Andrew Reid

  With a electronic rolling shutter, you will get strobe in your electric lights at high shutter speeds. So it isn't just the strobe from frame to frame and lack of motion blur that is the problem with high shutter speeds and an electronic shutter.   You will get jello in your stills with fast movement of course.   Still better to have a mechanical shutter or global shutter for stills.   Aesthetics are the least of the problem but it does pose an awkward dilemma. Sometimes you can get a sharp image at 1/50, but if you're doing handheld work stills will need at least 1/100, and that hurts the look of your video especially handheld.   4K global shutter stills from the BMCC will be interesting but breaking the 180 degree shutter rule still necessary for many kinds of stills.

  Here's my research... Resolve is taking the reduced-resolution image metadata for the Magic Lantern DNGs.   Cinema DNG has different EXIF data to stills standard DNG. For a start no reduced res image EXIF.   Resolve seems only designed to read the Cinema DNG EXIF data.   Since DNG and Cinema DNG are practically the same format aside from metadata, if they make the metadata Cinema DNG standard in Raw2DNG I think that might fix the problem.

The look isn't applied when you convert from raw to DNG, it is applied in your grading workflow, be it with Adobe Camera Raw controls (After Effects) or in Resolve.   The new Windows app looks good. A LOT of development to come on the workflow front.   Today Andrew Wonder's team and myself included are trying to get Resolve to eat the DNG files. Same issue right now as the Nikon 1 NEF burst mode stills converted to DNG. They don't work. Metadata isn't right and they're not Cinema DNG files.

It is a very low starting point to be judging raw quality from.   720p streaming on Vimeo, not even a download option!   Would rather see a direct head to head comparison of the 5D2 and 5D3 raw, because with raw there are too many user variables. It comes mainly to grading as to what kind of characteristic you're getting.   For me so far the 5D3's sensor looks the best, but I'm willing to be convinced by the 5D2 if I see anything that is genuinely the result of the sensor and not the user & workflow.   So far I haven't. Just a lot of aliasing and false detail, which in some ways makes the image pop.... But no thanks. I'd rather sharpen the 5D3's raw in post if I wanted this kind of pop and sharp image, than have unstable detail.

  A lot of bullshit spoken about Blackmagic there. Internal battery was an extra feature. It works as a UPS / backup power. BMCC uses an external battery as the main power source, like the Epic. Nobody complains the Epic has no internal battery like an iPhone. This is a consumer mindset. Try a filmmaking one.   If you think the dynamic range is 'disappointing in practice' on the BMCC, I can only assume you've never used one, and have picked up some quote from somewhere about usable DR being less than 13 stops. The BMCC excels at dynamic range. Vincent Laforet compared it to a 1D X raw still.   So their earlier attempts were crude? Dropped frames and moire all they had to offer? Really?   You are annoying.

  14bit to 12bit makes a lot of sense to me. I hope they find a way to do it.   14bit to 10bit I think would be trickier - wouldn't you have to remap the dynamic range to avoid clipping?

  Was the fix for this made public? Just curious to know what caused it, whether it was in the sensor readout or in the debayering (Raw2DNG). Cheers

  DXOMark also measured the 1D C (1D X sensor) at 11.8 stops total so something is wrong with that Canon LOG 12.5 stop test. You said yourself you can't get more dynamic range than the sensor provides in the raw data!   There's also a fundamental error of logic in the way you're comparing raw to MJPEG. You are suggesting that from the 11.7/11.8 stop raw 14bit sensor data, the 14bit raw video contains less dynamic range than compressed 8bit JPEG with LOG curve. Sorry but that makes absolutely no sense at all. By definition the raw data has the optimal dynamic range, and no matter what curve you apply to the JPEG, you lose quality when you compress it to 8bit.

It still has a better form factor than the FS100!

  Interesting. How would it impact dynamic range though? If you look at the dreadful DR in the H.264, I think a lot of that is due to 8bit compression.

Thread cleaned. I agree no more off topic stuff about Bloom. It's wrong to criticise religion.

This test was prepared jointly in cooperation with Rudi at Slashcam - here's his take on it (in German / in English) In the battle of the 1080p cameras, the game has changed. Here's how the 5D Mark III in raw recording mode compares to the best 1080p output from the Canon C300 and 1D C. [url=http://www.eoshd.com/content/10475/canon-1d-c-vs-5d-mark-iii-raw-and-c300-gh2-resolution-comparison]Read the full article here[/url]

Yeah and those same Alexa crews carry a generator and Arri suns 100m down the road, spending countless dollars to do so, then go and shoot ProRes. Madness.

