nickname

[quote name='Bruno' timestamp='1347733004' post='18149'] It costs 1/3 of the price, probably even less considering all you have to buy to be able to use the BMCC properly, that alone is a huge reason. Stills and 1080/60p are another couple great reasons. Do you have any doubts that Panasonic will sell thousands more GH3 cameras than Black Magic Design? [/quote] no doubts, no illusions! unfortunately.

[quote name='Simco123' timestamp='1347731358' post='18145'] Of course this one is sexist too. Half naked man sprawling over the bed and then getting on his knees. Not exactly gender neutral PC clap trap in either samples. [/quote] if this wasn´t sad it would be funny. or am i not getting your irony? am i reading homophobia as well as chauvinist revisionism?

at least it´s not sexist as the bmcc shots. but doesn´t make it the better camera unfortunately. still looks videoy and over sharpened. and this from the "cinematic" guy... also i don´t get why anyone wants a dslr after the bmcc is out.

for me it´s too close to my s95 and too far from g1x. i especially don´t like the rendering of the out of focus areas in the dpr samples. they look strangely muddy. maybe the jpeg engine trying to sharpen blurred detail? it actually looks dreadful. but a very impressive little thing none the less.

and another one: [img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/inline/20582/503d479a33558_rx100raw1600.jpg[/img]

here´s from dpr. try guess which is the rx100. i was beeing fair and chose raw iso 100. (every camera looks good at iso 100...) guesses please, i swear i won´t cheat in the reveal! [img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/inline/20582/503d469a7fc6a_rx100raw100.jpg[/img]

i hope with the bmcc we don´t need the gh3/7d/60d/5d/d700/d800/a77/a99 anymore for video.

wow, you seriously pissed off some people. your site is great entertainment!

working with red raw i usually used this workflow: preliminary grade in red cine - maybe ae for bmcc export prores proxies with grade from red rushes - maybe ae for bmcc edit prores rushes in nle of choice export edl import edl in resolve (i guess, haven´t touched reslove yet) (xml to color for red) reconnect to dng files actual grade it can get annoying when you get a lot of changes in the edit after grading, going back and forth from nle to grading tool, but it´s also usually unpractical to edit on the full resolution full quality files. grading in photoshop doesn´t seem practical to me since you need to see the clips in context, be able to store stills, compare, have power windows, secondarys, etc.

i just hope some sub s35 size sensor standard will be established at some point so it makes sense to build cine grade lenses for it with high contrast and no breathing. i´m tired of shooting "cinema" with photo lenses. every time an actor walks across the room my image zooms. i hate it. maybe we can wake up from that bad dream too. i mean i love my nikkors but they pale against even zeiss HS. will we see a scarlet with 1´ 3k sensor for 3k? will we see a set of zeiss digital16 primes?

i love how the fullframe look is so last season and deep focus is the shit now. what will we do if sony actually brings out the a99 with amazing video? will it be the fullframe look again??? what shall i tell the kids? but i´m happy the dslr community woke up from the h264 nightmare. we just have to tell the clients about this and if we´re lucky we don´t have to shoot on 5ds any more!

great trolling jcs! really impressed. bringing out the devil to take down the new christ! incredible feat on this blog! look at all the answers you got! you´re the man! but seriously there is no point to compare this to any dslr. it has a different look and feel and tells a different story. it´s a convincing image. i look at it and don´t think ugh what´s with the highlights, what´s up with the shadows? it´s beautifully uncompressed, it´s everything the 5dmk2+3 are not.

[quote name='bwhitz' timestamp='1345600596' post='16176'] Why? The sensors in the up-coming Sony DSLRs are already leagues ahead of the F3. Photo-tech just has quicker development cycles. Any new Sony DSLR with video mode, assuming they don't intentionaly cripple it, will most likley have better performance than the F3. It's just how technology goes. I think Sony is actually wising up to that fact that people aren't all dumb enough to pay the outrageous prices, for something like an F3, when it's obvious that the same techology in a camera can be had for under $3000. They MAY be ahead of the curve on this. Nikon is trying and making commendable efforts... and Canon is about 5 years behind the curve and out thier damn minds. [/quote] well, why does the f3 then look so much better than the sub $3000 7d and gh2 in the latest zacuto shootout? i still think that a dedicated video sensor will produce better results as a stills/video hybrid. and i think sony knows that they will not sell enough a99s to offset losing higher end camera business if it really produced better video. i´m afraid that canons business model will prove right in the end. low quality for the consumers, high quality for the ones who are willing to pay for it. the 5dmkii, which started all this, was an accident they will no let happen again. the consumers don´t have a choice, they will buy what´s around. only the enthusiasts are left out in the rain. i have been waiting for real advances in image quality in photo sensors the last 5 years. all i´ve seen is an increase in resolution and low light performance, which i´m not really interested in, but only a marginal better dynamic range which is for me the showstopper for digital mediums. i am actually very frustrated with this development. if i had the money i would get a 16bit medium format back which at the moment produces the only digital images i can accept visually. but i don´t so i have to sit it out another 10 years i´m afraid. the last sony sensors are nice for sure (d7000, d800) the nicest yet produced in the prosumer price range, but they still don´t make me happy.

