Leaderboard

2.5K mode on the NX500. Very impressive RS performance.

From Kinemax the same sensor as Terra 6k

Buried in one of these threads and on test videos from youtube, my recollection is that there wasn't a huge improvement in image quality above 180-200, that's why 180 is the default. Going from the factory 80 to 180, you will notice a huge improvement in what you can do with the image in post. Also, small tight patterns like asphalt or distant tree leaves look much better. Which hack to use depends on what you want. KS has more features, is reliable, but takes a few seconds to load when turning on the camera. Vasile's hack loads immediately, is reliable, but has less features and takes more steps to install initially. If you just want bitrate, Vasile's might be a better choice. Check out KS features though, he's done some amazing work, you may decide his is better for you.

I just spent the past year chasing specs, and although I learned a lot, my footage isn't much better than it was when I was just shooting with my eos-m... I was just chasing that elusive resolution. I know you've been looking for a camera to shoot your next feature with, if I were you, I would just grab the C100 mkii or C300 mkii and be done with it. You know they'll be reliable and the cinematic look is built into their color science. And honestly, I still watch most movies on a 720p JVC, so what do I know... It looks good to me.

It'll deliver perfect color in a small package. For whatever reason, everybody needs their crappy looking 8 bit 4k haha.

Just checked Whois - www.craftcamera.com is registered to: E.Saawadi, Mansoura, Egypt Yep, I'm just kidding.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/2e8ol7fwb0od20o/AACWr3GJ2EpKMThOs2NmjLnFa?dl=0 Downscaled from 6K Wide to 4K Wide, ProRes422HQ Footage is in KineLOG

Thanks for the explanation. I'll probably try KS's hack first. Would be nice if there were separate threads on this this sub forum dedicated to each of the different hacks with instructions and links in their first posts (including how to donate to the authors). Would make things a lot easier and move things forward faster I reckon ...

There was a korean guy who sold modified speedbooster with the EF contacts.

I have the 64gb version of that card and I was hitting 220 mbps. But the default 180 is already a huge improvement if your worried about issues.

Yes, people are best to grade it themselves before judging it.

Sold. I'm upgrading to the airPhone just as soon as it's out. I feel better already.

Received my 5DMK IV today I will try the 4K once I get my faster CF cards. but for now, trying out the 1080p ALL-I, 23.98fps. I find it very sharp compared to what I saw in my 6D. Those images are just basic screen grabs from Final Cut X (I added the 2:35 ratio aswell) First image is using EOSHD C-log. I'm very surprise how it handles the C300 C-LOG Impulz luts I have. Second image is using C300-CLOG-Fuji PRO 400_FC lut from Impulz Of course, those are just out of the box basic tests under poor light ISO 8000, F2.8... But I'm eager to test this in good light and see the performance against VisionTech and VisonColor profiles which I've been using on my 6D. Cheers!

I agree with a lot of what you're saying about Canon that's why I want them to do what others are doing but better, not great but two steps behind. Also, that quality differential is quickly disappearing with every company fine tuning their products. As far as 4k, I have a 2k monitor but I see a big difference between something shot on 1080 and 4k including the 80d when watching in 1080. For my eyes, the images that look best on my screen is shot on 4k but viewed on 1440 on youtube and 2k on vimeo. Watching it in 4k looks over pixelated. Again, for me, I see a noticeable difference when the material is originated on 1080 or 4k, 4k in 1440 or 2k looks nice, 1080 in 1080 not so much anymore.

This has the touchscreen I so wish my a7rII and a6300 had.....

