For real? Who cares? Who even buys this stuff? I bet they don't read NFS. I want the 4.6k sensor in a smaller package. Sorry, but the Ursa Mini is huge. They need something to disrupt the market and the only way for them to do that is to go after the GH5/GH5s. $2-3k. 4k, atleast 60p, raw capabilities, pro res, blackmagic color science, oh and decent battery life. They would take over the market. Maybe the next Pocket cinema camera will do this, I don't know. People who bought Pocket Cinema Cameras and regular Cinema Cameras are the ones who even made them relevant in this realm. Don't forget about us.
who is your audience? the categories are stupid and the list is ridiculous. "Best Camera with X & Mark in the name?" Canon 1DX Mark II. Lazy.
Anybody have the Star Wars LUT from the thumbnail? LOL.
Color space and color science are not synonymous. Please expand on “the real parameters of digital”. The entire internet community of filmmakers is depending on it. You’re telling me that I can make a GH5 look like an Alexa? The difference is the depth of the image, it’s like food. Lots of people can make spaghetti. However, please share! I’ll bow down. Btw, what do you shoot with and why?
Digital camera's do not have inherent looks? LOL! So, they all look the same? I'm confused. Why do people choose to shoot with an Alexa over a RED then? It's seems you're just here to troll, since you're not elaborating on your ridiculous statements. Have you ever seen behind the scenes footage and then the actual footage for a music video let's say? Or a family video at the beach vs. a movie scene at the same beach? That goes to show you that the location isn't the primary variable.
It's hilarious how worked up people are. These days "cinematic" means "looks like a movie". For most of these "internet filmmakers" they'd probably just put widescreen letterbox on their video and call it a day, right? I find that you have to break down digital video of most cameras to get a somewhat "cinematic" image (adding noise as an example). The closest thing to me digitally is an Arri or strangely enough the Ursa Mini 4.6k. It really is dependent on many things, color science, frame rate, camera movement, lighting and sound is also huge. The guy has 37k subscribers. If you think you're opinion has value maybe you should start sharing it with people who you think need to hear it. Here you're just preaching to the choir, complaining about some millennial who's using his platform to share his opinion. You guys sound like bitter old men. Truthfully, cinema is in the eye of the beholder. There is science behind cinema, but cinema is art, not science.