Leaderboard

Couple of practical (non image quality) thoughts on the C200: - I like the fact that it's built for the job rather than needing to have several extra's bolted on. Not as much customisation/fun (perhaps) in that sense, but just works. - Price represents a solid tool for the job etc. A lot of money (Though why pay list/offer price? Always negotiate as you may be surprised), but see it as an investment for 5 years say and the pain is a little less. Be warned this purchase won't stop you browsing camera body threads, but it helps a little with that affliction. You'll most likely end up endlessly browsing lens/lighting choices from now on (no bad thing), content in the knowledge the body is solid and fairly future proofed (for a decent enough amount of time anyhow)..... - Can be kept pretty compact/stealthy and stabilised with just a small (IS) prime attached - I have the Shape cage for additional protection and ability to bolt on more kit if really needed. Good snug fit. You'll want to protect that investment - Would be tempting to remove the viewfinder but permanently removed would be problematic. Such a shame this is not easily detachable/attachable by user. Size of unit quickly increases with top handle, microphone and 70-200 for example, far from stealthy.. - Viewfinder feels pretty substandard compared to recent mirrorless offerings. Totally fit for purpose, just quite noticeably smaller/less pleasant to use vs. say Fuji X-H1 - Screen good enough, touch very responsive in my view. Use is not so great in bright light and hence the viewfinder is present for a reason - Cable from camera to the screen is heavy/stiff/short and causes issues with Gimbal mounting/balancing - On that note, i'm far from convinced the Ronin-S is a good choice here. Balancing near impossible (especially with screen attached) without counterweights unless you really want to limit the choice of lens. Admittedly the Shape cage doesn't help here. Really you'd want counterweights (to mount to bottom of C200 or DJI mounting plate somehow?) and a very lightweight HDMI cable to feed another (non C200) monitor screen that is mounted to the handle somehow - if you want to see what you're doing that is.... - DP Autofocus is very good, but it's not infallible. For example, Fuji is 'nearly' comparable in my book, X-T3 better than X-H1 it seems, but still Canon is not lightyears ahead or perfect (in my opinion) as is frequently stated. Of course there's manual focus for which the aids are good.. - Moving the focus point with the joystick is painfully slow. Why not a two speed setting here I wonder? There is the touch screen of course which is responsive - Internal ND's. Well, brilliant really, but you'll still be tweaking ISO/Aperture as expected as they are stepped. Not easy to change ISO and Aperture without side handle attached. Perhaps i'm missing something here. Aperture/ISO vertical side wheel on the left is an odd one, it works, just not very tactile/easy to locate.. - No AutoISO exposure as far as I can find? I know it's perhaps regarded as a amateurs tool by some, but would be very useful still at times. I can hope this will be added in the future via Firmware revisions - Battery life concerns, well forget about them really compared to many mirrorless, especially with the larger BP-A60 (expensive but again sized for a job). Larger battery may also be beneficial in terms of weight placement on a gimbal - depending on lens etc. - Not having a stabilised sensor (of course good and bad here) means that stabilised lenses are well advised for many. The 85mm 1.4 IS is frankly amazing in my view. 35mm F2 IS also great. Want to go wide and stabilised with autofocus, hmmmm, F4 wide/shallow enough for you? Room for a new lens in the Canon line-up here.... - Will not be compatible with present/future RF lenses so 'forced' to invest in lens tech that may be superseded, but is of course still brilliant in many instances and will always work with an adapter on future models - In terms of general usability, accessing menus/options/button placements, I just don't love it, perhaps that is a 'yet' statement. Difficult to quantify, just a personal feeling.. Hope it helps some...

You did that joke before and noone laughed. Read your room.

