Leaderboard

Neither RED nor ARRI make their own sensors. They have them outsourced and made to their specifications. Just like BM do with their 4.6k sensor. BM make their own circuit boards. They don't outsource them. Then make them from scratch. They make the physical bodies themselves. They rely on commodity items for the chips and screens but they manufacture more than most other companies in house. They have an active policy of not outsourcing. You're just guessing or making things up when pass mis-informed opinion as fact. Maybe think about qualifying your guesses next time so those reading will understand that you're guessing or making something up. How does anyone know what the margins are for Blackmagic ? A company that don't tend to outsource but do tend to keep as much as they can in-house. Just like the first post that posited that few would sell when thousands have already been sold. It's just guessing at best, and most are way off. They're doing fine. Compare them to AJA and the Cion. Similar sized company to BM, they made a camera based on the same sensor package, but one that was considered to be the much better camera. Look how well that went for them. Why is it that Cion failed ? Everyone who was a "pro" breathed a sigh of relief that a "real" camera would be made and yet... Axiom ? That was going to show everyone how an open source market/ ML style approach would make a camera right ? Show those Blackmagic clowns how to do a camera OS. Look how grindingly slow that's been going because Canon didn't do all the heavy lifting on the sensor front end. or DB ? Why did they fail ? Again, they have an apparently loyal following and unique features. Again it failed. Panavison have failed at least twice to launch a new camera to replace the Genesis. Dalsa, who everyone forgets made the first 4K cinema camera have gone out of making cameras. Aaton went bust trying to make a digital cinema camera. Ikonoscope went bust using the same DB sensor. You armchair quarterbacks are all posting guesses but you actually have no idea what it actually takes to make a camera from scratch. I sure don't but I know that after seeing Blackmagic do it up close for the last few years it's way more complex and intricate than I ever imagined. I know that when I ask about a feature or aspect that I like or don't like of the engineering team they've spent a long time already thinking about it or trying to get past the hurdle. Making and developing cameras is a very expensive game and there's no way it would be some kind of loss leader. It's just way too expensive. At least they're still in the game and offering choices. They continue to innovate, and I think if you look at their first efforts, compared to now, they obviously listen to what their customers want even if it doesn't appear to be so. They have certainly hit some pretty big bumps in the road too but they are still here and trying to compete with the big boys, something a lot of others have failed to do. I find the "qc" issue hasn't hit me. I guess I'm lucky or maybe I don't expect to have my camera working or repairable after dropping it but in years of using all the BM cameras I have on commercial and paying jobs, I've not run into most of the problems that are cited as being their weakness. I mean honestly the camera doesn't overheat and yet it's constantly written as a problem on review sites or in the mythology. In the early days of RED they had to educate their users about how to get the most from their cameras and how to shoot RAW. I think BM need to do the same thing because you still get people who have no idea about a RAW workflow stumbling into using RAW for the first time after having only shot 8bit 4:2:0 previously. This community more than "pros" is where BM cameras do the most for filmmakers. Which other big box company gives you ProRes or even 10bit ? JB

I see where you're coming from but... That is the same as saying H.264 wasn't designed as an acquisition format, yet now it's the basis for Sony XAVC and Canon XF codecs. As long as H.265 has the hardware encoder / decoder chips to support it there's no reason why it can't be an acquisition format and an edit-ready codec.

STILL the same camera which is very sad but you are being too harsh on the original Handle never rotates accidentally and I've shot a LOT with it so should know Easy to break plastic lens? Nah, it's very robust as is the whole camera The zoom does fall out on a drone and the gap between handle and body IS to narrow for sure, that I agree with you on. Very common to have mic on top of the camera Look at the positives... superb stabilisation, superb 1080p, best codec on the market for the price, it is like a mini C300 Mark II, ergonomics can be very satisfying

The FS7 is great for slomo, the C300 II is great for AF, color, and skintones. Getting ARRI-like color from the C300 II is an amazing deal and the DPAF is super useful. Not having to mess with color AT ALL (if just wanting accurate/pleasing skintones) is a great advantage of the C300 II over the FS7. That's why Canon is still so popular.

Resolve has a post solution for the Black Hole issue, which is great because there are other cameras that have the same problem. I wa shooting MAC moving lights on a film four days ago with Alexa's and guess what.....they too suffer from black hole sun. IS lenses work great on the pocket ? JB

Yeah, you'd be 100% wrong there. But carry on... They seem to have sold thousands of them. Mostly they're still backordered. Such as...? Resolve...? Oh wait, you get that included with the camera... Monitors ? Converters ? I think you're stretching a pretty long bow.... JB

RIP Samsung, you were way ahead of your time. Too smart for your own good!