hmmm, i´m not sure if s35 will be abandoned for cine style cameras. after all it´s cinema we´re after and not dslr look. nobody in hollywood can really use the breathing of a photographic lens even on a ff sensor. they will not want to shoot on anything less than cooke and zeiss. also 4k should look good on s35 since it basically means a 12mp sensor, which should make for pretty good low light performance. i don´t think a FF video camera with s35 crop mode makes a lot of sense either. maybe for prosumer, but which prosumer has pl glass. and why waste all this sensor space. why pay for a ff sensor if you only plan to use the crop mode for your hogh grade lenses? a crop mode only makes sense in a photo camera where you typically use the full frame, but have the crop mode for range extension without post in pp. and i don´t expect any real advance in image quality from sony to be cheaper than the f3 is today. the a99 will be a photo camera first and foremost and i think it´s unlikely they turn it into a VG99. they are still the company which charged insane amounts of money for their HDCAM format just because they could and before that for beta and digibeta. it´s really funny that you are surprised that there´s so many sony news on a blog you write yourself.

i also check this blog every day because i´m bored and addicted to camera p+rn, but i´m not gonna get excited about this one. if they have all that video technology up their sleeve, why didn´t they use it on the a77 already? just had an a77 in hand. it´s a plastic toy. hate the electronic viewfinder. much prefer fuji hybrid one. a99 will be a consumer product with consumer features. will be fun to quote you all after the disappointing announcement of the actual a99 specs.

[quote name='Bruno' timestamp='1343452192' post='14672'] That's not how it works, you don't multiply the aperture by the crop factor, the f stop is the same regardless of the sensor size, smaller sensors don't make lenses slower! [/quote] the calculation is correct. obviously it´s not slower, but has wider dof. f2.8 correspond to roughly f5.6 at a ff body. more interesting though is the comparison to s35 where the difference is not that big. 11mm 2.8 on the bcc correspond to 17.4mm 3.2 at s35. the same field of view on the bcc will have half a stop deeper focus at a given f-stop compared to s35. according to this (nikon 1 sensor): [url="http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html"]http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html[/url]

[quote name='Bruno' timestamp='1343401246' post='14628'] The sensor is not that much smaller than s35/APS-C, i haven't done the math, but to get the same as an s35-18mm on this camera you probably need a 14mm or so. A Tokina 11-16 should be quite handy with this camera. [/quote] 18mm on s35 seems to be 11.5mm at bcc. sensor is a little smaller than 4/3. http://www.abelcine.com/fov/

[quote name='Ivor Koons' timestamp='1343385635' post='14608'] It looks very clean, but I am missing something that the name Cinema Camera promises - a cinematic feel. The DOF is too big, even the GH1 and GH2 deliver a better image in terms of a 3D impression. The colors look a bit washed-out, too. The cheap-looking, commercial-like setting might add to that. I can't get rid of the impression that the scenes have been worked on to look as filmic as can be, but this approach somehow isn't successful. I'm looking forward to seeing some less plasticky stuff. From what I've seen till now, the GH series, if handled well, seems to win over the BCC. But that is hopefully going to change. [/quote] but it doesn´t at all look as desperately "i want to be cinema" than this gh2 clip from musgo last week. bmc actually looks very good and could be the end of hdslr filmmaking. hopefully. shallow depth of field is only a byproduct of the s35 frame. the extensive use of it came about with video trying to look like film since it couldn´t reproduce the color or dr. before dops and directors were rather trying to get more light on their scene for deeper focus. documentary filmmakers always preferred 16mm. they could shoot pretty wide open but still have more in focus than a pair of ears. the shallow dof "cinema" look was invented to sell inferior video products and make vimeo clips look nice. and beauty shooters like philipp bloom love it, makes their job so much easier making everything look like a pack shot from a tv ad. i so hope the bmc is good! looks very promising. soft, nice dr, ok colors. only wideangles will be a real problem. the equivalent of an 18mm on s35 is what? 8mm? i´d love to use my bolex mount 12.5-100 f2 kern vario-switar on this. [b] [/b]

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1343049912' post='14357'] Is the G1X pocketable like the S100? Last time I checked, it wasn't. EOS M could have been an enthusiast's wet dream, instead it is a dumbed down T4i for your mum! She'd be far better off with an RX100 anyway. [/quote] but it´s not far from the rx100 last time i checked. i´m more disappointed with the nikon 1 system than the canon eos-m and i am a nikonian. i think eos-m is a step in the right direction combining portability and image quality. i don´t think that the 1 inch sensors will cut it in the end. i´m not after a 16mm image, i´d like s35mm if possible. i´m quite sure they will come up with an enthusiasts body as well. they would be crazy not to. but in the end you´re right, mirrorless aps-c is enthusiasts territory. my traveling aunt loves her bridge camera. she couldn´t see the quality difference anyway. but keep my mum out of this!

