RANT: Features cameras SHOULD have but DON’T 

When you thought Jake wasn't advertising for once

Jake starts speaking: *thinks it's a sponsor segment* Jake continues speaking: *wait maybe-* *Oh, never-mind*

Kinda thought Jake was gonna say "why can't these cameras have a VPN"

Video title: "RANT" Corridor Crew: *politely complains*

I miss jake talking about being a lawyer and stuff, so sad that he only does the ad skit now :(

Serious quesiton: Could the reason these features aren't available be related to the generation/age of the consumers using them? The people who can afford $20k cameras might not have a lot of overlap with people who grew up with smart phones and are used to features we find in our smart phones. I went to school for animation, and most of my instructors came from the generation of Tex Avery and Looney Tunes. They would actively discourage students from doing anything 'anime style'. My roommate ignored them, and strictly did things in an anime style, and was continuously criticized for it. She ended up getting hired before even graduating, and today a majority of modern animation has influences that come from anime. I can envision a similar thing happening in the camera industry- as people like yourselves start replacing the older generation of filmmakers, the industry will have to adapt and provide the products you want.

What I'm hearing is that GoPro needs a professional line.

Imagine Jake being hired by a brand for a legit tv ad, and becoming very famous as the face of a product. This would be funny.

Title: Includes "Rant." Thumbnail: Includes Niko. Me: Oh, this should be fun.

I find it strange that most camera don't have the ability to take a clear image or record clear footage of me

5 years ago: Phones will never be as good as a decent DSLR Now: My phone can do it, my go pro can do it, WHY CAN'T MY CINEMA CAMERA DO IT >:(

Jake: It's 2020 . . . Me: Ah sh*t, here we go again.

"this thing could run crysis practically but yet can't focus" omg best freaking line in the rant! that game melted my laptop

When you thought Jake actually had a thoughtful critique on making it easier to monitor audio while filming....

"This is 2020, it's the best time to be alive for independent filmmakers..." 😬 famous February words Niko

Jake: Why can't these cameras build you a premium website?

Here's my theory: High-end Cinema cameras are tools created for an industry that in many ways hasn't changed for decades. In contrast "lower end Cinema cameras" are tools being created for a different market demographic. the former is still very much set in their ways whereas the latter demands new tech and new innovation be available to them in order to produce their work. That's why you see better features on "lower end Cinema cameras", and the high-end cameras are basically $20,000 brains that don't do much.

I miss the magic lantern feature that let you put a big red "not filming" logo on your screen, so you always new instantly if you where not rolling

"It is the year 2020. There's not a better time to be alive-" Wh- "if you're an independent filmmaker." They had us in the first half, ngl

My take: Wow. I had no idea Red's autofocus was that f'ing shoddy.

Sam: “What really burns my biscuits...” *I’m using that now*

The next Corridor Crew video: "We engineer the perfect camera... again."

My eyes could not have rolled any harder upon realizing Jake's part was yet again an ad

Jon Favreau used VR while “filming” The Lion King.

As an engineer that works in this arena of camera development I can answer some of these questions. 1. Image stabilization: The large FOV of the gopro and the smaller file format makes stabilization easier because shot to shot image noise is harder to see and there is less information to be concerned with corrupting. In addition these factors also mean that stabilization processing requires less processing power and less battery power. My guess is the majority of the effort is getting high speed quality high dynamic range images and imbedding the sensors and data acquisition might be different enough to the core electronics that it isn’t easy to do. What you are asking may sound simple, but so is saying, just simulate photo realistic virtual rivers. 2. Auto focus is a matter image processing, and in order to make it function requires image processing very early on in the sensor readout analysis. The challenge here isn’t likely the processing power to do it, but more likely that it is where in the sensor/data architecture can the hardware and the software analyze the data to make the focus changes. The issue here maybe that it requires a complete hardware architecture change, and the core electronics likely cost millions to develop alone and they are likely waiting to launch an update after the engineering cost invested is returned in profits. The hold back on high speed/high rez cameras is likely the architecture and image processing to do all of the stuff you want. 3. Wireless monitoring, the issue is usually interference, lag, and transmitter regulations… the challenge is likely that the big high quality camera companies don’t have the expertise to develop the IP to do it. 4. The challenge with Bluetooth is always meeting the Bluetooth regulations and cost to be able to market the product with any of the many Bluetooth compatibility regulations. 5. Camera position sensors is likely just a low demand requirement. The short answers is that embedding the technology likely requires a complete electronic and software redesign from the ground up. The demand from the companies is likely low especially with modular solutions available in the market.

