Tim Naylor

Enough already with the slagging off on Roger Deakins. It's an embarrassing level of arrogance and ignorance. It's like saying as a painter you can't learn anything from Michaelangelo because he had all the Pope's resources at hand. If you think what makes him great are resources unattainable to you I suggest truly study how he does things. Composition, direction/shape of light, blocking are all tools he understands at a high level that are also available to the amateur. And he has the good grace to share much of his trade with you on his site for free. But regarding his choice for mirrored shutter, I completely understand as quite often, the level of detail he needs (he is shooting for 20-40 foot screens), just isn't present on an EVF. I shoot with Alexa's quite often and though it has the best EVF in the business, it's still doesn't render the detail you need to see for big screen shooting. Now consider Deakins operates as well, running back to monitor isn't always practical. That said, when it comes to a small camera like the A7s, I'm quite happy it's mirror less. It keeps the size way down. I also shoot a lot of stills with it, and the silent shutter has allowed me to get shots that I can't with the noise of a mirrored shutter. However, when I'm shooting more involved video work, I always use an onboard monitor because I find both its LCD and EVF insufficient for pulling / maintaining focus.

I sold my 5D3 to help finance my A7s. But I use the A7s primarily for video. So autofocus means nothing to me. The low light is indispensable. If you do doc or wedding, it's nice to be able to discreetly get candid footage without lights. That said, I think the color profile on the C100 is better and also the A7s rolling shutter is dreadful - perhaps the worst of the worst. Be prepared to do some post fixing. I use the A7s with clients but for specialty use (low light) only. They all love it. A C100 IMO is overall a better doc camera with the built in ND's, audio, no rolling shutter and deeper color profile. Throw an Atomos blade on it and you're outshooting a C300 in terms of codec. It's no slouch in low light as well. If you're already invested in EF glass, for your biz model, I'd upgrade the C100 with Atomos and keep the 5d3 around for stills. Then wait for the F7s to land.....

Wish I saw this a few hundred dollars ago. I ordered a Viltrox and it had way too much play and returned it. Kept the metabones. How is the amount of play on this one?

I know it's more money but I'm compelled to get both. There are times you need a tighter shot and regular metabones at APSC will get you that. Yeah it sucks to shell out more cash but I see no other way around. The other solution maybe to use rolling shutter fixes in premier. They actually work.

Software aside, I 'm surprised how little is mentioned about Axiom's hardware. That to me is the weakest link. A slow chip, no EVF, HDMI outs, no internal ND, no smart Canon adaptor, no record module, etc. All the software in the world won't fix this.

Actually, you implied the pocket has a better image. As someone who has used both, it doesn't. But it has its uses nonetheless. I think you may have misread my post (or I expressed my self wrongly). Also, I don't think I suggested "for a moment" the BMC 4k compares to the F55. I was pointing out how the A7s performed wonderfully alongside the F55 on a recent job. Misunderstandings aside, I totally agree with you that by the time Axiom is rolling it'll be dated. What I'd really like to see from any camera maker is a Full Frame, well priced, proper video camera, let's say a full frame Sony F7 with a crop option.

For all these reasons and more, I'll pass on the Axiom. But because someone vetted, guaranteed and extensively tested the software for Sony, I took an A7s on commercial campaign and it was an absolute hero. Less than a week after I took delivery. It may have embarrassed the F55 we had in some respects. A hobbyist with loads of free time and money will toy with the Axiom. Unfortunately for many of us in the camerawork trade, framing, lighting and a dramatic eye doesn't always translate to computer skills. Also, I just don't see proper R&D happening at their current funding level. At 150/hr....... Unless of course you speak Mandarin.

Stop reading specs and shoot. Sure the pocket cam has more DR but it doesn't compare in overall IQ as the BMC4k. The detail and color space of the 4k is in a different league. Different tools for different uses. Just finished an NJOY campaign in which we used F55's and A7s. The A7s got us shots that would've been impossible (interviews at night in dark tinted cars with no lights for example). But in no way would I say it comes close to "slower" cameras such as the BMC 4k in terms of overall IQ.

