Gregormannschaft

This is true, but it still requires a sizeable investment over time to buy new drives and media. I find things get cheaper, but sizes go up. The RAWLite out of the C200 is just about manageable to the moment, with 256GB getting you about 30 mins of record time. This is nicely broken down. I purchased a second hand (never used) C200 from a production house 2 years back for just over 5k euros which was a great deal at the time. So if you buy second hand you can easily get cheaper prices. I'm not entirely sure why you'd want the 1DXIII if you're doing both video and photo. It offers the extreme best of both world, but do many jobs really require you to be shooting 5K Raw and using a top of the line professional photo camera? I guess the middle broadcast codec is a great thing to have for some photojournalists out there and the more I think about it the more I think that's who will really end up buying and using this camera to its full ability. The rest of us probably specialise on one side or the other. Doing only video, once you have internal NDs and built in XLR audio it's very hard to go back.

The specs are really nice, but 13 minutes or so on a 256GB card is crazy. It's nice to have the option and it's great there's a ton of codec options in there but that's a serious cinema camera bitrate for serious productions. Maybe it'll be used as a B or crash cam on some bigger productions. I'm not entirely sure who this is for to be honest. It's a couple more grand more expensive than the C200 I bought a couple of years ago. My hopes for a middle codec have completely disappeared, but I can't see myself seriously requiring more than the Canon RawLite format. Once you start shooting in these really nice, thick codecs it quickly shows up other areas of your production that could be improved like lenses, lighting and sound. I'd argue that if you have a camera that can shoot decent RAW and you like shooting with it, there will be no real reason to upgrade for a long time. It's going to be too big for a lot of shooters used to mirrorless, and it's too expensive to be used as a B cam. I'm currently using the BMPCC4K as my B cam and gimbal cam and it pairs really well with the C200. You would have to have a very particular use case to warrant splashing out on the 1DXIII as a B cam. Serious hybrid photographers maybe?

This is true, but I'm a big fan of the Light Dome for documentary lighting. I use it a lot in corporate spaces, and it means I can change locations and really quickly and easily. I use a light wand as a hair light, and a small LED as a fill (if needed, I prefer to get as much contrast as possible usually).

I'Ve always liked shooting with that lens. Wide open it produces a really filmic bloom while still retaining a lot of sharpness. Wish I lived Stateside, it's much more expensive in Europe.

This is exactly what I was after, thanks so much. I actually found a good deal on the 50 1.4 and it has a lovely clean look from f2.4 and above, below the sharpness really takes a hit.

Thinking about selling my A7SII and buying the 4K BMPCC. Does anyone have any experience with using this on a gimbal? Is it a hassle to balance? I currently run the A7SII as a B-CAM for my C200, but the slow mo quality is really getting to the point where it sticks out like a sore thumb. I run it nice and light with manual focus lenses on the Zhiyun Crane v2, so I'd be looking to upgrade both the camera and the gimbal.

You're certainly right, but the level of fringing is a bit mad. Still, some of the footage looks great, will just avoid shooting wide open in the future.

I was going to buy the Jupiter 9 a while back but decided against it. Now looking at getting a slightly cleaner set of lenses with a 35 1.4, 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 set of Contax Zeiss Planar. Anyone have any experience with these? I used the 85 1.4 ZE lens (which is said to be the same lens as the Contax 85mm rehoused in a modern body) recently on a shoot and was surprised at how much purple fringing there was wide open. Other than that it was nice and clean and relatively contrasty. Not a lot of vintage character but a nice lens.

I'm editing CRM on a mid-2014 MBP (16GB ram, i7). I don't know about multi-cam, but I can edit the CRM files natively within FCPX without any LUTS applied. As soon as I apply any LUTS, or colour correction, the whole thing falls apart. It's not a massive issue though, just create proxy files and you should have no problem.

We have a Wally Dolly at work that is an absolute breeze to setup, and can get you a solid 6-9ft of smooth movement. Might be worth looking into for rental, it’s relatively easy to transport.

Haven't posted on here in ages but still lurk, just wanted to say you've done an amazing job kaylee. I don't really 'get' the story, but I'm all for films being mood pieces and trying to evoke a particular feeling rather than being as accessible as possible. I'll try not to repeat what others have said on the visuals, but I really really liked what you did with colour. The opening shots of the man on the bus, at work and then on the subway home were stunning. My favourite set of shots has to be the woman travelling on the bus which felt very cinematic. I liked the idea with the very dark shots and they'd probably look beautiful in a pitch black room, but I couldn't much on my monitor during the day. I like the idea though, did you underexpose these or did you push the levels down in post?

The C300 Mark II image is certainly superior if you're comparing the C200's 8bit codec vs anything higher on the C300 Mark II. Colour graduation, noise, sharpness are all noticeably better from the C300 Mark II. I'd be curious how RawLite holds up in these tests though, I know Ed did a few test videos with it and I'd be interested in why it couldn't get close to the Alexa image.