Why does this feel exactly like the Linus tech tips video complaining about lack of included red features that corridor brutally tore apart like 2 years ago...

The Wren autofocus trials were so cute hahaha i might need those in gif form

I flipped this on 3 months later than the upload. "The year is 2020, it's the best year for independent film makers!" Oh boy do we have a surprise for you...

The biggest problem with cameras is that none of them can give ad reads like Jake

Honestly, it's impossible to be angry at Jake's sponsored sections because they transition so good and do it in such a fun way.

The cameras are only using specially designed high speed DSP processors for image processing with a small cheap general purpose CPU to handle the interface. It's not only adding the sensor or communications hardware, but probably adding another full CPU and writing an OS to handle management of all components. Basically, to handle all the stuff the crew discussed, you would basically be building a smart phone into the camera, and the camera companies view that prohibitively expensive, even though it would massively improve their customer's workflow. The first who does it though, is probably going to make a massive amount of money,

The key word here is "pro", if they added some of these features at the same level of functionality as a smart phone have, they wouldn't be used for anything much at all by the film industry, because they wouldn't be good enough to replace the workflows that are in place already. Maybe autofocus would be useful in some niche cases, but you would never risk autofocus stealing a take by focusing in the wrong spot in a dialogue scene for instance. Human error is definitely a thing in focus pulling, but I'd wager that's the preferred risk to take. 3D tracking could be useful for a quick post-vis mockup, but probably never for production. And the real reason they probably haven't done it is because of all the infinite combinations of lenses and focal distances and lens breathing which all have a unique distortion profile. Phones on the other hand have a known lens, the device knows its distortion exactly which goes into the calculation. Also, there are already pro cameras that can track camera rotation on a per-frame basis, stored in the metadata, so that is potentially useful already, but the workflow for actually extracting it is lacking unless you already built a custom tool for it, which I doubt many have done.

Gotta say, Jake, that RayCon plug was smooth. But at this point, I expect nothing less of you.

The SECOND Jake got on camera I knew he was gonna swing this into a sponsor ad. Love him

Also, I don't get why the comments are suddenly ragging on Jake. They need those segments to finance the channel and at least Jake keeps them entertaining!

Great vid. I could totally use the wireless audio. Also, does Wren have a stye? 12:45 Nothing but love, you guys are awesome!!

APPLE AND GOPRO BUILT GYROS IN A CAVE!! WITH A BOX OF SCRAPS!! 20k camera: “Well I’m not Apple or Gopro”

Yeah, the autofocus drives me absolutely insane. I totally get WHY a professional would want to use manual focus and a focus puller - but why do they not even have a decent option. More than anyone Blackmagic shocks me they don't do it properly yet. They're supposed to be this industry breaker, and yet the dream cameras right now for me aren't a Red or an Alexa Mini LF, they're the Sony FX9 and the Canon C500. Why, because they do 95% of what their "super pro elite" counterparts do, including soon 16bit RAW output and 15 stops of dynamic range on the FX9 and I tested that earlier this month with a motorised cinema lens and it's focus just grabs an eyeball and will not let go. It's like actual sorcery. EDIT: Additional note, yesterday on set, I had a threeway rack focus that would have been a pain in the ass for a manual focus pull without a wireless puller especially as the camera was basically on giant stilts, autofocus, nailed it. Same with this 3-minute monologue one take with the slowest pull out ever. (Yes I'm away I said three way rack and slowest pull out ever, that's film, get your heads out the gutter)

I really love the editing in this video. Nice work!

Corridor: "Let's make a system that a normal person can operate!" *Industry unions want to know your location*

I haven't seen Jake outside of an ad in so long :'( it's good to see you bud... hehehe LOL oh my gosh I was writing the first part of this comment before I realized it was an ad.