Could be. Bout the mount... how does the EOS-M mount compare to the E-mount anyways? Flange? Just as flexible? Or more like the NX-mount? Are there any fancy adapters out there already? Is it possible? Are people working on it? Are there just your typical Chinese manufactured ones? I know a lot of people don't mind a 1080p resolution only. Especially people who are creating online content and need to think about quick turnarounds, with fast editing and mainly dealing with mobile use and/or 1080p screens with 1080p uploads. When it has the skintones and color to match... and the dualpixel AF... that's why I don't get why they did not give it a fully articulated screen. Now GQ's Men of the year (category 'New Media') Casey Neistat has to continue lugging around that Canon 70D/80D a little longer. Honestly, I always think Canon just come up with these kind of things themselves. But why not ask for input and create something that makes a bit more sense for a whole lot more people? Hey, atleast it looks legit now... and! they've included a mic-in. I'm just not sure why they can't make 'consumer friendly 4K'. I mean... people will still buy a GH-camera, because it's a productivity tool with advanced features... yet all their other cameras provide users with 4K options. That's the thing with Canon... You want 4K, haha! Howabout $4k in cash and bloated professional range cameras? Thank you. Come again. 4K doesn't mean I need 500Mbit MPEG and Canon LOG. Ok, then don't make it that 'fancy', geez. Or... just provide 2.5K/2.7K to really safeguard and differentiate your 4K cameras. I don't get the fear of moving away from 1080p. You've got to step it up to stay relevant (amongst the competition, but also phones are getting 2K, 4K tv's...).

Looks like they've finally gotten the hint from the NX1 and G7. Unfortunately only looks wise... maybe the next generation the specs will finally match it? And have a fully articulated screen for the vloggers?

Looks great to me...always worth colour correcting footage yourself to see what's what. 30 sec ballpark correction in Colorista from ProRes :

All these lenses are good. The reason I recommended the 17-55 was that is has BOTH IS AND a constant 2.8. The issue for me is being able to get more light into the cam, a shallower DOF, while hand held. The only full frame 2.8 with great DOF and stabilization is the Tamron--beautiful image, weights a TON, and has a curved convex lens that prevents the use of a variable ND filter---Arghhhh. But in the right place with the right light it works a treat---and is less $$$ than Canon.

That makes sense. I decided to go with the 35mm f2 IS. I'm really looking for something to use along side the XC10 in 1080p, for close ups, so the fast prime made more sense and Canon USA is having a sale on their refurbished lenses. However, if I enjoy the DPAF, I will probably consider the 17-55mm, or the 24-70mm f4.

Hi LookCircle: ask him! https://vimeo.com/user447706 http://www.filippochiesa.eu/

No. I decided to go with the Sigma Art zooms and the Canon STM zooms as a complete lens kit. That way it's always a clear choice - image or pragmatism. If I had the 17-55 I'd always be conflicted. If I could only have one set of lenses it'd be the Canon 17-55 and 70-200 f/2.8

Surprised at how close the colors are with the GH4 and 5Div. The A7Sii looks like shit in that comparison.

This is exactly what I want from a canon stills camera. I have loads of EF lenses but can't use them to their full potential for stills on Sony.

Point taken... Yes I was being lazy. So here are some heavy handed grades to see how far this footage can be pushed before it crys like a little baby. And I can tell you it seems to hold up pretty dam good. Lots of room to get some crazy color grades and it keeps it's cool. This footage is definitely more robust in post than anything from a DSLR. I would love to get my hands on one to see how it handles in the field.

Well, I thought we were past the personal attacks, but I guess you just can't help yourself. Indeed, some people never learn or "wise up." I'm not calling the UM 4.6K "off-the-shelf," as you already assured me that it is not. It is custom designed and exclusive to BMD. Fair enough. The Fairchild sensor, on the other hand, is listed as available to the public and is by definition "off-the-shelf." I never said ASICs are related to sensor design, but they are part of the image processing chain, which I wrote about back on page 6 of this thread: "It appears that BMD has to involve third parties like Fairchild in sensor design, suggesting that they don't have the same mastery that RED currently has. This lack of expertise may lead to problems such as we have seen with magenta-gate, considering how the sensor and its integration into the surrounding circuitry and the larger image processing chain would have to be designed with absolute precision." http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/20526-ursa-miniis-this-the-end-of-blackmagic/?page=6 You apparently forgot to read this part. My point is simply that when you design all the components in-house and have demonstrated expertise in sensors and image processors, it is easier to avoid such problems in the first place and to diagnose and repair problems as they come up. RED had numerous mishaps in their 10-year history, as you well know. BMD is just starting out and has to go through a similar learning curve as with any company that is new to designing cameras. That's about it. ARRI, RED, Canon and Sony all have numerous patents relating to their cameras. BMD needs to complete its patent applications, which I cited above, in order to put them is the same category. They are surely aiming for just that kind of recognition after designing an advanced camera like the UM 4.6K. At least, I would hope so.

