Leaderboard

It's unfortunate that so many of the replies here come from a spec sheet formed opinion. I personally couldn't afford to invest in this camera, however if i were an artist/film maker who values the benefits of true monochrome, or one who's art practice is purely in b+w this is definitely the cheapest option. It's sad that so many seem to compare this to the bmpcc and the currently not released bmmcc. It's also sad that it seems ISO's are more important than image quality to strong mouthed eoshd-ers. Rag the hell out of a b+w sensor and i imagine the grain is rather pleasing - as it is when you rag monochrome film. it;s only colour noise that looks nasty. film grain looks lush

Hi everybody, my first comment on this forum, very nice to meet you. I like Andrew's review for EOS M3, and I find it to the point and I find very useful the videos "Japanese Garden" and the "Studio Test Scene". Well I am from the first who bought EOS M3 body from Amazon Japan at under $500 with free EVF included. I already have a Nikon D800 and when I compared it with EOS M3 in movie mode side by side, I was impressed to see that the EOS M3 video is much more clear and full of details than this of D800. After I liked the freedom that M3 gives me: small size, tilting screen, standard external microphone port, focus peaking that make manual focus quick, and a variety of lenses to choose from Canon, or Nikon, or legacy Pentax, Tamron etc. You cannot find all these at this price. Not even an external microphone port unless you go more over $1.000. I also want to inform other M3 users that if you search the settings in "Picture Style" you will get a movie output much more rich in details: not only remove sharpness but remove contrast as well. But I was really surprised to see that magnification assist for MF doesn’t work in movie mode, while it offers focus peaking, which is related and has to work together with MF assist. I hope that they fix this, it is crazy: every time i want to fine focus or to check the accuracy of the focus peaking, I have to: rotate the selector from movie to photo mode> fine focus>rotate again the selector to movie mode. In general am happy with this camera and for this I made a short "Low Light High ISO Movie Test" which i can share with you: Chipped and unchipped lenses were used for shooting the samples of this movie, which are: 1. Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 non-Ai (adapter used). 2. Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 60-300mm f/3.8-5.4 (23A). 3. Tokina 12-24mm f/4 AT-X 124AF Pro DX II for Nikon (adapter used). 4. Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD IF for Canon. And here is a picture of EOS M3 with the lens: Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 60-300mm f/3.8-5.4 (23A). With this long lens, the first clips of the movie test were shot: Best Regards!

I bought the regular D16 (not the M) since its imo pretty much a bmpcc mkiii (the micro is the mkii) and priced similar to anything Blackmagic if you look at what they charge for specs. The way I saw it was bmpcc + SDs for 2h raw + a Tascam DR 100ii + The battery I use for my Blackmagic + a rig to hold it and to help with handheld = $1-1.5k. Then it's the added Global Shutter which is another $500 if you go micro. Of course then you need a monitor also but let's call it even for the 60fps. Then there is no more Moire. What that is worth is individual but I would gladly have payed $500 for it in a bmpcc update. Some other small things like higher resolution, last clip deletion, full size HDMI, off load to CF and such might be worth a little to some. And lastly it's the CCD and the look that gives. And this is the whole point actually. Either you want it or you don't. I did and its worth atleast $500 for me. When I added it all up its imo worth around $2,5-3k. Pretty fare for a cinema camera with those specs if you ask me (I paid 2.3k for the 500gb version and an mft mount is $350 if I decide to get that in the future). That's atleast how I viewed it. For those that don't I totally understand. We all like different gear and looks. So if I was buying it for the same reasons but with the intention to shoot B&W only I would of course consider it because of the extra stop of DR it gives. Ive only seen I think one demo from the M but that looked really good.