Samsung was ahead of it's time with the NX1... Too bad they got out of the DSLR business. They showed real promise.

My mistake. You know it all. They just rock up to the sensor drive though and get a Big Mac sensor meal to go. JB.

Grrrrrr... Google serves up that ridiculous piece of software for just about any transcoding question. Brorosoft has vomitted this sort of manufactured content everywhere to exploit SEO. Heaven forbid one actually tries to locate legitimate advice about video transcoding through a search engine --as wading through the algorithmic garbage dump of information is barely useful. But then again, Monica660, you already knew that, didn't'cha? That's why you're here.

Do you go on refrigerator forums and post about refrigerators that don't interest you too?

I'm not sure jpg has a 10bit mode, but what I do is grab sills from video, if the video is 10bit than the stills can be 10 bit.

Another thing to mention is, the original C300 is still being used pretty widely. If you're not rendering out to 4K, I am not sure the upgrade is really worth it. Man though, if you shoot a lot of interviews, you will really really please your clients if you shoot with the C300ii. The color is just so amazing. The auto focus is also incredible. Those two features alone are worth it. No 60p/4k is a really big bummer. Exactly. I do want to say, the Sony Cine Alta cameras are on a different level. The F3 has amazing color. So cheap as well.

A lot of great footage in this thread. Thanks for sharing guys. Is it just me or does the gx85 handle highlights more gracefully than than the g7?

A small update to B&H modding: I’ve been using the silver Series VII ring that comes on the back of most B&H’s found on eBay. I made a polyurethane version for Tito since his did not come with one. The ring is great for adapting to whatever taking lens you’re using. On a whim I decided to take off the silver ring to see if I could get my Helios any closer to the back of the anamorphic. Here’s the back of the B&H without the silver ring. Since my Helios has a diameter of less than 61mm (which is the inner diameter of my support bracket), I was able to slide it closer so that the back of the B&H is actually sitting inside the taking lens. So the series VII ring isn’t necessarily needed in all situations. It doesn’t necessarily improve the resulting image either, but it is a snug fit. In other cases, like if you have a taking lens with a 72mm thread, I would definitely recommend a 72mm-to-S7 adapter to ensure that your lenses are locked, light-sealed, and centered. On Tito’s advice, I also took a 3D file for a follow focus ring, altered it, and fit it around the helicoid of my B&H mods. It’s a much easier process than hand-gluing focus strips, and the results are a little nicer looking too. Cheers, |. . | .|

Bringing this back to life, this time with a picture :

Give Blackmagic credit. First, they're a relatively tiny manufacturing operation. They deadlifted their chances of success in a tough market. Samsung left, for crying out loud. Digital bolex, done. A few others tried too, and failed. Blackmagic brought innovative products at an accessible price point - many of us are direct beneficiaries of that. Years ago, I replaced my red scarlet with the fresh BMCC, which had a better overall image with far less fuss. And the camera was ready to shoot at a cost 1/10th of the price of the red scarlet, which itself was the cheapest real cinema camera at the time. And even if you don't like their prroducts, you still benefitted indirectly from that. Blackmagic is an industry disrupter. They put a lot of pressure on a lot of companies (Red immediately responded with a failed 4K for 4K campaign) and raised the quality and features of competing products. Don't forget the fact that Blackmagic also offered a class grading software free with Davinci resolve (again disrupting the industry) as well as integrating a NLE into it (again disrupting the industry). All their moves have helped the independent filmmaker. Yes, they've had delays (not nearly as bad as RED) and some minor flaws (that other companies had too), but these are the growing pains of a small company. They don't have the resources that Canon and Sony have for QC and supply chain management. If they raised prices that would obviously help, but they're intentionally pricing their stuff very aggressively. They're probably operating at a loss or very slim margins to stay in the game. If they go under...that would be a painful loss. Because they are approaching products with an intelligence and practicality that are sorely lacking in the competition. The ursa mini 4.6k is not for extreme low-light situations, or autofocus, or drone work, but for traditional filmmaking, there is nothing out there that provides a comparable image at its price point. This forum has a lot of dslr/mirrorless users, who complain a ton about their image. What's funny, so many of their complaints are answered....with blackmagic cameras. Color science, simple straightforward menus, no overheating, motion cadence, filmic, thick codecs, etc. It's all right there.

