I think you might really like the Nikon z8. Other than Open Gate, it hits all your points. It shoots tons of codecs, records up to 8k with various crops and resolutions available, has a very fast sensor, and features a locking ibis unit.
Agree 100% with your opening here. If you can't get good images out of most modern cameras, the problem isn't the camera. I still mix 8 bit shots from my A7Sii and ancient Lumix GH2 alongside my Terra 4K shooting ProRes 4444 and it works because I take my time planning my shots and getting my lighting right and getting 90% of the image I want in camera so it doesn't need heavy grading.
This lost me when it tried to say Prores is a better mid level codec than Braw. That simply isn't the case BRAW 12:1 or even better Q5 is more efficient than pretty much any Prores codec one would realistically want to shoot a project in when shot at the same resolution. Sure one could shoot Prores Proxy, but it's so horrible one is often better off shooting with H.264 or H.265, which several of the newer cameras do as a proxy automatically at the same time they shoot BRAW now. Seriously 10bit Prores LT 4:2:2, the smallest non proxy format that is worth shooting in, when shot at the exact same resolution is BIGGER than BRAW 12:1 which is a 4:4:4 12 bit codec. So it begs the question WHY would anyone choose to shoot Prores over BRAW? Some would then make the argument that BRAW is more limited in editors, except that is a half truth. BRAW can be read into almost all NLE either natively or with a Plug-in at this point in time, and a copy DaVinci Resolve Studio comes with almost all of Blackmagics cameras except the Micro Studio which is limited to UHD so works fine with the free version, and it works on MAC, Windows, Linux and even iOS on some Apple Tablets. If one needs a different codec then BRAW then the Blackmagic Proxy generator can convert those small BRAW files into large and less color rich Prores files fairly easily, or use Resolve to transform it into even bigger formats for theoreticaly incompatible software, except Prores exporting is not officially supported on any platform outside of Apple products. So sure that is a debatable limitation. Another argument I've herd is that BRAW is LOG and people don't want to deal with grading, except this argument falls appart because BRAW uses a sidecar file that includes linking a relative LUT that will auto load and apply with the footage. AKA it's not really an issue unless one breaks the footage folder structure. The only real argument for Prores is for in camera image processing. AKA lens correction and in camera effects getting baked into the footage. Given Blackmagic cameras don't do this type of processing the only time that becomes a factor is with cameras that use the Video Assist, which is outside the scope of the argument of this video as he clearly states he doesn't want an external recorder.
I think the point is that they should be giving us the choice and not taking it away. I would never choose prores over BRAW, but if for example you're on final cut pro, I don't see why having an option for prores would be that bad?
@@jammaschan Answer this. Why does one need prores if it offers no file size advantage while using a lower color bit depth, and doesn't integrate with Blackmagic cloud via dynamic proxies for rapid turn around? The only thing it does is perpetuate and old arguably inferior format that has no real advantage. IF one can name a real advantage to it I'm all ears, but to add something inferior to a product that would raise the cost of the product doesn't make any sense.
Great content, thank you! Especially that you don’t forget to put all technical obsession in perspective of the actual purpose of a camera.. ;) One quick note: the C400 actually has a 3:2 sensor, just like the fx6, not a 17:9 one. It’s really unfortunate that these two brands don’t open up to making full use of their „full format“ models.. 🤷🏻♂️
"Only Raw" when talking about Blackmagic cameras is not a valid criticism. They can be heavily compressed, beyond PRORES, with 12:1 etc, and outperform PRORES! The only downside is you are stuck with one workflow pretty much, in resolve, and if you hand off footage to clients it will be in a format they may not want (unless you transcode yourself beforehand).
@@LE_GRATINnot necessarily - ColorFinale has a transcoder for braw and I’m pretty sure you can now use Braw inside of Adobe… for sure you get the most benefit out of BRAW when working in Resolve though, at least for now.
This is a GREAT video. Totally agree with everything you have said here. The Pyxis records h264 proxies alondside the raw files. Super helpful. I bought one SPECIFICALLY for the resolution and control of the sensor as you mentioned, and the raw codec. The value proposition of that camera is currently unsurpassed. Subbed!
