jgharding

This seems to have very drab colours compared to most Canon in video clips, so this testing is useful in that it proves this is not an illusion! For the price of this you could go and buy a proper video camera 2nd hand. I can't see why you'd get it unless you're primarily a stills guy, weddings and so on. I think it's a sort of last-gasp of their current sensor style. They will HAVE to innovate sooner or later. As soon as Sony fix colour and menu system they're in real trouble. its clear that Canon engage in "perception management" and refuse review stock to people who have an opinion, and I for one like the alternative voice at EOSHD. They can't stop you buying it in a shop so that's what Andrew does, like the rest of us. there's no "Andrew Reid edition slider" here, no banner ads for products that are supposedly impartially reviewed. one doesn't have to agree with everything said in order to appreciate free speech.

With the release of a $6000 1D body that has no peaking, uses an ancient 8-bit codec and has no log, don't expect the lower range 5D body to be whipping those specs... the writing has been on the wall for so long it's faded and someone has graffitied toilet-dicks all over it: Canon has seperated video and stills for the foreseeable future. sad times.

My favorite was the Chinese University ones. That was 15 pages wasn't it?

I'd upgrade to CC and save the transcoding trouble! :0

220x, the x stands for 10, as in 10-bit

Just did another shoot with an Amira and a Scarlet. There's just no competition for Amira/Alexa in overall image. The Amira resolves more with upscaled 4K than the MX sensor does at native. Its noise pattern is fine and has soft colours, while the MX sensor's is blotchy yellow/purpleyblue. The colour and grading latitude are stunning with no need for raw in most circumstances, the hardware and software are rock solid. It's just jaw dropping to use in post. BUT I can't justify the cost to own, so an older Scarlet for £5,000 for the whole kit was more sensible. A decent Amira setup will cost you £35,000. I've not used Dragon sensor yet. An MX sensor still kicks most images, it's just when you put it next to the Arri sensor, it's a jaw dropper. Next shoot though will be two C100s. It's all horses for courses as they say. One always has complaints about an image but it just depends how spoiled you are! Blue Ruin is a great example of how good the C300 is as the whole thing was shot on it, but some of the listed pieces it was an occasional B-cam.

I've used C100 AVCHD native in Premiere for a couple of years with no problems. You don't gain any grading latitude by transcoding to another codec even if it is uncompressed 16-bit or whatever, as the Mercury Engine is moving around in a 32-bit space anyway using acceleration to decode and render. Just be sure to render your final with "render at maximum bit depth" ticked and you'll be good. Transcoding is for when you don't have a native engine or your computer can't handle the playback so need to make it iFrame. I've A/B tested it with Premiere and unsurprisingly, there was no difference. Most of the ones where there's difference are people not ticking the right boxes on export. That's my experience!

As well as the aforementioned comically giant 8-bit files, every film I've watched so far seems to have clipped flat highlight areas knocking around. It's not the end of the world but it's not that nice when even cheap cameras come with log now. What's the excuse? It costs 4 grand! Sony give you log in a pocket compact. Why make you use an ancient 800mbit codec at 8-bit with no log? Because this doesn't have a "C" on it, so you aren't allowed nice things. I do start to cringe when the "well it doesn't need it" defensive arguments come out, it reminds me of Mac fanboys who tried to defend the Mac laptop with only one USB slot that doubled as charger. "Well... I DONT NEED IT! I LIKE NOT HAVING IT! ITS A GOOD THING" Yes you do, no you don't and no it's not. You're trying to feel better about being stiffed there's no prizes for It. And also it has no peaking right, or so I hear?! and I suppose no one needs that either? So a 550D with magic lantern still has a bunch more video features than this?! I'm a canon fan, I have three video cams of theirs. But I'm not a fanboy, and won't cuck it up and pretend that cheaping out on features is somehow generous. It's not, they've really held back on video here quite obviously because it's not C series. maybe if you're a still+video guy this is a good option. Weddings etc. Shoot stills, roll baked-in 8-bit video. But It all seems a bit ropey for video only use. I can see no reason to drop that kinda cash on it TBH and in hiring terms the C300 mk ii has it beat. still, each to their own. It's not a bad camera obviously, but as far as I can see it's just more proof that they're determined to separate stills and video.

Well put! Yes they do it very well in real life, as opposed to brilliant on the spec sheet and poor in practice.

LOL! Straight in there with latest meme! Nice one! It's the new Hitler Downfall! I love that it's an argument about Krautrock.

I don't have the DAF upgrade on either C100 body, so I have no STM lenses. I don't think I'll look into it at this stage really, I'll probably wait til C100 MKiii if it ever arrives with 4k. I use the Sigma 18-35 1.8 and the 24-105L f4 mainly. The latter is not by any means spectacular, but it's a sort of "camcorder" workhorse with the IS. That's what puts me off this one a little too: lack of stabilisation. I have a bunch of nice Contax primes and so on but they only come out for the big projects to reduce general wear and tear on them, and because using primes is very slow in comparison. What you talk about there is the secret to Canon success: doing all of it well enough. The package is just very usable. You can rescue the AVCHD from much worse mistakes than you'd think too!

