andrew_dotdot

Thanks for the LUTs and ffmpeg fix technique.

The issue this video covers was already mentioned in several topics, but I promised a video explanation and fixes, so here it is.
Beware: long, boring, bad English.
 

Nope

I think it is a very good lens (Fujinon XF10-24 mm F4 R OIS) on my XT-3 and especially for my purposes. Very sharp images, and it works great with video.  I will post some footage and stills with it when I can. For doing my lectures for my online courses in my recording studio, it is a better focal length than the 18 - 55 mm kit lens, and for outdoor photography and video work, especially landscapes, it is great. And for other situations where you would need that range. It was a great move to get this lens. It has some weight to it, but that's not a problem. I also really like the Fujinon XF55-200 mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS lens. I will be trying it out for wildlife photography and video. I hope that I can get close enough with the telephoto lens. Will see. May have to get the longer telephoto at some point. Fujinon XF100-400 mm F4.5-5.6 R LM OIS WR, Black. Any thoughts about using a teleconverter, pro and con?
Also, I really like to do macro photography and video, so I am probably going to have to get the FUJIFILM XF 80 mm f/2.8 R LM OIS WR Macro Lens.
I am also saving up for these two lenses. 
Fujinon MKX18-55 mm T2.9 Lens and Fujinon MKX50-135 mm T2.9 Lens. 

I’m just about to invest in the 10-24 f4 for video myself. I had a Sigma 10-20 f3.5 for my aps-c Canon 70D, and it let in enough light to get acceptably clean video indoors, where I really needed the ultra wide angle. I wonder how you’re using your 10-24 and whether you’re happy with it on the X-T3?

It makes more difference if you have a lot of motion and/or a lot of detail in the footage. I never want to see a compression artifact if I can help it. That said, I’ve had really good results with 200 Mb/s, too.
For me, though, the revolution has really been the 10-bit color.

It makes more difference if you have a lot of motion and/or a lot of detail in the footage. I never want to see a compression artifact if I can help it. That said, I’ve had really good results with 200 Mb/s, too.
For me, though, the revolution has really been the 10-bit color.

2. I use the Zhi Yun Chrane v2 — I recently switched from Canon DSLRs and used rigs that were right at the limit of what was possible with that one, so the X-T3 feels like a skinny legend on it by comparison. Though the X-T3 maybe a little nose heavy by comparison with the 18-55.
1. I don’t have the 16-55, so I can’t speak to the auto-focus question, but...
A few unsolicited observations on video... For video I think you want the OIS unless you build the camera into a bigger rig with some handles good. I use a Small Rig cage to beef up the handle, and even with the OIS, it’s all I can do to keep things steady. I once shot with the same setup without OIS by mistake, forgetting to turn it back on after going off tripod. It was not useable due to the shake. My next lens is going to be the 10-24 f4 OIS, and that will be it for video lenses for X-mount.
I used to be very annoyed about the non-constant f stop lenses in the Fujinon range — having used Canon L zoom lenses. I’ve mellowed on that stance. My old go-to was Canon’s 24-105 f4.0 IS L. For documentary, f4 gives some bokeh, but also forgives when the auto-focus doesn’t keep up. So, on the X-T3, I often find myself locking the aperture at 4.0 just to keep my highlights under control in bright indoor scenes (rather than putting on an ND filter), thus taking the whole variable aperture over the zoom range out of the equation, in a sense.
Here’s a camera test I just did*. The negatives I noticed was that the auto WB misbehaved in a couple of spots — I should have remembered to lock that down. Also, the autofocus was completely off the reservation sometimes (which is different than the slow focusing, which I had dialed in on purpose). I’m super curious whether the coming firmware upgrade will give a useful bump in AF performance. 
* It was the 18-55 OIS lens, hand-held.
Aperture locked at f4 with auto ISO and auto WB.
The focus speed was set to -5. (I wanted it to feel a bit sloppy and sloshy)
4K 25fbs F-LOG @ 400 Mb/s h.265

I wrote in English to the Japan office last week with a request and they answered me with a specific reply (they did actually read my email) within a few days. So it isn't hopeless.
I asked if they could implement a setting for max ISO in video mode, or at least show the ISO being used, instead of just "ISO AUTO".

I wrote in English to the Japan office last week with a request and they answered me with a specific reply (they did actually read my email) within a few days. So it isn't hopeless.
I asked if they could implement a setting for max ISO in video mode, or at least show the ISO being used, instead of just "ISO AUTO".

you have to put it into boost. If you don't do it, after a few seconds of not pressing any buttons, it will jump into power saving mode, with slowed down readout and refresh time. if you didn't reprogramm it, the arrow down is the toggle for the boost mode. 

Wtf? Do people on this forum even work in production? EVERYTHING with a budget I work on is Alexa with fast lenses close to wide open, big soft LED sources, and practicals that play as real scene lighting. Low light levels are the current flavor, not only for speed (HUGE on paid work where producers are trying to save pennies anywhere they can), but because at those intensities, lighting looks about the same to the eye as it will to camera, as opposed to high levels where you'll often have no idea of your ratios until you pull out a meter or a monitor. This also means controlling your sources, blocking light, and choosing visually conducive locations becomes more important than ever, as your keys aren't nearly bright enough to knock errant light down. 
Maybe we need to make a topic detailing current industry visual and sound techniques, just so we're all on the same page with how things are done now and what matters.

I have used the 70D to shoot ML raw, but I wouldn't say it works well. The ML menus often disappear and re-appear. Also, you can't record 1080p raw. The max resolution is somewhat less. Recording sound is also hit and miss on the experimental builds. 
The deal-breaker for me and the 70D was the aliasing. Whether shooting at 720p or near-1080p, the aliasing has been really bad for fine patterns. So much so that I was considering trying to get a Mosaic Engineering VAF for it. Instead, I decided to see the 70D and I bought a Fujifilm X-T3, which I've had for about a month now.
Here's a sample of ML from the 70D "at its best" -- shooting a favourable subject: 
 
 

if you work with sliders, gimbals and other forms of stabilisation, you don't need to get the OIS lenses. If you want a zoom, I would go for the 16-55mm f/2.8, even though it has no OIS.
if you are recording audio near camera, don't go for 35mm f/1.4, 18mm f/2.0, 60mm f/2.4 those are loud to focus
I also wouldn't recommend 23mm f/1.4 and 56mm f/1.2 since you can hear those too. 
Optically even the cheaper lenses are very good, so you can't go wrong.