mercer

I don’t know... for some reason there is this notion that Canon should not release products that will make money because the consumers can buy something better for similar money? Then the consumer should go out and do just that. Why is it Canon’s fault that people don’t do their research? But also, for the cost, I don’t know if there is really that much better on the market. It’s a beginner’s, aps-c, 18mp DSLR that will shoot Raw photos and HD video. I love Nikon colors but their cheap DSLR’s aren’t the most user friendly for video. And I must assume that this Canon will be as good as, or better than, a t2i. What more does a beginner need?

I get your point but is a metal mount really going to save any fallen entry level dslr from destruction? Unfortunately, we live in a disposable world I like these cheapo cameras. I almost bought a D3400 around Christmas when you could get a kit for $300. I’d like to see what people can do with these limited features.

Also perception goes a long way. A lot of people envision DSLRs when they think what a “real” camera is. So I’d imagine, by a huge margin, that most people who buy their first real camera it is usually a DSLR. And honestly I feel that way sometimes as well. There’s just something about the feel of a DSLR in the hands.

If I’m a parent and my child shows an interest in photography, what camera do I buy them? This is Canon’s market for this camera. The parent isn’t going to research a Sony A7 plus adapters. They’re going to find a simple bare bones, inexpensive camera. A smart phone owner who wants a real camera for the holidays or vacation that takes good photos and acceptable video... they will look at this camera. Over the past few years that I’ve been frequenting this site, one of the most common phrases shouted time and time again is that Canon is in trouble... yet every year they sell more cameras and lenses than most of the companies combined.

So I’ve been reconsidering my lens choices. I own too many and use only a few of them. I recently came across an old Canon L zoom I had never heard of... the 20-35mm f/2.8. After reading some reviews and looking at samples on Flickr, I decided to take the plunge when I found one for a reasonable price. I rarely shoot with ultra wide lenses, but for tight spaces, they are useful and with this one lens, I can have Canon L quality from ultra wide to wide normal... and I’ve heard it described as having prime lens quality... hopefully it will be a great option to keep in the bag when needed. Anyway, does anyone have any experience with it? I’m also looking at a couple Sigma zooms... the DG models... probably either the 24-70mm or one of the 28-70mm variants... would love any info on them too.

You had fairly good interior light in your video. Forgive my ignorance as I haven’t shot with cine2 profile very often, but couldn’t you spot meter the interior and exterior and split the difference so you don’t have to push or pull either too much? Or over expose the exterior by +1.7-2 stops and then pull down your exposure in post. I know you’re not a fan of sLog2 but I believe the official Sony LUTS work fairly well? Or I’ve read that anyway. Also, auto iso works fairly well on the a6500, so test that as well.

@Matt Kieley here is a picture of the bottom of my lens and the inside of the adapter. As you can set it has a bevel on the bottom that just clears the inside tier of the adapter. And here’s a picture showing the rear element housing/c-mount threads protruding from the back of the adapter... Does your lens/adapter look the same?

Okay, let me look at my lens and see.

Hmm... Okay, will it screw on at all? And is the bottom of your lens beveled?

Hmm... do you have this Fujinon 12.5mm... It works on mine.

@kye do you like your camera? Does it feel good in your hands? Do you enjoy shooting with it? I had the XC10 and I can say without a shadow of a doubt, I loved that camera, it has great ergonomics and I loved every minute I shot with it. And luckily for you... the image has some mojo. The C-Log in 4K or 1080p is gorgeous. I’ve never used a camera that had better 4K video than the XC10. I think all you can do as an operator is work on the basics. Lighting, composition, exposure... etc... With that statement, I was addressing another member because he seemed to be looking for a formula to get the mojo. And sadly, if there was a formula... other than time, practice and craft, everybody would be amazing filmmakers. However, I do believe that certain cameras have more mojo... it could be the way it’s coded, or the amount of MPs mixed with the color science, or the bitrate, mixed with the curve... the possibilities are endless Thw good news is that almost every camera on the market in the past 5-10 years is capable of great images. @TheRenaissanceMan gave me some great advice when I was starting out. Take a notebook with you and jot down all of your exposure settings, where your light is coming from, time of day, etc... and go back and watch the footage. Rinse and repeat a couple dozen times and you’ll figure out what’s what. Either way, great topic and good luck.

Kisaha, opinions are fine but how can this gentleman have any idea what it costs Canon to manufacture a camera or the costs to market the camera? And who made him the social police in his crusade to persuade or bully Canon into providing low cost cameras to needy school children? The whole premise is silly and self righteous Of course, I am a bit of a hypocrite because I regularly share my opinion on cameras I feel are too expensive. I guess the tone of the article got under my skin, but you’re right.

So, basically the author of this article, with all his infinite wisdom, gets to decide what price Canon should sell their product for, who they should price this camera for and why they understand the internals of Canon’s production cost pipeline moreso than Canon themselves?

Haha... out of likes for the day.

