Hasselblad is aiming to wipe out the MF competition.
>>2867666
I'd rather use one with a proper viewfinder
>>2867666
I say it takes nice photos, but I'm not sure who this is aimed at.
Has anyone found a habbelsad face on it yet
>yaawwwn!
>>2867672
This camera is cheaper than the leica S system, so it's not outlandishly expensive. Depending on performance of course, this could make an impact with press photography as it seems far more compact than a full frame slr system while potentially providing much higher quality. It would be hard to beat a rugged 1dx though.
>>2867710
How is any of that ridiculous to say?
The Leica S is almost twice as much for the camera body.
It's a mirrorless camera and based on the size of the sensor and the body it doesn't look much bigger than existing medium format rangefinders. Being that it is medium format I would be shocked if its image quality ends up lower than a current full frame camera.
Calm down lol.
>>2867669
But would you pay 20000 euros or dollars for it? There's the Pentax for sure but for some reason many pros still use either Hasselblad or Phase One.
>>2867672
The same people, who already shoot MF, i.e. landscape and studio photographers and because this is relatively compact, it may attract other people as well. Maybe even some street photographer would want to try this? I shoot landscapes and if I could afford this, I'd buy it without thinking twice.
>>2867717
>The Leica S is almost twice as much for the camera body.
It's also retardedly expensive, and very nearly literally nobody owns one. That's like saying that a Maserati GranTurismo isn't expensive, because it's less expensive than a Veyron.
A 40 million dollar house isn't that expensive, because look, Someone over there has a 90 million dollar house!
Compare it against what the normal market is, and yes, it's fucking expensive as shit.
It's also not any more compact than a DSLR, and why the hell would it ever be? A lens that covers a medium format sized sensor is going to be double buttfuck the size of a full frame lens, OR, it'll be dramatically slower, with less features, and will still cost more money.
At 11690 for a one lens kit?
That's such a ridiculously low price for medium format, it must be one of the older type crop sensors. I'll be interested to see whether it does any good at all. It's really competing with the 645Z more than any other medium format system at that price
You guys are forgetting all of the rich Chinese people who will buy this thing just to show off.
That aside, there's still a niche for Hasselblad and other MF cameras, though. I could see this thing being great for advertising photography outside the studio, and it might even be able to catch some commercial action stuff that hasn't been practical with previous MF cameras due to how slow the big mirror mechanism was. (In-motion automotive shots are an example of that.)
I also saw some 'Blad shooters admit something interesting in a video recently, too. A lot of the time, shooting Hasselblad is only half about the images, the other half is about showing up with a camera that impresses clients. It helps commercial photogs justify their prices in a way they couldn't do if they showed up with a D800 and the client was an enthusiast who owned the same setup.
>>2867666
sony on suicide watch
>>2867666
>yfw that looks similar to a pentax k01
>>2867731
I think that this camera will be very successful. One of the things you want with an ultra high resolution camera is precision. SLR and precision don't exactly go hand-in-hand, which is why it was so exciting when these medium format SLRs started getting live view. This camera cuts out the middle man and uses live view full time, which is the same principal as smaller medium format cameras. Only, I think the benefit of live view will be even greater on a camera of this type, which wouldn't be shooting sports regardless. Also, being 645 or smaller, it will be able to use nearly every medium format lens ever made, except maybe a few fuji rangefinder lenses, if those are even interchangeable.
>>2867737
CANNOT BE UNSEEN!
>>2867727
Lol I don't think you know about medium format. This is like the cheapest complete digital medium format camera; If you want something cheaper you buy a back for 4k for your film hassy. The lenses for medium format are bigger, and slower but they aren't bigger by much. Something like an f3.2 lens in medium format isn't exactly slow like it would be for a ff or more so a cropped sensor. Whatever dude, it's out of your budget. For professionals this isn't bad.
>>2867742
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Macintosh Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2012:02:02 11:18:17 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 570 Image Height 450
Is there a case for diminishing returns?
What I mean is that quality does not scale with price. So those people who are saying they would buy one without hesitation, surely a FOOL frame would be sufficient with a nice lens.
>>2867750
It would be sufficient but MF goes the extra step. More resolution, more dynamic range...
Because I have to also eat and live somewhere, I can't buy a digital MF but I do acknowledge its advantages.