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1343003580' post='14326'] Wrong! Where the hell are you getting the 30% thing from? Also please do name a compact with a bigger sensor... I'll give you all night to think about it. Bye! [/quote] good morning! well ok, 30% was an exaggeration, sorry about that. it has double the sensor diagonal. but still it sits right in the middle between the g12 for example and m43, so i think it´s misleading to call it large sensor. it will not have large sensor (i.e. aps-c, m43) image characteristics in many respects. compact with a large sensor? canon g1x.

andrew, the sony rx100 is not a large sensor compact. its sensor is only about 30% bigger than an s100 sensor. and it does not in any way deliver dslr like quality. dr, colors, sharpness, dof are completely in small sensor territory. even at base iso it looks soft. your test video looks exactly like what it is, an enthusiast point and shoot. i can see nothing game changing about it. it is a j1 with a fixed zoom lens and a sony badge. any m43 sensor beats this in every image parameter except high iso noise. also your wish for a compact camera with dslr image quality will not come true. you should know that this is impossible. concerning your rant about the eos-m, what do you want canon to do? make you a gh3? will not happen. they are not willing to give up their slr legacy and why should they? there is a good reason to not abandon the prism and the mirror for photography. there is nothing more immediate than looking at your scene or subject just through some glass and not to look at a video representation of it, no matter how high resolved it might be. you will not be looking at the thing itself but at a representation of it. but this representation you should first create in your head, then make an image out of it by capturing it. in the prism box there is no delay, no ghosting, no color shift, no shutter effect, it is just light through an optical system. an unbeatable advantage. i hope that the mirrorless systems stay for a long time what they are now, consumer products. and i hope that for a long time professional photographic products will have a prism and a mirror to divert the light from the lens to my eye. in addition it would be unfair to deny canon the right to also make consumer products like panasonic, olympus and sony. canon is in no obligation to you or anyone to give you a 1DX in a s100 body for 50 dollars. they would be out of business very soon and you couldn´t even complain about them any more. and since the nex system is so successful why shouldn´t canon make one too, they even already have lenses for it unlike sony. i think the eos-m system is promising. it will never be as pocketable as the rx100 because its sensor is aps-c. you can not seriously hold this against it if you want dslr image quality. nex with 18-55 is not a small camera either. by the way, in your photo the canon pancake looks smaller than the nikon e 50. and the nikon e series is notorious for softness and low resolution. i would never buy one again. canons aps-c sensor they used in the 7d and downwards is very good in photographic terms. i think it is pretty amazing that with the 600d you can produce the same quality for half your money. that is actually quite a democratic move. most of the cameras you review are first and foremost photographic equipment. if you want to shoot high quality video get a dedicated video camera. small or large sensor. they exist. you own some obviously. and don´t tell me now: but the gh2! resolution doesn´t make over sharpened, over saturated and low dr go away.

a sad affair. this test is revealing mostly the visual education of the viewing public, which obviously are soap operas. that is exactly the plastic look with exaggerated colors (quote from andrews blind viewing!) the gh2 is capable of (and all the others as well!). i´m sorry for the angry tone. but as a professional image maker i have been following the discussion over the last years and i am fed up with the hailing of this digital product over that. film or photography. we have to wake up! it still all looks like cr*p! they are just taking our money until they please to produce something that you can actually look at without thinking: damn that looks digital! unfortunately i was educated visually in the pre-digital era. to my eyes all these cameras look like sh*t no matter how expensive or industry changing they are. i can´t forgive the industry that it´s letting film die for financial and marketing reasons. what do i need resolution for when i´m only getting cartoon colors? 8bit, 10bit, 12bit, it all will allways look like video, there are just not enough shades of color captured to give a realistic three-dimensional image. if you compare the film shot hbo series rome (2005) and the alexa game of thrones you can see how big the loss of image quality is. compared to the differentiated tones and pleasant roll-off in the lights and shadows of rome, game of thrones looks like a computer game. an analogy that i don´t mean flattering. none of these cameras can compete with film in color and contrast. not anyway near. it is so clear to me why they didn´t include kodak50D or 250D in the shootout. it would be totally obvious that the digital revolution is a very sad affair and a big step back in image quality. it´s only purpose is to transfer our money to zacuto, panasonic, canon, sony, whatever for a new technology that tries so hard to emulate film. a properly lit film set would have blown away all these cameras. regards, h