Bruno

[quote name='sanveer' timestamp='1347500352' post='17873'] There is also a multi-control dial, in the front, for silent handling, and changing settings while shooting. I don't think its of any gr8 consequence, so it can be passed ... ;-) [/quote] That's funny, you wish you had all these professional audio connections but then you'd pass on the ability to actually adjust audio levels while shooting? Hope you were being ironic...

[quote name='ssrdd' timestamp='1347450152' post='17827'] sony sucks in front of canon 5dmk3 90mbit Vs VG900 or A99 24mbit. [/quote] Different codecs and different compression technology. Sony FS100 also has a 24mbit codec and it looks cleaner than the 5Dmk3. [quote name='TC' timestamp='1347435778' post='17821'] Canon is dead. Sony has arrived. [/quote] There's too many people with way too much Canon glass and accessories. If Canon reacts in time, people will stick to them. Also, this has been said of Sony a few times, and then it always turned out their cameras had serious issues on the video side too, so let's wait for proper reviews before going crazy.

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1347149734' post='17625'] Also there's a lot of people with Canon glass who will still be better off with the EF mount. You can't use Canon glass on the MTF version as there's no way to control the aperture. [/quote] That's true, but only because the MFT mount hasn't been properly implemented, I see no reason for it not being active (considering the EF one is) except for it being a rushed decision. This issue has been pointed out as soon as they first announced the camera, but BMD only realized how serious it might be around release time.

It is a niche market, probably less than 1%, but it's not like they designed a whole new camera for it. It's an alternative to the sensor they had before on the same camera, pretty easy for RED to implement, and gives them a product no other brand sells at the moment.

[quote name='galenb' timestamp='1347045381' post='17558'] Did you see any rolling shutter issues in any of the shots? Looks pretty awesome to me. [/quote] Are you joking? He barely moved the camera! Rolling shutter would have to be VERY bad to be visible in those shots! Raw is definitely very powerful, but I doubt anyone will be using it for every single project, it does add a few time consuming steps and loads of storage space. People shooting projects with a quick turnaround and no need for much post work will choose the prores mode in a heartbeat. Even you Andrew! :)

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1347035777' post='17544'] However you'd be well advised to keep hold of the EF until the MTF ships, and sell it in my view. You might even make 150% of your money back since demand far outstrips supply. [/quote] Not sure the demand for the EF mount version will be that huge anymore... The MFT mount is great news, but feels rushed, it's obviously not there for MFT lenses, but for its adaptability to other mounts, still it's a shame it won't be able to power IS lenses or electronically controlled apertures. I'd rather see a version of the camera with replaceable mounts and pay more for a specific mount as long as it is fully supported.

They did listen after all, they might have screwed some early birds over in the meantime though...

That's such a biased graph. You're comparing squeezed prores with stretched raw, how come you show a scaled up raw version if you don't scale the prores one? Prores doesn't scale as well? Why not? Obviously 1920px is not as good as 2432px, but if you're comparing both with the same anamorphic squeeze, then the real values would be 1920x720 against 2432x914. Shooting raw doesn't store any additional resolution, saying prores (which is a decent codec) is not worth scaling and raw is is a bit silly, innit? And anyway, stretching any footage is not a good idea as you'll always lose resolution, you should just squeeze it, keep the same horizontal resolution and gain on the vertical resolution, since that's the screen space you're not using anyway. I could bet that if you did that to actual footage, the prores would be WAY sharper.

If this is at or below 1500 USD, comes with 1080/60fps and performs well, I find it more appealing than the black magic camera!

[quote name='bwhitz' timestamp='1346576004' post='17141'] I didn't know that the Alexa actually needed an external recorder for RAW. That makes the Alexa look like another over-priced hunk of crap, honestly. [/quote] Price and specs is not all there is to a camera, in the end it's all about the image they produce AND the usability. Do you really think any serious DP on a high budget film would go with a camera that's limited to EF lenses??? Some of the best DPs of our times have only made the switch to digital after the Alexa came out, and this was even before it shot raw. The RED never convinced them, but the Alexa images they saw up on the screen together with its on set workflow finally did it for them. Don't compare apples to oranges.

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1346460276' post='17052'] This is a damned good point. Certainly worth investigating. Also good to have that backup too. Some SSDs not famed for their total reliability. [/quote] This would be definitely handy, BMD should make sure it is well supported, at least with their own recorder, for timecode syncing purposes etc. Having a set of prores proxies that don't sync to the raw footage would end up being way more time consuming to sync than reenconding all the raw material.

Samyang now sells cine versions of their lenses, with declicked apertures and follow focus gears. Glass quality is exactly the same though, but it is a nice gesture from them to our community. It's a bit of a shame that we can't use 16mm cine lenses with this cinema camera really. Well, we can use 35mm (expensive) EF cine lenses but that kind of defeats the purpose of a $3k camera! One of the reasons film usually looks so good is that a film camera package always comes with proper cine lenses, you don't see anyone shooting 16mm or 35mm with cheap stills lenses, and in this specific aspect the Digital Bolex has a huge advantage, since not only the sensor is 16mm sized, but it will have a more adaptable c-mount (and other mount options later on). At the moment you can still find amazing 16mm lenses on eBay for great prices (lenses that used to cost over 5 grand), it's a shame we can't use them with the BMD camera. I can already imagine some companies offering mount conversion services for the BMD camera for a thousand bucks or more :)

I wonder why you say that... There's plenty of films (at all budgets) that used 17mm and 20mm lenses for most close ups on Super 35mm and they look great. There's even more extreme examples of course, but those were used to achieve a certain look/effect. As you can imagine though, they weren't using Canon still lenses...

