hmcindie

It's about 2.7k right. They could upsample it to 4k easy. Like Alexa does. Besides cameras upsample / downsample all the time. Slowmo modes are usually lower than HD anyway and they upsample to HD (rx10 ii etc)

Reliability was good, a couple of crashes but nothing mayor. Need a good offline system so you can offload the cards fast and several really fast cards. One 128gb card gives you only a bit over 20minutes so be prepared. Its basically like bm raw except without SSD storage. The playback is shitty so watch out for that. Working on a third Raw shot short now, with a couple of a7s and rx10 ii shots mixed in.

Thanks, yes, in an actual bar!

I've shot two shortfilms with the 5D RAW (one trailer here). I love the 5d raw. Freaking love it. Password: fray

Though Cinema5d did measure the 5diii h264 having more dynamic range than the c300 so ... eh? Why does gelaxstudio claim the FS7 has 14+ stops when even in the cinema5d chart the c300mkII looked better (except for the stripe but I guess that comes from a preproduction model?)? But the c300 has 12? Weird. Did you also notice how the Arri was at f2.8 vs f4.0 Canon and 5.6 for Sony? That's just...Weird.

One thing good about 4:2:0 is that you can immediately spot how it would look like in youtube/tv anywhere. As everything that comes out anywhere (except the cinemas) is basically 4:2:0. That can lead to awesome situations like doing a cool ass very saturated animated commercial in 4:4:4. Client loves it, everything looks great! But when it comes out of the television or goes out to youtube: "OH MY LORD what are those huge blocks of colors next to my red text on green background?!"

That banding doesn't happen because of 4:2:0, it happens because of compression. Compression takes out bits and bits of material. Your 8bits get compressed down to 6-7bits and then expanded back up to 8 in essence. 4:2:0 vs 4:2:2 has nothing to do with banding, only with edge / color sharpness.

Arri Alexa shoots 2,8k while the RX10ii shoots 4k, how does that make SENSE?!

5D3 still looks great to me. For example if we compare the bitrates in h264 All-i vs the A7s. A7s: macroblocking in movement (lots in 50p mode). Quite sharpish though. Moderate amount of Sony "edge artifacts". Some come from sharpening and some weird white/black highlights around contrasty edges. Blue leds are completely horrible. 5D3: No artifacts from compression almost at all. Smooth and soft (no edge artifacts either). Blue leds are bad but still quite workable. Switch to RAW and the 5D3 goes from quite nice to crazy good. No HFR? It does 720p60 and I've done several 720p shoots on it, with clients always liking the image. A7s does 1080p60 but the compression starts to fail and moire/aliasing goes up (unless you switch to APS-C). Funnily I quite like the 120fps mode on the A7s, eventhough it starts to get on the ugly side. The RX10ii is a different story though. First consumer camera to really make nice HFR, I've been having lots of fun with it. Oh and on to the 4:2:2 vs 10bit grudge match... 4:2:2 is not very important in grading unless you do a lot of masks and edge keys. The end results will anyways be 4:2:0 so these edges will always be a bit snuffy. Proper 10bit is more important (especially if the image comes from Alexa or something)

Ehm? Focus can't be nailed by just using a focus assist (or peaking). For example the peaking in the A7s is constantly a bit off. Best way to focus is a good quality and large monitor. Also watching playback on the tiny weeny lcd that cameras have is just not good.

Hmm.. I disagree. A7s falls apart after iso 51,200 and even that is noise removed to all hell (lots of smoothing and temporal artifacting). The Canon seems to have WAY less noise reduction which is always good for more professional work.

? In Finland the retail price for the 5d III is still 2999 euros. That is THE EXACT same price as I bought it in 2012, 2999 euros. The retail price for A7s is now 1999 euros. When I bought the a7s it cost 2399 euros. That's a drop of 400 euros in a year from the retail price and that will definitely affect the used market. I have no idea what your even arguing for or claiming that I'm lying. They are probably pixel binning and basically lying in the press release. The RX10 ii has more rolling shutter in 4k mode than in 120fps HD mode. There is definately pixel binning/skipping going on with the RX10 ii at 120fps HD, it just does it in very high quality.

