voyagervideo

I gotta say, I'm not sure if it's the Log emulation or Andrew's LUTs (probably the latter) but it really looks like the net effect here is converting Canon color to something that looks more Sony-ish: low-contrast & desaturated (because you can't make the 8-bit flat colors 'pop', and odd brick-color skintones (def the lut).

Looks good

Downloaded and installed on my 6D... The image definitely LOOKS like C-log out of the camera, the issue is grading it. I haven't been able to get the flat image to 'pop', even with the luts. Not anything like grading true C-log from C100 or 1DC. I wasn't expecting much given the low bitrate 420 and how shit the video quality in this camera is, but have been considering the 5D IV... Question is: given the 5D will use the same compression as 1 DC - have you been able to grade the EOSHD CLog as easily out of the 1DC as with the actual Canon C-log, is the same amount of DR present?

Hi guys, just thought I would throw this out there because a lot of press releases claimed the FZ1000 does 240fps in 720p and 360fps in 480p. It does not. Some pre-release cameras even had this function, but Panasonic seems to have scrapped it at the last minute. Anyone know about this and why it was removed?

If the G6 can be hack it would likely be superior to the GH2 hacked.  The footage I've seen from the D5200 looks fantastic but it is hampered by the bitrate, codec, and video-centric options in comparison to the GH2.  GH2 remains the best value, I'd say the GH3 edges out all of them in terms of recording options (various codecs, bitrates, and 1080 60p), dynamic range, ergonomics, and video functions.

Did you post the wrong link? I cant find the images...

Ummm your link is not in American.

Yeah or unless you don't want to have to buy a ton of (relatively) expensive sub-35mm lenses for the BMPCC to cover your focal lengths. The difference between a 12mm and 17,5mm is HUGE on the BMPCC, whereas it's not much on a GH3 and basically nothing on Super35. I guess I am just apprehensive about investing in lenses for Super16 when the way things are going there could be a Super35 option at the same price point right around the corner. Damn technology - why does it have to move so fast??

Yes well how the lens performed in this test video is a major reason why I am considering it :) Given the lens is electronic is it possible the focus throw could be made longer via a firmware update?

Thanks for the input, can you expand a little bit on why you wouldn't recommend and why the focus and aperture is a pain? will distortion be that much of an issue given the bmpcc sensor size? also can you comment on image quality in terms of pulling off cinematic shots?

Have been seriously considering this lens for my GH3 and (eventually) the BMPCC - though I can't seem to find any non-nature/event footage to get an idea of how it performs when shooting narrative work... The focus-by-wire and electronic aperture will be a pain for video shooting also... But the 12-35 range is really appealing (esp for the BMPCC). Anyone have any experience with this lens beyond test videos and home movies? Is it possible to create cinematic images with it under the right conditions, or are primes the only way to go? And if so, what would be an ideal prime lens set for the BMPCC (regarding focal length, not brand/model)?

A 25mm & 35mm, modified by Duclos with Cine lens features.  Nikon mount.  Also selling Tokina 11-16.   http://www.ebay.com/sch/voyagervideo/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_from=&_ipg=&_trksid=p3686    

@jasonmillard81   It's absurd to spend money on a 6D unless you're equally interested in photography.  Even the GH3 is a bit overpriced for what it is.  The Blackmagic Cameras are likely to exceed any camera up to double (or quadruple in the case of the Pocket Cam) of their price when it comes to video quality, bitrate, ability to manipulate in post, etc.  This isn't an endorsement of Blackmagic, but to illustrate how quickly technology is moving.  Now is not the time to spend $2k on a DSLR body (unless you want to do photography as well), a year from now the same money will buy you many times the quality.  As for the "Canon look"... if you're only planning on making quirky indie movies then go for it, but you can grade any footage to get it close enough, and the audience isn't going to notice the difference or care.  Spend your money on future proof glass, lighting, sound, etc.   To make a long story short, keep shooting on whatever you've got, let the dust settle, because the lifespan of digital cameras is getting shorter and shorter, and you'll be lucky to resell a camera bought today for half the price you paid.  In a very short period of time, RAW 4k cameras with Super 35 sensors will be cheaper than any camera you're considering right now.

  Too bad, in the end it just ends up costing everyone involved more money.  I could tell my clients I'm shooting on an Alexa and they wouldn't know the difference.  It all looks pretty much the same on TV anyway if you know what you're doing.  It's unfortunate more clients don't get that.

  Over the Mark III?  Do your clients really care?  Or are you saying if you didn't need a big dedicated videocamera to impress your clients you would just use a GH3?

The cinematic look is achieved more via lighting, lenses, production value and in post via grading.  I don't think either camera has a more "cinematic" look out of the box.  The GH3 is sharper, the advantage there is you can always tone it down in post.  You can't make Mark III footage sharper than it was shot.  If you want the full frame look go with the Mark III, I believe both camera's sensors are roughly equi-distant in size to industry standard Super 35 (1.5x crop).   When it comes to grading, the Mark III beats the GH3 slightly in terms of dynamic range.  Both have 8-bit codecs (even "uncompressed") so your ability to grade is fairly restricted in either case.   As far as the Mark III's uncompressed HDMI that is starting to emerge, it's just firmware, the camera is simply being "unlocked".  I imagine Panasonic will do the same with the GH3 as the Blackmagic cameras become more available.  Even then though, expect to pay another one or two grand for a good uncompressed recorder.  For the price of a Mark III body, you can buy a GH3 and some great glass, it's kind of a no-brainer.   I love my GH3, but if I had the money to consider a Mark III, I would go with a Blackmagic, haha.  Even the pocket cam will probably beat both in terms of image quality, dynamic range, cinematic look.  Of course it's a smaller sensor than either, and if you're interest is also in photography, go with the Mark III.

  The best solution is to buy the $50 ($80 if you buy it separately) proprietary lens hood, but a $5 55-77mm step up makes the same difference for all intents and purposes, you just have to be mindful of the fact that the lens hood is not fixed in place.

  That is if you are using the 49mm filter thread, the lens hood itself has a filter thread as well and it's 55mm.  If you can deal with the fact that it rotates then it's a much cheaper solution to attach filters to the lens hood (my 55mm to 77mm cost $5).  Of course this can be a little tricky with gradual ND filters, but as long as you keep the lens hood extended, there will be no problem with focusing to infinity.  And ofcourse I wouldn't put a clamp-on matte box on the lens hood.

Have to say, I recieved the 25mm last week and it's great.  No issues with aperture ring (so far!).   One tip:  they want to charge you $50-$80 for the step up ring, the built-in lens hood has a 55mm thread, get a $5 step up ring for that to attach filters.  Wouldn't put a clamp-on matte box on it, but it works fine for round filters.

The 17.5mm will be around 35mm on GH2 and a bit over 50 on the Pocket - seems like a good investment.  Don't forget though, when thinking of crop factor - a lens is a lens.  A 50mm "equivalent" on a GH2 (25mm) will not look quite the same as a 50mm on a full frame.  A wide angle lens cropped to normal lens size will still have wide-angle characteristics.  I imagine this discrepancy will be more apparent on the Pocket.  Someone correct me if I am wrong.

Great article/review! Another thing to add to the cons list (unless you've found a way around this?): the info on the display disappears after 10 seconds, you have to keep pushing the button and there's no way to keep it on permanantly and it's terrible for trying to maintain exposure/watch histogram.