abehalpert

If you want RAW and you're willing to pay 1DXmk3 prices, I think that RED Komodo may end that conversation. The RAW is flexible enough with compression strengths that you could probably use it even for data-limited projects.

Sure, it doesn't have continuous AF or IBIS, and maybe that would be a dealbreaker for some. I love the IBIS on my S1 and I pine for good AF.

But if you want the best codec and IQ in a real video camera at that price point from a brand that's respected, I mean damn. 6K REDCODE RAW or 4K prores from a slightly larger than S35 sensor with RF mount on a body that can go on my Ronin-S... the global shutter is a beautiful cherry on top!

Yes, the proof is in the pudding. But the dynamic range and IQ seems very promising.

1 minute ago, Andrew Reid said:

I also find it extremely sad and suspicious that the two main doctors who blew the whistle early on are dead.. One of them in his 30's. The virus has a 2% mortality rate and tends to impact old people worse, so the chances of a fit and healthy 30 year old doctor dying from the virus alone are very slim. I think there are factors at play we don't know about.

Wow that's a really good point. The Chinese government is extremely powerful and could have seen to their deaths one way or another. Disobedience of any kind can't be tolerated. Gotta kill the messenger...

2 minutes ago, Django said:

welcome to the club, I bought mine second hand last year. strongly recommend shooting in cine EI and set up in camera LUT to Venice CS (you can find the LUTs in google search). WB remains the tricky part..

Thanks for the tip! I'll try that

Wow Sony is lame. Looks like Canon is back on top. That being said, I just bought an FS7. The second-hand prices are crazy right now! I'm years late to the party, but the form factor and codecs are right and my clients like them in spite of the color science. I hate the color science!

The coronavirus is such a nightmare. I thought it was only killing the infirm, but according to the BBC article it looks like a lot of middle-aged folks are dying, too. Maybe they would have survived in hospital? So sad...

The more I read about these rumors, the more I think that the R6 will be the camera for me. But I want a Canon FF ENG camera to pair it with that shoulder mounts better and has a better price than the C500mk2.

13 hours ago, Mokara said:

No they wouldn't. Display devices in general run at 60Hz, so that is what people would shoot at.

Since there are 8K TVs out there, and likely increasingly so in a year or two, yes, people would shoot in 8K.

These clients are delivering in 24p not 60p. They only overcrank do they can slow-mo any shot at will.

8 hours ago, wolf33d said:

I don’t agree. I would like 240 or 580 4K. 
Of course due to technology my today’s expectation is 4K60. But I would love to see that 4K120 become true. 
It really allows for some creative stuff. 

4K120fps would be great. I just mean that for a lot of corporate/doc/eng stuff I shoot, 60fps is sufficient. You can don't need to slow down a handshake or someone walking that much. Would corporate people shoot 4k120 "just in case"? Maybe. But for most of my work, I need uncropped 60fps more than I need cropped 120fps.

But obviously for sports, fast-action, music videos, the sky's the limit in terms of frame rate...

4 minutes ago, MeanRevert said:

XT4, EOSR5, GH6?, A7SIII?

I'm losing count. Could 2020 be the greatest year in the history of cameras?

You left out RED Komodo. Might as well include FX9 and C500mk2 although they're in a different price bracket 

I'm betting that 4k120p will be cropped to half the sensor width. (But of course we can speed-boost it.)

And 4k60p will be 3/4 sensor width and/or pixel binned full-frame.

I think the R6 may be more useful to me than the R5 if it pans out to be similar to a mirrorless 1DXmk3 and has better low-light and DR performance. But the 1Dxmk3 has relatively limited codec options, which make it less versatile than a real video camera.

That being said, 4k120p would be a great feature to offer in any package. Although I bet that general slow motion applications don't need more than 60p...

8 hours ago, currensheldon said:

With the lenses Canon has been putting out, I really do think they are coming out swinging in 2020. Two monster full-frame RF cameras and I bet a C300III with the RF Mount at NAB 2020 that is the direct competitor to the FX9 but, unlike that camera,  will have internal 4k raw, 4k 120fps, and a full-frame sensor.

I hope you're right about the C300III. I've been pondering my upgrade path: FX9 vs C500mk2, with a DSLM for a B cam. Or could I even get away with 2 RED Komodos?

But for the doc/ENG/corporate stuff I want to capitalize on, I'm coming to the unfortunate conclusion that the FX9 would be the most marketable choice due to form factor and codec options: viewfinder, shoulder-friendly, many bitrates to choose from... I don't think those clients need RAW and if they did they would probably want an Epic.

That being said, I would love for the C300mk3 to be the solo operator doc dream camera I want and have better framerate options than the FX9 to boot! That plus a great R body for video would REALLY simplify my decision-making, especially since there isn't even a Sony 10-bit DSLM yet...

I thought that DPAF didn't work in no-crop 4K 50/60p. But it did work in no-crop 30p and in cropped 4K 60p.