Well, there goes my A7s for sale. Goddayum the price drops on these Sony cameras are crazy. My 5d III is still almost same price as I bought it years ago

Yeah nope. The preview image is pretty much the same as an exported TIFF, as long as the resolution is the same (100%).

But the cropmode on the A7rII looks better than the cropmode on the a7s. The crop on the a7s does a bit of aliasing

Dayum, people on this forum must really hate filmmaking!

If you use magic lantern on the 5dIII you can get the rolling shutter down to 16.9 ms by tweaking timers.

I've used the Sony FS700 a lot (C300 looks way better, it's not even a comparison really though it misses the slowmotion features on the FS700 which is the reason we've rented the FS700 so much for music videos), the 1DC (1DC looks great too, except for the rolling shutter), A7s (I have problems with the colors but I think it does look better than the FS700 h264), 5D iii (great except not very detailed), 5D iii RAW (excellent, beats all the other cams except Alexa purely on image quality). I now have in my arsenal also the RX10 ii which is colors wise close to the A7s at least a bit. It has excellent 100p, I'm not that interested in 4k yet. I have not shot with the Alexa but I have edited a lot of Alexa shot material and it's at the top of the heap image quality wise. Though looking at the ARRIRAW files from the Alexa and the RAW files coming out of the 5d iii...the 5d iii isn't that far off! Less dynamic range and bit of aliasing but otherwise it has pretty good qualities.

I finally got a chance to work with the C300. One very quick shoot, no lighting, no budget, no nothing but I wanted to try the C300. During the shoot I wasn't that impressed. Changing ISO's, WB and stuff seemed a bit more cumbersome than the DSLR's. Also the shape was a bit weird for me. Looking at the LCD I was a bit bummed because we had no lighting and everything was a bit ugly. But then... I got into the edit and it looks surprisingly good! The colors are great. Used WIDE DR (premiere clips the highlights but I brought them back with the procamp effect) and it just worked wonders. Good dynamic range, good colors, good look.

Lexar too. I've had it on two clips and I've shot a lot so it's not too common but it is very ugly. Mine was in the middle of a shot.

Yes! I've had that same glitch in some scenes. I thought I was going crazy or that something had gone wrong in the transfer. I had to delete frames to get rid of those things. It's not an AE/VLC thing, the bug can be seen in every software. In my case it happened with a 250fps file

Art Adams specifically states that "the one color that Canon nails is flesh tones". How can they be "inaccurate" if Canon specifically nails them well? Canon has really designed their color science for flesh tones.

I bought the RX10 ii, used it in a music video recently. I used it way more on that shoot than my A7s, good for running and gunning. Lots of cars, lots of driving. The 100p mode on the RX10 ii has very little rolling shutter and a good sharp image so I used that mostly. Excellent action cam, explosions shot on the s-log mode with 250p looked great! The compression is finally getting good enough so that half the image isn't breaking up.

That 1080p sample looks really nice. Canon smoothness but this time with a bit of actual detail. I wonder what the rolling shutter on the 5dsr is?

You can change the shutter in about 0.25 seconds while you are filming. You're not stuck at all. And even if you have a 1/50 shutter, just jam the shutter button in and take four shots in a row, one of them will be sharp and recording will still continue automatically. Still 1000x faster than what you need to do when shooting with a Sony. Also if you shoot on manual, you still have to change the shutter speed on a Sony too. In Sony world you are actually stuck because you have to A) stop recording B) change modes. C) take out slog (it will otherwise bake into the RAW photo) D) take a photo E) change modes F) put slog back on (!!) G) start recording. I actually thought the RX10 ii would've enabled taking stills while recording. But no, still shit. I used the RX10 ii on a shoot which had the 5d III raw as the main cam, two Sony A7s cameras as b-cams. RX10 ii was used for specific 100fps and slowmo shots. It seemed to work really well but I still have to grade stuff to see how well it matches the others. 100 fps was really good! Which camera made the worst shots? The camera which was operated by the worst user.