jlev23

[quote author=gene_can_sing link=topic=649.msg4796#msg4796 date=1335552847] jlev23,  I definitely will feel the pain of the FS700 being 2x as much. But the thing is, I think there are a number of people who have saved money and were willing to pay 2x more for a better 5D3 oriented towards video in the $8K price range. But Canon completely under delivered in all aspects and left many people (myself included) hanging. It was either get a very crippled camera for $3.5K or cough up $15K for the next step up. Too drastic of a leap. As for the Sony FS700 not being out yet. Yes, that's true, but Sony did the RIGHT thing by having numerous people test the FS700 and there a lot of videos shot by the camera on the web, and it's not even suppose to come out for another 2 months. Everyone knows it's going to be good because the proof is already out in the form of numerous tests videos and testimonials from many shooters who have used it. Canon, with the 5D3, kept the video completely under wraps. Nobody saw hardly any 5D3 video and hardly anyone used one until it basically came to market. Canon obviously had a lot to hide with the 5D3, yet they were happy to take your pre-order. Canon is doing bad business IMO. But yeah, more power to Magic Lantern. Those guys are AMAZING. [/quote] i agree, but what i meant by it not being out is that you cant have it now! ive had my 5dmk3 for a month now and shot 3 jobs on it already, one more and ill have the return on my money already. i actually shoot on sony f35s, well used too, before the epic. the sonys had the best keying ability for green screen and vfx, the only problem is that they never looked filmic to me. when i was forced to use one for entire shoots, vfx and some lifestyle, i would wind up diffusing the hell out of them to make people look good. for this reason they just arent used that much anymore. it gave me another reason not to invest in high priced equipment, you just never know whats around the corner and productions want to rent the cheapest alternative these days. so i can see the fs700 being a great tool, its just if you buy one, are you going to regret it once, lets say they hack the 5dmk3 and get clean hdmi out, or if next year there will be a fs800! for the commercial world i live in, its either an alexa or an epic, or if its low budget then "5D" is actually written into the treatment, "this is a 5D job"...when this is the case, there is no changing it, its decided on the client/agency level, even if i say i can get an alexa for the same price...  i guess its had to invest these days, i just know you have to jump on something quick to be able to make your money back, otherwise, just rent whatever is best for the project.

[quote author=gene_can_sing link=topic=649.msg4793#msg4793 date=1335548580] This is great, except I'm not really sure that ML can fix the really soft resolution of the 5D3. That's the big deal breaker for me. Even though the chunk of change that I have saved up is probably going to the soon to be released Sony FS700 since it's far superior to anything Canon video is offering, especially for the price; I will probably donate to ML just because they are doing great things. If Magic Lantern can 1) Increase the resolution on the video 2) offer clean HDMI out 3) Can over-crank to at least 60fps at 1080p (hopefully 120fps at 1080p since Sony has raised the bar so high at 480 fps at 1080p); then Canon might retain me as a customer, otherwise, Sony it is. It's kind of sad that Canon video has fallen to such a low that they have to depend on a group hackers to save their dwindling customer base who are flocking to the much better alternatives offered by Sony, Black Magic and even the Nikon D800 has some huge advantages over the 5D3 like higher resolution, clean HDMI and crop modes; and that camera is $400 less. WTF Canon. Anyways, go Magic Lantern. You guys rule. In response to jlev23's comment about only real owners of the 5D3 should be allowed to complain. Well, the reason why there is so much complaining again Canon and why many people have not bought the 5D3 is because the the 5D3 in it's current offering is extremely crippled and not really worth $3500 IMO. Look at the Sony FS700, it's has some amazing specs and some really great footage on the internet, and everyone is singing the praises of Sony, kind of like people did when the 5D2 came out 4 years ago. And I know the 5D3 is about half the price of the FS700. But if Canon offered even something close to the FS700 for double of the price of the 5D3, I would have gladly bought it since I own some good L glass. But the only thing even remotely close to the FS700 is the 1D-C, which is pretty much a joke for $15K. Meanwhile, Canon is getting bashed to death because their latest video offerings are so over priced and underspec'd it's ridiculous. Moral of the story, if you plan great products (like the Sony FS-700 and Black Magic) people will sing your praises. If you release underwhelming and overpriced products like Canon, people will bash you. It's as simple as that. [/quote] im sorry, i said critique not complain, he mentioned being a critic. also i think its hard to compare cameras in a completely different price range, anything over a few $1000 is mostly a rental item for me, but in my mind i cant say that a $3500 camera should be as good as this $7000 camera, thats not even out yet! the 1DC is definitely going to have its market for films meant to be on the big screen and commercial shoots, especially for vfx. most of my clients insist on 4k for all of those so they can reframe the elements in post. thats why RED has cornered that market, but canon will for sure dip into it with the 1DC, and its about $50k less then the EPIC!

