Andrew Reid

No shit sherlock! But I'm EOS *HD* in case you haven't noticed that yet in all your negative commenting.

Corrected article on the audio jacks, thanks. I really need to get my head around those 1/4 jacks, so rare to see them on a video camera. 5D3 doesn't have peaking as Magic Lantern isn't yet available for it.

With both cameras around the $3000 with a Canon lens mount, and the DSLR being such a popular choice for video, I thought I'd examine the reasons for buying one or the other. Which should you choose? http://www.eoshd.com/content/8841/5d-mark-iii-or-blackmagic-cinema-camera

[quote name='jonjak2' timestamp='1345999712' post='16510']The MKII, as Gale Tattersall (House DoP) pronounced, is capable of cinema quality images, so why not get to the point where you can make it look as good as he did, before criticising its failings. So many people trash cameras like the 5D MKII/III, but they can't even make it look as good as it's capable of. These days, cameras are way ahead of us and we need to catch up. [/quote] Undeniably Gale did a great job on House. There are also some very nice cut aways in modern blockbusters to 5D footage, usually as a crash cam. However why cripple yourself now better cameras are out for the same money? Look at what you gain vs what you lose, if you went for the 5D Mark III over the BMC. You'd gain: Wide angle faster than F2.8 Stills Usable ISO above 3200 You'd lose: 12 bit colour 4-2-2 sampling Nearly half your resolution (600 lines vs nearly 1000+) Raw codec Larger built in screen HD-SDI XLR Da Vinci Resolve (it comes in the box) $500 cheaper I believe the BMC is by far the better deal. We don't need to catch up to Canon, we need to catch up to Blackmagic and so do they. What people don't realise very often about the large sensor in the 5D Mark III is that it only has ONE advantage - the way it renders a lens. Shallower DOF all else equal (which is not actually what you always want on every shoot, every scene, every shot) and more choice of lenses at wide angle. It doesn't give any of the dynamic range, resolution or low light advantage in video mode that the sensor is capable of in stills mode. The Blackmagic's image shits all over the 5D Mark III. The only thing it can't do by comparison is 24mm F1.4 and ISO above 3200. 13 stops of dynamic range for $3000 is a much bigger deal than a full frame sensor which is crippled by a dreadful image processor and dated codec.

I still can't download them. Their server is terrible.

Spoilt for choice!

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Rewo-gh2-cage-on-set.jpg[/img] Photokina is less than a month away now and it is going to be a busy time. I will be there to get my hands on the new cameras, and I don't think I can remember a month like this with such exciting products being released. Sony's full frame camcorder the VG-900 will have a mirrorless mount, all in a video camera form factor for £2.5k and now we have a Blackmagic Cinema Camera that shoots amazing 12bit raw for the same price. These were mythical cameras only 6 months ago. Raw video for $3000? Full frame video camera with E-mount? Then we come to the GH3.

He has a pre-production demo as have Frank Glencairn and Seb Wiegaertner. The problem is he's not allowed to do a full review of the pre-production unit, so he like everyone else will have to wait for the retail units to ship. I am number 7 in the queue at CVP for the retail unit. The reason I don't have a demo unit is because I didn't push hard enough for one. I am more interested in reviewing the finished retail unit and paying for it myself as a keeper.

Talk about what you like, as long as it isn't bullshit I don't mind :)

[quote name='HurtinMinorKey' timestamp='1345857689' post='16447'] What are the chances Canon puts out a 5D-C (@ $4000) with 1080 raw? [/quote] Well considering the $15,000 1D C doesn't have raw, zero %. It is 8bit MJPEG!

I'm talking in the broad sense and you are talking in the very narrow sense (i.e. Hollywood). I'm tired of the back and forth, please get back on topic. A guy walked into my local camera shop in Manchester once and bought a DSLR for his small production company, is he not part of the filmmaking industry as well?

No laptop on earth will edit the raw DNG footage directly. You need to edit by proxy, i.e. transcode to a lossless format for playback and editing.

[quote name='Bruno' timestamp='1345841366' post='16437']Try to find out how many 7D/5D cameras alone Canon has sold so far... if BMD manages to sell even 10% of that it will mean it's a huge success, far beyond their own expectations.[/quote] Ask yourselves how many new product lines Canon have felt the need to start from scratch. SLRs, office machines, consumer inkjets, compacts, DSLRs.... and Cinema EOS. Hardly a niche. The broadcast and filmmaking industry is huge. I can rent a C300 down the street. Not to mention that there is more margin in the high end stuff. The DSLRs will continue to sell well as stills cameras. Their video appeal is now dead. The video appeal gave Canon that sixth business division. Well done Canon. Anyway, you are dragging this a bit off topic now.

We are not a minority!

Are you forgetting the lens?

You could probably get away with 24mm or 25mm on an Iscorama 36. New options to try. I need to test this!

[quote name='nigelbb' timestamp='1345811610' post='16400'] That the 5D3 has a woefully soft image is just a stupid Internet myth promulgated by people who haven't used the camera. The image straight out of the camera it is no softer than the 5D2 that most everyone loves. Add a bit of sharpening in post & it looks better than the 5D2. It's not usually possible to add sharpening in post to the 5D2 due to aliasing problems. [/quote] That it has a soft image requiring work in post isn't the only problem people have with the 5D3. 5D3 sits on my desk in front of me. It is soft. Yes it does sharpen up a bit in post. But still not as much resolving power as a $700 GH2. The codec on the FS100 is better. I could go on...

