eatstoomuchjam

In general, the stills stuff is a really close match for the film stocks (differences in the production are tiny)...  and we weren't talking about a small difference, especially in the greens.  Meanwhile, FilmConvert and Fuji's own Velvia profile both look quite a bit like my slides.  😄
As you said, though, a lot of the people using it have never actually used the film stocks that it claims to emulate - and some of their emulations look nice.  If you won't suffer cognitive dissonance from many of them not looking a lot like what they claim to be and/or want to use ACES as a starting point, it's a decent product.  Unless something changed recently, FilmConvert really doesn't have a good story for ACES (I think that last time I checked, it was "transform out of ACES into something else, apply FilmConvert, and then transform back").

The budget is just for the body and not for the body+glass?
1) Used GFX 100S - the video is good enough for vacation and the stills are incredible
2a) C70 - looks nice SOOC, built-in ND's, nearly the perfect camera for a fast turn-around
2b) GFX 100 II (Love mine)
3a) C70 - as before and the raw from it is flexible enough for anything I do
3b) Used Monstro 8K VV - I haven't actually shot with one, but they seem pretty nice and I sometimes consider doing some trade-in toward one - used models are now about 6k for the brain on reputable used sites

True.  Especially if you wanted to have good control over it independently across the 6 main colours.
There's a lot of talk about how these two plugins are going to put DCTL writers (plugin scripts essentially) out of business. I don't think it will, because DCTLs can be made to do a lot more things than they are currently used for, but it's an interesting observation that the DCTL writers were using them to do things like this because they weren't so easy from the UI.
In the same way that a new camera gets everyone on here excited and then start to argue with each other, discussing film emulation has the same effect on the colourist groups.
I've found two things:
1) The more I read these discussions the more I realise I don't know.  
2) The more I read these discussions the more I realise I don't care!
Seriously, the focus for the colourists who are arguing seems to be how accurate they are.  What is interesting though, is like here with cameras, the people arguing seem to care a lot about tiny little things, and yet the people out in the world doing the things also don't care about the accuracy of the tiny little things, but just see the emulations as useful for actually doing real work.
I suspect that the niche for Dehancer is likely to either be that it's more accurate, at least for certain film-stocks, or that it is more useful in some feature or other.  These are the kinds of things that colourists seem to care about.  The fact you tested it with a stills film rather than a motion picture stock might also be significant as the colourists likely don't care too much about those.

I was given a free temporary license of Dehancer to do a review for them and they said I would receive a free permanent license upon finishing the review (whether I gave it a positive or negative review).  I tried it and declined to continue.  If you already have a Nitrate license from FilmConvert, you're in the right place.  Dehancer did a few things better and could make a pretty nice starting point for an image, but the output colors in many cases didn't actually match the film that it claimed to be emulating (like not even close with Velvia 50) - and their answers for why made no sense at all.

I debated between the two last year and went with the C70.  It's my go-to A camera these days with the R5 as B camera.  Without watching that video, I'd guess that the image on the right is the C70 (more highlight and shadow detail).

Both of those cameras are great, you should get one. What are you shooting with now?

Film Look Creator all day long! Slices seem cool too. Only trouble is that render cache seems a bit borked in the beta - where I was previously getting real-time playback it seems to be falling over a bit.
You?

So there's a guy who lives near me - young guy, good looking - who 2 years ago gave up a film-making degree at a London university (can't remember which one - but a good one, I can remember thinking when he told me) to go on the tools with his dad, because he couldn't see any way that an expensive 3 year course was ever gong to wash its face.

Was talking to his sister this evening and she reckons he'd be totally up for getting involved in my short. Which could mean I've either got talent that isn't me, or a camera op that isn't me. Either way, it suddenly makes this project a whole lot easier.
(Not to mention Resolve 19 - which changes the space entirely!)

To be fair, I vaguely remember the OP stating at some point that he/she likes to have discussions about gear. And let's be honest, this forum is primarily a gear forum. Perhaps the OP should mention that this discussion isn't necessarily about a decision he's currently planning on making and instead it's about learning and gathering information.
With that said, @kye has a fair point. These cameras are only tools for creative endeavors. These cameras will not make the film or  color grade your film or make your film good. At the end of the day, story is king.
I would suggest to the OP that they take some time and go back and look what people were creating when the DSLR revolution began. Look at t2i and GH2 videos to see what was possible with limited resolution, DR and resources.