I've been in Japan for about 11 years now. That doesn't make me an authority on the Japanese camera market or anything but from what I have seen, the average camera enthusiast is shooting Canon or Nikon. I always approach professional camera men and women and ask about how they like video on their D800 or 5DMK3 or whatever and they all look kinda embarrassed and say, I haven't really gotten into video. When I go to the park there are a lot of old men with 1Ds and giant zooms shooting ducks and birds or kids playing with their parents whatever. I get the impression that the major chuck of the domestic market for these companies is probably not looking at the internet for reviews of lists of specs (I know many people are but probably not the majority), nor are they buying these cameras with the intention of doing something new. They are most likely in their 50s and 60s, with full-time positions in a company and nearing retirement and are reading camera magazines that are basically advertisements for these two companies and then going to the big electronics stores and buying them from salesmen who don't know anything about anything. My beef with Japan is that the older people have all the money and are the largest segment of the population so Japanese business and culture will cater more and more to what they want. This probably means less innovation. Japanese manufacturers are finding it harder to compete internationally so some retreat and focus on the domestic market and that means just playing on nostalgia. If they are confident that their domestic marketing campaigns will allow them flex brand power and sell inferior cameras for higher prices than the competition, they will continue to do it and find the logic of your argument incomprehensible. Like all paradigm shifts, people don't really change their beliefs. The older generation just eventually dies off and the new generation is left to choose between two alternatives and usually chooses different than the prior group because they don't have an emotional commitment to the past. I'm also willing to admit that I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about, though.

I recently read an unsuspicious text from the Adobe site, listing the new features of Premiere CC 2015 for NAB. Let me cite: 1. New Color Workspace: now includes the Lumetri Color panelAs many of you know, Lumetri is the color engine that powers Adobe SpeedGrade and it’s now integrated into Adobe Premiere Pro CC in a new more “creative way”. The idea is to adjust color as you go during the editing process. I like to call this “color editing” . While the new Color Panel is very powerful and will satisfy most users need for complex color work , we wanted to be careful not to confuse Color Editing with Color Grading with specific grading tools like Adobe Speedgrade and others. I asked myself, why should it be important not to merge color grading and editing (or whatever else one may think of) in one program? Up to now, I was under the impression that it was difficult to accomplish, that Speedgrade simply was so unique and fundamentally different from Premiere that they couldn't integrate it seamlessly. Then I was told by a post guy that the reason probably was a strategic one. He could be asked by a client to refine the edit though he really was paid only for color refinements. Professionals like to have every task strictly separated. What Blackmagic now does with Resolve 12 is not what professional colorists ask for. Reasonable, understandable. From an amateur's view, this means actually 'deliberately crippling the products' (a nice term I picked up from Andrews rant about DSLRs with poor video functions to protect other product lines). Then Randy Ubillos retiring (he was the force behind FCP - historically a 'spin-off' of Premiere - , iMovie and then FCP X). Why is it, I asked myself, that FCP X was such a careless fart into the faces of the FCPro users? It obviously aimed at the consumer/amateur market first. Why did they (in 4 years!) not develop the rudimentary color correction tools themselves? Why did'nt they finally integrate an audio mixer (frequently requested by users)? Inability? Strategy! They don't want to frighten off the remaining pros. Am I paranoid? I think all this vanity about professionalism, using the 'right' system and so forth is nothing else but a delusion of us pawns, encouraged by the industry. Sorry for not finding the right words, english is not my native language.

Hi guys just wanted to share my mac pro upgrade DIY style. I wanted to build new power PC for resolve and rendering but i was thinking why spend 4k when i can just upgrade my mac pro with a bit of modification. i have Radeon 5770 for monitors and gtx 770 4gb and 550ti for resolve and premiere and any other application that needs it In few months i will add 6core 3.4 cpu and 32 gb memory and another gtx 770 4gb to replace 550. Some people might say oh no what did you do to mac but i really don't care about look only that it can do the job and its under my table where i don't see it at all. I have power supply powering 770 and have relocated my HD where DVD use to be i have used DVD sata connection to power the HD there is one more sata connection for another HD and on top of that i can run extension sata for another 2 HD from the free bays That is it Thanks

the unit you have is maybe the worst available. However if your lens wont even seat into that adaptor it probably wont fit any eos-pl adaptor. It doesnt look like the work of RAF. it looks like they fashioned that pl mount by hand -it's certainly not been made on a lathe! the ciecio7 unit is the best value for money while being very close to true PL mounts manufactured by Arri however I'd hazard a guess that you lens wouldnt even fit a real arri camera. the main problem with your adaptor from jie ying is that they havent placed the orientation pin in the correct position meaning the anamorphic wont be aligned correctly from the start. other than that, as long as the back of your lens falls within the parameters listed in this listing, http://i1183.photobucket.com/albums/x474/henrykborsuk/pleosbagnetwymiary.jpg there shouldnt be a problem - the lens should at least seat into the adaptor you have. if the pl mount on your lens is bigger than the dims on this image, no eos-pl adaptor will work with it. .