I'd say price and quality increase proportionally until the ballpark of D810/Sigma Art/Zeiss Milvus and after that it's all chaos. FF pro cameras are still reasonably priced but the extra money mainly increases speed, connectivity and build quality. MF can potentially increase image quality but not as much as you have to pay for it, especially if you go beyond this new Hassy and Pentax. And then there's Leica, which has reduced itself to a fashion accessory company.
IT'S FUCKING NOTHING
>>2867750
APS-C is the sweetpoint in price/performance.
I like my FF DSLR for its bigger viewfinder and lens selection.
But a FF mirrorless is already dumb IMO.
>>2867762
>But a FF mirrorless is already dumb IMO.
Why?
I shoot a lot in dark environments, so for me FF is the sweet spot and there are also a lot more nice lenses available. I shoot a D7100 and my friend shoots a 6D and he can puch ISO a stop of two higher and still get cleaner results. It's also ridiculous that the 12-24 mm I use costs more than the 16-35 mm. With FF i could have even settled for the 18-35 mm. Thank Ukko for used lenses...
>>2867757
Good reply, thanks.
I'd say if you really are aching for MF, get a film MF and find a decent film lab - you can do wonders with a 120 roll of Ektar. And you'd go through several rolls of Ektar for $9000.
>>2867762
I agree. The size difference between APS-C and FF is tiny when compared to FF and MF.
The most important question: Can old medium format lenses be adapted?
>>2867780
>The size difference between APS-C and FF is tiny when compared to FF and MF.
2.25x vs 2.7x (assuming full 6x4.5, smaller with most MF sensors)
>>2867780
I'm lucky to have a photo enthusiast as a father. When I started to take this hobby seriously, I started with a F-801 to learn the very basics of theory and after a few years bought a D7100. If I want to shoot something bigger, I can borrow my father's Hasselblad or Linhof and we even have a darkroom at home. So that sector is pretty well covered. PAN F PLUS is my favourite. Colour film is a bit of a mystery for me, because I have never shot it.
>>2867757
>It would be sufficient but MF goes the extra step. More resolution, more dynamic range...
You may know something I don't but that advert tells me almost nothing about the camera. All is says is "We're Hasselblad, give us money ... nowt"
>>2867794
The exact details are unknown, because the camera will be officially announced tomorrow but looking at reviews and photos taken with MF cameras, they do things that lesser cameras simply can't do. As far as I know, the Pentax 645Z uses the same Sony sensor as this Hasselblad. Here are some thoughts on that camera:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0121577106/medium-well-done-two-takes-on-the-pentax-645z
The CFV-50c also uses the same sensor.
Let's assume that for a pro the D810 represents the last point, where price and "quality" meet. Some pros pay extra for more speed, more connectivity, better high ISO capability and even more rugged build quality, i.e. the D5. Some other pro could be willing to pay more for even better image quality and that's where the Pentax and this Hasselblad come in. For a hobbyist, like myself, those cameras are practically out of reach but that doesn't mean their price makes them useless.
i want to put my old pentacon six and pentax 67 lenses on it. also i want a WLF. if i can have these two id buy it no hesitation.
>>2867793
Yeah you're lucky. I have some very enthusiastic friends and my gf is an art photographer - or she used to be, you can't feed yourself off that talent.
I hope to do that to my kids some day - if I have any. If not, I want to be one of those interesting old fucks that has a dark room and a few decent film cameras, and hopefully some minor legacy worth talking about.
>>2867708
>this could make an impact with press photography
u wot
>>2867783
doubtful but Im sure the Chinese will have adapters soon
>>2867844
>mfw RB67 glass on a digital back
I'll rob a fucking bank for one if someone makes that work somehow.
>>2867846
>>mfw RB67 glass on a digital back
>I'll rob a fucking bank for one if someone makes that work somehow.
????
>>2867666
OH SHIT
that's exciting news
>>2867870
ikr? i thought this was gonna happen in 2018 or something. mfw the faggots at the "future of photo technology" thread couldnt even see it coming.
Its a properly sized Leica SL!
>>2867884
>>2867697
There's this
>>2867885
I got to play around with an SL a few months back. I was shooting the shit at the local store and the guy said something to the effect of "dude, check this stupid fucking thing out."