POLL (hopefully the Magic Lantern guys read this!!!) http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=6136.0

[quote author=TC link=topic=649.msg4786#msg4786 date=1335538502] [quote author=jlev23 link=topic=649.msg4785#msg4785 date=1335538072] thats the main problem us real owners have with this forum, im starting to think you need to enter your cameras serial number to post! [/quote] What?  Only 5D Mark III owners should be allowed to post here? [/quote] no, but people that vocally criticize a certain camera should at least of used the camera first. maybe i misunderstood you, i think you were saying you vocally critique the 5D but are still deciding to buy one.

[quote author=TC link=topic=649.msg4784#msg4784 date=1335537340] [quote author=sandro link=topic=649.msg4782#msg4782 date=1335535477] I doubt Canon was so stupid to limit the resolution via software though [/quote] I fear you over-estimate the intelligence of the-powers-that-be at Canon.  Amazing engineers, but it is run like most big Japanese companies - by an elite group of old men stuck in the past and completely out of touch with reality. Anyway, back to the subject of this article - Magic Lantern.  Fantastic news!  I think we all know the firmware is the main limiting factor in the 5D III's performance.  I haven't ordered yet and have been a vocal critic on these forums, but if it can be hacked to give a higher bitrate, I'm ready to buy. [/quote] higher bit rate then 90+?? thats not the problem...and you havent got the camera yet and have been a vocal critic? thats the main problem us real owners have with this forum, im starting to think you need to enter your cameras serial number to post!

if it cant do 1080 60p, please give us the even more useful 48p! or 40p, or 36p! something higher then 30 at 1080 :) i cant wait to see what they do. maybe give us an Mpeg/pro res compression instead of h264?

[quote author=piz link=topic=637.msg4755#msg4755 date=1335483529] There's probably no one alive anymore but it would be interesting to know how early cinematographers during silent films era who shot at 16fps  felt when 24fps + sound became standard and if there was any resistance to it.    It's obvious that due to those technical advances the narratives that film dealt with began to drastically change.  I think this is the same shift in paradigm.  Higher frame rates + 3D have a different feel that can be applied to a certain type of presentation for a given narrative.  It maybe something completely new we've never seen before.  Take for example if when 24fps and sound came out if all they did was update silent movies to the new frame rate and just read cards out it would have been totally pointless.  Like wise maybe the current style of film narrative isn't correct for this new type of presentation.  I know this is off topic but Tupac is making the rounds as a hologram now.  We can only expect how that type of technology could completely later what a film is and how it can be experienced. [/quote] soon we will be going to elvis and beatles concerts...

and i remember when Cameron put out Avatar and was upset that movies that werent shot in 3D arent real 3D and are terrible to watch...now he makes Titanic 3D! i also remember when we first got high end color grading with telecine houses, people from all walks of life were like why do all the music videos all of a sudden look so hyper real and amazing? that being said, i also dont like the look of these new processes that give you so much detail, but im biased, im the one who has to deal with making it look good, the RED camera is not the talents friend, you can see every imperfection. as well, ive experienced the art department going crazy because they have to use real wood or real oak when walls used to be painted flats!

[quote author=allupons link=topic=637.msg4672#msg4672 date=1335365829] People need to stop mis-using the word sharpness. The reason 48fps and higher looks awful is due to motion characteristics and blur. When you all but remove all motion blur, yet maintain highly fluid motion with more recorded frames you get the awful vhs "soap opera" effect. Very sharp, high resolution video @24 fps can look completely amazing and simultaneously cinematic. It is when you break the dreamlike fantastic appearances of 24fps, with the vhs-centric poorly reproduced smooth motion reality look of 48 fps that things look like crap. Leave sharpness out of this. [/quote] shooting at higher frame rates makes footage "feel" sharper and clearer, this is a fact. it reduces the motion blur mainly due to the increase in the shutter speed as well as more frames being taken in by your eye. thats why we use this technique in shooting for compositing elements, normally on green screen. this is exactly why people are complaining the sets have too much detail and look fake.

also speaking of people being used to certain looks, i remember when mtv did their awards show on 24p for the first time, and people freaked out saying it didnt look "live"! ive been trying to say that shaper is not better for a long time...unless you are shooting a visual effect shot or element for compositing, but people have been fighting me saying the gh2 is so sharp, its better! and people taking apart their 5Ds to make them shaper, its ridiculous.

weirdly enough i had a whole debate about this last week when a director asked about why the hobbit was shooting at 48fps. i was actually shocked when i heard it, my reply was that, well, it certainly will make it sharper and clearer to the eye, especially if they were to project it at 48fps, but something i would do for a special effect shot i wouldnt necessarily think would be conducive for watching an entire film. my only restitution was that maybe they did some tests in 3D and the results were magical. apparently they did not!

just keep your 5D as as still camera, the BMC doesnt shoot stills. then youll have a camera for each occasion that share lenses.

