cameraboy

looking at the image 5d mark iii looks like very close with c300 in resolution... maybe c300 use only one aa ... i told before that i think c300 sensor is just s35 crop of 5d mak III.... when u resize c300 to FF u got 22.3 it match in the pixel....

u can not sharper no aa image same as one with aa .... use smaller radius value ... no aa image has better pixel separation and too much sharpening produce halos ... use less , now u got more REAL resolution...

canon change internal design with every new camera ... old one like 350d had only one olpf ir uv filter ... then 5d mark II 550d and 7D had two with one glued on sensor ... 5D mark III seems different design ... we should wait  ...

yes ... this is only for people who know what are they doing... u can damage camera easy... [url=http://www.lifepixel.com/tutorials/infrared-diy-tutorials/panasonic-lumix-gh2-ir]http://www.lifepixel.com/tutorials/infrared-diy-tutorials/panasonic-lumix-gh2-ir[/url]

canon cameras have two aa filters ... one blur y axis and second for x axis... u can remove only one because second is glued with sensor ... thats only half job but it does give more resolution .... only problem is that u loose dust filter and u need additional uv/ir filter ... gh2 is much better for that it has only one olpf and dust filter stay in the camera .... second gh2 sensor is much more dense because smaller pixel and there is less possibility for moire ... i saw some videos from modified gh2 and it beats c300 in resolution ... but maxmax doesnt send cameras in my country .... :( let see what d800e can do but  nikon is already got problems with aliasing  ....

red  scarlet is a great camera but its not that user friendly ... batteries last less than 30 min .... red ssd are insanely expensive (cheapest ssd can recorde 55MB/s max red scarlet bitrate)... overpriced accessories not that good low light possibilities ... need more  logistics ... basically is not run&gun camera.... 

i own gh2 and i think that c300 overpriced... 16000$ without 10 bit  not in 2012 ... but its sharpest s35 1080p camera on market ... 780 line is lot of resolution (its sony f35  league) ... af100 mesure 680 .... and i dont think that canons go beyond 450- 500 lines... on dvx forum there people who claim 1000 line of canoon 5d mark III :) gh2 dont need that kind of defense ... it beats 7x more expensive camera it will take care of itself ...

yeah ... i hate charts ... but i love details... fine details in  faces , flowers , buildings .... charts just help us find camera who does that... and we own audiences to show best possible images... because tools become cheaper  but standards should remain high ... dont underestimate audience they dont like to see  people on the screen  who look like they made from plastic... there is reason why Christopher Nolan use 65 mm film ... we cant afford that but we should do best we can...

do u think that measurements are not valid ... i see charts and i can see more resolution and lab  confirm that ... and of course that 1080p is just  container and the measurements show how much of that  is filed with real details...

here are charts for f3 and fs100 [url=http://provideocoalition.com/images/uploads/FSCSRW-F3.jpg]http://provideocoalition.com/images/uploads/FSCSRW-F3.jpg[/url] [url=http://provideocoalition.com/images/uploads/FSCSRW-FS100.jpg]http://provideocoalition.com/images/uploads/FSCSRW-FS100.jpg[/url] f3 got more resolution but u can see it has lot of moire... when u got two camera with same sensor and one got more resolution and moire thats means weak olpf ... thats reason why i thinking to remove aa filter from mine gh2... im not afraid of moire because gh2 pixel pitch is 133 lp/mm and there is no lot of lens who can go beyond that... but mamax price is to high ...

horizontal resolution 100% is 1000l max resolution for 1080p... man thats standard lab measurements  for resolution . just go to red forum they love to pull that method when they try to prove red superiority ...

GH2 has great resolution  but resolves around 780 lines ... c300 goes beyond 1000 lines probably with little false details... there is something about f3 vs fs100 ... fs100 resolves around 700 but f3 goes almost 1000... same sensor but different olpf .. measurement take by slashcam.com ... i believe that guys doing best job... [url=http://produktdbimages3.slashcam.de/camcorder-testergebnisse_testbilder_luminanz_aufloesung_211.jpg]http://produktdbimages3.slashcam.de/camcorder-testergebnisse_testbilder_luminanz_aufloesung_211.jpg[/url] [url=http://produktdbimages4.slashcam.de/camcorder-testergebnisse_testbilder_luminanz_aufloesung_204.jpg]http://produktdbimages4.slashcam.de/camcorder-testergebnisse_testbilder_luminanz_aufloesung_204.jpg[/url] 1. f3 2.fs100 and gh2 [url=http://images0.slashcam.de/texte/911-luma-Luma.jpg]http://images0.slashcam.de/texte/911-luma-Luma.jpg[/url]

because is NEX its probaly 8 bit 444 HD-SDI ... and if records 4K internaly thats going to be 80-100 mbit 420 h264... gamma curves same as fs100 ... no slog .... that is enough to protect f3...