Assistant Camera and Camera Technician here: It's a very difficult topic when you're dealing with professional video equipment, and there are so many sides and opinions from different people, professions and companies. Traditional filmmakers would say that these more manual or analogue aspects are important for storytelling and control over the delivery; also if everything got automated many people would become jobless because producers would do anything to get the production costs cut. Autofocus would cut the focus puller. In-built audio or xlr cuts the soundguy. Gyros gets the small studios that do VFX and CGI services. Not to speak of cable guys, video operators, grips and whoever else. On the other hand, reliability is essential for high-end movie production: if your teradek breaks you toss out the module and replace it. With The smallHD bundle you loose an monitor and the teradek. If you have to tweak the audio, the sound guy can do it from his stage and not bother the camera crew. Also bluetooth is considered "consumer technology", it's compressed, lags, doesn't support multiple channels etc. Now imagine a camera with all the things built in, and suddenly you loose your video feed. Get a new camera, that's probably 30k $ and many hours costing you. I believe that the independent filmmaker scene is still young and becoming a niche that gear manufacturers will, eventually, bow to; especially now that independent filmmakers are becoming big enough to afford professional video gear aimed, at least partially, to full crew productions. But I'm also afraid how this will translate to the traditional filmmaking, especially where nowadays everything is aimed at getting done as fast and cheap as possible.

Just noticed and totally dig the stars and stripes hanging in the office. Great video.

Really enjoyed this video! The lack of these features on mainline cameras shows just how much room there is for mobile filmmaking to make a bigger splash. With increased accessibility/convenience, all that’s left is for the quality to improve. When it does....it’s gonna get reaaaaal interesting!

Seems like they messed up the sponsor segment timer, so here is timestamp when it ends: 5:34

Maybe there next cameras will have water cooling. LTTstoredotcom.

Major camera company: Focuses almost completely on making a better image come out of their camera. Third Party Accessory Manufacturers: Makes accessories to add functionality. Corridor: How dare they. Aside from my own personal joke, here's my two cents. This really feels like scraping the bottom of the barrel. Corridor knows full well why all these totally niche additional functions aren't in high end cameras right now. These companies don't care about the small independent studio in this case. They don't add 3d self tracking because it'd just end up being a gimmick that VFX studios could do better, and they already have lite 3rd party versions of this for on set with green screen compositing. They don't add image stabilization because someone using a 30K camera should be able to get a steady shot, IBIS can add unnatural motion to a shot, and calibrating a gyroscope for every lens is tedious. Autofocus isn't a priority because cinema lenses aren't electronic. Wireless monitoring has already been solved by third parties. Wireless audio is not going to be taken seriously by the film community due to the transmission quality being so much less than wired, and the consistency not being on par. Why would any cine camera manufacturer waste R&D on these low return features that would take immense time and money to get to an adequate level? Especially when 3rd party companies are already working on decent solutions. Corridor is one of few youtube studios that I would consider to be professionals, but this video shows immaturity of understanding from a business perspective, or a desperation for content at the expense of quality.

Well, since you made this video & brought real attention to the subject, they will start to integrate those features into cameras eventually. So good job, you took the first step in that direction for us.

Jake you’re too good at integrating the ad portion into videos

I would like a camera that comes with a drink holder

The comment Wren made about marketers focusing on specs like resolution made me think of a guest that you could have on: Steve Yedlin. He's all about seeing through the marketing chatter and getting to the heart of what a camera can do.

Imagine gyroscope with the precision of the Nintendo Switch's joycons or controlling a camera with them!

6:10 I'm getting the feeling that this is a sales pitch and you're about to ask for funding to create your perfect camera.

Last time I was this early Niko still had long hairs

Excellent points all around, folks. My company made the Oculus Quest (not "Occulus!") commercial you referenced so we have plenty of the same gripes you do.

In defense of manual focus / having a separate person pulling focus... I understand why lower budget projects as well as documentaries would really benefit from quality autofocus, however, with higher end narrative productions, the focus puller is as much a part of the storytelling as the framing of a shot is. Autofocus can track a subject in frame, but it can't track a story. Moments like when to rack to something in frame only when the character in the scene notices it, or maybe you stylistically want the shot to begin out of focus and slowly come into focus because its the perspective of someone who is just waking up... or maybe you want to achieve something like in the film "The Graduate" when Katherine Ross's character turns from her mother to Dustin Hoffman's character when she slowly realizes she's been cheated on. The focus doesn't become fully sharp until she understands the extent of the situation in her mind. Thats not something you can program into a camera. With that said, I do see how combining auto and manual focus to make the aspect of human error more forgiving while still maintaining the creative benefits that manual focus can bring to a film. I know some of the newer Canon Cinema cameras have that function, but it hasn't been fully explored to its fullest extent yet.

Linus from LTT said it best. 'the more you spent on a camera, the less it comes [equipped] with'

I like Jake's ads, for some reason they make me laugh.