Me too So get yourself a WS 2000, really really good lens. I'm thinking of re-buying the proper single focus Iscomorphot again, don't know why I ever sold it!!!

GFilm shoot on Prospect Short Film BMCC and AG-LA7200 Full info on process http://nofilmschool.com/2014/03/blackmagic-cinema-camera-panasonic-ag-la7200-anamorphic-adapter-kickstarter-prospect-sci-fi-shep-films

Never seen this footage before. Some seriously beautiful stuff in there!

It works great. Everything operates perfectly.

I used to use the 17-55 on the eos m with canon EF adapter (also Vlitrox). It's just a pass-through, there's no reason why any lens shouldn't work.

Pricing probably calculated so that when they sell it as a kit lens with an FS700 etc they can have a really generous discount to make it look like a bargain.

Yes. Everything works as normal, fit is tight, obviously AF is slower than a mirrored body. I'm going to build a custom EF-M speed booster soon with a Lens Turbo ii and the EF adapter combined. Will post it up here when I'm done, I just got another original M for 100bucks new after my first finally died, such a good priced camera.

At 4000$ per lens, there won't be a cue!!!

Yeah, but there's definitely a market for it. More people have looked at dpreview A7RII studio charts than all the movies I've ever made. Now, I'd like to say my movies have probably made more people cry than dpreview studio charts, but I suspect that's somehow wrong too.

I'd say with the Crane, the video would look about 90-95% identical. You can change how the pitch is corrected (follow or stabilized) to allow jib like pitch correction which will open up a few more creative shot options. What it would help with would be the sudden shifts to the YAW axis which a very few are present in the video. It will smooth those out. At that height, there probably isn't much ROLL or PITCH stabilization required. Much of the unwanted motion, if you are looking for a perfectly smooth shot, is the up and down motion. To stabilize that, it's all in your technique of walking and holding your gimbal. You have to walk flat footed and hold the gimbal horizontally as far as comfortably possible away from the body.

Some questions: Can it record clips longer than 30 minutes in a row (like a 2 hour uninterrupted event)? Does it have 24p? Will DPAF work with regular Canon EF lenses (like the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L II lens) ? Does it have clean HDMI output for external recording? If the answer to any of these is "no" then it's definitely not for me. If they're all "yes" then I would be very interested.

Trying to output 4k60p

After three years of hoping to get one, I finally purchased a used 1DC. I have been through many of the cameras that seem popular on this forum (5d raw, NX1, a7s, C300, C100, XC10) but there is something about the image of the 1DC that I find unsurpassed in the under $15k+ category. I did consider the 1DX II, and I think it looks great, but the used 1DC was cheaper and a little more to my taste "film stock" wise (although DPAF is something I really wish I had). In particular when I think of the 1DC image I think of the work of Camille Marotte on Vimeo. It has that unique mix of vibrant yet mature color, layered with the gentle roll off of C Log on top of 4k resolution that just looks so organic and cinematic to me (obviously we all have our opinions about these things). What I find interesting is that if you read through Marotte's comments below his videos (some of it is in French) he says that to capture the brighter high contrast scenes he will take his shutter up to 4,000 (he is often shooting wide open at 1.2 or 1.4 handheld) and that he never uses NDs because they distort the colors and image too much. This breaking of the shutter "rule" seems so contrary to everything I have heard I wanted to get your thoughts on the technique. Does anyone else do this? Thanks.

no one has tried if it works?

I don't know of anyone who has done this... I think most filmmakers want the flexibility to switch lenses quickly and easily. A single-bodied anamorphic solution that integrates the taking lens would prevent that. But if you only ever wanted to use one taking lens, an "all-in-one" solution could be done. If you want it to be single-focus (where the taking lens is set to infinity, and you focus with the anamorphic), this limits your options. You would probably need an SLR Magic Rangefinder or Rectilux DNA. Many people have made housings where anamorphic alignment is set once, then all they have to do is swap taking lenses. Here's mine: Fabrication can be tricky depending on the the size & weight of your anamorphic, and whether your anamorphic already has filter threads on the front & back. But once you are done, shooting becomes a lot easier. If you do a search (especially in this forum), you will find a lot of different setups that users have created to accomplish this.

