markm

If I was to take a wild guess I would say If it was near to resolution Grant would have said something to appease the many critics and his quietness is likely to be that he thinks if they mention the problem they will lose customers.   So I reckon a delay of at least a month could be coming up.  Maybe they will go with a new sensor company.   Still I'm in no rush. I reckon the four thirds version that I want will be shipping around feb/march 2013.

    Do you notice anyone speaking in my defence?   Ask yourself why.   As I said it. It was between Andrew and Hurt minor key. Also what matters is the way you post. Manners cost nothing. Everyone is entitled to a point of view. Asking me not to reply to a putdown is a desire on your part to pull rank.   If you wish to post because you wish to establish your authority . You have to have solid argument. Not berate, bully, tar or feather. Or use putdowns and inuendo.   I would suggest that you should post on what you know and not what you think might be right. I also suggest that you stop trying to force lost arguments by changing the rules with putdowns.   I hope you are not in authority of any kind if this is your attitude.

  Thanks for the link film man The F55 has a different look to the Alexa. Some will like it some won't. Not a match for 35mm though.

    Andrews original post was in two parts. In the second Hurt minor key also asked Andrew why he hadnt flooded us with footage yet. I assumed Andrew had taken offence for whatever reason I and others were not privy to.   Bruno remarked on the first part of Andrews post. I therefore reminded Bruno about the second part. In my opinion it was wise not to jump to conclusions and speak for Andrew and to wait until Andrew or Hurt minor key made clear the issue they were having.   Andrew has done that and apologised. Its also a lesson in why people shouldnt speak for others because they are only guessing. What I tried to do was redress the balance to being nuetral.  

1)Riolling shutter is not an issue on the vast majority of shots and only becomes one if you pan the camera hard. 2)Image stabisation will not work hand held on a 200mm lens. 3)Using a shoulder mount camera or a tripod or any other stable platform to create a handheld look is not the same as handholding a camera which was your original statement. You cannot get a handheld look with a 200mm lens holding it in your hands. 4)Its not about how the industry works. Its about the fact you cannot hold a camera with a 200mm lens and get a handheld look. 5)I have no idea what you do for a living although I do hope its not as a cameraman as you yourself stated you have never used a 200mm lens on a camera before.

Jon   1) The look of handheld which means any means possible to achieve a professional hand held look 2) Handheld which is literally handheld That is the way the meaning has been used in this thread.   The same scenario could apply to Film and a Film look One is artificial the other is real.   Te way the term handheld was used in this thread was certainly not in its professional context.   However I think we can agree shooting handheld with your hands with a 200mm lens is not a good idea.

  You are wrong.   Film weave is caused by only having sprocket holes on one side of your film. No plugins will give you film gate jitter as the problem is not with the gate which is aligned perfectly but with the film.

  A shoulder mounted camera mounted on a shoulder is not handheld  It is shoulder mounted. This should be pretty obvious . Handheld for a professional crew is a professional term  the camera operator is actually quite skilled in achieving this effect.   Hand held by amatuers is usually thought of a as a way to make amatuer films.   Your thoughts and some others seem based on something that doesn't exist except as a concept made up as you go along and therefore anything you want to attribute to your view of what handheld should and could be will be acceptable within your reference framework.   Handheld is therefore whatever tripod you wish to attach it to.

  The video Bruno used was clearly not handheld as it was resting on the road while the guy focused.    We are talking her about using a 200mm lens in a film on a 4/3 sensor. No DP would do this as it would be silly. You would put the camera on a tripod and emulate hand held OR do it in post.     HANDHELD Holding the camera in your hands with no other means of support. Resting the camera on a wall a road or on a body mount is not hand held.   STILLS PHOTOGRAPHY The only way you can get usable image would be to shoot at a very high frame rate and hopefully you may get a usable still For still photography.