Great video! Thanks for putting so much hard work into these. I really enjoyed your dynamic range video. And totally agree on this one too, it's interesting to see what manufacturers will do moving forward.
Man, really lioke your channel, subsribed! Have to digress about your part on braw, its smaller (12:1) and (18:1) then any of the prores options, also smaller then all-i and many of the H264/h265 options out there, but you get all the benefits of 12bit raw and also one big thing working with braw or any other raw format includin all all-i and prores options is consolidating projects for archiving or later review of grade, with or without frame handles. doing mostly music videos, commercials and narative work, i find consolidating projects with long gop formats in projects is hit or miss, at least few of the clips have fewer frames and you get offline media in the middle of the clip in a timeline. only workaround is to convert all long gop clips to prores/dnx HQX and relink that files to timeline and consolidate from them. which is a pain, and time consuming.
Braw is great, and as a Davinci-based editor and colourist, I have no problems with it. It's just as cameramen we sometimes need to hand off footage and BRAW is not a widely accepted as industry standard codec, while ProRes is, and h.264/5 also, it's just how it is. Having options is always better than not having them. I would hate to have to transcode a terabyte of footage just because a client doesn't want BRAW. But anyway, it's not the biggest deal in the world.
That's why I bought sigma fp that shots true 12 bit uncompressed raw directly on ssd that I can just plug in and edit of it. It does shot 400mbps long I gop but sharpening and noise reduction cant be disabled. Every camera should have options to disable camera postprocessing so we get clean video!
Image quality peaked for photography in 2012, and for video it peaked in 2018 for consumer cameras. Only way forward now is for companies to create different sensor than CMOS with a bayer filter, unique colour profiles, different body designs to appeal to the masses. Sigma should do Foveon for m4/3, it would be far more successful than the previous Foveon attempts, not only is it small enough to not bottleneck the CPU, if they are competent enough to design a good body to go along with it, and allow for video, it could be a real winner.
@@jammaschan Blackmagic, Canon Cinema lineup are all same price range as a Sony A1 or a Canon R5M2. Besides you cannot sit there and claim Fujifilm X-T3 or Panasonic GH5 produce worse video than todays "low - mid range" cameras, I am assuming you want the price to be under 3k. What about Panasonic S1? This was a camera that pretty much defined video for a full frame when it released, Nikon Z6 III has about same dynamic range as the X-T3 in real world testing since they are both 12bit ADC video converters onboard you essentially limit your video to m4/3's level of DR anyway, in fact and you can look this up, the GH7 produces same useable DR as any full frame camera under 4k euro. Full frame has better noise, but if you are shooting at 6400+ ISO, you should invest into faster glass or maybe some lighting.
So... You're basically looking for an XH2S? ✅ Many choices of recording modes and codecs ✅ High Max Bitrate (730Mbps) ✅ 6K+ Resolution ✅ Open gate recording ✅ Native aspect ratio ✅ Next to no rolling shutter ❌ No IBIS (I imagine you could turn it off and live with this for all the other features) ❌ Internal 12-bit recording
Well outlined and I had not considered the sensor heat dissipation issues inherent with IBIS. I appreciate you pointing that out (and yes the slow sensor on the Burano is a total deal breaker even though I’m primarily a Sony shooter these days). I’m curious to see what Sony has in store for an FX9 update. My FX6 and FX3 kit covers me for a lot of shooting situations but I would like to have a 6k 3:2 option with a 12/16-bit internal codec for those times I want/need to do more refined color work. And can the keep this under $10k? Wouldn’t that be sweet. Anyway, Sony has been slower with the FX9 update than I had imagined, but there were some rumors swirling over the summer (which have since dried up) that an announcement was close, so maybe we’ll hear something definitive soon.
I think the only thing that can push Canon to enable Open Gate for the C400 is Sony releasing a competitive camera that has it. Otherwise, it's gonna be exclusive to their upcoming flagship (C800?), probably along a new 16-bit raw codec.