in theory canon only I frame codec should be similar as gh2 hacked on same bitrate .... they both are h264 without cabac implementation ....

i expect cheap c300 soon  ... probably they call it c100 ... spec: 35 mbit h264 same as Canon G1X ... no log curve ... no nd filters  ... hdmi only ... cheaper designed box... stronger aa filter to reduced resolution (same as f3 vs fs100) price around 5500$

yes ... sometimes greed can cost.... anybody remember xerox they made first PC  , GUI , mouse and refuse to put it on market because they try to protect their photocopier  machine and we all know what happen...

Conspiracy? if somebody  pay u to shoot video and then expect to do editing for free and u refuse is that conspiracy... companies goal is to max profit...best way is to sell same tech in different niche ... just  lock some options for consumer market... have peaking in the viewfinder is lamest thing they can do to protect af100... more people  ask for clean hdmi,zebra or waveform and got nothing....cheap consumer camcoders have clean hdmi ... and how about their answer that hardware for 10bit hdmi would up the price of af100 beyound 10000$... now in 2012 we still  use 8 bit 420  as standard... what canon learn from 5d mark II that is big market in aps c and FF video cameras and that is what they give to as in c300.... so dont expect to get same quality from 5dmark III ... cameras are nothing more than peace of plastic and silicon  ... tools  not religious artifacts ... all that fanboy talk is nonsense i dont care what is logo on my camera... all big companies got tech to give as 4k raw images for less than 5000$ ... but if they do that will crash market  ....so baby step is a answer for good profit... independent players are only way to shake industry like red did with high end ... they made big sony to drop price from 250000$ f35 to 50000$ f65 ...

im afraid that panasonic will decide to go same route as canon ... cripple gh3 with low bitrates  and bad hdmi ... they can easily lock firmware ... af100 is not big success and we can see price going down fast....  so they can decide to do canon policy cripple photo cameras to protect video division... because they are only company who kill their camera sales by implementing too good video options in their photo cameras ...

here is snapshot from philip bloom marshal monitor ... preproduction gh2 hdmi... not even in the  interlace wrapper just pure progresive...

i dont try to defender  canon  .... its just reality of video industry... even panasonic  cripple gh2 hdmi (if u remember preproduction gh2 send to Philip Bloom had clean progresive 24P) i dont own canon dslr  and i dont need that DOF porn from FF but i need true 1080p...

exactly... canon is company not charity organization... they need to protect video division... if c300 use old DIGIC DV III then DIGIC V can do 17x better... many people say that they satisfied with 5d mark 3 video quality i dont see problem ... dont forget 95% of sales goes to photographers ....

c300 probaly use APS-C crop of canon 5dmark iii sensor ... when u upscale c300 to full frame u got 22.3 MP...(2.14158238 * 8MP * 1.33 = 22.7864365) all companies do that ... design one sensor technology and the upscale or downscale size and deactivate some options for cheaper or photo cameras ... image from 5d iii sensor is probably perfect 4 MP and then canon use some black magic to do worst possible downscaling to 1080p ... c300 has huge profit margin ... if canon does no line skipping and read whole sensor with pixel binning only way to get such low resolution HD is on purpose to protect video division...

[url=http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/417078_915933604947_39610478_38937619_455554040_n.jpg]http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/417078_915933604947_39610478_38937619_455554040_n.jpg[/url] The 'shoe box' version still has the typical colored gig-e cable hanging out the back ! ( still Allied cam in the box, i'll bet )

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtlSDqssK2M#ws]EOS-1D X : Performance Redefined[/url] from the you tube video it looks like that 1dx gives better picture quality than mark III ... i think that canon decide that there is no more free ride ... u got what u paid for ...

what is wrong with this image... nice analog look... https://vimeo.com/30039857