72 frames becomes a data pig. After more thought, I feel the Axiom is a non-starter. DP's who shoot for a living need software with a support system in place as well as pro standards such as SDI, Proper EVF, etc. Semi pros / Amatuers won't foot the bill for the all the trimmings you need to make it work. At less than 200k in development funds raised , I' m more than skeptical. Sorry to piss on one's parade, but this article in general overlooks what really goes into t a functioning camera system.

They lost me at their excitement over "triple HDMI". Triple headaches over SDI if you ask me. The other glaring omission is the lack of a 4k recording system. Add the price of a 3rd party 4k and SDI module plus the other attendant rigging, we're now encroaching on CION prices.

This sort of modular build is reminiscent of Red where I can say as a former Epic / R1 owner, the body is the cheap part. To be functional on a pro level costs a fortune (my package was about 150k USD, the "brain" was a fraction of that) . But let's start with the basics a semi-pro needs to be functional. Axiom Body (2or 4 grand at retail). 4k recorder EVF On board Monitor Media (whatever it uses) AB or Vmount Battery system (four batts, charger, batt plate) Baseplate and rods Mattebox Canon Adaptor (the semi pro won't be buying PL glass) ND IR Set (Axiom has no built in ND) SDI Module (Price?) Hand Held Rig Put in your estimates, add it all up and tell me does it cost less than Sony's proposed price of an F7s? Will it be as functional without built in ND's? Will you be using or buying more lights with its less than stellar ISO? Will you lose set up time lugging a battery system instead of small internal mount batts that'll get you till lunch until you have to change? How well will it talk with Canon EF Lenses? Is your Alphatron or Zacuto EVF driving you nuts already? Are you better off buying a used Red 1 MX with better ISO, IQ and established workflow? How much do you really save? Things to think about before pulling the trigger on any system.

Guaranteed, every major rental house will have one. Hopefully, it'll supplant 3D as the new tech trend.

I don't think upgrading formats for the masses degraded anything, it just polished turds. Personally, I don't care who gets their hands on the tech because everyone has the ability to make shine or stink regardless of budget. If you don't believe me, watch Far and Away, shot on 65mm with Tom Cruise. Perhaps one of the most expensive turds of all time. I would've loved to see Aronofsky's 16mm no budget gem, PI shot on 65mm over that anyway.

In a word it blows. The amount of play between lens and mount is unacceptable for precise work and quite noticeable on long lens pulls. I tried more than one to make sure I didn't have a defective. Returned it to B&H already. Way too expensive for that kind of jiggle. Waiting on a Viltrox any day now. Jacek at Optitek just got back to me and has chatted with Sony about developing a mount. Fingers crossed. If you've ever seen his work, it's uncompromising. His Nikon / EF mounts to other cameras are genius. Instead of clicking, a pressure lock disc presses the lens into place. In short a PL system for still lenses.

Ebrahim (or anyone else for that matter), can you recommend a good "smart" EF to Emount that isn't Metabones? Something with no play whatsoever. Thanks.

Why's that? The only weakness I see is the lack of a good PL to E mount adaptor. But someone will jump on that soon enough. But the size of the camera without external battery pack will be welcome for cinema, especially for gimbal and handheld work. If C300/500's are being used in movies and episodic, I see this making big inroads to cinema. Guarantee this camera will be all over the place. Indies will now be able to afford a B camera, broadcast will get a 10 bit 422 small file size codec, and doc guys will be in heaven.

That's exactly the opinion of the rental houses here in NYC. I can't blame them. Emount adaptors are made like toys. The last thing they want is a client bitching about the amount of play. The only adaptor situation they seem to accept is Sony F (F55/5) to PL or whatever. They're made to pro tolerances.