Personally, I am getting more excited about Komodo...the FX9 and the C500mk2 each seem to have drawbacks. For B camera, the 1DXmk3 is awesome but expensive and limited codec options. No Sony 10-bit DSLM yet.

Komodo COULD be awesome. Although ultimately I have to consider what my clients want. But 16-bit R3D with compression options, speedbooster options, RF mount, half the cost of an FX9...

8 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Professional web surfers.

Who made the rumours sites any kind of authority?

Huh?

2 hours ago, androidlad said:

I leaked before them, in the A7S III thread buried somewhere.

That may be true, but Andrew's article reads, "The sensor for the A7S III has leaked on the EOSHD Forum..."

This makes it sound like the info just came to light. Everybody was speculating in July that it might be the A7S3 sensor, but when the camera never materialized and the rumor mill quieted down, I bought an S1. We'll see what Sony releases and what the reviews say. But if Sony uses quad bayer to give us live HDR that could be amazing...

Sonyalpharumors just reiterated that they leaked this sensor in July...

Didn't this sensor leak in July?

https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/here-are-the-six-new-next-sony-full-frame-sensors-with-quad-bayer-structure/

Also, is it possible that it can do phase detect AF using microlenses that cover a 2x2 patch of pixels instead of individual pixels?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.gsmarena.com/sony_unveils_2x2_onchip_lens_tech_for_quad_bayer_sensors_which_promises_better_af_performance-amp-40523.php

It's just my gut instinct, but I doubt that VR will be "the" future of cinema. If anything, I would guess it would develop as a special genre alongside regular offerings. I don't think it will supplant regular cinema.

5 minutes ago, Shell64 said:

I really wish this thread didn’t start. This is a camera forum guys. I love how we can all come together to talk about something we love. Why ruin this with such a decisive topic?  Obviously, we disagree on this issue, but that isn’t what this forum is about. Go on reddit for crying out loud!

You don't have to read this thread if you don't want to, let alone reply.

BTW here's an op-ed in the NYT that completely agrees with Andrew's original point: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/25/opinion/trump-apple.html

1 hour ago, Mokara said:

Lol....the reason he has very little black support is not because he is racist, it is because he is gay. The black community may be generally supportive of many liberal policies, but LGBT tolerance is not one of them. They are conservative when it comes to that.

Sanders has not been accurately diagnosing the problems in America, he has an unrealistic view of what they are and how to solve them. The policies he proposes have zero chance of getting through congress, he knows this, yet he pushes them as his platform anyway because that is what his supporters want to hear, instead of solutions that might actually work. He is great on the sweeping gestures, but short on exactly how they will be accomplished.

People like McConnell and Pelosi get to where they are not because of some secret wisdom, but because of a combination of patronage, the seniority system and bullying. Congress is set up that way, and that is the basic problem. The backbone of their support are a bunch of people not much younger than them, and they hold power that way. Their ideas have nothing to do with it, it is all about entrenched stagnation and not rocking their particular boat. There are plenty of younger folks with newer, fresher and more relevant ideas in both parties, but they are shut out because of how the system in congress is run.

"Reducing Pete Buttigieg’s struggle to attract black support solely to black homophobia is not only erroneous, it is a disgusting, racist trope..." https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/opinion/pete-buttigieg-black-homophobia.html

Sanders sounded the warning on climate change and growing inequality 30+ years ago because he saw the processes at work and understands the underlying mechanisms. Why do you think his solutions won't address the problems? As for implementing them, it's purely a matter of political will and support. Social security and medicare were vociferously opposed by the business interests of the day, but now they're the most popular programs in America.

I'm not talking about Pelosi and McConnell's ability to gain and retain power; I'm talking about their ability to get things done once they have it. They're very good at reading public opinion and predicting the future. That's how Pelosi passed the ACA and McConnell packed the courts. They know when to hold them and when to fold them. It's not about ideas, it's about tactics.

1 hour ago, Cinto Brewer said:

Every conservative I know thinks climate change is real, we just realize that China and India produce 100's of times more carbon than the US. Maybe the reason why the American south is so poor is because the richest area in the country is washington D.C. Bernie Sanders has never had a real job but he's worth over 6 million?

If conservatives believe in climate change, how come their President denies it and they refused to do anything about it for decades? Boomers have been massively irresponsible and totally screwed future generations.

The south is poor because they pursued a path of low taxes and low educational investment. The US economy has shifted to technology and services; metropolitan areas with educated workforces have thrived. Low-skilled work has been outsourced to low-wage countries thanks to destructive free-trade deals.

Bernie Sanders' money is largely from writing a best-selling book. He could have made a lot more money if he were crooked.

2 hours ago, RWR said:

While Obama was a wet blanket on the economy, Sanders would be a lead blanket. Warren is same but more likely.

Hey..how 'bout them cameras!!!

The Trump economy is growing at the same rate as the Obama economy, in spite of Trump's massive tax cut stimulus and deregulation. And it's growing at a far cry from the 3-4%+ that he promised.

