pixelpreaching

What cameras don't use Sony sensors? Arri, RED, obviously Canon, Sigma (Foveon, anyway, the Fp is a Sony sensor), and by all indications, the Blackmagic Ursa 12K.
And I'm unclear about some older sensors, like the Panasonic Varicam/Varicam LT (guess that isn't "old" - it's still being made). That camera was the first true dual native ISO (vs. dual GAIN, which is what most cameras actually are despite being described as "dual native ISO") and predates anything Sony did with dual native ISO tech. So, my guess is they did not make that one - maybe Panasonic themselves or TowerJazz. Someone more internet savvy than I might be able to figure it out.
I don't put much stock in this whole "did Sony make the sensor or not" as it relates to how the image looks. Sony makes multiple sensors used in Hasselblad, Nikon, Panasonic, Fuji, Olympus, Blackmagic, etc. And every single one yields completely different raw output in a number of different metrics. The processing pipeline that Nikon/Fuji/Panasonic/whoever implements matters infinitely more.
Looking at images from, say, the original Blackmagic Pocket vs. the Pocket 4K/6K and preferring one over the other has far less to do with who made the sensor and more to do with what Blackmagic is doing (advancements from their Gen 1 color science to their new Gen 5, for example). Exceptions would be comparing CCD to CMOS; Hasselblad's Kodak CCD sensor clearly is very different from Sony's CMOS sensor, no matter what Hasselblad does. But that's a bit apples and oranges.
Now, should someone (like a big company) start making sensors? Absolutely. Competition is f***ing great, and Sony is bulldozing the sensor market. Samsung is probably best poised to do something like that, and I hope they do.

I don't consider it one, it IS one.
So is the Varicam, Sony FX9/Venice, EVA-1.
Despite what people claim, the a7SIII and FX3 are NOT dual native ISO. They are dual gain. As is the RED Gemini.
Basically, dual native ISO is that there are two actual circuits underpinning each photosite and it will switch between them. With dual gain, the process is happening in a second ADC, but each photosite still has only one circuit.

Wait. The SL2 is sexy German design, fine. But doesn't it use Sony parts (sensor, EVF, etc.). Your complaint about Nikon was that they're doing.... exactly that.
Yeah, you have better video options on the Panasonic S cameras (at least we assume, we know nothing about the video specs of the Z9). But you have worse video specs on an a7III or any Sony that's not a7SIII or a9.
Color science you mention. But they're the same sensor, I thought that was the issue?
Your complaint was literally "rebadged Sony" is what Nikon makes now. Not interesting tech, which is a nebulous term anyway.
So, from what I gather now... "uniqueness" is the problem. That's what you value. Many people - especially pro photographers and not gear heads - don't give a hoot. If they like Nikon's body, color, lenses, performance, whatever... then they'll use it. Uniqueness isn't a metric that working photographers ever use.
Yes, it is your opinion. As this is mine. My issue is you consistently fail to apply the same standards across the board. For example, your love of the Sigma Fp but disdain toward Blackmagic and the Pocket 4K/6K, despite all of your complaints of the latter being true (and often even worse) on the Fp.

I don't consider it one, it IS one.
So is the Varicam, Sony FX9/Venice, EVA-1.
Despite what people claim, the a7SIII and FX3 are NOT dual native ISO. They are dual gain. As is the RED Gemini.
Basically, dual native ISO is that there are two actual circuits underpinning each photosite and it will switch between them. With dual gain, the process is happening in a second ADC, but each photosite still has only one circuit.

What cameras don't use Sony sensors? Arri, RED, obviously Canon, Sigma (Foveon, anyway, the Fp is a Sony sensor), and by all indications, the Blackmagic Ursa 12K.
And I'm unclear about some older sensors, like the Panasonic Varicam/Varicam LT (guess that isn't "old" - it's still being made). That camera was the first true dual native ISO (vs. dual GAIN, which is what most cameras actually are despite being described as "dual native ISO") and predates anything Sony did with dual native ISO tech. So, my guess is they did not make that one - maybe Panasonic themselves or TowerJazz. Someone more internet savvy than I might be able to figure it out.
I don't put much stock in this whole "did Sony make the sensor or not" as it relates to how the image looks. Sony makes multiple sensors used in Hasselblad, Nikon, Panasonic, Fuji, Olympus, Blackmagic, etc. And every single one yields completely different raw output in a number of different metrics. The processing pipeline that Nikon/Fuji/Panasonic/whoever implements matters infinitely more.
Looking at images from, say, the original Blackmagic Pocket vs. the Pocket 4K/6K and preferring one over the other has far less to do with who made the sensor and more to do with what Blackmagic is doing (advancements from their Gen 1 color science to their new Gen 5, for example). Exceptions would be comparing CCD to CMOS; Hasselblad's Kodak CCD sensor clearly is very different from Sony's CMOS sensor, no matter what Hasselblad does. But that's a bit apples and oranges.
Now, should someone (like a big company) start making sensors? Absolutely. Competition is f***ing great, and Sony is bulldozing the sensor market. Samsung is probably best poised to do something like that, and I hope they do.

