Leaderboard

There's no holy grail lens, some may be better than others. This whole "filmic" thing is stale...what you're noticing is how this lens resolves detail off the sensor. No matter how it's sliced or diced in camera you're gonna get back what is captured. I think what you're expecting is totally wrong. From what I saw so far this lens will capture the very best as well as the very worst of what the sensor is capable of. To me thats a great lens. No doubt this seems to be a quality set of glass and I bet if it were the baby Hawks you'd be saying the same thing. "It's not filmic"...well wrong. Actually what you mean to say is "cinematic" and there's a lot more that goes with that than a lens can offer. Just my 2 cents, I think it's unfair to blame to a lens when in all actuality you should be blaming the sensor or one better, just blame yourself.

Above: beautiful new film from Seb Farges shot with the SLR Magic Anamorphot on the Sony A7 and Olympus E-M5. SLR Magic have officially announced the Anamorphot developed with feedback and technical assistance from EOSHD and the anamorphic community. Read the full article here

Top frame is SLR Magic (from a sample video). Bottom frame is from my Iscorama. Perfectly oval bokeh in both examples. If I didn't know which is which, I would say the Iscorama looks more "videoish" because of the sharpness (which is more a function of the taking lens IMHO).

Canon could do almost anything possible, if they wanted. They just don't care enough for this segment.

I know this is an old topic but I had to put my two cents in. The Go Pro cameras have gotten better and better over the years. The quality of video you can get from the Go Pro Hero 3 + (I do mean specifically the +) has gotten dangerously close to something that could be used along side other high end professional cameras. I personally have been using a Hero 3 + on a DJI Phantom with a Zenmuse gimbal and a pair of Fatshark FPV goggles to see what it was capable of. I have been mostly pleased with the results and feel that it could provide me an easy affordable way to add some aerial shots to the content I produce. I love the protune mode and Camera Raw White Balance (although I do notice slight color fluctuations for some reason) and these are great additions for people who want to use this camera on a professional level. However, the major thing holding it back from being ideal is exposure control. I simply cannot understand those who cannot grasp the importance of this. If I am using this camera to simply document an experience such as surfing or skydiving, than sure... I love the idea of auto exposure. But if I am trying to meticulously film something on a professional level then I really don't want my exposure jumping all over the place. It gives it that distinct, "Shot on a cheap auto camera" feel and makes any serious color grading a pain. Anyone who does any sort of videography on a professional level can appreciate having full control over your image. As much as I would love to have full manual ISO and shutter control (I believe the iris is locked at 2.8?) even a simple exposure lock that would let me lock it and dial it in with a slider via the LCD screen would suffice. This camera is so close to be something amazing and I do hope that they at least add these features into the next edition.

the second item has been answered by multiple reviews I have seen. For "ntsc", there is no recording limit. If you switch to pal/25/50, 30 min limit due to EU restrictions.

Yes, the video is nice, but as for the anamorphic film look, I don't really see it, especially in the wider angles, except for the flairs. I think the same video shot with an Iscorama would look a lot more like film. I wish they would have tried to copy the Iscorama. I actually like the 1.5x and orange flairs a lot better.

Why? C300 is still a hot rental and I understand C100 is selling pretty well, too. I don't think they are too concerned with BM or Panasonic at the moment. BMPCC seems attractive (4K, high dynamic range, etc) but not very practical. Audio recorded separately, the inability to format media in camera or know the available rec time remaining, the price of SSDs, the internal battery, poor ergonomics and a crop factor of 1.86 (what they call s35 is not completely s35). So far BM cameras have felt like they've been released in beta stage (and firmware still feels like that) Panasonic: excessive crop factor + known drawback of the m43 sensor, poor ergonomics with the added brick, the need for an additional recorder and respective batteries... The C-series is probably overpriced and a little outdated specs-wise compared with these new releases but it is still one of the few ready to shoot "camera solutions" with a true top notch s35 sensor, known and tested dynamic range, XLR conectors, built-in ND filters and proper ergonomics.And they have the 1D C in case you need 4K and full frame. Don't get me wrong, both the Panny and the BM sound like very nice cameras but right now I can imagine the people at Canon thinking "Unbelievably, we dodged another bullet!". When they released the C series there was some 8-bit dissapointment and the feeling that competitors had a perfect chance win certain segments. Unexplainably, it still hasn't happened. No one has cared to release a C300 clone with some added/corrected features and a 5.000 € price range. Why??

Last week we used our new Porta Head 5 system for the first time with the cablecam and the brushless gimbal brought another improvement into the stabilization together with the kenyon gyro we used before. I edited some footage and making-of-material from the shooting with the cablecam. The camera used was a Canon 5D Mark 3 in RAW modus. Focal length mainly used was 50 mm, some shots used 35 mm and up to 85 mm. Best regards, Andreas Kielb http://www.portahead.de

I haven't tried it, but probably not. But if your main use of 4K is to slightly re-frame your shot and deliver in 1080P, I think that it's fine for that. Also, using the 5D with anamorphic lenses can offer pretty high resolutions. Using the 1600x1200 crop mode with a 2x lens can give you a 3200x1200 image, in raw. I'm not saying that the 5Diii is going to be better for everyone. I think that the GH4 will probably be a really nice camera. But even before production models start rolling out, we already know that it can't match the 5D's 1080P codec. So, if you're mostly interested in really good-looking 1080P, I think that the 5D with Magic Lantern remains a strong contender.

I also have a 5Diii running ML. I'm not going to buy the GH4 because I don't need 4K, and with my 5D I'm getting a full-frame sensor and a better codec without the added bulk and cost of an external recorder. Plus, I get NIGHTLY firmware updates from Magic Lantern. I just downloaded last night's and it's hard to believe all the bells and whistles that have been added in just the past week. In terms of shooting with raw, I use it for the option of matching white balance between shots and tweaking exposure. Then I export them out to 12-bit ProRes 4444 files, and edit and grade as usual. I don't bother with the KomputerBay cards. To me, the piece of mind that I get from the Lexar 1000x cards is worth the extra cost. If you are really keen on 4K, then maybe the GH4 is the camera for you. But otherwise, the 5Diii delivers some of the best 1080P I've seen, and you already own one!

I'm pretty new here but I think the tone in Tim's mail is.... Unnecessarily harsh. Why "you failed to" etc? It's not that eoshd.com owes this person anything. The tone is a shame because there are some good points in Tim's mail. Anyway I thought the article was a good read.

Well, that's very "theoretically". I own both, and both start to vignette around 50mm on full frame. :P