Various sources have suggested that the C300 Mark II is having difficulties coping with the run-away success of the Sony FS7 on the rental market. Is it truly being left on the shelves? EOSHD analyses an unexpected situation... Read the full article

XC10 Mark II or an XC20 would be a replacement. An XC10 / XC15 is just like the XA30 (standard model) and XA35 (extra port). It's all in the name. It would be a big break with tradition for Canon to make a major change on a 'XX-5' model.

Those things all sound like something that would be in a new model. This however is likely just a xx5 version. So you are going to have to have some patience. (Its been said already, compare the xa20/25, xa30/35, xf100/105, xf200/205)

HEVC is like double the current compression in terms of the efficiency, so 120Mbps will be equal to 240Mbps in H.264

4K 60p

I think we can all agree none of us know the cost and time it takes to make a camera. You are right John, I shouldn't poo-poo this innovative camera that gives raw and pro res - no one else has done it at the price point they do it as except for DJI I apologize for this thread. But still, the Ursa Mini is built pretty cheaply. As well as the Digital Bolex. To me, the most exciting upstart is DJI with the Inspire one. They went from the phantom which is fairly cheaply-built to an incredibly beautiful and powerful. I have no clue how DJI is doing it, and no company is the same. But I guess to be positive now - what is DJI's secret? What do they have that allows them to put out a beautiful drone for so cheap?

Don't shoot the messenger. Just thought you guys would be interested. It's like going in an appliance store to peruse... Then saying you ain't interested in the refrigerator, but enough to tell your friend, who is actually looking for a fridge... "Yo! There is a sale on this fridge here." BTW, I do that all the time... When my wife wants to go shopping and drags me along... I peruse the electronic section... Walk through bestbuy... To pass the time, get to know the latest gadgets.... Stay a top of things in terms of tech... Don't be all touchy and heart broken if someone said something bad about your camera. Even if it is as simple as "I'm not interested."?

I like the silver Helios! hahahaha Great job, man. Shooting the tests with the mod was the most fun I had in a while! Video comes out this weekend.

Hate me, but... Get both. the vari-str will let you rack focus, while strong power diopters will solve your super close focus issue (+1 and +2). You switch between them (vari and regular) according to the shots. My guess is that you'll keep the variable on for most of the time. The difference between the Rangefinders is indeed what @IshootbeforeItalk said, size. And the markings. SLR Magic wanted to have a really cheap option out there. Small correction though, the minimum focus for the Recilux CoreDNA is 0.7m, but 0.5m for the 3FF-W. Lastly, I know you watched, but it works as a reminder, how to get a cheap 72mm +0.5 http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=9053

I was thinking that exact same thing. If you look at the top-down image of the leaked photos, you'll see that the accessory shoe on top is not a hot-shoe for attaching a flash like the original XC10 has, it's a cold shoe with a screw hole, just like the C100 mkII has for mounting the XLR handle. The first image attached is the leaked XC15 and below that is the same angle on the XC10.

Did my first test, excuse the dramatic soundtrack. Password: Bolex

They share general sensors, and camera software between lots of those cameras. Which helps reduce the R&D costs per camera by a significant amount. A good next step would be if they did a base mount (such as Sony FZ or Kinefinity sub-PL mount) as a common mount across their cameras. As I blogged about here: http://ironfilm.co.nz/what-if-kinefinitys-kinemount-became-a-universal-cinema-mount/ What he means is the other companies do that as well.

CR has leaked pictures of the XC15. Still not interested.

This is really the point i'm getting at... The C300 is still ideal for that market and quite a few others, where 1080/24/25/30p is enough. I'm not sure that the FS7 is taking those jobs from the C300 ii any more than the C300 is .... I think C300 ii didn't really have a defined market and it is suffering for it, a case of bad timing from Canon... the events guys don't need it's additional features... the music / narrative guys have options that cover more bases... When events/reality tv etc move to 4K, it will probably regain some dominance.

Not timelapse but 4k from space.

Its done as in recorded and ready. Just never seem to have time to edit and do the voice over. But yes. Its a very good camera. I would say its for those that want a C300ii or FS7 but cant afford it. Or because you want one of the many LS300 features those two camera don't have.

Im with you on all that. XC15 will probably be to the XC10 what the XA35 is to the XA30 (Or xf200/xf205). Also believe IBC makes more sense.

