The Dancing Babamef

Resolution 8208x5472, pixel size 4.386μm, high dynamic range mode readout time 2ms, high speed mode readout time 1ms, same readout speed for both video and stills, double stacked back illuminated CMOS sensor

Yeah, this is super frustrating. BRAW is great but Blackmagic doesn't (yet) offer the sensor-in-a-box I need.
And looks like we won't be ever be getting internal ProRes RAW due to RED.
I bought a Ninja V+ recently. It's great. But it is something you need to rig, power and wire; one more potential point of failure that can **** a shoot.

RED who?

This is clearly a subjective question. To me, pleasing grain structure is well-defined, tight/small noise with no fixed patterns and as little green and magenta as possible. But please share your observations, even if your criteria for pleasing grain/noise is different.
For me, I'm really liking what I'm seeing from the Red One MX. Unsurprisingly, none of my other recent or current cameras (C70, C200, EOS-R, 5Diii with ML Raw, G85, or EM10iii) comes close. It meets all of my criteria for pleasing noise/grain. But I'm also curious if there's anything smaller that does well in this area.

Excellent work.

The C70 is a great image. In the right setting, it definitely looks great. Arri beat it in skin texture, color detail in the shadows, over exposure, color separation, etc.
I’ve shot very consistently with the Canon C300 Mk2 for the last 5 years. The C70 is such a close image. I’m sure the OG C300ii would feel very close to the Alexa as well. The DGO sensor is great and all, but the C300 Mk3 / C70 is also 5 years newer than the C300 Mk2. I’m honestly a bit underwhelmed if anything.  It’s just so similar. Cleaner... but again, it’s 5 years newer.
Things like false color, better auto focus, long GOP, cleaner C-Log2, 4K/60p are all things that impress me more than the DGO sensor. I’ve shot projects where I used the C70 and C300ii next to each other for interviews. For better or for worse, I very much doubt anyone could tell the difference, even when looking at the raw source material. 

The highlights are great on the C70, but anything pointed into the sun sucks. You get the clipping blob in really bright sources or the sun. Once you see it, you know what to look for and it is always there. Pocket 6K probably does it worse.  Komodo a little better. Film handles it by far the best.
Ive said this before... but the Long GOP 4k codec on the C70 is so great. You get a cleaner, sharper image than the older generation Canon cameras and it looks really great. The files are also almost 3x as small.
I’m interested to see what effect the CRL files will have on the image. If the files are even a little sharper and just a bit noisier / textured, that would be great.

As I gradually get more serious about learning the art of editing, I've discovered it's a very under-represented topic on social media.  There are definitely some good resources, but compared to cinematography or colour grading, it's much more difficult to find resources, especially if your interest isn't purely narrative film-making.
A good strategy is to search for editors by name, as often the good stuff is just called "<name> presents at <event>" and no mention of editing or even film at all.  However, you can search for editor after editor and find nothing useful at all.
As such, I've now started analysing other people's edits directly, hoping to glean interesting things from their work.
My process is this.
Step 1: Download the video in a format that Resolve can read
I use 4K Video Downloader for Mac, but there's tonnes of options.  You're probably violating terms of service by doing this, so beware.
Step 2: Use the Scene Cut Detection feature in Resolve
Resolve has this amazing function that not many people know about.  It analyses the video frame-by-frame and tries to guess where the cut points are by how visually different one frame is from the previous one.  It's designed for colourists to be able to chop up shots when given a single file with the shots all back-to-back.
This isn't a tutorial on how to use it (the manual is excellent for this) but even this tool shows useful things.
Once it has analysed the video, it gives you the window to review and edit the cut points.  Here's a window showing a travel video from Matteo Bertoli:

What we can see here is that the video has very clear cuts (the taller the line the more change between frames) and they occur at very regular intervals (he's editing to the music), but that there are periods where the timing is different.  
Let's contrast that with the trailer for Mindhunter:

We can see that there's more variation in pacing, and more gradual transitions between faster and slower cutting.  Also, there are these bursts, which indicate fading in and out, which is used throughout the trailer.  These require some work to clean up before importing the shots to the project.
Lastly, this is the RED Komodo promo video with Jason Momoa and the bikers:

There are obviously a lot of clean edits, but the bursts in this case are shots with lots of movement, as this trailer has some action-filled and dynamic camera work.
I find this tool very useful to see pace and timing and overall structure of a video.  I haven't used it yet on things longer than 10 minutes, so not sure how it would go in those instances, but you can zoom in and scroll in this view, so presumably you could find a useful scale and scroll through, seeing what you see.
This tool creates a list of shots, and gives a magic button...