If you purchased a camera today for a solo creator who short films, doc work, and travel content, would you choose a Sony Fx3, Canon R5 mark2, or Sony zve-1 any other suggestions? Keep up the good work
Depends on so many factors, but let me put it this way: there are basically two separate paths - content creation and filmmaking. For the former yeah I'd go with the FX3 or even the FX30 if budget is a major concern. For the latter I'd go with Pyxis or Mavo S35 mk.II. Thanks for watching!
Honestly, I’d go s5iix over fx3 - fx3 has great rolling shutter performance but regarding codec options and doubling as a fantastic photo camera, the value proposition of the s5iix is well above the fx3 - and with the money you save, you can buy some really good glass. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve used the fx3 and it’s a great camera but doesn’t have open gate, has effectively one codec while the s5iix allows you to shoot directly in ProRes, you can select between long gop or all-intra and you can even record pro-res Raw without an external recorder should you need it. The primary advantage of the fx3 is that there are so many E-mount lenses relative to L-mount, but L-mount lens selection is growing and there is some very nice glass available.
At least your case is not as extreme as mine... I can only choose between recording at 60Mbps or 2000Mbps and at almost 2Gbps I can't edit directly because the editor doesn't accept the format (yet) so either I export to ProRes, HEVC or Cineform or I edit in CinemaDNG and in that case it goes to 4080Mbps... Note, this is not a camera, but a smartphone.
Even the C70 and C300markIII had a long list of codecs to choose from. I have received FX6 footage that was recorded in the long gop mode an 8bit and the operators had no idea. Since the camera doesn't tell you. Just seems insane to me, but another reason I still preferred Canon's DGO sensor. Too bad more ops just didn't take the time to learn about the differences. Here's hoping the C400 gains an open gate mode since the sensor is actually 3:2 but only 17:9 is being used currently. I also don't get the love for IBIS either. The burano seems so strange of a camera for that reason. Honestly, I think the biggest issues might actually be the buyers. A lot of operators asked for IBIS and lightweight codecs because many just didn't know why they might be a mistake.
your right. But you know what? Theses many operators want IBIS and light codec, because they do video. Not cinema. "cinema camera" are sell to video-operator. they don't know composition, they don't have a good photography, they don't have thousand and thousand pull-focus work behind them. they do "POINT & SHOT" with "cinema camera" .
@@LE_GRATIN I get all that, I just don't like the false advertising where the camera allows you to shoot slog3 while also in only 8bit. When the file breaks apart in 8bit very easily.
@@avdpost yes, we know that since A7S mk1 . In 8 bits, you need to tune your picture profil (sometimes, for each shot) for no Post process in NLE. it's work quite well. I was happy with "cine4" fine tune, 10 years gone.
BRAW is a good codec but the BM sensors tend to be very limiting in real world use. If you have time, budget, and crew for lighting a Pyxis will do a nice job. At the same time, if a client is putting up a proper shooting budget then they aren’t going to be happy with BM cameras.
@@waveland in what way are the sensors limiting? they have really decent dynamic range for their price, perfectly acceptable readout speeds and plenty of recording options
@@verebellus I had a pair of the full frame CC cameras which provide ISO400 and though the spec sheet says ISO3200 is the high-base it’s actually ISO1250. So if you have loads of sunlight or lots of lighting equipment then you can feed the sensor fine. But as a solo shooter often working with limited budgets and limited timeframes, feeding that sensor enough light isn’t practical. It’s a lot easier to drop ND in front of a Sony sensor set to ISO12800 than it is to light for a Pyxis maxed out at 1250.
@@waveland the second base is 3200, but theres a difference between digital gain and analog gain. The bases are analog gain, these can not be changed after the fact. but the iso you set the camera to is Digital gain. from iso 100-1000 its using the Low base, the lowest analog gain. and from iso 1250-6400 its using the high analog gain, after 6400 it is altering the image so much that you actually lose dynamic range. But from iso 100-1000 you can expose however you want and the highlights will be clipped the same. and you will get exactly the same highlights and shadow performance no matter which iso you choose within that range. all the digital iso does is change where it puts middle grey. i used the pocket 6k pro for about a year and if something was too dark for iso 1000 but a bit too bright for iso 1250. i would pop the nd on and use the high base instead. now blackmagic cameras cant see in the dark like sony can, but neither can the Alexa 35. it has only a single base iso, and exposing at the right iso on that camera is way more important than on a blackmagic.
