using a sector editor and block-based search tools to compare a freshly-formatted card to one which has a missing video after recording. And lots of effort.
I was actually an embedded firmware storage engineer for most of my professional career so this would be in my wheelhouse. I'll see how much demand there might be for this before I spent any serious amount of time on it.
In the meantime I'll also try some other recovery apps to see if they have better luck...in case SanDisk's utility is not doing the job it's supposed to. I recommend others try the same so we don't unnecessarily reinvent the wheel 🙂

I am absolutely not saying that someone who had an R5 could use a good old fashioned CR2032 battery eliminator in the camera then bring it out through the camera enabling them to provide a switchable power source to it to effectively remove/re-insert it without taking the camera apart each time they want to reset the recovery time.
I'm absolutely not saying that.
Someone else might say that.
But, just to be clear, I'm not saying that at all, OK?

Same can be said Blackmagic Pocket, Sony FS5 or Komodo. You can also adapt without a focal reducer to a7S III, Panasonics, FX9 or use natively on Canon EF cameras.
RF mount is not the only solution for EF glass – RED, Blackmagic, Sony & Panasonic with adapters all work with EF glass.
"Ok so a lot wrong with this." "your statement is quite misguided and not very well thought out" – thanks for being so harsh without understanding my comments. I was talking about unique selling points of RF mount cameras: they are the only ones working with RF lenses.

I'm happily using my A7III for paid work and so are many others... so, I guess? I sold an M43 lens to someone that ranted away at how trash the Sonys were and how they fell apart on him after a year... Mine looks more or less the same as the day I bought it, and all the buttons still work fine. I don't love the A7III but I love it for its price point and capabilities when it was released. It has many flaws and things that I don't like, but the old school of "it's not metal and hard therefore trash and will fall apart" is... old school.
The materials aren't "really cheap", I don't do handheld so how it feels doesn't matter as much, but there's nothing wrong with how the A7III feels, the menus aren't great but they're fine, I set up the custom menu and I can scroll... 
Why do you think people use BMPCC 4K? For it's useability on a gimbal? for the tilting screen and long battery life, as well as external ssd and no af-c? It's for the IQ and price...  So yeah, lots of people will put up with whatever you apparently "can't" put up with. I can't deal with no AF-C but I don't tell other people they need it and then ask them why they don't...

I can't wait to see what Linus Tech Tips thinks of these cameras. Gonna be an interesting perspective outside the repetitive YouTube camera community. 

Honestly they are the target audience. They are RED users that use the resolution heavily in their edits for cropping and zooming, also have been heavily critical of the RED ecosystem in the past.

Big reasons they are switching:
- In camera backup to 2 cards.
- Ability to use common media instead of RED mags, which is HUGE for their storage costs. 
- Every editor in their office now has a fully featured copy of Resolve.

I often look at the 4 or 5 cameras in my bag and think “this cost me far too much and they’re all the same”. Then I have a cup of tea and try to forget about it.
Yes it’s true, the full frame market is overcrowded and image quality differences between them are getting smaller. What about selling 3 or 4 of those cameras, I thought to myself… And consolidating them into one giant mad one.
So this happened…
https://www.eoshd.com/filmmaking/inspecting-the-fuji-gfx-100-and-having-a-cup-of-tea/
 

Or Panasonic, who make some of the very best fancy multi function toilets.
Panasonic - Great for IBIS, Great for IBS.
 
 
 
Have that Saatchi & Saatchi !
 

As opposed to a photocopier company?!

humm... there is still time for it

Hmmm.... street photography is a topic where I get a little rant-y.  I will however resist this urge and simply offer my one frustration, which is that there is a double standard in place.  If you are a private citizen and want to take photographs of people in public then you get all kinds of reactions about privacy and related concerns, but large corporations are not subject to the same scrutiny.  Walk down an average out-door shopping mall and see how many security cameras you can see that cover the street.  Think about the CCTV systems that governments put in place for logging vehicle and pedestrian traffic, and also consider the number-plate and facial recognition that they are running on these 24/7.  I can understand the government ones are for our safety, and the private ones aren't positioned to take eye-level portraits, but the "right to privacy" argument should also extend to them.  To say nothing of the various forms of universally applied but highly targeted electronic surveillance that have been exposed in recent years.
His technique was interesting, and the end results were definitely impressive artistically.
...and for anyone that hasn't done it themselves, it's actually more uncomfortable to do in real life than it appears!

Sorry mate it just isn’t. Morally he is valuably documenting and creating photos for the preservation of an age, which will be looked back on by mankind in 100’s of years to come as rare examples for their candid, non staged nature.
Morally the photos portray their subjects in a compelling and flattering way... Sometimes with a weathered and unflinching edge to them, yes, but I wouldn’t mind looking as cinematic and interesting as his subjects if I were one.
Morally his intentions and use of the photos is good.
And realistically you can’t expect absolute personal privacy in public... Why should you? It’s a shared space you’re in! You’ve gotta share it with artists when you step out of the door and try not to get butthurt if you’re in a work of art... I know this is the tricky part for most people as they don’t know what art is.
Ironically the biggest philistinism of all comes from the German government with their privacy laws designed to ‘protect’ the individual, but it actually trampled all over a major art form and individual freedoms... That the lawmakers didn’t realise this when they came up with it shows what philistines are in power today in supposed “liberal” democratic countries.

Fuji made this X100V advert featuring an artist who breaks Japanese social norms.
They pulled it due to adverse hysteria on the internet (not real world)
His technique (filmed from 00:45 in the video above) produces very interesting art with the best intention... Documenting the normal in a cinematic way. If the subject sees the end result, they'd approve 9/10... But in the moment, it just seems intrusive and a bit weird. Poor them.
Their poor feelies, big frowny face, boo hoo!
What a violation of privacy, blah blah blah.
Art is bigger than that I'm afraid.
Dear Fujifilm. Put the ad back up and stand behind your artist!
His work:
https://www.tatsuosuzuki.com
DPReview pixel peeper comments (gives me a fucking headache)
https://***URL removed***/news/6165309898/fujifilm-pulls-controversial-x100v-promo-video-due-to-the-featured-photographer-method

One second lol that’s hard to work with. 4 seconds would be nice. 2K240p for 4 seconds would be amazing. 

https://www.eoshd.com/news/fujifilm-hint-at-44x33-large-format-gfx-h100-filmmakers-camera-open-gate-4k3k/

I’d be interested if the cinema variant of the GFX100 is still on track.  I forget if the sensor is Quad Bayer in addition to being x-trans technology?

I might just sell everything, buy a GFX100, turn the internet off and call it a day.