Shawn_Lights

Although I played with footage a long time ago and loved what I saw. I really just want to test the camera out on a shoot to see how I like it. At the very least I would love to mess around with it in a store to see how I like the handling of it. Hopefully soon.

Too much time on your hands buddy lol

In the ML forums they said it may be a hardware issue. No matter what SD card you put in you'll still get about 22mbs speed. We have to wait and see.

  A little greedy my dear sir XD

[URL=http://s407.photobucket.com/user/MOE-GUNZ-JACKSON/media/600D1.jpg.html][/URL] [URL=http://s407.photobucket.com/user/MOE-GUNZ-JACKSON/media/600D2.jpg.html][/URL]

Not liking that test. Grabbed the frames Andrew uploaded and upscaled to 1280x640. Really nice. Raw also gives you the ability to add some "clarity" giving you a bit more perceived detail in the shot. Looks great to me.  

I try to look at things from multiple perspectives. I shoot for myself and also for clients so I have to look at things in a different light. The practicality of the 5D raw is important to look at. However, not in the total misunderstanding way some professionals are (heating). I think recording time and the CF cards price:footage ratio is something we have to look at. There is practical things to be considered. I can't for the life of me understand why one wouldn't find this breakthrough exciting. It's simply amazing what the ML team has done and it should be treated as such. Where I differ from Andrew is (unless they fix the recording times) I wouldn't have the 5D raw as my A cam. Well even if they fix the recording time I may still use it as a B cam. Reason being not all jobs require raw and I rather not have to shoot h.264. It can be my A cam for certain things that require stealth and doesn't require controlled subjects. Thinking nature type stuff.  So I would go for the BMCC 4k + 5D3 raw. BMCC will handle my main stuff, but I can always go to the 5D for those full frame needing shots or establishing/scenery shots. I can get wider on the 5D and I think I can use that creatively. I'm also a fan of 16mm since I came from shooting on the Bolex and Arri-S. I will still have the pocket camera in my arsenal. Sometimes I need a greater dof etc. So for me I think the 5D raw fits into my system. I agree that the practical aspects need to be considered, but it's very early in the development and this is a free upgrade on a old camera. I never the type to go with one camera so people may not like this post of mine. I find using each cameras' strengths works best for me. I'm not married to any one of them. The dismissiveness of some of the bloggers is frankly annoying.

And a solar battery that charges when not in used along with a in camera anamorphic simulator that'll make the footage indistinguishable from footage shot with anamorphic lenses. While we're at it, how about a in-camera assembly edit feature?

From ML forums: "The best you can with 600D (550D/60D) is: (limited by hardware SD transfer rates) - 960Ñ…540, upscale it to 1280Ñ…720 (24 fps max) - 1280Ñ…400, tight aspect 3.20:1 (24 fps max) In Canon's 720p - lineskipping 1.66Ñ…, so you should upscale to restore correct ratio: - 1280x400 upscales to 1280x664 - near to 16:9 (24 fps max) - 1280x360 upscale to 1280x600 - 2.13:1 aspect - 1280x320 upscale to 1280x533 - 2.40:1 cinemascope aspect It is only 1280px wide, but pretty nice looking though"

For my personal projects I have the same mindset as you. However I do shoot events, music videos, etc for clients. Sometimes clients needs calls for a different camera.

It's only irrelevant if you make it irrelevant. Several situations can be thought of where the C100 will be the better option than the 5D Mark Raw. I don't understand the one camera to rule them all mindset.

5D2 now being tested.

In order for this to be successful this feature has to trickle down to the Rebel cameras as well. If the Magic Lantern team can get this on the 550D, 600D, 7D, and 5D Mk II...game over.

    You're confusing lossless compression and lossy. 

Same sensor as the current BMCC version.

Well I'm excited. Would be nice to hear about rental prices, but seeing as they're a small team they might not be able to supply houses enough. I'm also very excited to see this become a market breakthrough as far as price. We seen the steadicam go down in price when people started building alternatives to the big brands. I think this will happen here as well. Once it hits sub-$1000 the floodgates will open.

  Not to mention if you rent something and then you encounter a scheduling issue with an actor/actress etc. It can really add up. I rarely encounter scheduling issues but when I do I be glad I didn't rent anything. This is referring to personal projects. Renting for clients is easy if you can work it into your price. Renting isn't always the best option. Just have to know when its best to do it. I'm really not comfortable with labeling cameras that cost a certain amount as a "serious" camera and cheaper ones as not. Slippery slope there. In some situations I'll argue the BMCC is more of a serious camera than a F3 or C300.