...and if they had picked one up and shot with it, they might like or dislike it for reasons unrelated to the video it can produce (like where the buttons are, how the menus work, battery life, monitoring options etc.).

One of the reasons that people are getting frustrated is that you're "asking basic questions," but then basically ignoring a lot of the answers.  It's like you keep asking what saw makes the best cabinets.  When people tell you that you need more than a saw, you start asking people to compare brands of saws.  
Which cameras has the best color and in-camera noise reduction?  All of them.  Also, none of them.  Go to NAB and ask 100 people on the floor.  Every one of them will be completely correct.  Every one of them will be completely incorrect.  How do you know?  Ask almost any of the others.
It is also a bit frustrating that you are asking questions that seem like you are trying to choose which camera to buy and after you receive a bunch of answers, you shift your focus and start asking again.
If you want somebody to yell at you about which camera has the best colors, go to YouTube.  There are dozens of people shouting about how the camera that they bought is the best camera ever.  Then just try to ignore the other videos from all the people saying it's the worst camera ever.  Heck, there are already dozens of videos just about the Pyxis talking about how it's the best camera released in years or the most ho-hum camera announcement so far this year.  Bonus: almost none of the people with those videos has even seen a Pyxis in person, much less actually shot with one.

One of the reasons that people are getting frustrated is that you're "asking basic questions," but then basically ignoring a lot of the answers.  It's like you keep asking what saw makes the best cabinets.  When people tell you that you need more than a saw, you start asking people to compare brands of saws.  
Which cameras has the best color and in-camera noise reduction?  All of them.  Also, none of them.  Go to NAB and ask 100 people on the floor.  Every one of them will be completely correct.  Every one of them will be completely incorrect.  How do you know?  Ask almost any of the others.
It is also a bit frustrating that you are asking questions that seem like you are trying to choose which camera to buy and after you receive a bunch of answers, you shift your focus and start asking again.
If you want somebody to yell at you about which camera has the best colors, go to YouTube.  There are dozens of people shouting about how the camera that they bought is the best camera ever.  Then just try to ignore the other videos from all the people saying it's the worst camera ever.  Heck, there are already dozens of videos just about the Pyxis talking about how it's the best camera released in years or the most ho-hum camera announcement so far this year.  Bonus: almost none of the people with those videos has even seen a Pyxis in person, much less actually shot with one.

I'm just wondering why you were posting a random YT video.
If I posted a new thread with every video I liked then the place would just look like my YT viewing history and not a forum where discussions can happen and people can share knowledge etc.
I don't know what experiences you had in high school, but I've been an adult a long time and I've become fond of talking to people.
I really don't know what you were trying to say?
What point were you trying to make?
Maybe if you actually typed something then there might be some communication....?
There are all sorts of interesting things in that video, so the discussion could be a good one.
Let's all leave high school behind and try and discuss things like adults 🙂 

I just realized - I did come to the wrong forum. I just assumed this was a wider community than what actually is. Many view themselves as filmmakers. I do not, I’m sure there’s other forums/places to chat just about equipment etc and not ruffle weathers of those who see themselves as “filmmakers”. 

Here's my recommendation for SOOC shooting - Sony AX100.  As Dave says "Sony AX100 looks better than your camera".
Just look at the nice contrast, saturation, and above all...  skintones!  and in mixed lighting no less!
Good luck getting that with a "better" camera - they all have far too much DR to give you a punchy image from their 709 LUTs or profiles.

If you're looking for SOOC color, you probably want a decent amount of SOOC noise reduction.
If you're working on a project which will have reasonable post-production work done, you want the least (or no) noise reduction in camera.  Tools like the denoiser in Resolve, Neat Video, and Topaz Video AI give a better result as well as giving you a lot more control of the trade-offs of noise vs lost details and plastic/wax skin.

If you stare at them for hours and hours then you start to notice differences and they start to look normal.
That's how all the YT "cinematic" content now looks nothing like cinema.
I just watched Kill Bill 1 again, and yeah, it might as well be a different universe...


When the people who can create any image they like with virtually unlimited budget create images like these - contrasty and punchy and not sharp in the slightest, then the people who are pixel peeing the 6K cameras aren't even playing the same game.

DR of course is not world leading....



In less-than-ideal light is not great, but I would say better than the 1 inch that is surprising.