What an awkward fucking camera. It's like holding a pro Nikon or Canon body, but with much worse ergonomics, and it's absurdly heavy. The 24-90 is similarly huge and heavy too, especially considering it's variable aperture.
>>2867708
>press photography
yeah because press photographers always choose image quality over speed and precision, fucking kek faggot
>>2867747
That is hideous even for Pentax
>>2867981
>Depending on performance of course, this could make an impact with press photography
>It would be hard to beat a rugged 1dx though
Literally read the post properly before you decide to be a faggot, faggot.
>>2867737
A K-01 with better ergonomics and a touchscreen, and a viewfinder
Im going to buy this fucker, get a c-mount adapter and shoot snapshits with it.
>>2868037
You should try a pinhole cap instead.
>>2867885
Sony really nailed the design/size for the A7 series. 1st gen still had issues with slippery surface and grip, but second gen fixed all of that at the expense of a bit more weight. Still surprised at how they managed to cram an IBIS system in there.
>>2868093
>tfw when I actually build myself a pinhole camera out of an old MF camera
Fuji are the only ones doing it right, MF mirrorless was always going to happen (Fuji have been developing theirs for a few years already) AND the difference in performance between APSC and FF is negligible, with APSC offering the best size to performance ratio.
MF is going to become more of a standard because it offers a big jump in IQ, the size is no longer ridiculous and the price is not as outrageous as it used to be.
Fuji will offer both APSC and MF systems (they already manufacturer Hasselblad MF cameras and lenses), Sony will do the same, Canon and Nikon will continue to do high end FF DSLRs but the market landscape is really changing.
Seriously, a MF mirrorless for under $10k by HASSELBLAD, the Fuji and Sony alternatives will be even cheaper, it is yet another reason while companies offering mirrorless options will gain marketshare while high end DSLRs will become more niche.
As I mentioned Fuji are the ones doing it right, once MF becomes more mainstream (and it will) people won't want to use the ridiculous a7 series cameras with their FUCKHEUG lenses, sorry sonyfags but APSC offers almost identical quality and a smaller size which compliments a MF system better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tah8tiFLBZc
Live stream here
Jesus this thing looks tiny.
>>2868176
>>2868178
noice
>H system lenses are compatible with small adapter
>14 old lenses usable with simple adapter
Not sure if it'll have electrical contacts though since it's supposedly simple
I don't understand why the photo industry hates mirrors so much. Yes they are slow and mechanical but you don't have to deal with looking at a screen or a terrible evf. I'm sure the camera itself will make fantastic pictures and will be handy for landscape and studio work
>Let me be very very clear. First of all we have a very good relationship with FUji. But this product has been produced, concepted here in Sweden. Manufactured in Japan by Nitto. Nothing in relation to Fuji.
Fujifags get rekt.
Grip looks to be a good size.
Last post from me.
Info up on the Hasselblad site already
http://www.hasselblad.com/x-system/x1d-50c
>>2868187
It also said MULTIPLE TIMES
>handmade in sweden since 1941
Which is an outright lie, everyone knows Fuji manufactures bodies and lenses for them, so why would you trust them about what is being said??
I mean even what you quoted >manufactured in Japan
.......... How the fjck is that handmade in sweden again??
>>2868196
He said this specific camera body is manufactured in Sweden. Try to stop the fuji shilling from impairing your hearing
>>2868192
>50MP
>>2868197
No you fucking faggot, every slideshow and video they showed said handmade in sweden since 1941
Hope you enjoy the shit they just shovelled down your throat
>>2868200
You're not very smart are you
>>2867783
Depends on the shutter mechanism they've opted to use.
>>2868203
They're going with a leaf shutter built into the lens same as the H series cameras.
>>2868204
Fuji manufactures the lenses and bodies for the Hasselblad H series.
>mfw
>>2868192
>contrast detect AF
Game changing? As in going backwards?
My EOS M has a more advanced AF.
>>2868235
You got it all wrong. It's retro just like Fuji X series or Nikon DF.
B&H video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQIxvY1ofXc
>>2868235
Then why can't your Eos M keep up with the contrast detect AF of any Panasonic camera? Or even any Olympus for that matter? These days you can't judge mirrorless AF by it's type, even lowly contrast can be faster than contrast +phase +4D laser analyscope
The press conference guy acts as if millions of people are going to drop 9k on camera.
