Leaderboard

watermark it with the person who signed the NDA's name on it and give it to them low resolution? that's how i get screener material that hasn't been released yet. if it gets out, someone gets sued, heads roll, people jump off balconies etc.

Hey everyone, just picked up an A7s and used it for a 1 day trip up to Alaska. So far it seems like a great camera. I had a GH4 and really liked it, but since I mostly shoot stills I really couldn't give up the shallow dof that I had gotten used to. The A7s puts out great 1080p and I figure I can rent a Shogun when I want to make a "serious" video...

> almost like Canon OWE them something. They do, the relationship between company and consumer is not a one-way street. You buy a product with the expectation that it will live up to its advertising and be fit for the purpose it was intended. If Canon wasn't claiming that their DSLRs are designed for videographers and are excellent for that task (read their ads for the 7D Mk II) then there would be no problem, but they are so there is. > Compared to 10 years ago we are living in a dream land... If we are, it is only because consumers have learned to start pushing back on some of the less-than-nice business practices of the major camera makers. I think we have the Internet to thank for that - it's provided a place for people to gather and discuss these issues and work on unofficial unauthorized hacks like Magic Lantern to get more out of the hardware than manufacturers like Canon are willing to provide. In the interview Andrew did, note Canon's hostile reaction to the mention of Magic Lantern. They are taking active steps to stop ML, for example by requiring that the higher-priced cameras be sent in to get firmware updates. Remember, the first push for "affordable" ($20K) digital cinema cameras came from a little company called Red, not from the major players like Sony who were charging close to $100K for CineAltas that were less capable at the time. So yes, go out and "shoot", but also keep in mind what it took to get to where we are, and that Canon's policies are unlikely to change if we don't continue to speak out regarding these issues.

Interested, depending on tests/footage

Interesting, liked the sound & visuals, although I wasnt scared by the woman :) Nice shot with the moon. Do not let your film out there without that watermark(but even that can't stop design pirates intent on stealing ideas & reframing them, pity the decision maker can't be in the room, but understandably they could be far away. At least one person from the Distribution Company should attend to show support, and to see it as intended on a big screen, otherwise it could be shown on some laptop. I'm not sure I would want to send it though, cant you just point them to a private/secure web page, that only they can see & you can monitor. Alternatively wrap it into a secure PDF just to make it awkward.

Hey guys, Just a head's up the new Nikon D750 is superior to the D810 for video. I saw proof of this in person. Sorry I cannot show you the footage. It wasn't mine and was used on an adult vid. Both cams were on the set. (D810 still better for stills - super large). On the video side, the D750 has zero moire/aliasing to speak of (you will find it on D810) and it has a flip lcd screen. It's just as sharp as the D810 (GH3 quality in 1080p but MUCH MUCH better colors!) and is 24 meg Full Frame. The lcd is sharp as hell. It has zebras, dedicated movie buttons and is lighter than D810. No peaking unfortunately but the zoom in for focus is real nice. Best of all is the low light. It's at least a stop and half over the D810. Compared them side by side. I saw some footage where 12,800 ISO looked good (great with neat video) and 6400 ISO looked damn near perfect. That's shocking for a Nikon dslr video. So you get one of the best still cameras in the world with perfect 1080p. (And yes it does 60 at 1080 and that looks fantastic as well. Could see no visible banding. In my opinion the D750 is just as pleasing as 5D raw but without the time involved. If you shoot stills and want high quality video it's something you should consider. If you only shoot stills go with the D810. For video DSLR it's a no brainer with native Nikor lenses. For mirrorless I would go A7s but if I'm 50% stills and don't need 4K, than I'm going DSLR Nikon. These dudes have upped their game. Big time. Just one man's opinion. Cheers

Count me in for one of these.

Looks like similar to 16D, not wide for sure. I have ELMO 20mm F1.4, which came with Elmoscop-II that equals to 16H.

After more thant one year of shooting with this lens i am more than happy with the resuls. I compiled some shoots made with this adapter in conjunction with the 5d3 and ML. Here they are, i'd love any type of feedack.

Can you tell us anymore about the Film & proposed Distribution, will it be DVD, Blu-Ray, theaters?

> I honestly don't understand why people are so upset over what Canon are doing or not doing I think people are upset because they bought the 5D Mk II and invested in Canon lenses thinking that Canon would continue and improve upon what they started, in the same relatively affordable price range. Instead, Canon put the next version of the 5D on ice for almost four years and told Canon DSLR videographers that if they wanted any improvements, they would need to take out a second mortgage on their house and get into the high-priced Cinema Series. To rub salt in the wound they withheld basic video features on their DSLRs that they were happy to give to the cheap small-sensor camcorder crowd. When you can get a head-phone jack on a $249 Canon camcorder but not on the $2,000 6D (like the 7D also advertised by Canon as being designed for videographers), there is no way that can be explained away. Yes, you can sell all your Canon gear and buy something with more up-to-date video features at a more reasonable price from a different manufacturer. But for true Canon fans, it's a sad occasion when they have to do that, reflecting on what could of been if only Canon had stuck by the folks who helped them start the whole DSLR video revolution in the first place.