Plus, the new jobs that are being created are part-time and/or low-paying, which is part of the reason the top 10-20% of wage earners are pulling away from the bottom. This is the problem Bernie wants to address.

Fun fact: the average US GDP growth in the 1950s was over 4% and the top marginal income tax rate was 91%.

3 hours ago, Mokara said:

There is nothing to indicate that Buttigieg is racist, other than you not liking him. 

Sanders has been saying the same thing for years, so what? It still pushes the right buttons with a certain demographic just like Trump does with his certain demographic. To follow people like that you have to abandon objectivity and pragmatism, and instead follow a cult of personality. No other view is acceptable, only theirs.

You start losing brain function at around 40, there is a steady decline after that. When you get into your 70s that loss is significant, which is why most people that old are not nearly as sharp as they should be. In 70s you begin to see real problems with the onset of conditions such as dementia and the affects of other degenerative diseases. Intellectually people are in their prime in their 40s and 50s, that is when most great work is done. Very few people peak in their 60s and no one when they are older than that.

First of all, Buttigieg claimed to have endorsements from dozens of black South Carolinians who did not endorse him. He also sent out a message with a list of endorsements that were implied to be from black people but many people on the list were white. This is racist in and of itself: he's putting words in the mouths of African-Americans so he can fool other African-Americans into voting for him.

He's also under a cloud of scandal for mishandling a police shooting (of a black person) in his town and also the firing of their first black police chief. The evidence against him is mounting, which is why he has so few black supporters and prominent blacks from South Bend have endorsed his opponents.

Sanders hasn't just been saying the same things for 40 years. He has been ACCURATELY diagnosing the problems of America. There are areas where I disagree with him and I'd be happy to tell you where. It's not a cult of the personality. I like his policies the most and I believe he would enforce them.

Say what you want about mental decline with age. All I know is that McConnell and Pelosi can predict the future of politics better than anyone else in the game. They know when a scandal is going to be a big deal and when it will blow over. They are more effective in their roles than younger folks have been. Experience counts. Again, I say that as a 30-year old but an avid reader of political news.

2 hours ago, Mokara said:

No, he is a demagogue just like Trump, just for the other side. Says things people want to hear so at least some of them will be diehard supporters and his ego will be satisfied. It is less about winning and more about having a core of people swearing blind loyalty to you. So he says things that are "pure" to that demographic and hopes that enough people dislike the other guy more that he will win anyway, even in most voters don't care for him personally. It is NOT about having policies that are going to be agreeable to the majority of Americans. Warren is the same way. I think it totally sucks that mainstream voters are probably going to have to choose between who they dislike the least. It is not a recipe for stable government.

I am sick of these old men and women who should be in a retirement home pretending to have all the answers and wisdom, and I am an old person myself, so I am not being biased here. We need a new generation of leaders, preferably someone who is centrist. I don't care if they are Democrat or Republican, that is not important, what is important is that they have reasonable and practical policies.

Of the Democrat field I think someone like Pete Buttigieg seems like a reasonable candidate to me (among the front runners). The only issue I see with him is that enough Americans are sufficiently biased against gay people that Trump might sneak in anyway. A military guy with administrative experience who comes across as a smart, decent, rational person who doesn't lose his shit when challenged. That would check off most boxes I think. A bit on the young side but I could live with that. Ideally you would want someone in their 50s for the position though, IMO.

Bernie Sanders has been saying the exact same things for literally 40 years. It's the American people who have caught up with him. He bears no relation to Trump. Trump lies constantly. Bernie is the only honest politician in this race. I don't agree with everything he says, but I believe that he means what he says.

Pete Buttigieg is probably racist, and besides that his policy prescriptions are so carefully crafted and poll-tested that I don't believe a word he says. It's mostly BS once you dig a little deeper. And he has hard-core partisan reforms (eliminate the electoral college, stack the supreme court) that I approve of but would probably keep him from getting elected IMHO.

Furthermore, I wouldn't vote for anyone younger than 60 for President. Look at how Obama got played repeatedly. Our best operators are in their 70s: Pelosi, McConnell... I hate McConnell, but these old-timers who have been around the block but kept their wits about them can see around corners. And I say that as a 30-year old.

I, for one, am going to vote for Bernie Sanders again in the Democratic primary. I actually believe him when he tells me his values. I believe he values human rights. I believe he wants to stop the suffering in the U.S. that is caused by oligarchs manipulating the political system to unfairly hoard an increasing share of the national wealth while removing the social safety net for the vulnerable part of the population. He wants to halt climate change. And he wants to make the world more peaceful. In short, he's a warrior for justice.

One of the most problematic aspects of this whole issue is the reason for Apple to boost Trump, as stated in the Bloomberg video you linked: Apple wants carve outs from Trump's December tariffs so they can keep manufacturing in China without taking a hit to their bottom line. It's ironic (since the Austin announcement was about American manufacturing jobs) and it's also crony capitalism at its worst.