Sounds good but still very conservative pricing from Canon. This should be priced to compete with the FS100. The FS700 has a bunch of features that make it very special and extremely good value. Obviously Canon is hoping to bank on the reputation the C300 has been making in picture quality.

That's just silly. When I asked if he'd ever graded C300 footage, I never implied he needed to own one to do so. And I don't own one either. Even using raw in the BMCC won't give you the same low light performance you can get from a C300. Not even film will! That doesn't mean the BMCC is not a great camera and won't be better than the C300 in many other aspects, but don't be blind. C300 footage has nothing to do with Canon DSLR's badly compressed video, its grading possibilities are way better than that, even if it's not raw. Of course it costs 4x more, and personally I'd go with the BMCC, because it's a better deal for my needs and budget, but I'm not going to ignore all its downsides and pretend it's as good as an Alexa and can beat all the other cameras out there. I know there's no way you'll ever give Canon a compliment again, but there's no need to pull a BMCC version of reduser.net here!

Just out of curiosity, have you ever graded C300 footage?

Should I answer that or get back on topic? :)

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1345843370' post='16440'] Hardly a niche. The broadcast and filmmaking industry is huge. I can rent a C300 down the street. Not to mention that there is more margin in the high end stuff. [/quote] "Broadcasting and filmmaking" industry is not the same as the DSLR video shooters. Yes, they might have bought a bunch of them to shoot B roll and place in boxes when shooting explosions, cars, etc, but those guys also have REDs, Alexas, and now C300s to spare. We're not the same as them.

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1345816113' post='16405'] I'm not just listing everyone who bought a Canon at all, in each of those groups there are very knowledgable customers who want the best most sophisticated video tool they can get their hands on, for an important project which will make them money or pass them a university course. [/quote] Of course there are, thousands of them, but they sell millions of cameras! We are a minority. If you were saying the BMC will be a problem to Canon's cinema EOS cameras (C300 and 1DC) than I'd agree with you, but not their DSLRs. Try to find out how many 7D/5D cameras alone Canon has sold so far... if BMD manages to sell even 10% of that it will mean it's a huge success, far beyond their own expectations.

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1345782408' post='16365'] Really, how many people bought a 5D or 7D for video? We're not just talking indie filmmakers here Bruno. - Students - Consumers - Hobbyists - Small studios - Indie filmmakers - Freelance journalists - Corporate filmmakers - Music video directors - Hollywood filmmakers - Even Philip Bloom [/quote] Yeah, but you're listing everyone that bought a Canon, what's the point? More than half of those people wouldn't know what to do with a professional camera and would return it before they even figure out what a raw workflow is. That's not what they want or need either. Those same people probably have no issue with their Canons, in fact a lot of them are just gear lovers and will buy every new model they put out, even if they'll never use any of the new features, you know damn well how many sightseeing tourists who know nothing about filmmaking have better gear than we do. Also, most of the people you mentioned bought these cameras mainly as stills cameras. Don't underestimate the numbers of tourists, people who just had babies, gear enthusiasts and especially plain stills photographers, because they can easily outnumber us by a very large margin, and no matter how cool and better for us the BMC may be, it is not what they will be buying. So no, I don't think it will have a huge direct impact on Canon. If Panasonic and Sony step up their games then yes, you may expect a reaction from Canon, but not from BMD, not at this point.

I'm sure it will. As I said before, the independent filmmakers are a small market for companies like Canon, and this camera is not going to be that disruptive to them, but it is to other companies, and I'm sure there will be a ripple effect that will eventually affect Canon and the big guys too. I keep thinking the next 7D could be great, let's see...

People don't usually edit raw footage, the first thing you do is make some compressed proxies for editing and you forget about the RAW. Once you have your film ready, then you replace it and only post and grade what you actually need. Grading is also about color and light continuity, so doing it before editing is not only overkill but not good practice really. We could do with some tools to make all this process smoother. RED actually have something pretty cool for this. With their R3D raw format footage comes a bunch of different resolution quicktime proxies. These files are actually really light as they don't contain any images, they're just interpreters for the R3D raw footage that will tell Premiere/FCP/whatever to only read ever other line, or every 3rd line, etc in order to get fast playback for editing. This is cool because then you don't need different duplicates of the footage in different resolutions and codecs, all the proxies are actually reading from the source raw material. This obviously makes sure that all different resolution proxies share proper timecodes and will be easy to switch to full resolution for post. Hopefully something similar will eventually come out for the BMC/Digital Bolex footage.

http://nofilmschool.com/2012/08/blackmagic-john-brawley-release-raw-cinema-camera-files-for-download/

Soon enough we'll be able to compare the BMD camera with the Digital Bolex and see what's the advantages you gain in trade for the crappy rolling shutter... When you have still photo cameras with rolling shutter issues I can kind of let it go, they weren't meant for it, but once you start calling it a video camera, or even worse, a cinema camera, than it is just not acceptable. Video cameras from 10 years ago didn't have this problem, let's not start taking it for granted just because still cameras have it!

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1345209369' post='15890'] How many times is rolling shutter really a problem? Not that often in my opinion. John said in the interview that it is no worse than the GH2 and 5D any way. True the sensor probably has a global shutter mode but the image quality won't be as good in that mode - likely much noisier with less dynamic range. Look at the current specs of scientific sensors - global shutter mode always worse. This is why Panasonic haven't brought theirs to the market yet. [/quote] In my handheld style, it's been problem in every single project really. Being no worse than a 5D or a GH2 is not a good thing really, it's one of the basic issues, and I hoped they would get it finally fixed, it's about time someone does!