mercer

Yeah... I just spent an hour watching short films on Vimeo shot with the C100 Mark I and II... I actually preferred the image from the Mark I... and there was absolutely nothing about the image I didn’t like or caused concern with either camera... and I specifically watched narratives only. For the price of these cameras, and the set of features, I’d have no problem choosing it for a Micro/No budget feature film. Like most cameras discussed on this forum, there’s absolutely no reason one can’t create great images with a C100. As always, content is king and the C100 is just a tool that has proven to work.

Ehh... just take a few steps back and he’ll get the full face in focus.

I’m thinking about buying a Mark I, so yeah I think the Mark II is definitely still relevant. As John Brawley stated in a different thread... a lot of US network television is broadcasted at 720p... so 1080p is more than enough. The C100 series cameras are workhorses... I’m sure you’ll have the camera paid off after a job or two and then it’s all profit. And for that money... it’s a no brainer.

Are you going to sell your UMP or use the P4K as a B-Cam? Well, either way, a speedbooster makes sense for you, especially if you’re using EF-S lenses. Since I’m shooting FF, there aren’t many wide angle options that even a speedbooster would solve. I actually like the EF Mount, there are more than enough good Canon lenses at reasonable prices... some of which have excellent image stabilization and then there are plenty of options to adapt Nikkor, Contax Zeiss, Pentax, etc...lenses to EF Mount. There are also some options to have FD lenses modified to EF and also a couple Minolta lenses as well... which I am in the process of doing. If you prefer Cinema lenses you don’t have as many options but there are a few... in fact, I believe there are some PL mount lenses that will work with EF. So yeah, not as many options as a shallow mount, but a lot of those options are lenses that I either can’t afford or don’t really need for my filmmaking goals.

I’m actually tired of adapters and the ones I do use are either thin adapters for adapting to EF or permanent Leitax adapters, which turn the lens into an EF Mount. With Micro 4/3, I have zero interest in using a speedbooster or big clunky adapters required for most still lenses... so with the 2x crop of the P4K, I am left with native lenses... the smaller Rokinon Cine lenses are decent, as are some Olympus lenses. My original thought of using only c-mount lenses leaves me with no wide or wide normal options since BM decided to go with a traditional M4/3 sensor and the only c-mount lenses that will work are 25mm focal lengths or higher. Since I decided to invest in Canon glass, this leaves the P4K in a weird spot for me. On one hand... it is very cheap, on the other... I’ll have to invest in lenses I don’t foresee myself using beyond this camera. Also, my main interest in the camera is for the 1080p ProRes up to 120p... so as cheap as the camera is, for some slow motion... it becomes a pretty hefty investment when you add lenses, IR filtration, and perhaps an OLPF filter. I think I’ll probably wait for an open box model to pop up somewhere and get the camera even cheaper than the release price. Or even better... since I am already invested in Canon glass and I am happy as hell with ML Raw... I may just stow the money I would put towards the P4K and save up for a C200... by this time next year, they will probably start going on sale for a reasonable price. Or maybe if I feel like putzing around with a camera in between shooting days, I’ll pick up an M50 for my C-Mounts or an OG C100. Either way I decide to go, there is absolutely no doubt that the P4K will be an awesome camera eventually... the XLR input alone is worth its weight in gold.

Well I was being a little hyperbolic but anonim went from one side of the spectrum stating that Grant Petty is an honorable man that wouldn’t risk his reputation to saying BM has too much of a bad track record to be trusted... But yeah, nothing is wrong with criticism or skepticism... I am skeptical of this camera. Actually I have two fears that are completely opposite scenarios... on one hand I am afraid that this camera’s use of this sensor is giving a lot of people false expectations that cannot be lived up to. But on the other hand, I really hope this isn’t a generic, vanilla camera that lacks the edgy, indie film look that was so beautiful in the first Pocket... I guess we’ll know soon enough.

The GH5 was announced that it was in development at Photokina ‘16 and then officially announced in early January of ‘17. Anyway the point is that this thread is full of people that act like no problems ever existed with BM cameras and people that act as though BM has the worst track record ever... both are a disservice... one looks like shilling troll and the other looks like they should just not buy one and be happy about it. Concerns or respect for BM is fine, but hate and extravagant praise is just silly. This thread is 136 pages because this camera is a near historic announcement for the indie filmmaker. The problem is that too many people want this camera to be something it won’t and others want it to fail. And then the best part of the thread had a pro cinematographer openly and happily providing insight on how he uses BM cameras in his productions. But of course a bunch of eoshd pros have to argue with him about mundane things and chase him away.

Well Panasonic announced the GH5 7 months before release... so...

Have you tried contacting Canon official support. This seems like a pretty basic question that could be answered if asked as simply as possible.

