Jerome Chiu

I am glad I ditched Sony and go back to Canon last year, all I need now is the tasty new body 😎
But man those new R5/R6 definitely make my R look like dinosaur for sure, but R still producing pleasing image with minimum tweaking.
Now just need Tamron to port their lens to RF and that will be perfect.. not all of us need big expensive lens.
My interest for Red Komodo 6K drop to 0%

Everything that Andrew has said in reply to you, plus:
 
1. Metabones Hasselblad V to GFX Speedbooster. It brings real medium format to digital! Good choices (for stills as well as video) are
(a) 50mm f/2.8 F (forget about the FE versions -- the electronics won't communicate, and they are more expensive)
(b) 80mm f2.8 F (the CF or C versions are also good, and optically the same; but the F version focuses closer, and could be easily de-clicked)
(c) 150mm f2.8 F
All three above are excellent optically, could be easily de-clicked, and surprisingly affordable. I have omitted the legendary 110mm f2 not because it isn't good (it is), but second-hand price is very expensive.
 
2. For video use, the 16:9 4K crop of GFX 100 is 0.918x, i.e. only a little larger than the 0.934x crop of Red 8K VV at FF. Any FF lens, except perhaps the widest of superwides, should cover. The DCI 4K crop is just a bit bigger, but we still have room to experiment. Judging from screenshots I've seen (I've forgotten where....), Sigma 24mm f1.4 Art should most likely cover the 0.918x crop wide open at near- to mid-distance, or stopped down at infinity.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1501863-REG/metabones_mbsphv_fg_bm1_hasselblad_v_lens_to.html

Damnnn, didn't know this product had came out! Nice. 

Hope Metabones does a Pentax 645 speedbooster as well. 

Everything that Andrew has said in reply to you, plus:
 
1. Metabones Hasselblad V to GFX Speedbooster. It brings real medium format to digital! Good choices (for stills as well as video) are
(a) 50mm f/2.8 F (forget about the FE versions -- the electronics won't communicate, and they are more expensive)
(b) 80mm f2.8 F (the CF or C versions are also good, and optically the same; but the F version focuses closer, and could be easily de-clicked)
(c) 150mm f2.8 F
All three above are excellent optically, could be easily de-clicked, and surprisingly affordable. I have omitted the legendary 110mm f2 not because it isn't good (it is), but second-hand price is very expensive.
 
2. For video use, the 16:9 4K crop of GFX 100 is 0.918x, i.e. only a little larger than the 0.934x crop of Red 8K VV at FF. Any FF lens, except perhaps the widest of superwides, should cover. The DCI 4K crop is just a bit bigger, but we still have room to experiment. Judging from screenshots I've seen (I've forgotten where....), Sigma 24mm f1.4 Art should most likely cover the 0.918x crop wide open at near- to mid-distance, or stopped down at infinity.

https://***URL removed***/articles/6428199442/it-should-cost-the-three-main-ways-you-re-wrong-about-camera-prices?utm_source=self-desktop&utm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source
Interesting article from Richard here
Give it a read.

Sounds like a job for Cleese to explain the options.
 

I've been playing around with it and can't fault it really. In fact for me, so far, it's been more reliable than Nikon's own FTZ adapter.
All my EF lenses have worked on it even old weird shit like Tokina 28-70 F2.6
It works well in video mode and has so far been far more reliable and bullet proof than Techart E-mount adapter for Nikon Z.



Going to continue to test but it looks like we did finally get that full frame 4K camera from Canikon.

Fuji with it's X-mount (<18mm flange) is in prime position to create that "use any lens you want" camera with X adapter... 
A LF (43.8 mm x 32.9 mm) Cinema camera would probably make more sense though in that market space. But I think it would absolutely require RAW or REDcode license to be successful.

Yeah, Fujifilm lacks a great vlogging camera. Just give us both a screen that you can see *and* a mic input at the same time. (bonus of course if it has IBIS and great AF! Dumb things like only 8bit and 15 minute limits won't even matter if it has everything else I just mentioned)

As much as we might look down on vloggers, they do have a huge huge influence on future sales. (and those baby vloggers do later on grow up and buy a "real camera" for "real work", and who will they choose? The company they learned on, let's hope that is Fuji!)

 
Exactly what I've been saying! S35 X Mount cinema camera.
 

That's a good idea as well. I like Fuji continuing to offering something different than the competition in those two fields, and video is one of the best ways to differentiate itself.
Super35/APS-C: Packed full of features, high frame rates, IBIS, great AF, etc
Fuji Cine LF: Medium format sensor for dreamy cinema. Basically the GFX100 specs in a compact (FS5-ish) cinema body. Or a EZ-Cam/Red Komodo like box.
That'd be sweet. 

If Fuji made a dedicated cinema camera with a large format sensor and the GFX mount totally by passing mid tier S35 and FF cine cameras would be insane. 