  First of all I take great offence at being called a baby and I'm sure so would anyone NORMAL posting here. But then that's the game isn't it?  Disregard facts just insult tar and undermine.. Demeaning putdowns combined with I know cos I know answers are trolling.   There is one site though where this behaviour as long as you bow down to your master IE Personal view, is perfectly acceptable. I hope this is not allowed here. I wonder if some of you are here to stick the boot in to Andrews site?   1) Image stabilisation is completely at odds with Handheld. Can you see how handheld IE shaky footage and Image stabilisation IE Stabilise are at odds. 2) At 200mm the shake would be so bad NO Image stabilisation would be able to recover it. Its just a FACT. 3) Jello +image stabilisation+200mm lens = TOTAL GARBAGE.   You know nothing and are backing the wrong answer You obviously wish to support certain people instead of contributing. Including you there are at least three trolls here now.

  Lets look at what Bruno said. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What she meant is that for the price of a C100 you can get a BMCC + essential add-ons + workstation and you end up with superior image quality, which seems to be among the lines of what you were saying yourself. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WHAT Bruno is saying and you are backing up is that Andrew misunderstood a basic sentence entirely and then to add to his stupidity he believes the same thing anyway.   Really? You want to rubbish the owner of the forum? The question of course is "Why would you do that?" Each of you backs up each others posts to add credibility to something that is clearly not right.   In the end no one will post because their time and energy is trashed, Is that the idea?

I think it is offensive to talk on behalf other people. You clearly know nothing about cameras and yet your attitude is condascending and arrogant. As for the BMC and the F55 the market you talk about is those who need the highest picture quality RAW. The BMC competes and is therefore the same market. Just a different price level.   The C100  works with 8 bit highly compressed 4.2.0 and the BMC works in RAW CLEARLY TWO different markets. NOW if you cant see the difference then your posts are of no benefit to this forum. In fact they pull down all the constructive and positve elements and are in my opinion troll like behaviour.

Hurt minor key asked Andrew why he hadnt flooded us with footage yet.

The BMC and Canon C100 are completely different markets.

You cannot use a 200mm lens handheld. I thought you were a cameraman?

Bruno. Have you ever shot handheld with a 200mm lens? Care to post the footage?

I'd like to see you go hand held with a 200mm lens on any camera.

Having said that I've just heard RED are getting into distribution.   My next camera might now very well be a RED.

Why do people fall for  the hype. Canon had everyone drooling last year at a NEW change in film making and we got an 8 bit 4.2.2 camera that didnt stop everyone saying this £12000 marvel was better than everything else.

