Video Hummus

A few years. I have been disappointed with Canon’s third party lens fiasco, lack of mid-range quality L-glass, and some other things. My R5C is sold off. I kept the R5 for photos but might sell that off. It says “wholly-owned subsidiary” of Nikon. So my guess is key technology will trickle from Red to Nikon (global shutter sensors, raw compression on high end Nikon gear, etc…) Red probably continue to do what they do but with Z-mount ecosystem integration. I also wonder if this is a way for Nikon to break free from Sony Semi-conductor in a way with global sensor technology, which seems to be the direction the industry is going.

Big moves against Canon. This has to be related in someway to the settlement as it was extremely hush-hush. The corporate culture couldn’t be more different between the companies. Very interesting. I think they will be run separate with some co-branding happening here and there and of course technology sharing. Red fanboy panties will be twisted hard if Nikon is slapped on their camera.

I have the R5C and the R5 and I prefer the R5C setup over the always on IBIS in the R5 for video. At least with the RF 24-70 the OIS + EIS combo has worked amazingly well for hand held static and controlled handheld pans and tilts in my experience. IBIS wobble is horrible. I come to really notice it and hate it.

LP-E6NH give me on average about 30-35 minutes of actual record time with occasional waveform and false color usage, 4K XF-AFC, Continuous AF, Lens IS. If you are running and gunning you can use the media button hack and extend standby battery life considerably probably even more if you flick the IS Off on the lens as well.

It sucks ass. - A R5C owner I enjoy using the camera though and just carry 3x more batteries with me than if using just my R5. You can rig and shoot for hours but I don't like using cables if I don't have too. I would have gotten a C70 but would prefer FF with RF glass I have.

It seems so. Kinda shady, for sure. Although the camera and cards become really hot. I would say the CFExpress becomes so hot it can cause burns if taken out of the camera too fast.

I would say the R5 does respectably well for a 45MP FSI sensor compared to those other cameras in that test. S5 definitely is a goat, if you don't need reliable video AF.

I really, really want a XC15 style camera with internal ND and a newer 1" sensor with 10-bit CLOG3. If they could improve the lens and make it a 24-240 f/2.8-4...I think it would be a killer little "bridge" cinema camera for pretty much anything. I have a R5C and I have been enjoying the 3K s16 RAW mode on the RF 24-70 and especially on the RF 70-200. But honestly it renewed my crazy want for a new XC style camera even more. Fuck it. I'm going to rent a XC10 next month and pretend its what I want 🙂

This is it. All the other language about "greater than 23fps" and "4K or higher" or "internal, visually lossless" is all written to broaden the patent intentionally as a, in my opinion, blatant "idea" smash and grab. They only came up with a method and instead they got a patent for essentially: "visually lossless compressed bayer data in a camera at greater than 23fps and 4K and up resolution". Ford invented a novel form of locomotion via a box ("vehicle") with 4 or more wheels, powered by an internal combustion engine (as described in prior patent XYZ), moving at speeds greater than 23mph. Ford is calling it a "motorized vehicle" and will sue anybody that tries to use wheels and internal combustion engines to go faster than 23mph.

Looks like their new LiDAR device on the top of that picture. I was actually interested in a Pocket 3 for various things. It does so much better than a GoPro/Action in lower light conditions since it stabilizes with a gimbal and not electronically with fast shutter. My guess if there is a pocket 3 it will have the Mini 3 Pro sensor and gimbal.

I only see LUMIX surviving if they implement PDAF on par with Olympus or better. That is the bottom line. It's 2022 and every camera out there worth a damn is track focusing fairly well (except Fujifilm). I always wondered what exactly Leica contributed to the L-mount alliance except for the mount. They jointly (perhaps) help with development of the LUMIX PL lenses but beyond that Leica SL and SL2 internals are all from Panasonic with the color engine done by Leica. Perhaps Leica agrees to invest more of their profit from their $7000 re-skinned S1R into the alliance going forward.

ProRes internal is great momentum going forward. Seems like more and more companies are adding it. IBIS looks like it is not the best even just static hand holding. Not sure what is going on there. I've seen a lot of people complain about CF Express being expensive in reviews. You can get a Angelbird 512GB card that will handle 8K for $179. Prograde 256GB SD card is 62% more expensive for half the space. Prograde 256 SD = $1.12/GB Angelbird 512 CFX = 0.34/GB Angelbird 1TB CFX = 0.48/GB Angelbird 2TB CFX = 0.48/GB Angelbird 4TB CFX = 0.45/GB

That's entirely different to a highly nuanced technology discussion.

I'm not doubting the work of Graeme's work. Patent the hell out of it. But they can't claim they have exclusive rights to "'visually lossless' compressed data derived from raw, stored in camera memory at greater than 23 fps." Precisely define visually lossless. Precisely define "in-camera". Precisely define "data". RAW Bayer CFA? What is stopping Fuji from using its X-Trans sensor layout (not bayer) and doing the same thing? Can they sue Fuji for that? Does RED's patent apply to every possible sensor layout not invented by them because they have patents over words like "camera", "raw", "data", "compression"? There are lots of patents for data compression 'methodologies', which is what Graeme's work truly is, as applied to cameras. He did not invent "camera", "raw", "data", or "compression", or "greater than 23fps capture".

So I guess dealing with 1:1 4.6K RAW is worth it over using a RED camera just for the compressed RAW. I have no problem with RED's innovation and them making money off it and protecting it. However, the way that patent is written is complete and utter bullshit. It's like someone claiming they have exclusive rights to any vehicle using round wheels going over 50mph. It's excessively broad.