Serious cameras are dictated by cost now, not image and capabilities?

Going to have to disagree with you about the inside shots being ugly and the grain looking like digital. I think it's the total opposite. All have different taste.

I think the BMCC is going to force Canon and other companies to play ball. Generally huge companies are conservative, they wait to see where the market goes then they enter. The small companies usually take the risk. Blackmagic, Kinefinity, etc. is going to launch the second revolution and I'm sure the big companies are going to follow eventually.

[quote name='nickname' timestamp='1345761650' post='16339'] i love how the fullframe look is so last season and deep focus is the shit now. what will we do if sony actually brings out the a99 with amazing video? will it be the fullframe look again??? what shall i tell the kids? but i´m happy the dslr community woke up from the h264 nightmare. we just have to tell the clients about this and if we´re lucky we don´t have to shoot on 5ds any more! [/quote] I don't think we're saying the fullframe look is bad or that deep focus is super awesome. We're saying the excessive use of shallow DOF and the degree of how shallow people shoot is ridiculous. When the 5D came out it was cool because we wasn't able to really do that before. However, that's not how movies look. People are waking up now. I love the fullframe look.

[quote name='JHines' timestamp='1345752633' post='16318'] I'll drink the BMC Koolaid when the sensor size isn't blown out of the water by most modern video cameras. It simply isn't a camera for low light wide angle work. Raw is amazing to edit with and there is no doubting that. I'm glad the progress this camera has forced on the industry, but a more all around camera with my current set of lenses that I've invested thousands of dollars in is what I'm waiting for. I'm sure the success of this camera will lead to bigger sensors in the future and I'm looking forward to it, but for now, locked off telephoto, closeup, well lit work with manageable DOF will be what this camera is all about. Little bit worried... SLR Magic lenses aren't know for their superior optics. [/quote] Wide Angle work probably not. Low light? I think the footage shows that it'll do fine. Sure not as good as the C300, but at ISO 1600 it did fine. Plus the grain from the camera is beautiful. However, if you don't like the grain, the camera resolves a lot of detail. I added denoiser and the grain went away, yet the image remained sharp with a ton of detail. I think I'll keep a little grain though when I get the cam because it looks lovely. Wide angle work I think you have a valid argument. My question is, why not use your current camera for those special cases? Sounds like you already have a camera. Make them both work together. The BMCC has few faults that one can get over. I agree with the others, Extreme shallow DOF is just annoying now (I'm guilty of doing it too). If you look at movies, you'll see that the background slow blurs out. It's buttery, not extreme. That's why the DSLR community kept complaining about focusing. Everyone was shooting way too shallow. I think smooth DOF has been shown with the BMCC. Like the shots where the girl is at the pool table. Also in the other video posted where we see a flower sharp but the background is shallow.

[quote name='Remsy_Atassi' timestamp='1345747900' post='16305'] Here's a question... When I try to import the files into AE it prompts me to use Camera Raw for every single frame. There has got to be a better way to apply those settings to an entire folder or sequence, right? The Brawley clips come out as Folders for each shot containing the individual frames inside. This has also presented a challenge when I work on these clips in Resolve, because the naming convention makes Proxies very tough to create. Can you explain your import workflow in a bit more detail? Really want to play around with these in Premiere but it has me stumped. [/quote] Most likely you highlighted each frame to import. I did that the first time. You only have to import the first frame in the folder. AE will look for all the similar named frames in order and make it a sequence/shot.

[quote name='rommex' timestamp='1345675882' post='16256'] Andrew, before chart-lovers hijack this thread: You wrote: "I couldn’t get above 1fps in Premiere CS5.5" I could be saying stupid silly stuff, but I couldn't overcome exactly the same rate -- 1 fps -- in Premire Pro until I realized that imported DNG sequence [u]is interpreted as a 1 fps sequence[/u]. Then I right-clicked my clips in Project Bin and in "Modify > Interpret footage..." pop-up menu changed 1fps to 24 fps. :) [/quote] Yep. I stayed away from importing straight to Premiere because it added contrast, crushed black, etc. It did all types of stuff when I imported it for some reason. I found this workflow to be simple and effective. It's also pretty damn fast too. This is the same workflow I did: http://cinescopophilia.com/ikonoskop-cinema-dng-workflow/

[quote name='tabac' timestamp='1345663490' post='16234'] Charts and number comparisons aside, this looks like an immense camera. Looking at it on the dough to image equation. [/quote] Personally I put more stock in the actual image. Not a fan of charts and graphs. The Blackmagic camera just has a lovely image. Even the noise in the low light shots are beautiful. I agree with you. Great camera.