Bingo! A Fuji Cinema Camera would have none of the downside risks that a FF camera would have, while playing to Fuji's strengths and existing product range / customer base. 

Take the X-T3 internals, boost it up to make it be 4K 60fps 422 10bit internal, with built in NDs, and a couple of XLR inputs, and a TC & SDI I/O, plus just in general a smartly designed body like a FS5 or EVA1, then Fuji has a winner on their hands so long as they keep its final price below the competition!

I'd prefer if they released a dedicated cinema camera instead. It's easy to forget that Fuji has over a half century of experience making motion picture stocks. They were Kodak's main competition. Their Vivida daylight stocks were gorgeous. Deep rich colors and solid velvety blacks with warm lovely skin tones. Sadly, they no longer produce film stock, but bringing that look and feel to a digital cinema camera would be an amazing coda to that legacy. 
I also think that Fuji's ergonomic sense work translate very well to a video camera. They have a charming analog feel to all their cameras, which is something that is sorely missing from most low cost video cameras today.

Great idea.  Ken Rockwell has done a similar thing with this reviews, and it's really useful because he doesn't forget anything, so if you want to know if a lens has focus breathing or how much it weighs etc then you know that if he's reviewed it then it'll be listed.  For that reason I will often see if he's reviewed something before I google for other reviews which may or may not specify something, so I think it would help the site  

17.7mm vs 26.7 mm , an adapter should be doable! Would be a tighter fit though for the electronics. 
However people who buy GFX lenses (they're very expensive) is an extremely small niche of buyers, an adapter wouldn't sell many at all. 

And I doubt a Fujifilm FF camera should be made, as Fuji would just run into the same problems Sony did. (if not even worse, for Fuji)

As Sony never started out with planning to make a FF mirrorless camera, thus when they decided to later on they had to face the decision of:
1) ditching E Mount and creating a new mount, like Canon has done with EOS-M (then making RF Mount instead)
2) squeezing in a shoehorned FF sensor into a mount intended for APS-C, with all those compromises that mean (such as Sony's IBIS never being as good as the competition)

I personally think Fuji has been very smart here. They realize they're too small to compete head to head against the big guns of Canon/Nikon/Sony FF.

Instead they've got the double headed strategy of:

1) embrace the essence of the purpose of mirrorless, high quality but very compact camera packages. A Sony FF kit will never be quite as compact as a Fuji APS-C kit (Olympus is taking a similar strategy here, but leaning the quality/compact balance further towards the compact side). This allows Fuji to sidestep competing directly against Canon/Nikon/Sony, and Fuji can instead play to their own strengths.

2) bring out mirrorless medium format cameras positioned above FF cameras. As Fuji is gaining the first mover advantage in the medium format mirrorless market, and in the long run sensors will become cheaper and cheaper. Eventually medium format will become "affordable" for even the average joe, just like has happened with FF cameras. Today an entry level FF camera is one anybody could buy, FF is no longer super expensive like it was back at launch. (imagine a world where a Medium Format camera only costs a few hundred bucks more than a Full Frame camera??) 

It's a nifty business strategy, sidestep the white hot intense competition in FF bodies, and instead bring out the very best there is one stop above and one stop below FF. (which also handily positions Fuji's own products two stops apart, which is a good distance to space them apart. Prevents their own products being so directly in competition with each other as they're spaced far apart. Interestly, Panasonic has a similar strategy wih a gap apart of two stops as well with their cameras: but MFT vs FF, instead of APS-C vs Medium Format)

Is a bold strategy which is a bet on the future that Fuji (and Panasonic) are making:

They're betting that with time the performance of their smaller sensors will become so good, many people will happily compromise in exchange for having a small compact kit. 

They're also betting (this was a much eaiser bet for Panasonic to make, than for Fuji. Except that Panasonic is fighting in a tougher market niche... against Sony/Canon/Nikon) that the prices on their large sensors will come down in price far enough that they can become relatively mass market products and not just a small small niche. 

They don't need to. Everyone using it on MFT with speedboosters anyway. 

In the "Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K" thread it is mentioned that the sensor stack thickness of black magic sensors (being that they have a thinner sensor stack) may cause issues with the image with lens not designed for a specific sensor stack thickness.  There is a mention of the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 being basically immune to this issue due to the fact that its is a very telecentric lens.
Kisaha wrote in that tread : "3. How telecentric the lens is. (More specifically, how far forward the exit pupil of the lens is.) A lens with the exit pupil far away from the sensor is not affected by the thickness of the sensor stack very much. A lens with the exit pupil very close to the sensor is affected a lot."
and drm wrote: "3. The Sigma 18-50 f/1.8 lens is pretty much immune from the problem because it has an exit pupil distance of 150mm." As sigma does not make an 18-50 f1.8, I assume he is talking about the 18-35 f/1.8.
So the physics of the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 with its exit pupil distance of 150mm makes it very telecentric, which may explain in part why it is hard to beat as it finds itself on so many different sensor stacks thickness and still maintains its image quality.  The telecentric quality of the Sigma 18-35 may also allow the image to stand up better when running through additional glass like a speed booster.
 