Then you get the individual shots in your media pool.
Step 3: "Recreation" of the timeline
From there you can pull those shots into the timeline, which looks like this:

However, this wouldn't have been how they would have edited it, and for educational purposes we can do better.
I like to start by manually chopping up the audio independently from the video (the Scene Cut Detection tool is visual-only after all).  For this you would pull in sections of music, maybe sections of interviews, speeches, or ambient soundscapes as individual clips.  If there are speeches overlapping with music then you could duplicate these, with one track showing the music and another showing the speeches.  
Remember, this timeline doesn't have to play perfectly, it's for studying the edit they made by trying to replicate the relevant details.
This travel video had one music track and no foley, so I'd just represent it like this:

I've expanded the height of the audio track as with this type of music-driven edit, the swells of the music are a significant structural component to the edit.  
It's immediately obvious, even in such a basic deconstruction, that the pace of editing changes each time the music picks up in intensity, that once it's at its highest the pace of editing stays relatively stable and regular, and then at the end the pace gradually slows down.  Even just visually we can see the structure of the story and journey that the video takes through its edit.
But, we can do more.  Wouldn't it be great to be able to see where certain techniques were used?  Framing, subject matter, scenes, etc etc?
We can represent these visually, through layers and colour coding and other techniques.
Here is my breakdown of another Matteo video:

Here's what I've done:
V6 are the "hero" shots of the edit.  Shots in orange are where either Matteo or his wife (the heroes of the travel video) are the subject of the video, and pink are close-ups of them V5 is where either Matteo or his wife are in the shot, but it doesn't feature them so prominently.  IIRC these examples are closeup shots of Matteo's wife holding her phone, or one of them featured non-prominently in the frame, perhaps not even facing camera V4 and below do not feature our heroes... V4 either features random people (it's a travel video so people are an important subject) prominently enough to distinguish individuals, or features very significant inanimate objects V3 features people at a significant enough distance to not really notice individuals, or interesting inanimate objects (buildings etc) V2 are super-wide shots with no details of people (wides of the city skyline, water reflections on a river, etc) V1 is where I've put in dummy clips to categorise "scenes", and in this case Green is travel sections shot in transport or of transport, and Blue is shots at a location V2-V6 are my current working theory of how to edit a travel film, and represents a sort of ranking where closeups of your heroes are the most interesting and anonymous b-roll is the least interesting.  You should adapt this to be whatever you're interested in.  You could categorise shots based on composition, which characters are in the shot, which lens was used, if there was movement in the shot, if there was dialogue from the person in-shot or dialog from the person not-in-shot or no dialog at all, etc etc.  Remember you can sort between tracks, you can colour code, and probably other things I haven't yet tried.  NLEs have lots of visual features so go nuts.
Step 4: Understand what the editor has done
Really this depends on what you're interested in learning, but I recommend the following approach:
Make a list of questions or themes to pay attention to Focus on just one question / theme and review the whole timeline just looking at this one consideration I find that it's easy to review an edit and every time you look at the start you notice one thing (eg, pacing), and then in the next section you notice another (eg, compositions), and then at the end you notice a third (eg, camera movement).  The problem with this is that every time you review the video you're only going to think of those things at those times, which means that although you've seen the pacing at the start you're not going to be noticing the compositions and camera movement at the start, or other factors at other times.  This is why focusing on one question or one theme at a time is so powerful, it forces you to notice things that aren't the most obvious.
Step 5: Look for patterns
We have all likely read about how in many films different characters have different music - their "theme".  Star Wars is the classic one, of course, with Darth Vaders theme being iconic.  This is just using a certain song for a certain character.  There are an almost infinite number of other potential relationships that an editor could be paying attention to, but because we can't just ask them, we have to try and notice them for ourselves. 
Does the editor tend to use a certain pacing for a certain subject?  Colour grade for locations (almost definitely, but study them and see what you can learn)?  Combinations of shots?
What about the edit points themselves?  If it's a narrative, does the editor cut some characters off, cutting to another shot while they're still talking, or immediately after they've stopped speaking, rather than lingering on them for longer?  Do certain characters get a lot of J cuts?  Do certain characters get more than their fair share of reaction shots (typically the main characters would as we care more about what main characters think than what secondary characters feel while they're talking).
On certain pivotal scenes or moments, watch the footage back very slowly and see what you can see.  Even stepping through frame-by-frame can be revealing and potentially illuminate invisible cuts or other small tweaks.  Changing the timing of an edit point by even a single frame can make a non-trivial aesthetic difference.  
Step 6: Optional - Change the edit
Change the timing of edits and see what happens.  In Resolve the Scene Cut Detection doesn't include any extra frames, so you can't slide edit points the way you normally would be able to when working with the real source footage, but if you pull in the whole video into a track underneath the individual clips you can sometimes rearrange clips to leave gaps and they're not that noticeable.  This obviously won't create a publishable re-edit, but for the purposes of learning about the edit it can be useful.  You can change the order of the existing clips, you can shorten clips and change the timing, etc.  You could even re-mix the whole edit if you wanted to, working within the context of a severely limited set of "source footage" of course, but considering that the purpose of this is to learn and understand, it's worth considering.
Final thoughts
Is this a lot of work?  Yes.  But learning anything is hard work - the brain is lazy that way.  Also, this might be the only way to learn certain things about certain editors, as it seems that editors are much less public people than other roles in film-making.
One experiment I tried was instead of taking the time to chop up and categorise a film, I just watched it on repeat for the same amount of time.  I watched a 3.5 minute travel film on repeat for about 45 minutes - something like a dozen times.  I started watching it just taking it in and paying attention to what I noticed, then I started paying attention to how I felt in response to each shot, then to the timing of the shots (I clapped along to the music paying attention to the timing of edits - I was literally repeating out loud "cut - two - three - four"), I paid attention to the composition, to the subject, etc etc..  But, I realised that by the time I had watched a minute of footage I'd sort-of forgotten what happened 30 shots ago, so getting the big-picture wasn't so easy, and when I chopped that film up, although I'd noticed some things, there were other things that stood out almost immediately that I hadn't noticed the dozen times I watched it, despite really paying attention.
Hopefully this is useful.

