Been comparing the CinemaDNG and ProRes licenses for professional work and struggling with the decision. The CinemaDNG gives RAW 5.2K footage but costs $1,000, while ProRes 422 HQ is $500. CinemaDNG produces RAW footage, which gives the greatest amount of options for color grading, formatting, and other editing work. Overall, if you are trying to create Hollywood level footage, then the CinemaDNG is the best option. Anyone here actually using both formats in production? What's the practical difference in post workflow?

Been running both formats for 3 years now. ProRes doesn't produce RAW footage. Your videos will be churned out in an already playable format. Of course, they will still need editing but a lot of the work will have been done for you, and you will be able to lower system specs. For most commercial work, ProRes 422 HQ is plenty - saves massive time in post and client deliveries.

The file sizes are brutal with CinemaDNG though. You're looking at write speeds of up to 4.2 Gb/s which means those 480GB CineSSDs fill up fast. I'd go ProRes unless you're doing feature film work where you absolutely need that RAW flexibility.

For most people, the ProRes license is more than enough. This tool allows you to capture 5.2K video, which is exceptionally high quality. You will be filming just like a professional and find that the files produced are smaller and easier to manage than those produced using CinemaDNG. Start with ProRes, upgrade later if needed.