@@verebellus Yes the S35 sensors have a usable 3200 base, but the new full frame sensor used in the BMCC and the Pyxis fall apart at 3200. And for film work I never add digital gain in camera. I work from the base and adjust accordingly either in light supplied on set or via adjustments in post. And at least for me the Pyxis sensor doesn’t provide the low-light latitude needed for a lot of shooting scenarios. Combine that with single slot recording and the ridiculous bulk compared with an FX3 and I’ve sold off all my BM equipment and moved on. I will look again to see what they do for an Ursa design in between the Pyxis and the new 12k cinema camera, but at this stage I’m not likely to go back. I’m much more interested to see what Sony rolls out in terms of an FX9 replacement.
Would he great if you would start the video by telling its about video instead of photo. I do also think Ibis was designed for photography and people did like it for video in some cases
Panasonic has this feature on quite literally most cameras. I have it on S5 IIX which is by no means considered ultra high end but bang for the buck high end. @@NicoBaum-dr5sf
@@shagral canon is a very logical and traditionnal brand. Canon make sensor for matching DCI-standard. Any cinema projectors chips ARE in DCI 17:9 format. So...for cinema it's the most logical standard. I shot for theater release since 2012, i have never ever use other ratio than 17/9, manual focus only, no ibis, raw only. That quite simple. 90% of films for theater release is shot only with spherical optics, and we have goods reasons to use only spherical lenses. For my personnal taste, annamorphic is just a "gimmick" a "hype". many spherical lenses HAVE "character" and that plenty enough. absolutely don't care about point a flash-light and see band-light and say to me "hooooo it's cinema!" 😅
I almost shifted over to the C400 but ultimately the lack of symmetrical dual slot recording put me off (an SD slot in 2024?). I had a major brand CFExpress B card die on me earlier this year. Thankfully this happened during some test shooting and I did not lose any footage owed to a client, but it definitely renewed my commitment to having full resolution dual-slot shooting on any paid project.
@@Chandler_Goodrich Limited bandwidth. You can’t dual record RAW or the faster frame rates internally and at $8,000.00 I find that an unacceptable compromise for paid filmmaking. A lot of operators will not feel that way, but when money’s on the line I do not want to depend on a single storage slot. That’s just how I choose to run my business.
I think you might really like the Nikon z8. Other than Open Gate, it hits all your points. It shoots tons of codecs, records up to 8k with various crops and resolutions available, has a very fast sensor, and features a locking ibis unit.
Agree 100% with your opening here. If you can't get good images out of most modern cameras, the problem isn't the camera. I still mix 8 bit shots from my A7Sii and ancient Lumix GH2 alongside my Terra 4K shooting ProRes 4444 and it works because I take my time planning my shots and getting my lighting right and getting 90% of the image I want in camera so it doesn't need heavy grading.
Yep, pretty much. Thanks for watching!
