Probability of a new BMD camera in 2018?

[DPStewart]

The bmmcc is rated at 13 stops when shooting raw log and the gh5/GH5s is rated at 12 in vlog. Now I know raw will be 12bit and much more robust but if you can nail the exposure then they shouldn't be too far appart right?

In many instances that last stop can make a lot of difference.
However, in just as many instances we are increasing contrast in post and therefore removing a stop or so of DR. It's a valid thing to do when achieving certain looks.

I still don't think there is any DSLR/mirrorless camera shooting lower bit rates or codecs that can really compete with the USABILITY of the RAW on the BMD cameras.
If there was, I'd own one.
That being said, I am seriously looking at the GH5s as a "lowlight needs companion camera". Not an "A" camera. Mainly because I wouldn't have to change a single thing about my lens situation to add it.
But I need to get a hold of one and do some shoots first, because with my relatively fast lenses and the Speedboosters my BMD cameras do pretty darn well in low light already.
So the GH5s would have to be A LOT better for it to be worth it. But from the footage I have seen so far...it might be.

[stip]

Please, no GH5s debate )

[Alex.Mitchell]

I don't care if a company claims 10-stops or 15-stops; until there is an industry standard, broadly accessible latitude test that we can use to independently verify the manufacturer's claims, I have zero use for that information. And don't tell me to get a Xyla-21! Has anyone here ever tried getting their hands on one outside of a major centre like Burbank? They're rarer than hen's teeth.

[John Brawley]

Most manufactures stop / DR claim is based on a theoretical calculation based on sensor performance, not an actual photographic test.

It's well understood that Arri are probably the only company that seem to have underclaimed their DR.

There is no standard way of measuring DR.

That's because DR is subjective. What one person decides is an acceptable noise floor is not what someone else will find tolerable.

There's no machine that measures noise. There's actually no test equipment that does this.

Therefore, it's a weird subjective agreement based on how much noise is too much based on someone looking at a monitor. I asked someone who does QA full time on broadcast masters for a living how they measure noise and he told me "experience".

Uhhh, so yeah, no one agrees, therefore, no way to empirically measure it. That's why you get so many different opinions and weasel phrases like "useable" dynamic range. On top of that the skill of a colourist and recording bit depth can do a lot to help or hinder the files near highlight clipping recovery. Noise reduction can also further extend the reach into the shadows. The shot itself can affect how noise is perceived so again, lot's of variable can affect the perceived result. Noise in motion is usually perceived to be less than the noise from a still frame.

JB

[S_Berger]

The bmmcc is rated at 13 stops when shooting raw log and the gh5/GH5s is rated at 12 in vlog.

lol. 12 stops? Where? Do you have any source. If shit sites like cinema5d would not claim that the GH5 has 12 stops.
I think it is 10. Maximum 10.4.

And Dynamic Range is not about noise. If the is no difference in brithgness of a black image... than there is no stop. Same with white. So you can messare it. And there is a difference beweteen "technical DR" and "usable DR". And Blackmagic, but also RED, ARRI, etc... are talking about "usable dynamic range". And on the BMMCC it is 13 stops which is pretty acurrat. And on DSLR it is around 10.5 stops. Some sites want to push a Sony A7S II Vlog to 11.4 stops usabble dynamic range but it is just Bullshit.

[DPStewart]

lol. 12 stops? Where? Do you have any source. If shit sites like cinema5d would not claim that the GH5 has 12 stops.
I think it is 10. Maximum 10.4.

And Dynamic Range is not about noise. If the is no difference in brithgness of a black image... than there is no stop. Same with white. So you can messare it. And there is a difference beweteen "technical DR" and "usable DR". And Blackmagic, but also RED, ARRI, etc... are talking about "usable dynamic range". And on the BMMCC it is 13 stops which is pretty acurrat. And on DSLR it is around 10.5 stops. Some sites want to push a Sony A7S II Vlog to 11.4 stops usabble dynamic range but it is just Bullshit.

I agree.

But i also see the "acceptable noise" issue as ONE OF the criteria people tend to measure DR by.
Using a grayscale chart and the waveform monitor easily shows DR as a stairstep line. When the difference between two steps in no more than the width of the line itself then you can reasonably call that the limit.

RE: Measuring DR - It does work reliably when the exact same method is applied to all the sensors in question. I think folks should simply INSIST on that when anyone attempts to put forward any DR measurement conclusions about any sensor.

[Alex.Mitchell]

Uhhh, so yeah, no one agrees, therefore, no way to empirically measure it.

If no one agrees and it's largely a subjective figure anyway, why even bother listing it (other than to compare it with other cameras from the same manufacturer)? Manufacturers should at least show end-users how they came to those numbers by publishing their tests/data. I just want accountability and verifiability from manufacturers is all.

[DPStewart]

If no one agrees and it's largely a subjective figure anyway, why even bother listing it (other than to compare it with other cameras from the same manufacturer)? Manufacturers should at least show end-users how they came to those numbers by publishing their tests/data. I just want accountability and verifiability from manufacturers is all.

Indeed.
Really though.
It's just not that hard to hit multiple cameras on the same day with the exact same test. Even Tom Antos has done it.

The different test methods, done piecemeal, are just throwing noise pollution into a pretty simple concept.

[NorBro]

DR is just one feature of a camera...so many more considerations. Sometimes it doesn't matter what the number is and you may simply fall in love with the image.

[John Brawley]

If no one agrees and it's largely a subjective figure anyway, why even bother listing it (other than to compare it with other cameras from the same manufacturer)? Manufacturers should at least show end-users how they came to those numbers by publishing their tests/data. I just want accountability and verifiability from manufacturers is all.

Like I said, mostly they seem to calculate it theoretically, based on the SNR of the sensor.

It’s not a bad way to do it I guess, it takes out the complications of recording formats, lens, executing the test correctly etc.

Like I said, there is no standardised test that anyone agrees on for DR. I never quote the total stops of a camera, and I know any claim about the number of stops must always be proven by actually shooting with it. The only real way to test is to shoot the cameras you want to test side by side in the same conditions for yourself.

It’s so easy to say that you can tell but when noise and detail is so differently perceived you get ridiculous claims like when RED were saying their first EPIC dragon sensor was photographing 20 stops.

http://www.studiodaily.com/2013/01/n...65mm-comeback/

You can make these claims when you don’t care how noisy your threats hold is for photographic information in the shadows.

I know from my own experience which cameras have more DR than the other in comparison to each other. What does it matter how many stops they claim it is ? What matters is how they stack up order your shooting conditions right ?

Just like with lenses, you’ll find what they claim as a T stop on the side often isn’t real. Also plenty of variation on the shot size even when on the same focal length number on the barrel.

This is just understood to be the reality as opposed to the marketing speak.

JB