​Yes, I don't doubt this. But if someone is a brilliant 'surgeon', and this is his only calling, would he then grade in the CC embedded *Speed*grade anyway? He then will have one of those hardware suites with elitist software, the names of which are seldom uttered, because they cost $100.000 and much more (hardware calibrated reference monitors, a full cinema projector if he grades for the big screen, control panels that even Mr. Chekov ate his heart out). The protocol by which the colorist gets access to the footage from old AVID could as well be carved in stone, compared to this 'workflow' Adobes dynamic link really is already an all-in-one-solution. ​Here is the riddle: Apple could have made FCP X the consumer's (or no/low-budget filmer's) definite NLE. They had the crew from Color, they had the crew from Shake, from Logic, they had Soundtrack Pro, they developed Motion. They put every effort into making the most advanced editing software in the world, but then they miraculously stopped. Take for instance the new mask paint tool. What is that supposed to be? The roto tools in Motion had been better since 11 years. The plugin-combo SliceX and TrackX had been much better (Mocha tracker). Why? If you think hard, you'll know the answer. ​When cows fly. But is it technically impossible? Surely not. Then why don't they? ​You say that because you're doing literally all the work. A one-man-band. Professionalism has a nimbus. You pay the CC fee because you consider it a pro app. And why did Apple not call their flagship 'iMovie X'? They savagely cut off anything resembling the 'Adobe Production Suite' (as it was called then), but they insist on being pro. A professional NLE, see AVID, doesn't have to be smart or make things easy. It doesn't have to swallow a hundred proprietary codecs, perform multicam edits, allow to apply funky looks, what have you. My posting wasn't meant to discuss the complexity of color grading nor to demand a better workflow integration, I just started to wonder why we all accept to be lied to so readily.

​First off, Blackmagic did themselves a great disservice by calling it the "pocket" camera. That name led everyone to believe it was a "point and shoot". While technically it is, if you are shooting professionally, it isn't. And really, a pro wouldn't expect it to be anything more than what it is. It's a small compact platform that produces pro quality (all be it cropped sensor) images. But as with any pro camera, there are support accessories required. ALL pro cameras require external batteries. 45 minutes on a battery is pretty standard stuff. All pro cameras require external monitors for viewing and focusing. So does the BMPCC. The images this little camera produces are amazing. i've used it extensively to shoot background plates to put behind arri raw foreground elements. beautiful results. If you want to be happy with this camera, buy a good external battery or two, an atomos ninja for recording and viewing and for 3K or less, You've got an amazing B cam than can be a saving grace on any set. If you're looking for a point and shoot.......stick with the GH4

If you do not consider yourself a pro, noone is expecting anything from you. A pro can work in an indie or corporate environment, and will get the job done no matter what tools he/she works with. And if you can't scale up your skills then get someone to help you. Noone owes you anything, man, seriously.

Anyone that thinks they know what I want or should have for my work without knowing anything about me makes me skeptical of that person's opinion. You're not me. I'm not you. My advice is to try and have a little empathy. Attempt to see things from a POV that's not your own. That's a healthy thing to do in life. Avoid being intellectually calcified. Regardless, wasn't the Bolex was always meant to be niche? If anything, they might be ahead of the curve as I think the future of digital video is going to move into specialized gear and less mass market...as the most likely scenario is that the mass consumer market is going to continue to dwindle for cameras.

​Here And the color version is very appealing: Bob

Hello everyone! With the new ability to shoot a 4K 1.33:1 image with the GH4, I immediately remembered of my film days (as an AC of course) where you had head and floor room on the viewfinder to shoot... and thought that I could use 16mm lenses on the GH4 with a decent crop... meaning, that one would be able to shoot with 16mm and s16mm lenses, crop out the heavy vignette and still get nice 3K sized footage. Here's a little proof test I shot:

The XC10 is a dog with fleas in low light. Not speculating here, I have seen it. All the bitrate in the world will not fix it. 10 bit 422 will not fix it. The problem is twofold, small sensor and slow glass, neither of which you can do anything about. A 1" sensor is 12.80 x 9.60 mm or 122.88 square mm. A MFT is 17.30 x 13.00 mm or 224.90 square mm. An APS-C is 23.60 x 15.60 mm or 368.95 square mm. The APS-C sensor is THREE bloody times the size of a 1" sensor. The MFT sensor is almost twice as large. If you don't care about low light performance, go for it, if that floats your boat. It does not float mine.