This lost me when it tried to say Prores is a better mid level codec than Braw. That simply isn't the case BRAW 12:1 or even better Q5 is more efficient than pretty much any Prores codec one would realistically want to shoot a project in when shot at the same resolution. Sure one could shoot Prores Proxy, but it's so horrible one is often better off shooting with H.264 or H.265, which several of the newer cameras do as a proxy automatically at the same time they shoot BRAW now. Seriously 10bit Prores LT 4:2:2, the smallest non proxy format that is worth shooting in, when shot at the exact same resolution is BIGGER than BRAW 12:1 which is a 4:4:4 12 bit codec. So it begs the question WHY would anyone choose to shoot Prores over BRAW? Some would then make the argument that BRAW is more limited in editors, except that is a half truth. BRAW can be read into almost all NLE either natively or with a Plug-in at this point in time, and a copy DaVinci Resolve Studio comes with almost all of Blackmagics cameras except the Micro Studio which is limited to UHD so works fine with the free version, and it works on MAC, Windows, Linux and even iOS on some Apple Tablets. If one needs a different codec then BRAW then the Blackmagic Proxy generator can convert those small BRAW files into large and less color rich Prores files fairly easily, or use Resolve to transform it into even bigger formats for theoreticaly incompatible software, except Prores exporting is not officially supported on any platform outside of Apple products. So sure that is a debatable limitation. Another argument I've herd is that BRAW is LOG and people don't want to deal with grading, except this argument falls appart because BRAW uses a sidecar file that includes linking a relative LUT that will auto load and apply with the footage. AKA it's not really an issue unless one breaks the footage folder structure. The only real argument for Prores is for in camera image processing. AKA lens correction and in camera effects getting baked into the footage. Given Blackmagic cameras don't do this type of processing the only time that becomes a factor is with cameras that use the Video Assist, which is outside the scope of the argument of this video as he clearly states he doesn't want an external recorder.
I think the point is that they should be giving us the choice and not taking it away. I would never choose prores over BRAW, but if for example you're on final cut pro, I don't see why having an option for prores would be that bad?
@@jammaschan Given one can't do dual recording of Proxies at the same time with Prores, it's limitations are what eliminated it.
@@billyoung9538 does having the option of prores make it so that you cannot shoot proxies with braw?
@@jammaschan Answer this. Why does one need prores if it offers no file size advantage while using a lower color bit depth, and doesn't integrate with Blackmagic cloud via dynamic proxies for rapid turn around? The only thing it does is perpetuate and old arguably inferior format that has no real advantage. IF one can name a real advantage to it I'm all ears, but to add something inferior to a product that would raise the cost of the product doesn't make any sense.
@@billyoung9538 compatibility and flexibility
I also add usability into the camera choice, but lighting is the key to great images.
Totally agree!
Great content, thank you! Especially that you don’t forget to put all technical obsession in perspective of the actual purpose of a camera.. ;)
One quick note: the C400 actually has a 3:2 sensor, just like the fx6, not a 17:9 one. It’s really unfortunate that these two brands don’t open up to making full use of their „full format“ models.. 🤷🏻♂️
Lumix S5IIX. Do some research, and I think you'll be happy with what you find in that $2000 camera.
"Only Raw" when talking about Blackmagic cameras is not a valid criticism. They can be heavily compressed, beyond PRORES, with 12:1 etc, and outperform PRORES! The only downside is you are stuck with one workflow pretty much, in resolve, and if you hand off footage to clients it will be in a format they may not want (unless you transcode yourself beforehand).
yes today braw is really the best codec for "any" situation, but you stick with resolve.
@@LE_GRATINnot necessarily - ColorFinale has a transcoder for braw and I’m pretty sure you can now use Braw inside of Adobe… for sure you get the most benefit out of BRAW when working in Resolve though, at least for now.
@@LE_GRATIN as long as I don't need to be stick with Adobe, it's ok.
This is a GREAT video. Totally agree with everything you have said here. The Pyxis records h264 proxies alondside the raw files. Super helpful. I bought one SPECIFICALLY for the resolution and control of the sensor as you mentioned, and the raw codec. The value proposition of that camera is currently unsurpassed. Subbed!
Thank you and welcome!
Agreed. It’s why I still love the ZCam E2 F6 and see little reason to upgrade.
Great video! Thanks for putting so much hard work into these. I really enjoyed your dynamic range video. And totally agree on this one too, it's interesting to see what manufacturers will do moving forward.
Thanks for your support, Seth!
Man, really lioke your channel, subsribed!
Have to digress about your part on braw, its smaller (12:1) and (18:1) then any of the prores options, also smaller then all-i and many of the H264/h265 options out there, but you get all the benefits of 12bit raw and also one big thing working with braw or any other raw format includin all all-i and prores options is consolidating projects for archiving or later review of grade, with or without frame handles.
doing mostly music videos, commercials and narative work, i find consolidating projects with long gop formats in projects is hit or miss, at least few of the clips have fewer frames and you get offline media in the middle of the clip in a timeline. only workaround is to convert all long gop clips to prores/dnx HQX and relink that files to timeline and consolidate from them. which is a pain, and time consuming.