Top kek.
Also that moon landing meme is getting so fucking old right now.
>>2868243
This is probably a stupid question but will there be any pancake lenses for it? I love the idea of a compact medium format camera.
>>2868247
It might be possible to use rangefinder lenses, I think it's the smallest you can get.
14 stops of dynamic range kinda sucks, it's a shame they used an older sensor.
There are a few MF sensors now that boast 16 stops.
>>2868264
Those don't cost less than $10,000 however. The point is to give an affordable entry into the medium format world. Not to devalue the entire medium format world.
>>2868266
Yea but with things like the D810 being around, having almost the same amount of MP, same DR and an ISO 50 mode for clear massive prints, you have to ask what the point of this is.. I would think it should totally outclass 35mm in every way and not just kinda do a little better, for the price tag anyway. Plus how slow the lenses is a big put off, 35 2.8.... I mean come on I can get a 35mm 1.4 and a D810 for less than half the cost of this machine.
>>2868190
Damn that's small. How long's the battery last? Bet a connection to a wall outlet would be good.
The D810 isn't a MF sensor.
What are the benefits of full frame? Better dynamic range, DoF becomes shallower due to the longer lenses required to achieve the same point of view as crop, and of course iso performance gets a lot better.
MF sensors are the upgrade from FF.
Their crop factor is 0.62 (FX is 1, DX is 1.5)
So that 45 is going to look a lot like a 28, and it's going to have a lot shallower DoF than you'd expect from a 3.5 on FX. In fact, it's going to look like a f/2.2 FX lens. So you see "45 3.5", in FX terms, that's a 28 2.2.
>>2868304
>and it's going to have a lot shallower DoF
That's not a good thing.
>>2868305
It's a difference. It's not good or bad. "Fast" lenses in the MF world are 2.8s. Comparing a sigma 35 to anything MF is silly - the 35 doesn't put out an image circle anywhere close to what MF lenses are delivering. Totally different class, different rules.
>World's first mirrorless medium format digital camera.
What about the Alpa + digital back?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Hasselblad Camera Model Hasselblad H4D-50 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS4 Macintosh Photographer SCANDERBEG SAUER PHOTOGRAPHY Maximum Lens Aperture f/4.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 30 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2013:07:01 17:25:30 Exposure Time 1/250 sec F-Number f/32.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 50 Lens Aperture f/32.0 Subject Distance 0.63 m Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Flash No Flash Focal Length 43.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 800 Image Height 800
>>2868196
Yeah my bad I left some parts out.
>Body 100% Hasselblad : "completely designed, concepted (sic), produced, manufactured here in Sweden"
>Lenses: "concepted and designed in Sweden, manufactured in Japan by Nittō"
Again they stressed no Fuji involvement in the camera or lenses.
>>2868331
>>2868334
They probably meant digital camera in that all the controls are digital, and AF/EXIF. Alpa is pretty much a MF back strapped on an analog camera. You get the bare minimum digital controls that the back offers you.
>>2867717
>It's a mirrorless camera and based on the size of the sensor and the body it doesn't look much bigger than existing medium format rangefinders.
X1D has a retarded 44x33mm sensor. Sure it is enough to shut up Nicanon fags but rangefinder medium format cameras have bigger frames and - sic! - have a rangefinder and that ridiculously priced 45mm F3,2 objective is kinda 38mm F2,6 on 35mm sensor - lol wat, where is that speed gain from going mirrorless?
>>2867669
H6D, but you can't afford that either.
>>2868204
The XCD lenses have nothing to do with fuji.
>>2867747
Appalling design. Kill it with fire.
Hang your head in shame, Newson.
>>2868196
Leicas are made in Portugal, yet they claim that it was 'made in Germany'.
just fucking shoot film
Only Hasselblad fags will buy this, any normie would regret it if they drop the cash to only see the Fuji and Sony offerrings down the track with far better tech and design.
Those companies also don't have a business model that needs its consumers to upgrade to a 60k model.
Fuck Hasselblad, can't wait for them to go out of business.