Exactly. Canon will improve their video a bit now that Nikon is improving their video (Nikon is currently their only real competitor in the pro dSLR market), but it won't be much or terribly soon. I do think the lack of moire in the Mark III was a real attempt to improve video and I see the Mark III used for professional BTS and corporate video ALL the time, even with some very very high end clients. What's funny is that Canon has crippled its products in pretty obnoxious and obvious ways... but no one here seems to care about their legitimately obnoxious omissions. On the still side leaving out 1/3 stop increments and MFA is a big deal and unnecessary. For video it's worse: AVCHD instead of XF Cam on the C100 is a significant and unnecessary downgrade, the lack of 60/720p confusing, but much, much worse is the lack of HDSDI/timecode and the horrible viewfinder... Next to those omissions, a lack of 4k is basically irrelevant. VERY few clients want a 4k finish. A LOT want timecode sync for dual sound. A LOT want a codec that's 50Mbps or higher. The viewfinder thing is just dumb beyond words. I mean that viewfinder is awful. But that's what Canon is about. dSLRs marketed toward still photographers and a cinema line marketed toward low/mid end professional video production. And from what I've seen they have 95% marketshare among pros in those categories. I do see a lot of Red Scarlets and Alexas, but the Scarlets don't rent nearly as well as C300s and the Alexas are too expensive. Sony has some traction, too, but Canon did amazingly well with the C300. Among artists? Well, you're the client. Buy what you want!

What they said! First a projection, but if you must send it, low resolution, big watermark! Good luck, it's good news they are interested!!!

Just a brainstorm idea, but you could invite them to a viewing if youve got a place good enough to do it, then theres no chance. Unless he runs off with the disk/player/laptop.

The iPhone is a phone. The MacBook is a computer. Would you complain that an iPhone doesn't come with the ability to load applications?

The Vixia is a video camera. The 7dmk2 is a stills camera. Would you complain that a geo metro doesn't come with a fifth wheel hitch?

Just to illustrate (even more) how artificial Canon's restrictions on video features on Canon DSLRs are, take a look at the little Canon Vixia HF R400 camcorder. It retails for $249 (I got one on sale for $199). It can record 1080p at 60 frames per second and has a headphone jack for monitoring audio, features not present on any Rebel or the $2,000 6D, although these finally did show up on the new $1,800 7D Mk 2. This cheap little camcorder can also do clean HDMI out (!), another feature not present on any Canon DSLR that costs less than $1,800. It also does not suffer from moire and other line-skipping issues. However, before you all throw away your Arri Alexas and get one of these $249 camcorders, I do need to mention it has a tiny sensor so in low light the grain looks like a snow blizzard. What amazes me though is that Canon is willing to give their cheap tiny sensor cameras features that they withhold from DSLRs costing six times as much. If you are willing to spend another $100, for $349 you can get a Vixia with built-in WiFi, the same feature that costs $850 to add to the $1,800 7D Mk 2.

What is it about new cameras that has such a magical power to transform professional filmmakers into arrogant, bratty children? It's incredible, really.

In that same DPReview interview Maeda San claimed WiFi wasn't possible because of the construction of the 7D Mark II's chassis. What's it made of, lead?   The D750 has a carbon fibre chassis and built in WiFi. More expensive to produce.   Excuses are bad enough, but if you have to lie to your customers in forming such excuses, it's doubly bad.   I was told by Canon when the 5D Mark III came out that it lacked full 1080p HDMI because the hardware wasn't capable of it, then along it came later in a firmware update, so I know they lie to their customers. I have seen it for myself.

BTW lafilm, what lenses do they use for porn?

Me too (but before that I need some video-tests to be done).

been in jail i got into a dispute with a guy on here a budha called burnett rocky roads who seemed to think the slr magic was better than a panavision c. i eneded up shattering his wanna be leica china optics over his fat head a kaleidoscopic mosaic of milk bottle optics.the destruction seemed to improve the look i think. the judge gave me a light setence after i showed him some youtube clips of the offending slr magic broke back flarings : )

John, I don't appreciate content from our private offline conversations being referenced here, and I feel the need to state that I am in no way affiliated with John's Rectilux. We were merely comparing exploratory notes. Respectfully, I suggest that the moderation of this forum be handled by a neutral party who has no commercial aspirations. Nick

fantastic design by the looks of it. interested to see how the long shroud might be removed/changed? for fitment to other anamorphics. Lovely large optic to accommodate the focus throw required for the 0.5m minimum focus (without vignette I imagine). front thread is spaced out from the optic to clearance and further reduced chance of vignette at full focus extension. looks like something designed very nicely from the ground up with a real bit of mechanical design rather than an ebay helicoid, a plumbing fitting and a pair of tiny off the shelf singlets. bet the price is reasonable too...

Its a cool app, but its not the stabilization is not THAT great. There is definitely warping all over the place as I walk through the house with it.