Certainly came out of the blue, did this from Craig. I wish him all the best. Sounds like he needs a break like me. If he sold the site to a good home, and took a good pay cheque from it I hope he can build something fresh and new out of that and use the money to take a good photographic adventure.
Social media brings out the worst instincts in human beings.
Tribal behaviours. Epidemic misinformation and lies.
I didn't see what has been going on with Craig, but he seems to have completely deleted his Twitter and closed up shop there.
The internet is fucked.
Facebook can go out of business as far as I'm concerned, and they've ruined Instagram / WhatsApp too, so they can go in the bin along with the whole Meta group. Fuck VR as well. Nobody wants this shit. It's a distraction at best, at worst it can takes lives or destroys democratic political system.
Facebook and social media has sucked so much life out of my own business - this forum would be busier too, if it weren't for the distraction of Facebook groups and Twitter. Thankfully $200 billion shaved off FB's share price this week so couldn't happen to a nicer company.
I haven't always seen eye to eye with any of the rumours sites. But I genuinely do wish Craig well in what he does next

Below is a short excerpt from his post but this is not surprising as so much goes on behind the scenes that most don’t know about. 
 
https://www.canonrumors.com/thats-all-folks-for-me-anyway-canon-rumors-will-live-on/
This has sort of been in the works for about the last year or so. I haven’t had much fun with this site over the last 2 or 3 years, a new demographic of people have exhausted me. I think a lot of this change started with the proliferation of YouTube personalities over the last 5 years.
Nothing is about information anymore, it’s only about whose saying it. This is true for all forms of media and I really don’t want to be a part of it.
However, yesterday they came at my children and my wife. They came at my family….. little fanboys of certain YouTubers that have obviously been raised horribly. What was in my inbox I won’t even show my wife. I’m tearing up writing this with absolute disgust for how horrible people are becoming. All of this is created by the personalities (I refuse to call them creators), they feed off of it, they profit off of it and they don’t care
 

Sets the cameras to match each other, and surprised they look the same. One of the dumbest exercises I've seen in a while. Full frame is nothing special compared to M43 by the same logic.
Thinking that DOF is the only reason to choose a sensor size is ridiculous. MF is often shot at the other end of the aperture spectrum where the detail, dynamic range, and physical size of the optical and sensor area provide an advantage in image fidelity, or retaining the DOF while stopping down where a lens preforms better.
Alas, a typical Dpreview video.