On initial tests, I'm really happy with it. It doesn't balance with the 18-35 from Sigma, but that's a long and heavy lens. I can't push the camera back on the mount far enough to centre the weight. I thought that would be the case anyway. I've also tried with the Sigma's old 30mm 1.4, Canon 50mm 1.8 and 10-18mm (which I hacked to fit the Viltrox) they all balance well and seem to be a good set to have in mind on a gimbal. I think short or light lenses are the way to go. the 18-35 is neither. I do need to add a weight onto the arm as the camera pulls down on the left, as seen in the videos I posted before. I was hoping I could mount the camera upside-down to make the weight more central, but that didn't work for me, it still pulled on the left. The good news though, is that the camera fits width ways, the right way up, without any adaptors / riser plates etc. the weight distribution is the only hangup and a very simple solution. For now I've used an old phone and some velcro, but obviously that's not a long term solution. Heading to the hardware store to grab some washers and wingnuts today. That way I can easily adjust the weight depending on the lens I'm using. With the washers in place, I'll upload some photos.

The new 24-70mm f4 compared to the older 24-70mm f2.8... starting at around 14 minutes in. The new lens looks sharper and more contrasty to my eyes.

I just got word the Weebill will arrive today, so I can do some testing over the weekend. People want to see how smooth it is in slowmotion right? If the weather is nice, I plan to test it filming a live song performed by a singer-songwriter friend - I'll happily share the SOOC file if people are interested. I'll shoot DCI ProRes 422 24p, unless people would like another format to play with.

But I’m not joking;)

The video posted above confirmed what I was seeing from the footage. It looks like it can partially be attributed to a better lens on the P4P. The distortion on the MP2 at full FOV is pretty severe. Now I just have to get my FAA certificate.... Chris

I'll go... when shooting a story context is very important so that the audience can understand where the characters are. Overdoing DOF can work against the story. Ideally, before choosing a lens, one should consider what using that lens is going to convey as relates to the story. Additionally, tracking subjects with shallow DOF can present challenges. I like having options... like everyone else, but given the choice of only one lens... and only shallow vs deeper DOF... for video, I would not favor a very shallow DOF.

Honestly I can't see low light being a concern with the Z6 or Z7. They seem to look pretty good at any reasonable ISO setting. I'm surprised at how good 25000 ISO looks.

C'mon, guys.. Digging up a 2.5-years old thread?

I tried with the battery slot empty and it still hangs left both when I mount right side up and upside down. You could do the dummy battery and attach the power pack to thto arm and use that as a counterweight I guess.

Resolve’s stabilisation does a fast job but not as good as WS so this may be the right balance of speed vs quality.

Yes, that's what I think is their strategy. Memory price have been very volatile and prices historically high, with CFexpress you might not need a big buffer anymore. Nice z7 video

Sorry that isn't mine (I wish it was). This is someone else's.

Thank you @Anaconda_ I was hoping for a more straightforward solution. Are all the modes possible with this combination? Can you control any operation of the camera from the gimbal? I just can not comprehend how Zhiyun underestimated the P4K popularity, which is a camera that screams "Gimbal!!!". I am expecting an in-house solution, and soon. The bigger gimbals are overkill for my needs, anyway.

If you have to do any kind of serious iPhone work I highly recommend the filmic pro app. You can even shoot in log.

I think that whatever Nikon decided to do it would have been heavily criticized. If ever they had done a bigger body everybody would have said that either they could not match Sony tech or that the idea about MILC was small size and portability, which was true at least until now. Since Nikon and Canon launch of their new mount with much wider size (more for Nikon), that give the possibility of faster lens, we are hearing that MILC can get you better and faster lens regardless of size. Some part of Nikon PR mess was that they showed up only days/weeks before the Canon EOSR and eventual Pana S1. For example, they got ten times the negativity because of the 1 card slot than the Canon R. While they are giving a much better and robust XQD/CFexpress compared to Canon SD card. For me when you look at the price and size of the Canon 28-70 F2, I am glad they stuck with the 2.8 aperture. Another thing people don't discuss is the 24 vs 28mm starting zoom range. I like the 24-70 because of its flexibility and loosing the 24 is a big compromise. With the higher ISO we can shoot now, for me the f 2.8 is the best compromise, anything lower would warrant a prime lens. In fact this f 2.8 looks at least shorter than todays 24-70 and with the size/weigh gain, you could even carry another camera prime combo easily. That's the promise of the mount. The F4 kit lens (S is considered super for Nikon) being higher resolution than the top of the line older F-mount lens. The z7 already broke the record from the D850 with the 35mm f1.8 lens and by a margin in terms of resolution. That is why Nikon has been defending their 1.8 zoom as real professional primes and not just typical affordable primes for those that could not afford 1.4 primes. These things are more usable at 1.8 than some of the 1.4 primes at 1.8 and even beyond that. They say that their 1.8 lens are more reminiscent of 1.4 primes in capturing the light and I guess it is about the overall sensor plane and not just the center, with less curvature/distortion and I guess vignetting.