  Yes that's actually what it is, raw still quality.   1080p is sampled from the full sensor area.   The 1:1 crop modes at up to 3.5K are a crop of the CR2 raw stills (every pixel read from a crop of the sensor).

  Wow 50D is looking very impressive, better than 600D.   Ssshhh don't tell ebay!!

They probably put the lag in there on purpose so you'd find the C300 more attractive.

The second video is genius. Very funny and original.

The BMCC definitely has more room to recover the highlights and when they do burn, the roll off is very smooth and film like.   In the blacks though, it is noisy.   The 5D3 has less potential for highlight recovery by about 2 stops and when they burn, they stand out.   The blacks though are silky and clean.   So the cameras both need a different approach. I expose the BMCC to the right to bring up the shadows, but I expose the 5D to the left to preserve the highlights.   James Miller has a good eye. Enjoyed his footage. I did a flatter grade on my footage today, and actually prefer the colour and contrast in the original. It is just so good out of the sensor, it doesn't really need that much work in post unless you are going for a very specific stylistic look.   Of course the potential for saving a shot which isn't exposed correctly is enormous with the BMCC and 5D3 raw compared to normal DSLR footage.

Teehee!!

  Why are you saying this on a forum full of filmmakers. We know. Stop stating the bleeding obvious.   How in any way does the story detract from the camera. They are complimentary. It is like saying to an actor not to bother acting as well as they possibly can because the script matters most.

  Because it isn't simple maths. It's hard maths.

Show isn't over for the Pocket Cinema Camera.   I suppose it is too hard to ask Mark to read anything properly.

  Turmoil! Disaster! Drama! Raw for free.   What a hardship. Better image quality than a $15,000 camera on your $3000 DSLR and the first ever full frame camera to record uncompressed raw internally to compact flash card.   FOR FREE.   I don't call that turmoil I call it a miracle.   You're trying to justify a preconceived purchasing decisions I'm afraid. The Blackmagic cameras whole selling point - ONLY selling point - was the image and raw workflow. Nobody bought a Blackmagic for the smaller sensor, heavy body, poor ergonomics and slipped delivery dates. We held out for the image. Now we have it in a DSLR, along with a ton of other important features - stills, better physical controls, HDMI, full frame sensor, low light performance and all else offered by Magic Lantern aside from raw like peaking, high frame rates, zebra, manual audio, etc.   Magic Lantern is reliable. I can shoot all day at 1080p to my fastest CF cards without a hitch. Battery run times are similar to when shooting H.264! The rig is much lighter than my Blackmagic with external battery.   I own both. I cannot for the life of me keeping the BMCC EF.   Blackmagic still have unique selling points for me though.   A) The Micro Four Thirds mount camera B) 4K and global shutter on the Production Camera C) Super 16mm sensor on the Pocket Cinema Camera D) Resolve 10   But as for the BMCC EF - it's been nice. It's been lovely. But show's over.

Does anybody actually know what the FS700 raw output looks like? Too early too call it on that one. What about pricing? FS700 is $8000 + $2000 minimum for the recorder (Odyssey 7Q) plus codecs have to be bought individually on top of that.   I'm calling it $11k minimum, close to the F5 price so you may as well get the F5.   All still very very far from $3000 and a free raw upgrade isn't it?   Don't forget how good the sensor is in the 5D Mark III. Very very clean, probably native 2500 ISO, 12 stops DR, not to mention full frame. I think people are underestimating it because they haven't downloaded any DNGs and have just watched the clips on YouTube.

  The problem with MJPEG is the CPU power to debayer and convert raw to JPEG inside the camera. That takes a hell of a lot of processing power. The easiest thing for the camera to do is raw! Not H.264. Not MJPEG. Not ProRes. Not anything. Just raw.   Saying the camera could do 2k 60fps in MJPEG makes no sense at all. The CPU would not do it. Also the sensor mode only goes to 60fps with a vertical resolution of around 670.   With the newest builds we are seeing a 16MB/s improvement in buffer write performance to the card and that makes 1440x540 possible at 60fps. Pretty nice. If you want to add a massive overhead to this lovely raw performance, the quickest way to do that is to convert o MJPEG in camera... It ain't gonna happen!