That 3d tracking in footage would be amazing. It reminds ne of when you guys drew in 3d and watched what was happening through a live camera. Its totally possible to do with modern tech in a 2020 camera

I think you pretty much nailed it. Us more individual content creators have to come up with 'clever' ways to do some of the most basic things. When I solo film, I use my phone to check if I'm in frame, I have a external bluetooth talk to another external blue tooth, thats plugged into my audio device. and these are things that COULD be added.

3:10 "the reds are pretty much unusable, they are very very slow and very difficult to quickly acess.." Sam sounds like american propaganda few decades back

When Jake appeared I thought he will tell us about today's sponsor but... Oh wait...

Nice video guys like always! A just spit balling here but you guys should maybe sent videos like this to companies that make the Red & other cameras if y'all have already.

Just like the way GoPro was founded, someone needs to take this feedback and make the perfect camera.

Hmmm that's so interesting. I'm a lamen, I watch this channel cause I love knowing about the behind the scenes stuff to movies I love. I know very little about cameras. I never would have guessed that such high end cameras were so lacking in equipment. So that begs the question then, at what point is it right for an indie film maker to just use the lower end stuff with the solutions and what point is it right to use the high end stuff? And if it's so lacking in these features, why use it at all? What are the tradeoffs here?

Why would RED invest in creating a good autofocus system, when 90% of us people using the camera won’t use autofocus? I have an A7RIII for that! Might even get a Canon C200 or a new Sony Fs9 or whatever is called for that, but then I’d have to use autofocus lenses, depriving me of using great manual lenses. And I will only use autofocus shooting interviews, people walking towards the camera, like blogs, some corporate video, and small things like that, I can’t use autofocus with fiction or dramatized content. And that’s why I use a RED, Alexa, etc... I’ve shot about 90 hours of episodic tv using RED and Alexa cameras without the need of autofocus or stabilization. And I’ve only used autofocus for still photography and very small corporate video with my Sony A7RIII. And besides not needing them, it’s because of costs, you know how many cameras does that still cameras sell? In the tens to hundreds of thousands, how many RED’s? For G sake! Now colors? You know how much does it cost to change the color of a camera that builds so little of them? I wouldn’t want to pay more just for color, I’d rather pay for quality and reliability.

The music in this episode is sick! props to whoever's in charge of that!

I think built in memory would be great in some cameras. Even if it is just used as a built in back up. Desk top computers have had read an write speeds faster then cameras for years. Computers has SSDs that go up to 3,500MB/s where the fastest memory cards are around 1,500MB/s. You could fit an entire 1TB M.2 NVME drive in a mirrorless camera and it'll probably be the size of a DSLR.

PotatoJet answers a lot of these questions in his various videos (if you're wondering why RED and other brands do what they do)

I was stoked when i got my m50 cause i could change lenses 😂

Wondering if any companies have reached out you at all since this vid! Great vid btw and hope you guys come across some solutions!

I love your videos about cameras! Never stop making these :)

Professional cameras have high quality brands, large operations to manage. These big businesses are like boats: they turn slowly. New technology is created fastest by small companies who aren’t restricted by previous standards.

Jake is a walking ad at this point.

My issue with all these issues are they only effect a small percentage of the people who may use the camera. RED, Arri and kind of BM and Canon's higher end cameras are aimed at a professional shoot. You'd have a steadicam or track / dolly for smooth shots, focus puller so no need for auto focus, Arri have now actually put a wireless system into some of there cameras but still if certain DoPs want certain monitors then it may not be compatible so easier to use a 3rd party wireless system. Again for sound, you have a sound recordist, the camera would be huge if you add that feature to it. The will have radio mics on actors as well as a boom and have to mix the audio fading up and down for the dialogue so the camera couldn't do all that. The VFX point I agree with as the number of times there isn't a VFX supervisor on set and there is a debate on what info we should note down for them, so the camera doing it all would be good. I think there are enough cameras for the lower end shoots the do all of those things and for the bigger cameras there just isn't the need for it.

Does anyone have any guides or tips on learning 3D tracking in after effects? I'm trying to replace an image of a billboard in my video clip but dont know how to track properly and am not getting a good result.