Give it a try, and let us know how it goes: Mod-menu > Custom Func. > Mod Resolutions > (select) VGA as UHD *note: if you have NX1, you need nx-ks v2.49 Set your camera to VGA, and check what comes out from the HDMI To tweak the hdmi-out, you can execute the codes above (via telnet), and see if there's any (there may not be any) difference in the output.

I thought that C-Log must be shot at ISO 400 or above to avoid banding on the 1DC. ISO 800 was probably chosen for what they thought may be the best performance, but it does seem slightly odd considering the fact that they had to use different apertures. As for the rolling shutter, they claim the 1DX II achieves an incredible number: 14ms. I do agree that the Xyla test is questionable considering everything we have seen from these two cameras. It also does not demonstrate the highlight roll-off of the cameras and is more informative for what is going on in the shadows (where C-Log is also preserving more color information based on other tests we have discussed here). And, yes, of course, Cinestyle is no real substitute for C-Log on the 1DC for reasons I have already stated (no access to RAW sensor data like C-Log). However, we should also not forget that filmmakers like Abraham Joffe have shot beautiful footage on the 1DC without using C-Log: In fact, Joffe has stated that he prefers shooting the 1DC using the picture profile settings and not C-Log: http://www.untitledfilms.com.au/2013/11/shoot-edit-deliver-4k-now/ You can check out all his 1DC films including the National Geographic TV series, Tales By Light, to get an idea of what is possible outside of C-Log: Now if I owned a 1DC, I'm sure I would use C-Log for most situations, but it doesn't mean that great results are not possible without it or that it is ideal for every lighting condition. C-Log or not, the 1DC is just a magical camera.

I agree that in the footage we have seen thus far, the 1DX II has much more contrast and has nowhere near the same highlight roll-off as the 1DC. At the end of the day, I don't care about Xyla tests as much so I have no idea why the DR is exactly the same here: the 1DC just has a very different and much more appealing look to me. As you suggest, the results may be due to a flawed testing methodology. I just want to see 1DX II footage that demonstrates the DR results in this Cinema5d test because I'm not seeing it in the 1DX II videos. Perhaps it has to do with the way the DR is distributed in the 1DX II since it does not have the same DR as the 1DC in the highlights. C-Log is also able to access RAW sensor data in a way that Technicolor Cinestyle does not, so there should be a significant difference between them as there is on the 1DC itself, where neutral and Log show about 3-4 stops of DR difference. This difference is especially evident in the highlights:

Wholly color gamut Batman! Whenever someone complains about 8 bit color, point them to 01:45-02:40 of this video. Only Canon can make 8 bit color look more rich and accurate than 12 bit color from competing cameras. Bravo to the filmmaker as well as the engineers behind this camera.

The 1D cameras are not mass produced and sold in the millions like iPhones or iPads. 1D cameras are marketed to photo and video professionals and "prosumers" with sales only in the thousands. One can and should have different expectations about consumer products that retail for $800 and professional products that retail for $8000 and come with a greater level of customer support. With so much competition in the $5000-10,000 4K video camera sector, Canon has really fallen behind and lost many customers to Sony, BMD, and even RED. But, of course, as I mentioned Canon doesn't care about what we want or expect. They are a massive electronics conglomerate with a bottom line to meet for every quarter and very conservative ideas about market segmentation and product development. It they thought that providing affordable 4K cameras with the necessary features was part of that they would have already brought such cameras to market and not a C300 II for $16K.