There's ZERO advantage to using an external recorder with any DSLR, other than the D800 and even then the difference is small. It isn't raw or anything approaching that, just less compressed. However on DSLRs the HDMI is usually compressed or interlaced, like on the GH2. You won't get better results from it than you would internally with the hack and AVCHD intra 80Mbit.

[quote name='HurtinMinorKey' timestamp='1345823666' post='16417']The Alexa and pretty much any other camera is much more vertically stable than the BMC. This puts the BMC at a big disadvantage for handheld shots. But with all the money you save you can buy yourself all the stabilization equipment you would want.[/quote] Haha, seriously you try handling both the Alexa and BMC handheld with no rigging. You won't get far. Both are designed as picture making boxes, the BMC being smaller and lighter has the more flexibility with rigging, in my opinion. Hardly a disadvantage for handheld work.

The DSLR is designed to be handheld only for stills. Video handheld with it is jittery and rubbish looking. The Blackmagic camera may lack a rubberised grip out of the box but it is a heavier camera, so it may actually even be less wobbly in two hands than a lighter smaller camera. The Alexa is also a brick. Nobody complains about that do they? Actually they do - those who think it is too heavy, especially front heavy, and are considering going for a Blackmagic rig for handheld work to save their arms. (The Alexa is not great for handheld work just as Rodney Charters on Shameless)

[quote name='tehgeek' timestamp='1345790944' post='16377'] Really love the idea of this camera but wish it wasn't so much of a 'B' camera ergonomically. I'd love a more hand held body as I can't see this being usable without buying a lot of extras. But I still love what they have done and the footage out of it looks fantastic and the price is amazing. [/quote] How is it different ergonomically to a DSLR? If you need to a rig a DSLR you will need to rig this. The only thing you need extra is a battery base plate. You can still hold it barebones like a DSLR or put it on a tripod.

I'm not just listing everyone who bought a Canon at all, in each of those groups there are very knowledgable customers who want the best most sophisticated video tool they can get their hands on, for an important project which will make them money or pass them a university course. You don't get it I'm afraid. Just like Canon's management, who have underestimated a lot of their customers.

Looks pretty. Maybe they'll fix the video mode on this one! http://photorumors.com/2012/08/24/this-new-fuji-x-e1-mirrorless-camera-will-not-have-a-viewfinder http://digicame-info.com/2012/08/x-e1xf18-55mm-f28-4-r-ois.html

Regarding raw and associated file size and data management. You want H.264 4-4-4 10bit long GOP? Well you have it with raw, just convert. You don't need to archive 10TB of raw files if you don't want to. The only thing that takes more time with raw is transcoding it to an editing proxy. You don't need to grade it all if you don't want to, just bake a DSLR style picture profile into it at the transcoding stage then do the normal light 5D Mark III grading with the Fast Colour Corrector in Premiere. Also you conveniently forgot to mention the internal ProRes recording option. The 5D Mark III at ISO 12,800 is incredibly soft. The noise on the BMD is not destructive like it is on a DSLR. You are getting less than 600 lines of res at ISO 12,800 on the 5D Mark III and all the Neat Video or turning NR off in-cam will not bring it back. Because the noise is blotchy and compressed and the sensor is skipping too much data to deliver its faux 1080p. I mention the sensor downscaling because it is absolutely KEY in where the 5D Mark III fails. Downsampling if you do it well is actually beneficial, nobody not even you would claim it helps the 5D Mark III's video quality. Downsample one of the 22MP JPEGs in Photoshop and compare it to a video frame - and do it to a wide angle shot with lots of trees or something not a close up shot. You will see a huge difference. I don't see this mystery IPB codec advantage some claim over the ALL-I codec. It just looks a bit more compressed. Because it is. I am convinced some people may actually be a little bit blind or at least imagining pixels! Do you have a link to Jason's chart test of the 5D3? If you don't it is no problem, because I think it proves nothing. Use eyes. Point them at screen.

[quote name='FilmMan' timestamp='1345771203' post='16354'] It'll be interesting how the Goliath's respond to Davey! Will they let BM get firmly off the ground or will they attempt to try to disrupt the landing? Will it be late nights for the engineers for Canon, Sony, Panasonic, etc., trying to develop a quick fix? Stay tune...it could get fun... [/quote] First they will have to fix the management. As soon as these cameras start shipping in volume at some point probably with the release of their 2nd generation model when the awareness is out there and the v1.0 bugs have been ironed out, they are going to be unstoppable. I already know a lot of Alexa people who need a raw camera to intercut, but one that is smaller and lighter for handheld work. The BMD is that camera. It will be popular at rental too. Who really wants to shoot with a DSLR now? The A99, GH3 and full frame camcorders from Sony have a chance. The D800, 5D3, 7D, etc. have now peaked and they are on the way out for video. At least they still have a purpose for stills so they are not completely dead!