That does look nice. I am about 2-3 months away from getting a new camera. I have been eyeballing the fz1000 for run and gun reasons, but after seeing this footage, maybe the gh4 is the way to go. I have a couple vintage cosmicar c mounts that may go perfectly in anamorphic mode.

FS7 seems like the perfect all rounder A cam, to me. Leaves ALOT of money for other stuff. C100 mk II is you don't need 4K

​You may not be able to quantify the 14 bit color, but you can definitely tell it looks better than a normal 8 bit source.

That's it, I'll just buy an Arri Alexa 65!

The first 20 minutes on Krypton were amazing. The rest of the movie crashed and burned with Superman landing on Earth.

JazzBox, how did you manage to get your hands on an early pre-production copy?? :-o

Probably Canon ignores that internet exists and some people use it, finding informations about prices, specs etc... A friend of a friend that has a friend that work for them sent me this super secret picture of a new model that will be on the market in June: they developed a new camera that uses REAL reel, in order to achieve a real "raw" feel. The first model will have fixed lens (20x OPTICAL!!! wow!!!), EVF, some buttons and... no, it will be not cheap, but enthusiast have to spend if they are serious about video making! (I hope it will be possible install ML on it!)

This would be a great present to my 10 yrld neice... Actually she would prob laugh at me and return it for a Panasonic fz1000 and a Mac....

This camera is quite possibly the most hubristic camera-spec-to-price-point camera Canon have ever released. I also think it's hilarious that they even mention the stills 'functionality' in the marketing. Chuck says "It can really do a credible job as either a video or a stills camera, depending on the needs of the user or the project." Uhhh, what? Unless you're a mom at a soccer game, I fail to see how 12mp JPEGs coming off a 1" sensor from a slow fixed lens will meet any photographer's needs. The whole spectacle is really absurd. Meanwhile Blackmagic announce the URSA Mini with basically every spec I desire outside of internal NDs at a base price only $500 more. It's really fascinating to watch how long you can milk brand loyalty and lens ubiquity before people wake up that you're selling the same thing for 3 times the price, while your competitor (BM) undercuts everyone else by half with almost 1/100th the manpower.

​If you've got the choice. Of course. Surely for people who shoot skater videos or dogs shaking their ears. Twixtor is a crook. But if you know your foe, you can plan any dramatically justified slomo with it. The amount of time processing? How many slomo shots can a film have without feeling slow? And again, you can't just shoot everything with 60p for the odd slomo and then believe the stuff will look good @ 24p without considerable render time. ​On 1080 devices, you can't see superior resolution (of original 4k), you can only see inferior (of 'not true' HD) resolution. There is an experience among us former cinema projectionists: one can distinguish 4k when sitting in row six or closer to the screen. Not because beyond this threshold the film looks much better, but on the contrary, you can still endure it in this size, whereas the 2k version is blown up too much. That's all there is to it. I had two 4k sources on my 1080 monitor, and though they apparently were good HD, they were no revelation. How could they be? It's all about size, and nothing else.

​Pocket footage looks better than GH4K footage on vimeo... Good 1080 is much better than low quality 4k.

  The AF is wonderful. Image isn't far off C100 Mark II at ISO 400 either, but raw baby!

​Me too! I'd be happy, and would promise not to contribute to wishlists ever again, okay, well at LEAST for 12 months. But seriously, I'm very tempted by the C100 Mark 2 as an all-in-one 1080p machine for the next 3 years, but I'm loath to buy into the Canon system due to their "just enough" approach. Come on Panasonic, you can do it. I'm hoping it's just slightly more compact than the AF100, and looks less like a shoebox with a toilet roll coming out the back. ​I agree, if they nail the ergonomics and it delivers beautiful images out of the box then they will have a winner on their hands. If designed right and priced right it could cover the C100 and C300 market segments like the FS7.