>No 4K video
jesus fucking christ it's 2016
guess they'll get it right by 2018 or 2019 with a second gen
>>2868567
If Sony had overheating issues recording 12MP from a FF sensor, Hasselblad will literally have a bomb on their hands if they sampled full 50MP from a MF sensor. They still got 1080 25FPS RAW video though, so shouldn't be terrible if the need arises.
>>2868512
Leica's are partly made in Portugal. They can still claim "Made in Germany" if there is a certain percentage of the camera actually made in Germany.
No camera is fully made anywhere anyways. The M240 sensor is made in Belgium.
>>2868501
I think the Fuji fans went full retarded after the CEO stated that Fuji has nothing to do with that and even made fun of the sensor/camera size.
>>2868226
Holy crap, that Fuji looks huge now.
>>2868712
It always has been huge.
>>2867747
Am I the only one who likes it?
I'm gonna get one. Can adapt all my glass, great walkaround & back-up. Not fuckhueg. Ticks a lot of boxes. Did you guys see the xpan mode? Sure, not the same, but still!
>>2868226
foojifags on suicide watch
>only $9000
bentaxfag on suicide watch.
>>2868226
Leica SL is a fucking embarrassment.
Fujifilm's is too.
At least the Nikon has the excuse it needs a large mirrorbox.
>>2868871
Sorry, I'm out of the loop and don't feel like digging through press releases.
What's up with the adaptability? Can it take the V lenses? What about 35mm lenses?
>>2868341
>where is that speed gain from going mirrorless?
And that's exactly why FF is the best format: fastest equivalent apertures of any format.
what a time to be alive
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Photographer Adomas Mockus Image-Specific Properties:
>>2868984
I'm very excited to see how they keep the image quality in the corners looking good.
>>2868984
That pentux is a collosal waste of space.
What do they even use all this space behind the sensor plane for?
It can't be the AF module.
They have some of the most primitive video processors around, so it can't be that either.
LCD panels aren't THAT thick, so it can't be that either.
What the hell is it that takes up that much space? Batteries?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software paint.net 4.0.5 Photographer Adomas Mockus Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 96 dpi Vertical Resolution 96 dpi
>>2868966
Leaf shutter so I doubt it'll be compatible with anything other than Hassy leaf shutter lenses. With a MF sensor, I doubt E-shutter would work well if they even included it.
>9000 USD
>1080P video
>>2868567
>>2868577
The problem isn't any of that.
It's because it's an old sensor, made a few years back when all they needed was enough internal sensor bandwidth for a few FPS across the sensor.
There probably isn't enough bandwidth to sustain a 6K stream or even a 4K stream of video from the sensor itself.
And there is a second deeper problem. The market for MF sensors is so small that once a sensor design is finalised, you're going to be stuck to its limitations for a while.
The foundry and their clients need to sell enough of them to recoup back the initial cost of designing them to begin with. So innovation will be slow for this reason.
Full frame sensors and APS-C will keep innovating faster than MF.
>>2868712
I was surprised when I first saw X-Pro and OM-D side by side. You just don't expect a RF-shaped camera to dwarf a SLR-shaped camera.
>>2869009
yeah my thoughts exactly. nine thousand wtf I don't even want to convert it into my currency
>>2869111
The price is fair for this kind of category of sensors.
I'm just disappointed they are using an old sensor that hasn't been updated with the newest technology the FF and APS-C sensors have.
>>2869009
Who is buying a medium format camera to shoot video? That's absolutely retarded. Not all tools are made with you in mind.
>>2869122
I know, right? Video plebs should be limited to small sensors always.
>>2869124
What would be the benefit of shooting even 4K on a medium format camera rather than something APS-C?
>>2869131
Same benefit you get from larger sensors everywhere else.
>>2869134
If you're shooting on a $10,000 camera, you aren't shooting in the dark, and you aren't taking head-shot videos (???) for your neighbor's kid. Real productions with that kind of budget have lighting, and locations, and you want things in focus.
Get off your stat sheet and look at things people are actually producing. Look at the films that have the largest budgets on the planet. You don't think they could have medium format sized sensors in their cameras if they wanted? But do they? No.
>>2869136
More and more film makers are moving to full frames.
Higher resolution and larger sensors is a good thing, contrary to retarded beliefs.
