TomTheDP

Looks beautiful. Downsampled 4k to HD is hard to distinguish from HD imo. I'd recommend rendering in 4k to get that extra YouTube bitrate. 

I am waiting on Adorama's brand CLAR to put something out in the 1000w range. I have found their lights to be excellent in durability and light quality wise. 

Yeah, I may re-upload. I realize that. Except I deleted the RAW footage, I plan to upload another example and will upload in 4k, then will post it here. 

I am waiting on Adorama's brand CLAR to put something out in the 1000w range. I have found their lights to be excellent in durability and light quality wise. 

Spoiled in regards to what people had to work with not too long ago in this price bracket. I grew up with VHS home video, which is barely watchable now. I now own probably the best digital cinema camera ever made and also have a myrid of hybrid cameras that shoot videos that are remarkably close in quality to that said camera, at least to the untrained eye. Couldn't say that when I first got into this, at least not without a lot more money. 

The BM pocket 4k is still a super dope B-cam or budget A-cam. It's easy to match to almost any camera because you have the light 4k compressed RAW internal. You can't get anything with that capability for the same price. 

Spoiled in regards to what people had to work with not too long ago in this price bracket. I grew up with VHS home video, which is barely watchable now. I now own probably the best digital cinema camera ever made and also have a myrid of hybrid cameras that shoot videos that are remarkably close in quality to that said camera, at least to the untrained eye. Couldn't say that when I first got into this, at least not without a lot more money. 

I agree. It is definitely also important to hold companies accountable for what they make. That probably sounds privileged as we are so spoiled when it comes to cameras now. They are raking in the cash though so why not keep them on their toes. 

I have always been a Panasonic guy as I felt they always pushed forward when it came to image quality and new features. I have felt the same with Fuji. Sony and Canon have always felt more strategic in what they put out, in a bad way. Hard to escape from their state of the art auto focus. 

Nikon's current in camera RAW release is exciting though and overdue. Hopefully that pushes Sony, Panasonic, and Canon to include RAW in all their models. 

I guess I don't care a ton because I only really look at the technical side of his reviews. He is sometimes the first person to post dynamic range and rolling shutter tests, although he doesn't use a measurement for RS so its not super useful. 

yeah i kno!!!! cg sucks (for the most part, in practice)
ima watch chucky!!!!
note: halloween candy is priced crazily. $15 pack of american spirits. society collapsing
i say "CG" too!! who says CGI anymore lol

My brothers have been binging halloween movies, they just finished the entire Chucky series lol. 

Definitely one of the goofier horror film series. Makes me miss the days before everything was CG though 

Cinema screen is actually not a great example as 85% of theatres in the world are still using 2K projectors (that number was probably even bigger a decade ago). Cable TV in the US aren't even all 1080i with some networks still broadcasting at 720p. 
That is the main reason why ARRI have been so slow to develop true S35 4K cameras and why DI/editing/finishing have been done on 2K timelines.
We often like to put cinema on a pedestal for various valid reasons but truth is that concerning resolution, that whole industry has been lagging behind home entertainment and streaming productions for a minute. The 2014 video I linked already assesses that back then. We simply can't ignore what's been happening on streaming platforms and social media like it or not that's most peoples daily reality and benchmark. 
So yeah depending on what industry you're in, what you shoot, what your end viewer is displaying on, your storage capacity and bandwidth, what your post tech skills & min/max requirements are: different workflows, different resolutions, different codecs may be used in the pipeline. That is the reason why there are so many options.
Heck for some, 8-bit rec709 may still be better than 10-bit log or even 12-bit RAW.
So within this diversity of context I don't think we can really blanket one codec or one resolution format as being ok across all scenarios.
That said, sure 4K ProRes LT is a pro standard codec, fairly chunky and superior to low bitrate h26x. Its no XQ 444 though.
ProRes in consumer hybrids is a great leap forward. Much more practical than RAW in editing sense.
On a similar tangent, I also think open-gate has never been so useful. Traditionally for anamorphic shoot but today also serves the purpose of multi-aspect ratio deliveries which is becoming pretty common.
Oh I'll believe you that the IQ difference is marginal in between 3.2K & 2.8K and 2.8K & 2K downsampled.
However for anamorphic shooting, difference in between the XT's Open Gate 3.4K in ARRIRAW  vs 4:3 2K ProRes of the Classic was substantial as the video details. Even though technically they're both the same ALEV sensor with identical characteristics.
The LF has a larger than FF sensor shooting up to 4448 x 3096 so yeah that's a major boost in IQ as far as detail but also noise levels which was the biggest con of the OG Alexa S35 sensors imo.

The difference between 3.2k the resolution being used if shooting spherical and 2.8k which is what the Alexa classic sensor uses is pretty small imo. Yes the Alexa Classic is 2k, but its downsampled from 2.8k. If you look at the difference between downsampled 2k from 2.8k and 2.8k native it is pretty much impossible to tell the difference. The benefit of shooting RAW is definitely nice, ARRI raw has more texture than prores. Of course it comes at the cost of a little more grain. I am sure the little extra info in Prores 444XQ is helpful sometimes too. To me ARRI didn't get a big boost until the LF tho. You do notice the extra detail comparing the LF to any of the previous S35 Alexas. Comparing different flavors of 3k is pretty negligible though at least in terms of resolution. 

