Leaderboard

Canon is repackaging a selection of their DSLRs to appeal more to video producers. Writ large with the phrases "FULL HD" and "SELFIE" the bundles come with one of Rode's cheapest mics and a 32GB SD card. The standard kit zoom (18-55mm) is provided as normal. Prices are anything but low end though with the bundles ranging from a hefty $899 for the T5i to a GH4/NX1 busting $1649 for the 70D. Read the full article

I really hope they can add a 120p mode that performs as well for the upcoming A7000. RX10 II is very tempting, but I'd prefer interchangeable lenses.

There is a good dose of irony here. EOSHD is happy to sacrifice things like raw, 10 bit, 4:2:2, colour science and various other aspects that make an image, just to be able to shoot 4k (no doubt in big letters on the box). Marketing works!

I never thought I'd see FULL HD printed anywhere in 2015.

​All of a sudden that Nikon Filmmaker's Kit looks quite appealing

I guess most enthusiasts finally figured out the EOS 700D is crap, so Canon is looking for a new target audience. You can see them pictured on the right of the box. Their dad will pay anyway. It's offensive to ask $899,99 for this kit of crap.

In terms of the mic: The TAKSTAR SGC-598 I bought seems pretty decent to me, don't know if/by what name it goes in your region, but here's a link to German Amazon: http://www.amazon.de/gp/product/B00E1CTFZY Just get a cheap boomstick/handle with it. I couldn't bear to pay that much money for (imho) mediocre mics as the Rode Rycote Videomic/Videomic Pro, I returned them both because I couldn't find the value I had paid for in them. And the retarded 9V blocks...The TAKSTAR sensibly takes AA batteries. And recorder-wise possibly try a decent Android/iPhone app? Dunno if this would do the trick. The Rode Smartlav/Android combo works nicely for me. At least for iPhone it seems you need an adapter, though. Dunno about Android, I believe they don't have the complicated setup. If you want me to test this on Android with the Takstar, just give me shout. Here's an article about the adapter you need for iPhone: http://www.danmccomb.com/news/iphone-4-as-audio-recorder-with-external-mic-a-comparison/

​Erm! Ever heard of satire!?

Did this market research also say what percentage of still camera sales accounted for video purchases? Because all this doomsaying about how not adapting stills cameras for better video production will ruin companies is getting rather tiresome.

Color shift isn't THAT bad. At least on mine. Here's with the Variable ND at the max. Below that is with no ND. (sorry for the shitty framing, just grabbed the GH4 for a quick test.)

I have to admit I too am confused by what this article is saying. Are you making fun of the kind of people who would buy this, or aren't you? If you are, then I do think that's unfair. Most of us started with little knowledge and some less than top level kit, just what we could afford, or indeed what we received as gifts from well meaning relatives who didn't know what the latest cool kit was. If the article isn't making fun of those people, then I have no idea what it's trying to say. Edit: Having said that, it is indeed a ridiculous box design.

Canon are doing just fine. They don't need to make big, innovative waves year on year as they sell more than anyone else and have a more recognised brand. They are able to wait for the market to move first. I still know a lot of people who film on their Canon DSLRs. They rent C300's, to go with the lenses. It's not as if Canon are going downhill, is it? Canon are differently innovative. Instead of relying on fabulous specs, they rely on reliability, ease of use and cameras that "just work" and work very well. No dodgy slow menus, poor battery life and unstable firmware. Canon make high quality stuff. I don't have any Canon gear. I'd love a C300 MK II but I couldn't justify it. I'd get by just fine with an RX10 II and Sony FS7 rentals. I'd only buy a Canon for stills or to mess with Magic Lantern. Such the quality at lower prices these days, I couldn't care less what Canon are doing, as long as there are options I can afford from other brands. I'm more concerned about my own creativity than curling up in bed having nightmares about Canons so-called lack of innovation.

​I don't think it has any weather sealing, there's nothing about that on the official pages. I kinda doubt any consumer Sony camera has weather sealing. http://tobinators.com/blog/index.php/2014/04/everything-else/sony-a7r-in-not-weatherproof-shock/ Found this here. Anyhow, I just got mine and it's really a nice All-in-one package, liking it very much thus far. Unfortunately, the otherwise great remote app (best picture quality of all the apps by far) doesn't allow you to use a Picture Profile. Filed a feature request in the beginning of 2015 when I got an a7s, but naturally nothing has happened, yet. Wanted to use the camera for Vlogging as well, but now I can see that the RX100 IV would have been a better choice due to the fully tiltable display. Otherwise, it handles really well, the stabilization goes a long way and I feel that the handling is getting better (I hated the a7s ergonomics, but this thing now I think is quite nice). Lightroom doesn't support the new RAW format yet, so I'll have to wait to judge stills quality, but video sure is sweet. Perhaps they're working on uncompressed stills finally and that's why it's not working anymore. Here's a little Slomo clip I've just shot (pimped it a bit in Premiere):

While it's tempting to try to save on the nd filter, it's not worth it in the long run and you'll just end buying something better eventually. You have a very nice lens and it would be shame to contaminate the light going into it by passing it through some low quality glass first. I do run and gun, and ended up using Hoya ProNDs with Xume magnetic filter adapters. It takes only seconds to change your ND on the go, and you will really notice the difference compared to a cheap variND.