1:50 Doesn't it make sense that you have to calibrate the lenses though? Phones and go pros don't have interchangeable lenses and more of a closed system device (I.E. no modularity where different equipment can interact disruptively)

I watch this while I only own my poor android camera that can't focus and destabilizes video when phone is perfectly still

6:38 when Nico smiles, my heart smiles too

Corridor. You have no idea how much you have helped me so much in improving in becoming a great creator

Simple answers for these gripes (because they are): 1-Stabilization: Stabilisation solutions that are used inside gopro's or phones are implemented in a way that it can offer some feature without being too expensive. Most of those are 100% electronic and are inherently flawed. Sure, they have come a long way but even now, most stabilisation in cheaper products is acceptable at best. Besides that, especially the BMPCC 4K/6K and the red has to have a massive datastream coming from the sensor to the processor and actually requires their massive active cooling (not in size but in effectiveness) and adapting that onto an actual moving sensor to offer that IBIS option would be neigh impossible at our current time. So maybe in the future, but not now. And EIS would be so bad compared to a professional Gimbal rig or steadycam that that would be more cost effective for medium to large production companies. Sure, youtubers would like it, but as a full-time production house it would be useless. That being said, Gyro data recording would be an amazing option but will go at a cost of resolution, something that there is just too much demand for right now (users rather have 12K footage than having a crop). So again, maybe in the future. 2-Autofocus: For autofocus it is just as simple. The demand is just not there. People who can spend 20K, 10K or just 5K dollars on a professional camera rather have the control over their shots. They don't care for autofocus since it is not used to create their vision and they can achieve better without it even. Because of that, most manufacturers focus on more frequently asked for functionality like resolution, RAW support, better compression, more dynamic range and so on. The userbase just has minimal demand for autofocus so it is something that doesn't have to be refined. Also again, youtubers are the ones that would ask for those features since they often care more about engaging content instead of creativity (le me stress: Most of them, not all of them). 3-Jakes bit: Glad to know that whenever Jake starts speaking i can just start mashing the skip 5 seconds button untill i see another face. Bluetooth/wireless audio is not implemented because, even though they made big strides with the technology, it still has latency and most bluetooth earbuds/headphones are more suited to music and specific sound styles (bassy, vocal, any mix of high and low sound while giving mediocre midtones, the ones you need for good sound mixing) instead of reproducing a realistic soundscape, so even editing using bluetooth is a bad idea. 4-Niko's conspiracy: That's dumb. Just dumb. And contradictory, because you say that if they implement all the things you have said into a DSLR people wouldn't buy camcorders/cinema camera's, but almost every feature (exept the bluetooth thing, because that is just the stupidest thing you can do and the things that are just phisically impossible) including the ones coming up in this video are already found in most prosumer and professional mirrorless and DSLR camera's that came out in the past 5-8 years. But yet they still sell them. Plenty. Hell, i work for a rental company that rents the damn things out. A lot. The problem is that those mirrorless and DSLR's are aimed at exactly the same crowd that likes a steady phone shot and gopro's hypersmooth. Consumers and youtubers. Professionals don't care for those features because it limits them in their creations and productions. Second to that: if you do everyhing a bit, you do nothing perfect A camera that does everything perfect would take a massive financial and technical effort to make in a way that nothing is wrong with any of the features, making it impossibly expensive. So companies choose to do some things extremely good depending on what their specific customer base demands of their product. Or: Supply and demand. 5-Wireless Monitoring: And as i just typed that last paragraph i realised that i could have been done with those two lines. Wireless monitoring already suffers from latency and connectivity issues, but as a standalone and seperate unit it functions at an acceptable level that those issues can be worked around. Implementing it would mean that the interference would cause even worse latency and connectivity and in the end the userbase only needs it in specific dedicated usecases, so it's dumb to pay for a feature that is rarely used. And even while this technology as standalone is at an acceptable level of usability, in my renting experience, from large million-dollar productions to two-man run and gun operations, most people even prefer to just use cables. A broken cable can be replaced. A shitty connection because you are two houses down from a phone mast is not fixable. 6-Wireless audio: Same problem as with wireless monitoring (although less due to adjustable frequencies, but still) and Jakes dumb ad-read. 7-3D camera tracking: Because if it is not needed in 95% of the cases, why implement it. It would be a waste of money and production time, let alone processing power. I do not need a dancing gecko when shooting an interview. The technology in our phones is less than mediocre. Fun for a little game or tech demo, but not actually usable in professional work. The cameras that can do it on a professional level cost so much that i find it hard to believe you can not see that it would be stupid to try to implement it in a camera that is suited for everyone. Sure, all is really hypothetical and i still love to watch your content. But the indie filmmaker you are using as the demographic for this hypothetical supercamera will never be able to afford it, let alone use it to it's fullest potential. Hell, even the highest of high end users wouldn't even want most of these features and i predict they wouldn't even be able to afford this hypothetical camera. And there are the technical issues most of these features present. The RED is a great example. Sure, it makes fantastic pictures but is expensive. But it has the one thing people that generally go around spending upwards of 50K on a camera want to have: customisability. It can be built to ones specific needs and be customised when those needs change. Coupled with fantastic processing, high resolution and consistent performance it is perfect for most indies that have actually grown out of being an indie and start to do some serious work. Most indies will use a DSLR or Mirrorless camera, which has most of the features you actually want (except for bluetooth monitoring, that is literally the dumbest thing i have heard in a long time. My 420 euro Bluetooth 5.0 Shure SE535 cuts out when i hold my arm in the wrong place, imagine that happening when shooting something that is a one-off occurence during an interview) while staying within a reasonable budget. And that budget is something i think Corridor has forgotten over time. Because indies often work as freelancers and spend most of their own money on their own creative movies. So a RED Mini mag that breaks on set is a hefty $1450 chunk out of an already meager budget while a $40 SD-Card replacement is way more manageable. It would be a literal Jack of all trades, master of none and would cost more than the GDP of most countries.