[quote author=Andrew Reid - EOSHD link=topic=621.msg4541#msg4541 date=1335130394] [quote author=jlev23 link=topic=621.msg4522#msg4522 date=1335106123] sorry that you misunderstand, i was saying that in relation to the footage you are posting, its looking and feeling more like gh2 now, so being worried that if i do that to my 5DMK3 it would also stick out like a sore thumb. and yes the pyramids do exist, ive seen them on a history channel documentary :) [/quote] Gaussian blur it then. [/quote] so i should take my whole camera apart, operate on it, get IR filters for all my lenses, then gaussian blur it in post, got it :)

[quote author=Andrew Reid - EOSHD link=topic=621.msg4519#msg4519 date=1335104748] Geeez some people are never happy. $600 camera sticks out vs $50,000 one? Wow what great detective work you've done there, please email me as I have an assignment for you to find the mythical pyramids of Egypt. Do they exist? [/quote] sorry that you misunderstand, i was saying that in relation to the footage you are posting, its looking and feeling more like gh2 now, so being worried that if i do that to my 5DMK3 it would also stick out like a sore thumb. and yes the pyramids do exist, ive seen them on a history channel documentary :)

i dont know, maybe you should of shot a nicely lit interior. what you showed looks like overly sharp news footage, like how the GH2 reacts to exteriors. i much prefer a slight softness and cinematic gradation from highlights, like the quality the alexa and the 5DMK3 both have. almost looks like you shot it at 30fps with a 1/60 of a shutter or something. i just did a shoot with the alexa, 5DMK3 and a GH2. the GH2 stuck out like a sore thumb, the alexa and 5D were almost a match without any post being done. i guess it all depends what you are using the camera for, but id sure hate to have to shoot through IR filters all the time!

[quote author=emgesp link=topic=613.msg4460#msg4460 date=1334968330] [quote author=dangerzonerj link=topic=613.msg4454#msg4454 date=1334953181] [quote author=garypayton link=topic=613.msg4452#msg4452 date=1334951171] Correct : we STILL love the 5d mark II...;) [/quote] I love mine that's for sure!  :D And it will be a great pair with BM. Also I'm not a big fan of the stupid little DOF people insist on MKII/III. So critical that any move from the cast and you re done, must be always hacking focus... I'm often working on 5.6-8f to get a decent focus area... We can have a good shallow DOF with GH2 so I guess it will be the same on BMCC . I guess with a Tokina 11mm-16mm 2.8, a samyang 24mm 1.4, samyang 35mm 1.4 and a canon 50mm 1.8 for those on a tight budget and you're ready for basically everything... Besides old nikons F. Put a 70-200mm an you get an amazing telephoto camera... [/quote] I can't stand the shallow depth of field on Full Frame HDSLR's with fast lenses. It's too extreme and makes focus pulling a pain in the arse. [/quote] yup, im finding i have to add like 3 extra cutaway shots per scene because of loosing focus so easily. another nice thing the camera will be good for is green screen shoots, with all that raw color data and the greater DOF you get with the sensor and being on wider lenses. im even thinking a nice 16mm c-mount Angenieux 9.5-57, with an eos to cmount adapter :)

i use mine and love it, just now testing it on the 5dmk3, looks stunning but havent shot anything to post yet. i did post a flare test from my gh2 though. i think its by far the best option, its just really rare and hard to find one. i have a few friends that feverishly search for them after testing mine out. http://vimeo.com/18833900

though if Canon really wanted to shut everyone up now, the only right thing to do is release a firmware upgrade next week that gives us clean HDMI out. that is the only answer. NIkon has it, its foolish we dont. this way we can still have our still camera and for 1500 bucks get a recorder of our choice and make us be able to shoot professional quality video. then we would have professional photography and videography in our hands, that beats the black magic camera in my mind, especially as far as a prosumer market.

why couldnt stupid canon make the 5dmk3 2k raw and prores and the 1dc 4k raw and prores, now they dont have anything to compete with black magic or digital bolex or ikonoskop. they should blow our minds and give the 5dmk3 the upgrade of a life time! then theyd be back in the game!

[quote author=Simco123 link=topic=600.msg4222#msg4222 date=1334729079] I never liked the bright outdoor look of the GH2 even with the hack. DR wasnt quite there, highlight clipping was poor and lack the roll off look of the 5D2. The wacky consumer grade colours and electronic look is also very off putting. The Blackmagic appears to answer those short commings and more. [/quote] completely agree, ive been trying to say this for awhile with out getting slammed by people swearing by their gh2, i have one, like it a lot, but though its sharp, there is nothing cinematic about it.