What cameras don't use Sony sensors? Arri, RED, obviously Canon, Sigma (Foveon, anyway, the Fp is a Sony sensor), and by all indications, the Blackmagic Ursa 12K.
And I'm unclear about some older sensors, like the Panasonic Varicam/Varicam LT (guess that isn't "old" - it's still being made). That camera was the first true dual native ISO (vs. dual GAIN, which is what most cameras actually are despite being described as "dual native ISO") and predates anything Sony did with dual native ISO tech. So, my guess is they did not make that one - maybe Panasonic themselves or TowerJazz. Someone more internet savvy than I might be able to figure it out.
I don't put much stock in this whole "did Sony make the sensor or not" as it relates to how the image looks. Sony makes multiple sensors used in Hasselblad, Nikon, Panasonic, Fuji, Olympus, Blackmagic, etc. And every single one yields completely different raw output in a number of different metrics. The processing pipeline that Nikon/Fuji/Panasonic/whoever implements matters infinitely more.
Looking at images from, say, the original Blackmagic Pocket vs. the Pocket 4K/6K and preferring one over the other has far less to do with who made the sensor and more to do with what Blackmagic is doing (advancements from their Gen 1 color science to their new Gen 5, for example). Exceptions would be comparing CCD to CMOS; Hasselblad's Kodak CCD sensor clearly is very different from Sony's CMOS sensor, no matter what Hasselblad does. But that's a bit apples and oranges.
Now, should someone (like a big company) start making sensors? Absolutely. Competition is f***ing great, and Sony is bulldozing the sensor market. Samsung is probably best poised to do something like that, and I hope they do.

What cameras don't use Sony sensors? Arri, RED, obviously Canon, Sigma (Foveon, anyway, the Fp is a Sony sensor), and by all indications, the Blackmagic Ursa 12K.
And I'm unclear about some older sensors, like the Panasonic Varicam/Varicam LT (guess that isn't "old" - it's still being made). That camera was the first true dual native ISO (vs. dual GAIN, which is what most cameras actually are despite being described as "dual native ISO") and predates anything Sony did with dual native ISO tech. So, my guess is they did not make that one - maybe Panasonic themselves or TowerJazz. Someone more internet savvy than I might be able to figure it out.
I don't put much stock in this whole "did Sony make the sensor or not" as it relates to how the image looks. Sony makes multiple sensors used in Hasselblad, Nikon, Panasonic, Fuji, Olympus, Blackmagic, etc. And every single one yields completely different raw output in a number of different metrics. The processing pipeline that Nikon/Fuji/Panasonic/whoever implements matters infinitely more.
Looking at images from, say, the original Blackmagic Pocket vs. the Pocket 4K/6K and preferring one over the other has far less to do with who made the sensor and more to do with what Blackmagic is doing (advancements from their Gen 1 color science to their new Gen 5, for example). Exceptions would be comparing CCD to CMOS; Hasselblad's Kodak CCD sensor clearly is very different from Sony's CMOS sensor, no matter what Hasselblad does. But that's a bit apples and oranges.
Now, should someone (like a big company) start making sensors? Absolutely. Competition is f***ing great, and Sony is bulldozing the sensor market. Samsung is probably best poised to do something like that, and I hope they do.

I have the Porta Brace AO-2XB which is great, costs $228 (pics below). Orca also makes great stuff, I have their OR-268 for my Zoom F6 when I just need something basic and small. But they have some very nice bigger bags, pricier than Portra Brace, though. Can't go wrong with either.
I also have a Loudmouth Large Cable File Bag (on Amazon for $100: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07WW4HTLT/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_7?smid=A2D3DSPXQTS3U6&psc=1) which is great for organizing cables (audio or otherwise, I use it for all kinds of cables) when you're not using them.

You're not wrong at all - though I disagree about the IQ of the BMPCC's. But, The X-T3 and X-T4 footage is VERY nice too. Not as much latitude for editing and h265 isn't as pleasant to work with, and there are some other differences, but I do love the footage they produce.
I wasn't saying that people who don't like BM are ignorant about cinema cameras. I was saying people keep wanting stills camera features in cinema cameras, which *is* ignorant to what/how cinema cameras are meant to be used for. And I was pointing out Andrew's inconsistencies in his complaints against BM cameras (the Sigma Fp was FULL of reliability issues too).
And I agree about the Fp - it felt like the beta version of a product, but it was a very unique and original product, and I too am very excited for the Fp II (or whatever it'll be called).