one thing i love from corridor crew is how smooth their transitions are, you dont expect it but when you realize youre watching jake on the sponsored segment, and i love it

Great video! this gives a great critique of modern camera technology! thanks to this video maybe someone will do all the things that you need!

You were right on every single thing that you said, but I hate auto focus and stabilization cameras, as a vfx artist that rely on the fact that the shot stay the same (I'm working alone so I can't both act AND manage the camera) And the fact that my camera (Coolpix b700, i know, it's not the best, but this is what I have) can't lock the exposure, auto focus or even the camera motion (yeah, it make the frame shift according to where i am and it's *destroying* my clean plates because of that) Is the reason I hate stabilization.

I'm a simple man. I see Jake, and I watch a sponsored segment.

I was expecting Jakes grievance to be that RED doesn't have Skillshare...get your free learning discount today with code CORR! But he actually.did better.

I'd be curious to see you do a head-to-head between one of your Reds and a BlackMagic Ursa Mini Pro 12K.

All very good points. the stabilization, auto focus, and wireless sound would be a good start for sure. Alos, thank you Jake for always carrying the torch on ads. You got this!

Niko: "canon wont make a frankenstein camera with all the features" Canon: "announces eos r5" Niko left the chat

The thing is, none of these high end cameras should cost as much as they do. It's just because they have the objectively best hardware available today, and nobody actually needs these cameras for personal use. So companies charge whatever they want, because they can. It's the same with pro audio and music gear. I'm a professional musician and have my own project recording studio. There is no reason microphones and preamps should cost $10,000, or even a drum cymbal to cost $500. But they do because of the same reasons. It's the pinnacle of capitalism. As long as the entertainment industry keeps making tons of money, and people are willing to shell out tons of money for this one of a kind gear, they'll keep charging that much.

3:34 Thank you. For giving us the joy of that reference ♥️ Now, make it happen 😁

You can tell Wren had a ton of fun making those focus demonstration videos. I love you guys.

I thought Bone Phone was a dating app

2:17 "some way to profile your lenses": It is far from trivial to create such a profile for a fixed lens and even more challenging for a lens with zoom and focus. You would still need to create a profile for every combination of camera body and particular lens. Lenses in Phones and GoPros cannot be changed and these devices target a consumer audience. Film-makers want a better quality. Including a feature which by design would only produce "okay" results for a demanding industry does not look like a good idea to me.

Watching this after the DJI Ronin 4D came out, it's checked so many of the boxes mentioned here, all in one package

This is actually so tru...I also thought of that, like no front to my a7sii and the "5-axis-sensor-stabilization, but the iPhone Stabilization...damn...

You guys literally hit all the nails right on the head! Pulling the industry forward! 😎 👊🏻

Could you react to scenes from The Finale Destination movies

Oh man, so true. Just got a new camera and shopping for cameras was so frustrating. It's crazy how weirdly stuck in the past DIGITAL cameras are. That should be the perfect platform for these types of innovations.

YES!!! THANK YOU!! You echo ALL my gripes, especially recording wireless audio, a big clear image for monitoring all built in off the shelf ready to shoot. Forget 8k 12k or 273k just put THESE features in. If low end cameras/phones do it and still sell new models then so can the big expensive cameras still sell new models.