I have a GH2 and an Arri BL In the past I have hired cameras and equipment. I haven't bought a BMC and don't need to as I'm not making a film yet. Although I have two features in pre production.   I have done a lot of grading and work on short films and think I have earned the right to hold an opinion from my past experience on picture quality. I know the best digital quality is RAW which in my opinion is not up to the standard of film yet and still has a way to go in how it renders colour.   Here is my advice. 1) Hire a DP who knows what he is doing. This is by far the best way to get a good picture. Anyone can make a crap picture on the very best cameras . Not everyone can paint with light. 2) Shoot the highest quality you can. You dont want compression on your master until the film is graded and in a delivery format. 3)Shoot 35mm film if you have the budget because film renders colours much better and has the film look as well as being future proofed for new digital formats it will last a very long time.  but it is costly. Although maybe not much more than shooting on an Alexa or Sony F65. I believe digital is best suited to pop videos and the like.   WORKFLOW A workflow is a way to overcome all the problems thrown up by the camera you use But also to maximise quality. Often this used to mean it was complicated to use RAW. It's a lot simpler now. All you really need is to get what you shot on your computer make proxies and be able to colour correct. Most of us know how to do it or can easily learn. You dont need to edit in Avid or final cut Pro to be professional OR have huge amounts of expensive gear.   Sony Canon etc would love you to conform to their so called peripherals or sometimes bandied about as workflow that are built around their camera sales. The cameras attract a lot of peripheral manufacturers. You could end up with a huge unweildy contraption that adult kids who used to love lego meccano.   The Sony F55 for example you need to get an outboard £5000 recorder with Special recording media that can simultaneously record a compressed version. This is handy for proxies But you stil have to transfer it to a hard drive and you can easily enough render a proxy out. One thing though If the Sony recorder doesnt record at the same point as its card version you will need to render a proxy anyway.   Sony have added bells and whistles to their F55 like 16 bit Global shutter and a new Colour filter Array in order to charge a massive amount of money and divide the market to Pro and consumer again. Something that works for them as they make shed loads of money. As do the peripheral manufacturers. What you get is to colour grade in 16 bit or the 16bit may be squeezed to 12 bit by the time it hits the recorder. Regardless, I've never seen a 10 bit monitor let alone 16 bit. editing. However you will end up with 8 bit 4.2.2 for broadcast in the end. Just that extra colour information can give you extra leeway in extreme grading . After all the canon C300 is a £12000 camera and works in 8 bit 4.2.2. I really can't see any advantage over 10 bit colour grading and the BMC offers 12 bit SO Surely overkill and job done.   SOME THOUGHTS.   BMC = RAW 12 Bit NO global shutter 2.5k smaller sensor. Hey Do you really need to worry about bokeh when you can let your lenses do that?   SONY F55 = RAW 16 bit Global shutter Need a recorder to record RAW. 2 or 4k   You need to decide what is the best way to get your Master transferred to a theatrical print . Red did a resolution test a few years back to prove digital had better resolution than film. They reckon that what you see projected is less than a thousand lines.   If you record Sony 2K then the BMC beats it with 2.5k If you record in Sony 4K you will have even more huge amounts of data. 4K is great for reframing but really if your going 4K then to pull this off everything else will cost lots more.     Lets be honest Isn't much of this just plain overkill even with the BMC.   The Alexa is now old and needs replacing. There is a new Aaton digital camera that looks very promising in my opinion. But as for the Sony or Alexa or canon You're looking at overpriced cameras that YES have global shutters. Most though will never know the difference unless extreme hard panning. It's another thing that so called film makers shout loudly they cant live without. But anyway, are still no match for film. If you dont need a global shutter because your secure enough in your own mind then surely a BMC is all you need.   But hold on. it could make sense to attract a talented crew to have a high priced professional looking camera. In this case you have to look professional . So shoot 35mm FILM!   In my opinion a BMC will give you top quality RAW. That takes care of your picture quality. However Only a Quality DP can make a movie look a million dollars.   No camera technology in the world can do that.

Bruno Andy Lee and Screens Pro.   I've finished this conversation with you because it deteriorated into arrogant rude vitriolic and childish behaviour that usually means  you lost the argument So keep undermining me. Seriously you make yourselves look like losers.   To those who get a BMC. You literally got yourself a baby Alexa. There will be jealousy.

Not enough to make any difference most will ever notice.

You're right. I don't whip. If I did I'd pan slowly and speed it up in post. Bruno WHY use reds lighter versions when you can use proxies and edit You would want to colour correct all of the RAW image and take a master from that. The global shutter is NOT huge Yes its an advancement but certainly not $37000 worthand you know what some of us can live without it. Some of you are really trying to blind with science or what your favourite camera can do. This is what I hate about forums as they destroy the truth in favour of fanboyism and to keep a status quo for Gurus who and manufacturers that pay them off. I feel sorry for the poor indie film makers who listen to those wishing to pull the wool over everyones eyes. The BMC changes the landscape. Get used to it.

The Canon C300 was promised to the canon 5d market and then made a camera initially with a £15000 price tag. You can buy a damn fine car for the same money. If the GH2 could have on board most of the important technology albiet hacked and sell for £600 then the canon was about greed and greed based on marketing strategy for when later cameras come out.   As a company Canon went down in my estimation. Some like DV forums have promoted it and get rid of posters who say anything against it. Many buyers are now left holding overpriced bricks out flanked by newer cheaper cameras that take better pictures. They stuffed their customers with the C100 that again is overpriced and needs an outboard recorder. All in all canon have to win back the trust of those miffed and out of pocket by their clever tactics.