DBounce

@Kisaha, Canon has been mum on the bit depth, so it might well be 10-bit when XF-AVC arrives. Honestly, that, combined with a raw 12-bit option and DPAF would make the Canon hard to beat. I'm particularly interested in building up a C200-B for handheld with the option of stripping it down when it needs to be used on a gimbal or jib. I will just add a loop or EVF when I need it for handheld work. I had the opportunity to watch Canon's demo film and like how it handled low-light. It looked quite clean. I also loved the black levels and highlight. Overall so far I am really liking what I see from Canon, but am still a bit weary of them gimping out on features with the new codec. I am determined not to commit to either until all the questions are answered. As for Sony... they bring much for the money. And no doubt, their next offering will have some killer features... It's just that something about Sony's image leaves me underwhelmed. Still, I can never count them out... they are very innovative.

This comparison will be mute once Canon add the XF-AVC codec, which will likely be 10-bit. The idea of comparing the C200 to a hybrid DSLR is a bit silly. Where are the XLRs, Timecode, SDI outputs etc, on the GH5? I think this person put across the differences of working with a dedicated video camera vs a DSLR hybrid best.

Clearly this camera is not meant as an A-cam to GH5 B-cam... it is meant to be a B-Cam to the Varicam LT. This is why it uses the same mount as the Varicam LT. This is why it's color science will match the Varicam... not the GH5. This is why it is designed to be mountable on drones. When people say M43 is not meant for professional work, it is not the same as saying no professionals use m43. I think we all know pro work has even been done with smartphones. But in most cases, m43 will not be the ideal choice for professional engagements. Moreover, the DSLR form-factor in general is not ideal for professional video work. However, it does have it's uses. I think it's fare to say the with the introduction of the EVA1 and C200 we are moving into a new era of budget filmmaking. We now have compelling options from Canon, Panasonic and Sony, for true video cameras, with real XLR imputs, SDI, remote, network, timecode etc... You might notice that I left BM off that list... I consider them more of a niche player. I think most that are drawn to the former brands will not jump on BM as these cameras have a reputation for not being the most dependable option. So for those of us that require good customer service, and rugged hardware the BM will remain something that only sees use in personal projects. I will not purchase either camera until all the smoke clears. I need to see finalized specs and footage from Panasonic. And I will not buy the Canon until I hear details on the implementation of the XF-AVC codec. Will it be 8-bit or 10-bit? And will it be a paid upgrade? Will it ship on later cameras for free? At present I am leaning towards the Canon, but that could change if Pansonic brings their A-game with the EVA1. These are interesting times.

Did not DJI already do this? Along with a few others. Honestly, a gimbal camera single unit combination would be great. These traditional form factors (DSLR, ENG style) are less useful for modern video styles.

I would love to love this camera, but with not a single frame of footage I'll hold off from praising it. Knock Canon all you want, but they bought actual footage to back up their claims. At this time no one knows if the EVA1 will be an overpriced GH5 or a bargin priced Varicam LT.

I think the logical upgrade to a 1DC is the 1DMKii. The two handle the same. All lenses are native. If you are comfortable with the 1DC you will be at home with the 1DXMKii. I also suspect it will not be made obsolete every six months like Sony cameras. So it should retain reasonable value. If you can't get the job done with a 1DXMKii, then it's time to consider refining your skills.

Love the piece. Nice to see a real effort instead of cat videos or leaves. That said... the imagery looks good, but the motion cadence feels videoish in places. This might be down to the 24p conversion. Would love to see the 10bit vlog. I'll give the lenses a pass as their price to performance make them sort of the only game in town... still these come out.

Deleted

Interesting, if sharp.

Well I have to confess... this pisses me off. Not only did they not fix the crop, but they also pretty much gave a big FU to the owners of the 1DXMkII. A camera that many have argued needed C-Log from even before launch. The annoying thing is the hardware in these cameras is more than capable of producing 14 bit raw at 24p, or 60p. It is simply a neutered in order to protect the Cinema line. Personally, if my intention was only to shoot video I would not choose the DSLR form factor. And I believe the same is true for most of us. Crippling the capabilities of these cameras is pure BS. I feel like the only real threat to Canon is Sony. It they can somehow fix their color science and perhaps increase their bit depth to 12 bits... as I'm not certain 10bits is a huge difference. Then they will have a real winner on their hands. But it cannot be in the A7 series... it must be in the larger A9 series. As a larger battery is needed. Also there needs to be ample space to allow for heatsinks to dissipate heat. Dam you Canon...