I have only surface level knowledge, but any time your lens is longer than your FFD, you'll need extra lens elements to provide a "reverse telephoto." For example, an 18mm lens on an EF mount 44mm from the sensor. The extra elements introduce aberrations, which require more elements to correct, and so on. Add to that the complexity of making a zoom lens in the first place, and you quickly rack up size and cost.
That's one reason there are smaller wide angle lenses made exclusively for mirrorless mounts, such as the SLR Magic MicroPrimes.
On the telephoto end, it's simply the sheer size of the lens elements required. As focal length increases, the physical size of the aperture also increases to achieve the same f-stop.

Because no one cares about APSC except for Fuji.

If these A7S-III specs are right. Sony seems to be targeting the Lumix S1 but maybe NOT the S1H. I suspect that the S1H is WAY over spec'd for Sony to match in any "consumer" Alpha. XDCAM managers will demand that the future A7S-III will need to be crippled in very distinct ways. Alpha will want it to have everything and XDCAM would rather it not even exist at all. At some point they will agree and compromise with each other. The S1H is overloaded with an extremely high feature set that rivals an FX9 or even possibly Venice. Lumix is using Sony's own EXMOR image sensors against them!
10bit color is a must but what about Alpha's 29 minute time limit? Will Sony allow it to properly overheat to keep the high dollar pro's away from it? Rumors also say an FX6 is on the way...the cheaper, SD card long-GOP version of the FX9.
I suspect that the A7S-III is THE most hotly debated camera in Sony headquater meeting rooms in the companies history. 
The A7S-III's biggest enemy wont be Lumix, Cannon, Nikon or BlackMagic. Its biggest enemy will be Sony's own internal politics!

Now this is interesting. Mike Johnston, as Chief Editor of Photo Techniques, commissioned a series of three articles on bokeh back in the 1990s, and he added an "h" to "boke" (Japanese "boke-aji", lit. "quality of the blur") so people wouldn't pronounce it as rhyming with "broke". It has caught on -- I mean, the spelling with the "h" -- in the English language enormously, while the Japanese have moved on, nowadays, to a different term, viz. "outto fokasu". Go figure.
He could also be credited for anointing Leica's 4th generation 35mm Summicron (last generation pre-asph, designed by Walter Mandler) the "Queen of bokeh" for rating it 10 out of 10 (one of three lenses that get this rating) for its bokeh rendering. What many people fail to realize is that Johnston specifically refers to the bokeh rendering of this lens at f/5.6, not at f/2 where people are baffled why the rendering is very far from 10 out of 10.
So yes, we should be talking about the rendering of the bokeh at different apertures, and especially while stopped down to f/4 or f/5.6. It is wrong to assume that bokeh is only about blurred background in the widest apertures.
[Edit] Here is a recent article of his, where he revisits this ongoing tale. Also note that his latest article is, rather coincidentally, also on bokeh.
https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2019/11/what-is-bokeh-and-the-dogs-nose.html

Now this is interesting. Mike Johnston, as Chief Editor of Photo Techniques, commissioned a series of three articles on bokeh back in the 1990s, and he added an "h" to "boke" (Japanese "boke-aji", lit. "quality of the blur") so people wouldn't pronounce it as rhyming with "broke". It has caught on -- I mean, the spelling with the "h" -- in the English language enormously, while the Japanese have moved on, nowadays, to a different term, viz. "outto fokasu". Go figure.
He could also be credited for anointing Leica's 4th generation 35mm Summicron (last generation pre-asph, designed by Walter Mandler) the "Queen of bokeh" for rating it 10 out of 10 (one of three lenses that get this rating) for its bokeh rendering. What many people fail to realize is that Johnston specifically refers to the bokeh rendering of this lens at f/5.6, not at f/2 where people are baffled why the rendering is very far from 10 out of 10.
So yes, we should be talking about the rendering of the bokeh at different apertures, and especially while stopped down to f/4 or f/5.6. It is wrong to assume that bokeh is only about blurred background in the widest apertures.
[Edit] Here is a recent article of his, where he revisits this ongoing tale. Also note that his latest article is, rather coincidentally, also on bokeh.
https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2019/11/what-is-bokeh-and-the-dogs-nose.html

If you've been following Potato Jet from the start watching all his videos then you'll know he has talked about when he first moved to LA, he was barely scraping by, having to hustle hard, life didn't come to him easy. Any American can move to LA if they wish and give it a shot (although there are probably better places to choose now than saturated Hollywood, such as Atlanta). 
 
 

It certainly helps and the monitoring advantage to mr isn't just the extra size but also the extra features like false colour and monitoring LUTs.
On the upside for the 1Dx3, though, it doesn't require someone fucking about with lasers to make it do continuous autofocus !

Spoken like a true spambot.