The 2 videos were shot one after the other. The "difference" is due to clipping in the highlights that create this weird flat grey sky

@@nonfacciofoto , Sorry, you must be mistaken. There is probably no clipping on the left (Clog). So, from the looks of it, the dynamic range of the scene was enough for the CLOG1 to handle.There is almost NO CONTRAST in the clouds on the right (RAW) besides that one darker patch. It seems highly improbable this is actually the same scene in the clouds! Must have been minutes apart at least and/or totally differently illuminated sky, happening within seconds (which is possible). Here's both images superimposed: s12.directupload.net/images/201014/q6txs2h9.gif the landscape is almost lit the same, the contrast there is almost the same, only the sky is different. This makes no sense.

@@randfee No the were shot in the exact same time (less 30 sec apart) s12.directupload.net/images/201014/9wdd3gpi.jpg

And no changes in illumination. This fake dark cloud that you see on the right is the darkest part of the cloud that you see in the left. The raw in r5 is half baked!

@@nonfacciofoto then the only explanation I have is some kind of mistake with importing the raw in your workflow. The RAW video does work and provide about 1-2 stops more dynamic range than the CLOG1, I've downloaded and tested some test videos myself a month ago. What software did you use to produce the video? Go and check how that RAW is handled/imported/scaled. Don't know the terms.