Fuji instead of Sony?

Started Oct 18, 2018 | Discussions thread
SafariBob Senior Member • Posts: 1,560
Re: Fuji instead of Sony?

ajendus wrote:

Cinematographer here... the cinematic look? What is that exactly? I’ve shot with $1000 cameras all the way to $250k cameras. Cinematic looks is by skill of the cinematographer not something that can be produced in post. But if you’re referring to color grading, Fuji RAW files does just as well as anything else I’ve encountered and generally far more accurate color science than Sony.


I am gonna call bs on this one.

Sure fuji has better color science (according to some or most, who knows), however for moving pictures they do not have any cinema cameras, no Sony cinealta or similar. I have not heard anyone preferring f log to s log, although they might exist too. There is no Fuji camera that can output 24fps raw that I know of, at least not in super35 or larger image processors.

obviously cinematic look means different things to different people, although typically cinema is shot to look good in a dark room (cinema) while photos may be shot for a variety of ambiances. Part of it is art, or “by the skill of the cinematographer, as you say. But presumably the overall look is a collaboration of the director, the make up artists, that color graders etc etc. Nevertheless there are elements which are considered “cinematic” in the photography world, might I suggest for example large out of focus specular highlights, interaction between in focus and out of focus elements, low key, motion streaking as is generated by 1/50s shutter speed etc.

 SafariBob's gear list:SafariBob's gear list
Sony RX1 Sony a7R II Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM Sony 70-400mm F4-5.6 G SSM Sony FE 35mm F2.8 +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow