Mmmbeats

I'm not an expert in this, but one thing i have been gleaning from pro Canon users is that the official LUTs are not very good for some reason, and that highlight rendition is a particular area of concern. Many people are using third party LUTs for input.

Sounds like a complete waste of time. Within seconds you'd be monitoring stuff that happened (in real life) seconds ago. How would you even know where to point the camera? Am I missing something here?

Shot on vintage glass I think, and likely with filtration too. Available on Vimeo too by the way.

Ah - now that you mention it, both the hire lenses I was using had IS engaged! I'd forgotten that because I generally own manual, non-stabilised glass, so I had mis-remembered the setup. Apologies!

The weight is a good thing in my view. I had to do some off-the-cuff hand-held shots with no rig. No micro-judder! None! I decided to build some more handheld into my project. Built like a mirrorless, but really handles like a camcorder. eta: I was using the A60 (or whatever the larger battery is called) though.

Yikes! I'm going to be using that same combo on a shoot soon. Do I need to get that baseplate or will the standard RS2 one work?

Shadow integrity is phenomenal on the camera. Would make using the (otherwise excellent) previous gen cameras like the C300 mkii, and the C200, a bit of a pain now. Agree about the official Canon LUTs - they are a disaster. Not quite sure how they've allowed that to happen. I actually genuinely believe some of my early concerns, re: highlight rendition, etc. may have been down to how people have been applying the official LUT! 😲 Would recommend trying out CLOG2 over CLOG3, as the latter is really designed to protect shadow in a way that isn't really necessary with DGO.

Used the C70 for a shoot for the first time recently. Very impressed. I honestly think that Clog3 is pretty much redundant in this generation because the shadow detail is rendered so clean in Clog2.

Well that typo got me excited.. for a second!

Imaging does have a skintone problem. It annoys me that IRE values are frequently referenced without including darker skin.

You can but I don't fully trust it. It's nothing more than digital interpolation, though admittedly brilliantly implemented using AI. I've steered clear of that kind of artifice so far, so I'd want to do a ton of testing before relying on it.

It's the same thing. In both cases, all you are doing is seeing a wider portion of the same imaging circle, so naturally the depth of field does not change.

You're both right. The reason is complicated. Basically - same lens / different sized sensor = same DoF same lens / same framing / different sized sensor = different DoF

Not the FX6. It has an essentially 4K sensor so can't do a 4K S35 crop (you can do 1080p). Seriously head-turned by the camera though.

GH4 is simply a great camera. It has massive usability with all the customisable buttons and menus. The 4K image is really nice. The battery life is simply insane. Use genuine batteries and it is actually difficult to go through two in a single day. Some shoot days pass without a battery change. I've never owned a video camera of any kind that managed power like that. Unfortunately the GH5 has not carried on that aspect. Only downsides - 8-bit internal only, and low-light performance, which is decidedly meh. Any other omission is just a matter of need / taste / luxury really.

Been doing it for years on the GH cameras. Always have Monochrome Live View toggle allocated to the top right function button (Fn2 I think it is).

I feel the same way. The classic EOS C body suits me much better. I'm thinking the C200ii might fit right into the right spot (fingers crossed).

Well if they had an Oscar category for tallest camera utilisation, it would have done pretty well too.

C300 mk I was the king of tall:

Well the C200 is already taller than the C70 before you add a monitor, SolidPod, etc.

I thought I was quite okay with C300iii RAW, but now I can't seem to find any really nice examples of it. Seems C200 and C300ii RAW is much nicer (creamy, organic, whatever). Are there any examples of C300iii RAW films that anybody particularly likes? Thinking in reference to a possible C200ii mainly.

Some good ideas there. This person has gotten quite organic footage by piling on the filters!

I imagine so.

Firm rumour now of a C200 mkii incoming! 😲 This line-up is getting extremely hot. I'm just wondering (if true) how are they going to differentiate the C300iii? Presumably the C70 will be cheaper. C200 (mk i) might become a steal soon (both new and used). https://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-cinema-eos-c200-mark-ii-will-arrive-in-april-cr3/

I agree. I also wonder if digital camcorder design had not taken so much lead from digital stills camera design if the form would be completely different, not just for ergonomics, but for cooling air flow as well.