I do think 12bit 444 makes a noticeable difference over 10 bit if you push the color at all, mainly with skin tones.


just my 2 cents 

The difference between 3.2k the resolution being used if shooting spherical and 2.8k which is what the Alexa classic sensor uses is pretty small imo. Yes the Alexa Classic is 2k, but its downsampled from 2.8k. If you look at the difference between downsampled 2k from 2.8k and 2.8k native it is pretty much impossible to tell the difference. The benefit of shooting RAW is definitely nice, ARRI raw has more texture than prores. Of course it comes at the cost of a little more grain. I am sure the little extra info in Prores 444XQ is helpful sometimes too. To me ARRI didn't get a big boost until the LF tho. You do notice the extra detail comparing the LF to any of the previous S35 Alexas. Comparing different flavors of 3k is pretty negligible though at least in terms of resolution. 

I do think 12bit 444 makes a noticeable difference over 10 bit if you push the color at all, mainly with skin tones.


just my 2 cents 

I probably draw the line around 600-800 mbps, which would be 4.5 to 6GB per minute.
I prefer BRAW whenever possible - better than ProRes RAW - and of course it's internal on my BMPCC 6K Pro and BMPCC 4K. I generally shoot Q5 on both, which can average around 5-7GB/min on the 6K and about 2GB/min on the 4K. If I'm doing something that needs green screen work or anything like that, I might shoot Q1 on the 6K, which is a whopping 11-12GB/min or Q0 on the 4K which is about 8GB/min. But that's better than ProRes 422 HQ which is 7GB/min on the 4K.
I reviewed the GH6 recently and while ProRes is a great feature to have, it takes up a ton of space, especially if you shoot the open gate 5.8K. Much prefer to just shoot 200mbps H.265 LongGOP (in 5.7K DCI or 5.8K open gate), which is a lot nicer than ProRes 422 HQ which clocks in at 1522mbps (both 23.98p). For 4K DCI I would use the 400mbps All-I H.264 4.2.2 - I wish Panasonic had at least offered H.265 All-I 4.2.2 for the 5.7K DCI and 5.8K open gate, instead of just 4.2.2 All-I ProRes. Supposedly they did this since H.265 is heavy on computers, but my Mac Studio can easily handle it - even my Mac Mini M1 doesn't have a problem with it.
For me, I use BRAW whenever possible. It's the best compressed RAW codec out there outside of REDCODE RAW. Smooth as butter to edit and of course seamless integration with Resolve. CinemaDNG provides little benefit for me and produces massive files that are simply unwieldy to deal with.
ProRes is more of the a convenience thing than an actual efficient codec. It just works smoothly on a lot of computers without top of the line specs, but once you get beyond 1080 HD, it becomes simply too much storage.
I edit off a few SSDs in RAID 5 configuration, then I have some regular HDDs in a NAS for archival storage.
Hopefully more compressed RAW options open up in the near future once RED loses their patent in this Nikon suit - at least that's what I predict will happen. It will also be hilarious to me if Nikon, the company that has historically never cared about video or filmmaking, is the one to invalidate their stupid patent.
(keep in mind, everything I shoot is narrative film, so high-quality video is necessary - so I'm willing to tolerate higher bitrates, though not excessively so)

In terms of vintage glass I love the Pentax 50mm 1.2 

Shooting at 1.2 isn't super practical but it definitely gives a crazy interesting look. The Pentax 50mm 1.2 is the sharpest lens at that speed I have ever used at least of the vintage variety. 

I love the Minolta 35mm f1.8. It's my favorite 35mm vintage lens I have used. Very sharp and really nice lens flares and color. I wish it was adaptable to EF mount but alas your L mount will have no issue. 

In terms of super cheap 50s the Nikon pancake 1.8 is really nice. Very sharp and super cheap. 

I do love the helios 58mm as well. 

The Pentax 20mm 2.8 is the sharpest wide angle vintage lens I have ever used. Not super cheap but not super expensive. 

The Canon FD 85mm 1.8 is really nice. Low contrast but sharp, just super lovely. 

 

The computing time made it a lot less attractive for me. Definitely works a treat though. 

The magic of L mount is you can literally mount any kind of lens to it with a cheap adapter. That said it really depends what kind of stuff you'll be shooting. The Lumix lenses for the S1 line are solid if you need AF. 

I think it has more to do with processing than the codec itself. Of course motion will generally look better with ALL-I vs Long GOP due to the nature of the compression. But everything else comes down to processing. 

I would think aside from the manufactures choice in processing that H264 ALL-I at 200mbps in HD would match Prores 422 HQ at HD which is around 200mbps. 

Tough question. I love shooting higher bitrates with lower resolution. The Alexa Classic 2k lets me shoot in 444 without massive files and super smooth NLE experience. Sometimes I do crave 4k recording. With the relatively cheap costs of SSDs shooting 12bit 4k on the Sigma FP is doable. Still long term storage becomes a pain the more data you rack up. Maybe I just need a better archiving system. 

