markm

I hadn't realised the Nikon mount adapters could be a problem if you have lenses other than Nikons. Oh dear.

Andrew Where was your film shot?

Andrew But people need to be more discerning and know the truth. This video could have been shot on the 3 year old 5D Mark II and looked the same, if not better. Video on the D800 is not at the GH2 level in terms of resolution and compression, it just isn't. Those are the facts. -------------------------------------------------------------- Awfully as it may sound to some - I now prefer the new GH2 Update, version v1.1 more than the hacked original. because of the better noise reduction and 25p which even at 24mbps and with sharpness set to +2 for me beats the 24p original version WITH THE HACKS!.  To me this is the best picture. Although the 24mbps looked great on the Nikon its the abilty to have uncompressed HDSDI out that takes it above and beyond the GH2 ----------------------------------------------- I believe people are being slightly blinded by the fact this video has a cool motorbike in it and lots of prozzies. ---------------------------------------------------------------- I think having a fast motorbike WAS more of a test? Also there was a lot of Black gradations in this that really seemed to be handled well. Much better than the GH2 would have done. Also the colour was so solid with the opening shots looking almost THREE dimensional.

The film outdoes anything I've seen from a GH2 in my opinion. But then thats my opinion. To me the film looked wholesome full and solid and that's at 24mbs. I'm hoping the HDMI might offer uncompressed and that will take this out in front of everything else below £20,000. But I do agree with Andrew to wait and see what else comes along this year.

[quote author=tjbates05 link=topic=190.msg1387#msg1387 date=1326892506] Right now I think the C300 is the only camera that does almost everything required internally. As a freelancer workng for broadcast television, reliability is key. I'm not sure I'd be happy shooting daily with an FS100 or any other camera coupled with an external recorder.  Anything added on to a camera system can quite often be an invitation for problems on the job and expensive repairs. I need gear that I can trust day in day out under varying circumstances. Now if your shooting test video of your cat for Vimeo consumption then that's a different story. Broadcast standard gear is expensive. P2 cards are expensive because they meet military and broadcast standards. SD cards don't meet the same standards. Just try and name one camera under $20K that can do everything the C300 does straight out of the box. If I really needed to buy today and had the means - I'd grab a C300 without an after thought. [/quote] tj Why would journalists pick a camera specificly designed for out of focus backgrounds that would be best used with a focus puller and more for film making? Surely an EX1 with its fantastic lens resolution 10 bit hdsdi would be better? If it was for sports even a zoomed in EX1 can give you out of focus backgrounds!  I'd be very worried about losing shots with a C300 if I were a journalist? Another thing is why would a pro film maker buy a camera with 8 bit out when you could buy an F3 with s log 10 bit out to a nanoflash or even 4.4.4. To me it seems the C300 is to expensive for indie film makers and not good enough for pro's.

In my opinion the C300 and the F3 are not worth the money. Nor are the fs100 or af100. You have a choice buy something that can do most of what the big cams can do but are deliberatley crippled in a way that keeps you out of the big boys league OR buy something you know really isn't worth the money likely to be replaced shortly and maybe can ill afford but can get you near to a professional level. Why Sony doesnt just give SLOG instead of ripping everyone off for over £2000 for a little bit of software is beyond me. You'd think they would offer it free as an incentive to buy the already over priced F3. I guess the good news is so much can be done much cheaper with the GH2 especially if the new firmware with better noise reduction gets hacked. I guess for me is the C300 is a rich mans toy. Not professional enough for the pros or cheap enough for indie film makers. uNLESS they decide to bring the price down to about £6000 that could make it the indie camera of choice.

Capitlism is the only system tha works But needs to be tempered with a government that make laws for the people that makes tempered and under control and is beneficial to all. Unfortunatly for the most part our governments have been working for themselves and been got at by big business and lots of bribes mostly hidden although cash for questions peerages and the expenses give a glimpse into their world of lining their own pockets. As for Cameras like the GH2 often made in countries like china where the currency is deliberatly undervalued and kept that way. China now has most of the worlds money) We are paying a price when we import cheap goods when really there should be import duty that levels the playing fied so British workers can compete and we can live within our means. We have seen most of our manufacturing closed down due to this and it can only go on for so long. Because our government allows cheap imports those countries are growing stronger and demanding better lifestyles and massively contributing to the pollution that is destroying our planet. Not that you can blame them its just a shame we couldnt find a way to control pollution before importing cheap goods to enable a quadrupling of it. We love our recycling and emmision targets Meanwhile China etc use the biggest coal polluters they can to export all our cheap goods to us. We are at the end of the road with cheap imports now and a leveling is occuring with our economies decling and living standards going down although mostly down to the EU but thats another story. Unfortunatly its all down to our politicians who are mostly self serving bunch of idiots who often get nice little back handers from big business and why the bilderbergers the architects of the EU got founded. One of this countries other problems is just how unpatriotic the people are. They would always go for the cheapest no matter how many times they shoot themselves and each other in the foot

I think Camerons idea is to try and get our film industry to make money for the economy. Star wars Indiana Jones and an awful long line of films made here using our expertise studios and people but by Americans while OUR directors follow an artistic path that is often not mainstream and often a moan at mainstream films. Another problem is many of the theatres here are owned by American distributers who choose what does or doesnt get shown. I want to make mainstream films and many times come across obstacles from those who dont like it. Dont see any value in mainstream standards and feel anything new or different no matter how bad many here in this country would feel, is preferential. The film council loved anything from other cultures or off beat and put money into films like Harry Potter they KNEW would be big But very little if anything to the indigenous culture and people. There has and always been a gate you have to pass to get distribution if they wont let you in your stuck. As for crowd funding and airing on the internet thats fine if you make something people want to spend ten seconds on. Like a cat chasing its tail or a titbit like how to tell if you have chlamidia. Or how to apply makeup. All really nothing to do with proper film making skills but can make money through ads etc. The more people are attracted to film making the more watered down even the most basic opportunites become. I would say its harder now to make anything likely to be succesful than ever before unless you have a captive audience that follow you like for example Andrew does. You can see this on vimeo where the guy who invented it can put any thing up he wants and get nice comments loads of views etc. Maybe people have to spend all their time creating a blog that people follow before they can get a very moderate amount of praise for films that without would be completely ignored. Making a film is far more than having access to a cheap camera. A camera is just a very small part of the equation. The most important thing is script and actors and budget. But a good director can use a good DP to enhance already high standards of acting. A DP is someone who is highly trained in camera work and lighting and could make a phone camera look great. Far more than most realise. A film can be a flop because to much emphasise is placed on the camera and its moves. Lighting, sound, set design, effects EVERYTHING has to work together to make a pretty film But ONLY the actors and script will make a film that people will want to watch. Better though to have a film people want to watch and pretty. Cameron wants those with a proven track record to get funded and yet another chicken egg situation HOW do you get a track record if you dont get funding. As always in this country its a head they win tails you lose situation. Of course we could always get those with extraordinary skills together and make a film so good that it just bypasses all the gatekeepers and all those with vested intersts. But getting cooperation of this sort takes setting aside your own personal interests and investing serious time into a directors vision. How many can do that in todays consumer world of its all about me. Thats why manufacturers and the media always win and why we end up with cameras and equipment designed disallowed to cross into the pro world IE crippled or just under the standards and rules set by pros. Of course some may break through but most never will.

All good points Andrew. For me its usefulness would be in possible advantages for colour correction when down rezzing to HD  which the red does so well. But with all its negatives  I can't see a use for it.