Well I think it’s probably a symbiotic relationship. Some filmmakers just seem to have a beautiful relationship with certain cameras... Andrew Reid with his hacked GH1/GH2 films. Kendy Ty with his t2i videos, that Ruslan guy with his Leica D-Lux 6 videos, Ed David with his NX1 video, Mattias with any camera he picks up, etc, etc, etc... so I think some combination of craft and mechanics can give almost any camera or more importantly film that “mojo.” But it does seem that certain cameras have it in spades. Think about it... on a technical level... 8K Red should obliterate Alexa footage, but it doesn’t...

If I knew the answer to that question, I’d undoubtedly be a better filmmaker. Honestly, I think you’re looking at it wrong. Find a camera and lens that feel good in your hands and makes you want to shoot. Hopefully that same camera will help you to tell the story you want to tell in a visually and emotionally engaging way. Use the strengths of the camera and lenses to your benefit while working around its weaknesses. I think searching for a quantifiable A+B=C approach to “mojo” or “filmic” is a fool’s errand. But I do believe some cameras will get you there quicker and a lot of craft doesn’t hurt either.

A color science discussion will send us through another wormhole.

I believe in camera specific mojo, but I am sure it is more than just the camera... it’s lighting, lens choice and placement, color science, subject matter, and obviously the pre through post production elements. So yeah... probably most cameras could have mojo within the right circumstances but some cameras seem to offer it more often. In my opinion some of the cameras with mojo, in no particular order, are... Canon 1DC, Hacked Panasonic GH1/GH2, Panasonic LX100, Sony a7s, Canon 5D Mark III with ML Raw, Nikon D750, the anamorphic from the GH4/GH5... especially in 1080p, anything Leica or Fuji for stills... and some video, BMMC and BMPCC/BMMCC in ProRes or Raw, the Canon Cine Cameras... I’m sure there are others. There are filmmakers that believe and strive to obtain an organic, thick, filmic and cinematic image and we believe that some cameras are easier to get there and then there are other filmmakers that question the quantifiable aspect of those statements... as if everything in life is quantifiable...

@PannySVHS you need the Fotasy brand c-m4/3.

Yeah, I guess. But my point is that I was tired of chasing “image advantages.” Sure there are 4K cameras in the 80D’s price range but a lot of them look too videoish to me. And if you look around on IG, or other sites, people are still shooting films with Canon firmware 5D Mark IIs... and they’re making beautiful films. I think we’ve talked about this before... if Kendy Ty can use a t2i and make such amazing shorts, then surely an 80D would be good enough... if you work within and around its limitations. And the funny things is... now that Kendy has upgraded to an a6300, his short films do not look as good... Somehow the magic got lost within the resolution.

@Damphousse well Kendy Ty’s t2i videos are still amongst some of the best videos I have ever seen online. And I know a filmmaker, well a friend of a friend, that shot a feature last year on a t3i and he had it distributed to WalMart. Here’s the trailer for it... So the fact of the matter is... cliche or not... content is king. If I didn’t buy the 5D3, I would have settled on an 80D by now... with the 17-55mm and the 35mm f2, I ultimately would have been content. Thanks for the info on stock footage... I may look into that this summer when my work slows down. Hell, even if I could make a $100 a year... it’s more than my short films will ever make...

Back in 2013, I replaced my t2i with the OG eos-m for an insane $197 brand new. I loved that camera... still do. It’s the only camera I’ve kept after experimenting with other brands. I tried ML Raw but just couldn’t consistently get rid of the pink dots, so I gave up on it. I may try it again with MLV Lite or the experimental builds, but it isn’t top priority. A year and a half ago, I bought the M10 and thought it was a fun little camera to mess around with but never shot any stills with it. In fact, up until recently I have never used any of these cameras for stills and like you said, the video on these powershot eos-m models isn’t the best, so I just sold it for a profit. But I am gaining more of an appreciation for stills and I just have a fondness for the eos-m system (nostalgia I guess) so I am looking forward to the M50. It will live in my glove box for stills and the occasional 4K video... unless the 4K ends up being horrible but so far it looks okay... we’ll see as more footage gets released. Thanks for the heads up on the 22mm. I think I’ll start looking around for one. Regarding c-mounts... back when I owned the NX500 I bought a c-mount adapter for it, knowing the flange distance was only good enough for macro shots but with a similar sensor size and a similar crop, I had no issue getting coverage with a 25mm... I assume it will be close with the M50 as well? What kind of cinema camera do you have?

Good to know. Even Resolve’s default Rec709 settings look pretty good with ML Raw footage for a quick turnaround to ProRes and a simple grade in FCPX... or Premiere in your case. As I said on IG, right now I’m just messing with footage while I shoot it but when I get closer to the editing stage I really need to get more serious about color and since I am just a tinkerer now, I am contemplating an ACES workflow... we’ll see... I’m pretty impatient. lol.

@webrunner5 Don, buy away... let me know what you’re looking for... I’ll give you the grumpy old dude discount. Lol.

@kidzrevil interesting. Do you do a quick Rec709 transfer in Resolve for 5D3 footage, or do you use BMD Film and turn to Rec709 after?