The biggest problem I see with E mount is the lack of well built adaptors. Yesterday, I returned a full set of Rokinons EF mounts and Metabones EF to E mount because the Metabones has the slightest bit of play between the lens and adaptor. I tested some others and they all seem to suffer from that. It may not be a big a big deal for hand held or run and gun but for precise focus work on a stable platform, the slightest jiggle becomes noticeable even more so on longer lenses. I'll actually be using my A7s for an ambitious commercial campaign mixed with the F55. It's really the best Full Frame option. But I can't have a client watching us blow macro takes or slider moves because of focus jiggle. It's the same problem I had with the Nikon to Red 1 mount that Red used to sell. So I worked with Jacek at Optitek and he designed a PL style Nikon mount (based off the old vista vision mounts) that is rock solid. I was his beta tester. It soon became the standard for Nikon to PL. He makes an EF to Sony F mount (for F55/5) based on the same PL lock principle and it too is a rental house standard. Nothing moves. I'm sure if enough people write in to him, it may get him interested enough to design an EF to Emount that's bullet proof. He did that with Nikon to Red and there will be a lot more Emount out there than Reds. Here's the link: http://optitek.org So my solution for now, I bought all Emount Rokinons. Solid mount. For my Nikon AIS, I use a Velo adaptor. This one is pretty solid and cheap. Metabones for the price is a big disappointment in terms of their tolerances, pro price, toy like precision.

I just got this too and it has a bad case of the jiggles on all my EF lenses. Ok for handheld but with an FF - quite bad.

This is good news indeed. I used my Metabones over the weekend and the amount of play is completely unacceptable for something that costs that much. Ordered a Viltrox. Is there any jiggle / play with the Viltrox?

Does this gamma cripple happen if you go through a 4k - 1080p convertor - to Atomos?

Ebrahiim, yes it would be nice to use a C300 like you say, but the reality is when shooting doc or reality (things that pay bills), you have to do takes any where from 15 minutes to sometimes an hour or more. Cradling it like Canon intended won't do. Now add in the sound hops that every production makes you attach to your camera, you have a complete mess. So you end up having to rig the camera on a baseplate with 15mm rods, handgrips, monitor or EVF, AB battery or counterweight. Some people flip the Canon monitor upside and pretend it's a monitor, but it blows for outdoor work and eventually your neck cramps up from having to look up. BTW, at least in NYC, it is indeed much to the bitching of many a cameraman being used constantly as an ENG camera. It's a great look and the sensitivity is amazing. After that, I want to kick it across the room. And why does the iris notch? Can't tell you how many times I've blown an indoor to out shot because you can't smoothly adjust the iris on EF.

I just bought the Metabones EF to E mount for my A7s. What a disappointment. While it's solid to from mount to camera, the EF lens to mount connection is far too loose and jiggly for prime time. While it may not seem a big deal to most, if you plan to use a follow focus or wireless FF, you will notice the play. For a mount that costs 299.00, this amount of play is unacceptable. Fine for Fotodiox. Why can't Metabones get this right?

Big news indeed. Cion and Ursa, please sit down. Sony gets the EVF/monitor thing right. Finally someone has. Red with the touchscreen / Bomb EVF combo is awkward and top heavy; Cion kills me with their 3rd party EVF (all the 3rd party EVF's universally suck); Ursa with a living room monitor also forgets we need light tight EVF's first and foremost; and of course Canon completely went brain dead in the monitoring department and seems to act as if they did nothing wrong. I'm so glad, Sony answered the ergonomic issues and has taken a broadside at the 3rd party Frankenrig market. Stripped down, it'll be floating on more than a few gimbals and octocoptors. My only complaint and this is minor is the omission of a two pin lemo or D tap out in it's non AB/Vmount form. It would have been nice for powering all the wireless doo dads that are popping up these days now within in reach of non rental house market. One day we'll laugh at how trussed up Movi's have become with Lipo batts hanging all over the place like Christmas decorations. All it takes is a forward camera maker to realize powering wireless is going to be a standard feature down the road.

The first one to develop a full frame camcorder with built in ND's, 422, XLR, etc wins. Ask them if they're developing that. No one seems to have that in the works.