It's truly a phenomenal lens, though for very specific needs. But if you have those needs, there's nothing else remotely comparable.
I just got a DJI OM4 gimbal, it's AWESOME. That + the Moment anamorphic adapter and iPhone 11 make for a very cool combo.
I recently got a DJI Mavic 2 Pro and it's a stunning piece of equipment for photos and video. Hasselblad colors are the best out there.

man I didn't say it was a Jesus camera, I said it distributes its DR more closely to the Alexa than a number of other cameras that favor the shadows. If you somehow take that as "it's as good as an Alexa" then that's on you.

Yes, stand for most mirrorless cameras.
These are not things that are becoming standard for cinema cameras, in part because they can be objectively detrimental. Like I said, if someone wants those things, get a mirrorless camera with them. People seem to think that because of the price point of the Blackmagics that they're supposed to have these things, instead of them being affordable options to five-figure cinema cameras. No one is out here asking why the latest RED or Arri doesn't have amazing PDAF with eye detection or IBIS. These cameras are absolutely no different.

It's truly a phenomenal lens, though for very specific needs. But if you have those needs, there's nothing else remotely comparable.
I just got a DJI OM4 gimbal, it's AWESOME. That + the Moment anamorphic adapter and iPhone 11 make for a very cool combo.
I recently got a DJI Mavic 2 Pro and it's a stunning piece of equipment for photos and video. Hasselblad colors are the best out there.

Why is everything about vlogging? Who is buying a $2500 cinema camera for vlogging? There's literally dozens of other cameras that are better suited to that and cost significantly less. Who needs a full frame sensor for vlogging? A Panasonic G9 or Olympus E-M1 series, or E-M5 series, or Fuii X-T4/S-10, etc etc etc... are all right there and much better options.
Flip out screens can interfere with cables and ports, unless you do what Panasonic did with the S1H, which is nice, but significantly increases the thickness. The a7sIII has issues with using the flip out screen while having HDMI or other cables attached.
I'd rather have internal ND filters than IBIS. Does ANY camera have both?
I'm just bewildered by why so many people want features in a cinema camera that aren't really beneficial to making cinema... CAF, vlogging features, IBIS, it's like everyone wants every camera to be exactly the same, even at the expense of cost, usability, or personal preferences. Like everything you mentioned is in the a7sIII, Panasonic S1H & S5, Canon R5 & R6, and a ton of other cameras if you strike the FF sensor.

Yes, stand for most mirrorless cameras.
These are not things that are becoming standard for cinema cameras, in part because they can be objectively detrimental. Like I said, if someone wants those things, get a mirrorless camera with them. People seem to think that because of the price point of the Blackmagics that they're supposed to have these things, instead of them being affordable options to five-figure cinema cameras. No one is out here asking why the latest RED or Arri doesn't have amazing PDAF with eye detection or IBIS. These cameras are absolutely no different.

Yes, stand for most mirrorless cameras.
These are not things that are becoming standard for cinema cameras, in part because they can be objectively detrimental. Like I said, if someone wants those things, get a mirrorless camera with them. People seem to think that because of the price point of the Blackmagics that they're supposed to have these things, instead of them being affordable options to five-figure cinema cameras. No one is out here asking why the latest RED or Arri doesn't have amazing PDAF with eye detection or IBIS. These cameras are absolutely no different.

Why is everything about vlogging? Who is buying a $2500 cinema camera for vlogging? There's literally dozens of other cameras that are better suited to that and cost significantly less. Who needs a full frame sensor for vlogging? A Panasonic G9 or Olympus E-M1 series, or E-M5 series, or Fuii X-T4/S-10, etc etc etc... are all right there and much better options.
Flip out screens can interfere with cables and ports, unless you do what Panasonic did with the S1H, which is nice, but significantly increases the thickness. The a7sIII has issues with using the flip out screen while having HDMI or other cables attached.
I'd rather have internal ND filters than IBIS. Does ANY camera have both?
I'm just bewildered by why so many people want features in a cinema camera that aren't really beneficial to making cinema... CAF, vlogging features, IBIS, it's like everyone wants every camera to be exactly the same, even at the expense of cost, usability, or personal preferences. Like everything you mentioned is in the a7sIII, Panasonic S1H & S5, Canon R5 & R6, and a ton of other cameras if you strike the FF sensor.

Love this lens, wish I could justify owning one LOL! You get so many unique angles since you can move through things.
I've gotten a lot of mileage out of a phone gimbal, and I had the Osmo pocket for awhile and really liked it - both are fun additions to my kit.
I think I want to experiment with a cheap underwater housing next. 
Chris

An exaggeration surely.  A long list... really.  I have a short list.  Some addressed by this new camera. 
What exactly is this long list you see?  Do tell? 
Yes, some users have had issues.  QC is a BM problem.  But many others have not reported the same issues that others have.  My Pocket 4K has been very reliable for me.  Poor battery life, screen in sunlight and no tilt being my primary concerns. 
I had more issues with some of my Panasonic cameras than the Pocket 4K.  