[quote author=popalock link=topic=596.msg4178#msg4178 date=1334686112] There is only 1 real worry with this camera - lens compatibility/incompatibility.  We need to know which lenses will work & which wont since we all have our own inventory of lenses I'm sure we'll want to use with this camera.  I've some EF lenses (great, they'll work) but I've also a GH2 and am acquiring manual lenses for that.  Will these "vintage" lenses work or not?  that is the ONLY [i][b]important[/b][/i] question.  then there's anamorphic.. All this chat about documentary vs film, and batteries are minor points, and quite frankly BS [/quote] Being able to use a vintage lens is more important that having a camera powered and ready to go at an instant which is needed for documentary projects? and versus film, where the shots are more set up and generally youll have power on set to be able to use the ac adapter. thats why i think the battery obstacle will make a difference on docu vs film making. the fact that it takes canon and nikon lenses should tell us which market they are going for, people that are already using canons and nikons! i could buy this camera and have almost everything i need to use it out of the box :) still, the main thing i would have to see is if there is an advantage with raw 2.5k over compressed 4k(canon 1DC). the raw might win, and i guess as much as the 1DC will be, i can get about 4 of these!

yeah, this is the only camera right now that can shoot in raw format for under 15k, and its 12k less than that!

yes, this camera is not for consumers, not for documentaries, not for news or interviews of any kind. [i][i]So documentaries are only about its interviewing people? How about a doc verite style 2k feature that needs authentic improv and scenarios out in the field away from a wall socket?[/i] WHO SAID I SAID DOCUMENTARIES WERE ONLY ABOUT INTERVIEWING PEOPLE??? if you take your time to read, i said its not for documentaries and its not for news or interviews... separate things. and the statement is mostly based on the fact of the short battery life, then the fact that this raw form of files is meant for grading, i feel like news or interviews dont usually go through that process, so its not optimum for their work flow.

[quote author=garypayton link=topic=596.msg4157#msg4157 date=1334677988] CAN ANYBODY TELL ME WHERE DID YOU PREORDER IT? [/quote] id like to know the same thing!

[quote author=biginvegas link=topic=596.msg4149#msg4149 date=1334673184] Only for it's 2.5K RAW everything else in this iCam is a massive fail.  Ergonomics, battery power, compatible lens issues,  utilitarian use no.. for what or who exactly is this niche camera?  The original Scarlet 2K and a mighty still camera was to me the future for Pro's but obviously not at price for low budget indie filmmakers.  $3000 is some cash though and you need extras to make it adapt for even the most basic day shoot. It has no modularity all solid state, much like an Ipad  It will depreciate in value in 18 months, unlike a 5D or D800.  I am surprised Andrew you have a hard on for it or is just the fact that Black Magic just undercut the camera industry that makes it the sensation?  If Ikonoscope came in at this price I could see a win - for the price.  It shoots RAW.  In my mind the only application for RAW is to grade for ... a cinema screen or a higher end commercial. There are many option for commercials as they have huge budgets. 1080 for creative work to Vimeo/YT embed is so fine considering the camera options out there.  That means this camera is for indie filmmakers wanting to make a narrative low budget feature. How many  films does the average independent filmmaker make a year?  Even if you make one a year, that's a 3 week shoot. For the doc feature filmmaker, in my opinion the biggest growing market for camera manufactures this camera seems to be unsuitable for even 1080 capture. It's internal battery system is baffling. Over at no film school the admin created buzz for his choice of camera a year before shooting.  Making a feature is not about the camera.  Black Magic, Canon and web forums are tapping into 1st time filmmakers gullibility and telling them you have to have your 2K or 4K otherwise your film will be no good.  This camera is for a production company with several DSLR's, an AF100 who need cheap fast 2K for grading in studio and green screen and occasionally rent lenses. [/quote] a camera that shoots raw for $3000 a fail??? hahahaha...the only other option is a scarlet at 5-6 times the price. i like that its made from people thinking about post production, thats usually where we start on a project, what format does post need to create and finish this project? they can finally give us a tool that answers all those questions. what i dont like about his camera is that its the first one, now they just need it out there and get feedback from people actually doing the productions and shooting the projects. what we need in shooting films is some variable frame rates, 32fps, 36fps, 40fps, 48fps, something else besides 60p. i for one am axcited about the form factor, i like the slick streamline look too and its about time we had a onboard monitor built in that is big enough to see! yes, this camera is not for consumers, not for documentaries, not for news or interviews of any kind. its for professionals or people moving up that want to make a film and have no problems in post with the footage. its also for lower end commercials, right now we have a 3 camera choice, epic, alexa and if they cant afford that then they actually write in the treatment "this is a 5d job"... so for the proce of a 5d we can have raw? wow! what id like to see is what hold up better, compressed 4k from a 1DC, or raw 2.5k...this is going to be an interesting comparison, especially with the massive price difference...i think canon should think about adding clean hdmi to our 5dmk3s to be able to keep up with this price point!