Agreed, unbearable narration, in an unbearable tenor of false gravitas. Turned it off after three sentences.
Isn't the headline a bit misleading? They are 4K recorders, not 4K monitors (the displays top out at 1920x1200 for the 7 inch model).
The grading is not optimal on this - down right awful for the flashbacks - and while the constant use of a sunny window for a backdrop does show of the latitude, it's not a very good creative decision. Makes for needlessly busy compositions. Overall the cinematography is competent, not much more. As for the camera characteristics - there is nothing to fault here, and those that do find fault with it are confusing creative decisions with technical merit. That said, I would like to see a higher resolution version, and have a feeling those desert landscapes are really going to sing when we do.
That very first shot with the sun in the frame has really smooth highlight roll-off, and throughout the many (clearly intentionally) blown highlights go from clip to color in a much more pleasing way than the old C300. And even with the somewhat aggressive grade you can see the consistency in the skin tones; you've got old, wrinkly guys, facial wounds, blotchy skin and a smooth young woman, in all sorts of light, but no weird separation of certain reds or yellows as often happens with RED (MX) and Sony (particularly when the grade is aggressive).
In the end, most new cameras are more than technically competent, making the final evaluation very subjective. For me, this showcase makes me optimistic, despite some dodgy creative choices. I'd really like to see more.
I have to say, from the specs to the construction, it seems like Canon were really, really listening to the feedback on the first C300.
I particularly like the improved, small details; wires connecting the monitor unit are now removable and interchangeable (very common gripe), 10 stops of ND (many pointed out that 6 stops fell short with a base ISO of 850), the mounts are now replaceable (ridiculous to have to choose before), the top-handle is both sturdier and has a lot more mounting points/options, it outputs raw.
Aside from the predictably disappointing frame rates, these specs are pretty sweet across the board - sweet enough for me not to feel guilty for paying an 8000$ premium over the FS7. Yes it's a lot of money, too much, but the Canon just feels so much better in all it's nuances. The build quality, the ergonomics, the logic of it's construction and the workflow, just the tactile feel of it.
But of course the image is at least 51% of the equation, so let's wait and see before passing final verdict.
I highly doubt that this is the same sensor with better processing. Better processing does not magically give you 3 extra stops of dynamic range.
Moreover, this sentence:
"haven't you realize the greenish color that is ALWAYS present because of the 2 greens channels in the sensor?"
reveals a fundamental ignorance of how digital images are created. It is (relatively) simple math to decide the strength of each channel in the final output. Currently almost all digital cameras use a Bayer pattern sensor, wherein you have two green-sensitive photosites for every pair of blue and red - Alexa, RED, Sony, Nikon etc.
This is simply a result of having square pixels and three primary colors; three pegs and four holes. The reason they choose to make cameras more sensitive to green (Which does NOT mean that green is amplified in the final image, only that more hues of green are possible) is because the human eye also has more green cones - human vision is more sensitive to green than Red or Blue. Why? Because the natural habitat of primates has a lot of green going on.
But I digress; the green color cast (that used to be) in Canon Log has nothing to do with 50% of the photosites being green.
Since we're getting into it, grammatical errors - which this would be, were it not made knowingly - are not typos. And neither are spelling errors. A typo is a mistake of typing - of input, not intention.