They will have to make a correction video explaining why they are wrong. When people in the comment section know more than the guys writing the articles, maybe it's time to look for alternatives.

Do these people even still make videos?
Here's a thought...

Yeah, a gross over simplification in order to generate clicks.
It is the job of people like DPReview to break the surface and expand the knowledge of those in the market for gear. It's incredibly depressing to see the sheep in the YouTube comments. The same people who rave about full frame Sony this and Canon that, all seem to buy the Chris & Jordan line that sensor size doesn't matter and it all looks the same. Why aren't they all shooting with a GoPro then!
I really don't believe DPR are this stupid and I think it could be a ploy. They are either doing this on purpose to create controversy, discussion and attention, or pandering to their vast majority of readers who own Sony & Canon full frame or APS-C cameras. If Amazon sells more of those, DPR has done its job. GFX and medium format users probably don't need to read DPReview anyway for advice on sensor size! Especially not when it's this wrong.
The F3.5 vs F1.8 shit is what really gets me.
It's like comparing the top speed of a Ferrari and a family run-around, but never accelerating past 30mph... then claiming they are the same! WTF!
It's impossible to satire it.
It even feels stupid criticizing it because in order to do so you have to point out such blindingly obvious stuff!
Every time Chris and Jordan recommend a full frame camera over micro four thirds from now on I will remind them of this video.

🙂

"Nothing unique or special about the look"
"They are all equivalent... APS-C, full frame, medium format"
*Stops down GFX lens to F3.5...."Same look to DOF as APS-C at F1.8"
FUCK
When camera store salesman become an authority on photography and video...
You get this!
Widespread misinformation.
Sad to see how many people in the YouTube comments just accept it.
Stopping down a medium format camera and then complaining it can't do anything different to an APS-C model at F1.8????
Put a Minolta MD 58mm F1.2 on APS-C, full frame and medium format and tell me they all look equivalent!
With same lens, look would be completely different on all 3.
Equivalency is being taken to mean there is no difference in the look of different camera formats.
It completely ignores the fact that lenses are matched to sensor size.
If you take one designed for one format and apply it to another, it looks different!
I wouldn't be surprised if they punted this out just to generate the heat.
It is after all quite chilly in Canada.

You give me a reason to laugh, that would be a start.

I think you're a consumerist idiot.
Genuinely - if you don't want hyped prices... why cut and paste a YouTube hype piece about it all over Internet forums.
And then say "NOOOOOOOO"
What are you? a 12 years old?
This shill likely trawls this forum for content ideas - This thread being one. Which is why you see his F3 hype piece and smirky expression.
Where do you think he genuinely got the idea for buying an F3 from?
Do you really think he has a single original idea of his own?
Youtube - the gold standard for scientific research 😂
And his stuff is that boring too, I can't get past the first 15 seconds

If you like lugging around very old heavy cameras, yes.

Still think Komodo has it. 
Global shutter and Recode Raw > Canon Raw.  That patent, may it burn in hell, is still doing its job.
 

It's illegal to talk about Panasonic and mention anything other than their poor AF.
This is your first and only official warning.  

https://www.canonrumors.com/here-is-the-canon-cinema-eos-c70/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+canonrumors%2Frss+(Canon+Rumors)
 
No wonder they didn't want the EOS R5 to go the extra mile.
They had this to flog us.
Who's got a spare $6K?

I've got no interest in the camera to be honest but I'd just like to say that its always good to see the democracy manifest fella making an appearance in any video.

 

Dolla dolla bills y'aaalllll
 

I don't watch too many YouTube reviews but I have to admit that your near-awkward Web 1.0 video style is kinda endearing. If I have to see another blue light special review on the bridge of the S.S. Cliche-aprise I may just gag. And since nobody on YT makes videos about the 5D Mark III and ML Raw, I have very little reason to watch.
With that said, why are Canon going all in with the R Mount? The R3 seems kinda nifty I guess, but I'd much rather have RawLite on an EF mount 5D Mark V with IBIS and internal NDs.
Like you said, the DSLR revolution is... over.
Maybe we should start producing art on cameras that were released pre-2015.
Fuck 'em!