There are way too many armchair professionals around here so @jase, I think it will be difficult for you to get an honest opinion of this camera based on YOUR criteria for wanting one. I shared your interest in this camera about a year ago and scoured Vimeo and YouTube for video samples and honestly, I found some pretty good stuff shot with it, so for the price... go for it. You’ve proven time and time again that you are more than capable enough to produce quality work with whatever camera you have in your hands. If you don’t like it, you can easily sell it and get your money back, or very close to it... so where’s the harm? Or maybe you’ll like the lens so much that you’ll want to upgrade to the a7iii. I see no harm in a good old fashioned test.

As awesome as BM is as a company, there is no reason to speak badly of tone1k for asking an honest and reasonable question. It also doesn’t serve any new customers that are elated by the announcement of the P4K. I believe every single BM cinema camera has had an issue or two when first released. Most people understand that a small company does not have the resources that the major players have but to ignore that the issues existed makes you sound like a shill. Sure previous cameras were made from off the shelf parts and everybody understands that it takes some trial and error through design and manufacturing to get everything right but moire was a problem because the camera lacks an OLPF and had nothing to do with the sensor specifically. Hell even the Micro had some issues with FPN and BM was using that sensor for years before the Micro was released. And I don’t know what you read but I followed the Ursa 4.6k magenta issue and there is no reason to say that it was user error. So yes, sometimes products do get released with issues that require a repair or a new unit but this is a regular thing with BM. Personally, I believe there will be some issues with the P4K as well, but at that price point, who cares? BM does have a track record of releasing cameras late and with issues, but they also have a track record of making the customer happy. But due to the price point, there is going to be a lot of new adopters to the BM ecosystem and hopefully BM either gets it right or these new customers understand what they’re getting for the money and show some patience. Or maybe since they’re using that sensor, this will be a more generic release from BM but God I hope that sensor isn’t a signal that it’s a generic camera.

Do you think you can get a baked in look without mashing the shadows too much?

So I finally updated my nightly build to the July 4th build and so far everything seems good... once I remembered all of my settings. I also tested the 4K crop module and in all modes it seemed unuasable. 2/3rds of the screen was whited out. And I really couldn’t get any higher resolutions/lower bit modes to work cleanly in LiveView. I don’t know if it was the build I was using or if I just didn’t have the correct settings configured... either way... I just reinstalled the latest nightly build.

Watch Sigma be the first mainstream camera manufacturer to offer Raw video in their still cameras...

According to the video description, Andy Lee made that video.

That’s cool. I don’t use Resolve enough to know short cuts. Honestly, I’ve been exclusively using the MLV App lately... I just love the LogC conversion to ProRes. Thanks squig, they’d probably be locked down shots anyway.

Good to know thanks. I don’t shoot many stills, but I would like to start and I am weird in that I’d rather have 2 cameras... one for stills and one for video. I’ve been following Mattias on IG for a while now and his B&W Sigma shots are freaking amazing... so I thought if Resolve opened the Sigma DNG, then I could shoot and process stills while practicing with Resolve... anyway, worth a try. Thanks.

So even after using ML for over a year now, I am still a rank amateur on a lot of the features. I started shooting 14bit 1080p (well in 2:35...) and haven’t done much experimenting with it. Just recently, I decided to test the 3x zoom and realized that I only really need 2 lenses... a 28mm and a 50mm and then with the 3x zoom, I’ll get an 85mm and a 150mm. Obviously, I am forced to shoot in a stuttery greyscale... but are there any other draw backs?

@BTM_Pix since you can record right to DNG, can you natively open those stills in Resolve?

I guess if shallow depth of field is overused in close up shots, then infinity focus is definitely overused in wide angles...

If Nikon is really going to implement IBIS, then I really hope that they make all of their lenses compatible and not just ai on. Honestly I still think a new mount sounds silly but maybe the adapter will be an interchangeable lockable F mount and not just a clunky adapter. Sadly, it seems like Nikon will try to take on Sony by making a small bodied FF camera... it will probably overheat. Hopefully Canon is smart enough to release an EF Mount FF mirrorless, shaped like a DSLR. And with the extra room they can add a great IBIS system and possibly some internal NDs.

Well... since it is fairly likely that JB will be providing some of the long awaited footage for the P4K, I think it probably makes sense that people get to know his background and thoughts on filmmaking and gear. Would you rather we discuss the pointless desire for AF in the P4K? Or if only the P4K would add IBIS to the specs? Or maybe we can keep wondering if we’ll need IR filtration (or ignoring that we probably will) Or I guess we can add some ad hominem questions regarding what cards we can use with the P4K or which is the best M4/3 lens to use with it... In life, conversations evolve... why can’t discussions on forums do the same?

Yeah, that looks pretty good. You should make a Rear Window inspired short film. Are you still processing your files in Resolve using Juan Melara’s linear method?

Are you confusing exposure compensation for aperture? Because there are factors that go into choosing the correct aperture for an accurate exposure... light, shutter speed, ISO, picture profile...

Hmm, if I had to guess, I would have thought you shot the barebones of footage for TV. How many days do you get to shoot an episode? And how many set ups/pages do you shoot in a day on The Resident? Sorry for all the questions, but how often do we get a professional cinematographer around here willing to answer... it’s very appreciated!