I'd say when shooting 4k its nice to have 5:1 compression option, really saves you a lot of space with no noticeable loss in IQ. 

Prores 422 seems to look nice and isn't too big. Of course with 8k its pretty massive, 4k or 2.8k things aren't so bad. Prores LT is a little brittle for me. But maybe shooting 8k kind of makes up for it. 

I just can't buy into the 6k-8k hype. 4k is a sweet spot for me and I don't mind shooting HD either. 

I assume you could get a zero distortion fast 24mm lens that would look about the same. Not many lenses that can do faster than 1.4 without compromising the image though. 

In my price bracket I just prefer 35mm vintage still lenses over cheaper S35 cine lens options. 

I am not sure what you are trying to say.

All the Alexa cameras before the 35 share the same sensor, the sensor just gets bigger and hence more resolution. Finer grain equals the appearance of less noise. Again the Alexa 35 changes this as it isn't the ALEV3 sensor. It's the cleanest and highest dynamic range Arri camera so far. This is what I find interesting. Will people choose the full frame LF which has worse high ISO performance, worse dynamic range, less color depth, and less accurate color reproduction just to get the FF FOV?

My point was this is the first time where the best sensor on the market is a S35 sensor with no sign of ARRI putting out a new FF sensor. We'll see what the big boys go with, time will tell. 

It's not really snobbery, it's the reality of a certain bubble "cine" world. That of ARRI/RED/VENICE.
Ironically, the very few theatrical releases I've done were shot with 5D3 (ML), C300mk2, BlackMagic Production Camera, FS7... albeit all low-budget documentaries/cinema vérité/art/festival films. And paradoxically, all my RED/ARRI shoots were for high-end commercials, TV, fashion/music videos. It's all relative. That's my reality.
To give further context, at Cannes this year films made with these cameras entered the competition:
C500mk2, S1H, A7S2, FX3, FX6, FX9 , A7III & iPhone 11X Pro (!).
https://ymcinema.com/2022/06/13/the-cameras-behind-cannes-2022-alexa-mini-still-dominates/
Mostly as B-cams & for documentaries but that is an interesting evolution. While the Mini still "dominates" those entries are the most surprising/interesting to me.
Budget, crew, clients pretty much drive what I'm going to use. The whole "cinema camera" term isn't really that relevant to me anymore personally. Yes, ARRI is the gold standard. But if an FX6, FX3, FX30 or iPhone better suits the project/budget then that's what will get used. I am attached to certain "cine" specs though.. shutter angle, DCI, I/Os, codecs, resolution, DR, rolling shutter etc. Luckily we're getting a lot of those in affordable bodies. 
Finally, "cinematic" image quality wouldn't be anything without lenses. The focus on these forums seems to be so tilted towards camera body brands, specs, sensor size etc.. but lenses can't be dissociated from the equation. It's really what may tie you to an eco system or a sensor size.
Seems like the big boy cine cam discussion has sort of turned into Alexa Mini/35 vs LF/VENICE.
If you look at the above camera Cannes list, or Oscar list or Emmy list.. it's actually pretty split in between S35 & FF.
You can reference frame it however you want, the divide is the same no matter the category. Some DPs prefer S35 others FF.
While sensor generation and overall specs (DR, ISO, resolution) may play a part, I think that again, what lenses a DP wants to use plays a decisive factor in his sensor size camera choice.
We've already had similar discussions in the past. I like to use real world examples to illustrate my arguments so let me re quote what the Ozark DP had to say about his switch to Venice with FF Leica glass:
“I started as a still photographer on 35mm film,” described Kutchins. “It creates a feeling. For example, I can describe it like shooting Super 8 versus full-frame, I feel like I’m watching it in a box, from far away. As a viewer, I feel distant, even in a close-up. It’s nostalgic, but I don’t feel connected. TV lives in the world of a medium close-up. We never go really tight. In full-frame, you still feel close." As Kutchins described, they took older Leica R lenses and rehoused them, which gave them the ability to shoot wide open. 
“It opens so super wide. I was intrigued by it as we went down the wormhole with the family, in isolation and distrust. I was intrigued to use the wider aperture to create more character separation. I love the result. Both Armando and I were excited by the possibilities. We play with depth of field and with lenses to create a separation from character in the background. Even with a wide lens, you can feel the character coming into my space and coming into the living room.
That’s what we’re trying to do as filmmakers, create a presence in 2D space."
 
 

I am not sure what you are trying to say.

All the Alexa cameras before the 35 share the same sensor, the sensor just gets bigger and hence more resolution. Finer grain equals the appearance of less noise. Again the Alexa 35 changes this as it isn't the ALEV3 sensor. It's the cleanest and highest dynamic range Arri camera so far. This is what I find interesting. Will people choose the full frame LF which has worse high ISO performance, worse dynamic range, less color depth, and less accurate color reproduction just to get the FF FOV?

My point was this is the first time where the best sensor on the market is a S35 sensor with no sign of ARRI putting out a new FF sensor. We'll see what the big boys go with, time will tell. 

Looks like the FX30 is a lot cheaper than we thought!