You're so picky.  Why? 
So it doesn't have IBIS.  I'm reviewing footage from 2014 at the moment, shot on a holiday with a GH4.  That footage was shot handheld with a IS lens.  Are you saying the GH4 wasn't a handheld camera?   
Also, with my GH5, I would turn off IBIS for shots with wide angle lenses as I would get wobble in my footage if left on.  Did turning IBIS off also switch off the handheld function?
For the record, I've used the Pocket 4K handheld with non IS lenses on some occasions.  I also use it loads of time with IS lens.  In both cases, I am hand holding the camera.
I've mixed views on IBIS.  Useful, yes.  But I found it made me lazy and also too dependant on it.  There were also weird issues where it would wobble, which was difficult to fix in post.  Don't get me wrong, it's very useful to have and my GH5 sits as a useful bit of kit in my bag for certain run n gun situations.  However, the Pocket is my primary camera for a reason. 

Easily my Laowa 24mm f/14 Probe Cine lens. Macro, built in LED lights, and the end is waterproof. So many amazing things you can do with it.
(not my footage, but shows some of the awesome stuff you can do with it)
 

Just here to say, I wanted the new Fuji to have an open gate video mode enabled SO BADLY. That alone would’ve put me in “sell all my other bodies for a switch” high gear. 
 
I’m still holding steady without a sweat... GH5S for anamorphic, Pocket 4K for easy Raw, C200 from work if good AF is needed. 
 
I want LF video just because I find it interesting and really want to explore it. The S1H is tempting, but that darn AF keeps it from being the monstrous all-rounder I’m after. Hopefully the S2H fixes AF. If not, hey... S1H prices will probably drop at the same time and make that purchase more justifiable.
 
I think the shaky market is still at a point where it may be a good thing, pushing the manufacturers to condense their lineups and get solid features into all cameras... but I guess we’ll see.

Don't know the reality on other markets - but here, having a Sim card in the camera would get zero sales.

People here use its smartphone SIM for all the mobile traffic. Notebooks and other deviced are used in tethered wifi connections - except a couple of financial market friends, no one have a dedicated sim card for their notebooks or iPads when the devices have the option.

Mobile fees are kind of expensive here - and, oddly, data-only SIM card plans are MUCH more expensive than the phone ones.

As people don't want to spend more money to have two devices to take photos, people don't want to pay two connections for their devices.
Some mobile apps (Panasonic and Fuji) already have the option to automatically import all the photos that you take with the camera. But you still have to open the app and have it connected - the Bluetooth enabled cameras make the connection process easier, but still slow because of the wifi handshake protocol.

Direct upload to the social networks, even if the camera suports it, have hassles too: people could want to put some filter (more computational need), cameras would need a good keyboard, with prediction and hashtags, and the most glaring problem: the social networks are closing their APIs for 3rd party vendors. They WANT you to use the app, to monetize targeted ads.

I was reading the most recent 5 pages of this thread and this made me literally laugh out loud
Andrew, you have this weird thing against Blackmagic that I think is personal.
Things you complained about on the BMPCC4K (no IBIS, no AF, no tilt screen, no EVF) are all literally true for the Sigma Fp.
Not all cameras are made for vloggers and hybrid shooters. Cinema cameras fall into that category. It's ignorant to expect a cinema camera to conform to the same expectations as a stills camera that shoots video.
None of the cameras you listed output better IQ nor do they have the ergonomics or user interface of a proper cinema camera (a la BMPCC).
Please, for the sake of your readers - myself included, get over your grudge against Blackmagic. It's childish.

Honestly, I know a lot of you are excited about this but.... this should have just been the a7sIII. The only point in having both is to make people want to buy both - I mean how many people are buying the a7sIII for stills? This camera has the same features - 4K120p, same sensor, I assume the same AF system, Cfexpress Type A, etc. But, it has many things that they (now clearly purposefully) left out of the a7sIII - like waveform, timecode, vectorscope, a nicer LCD, superior video ergonomics, 3/8 mounting on top, an XLR adapter in the box which mounts into two of those 3/8 holes, etc etc. Unclear about IBIS, but I assume it will have it but no eND. Some of these are just rumors but I think they're accurate.
It will still be a perfectly good stills camera in the same way the S1H or Sigma Fp is (except better than the Fp). But, significantly better design and features for a video shooter.
Maybe I'm wrong and a ton of people bought the a7sIII largely for photography. But I doubt it.
This just kind of reeks of the Canon-like cripple now that we know this is basically what the a7sIII easily could have been, with essentially no sacrifice. Even further supported by this coming out AFTER the a7s.