With these kind of anecdotal stories... You need to ask yourself some further questions before drawing any kind of conclusion: Is the C300 mk1 still renting well? Have rentals simply dropped across the mid range, now people can afford truly good cameras as owner/operators? Are people just renting the FS7 for occasional slow-mo shots to go with another camera? Has the FS7 taken rentals away from the F55, RED etc too, eg, we have hit saturation point where that camera is good enough to scoop up all kinds of work? It seems to me that alot of the market that the C300 was so successful in.. what I would call throw away tv (reality, interviews etc)... Is still 1080p based and the C300 is still king. I can see the C300 ii slowly grabbing back ground as the price comes down and the need for 4K in that area grows. Too little info and too little time passed to call it a flop.

Sure they would. I know I would. I would love a 10-2000mm f0.95 small as a coffey mug But I wouldn't trade a constant aperture and parfocal 24-70/4, 24-240/5.6 and 24/2.8 all in one for a 24-200/2.8 if it meant loosing not only the reach. But also the 5 axis stabilization, loosing the parfocalness and being twice or three times the size rendering the camera unbalanced? And probably way more expensive as well. There is a reason I don't run-n-gun with a 18-35/1.8 and 24-70/2.8 IS as much as I would with the 24-105/4 IS (or 24-120/4 VR if its on a Nikon). I would skip the extra stop if it gave me a smaller, lighter, cheaper, constant aperture, parfocal lens with better IS. Specially on a camera like this which is truly meant for run-n-gun. IMO, Indy filmmakers, porno, blocked shots is different. But that's not what we are talking about here. Super shallow depth of field, extreme lowlight and so on is not at all relevant when discussing the XC10/15. For those type of things there are way way better cameras. This is more for news gathering type of situations. Most one man band news crews I see and hang out with use the XF100 or XA20. Those are the cameras I compare to.

X-T2.... so $1.6K? That is barely more than what a GH4 has been recently. If they go nuts and give us 4K 60p 10bit 422 internal then I don't think a full two thousand dollars is at all unreasonable. The Nikon D500 is a crop sensor camera and goes for the same price. Will still be heaps and heaps cheaper than any comparable Sony or Canon or BMD competitor.

I also want to thank Tito for all his amazing posts & work - I wouldn't have gotten nearly as far with my work without it. Thanks!!!

Thanks. It is a video screen shot from the timeline.

Canon (C100, 7D and 5dmk2 experience) Likes: Colours, menus and ease of use. On the C100 I love the ergonomics, especially the hand grip and joystick. The quality of image on those little files is amazing. Dislikes: Doing stupid things like the crap viewfinder and LCD on the C100. PSF nonsense, 50i. Mts boredom.

Holy crap. That's horrific and a huge mistake from Canon. The rolling shutter on the A6300 is TERRIBLE. The fact that this is worse blows my mind.

Panasonic Lumix GX80.

I can comment on the 5200 and 5300 as I have owned both currently the latter. The 5200 suffers from banding (might also be called sensor noise?) from the sensor especially when using a flat profile. The d5300 fixes this and gives you 1080p 60 fps for slo-mo. The d5500 gives a stock nikon flat profile for once and I believe a touch screen?

On the mark, as per usual. What Canon is doing makes no sense at all to me...and apparently I'm not alone. I think the crazy thing is what you pointed out in your open letter; they give something wonderful and exceptional and, in the same model, take something else equally wonderful or essential away. What kind of marketing is that? What kind of thinking is that? As I've said before, is this some twisted revenge for WWII? Add to your takeaways taking the auto focus feature from Log in the 1dC. WTF! Who the Hell made that decision? Plus, what they offer on the one hand is terrific, but what they don't offer is downright weird. Where is their full frame constant 2.8 zoom lens? Sigma can make a crop sensor lens at 1.8 and the best Canon can do is 4.0?!? It's all very strange. snatch.tiff

As if the crop factor wasn't bad enough news, here comes rolling shutter results...

It's in the edit suite Italy was fantastic.

Aside from the 1D C their C-line can't do decent stills. I want both in one camera. GH5 it is then! It's not the crop by itself which is the issue, it is the mismatch between the lens mount and the sensor crop size. On a Micro Four Thirds camera the lenses are designed to fit the 2x crop sensor. And the lack of mirror means special optical designs like the Metabones Speed Booster XL are possible, effectively giving you a 1.3x crop of your full frame Canon lenses instead of 2x. So I don't even consider the GH4 as a 2x crop camera. The 5D Mark IV is a 1.74x crop camera and stuck with it. You pay that much money for a full frame camera, you expect it to shoot full frame.... no? You expect it to have LOG as well!!

Finally, the 8-15mm fisheye has a purpose. No more black vignette!

At this point the problem is not Canon but people that keep buying it.

Dual-pixel focus would be the only thing (at the moment, anyway) that that would make me consider an upgrade.