>>2869120
What newest technology? 645Z's sensor still measures up quite well to modern ones as far as IQ goes. It doesn't have on-sensor phase detection or fast enough read-out for 4K, but those features aren't very important on this market.
>>2869134
Medium format is mostly about sharpness/megapickles nowadays, and 8 megapixels for 4K is a resolution even 2x crop cameras/lenses have no problems with. You don't get any significant extra DR or color separation from larger pixels like in the CCD days, and borkeh is far less important in video than it is in stills.
>>2869142
A 100 MP sensor could output 8K video given enough bandwidth and processing power.
>>2869144
Sure, but what's in it for Hasselblad? They have neither R&D resources, nor marketing, nor appropriate service network for a high-end video camera. And they're too small of a customer for Sony to design cutting-edge sensors for them, ditto for whoever makes their DSP chips.
>>2869153
It would be a unique product. I would brand into new markets if I had something like that.
>>2869156
As I've said, I highly doubt Hasselblad has the resources. Cinema market (and we're talking IMAX tier cinema market, competing with Alexa 65 etc) is a can of worms drastically different from both consumer video and everything Hasselblad has been doing up to this point - they'd essentially have to build hardware and software from scratch.
>>2869144
If the sensor has more megapixels than needed for video it will either crop the image, skip lines, or attempt on-sensor scaling (=shit)
That's why the A7s is way better at low light video than the A7r, despite having the same sized sensor.
>>2869166
>or attempt on-sensor scaling (=shit)
This isn't shit Anon. Proper super sampling will increase the quality drastically, instead of just cropping off the sensor.
>>2869167
>Proper super sampling will increase the quality drastically
i super sampled ur mum m8, what do you think about that huh?
>>2869167
Sure, IF they did it properly.
Problem is they generally don't do it properly, if ever.
On the right is how the Nikon D4 does on-camera scaling (vs simply cropping on the left).
>>2869175
Nikon doesn't have the good video expertise.
Look at Samsung and Sony, the NX1 and A6300 record in 6K video and super sample to 4K. And it looks really good.
>>2869176
>NX1 and A6300 record in 6K video and super sample to 4K.
Source?
From what I've heard Sony generally uses line-skipping.
>>2869178
>From what I've heard Sony generally uses line-skipping.
Not in the 6K mode.
>>2867727
Eight thousand isn't ridiculously expensive though. Expensive, sure. But reasonably so.
Your house analogy is awful. A professional DSLR usually costs two or three thousand. If an average house costs around 180K, which it loosely does, then the proper proportional increase would be to around 360-720K, from average. The Leica S, in this comparison, would be up to 900K or just over a million. A non-pro DSLR or similar would be an apartment or something in this scenario, and I'm not doing that clusterfuck for you.
So, expensive. Yes. But hardly ludicrous, for what you get. Whereas the Leica S is on the 'you paid how much' side of things.
>>2867666
I don't understand, why are people dumping on a digital medium format camera when it's only 50% more than the latest Canon 1d series?
>>2871152
A bit about sensor size, a bit about ergonomics/usability and a bit about lens selection.
Most of which doesn't apply to non-professionals anyway.
As for me, I'll just continue shooting film until an affordable alternative shows up.
>>2869141
Is that why movies are still being made with Super35 as the most popular format? Just because youtube videographers are buying A7's and shooting with its fullframe sensor does not mean the actual industry itself is moving to fullframe. You can try and cite a source if you'd like but all the major cine camera manufacturers, save for RED and their meme 8k camera, have the Super35 sensor size as the standard format in their cameras. Even ARRI skipped fullframe over and went straight to 65mm format with the Alexa 65.
>Higher resolution and larger sensors is a good thing, contrary to retarded beliefs.
Except it's really not when it comes to video. 4k is already more than enough, the amount of detail visible to the audience means makeup takes longer to apply and any blemishes and defects on the actor will be picked up by the audience. And larger sensors make pulling focus a pain in the ass, especially if they have people like you making them and having the lens wide open for each shot because muh borkeh. You have literally no idea what you're talking about, the movie industry is still cemented in Super35, and the only people moving to full frame en-masse are meme youtubers and /p/ tards who think having a bigger sensor will up the quality of the poorly lit flower videos they post online.
