QuickHitRecord

I have committed to shooting raw with the 5D3 and invested in this system. If I can't make something good with this camera, then I can't make something good with any camera. I agree that color grading is what sets people's work apart and my choice is also an investment in myself to take the time to learn how to grade properly. The full-frame sensor of the 5D3 turns almost any cheap lens that I use with it into a virtual Voigtlander Nokton in terms of light transmission and shallow DOF. If I want the look, it's there without much additional cost, and that has a lot of value to me. There are irritating things about the shooting raw on narrative projects with the 5D3. I have been systematically attacking them to make this a more usable camera. Here are the major ones, and how I am dealing with them: CF cards. I bought a Komputerbay 1066x 256GB card. It hit my wallet, but this way I can get 48 minutes of raw 1080P, and this is plenty for me. No corrupted frames so far. I don't even think about it anymore. Batteries. I have a handful of Canon LP-E6s. They are so-so in terms of battery life. For shooting with a larger rig or tripod, I bought one of these to power both my camera and my SmallHD monitor simultaneously: http://www.ebay.com/itm/161336168920 Lack of flip-out LCD or viewfinder. Shooting with a loupe (in my case a Kinotehnik LCDVF) and a pistol grip is freeing, comfortable, and very battery-friendly. There are also solutions like this:http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=937481&gclid=CPeksIHL2b8CFVFp7AodEAsAdg&is=REG&Q=&A=details Workflow. RawMagic 1.21 is a breeze to work with. It removes vertical stripes automatically, joins spanned files and syncs audio, and it does it FAST. Thomas Worth is always improving it, so there have been frequent updates in recent months. Storage space. I'm still working on this one. I am experimenting with CineLog in Resolve to replicate Alexa Log-C as closely as possible, and then exporting the files as ProResHQ for the edit. If this works like I think it will, I won't have to hang on to the raw files anymore. In closing, I believe in Magic Lantern. If you look at the changelog for any of the nightly builds, you'll see that they are always hard at work trying to perfect their software. There are improvements on a daily basis. No one knows what tomorrow's build will bring.

For smaller sensors, I'd go with the Olympus Zuiko 35-70mm f3.6. The 55mm front ring does not rotate, and it is parfocal (which is why I bought it). The only downside that I can see is that it extends when focusing OR zooming, so it's best used with 8mm or small 16mm anamorphics only.

Thanks for the write up and the video. I was surprised to see the A7s's color moire on the factory at the 4:00 mark. It is the first time I have seen moire in any A7s footage. Personally, I think that the A7s is a huge step in the right direction. But I think that I'm going to stick with the 5Diii with ML raw for now. I'm getting good results using the ETTR Hint in the raw histogram at ISOs I wouldn't touch before, and the camera is forcing me to learn how to grade the right way.

Here's another wonderfully done no-budget short that hasn't gotten nearly enough views:

Reinforcing Ed's discovery, here's another Full Frame VS APS-C example:

Wow, that APS-C crop does make a big difference to the rolling shutter on this camera. Great discovery! Now that you've had it for a few days, how are you liking your A7s?

Great video. But the rolling shutter on this camera makes expensive IS glass a must if you are expecting go handheld. To further illustrate the point, here's a handheld clip shot on a manual 70mm lens (not by me):

I had one. At $2,500, it's a great deal for corporate and documentary work. I had no complaints there whatsoever. Coming from the 5Dii, it will definitely make your life a lot easier. But for narrative work... there's just something off about the way that the camera captures motion that doesn't feel quite right to me (I know, I've said this before).

Here's Steve Huff's review: http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2014/07/01/the-sony-a7s-digital-camera-review-wow-period/ I'm still waiting on a legitimate video capability review, preferably one that's not focused on shooting in pitch black conditions.

http://www.eoshd.com/anamorphic-guide

Thanks for sharing your observations thus far. Do you think that you could you could post a lens cap ISO test comparison between the two cameras?

The new RawMagic automatically merges all spanned .R00 files and incorporates vertical stripe correction as it churns out CinemaDNG files, which are automatically linked to their corresponding WAV audio files when opened in Resolve. And now with Resolve 11, you can do your entire edit with your raw CinemaDNGs and then go directly to grading, no proxies necessary. Convert files, then edit, then grade -- this is about five fewer steps than it was a few months ago!

With the release of RawMagic 1.1.2 and Davinci Resolve 11 (Beta), the process of shooting, converting, editing and grading raw footage has become much, much simpler. Anyone speculating that the ML raw workflow is difficult needs to take a look at the two apps above.

Are you are talking about the latest paid version of RawMagic (1.1.2)? If so, make sure NOT to check the "16 bit CinemaDNG Output" box. I hear that people have been experience the issue that you are describing when they do.

For 2x anamorphics, I still say that it's the 5Diii with ML raw. The 4:3 acquisition means that you can get by without a monitor if you need to (which you can anyway with 1.5x anamorphics).

I'm using a build from February, and it has a module called 'MLV_PLAY' that allows me to review shots, though not quite in real time. Not sure if this has progressed since then. I haven't upgraded though because everything has been working perfectly.

Very nice. Your daughter is growing up and maybe getting a little shy about being on camera!

It does look good, from everything I have seen. I think that the C100 is a winner here as well. And maybe you're onto something with the intra-frame argument, because I think that the stuff I've seen from the Magic Lantern raw cams looks pretty good as well. I don't have the tests on my computer anymore, but I was clearly able to see the difference between the way that these cameras recorded motion when I owned both bodies. I did have them set up together at points, recording the same subject with the same contrast. The only thing I may not have been able to match exactly was that the FS100 could record at true 1/48 shutter, while the GH2 was set to 1/50. But the GH2 was the one that looked way better to my eye. The clips that I have posted above reflect what I was seeing with these cameras. I see a difference!

If you watch the examples above, are you able to see the difference? It's easiest to see when there are people in motion on screen, at least for me. I'm not entirely convinced that anyone and everyone is capable of seeing it, just like some people can see more colors than others, and some projectors give certain people headaches. And it's equally tricky to define, but I'll try. It's how a camera captures motion, which I believe pertains to the amount and characteristics of frame-by-frame motion blur (i.e. shape of blur, opacity of blur, etc.). But I suspect that it might be something on top of that as well.

I'll go first. I bought and then sold my FS100 because I thought that the cadence looked all wrong to me. Here's an example (not shot by me), which in all other respects looks good to me: On the other hand, I think that the hacked GH2 has great motion cadence:

Like color science, cadence/motion can differ greatly from camera to camera. It's harder to spot and consequently it's not frequently discussed. But some cameras have 24P that looks an awful lot like 30P. So, strictly focusing on c​adence, which cameras look good to you, and which don't? Please post examples.

I think that the music stands on its own. They just take more risks with their videos than most bands.