Braw is great, and as a Davinci-based editor and colourist, I have no problems with it. It's just as cameramen we sometimes need to hand off footage and BRAW is not a widely accepted as industry standard codec, while ProRes is, and h.264/5 also, it's just how it is. Having options is always better than not having them. I would hate to have to transcode a terabyte of footage just because a client doesn't want BRAW. But anyway, it's not the biggest deal in the world.
Super glad i found your channel!! Subbed! 🙌🏾
Welcome aboard 🚀
That's why I bought sigma fp that shots true 12 bit uncompressed raw directly on ssd that I can just plug in and edit of it. It does shot 400mbps long I gop but sharpening and noise reduction cant be disabled. Every camera should have options to disable camera postprocessing so we get clean video!
Image quality peaked for photography in 2012, and for video it peaked in 2018 for consumer cameras.
Only way forward now is for companies to create different sensor than CMOS with a bayer filter, unique colour profiles, different body designs to appeal to the masses.
Sigma should do Foveon for m4/3, it would be far more successful than the previous Foveon attempts, not only is it small enough to not bottleneck the CPU, if they are competent enough to design a good body to go along with it, and allow for video, it could be a real winner.
How did it even peak in 2018 for video? It's still improving
@@jammaschan
Cinema cameras does not exist now? Wow.
@@SMGJohn bro you literally said consumer camera in your comment
@@jammaschan
Blackmagic, Canon Cinema lineup are all same price range as a Sony A1 or a Canon R5M2.
Besides you cannot sit there and claim Fujifilm X-T3 or Panasonic GH5 produce worse video than todays "low - mid range" cameras, I am assuming you want the price to be under 3k.
What about Panasonic S1? This was a camera that pretty much defined video for a full frame when it released, Nikon Z6 III has about same dynamic range as the X-T3 in real world testing since they are both 12bit ADC video converters onboard you essentially limit your video to m4/3's level of DR anyway, in fact and you can look this up, the GH7 produces same useable DR as any full frame camera under 4k euro.
Full frame has better noise, but if you are shooting at 6400+ ISO, you should invest into faster glass or maybe some lighting.
Sony always limit the hardware because they protect other cameras in the product line.
Totally bro. Why I shoot on s5ii most of the time
Maybe give a shot at Pansonic S5II IBIS, almost no issues (except rolling shutter ofc)
Yep, and even that you can reduce a lot of it using the APS-C crop mode
A man after my own aesthetic! You go, man!
Thanks mate!
So... You're basically looking for an XH2S?
✅ Many choices of recording modes and codecs
✅ High Max Bitrate (730Mbps)
✅ 6K+ Resolution
✅ Open gate recording
✅ Native aspect ratio
✅ Next to no rolling shutter
❌ No IBIS (I imagine you could turn it off and live with this for all the other features)
❌ Internal 12-bit recording
turning off IBIS still has similar issues
Well outlined and I had not considered the sensor heat dissipation issues inherent with IBIS. I appreciate you pointing that out (and yes the slow sensor on the Burano is a total deal breaker even though I’m primarily a Sony shooter these days). I’m curious to see what Sony has in store for an FX9 update. My FX6 and FX3 kit covers me for a lot of shooting situations but I would like to have a 6k 3:2 option with a 12/16-bit internal codec for those times I want/need to do more refined color work. And can the keep this under $10k? Wouldn’t that be sweet. Anyway, Sony has been slower with the FX9 update than I had imagined, but there were some rumors swirling over the summer (which have since dried up) that an announcement was close, so maybe we’ll hear something definitive soon.
I heard those rumours too, we'll see. Thanks for watching!
Another great one🎉
I think the only thing that can push Canon to enable Open Gate for the C400 is Sony releasing a competitive camera that has it. Otherwise, it's gonna be exclusive to their upcoming flagship (C800?), probably along a new 16-bit raw codec.