It might be time we re-visited the poor old A9 since the price halved! Help yourself here - https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/search/?www-product-search=sony+a9&www-department=all It is still around £400 more than an A7 III but it has some interesting extras: Slight more natural edge to very fine detail in 4K Far less rolling shutter and possibly slightly better motion cadence 20fps RAW for 10 seconds to 240 shot buffer = might be creatively interesting for video Drive dial and AF mode selection lever Electronic shutter usable in artificial light without banding (1/160 second sync / readout speed vs 1/30 on A7 III I believe?) No viewfinder blank out 50% higher resolution screen (1440k vs 922k) and EVF (3.6m vs 2.3m) Slightly more tactile ergonomics and buttons Possible improvements in white balance and colour on A9 (unproven to my eyes unless I get hold of an A9) Of course we still lack S-LOG / picture profiles / HGL but if you're doing light grading, it is surprising how much you can colour correct Neutral. A7 III is also a bit cleaner in low light then REALLY pushed or shadows raised +6ev in RAW stills... As it hasn't got a hot RAM chip glued to the back of the sensor. Otherwise they are both very impressive at high ISOs. There is still a chance it could get a firmware update for at least HGL, then it makes it a no brainer to pay just £400 more for a used A9 than get the A7 III, in my opinion!

The small HD focus monitor is fantastic, great options, touchscreen, great price as well.

I like the IR pollution - it's more filmic and cinematic

Yeah the differences become more apparent when you get tricky lighting conditions. In that test above I could spot the EOS R a lot due to the lack of DOF. The big issue with the video in the original post is Slog has a lot more noise then standard profiles, so when comparing ISO its really unfair. If he used the standard profile or Cine4 it would look very clean.

C200 is a beast for sure, a bit more heavier than c100mkii

Isn't the truth now that all modern cameras produce very good images and the differences between them are more a matter of taste and style than of one being markedly better than another. The flaws I see in footage these days seem to come more from operator error in either the capture or the post production stages.

I understand your point your point about manual focusing, my guess is that those lens are not necessarily meant for manual focus for movie use. I know it is a sacrilege for some but with those new autofocus, manual focusing might really become a niche thing like in photography.

I really hope so. A new Canon C100 type but a bit lighter and taking the best from the P4K, GH5 and FS5

Canon 24-70mm f/4 on the 5D Mark III. Processed through Resolve using its basic Rec709 conversion in the Raw Tab and then some curve adjustments...

The 1DXMk2 with lens is huge and heavy. It feels much heavier with lens than the X-T3 with lens. Battery grip or not. Don't get me wrong... it's built to withstand war. But that said, it's not the kind of camera that you take along on a whim. This is the strength of these smaller and lighter cameras. Btw... thanks to everyone for the kind words. We all know it takes guts to put your work out there, and while there is nothing wrong with constructive and positive criticism, I feel it reflects poorly on the community when things get negative. Remember, being negative with film just doesn't work?

With the coming CFe cards buffer shouldn’t really be an issue. Especially on the Z6.

I think it would be a great upgrade from your (albeit amazing of course) T2i.

The Nikon and Canon seemed to have less highlight retention then the A73, XT3, and GH5S. The A73 definitely held highlights best though by a small margin. It seems like the best way to see how much 10 bit makes a difference is to do a dramatic color grade across all cameras and see if the XT3 and GH5S come out on top. I have already seen comparison's between a GH5 and A7S2 with a heavy color grade and the GH5 held together significantly better.

SmallHD 501, SmallHD 501, or SmallHD 501. Plus the swivel pan/tilt mount.