On one shoot I was using a C100 with a Ninja 2 and DNxHD 220x and it dropped one shot, meaning i had to use the AVCHD backup shot from the C100 internal recording. Even with some heavy grading, you couldn't spot the AVCHD in amongst the Ninja 2 shots. It was a still shot, but there was smoke. It's the best AVCHD implimentation there is, a great piece of work. An external recorder is better, but the AVCHD is still very, very good.

800mbps Sorry, I just feel that needed shouting! That's incredibly inefficient! MJPEG is not the smartest way to be encoding 4k. It must be becuase they're using passive cooling and the same ol' processor, but that's gonna hog your hard disks. With Redcode raw at 50fps 10:1 it's about 800mbps at an estimate or so but you get 16-bit raw, not 8-bit baked-in. Then again the media are like 5 times the price. LOL. and I suppose it's not fair to compare to Redcode since no-one else has made such a codec. but it makes you think. there's a quality about cinema glass that's hard to pin down. I think it's the old adage of the last 10% of the work being 90% of the result, or something equally business cheese speak. I feel a lot of it simply has to do with the sheers surface area of the glass too, same with microphones, a large diaphragm sound just can't physically emulate a small-diaphragm sound because of what physically happens with the latter. It seems you can't really ape the look of a massive lens with a small one, because it ain't drinking the same amount of light. I feel I may have gone a bit hippy ther, but perhaps you get me?

Sounds like you use the same main kit as me C100, 18-35 1.8, and an XC10. Can't complain at all! As such I'll have a look at this lens, since on a two-cam interview that's both your angles covered.

I use PF25. DR is the same in all modes as far as I can see, but your shutter speed may be altering when you switch, changing exposure and giving an illusion of altered DR. If shooting PF25, be sure to interpret the footage in your DAW as progressive (remove field order) or you'll halve your vetical resolution

They're in the sin bin for me! I bought an RX10 ii, hated using it (thumbs in knots) disliked the image and by the time I went to sell it on it had lost 35% of its value in a few months and they'd announced the sequel. i can't throw money at that kind of depreciation, so they'll only be 2nd hand purchases from now on! If they're purchased at all that is. good luck to em though, great innovation.... Just need to sort the colour and menus and not try and squeeze people for an upgrade every 8 months

I think resolve relies on GPU for playback, so you may struggle with an Intel GPU. I'm not a Resolve user at the moment though, download the free version and try it!

1m is a long min focus... I'd be tempoted to go with a 100mm macro and a 50mm 1.4 instead! Quite a vintage milky look there in the bokeh too, not totally smooth but not crazy vintage jitters. a strange one by the looks of it... not quite the essential lens-bag winner that is the 18-35 1.8, but still unique. But hey, I've not used it

To speed up file reading use USB3 or thunderbolt ssd maybe... I doubt that's your bottleneck unless you're running very big file sizes. If you want high spec for a low price try a Windows tower with a good Geforce GPU and Adobe suite. If you want to stay in FCP-X you'll need to upgrade your mac at some point. I can't help much more because I moved away from Mac for this reason, perhaps others can give some more advice. I think FCP-X is very nice so I can understand the desire to stay Mac. Hate to break it to you though, but the sad reality of Apple is that you gotta buy a new one to stay in the race. They have a vested interest in selling new computers. You can't just swap out parts and stay on top like you can with a PC tower :/ I hope you find a solution!

High end alienware laptops have 4k touchscreens and geforce 980 gpus for best of both worlds. tablets aren't really there yet. Plus you can upgrade the storage and get 3tb of ssd in there, more in the future, and 32gb RAM and you can add an external GPU for more power. Gaming and video editing have a lot in common computer wise.

this obsession with 8-bit will be the death of them... MARKEST MINE WORDSES

There is another thing they'll definitely listen to... not buying it! If it's not fit for purpose don't purchase it, all companies listen to sales stats. I'm not beeing a superdick, that's what I do if the product is clearly missing a key feature, I'll let them know that's why I didn't give them money and went to a competitor.

When I think warehouse I think of those greenish fluro tubes or old-school sodium vapour lamps. When I think interrogation i think bright white blasted at face or into lens. I'd start with the atmosphere you want to create and the feel you want it to have and work from there. Also talk to your hire house, they'll be happy to meet with you and discuss options if you want to go through a scene and don't have the current knowledge to know off hand what to do. They want your custom, they'll help you to give it to them. The more they help and the more experienced you become the more likely you are to become a loyal customer. Also think about if your practicals will be useful, sometimes they are lifesavers, sometimes useless.

LEL x∞ m9!!!!1 do not WAAAAAAAAAAAAAANT

It's difficult to talk about budgets abstractly without the real-life client context, as these are so variable. But if you're interested in building a cost relatong to hire rates, there's nothing to stop you making enquieries of specialist 360 shooters/post-persons about a theoretical production.