If you purchased a camera today for a solo creator who short films, doc work, and travel content, would you choose a Sony Fx3, Canon R5 mark2, or Sony zve-1 any other suggestions? Keep up the good work
Depends on so many factors, but let me put it this way: there are basically two separate paths - content creation and filmmaking. For the former yeah I'd go with the FX3 or even the FX30 if budget is a major concern. For the latter I'd go with Pyxis or Mavo S35 mk.II. Thanks for watching!
If there’s any chance at all of stopping production for heat and you can’t have that, stay away from the ZV-E1 and the R5II
Honestly, I’d go s5iix over fx3 - fx3 has great rolling shutter performance but regarding codec options and doubling as a fantastic photo camera, the value proposition of the s5iix is well above the fx3 - and with the money you save, you can buy some really good glass.
Don’t get me wrong, I’ve used the fx3 and it’s a great camera but doesn’t have open gate, has effectively one codec while the s5iix allows you to shoot directly in ProRes, you can select between long gop or all-intra and you can even record pro-res Raw without an external recorder should you need it.
The primary advantage of the fx3 is that there are so many E-mount lenses relative to L-mount, but L-mount lens selection is growing and there is some very nice glass available.
How about a Nikon Z8?
braw is the answer, but sadly it will take years for it to be truly adopted
At least your case is not as extreme as mine... I can only choose between recording at 60Mbps or 2000Mbps and at almost 2Gbps I can't edit directly because the editor doesn't accept the format (yet) so either I export to ProRes, HEVC or Cineform or I edit in CinemaDNG and in that case it goes to 4080Mbps... Note, this is not a camera, but a smartphone.
Even the C70 and C300markIII had a long list of codecs to choose from. I have received FX6 footage that was recorded in the long gop mode an 8bit and the operators had no idea. Since the camera doesn't tell you. Just seems insane to me, but another reason I still preferred Canon's DGO sensor. Too bad more ops just didn't take the time to learn about the differences. Here's hoping the C400 gains an open gate mode since the sensor is actually 3:2 but only 17:9 is being used currently. I also don't get the love for IBIS either. The burano seems so strange of a camera for that reason.
Honestly, I think the biggest issues might actually be the buyers. A lot of operators asked for IBIS and lightweight codecs because many just didn't know why they might be a mistake.
your right. But you know what? Theses many operators want IBIS and light codec, because they do video. Not cinema. "cinema camera" are sell to video-operator. they don't know composition, they don't have a good photography, they don't have thousand and thousand pull-focus work behind them. they do "POINT & SHOT" with "cinema camera" .
@@LE_GRATIN I get all that, I just don't like the false advertising where the camera allows you to shoot slog3 while also in only 8bit. When the file breaks apart in 8bit very easily.
@@avdpost yes, we know that since A7S mk1 . In 8 bits, you need to tune your picture profil (sometimes, for each shot) for no Post process in NLE. it's work quite well. I was happy with "cine4" fine tune, 10 years gone.
@@LE_GRATIN Very true. Maybe we are all just spoiled now.
i think ibis is more of a photo thing than for video, because if you are seriously shooting video, you are probably doing it on a tripod or some rig
i think blackmagic is still ahead of sony in regards to lower bitrate options, as you can at least choose several different compressions on the BRAW
BRAW is a good codec but the BM sensors tend to be very limiting in real world use. If you have time, budget, and crew for lighting a Pyxis will do a nice job. At the same time, if a client is putting up a proper shooting budget then they aren’t going to be happy with BM cameras.
@@waveland in what way are the sensors limiting? they have really decent dynamic range for their price, perfectly acceptable readout speeds and plenty of recording options
@@verebellus I had a pair of the full frame CC cameras which provide ISO400 and though the spec sheet says ISO3200 is the high-base it’s actually ISO1250. So if you have loads of sunlight or lots of lighting equipment then you can feed the sensor fine. But as a solo shooter often working with limited budgets and limited timeframes, feeding that sensor enough light isn’t practical. It’s a lot easier to drop ND in front of a Sony sensor set to ISO12800 than it is to light for a Pyxis maxed out at 1250.