I wouldn't recommend it. This is definitely a two handed affair weighing what it does. It works well on the Helix Jr. But handheld is viable with an LCD eyepiece. Of course this does mean resorting to manual focus sometimes... it stills seems funny saying that.

It undermines nothing. These are still DSLRs. Adding Log does not change that fact.

Yes, the smartphone lacks the robust codec to really push the grade to any extent. It started to fall apart pretty readily, so I had to change the levels to prevent artifacts from appearing in the shadows. The Doc (the lady) is a great speaker. She was initially shy in front of the camera, however, now she seems very relaxed... and that makes her easy to film. I would love to do more fictional work. It's just hard to get a cast together that can be convincing. All the elements are important. Honestly, the cameras used take a back seat to most of the other stuff. I love seeing a project come to life. It's a magical experience.

Thanks on both counts. Kisaha, the advice is welcomed. I try to take all that I learn and better my work with it. I think this video was really just about getting out and shooting something. Lately I have not been using my camera as much as I should so this was really more about that than anything. As for the 1DXMk2 vs smartphone... well there are places the 1DXMk2 cannot go or is not really welcomed. Whereas the smartphone sneaks in unnoticed. Weight is another major concern, as is portability. I always have the smartphone on hand. The same cannot be said for my camera. FYI: You're right about the additional shots. But this video is really an improvised work. Dog cam, you are also right and to be honest I really would not have minded a tilting flip out screen for the Canon to help with those low shots.

Filmed this a couple weeks ago using the Canon 1DX Mk2 and a Google Pixel XL on a DJI Osmo Mobile. This combination did prove interesting when it came time to CG the footage. I also forgot that when I filmed with the Canon I used a custom baked in picture profile, so that complicated matters even more. The Canon's files did seem to handle the CG better, as they could take much more processing than what the smartphone footage could. Working with these two very different formats was an eye opening experience. Both had their strengths and weaknesses. Anyway it was a fun project and I'm happy I had the chance to film a little something. Comments welcomed.

My bad, didn't read the description and thought it was just cropped. Hard to tell in that static scene. Does this desqueeze in camera for framing, or is an external monitor required?

While I do not dislike it, there is more videoish feel to it than a cinema camera. That might be fixed with some cinematic movements such as using a slider or jib. Overall, you could do a lot worst. The GH5 looks like an interesting camera, but for me my next move will likely be in another direction. I am pleased to see that these are not slow motion clips. Slow-mo tends to look more cinematic, but can only be used in certain scenes. The colors do not look bad. Like what I am seeing here as compared to what Sony offers. It would be very interesting to see some anamorphic clips from this camera. That might be the one area where this body can set itself apart from the rest of the fold.

Well then, if that's the case I'm imagine you are now editing everything on your smartphone. Good luck with that.

I'm not Andrew, but I did purchase the 1DXMkii at launch, and I can say that my camera never suffered from any of these issues. Certainly not at any usable ISO.

Not sure I would part with a 1DC for a GH5. The image from the 1DC looks great. But I would certainly consider it as a B-cam.

It does produce a pleasing image. It would be great to see this sort of imagery coming out of a DSLR or mirrorless camera. The motion cadence really looks quiet nice.

Really, any examples?

This image does not pop at all. I'm thinking it's not the camera, but lighting. It just seems kind of flat.

I believe the Bolex is good at producing the "traditional" film look. However, I am seeing more and more use of a much cleaner look in modern movies. Imo, the traditional filmic look is being displaced with the newer clean look. While I do like the look of the Bolex, I think the new look is also pleasing, if somewhat less forgiving of physical imperfections of the talent.

I'd go with framing, camera motion, lighting and color grade. With theses techniques cinematic looks can be achieved with a smartphone... https://***URL not allowed***/shooting-cinematic-iphone-footage-filmic-pro/