​Mirrorless might be the future... but we don't live in the future, we live in the present. And the present situation is still that DSLRs are better in some areas, and mirrorless better in others. In fact, that's probably a big part of why the D750 was so well-received. In photography terms it's better than the D610 and A7, but not overwhelmingly so. In video terms, it's clearly weaker than the A7S and GH4 in just about all aspects other than colour rendition (and low light performance versus the latter). But it still does both things so well that it makes a very good package for people who need one camera for both purposes.

Ok that sony looks really amazing ! It has all that i am looking for : really good slo-mo and it' a water-sealed bridge (if i am not wrong). I already own a fz1000 but i am strugling with the colours... On the other side it has this magic lens that can go up to 400. So my question is How about the numerical zoom on the rx10 ii ? Does it impact the image ? And can we expect to still have the 120p ? I really need a long range like the fe1000 with the rx10 ii specs... Hmm sounds like a dream !

I don't think there is any camera that can compete with the rx10ii unless you are looking for high iso, shallow dof,raw video,interchangeable lenses,etc... Compared to the fz1000 it's a nobrainer.

I think it's even simpler than that... When you go to a store, Canon has more camera models displayed and on the shelves than other brands do. Also, the Canon and Nikon names are synonymous with photography. Panasonic and Sony and Samsung have products in so many different electronic arenas that it confuses your average consumer. If your average, everyday consumer decides to buy a camera, they go to the store and look at all of the cameras. They see Sony and think... I have a Sony TV and headphones. Then they see a Panasonic and think... I have a Panasonic electric razor or I have a Panasonic microwave... Then they move down the aisle and see a Canon or a Nikon and they think... My Dad had a Canon or... my Grandpa had a Nikon...

​Yes will do that but there's really no comparison, the 120p from the Sonys is in a different league.

This isn't a very good idea if you want good audio for interviews. You need to get that mic in close even if it's a directional mic. Griffin on Indy Mogul had a smart solution with an arm coming of his shoulder rig with a shotgun. Best way is to tripod the camera and have the zoom in your hand, text book reporter setup. Sugest watching this,

I'm an avid prosumer videographer and as much as I enjoy Andrew articles and his endless independent effort to trash manufacturers when they have to be trashed, I must agree with the previous comment. If I remember well, the video market on the middle to high end camera market represent accounts for 10% of the sales. Most people don't buy DSLR or prime mirrorless to shoot video and canon is not (entirely) stupid. They do market survey and have a marketing department. So far Canon photo/video division is profitable and each camera they bring on the market is successful. They pick several market segment (still DSLR and Pro Camera) and they stick to it. That's their strategy and we'll see how it goes overtime.

Brought my new A7ii over the weekend and played around a bit with the stabilization. I those of you going for the A7sii or A7rii will be very pleased with it. Combined with a rig or support it would be rock solid. And this is just 3 Axis since I used old vintage glass.

IBIS looks very nice to me, didn't see any warping. Loved the low-angle running after the dog shot. It's interesting how sometimes you can get a smoother-looking shot when moving at speed than when trying to do stealthy ninja walking.

I'd probably think most of the "internet camera nerds" don't bother using lighting, or very little. Whether this comes down to shooting style/hobby/lack of interest... Don't know. I can be a camera nerd who surfs the net on a daily basis to feed my latest craving. But I also see cameras/footage being critised where proper, good lighting was NOT utilised. How many actually realise that a camera produces superior images with a good set of lights, or a knowledge in how to mould natural light? A lot of the "skin tone" footage on the net with the A7s sucks because the operator raised the ISO to 20,000 in locations with weird colours/no colours, and didn't bother to consider light at all. Lighting is far more important than cameras. You start to realise that your tool has much better colour, dynamic range, resolution and motion than you thought. Even if you use a flat piece of foil to reflect the light on your subject, every little helps. My order of importance for every shoot: 1. Idea 2. Subject (actor, location etc) 3. Lighting 4. Lenses 5. Camera So onto your subject, whatever camera you use, start with lighting first. You will get much much further with your filmmaking and produce much better images this way My honest opinion is - those who are serious but don't consider lighting, you might as well not bother!