Quick tip, buy a bigger ND filter. That way, if you buy lenses with a larger diameter filter thread (77mm or 82mm are common), you wont have to buy another one. You can always buy a step up filter ring for next to nothing, but going down isn't an option.

To me it looks like there's minimal NR going on with CRL and it's most noticeable in the shadows. I'd be interested to see what you find when you get to looking at your files.

Used RX6 noise reduction quite a bit and have been impressed, although when it fails it really stinks. Wish this had a demo version but will keep an eye out in case the devs have a change of heart.

Really nice shots. Curious why you went with Wide DR? Don't get me wrong, it's great for stuff with a quick turnaround but I wouldn't have thought it would be the go to choice for narrative work. We shoot with a bunch of these at work on a very regular basis. The 8bit footage can be made to look great, but the 10bit footage from the C300 mk2 is noticeably better in quality, as it should be. RAW Lite is beautiful though, if you have a good data management system on set (basically just offloading 1 of 3 cards and juggling them) it's very doable to shoot all day. Just prepare to use Neat Video a lot in post.

Big thanks for this rec, I've gone ahead and bought the book as a paperback – I find the theoretical side of colour theory just as interesting as the technical side. Ripple was also the first course that I found on a cursory Google search and their free classes have been brilliant so paying for their full course sounds like a good place to get started. @capitanazo (your English is great) @kye thanks for taking the time to post, the LiftGamma forum recommendation looks great, too. No doubt I'll spend a long time lurking but that's often the best way to start learning.

After years getting passable grading results I've decided I want to really invest a bit of time and money into learning how to properly correct and grade footage. Does anyone here have any recommendations for online resources or courses that have helped them? Most of the free tutorials I can find on YouTube really only start covering the basics and a lot have errors that even I can see are a bit amateur.

Curious why you think the C300 Mk2 is a flop? I also have a C200 and absolutely love the image, even the 8bit stuff. I know it's been said countless times before but the colour science just makes footage sing. The RawLite footage is beautiful, and will become easier and easier to manage over the next few years as storage prices continue to drop. The AF is incredible and the ergonomics are lovely. Buuut, I don't see why the C300 Mk2 would be so much different. It has better codecs, but crippled by poor slow mo options and slightly bulkier ergonomics?

This is lovely. Really like that you tried to weave a personal story into it. Can I ask what your process is like to get those beautiful video portraits of locals? Are you travelling with a native Spanish speaker or a Columbian local?

Great test, Ed. I picked up a C200 a few months back and liked what I saw, except for the noisey shadows. Always liked your grades in the past, curious what your workflow is here with the Canon RAW Lite footage? Do you start off with a base conversion LUT?

Nice! Post back with your thoughts. The 24-105 is a pretty loud lens for AF (right? Or it might just be my lens with sand in the motor from years ago...) but works pretty well taking into account just how old it is. I picked up a Sigma 18-35 second hand for around 450 euros which is a beauty of a lens.

Cheers! It still looks a little darker here than it did in FCPX or in the exported still before upload. I was using the Sigma 18-35 at f2, ISO 800 with a Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/4 filter. Used Neat Video to process the noise, dropping the high frequency noise reduction to about -50% to avoid that plastic look and added some sharpening. Neat Video is incredible. @HockeyFan12 You've inspired me to do some more tests in the same spot and mess around a little with the exposure. I'll report back later this week.

The C200 is strange in that manner. You're recording a CLOG2 signal, and yet, you can only monitor in CLOG3. Very odd. I've read CLOG2 should really be exposed around 2 stops over, whereas CLOG3 is around 1 stop over. The extra stops of dynamic range of CLOG2 is in the shadows, but from what I've read, and seen, there's a lot of noise down there. I'll have to wander out and do another test, as I'm pretty sure, despite trying to expose for the grey card, I was underexposing the whole time. Oh, and the monitor (the viewable screen space) is exactly 5cm X 9cm.

Cheers for the input, I'll measure the C200 monitor in an hour or so and post results back here. On the exposure, I used a pop up 18% grey card and used the waveform monitor + spot feature of the camera – it basically highlights an object you select on the waveform monitor, which in this case was the grey card. I've found it to be really useful but felt like I was underexposing most images from the other night. I was being careful not to clip highlights with zebras at 100%, but feel like that was really throwing my shadows under the bus. I've looked around and there are a bunch of great tests done by Clockroom Media and they reckon that 5000 ISO is the max ISO you'd want to shoot at with the camera – so I was probably underestimating the camera. Although they did an interview shot at 32,000 and used Neat Video to produce great results. Either way, haven't shot much CLOG and feel like I'm still very much learning it's limitations.