"21st century"? Actually these trends started decades ago. And no one is saying Apple doesn't do it, but Sony and Canon were around long before Apple. At least with the iPhone, the most expensive and latest model, the 6S Plus, has all the best features. Not so with Canon and Sony on the 1DX II and A7SII, respectively, so the comparison doesn't hold in this case. Apple doesn't make you buy two different versions of the same thing just to have the different features and iPhones don't cost $6,000-8,000. As for my suggestion to wait for the 1DC II as the perfect marriage of the two 1D lines, this was intended for a forum member who doesn't like either the 1DC or the 1DX II. Personally, I would be very happy to shoot with the 1DC just as it is today. In fact, I was disappointed when Canon announced a higher resolution for the new 1DX II sensor since it meant a reduction in the size of the photosites and an accompanying loss in signal-to-noise performance on the new generation. Perhaps this is why the test above showed more noise in the 1DX II image. While technologically more advanced in terms of video features (DPAF, 4K60p), the 1DX II is a downgrade from the 1DC in terms of DR, color gamut (in addition to greater DR, C-Log also provides a wider and richer color gamut for grading), and noise performance. It's a shame that Canon made these compromises with the 1DX II just to protect the Cinema EOS line.

Surely, Sony isn't "crazy enough" to sell old sensor technology (A7SII) at almost the same price as newer and much better sensor technology (A7RII)? But, yes, they are just that "crazy" because they have mastered the art of incremental product advancement. The A7RII has internal 4K, BSI, and IBIS, all of which was missing on the A7S. This newer model, the A7SII, has S-Log3, which the A7RII is lacking, thus providing a slight advantage to the newer camera in one particular area even though the A7RII offers a much higher resolution and is far more advanced in terms of sensor tech (sound familiar?). Canon has the exact same strategy here with the 1DC and 1DX lines, except that, unlike Sony, Canon charges a premium for everything (e.g., $16K for the C300 II vs. $10K for a Sony FS7/XDCA combo with the same features). They will alternate which camera gets the latest technological advancement so as to get you to buy the next one, while holding out some features to make the last one still relevant. So, yes, the Japanese electronic conglomerates are crazy cats who do whatever they can to get you to buy as many models of a product that are available because each one is lacking what the other provides or what the next version will provide.

The lower production cost on the 1DX II enables a much cheaper 1DC II priced closer to the 1DX II. That is the "game changer" for the 1DC line. They are sister cameras after all and everything the 1DC II would need from a hardware perspective is already in the 1DX II body, with its amazing heat management, processing power, and recording data rate. You do realize that your 1DX II is capable of recording at the same data rate (100 MB/s) as the RED Raven and Scarlet-W cameras. That is simply incredible for a DSLR. I cannot imagine Canon would give up the chance for a 1DC II with everything that can be done with the technical masterpiece that is the 1DX II platform. The only major differences between the cameras will be C-Log, Super 35mm mode, and Cinema EOS support. They could possibly add a higher bit depth but I doubt it for the reasons I stated above. The unlimited recording time also might not be possible because of the EU taxes and the need to keep the price as low as possible. As for my current camera, the BMPC-4K, I don't like it at all. The rig that is required to provide power is cumbersome and doesn't play nicely with my equipment, including the slider, the stabilizer, and everything else. The rear screen is also useless here in the California sun so you need to add monitoring as well. Moreover, the RAW CinemaDNG files are far too massive at 12 GB/minute and very difficult to grade and edit with on most computers. The 1DC would solve all my problems in terms of portability, ease of use for production and post-production, and weather sealing for dusty or wet environments.

I expect Canon to keep the 1DC model around and to release updates just like any other camera model that they currently have in production. Of course, Canon may want to discontinue the 1DC entirely and bring out a C200/C100 III with internal 4K so as to compete more effectively with the Sony FS7 in that $8,000 price range. That is certainly possible. The 1DC II is pure speculation at this point, but seems likely to me based on the several important factors: 1) intentionally withheld cinema features on the 1DX II 2) lower production/retail cost on the 1DX II ($6,000) vs. the original 1DC ($12,000) 3) product cycle extension: as the 1DX II sales dry up Canon will look to maximize yields on the 1DX II platform 4) incremental feature advancement: 1DX > 1DC > 1DX II > 1DC II As for 10 bit internal, that may require a fan, which is not really possible on these weather-sealed bodies. They would also have to add another codec or redesign MJPEG using the new JPEG 9 standard, which allows for up to 12 bit processing. That may be too much to ask from Canon. If we do see a 1DC II, it will likely be identical to the 1DX II to keep the costs down, but it will add those missing cinema features.