You can see from the motion blur that probably it was 1/60 or less (no ND of course), but still some details in me and the bike..

 




Compared to 1 inch:








In quality is definitely a big step forward, I honestly did not expect this much. I think a combination of more pixel, double bitrate and improvement in processing made it possible.

Here an iPhone 15 Pro Max 4k screen grab.... 
 

Indeed there is!  They were smart to choose the Z Cam EVF for it so they won't need a separate wireless transmitter (though there will be a bit of lag with the Ninja in-between).
That one's been discussed here, I think.  Should fit in a niche somewhere, though with DSMC2 VV cameras selling and renting at pretty reasonable prices, I'm not sure what that niche might be.  😅

In good light the X4 is just on another planet compared to the 1 inch.

Is not apple to apple as is the same location, mount but different time of the year but still I could never get such details from the 1 inch or the R. Just look at the mountains in the background and the detail on me....


Unprocessed screen grab from 8k 30, 200 mbits, sharpening low


Processed X4




Processed 1 inch from 5.7 30



I will compare also in low light, but for a first quick look I feel they both look similarly bad 😉 

Panasonic is the easiest of those.  The Varicam has been used on a bunch of stuff.
https://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/cinema_camera_varicam_eva/shot_on/

As far as Canon...
https://shotonwhat.com/cameras/canon-eos-c500-camera
https://shotonwhat.com/cameras/canon-eos-c300-camera

Keep in mind that the C500 series and C300 series weren't the A camera on most/all of the things listed, but neither was the RED on several of the films that you called out.  
I doubt that Fuji cameras have been used on a lot of major Hollywood productions.  To the best of my knowledge, Fuji don't make ANY cinema cameras.  I'd be shocked, though, if Fuji's excellent cinema lenses hadn't made their way into at least a handful.

Anyway.  Take a deep breath.  In the end, it doesn't matter even a little bit to any of us if NIkon retire the RED brand - not unless you own stock in Nikon and are worried about it would do to your investment.  😉
FWIW, the most typical/obvious thing here is that Nikon will continue to operate RED as a separate business unit for a time, likely attaching Nikon to the RED name somehow - "RED by Nikon" or "Nikon RED" or something like that.  Eventually, the integration will get tighter and current RED engineers will be replaced by Nikon engineers and the naming will change - "The Nikon RED Z1" or something like that.  Eventually, RED will look just like any other business unit of Nikon, but continue to make cinema-focused cameras and nobody will care much about whether they keep or lose the name.
 

I just got mine 1h ago, boy they were fast in delivering.
I will go for an MTB ride in 1h and test it out a bit and report back.

First thing I did is to set it to 8k 30, highbitrate and sharpens to low.

Was this guy responsible for the genius idea of putting a CFE card inside Red mini mag and charge 10x? 

What the... HECK????
That makes no sense at all, unless they're planning to just let RED slowly die??
But when I read the article myself, I see it in a completely different manner:
1) will take time to integrate Nikon and RED together, might be years. There is a lot to do! So with all the other stuff on their plate, perhaps a Z Mount Cinema Camera won't be the first thing out the gate, maybe it will be one more cycle down the road. (maybe they want to make a BIG impact with it when they release it? Have awesome AF with RED)
2) they want to keep their loyal RED customers happy during these turbulent times, so "for now" they'll reassure them by keeping RF mount 
There is a very cool mod for a Fujifilm camera however:
https://www.newsshooter.com/2024/04/16/old-fast-glass-ofg-custom-65-rehoused-fujifilm-gfx-100-ii-cinema-camera/ 
 

I just sold my trusted 2 years old 1 inch 360 (I still have 2 normal 1 inch + dual lens) and ordered the X4 for the same price. 
From the paid "reviews" it seems that the X4 has more details and less artifacts, the biggest issue I have with the 1 inch but without trying myself I don't trust to much these reviews.

Lowlight I think they are all quite bad and not really usable, already skiing on north faces in shade in Alaska the 1 inch breaks apart compared to south faces in sunshine.  1 inch sun vs shade:





The X4 is 20% lighter, smaller and better weatherproof so if it turns out to really deliver a bit better detail and less artifacts, I'm happy.

I will let you know if it is really an improvement or not over the 1 inch. Ideally, they should do a X4 Pro with 8k and 2x 1 inch.... let's hope it comes in the future.