@@waveland the second base is 3200, but theres a difference between digital gain and analog gain. The bases are analog gain, these can not be changed after the fact. but the iso you set the camera to is Digital gain. from iso 100-1000 its using the Low base, the lowest analog gain. and from iso 1250-6400 its using the high analog gain, after 6400 it is altering the image so much that you actually lose dynamic range. But from iso 100-1000 you can expose however you want and the highlights will be clipped the same. and you will get exactly the same highlights and shadow performance no matter which iso you choose within that range. all the digital iso does is change where it puts middle grey. i used the pocket 6k pro for about a year and if something was too dark for iso 1000 but a bit too bright for iso 1250. i would pop the nd on and use the high base instead. now blackmagic cameras cant see in the dark like sony can, but neither can the Alexa 35. it has only a single base iso, and exposing at the right iso on that camera is way more important than on a blackmagic.
@@verebellus Yes the S35 sensors have a usable 3200 base, but the new full frame sensor used in the BMCC and the Pyxis fall apart at 3200. And for film work I never add digital gain in camera. I work from the base and adjust accordingly either in light supplied on set or via adjustments in post. And at least for me the Pyxis sensor doesn’t provide the low-light latitude needed for a lot of shooting scenarios. Combine that with single slot recording and the ridiculous bulk compared with an FX3 and I’ve sold off all my BM equipment and moved on. I will look again to see what they do for an Ursa design in between the Pyxis and the new 12k cinema camera, but at this stage I’m not likely to go back. I’m much more interested to see what Sony rolls out in terms of an FX9 replacement.
Panasonic Eva1 is still insanee
Would he great if you would start the video by telling its about video instead of photo. I do also think Ibis was designed for photography and people did like it for video in some cases
I agree that IBIS absolutely sucks but the marketing department gets their way 😂😂😂
Actually I think what the battle will become is eco system
It's really too bad that non of the Canon cameras that have full frame sensors allow for 3:2 or 4:3 recording. Should be a firmware thing.
They seem to think it's some kind of high-end cinema feature to be reserved only for the most expensive model.
@@shagraland blackmagic and Panasonic
Panasonic has this feature on quite literally most cameras. I have it on S5 IIX which is by no means considered ultra high end but bang for the buck high end. @@NicoBaum-dr5sf
It’s a hardware thing, you need internals capable of that level of sensor readout
@@shagral canon is a very logical and traditionnal brand. Canon make sensor for matching DCI-standard. Any cinema projectors chips ARE in DCI 17:9 format. So...for cinema it's the most logical standard. I shot for theater release since 2012, i have never ever use other ratio than 17/9, manual focus only, no ibis, raw only. That quite simple. 90% of films for theater release is shot only with spherical optics, and we have goods reasons to use only spherical lenses. For my personnal taste, annamorphic is just a "gimmick" a "hype". many spherical lenses HAVE "character" and that plenty enough. absolutely don't care about point a flash-light and see band-light and say to me "hooooo it's cinema!" 😅
Lumix S5iix or Canon R5C
I bought the Canon C400. It does it all for me. The model in your video I’ve seen in a C400 video? The images were beautiful. Maybe yours?
Huh? Can you post the link?
I almost shifted over to the C400 but ultimately the lack of symmetrical dual slot recording put me off (an SD slot in 2024?). I had a major brand CFExpress B card die on me earlier this year. Thankfully this happened during some test shooting and I did not lose any footage owed to a client, but it definitely renewed my commitment to having full resolution dual-slot shooting on any paid project.
@@wavelandwhat’s the problem with an SD card? They are tried and true.
@@Chandler_Goodrich Limited bandwidth. You can’t dual record RAW or the faster frame rates internally and at $8,000.00 I find that an unacceptable compromise for paid filmmaking. A lot of operators will not feel that way, but when money’s on the line I do not want to depend on a single storage slot. That’s just how I choose to run my business.
@@waveland I never had a problem with SD cards. Ever. But I'd prefer 2 CFB cards too. Arri and RED use just one. Not a big deal.
Wrong B RAW is 12 bit NOT. 10 bit
What? I never said that it was