currensheldon

A lot of people are shooting in HD (as I do from time to time depending on the job), but 4K is the standard for many streaming services and commercial work now. So at this point I think all manufacturers need to focus on providing quality 4K with required broadcast/streaming specs (10-bit 422) in their next $5-10k models. Most already have this in some of their models (Panasonic, Black Magic, Canon C300II and Sony FS7), but it really does need to be in all future cinema cameras (CANON). With that said, the other big advancements for new models that I see happening at NAB this year would be higher frame rates (96-120fps in 4K) and internal raw. I'm guessing Sony or Panasonic will get there first, so I'd guess the FS7 will give us a higher frame rate option this year sometime. Hopefully Black Magic does release a new external recorder (5" or smaller would be my hope) to capture BM Raw, but if manufacturers could offer it internally, even better.

Yep that's the GH5. I'd say he's got the Olympus 7-14mm on there for a lot of those shots.

The EF to RF mount adapters (Canon has three different ones) are all excellent. I use all EF glass on my EOS R right now and the adapter stays on the camera and honestly feels as solid as a native EF mount. Autofocus seems just as snappy as a native EF mount as well. Very much looking forward to the adapter that has the variable ND in it that's supposed to be shipping in the next couple of weeks. Canon has a done a great job with adapters for the RF Mount so I don't see any problem putting the RF Mount on new cinema or video cameras at all. Could even ship with an adapter to start (like the RP and R do now) - but it's a much better long-term solution to go with the RF Mount. I doubt I'll buy another EF video camera with a Super35 sensor due to the lack of solid lenses for that format. At least with the RF you have the potential for speedboosters and many more true Super35 lenses.

Most of the XC-style posts are referencing the long-term rumor about an XC-style camera with interchangeable lens mount: https://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-xc-style-camera-with-interchangeable-lenses/ - there have also been quite a few rumors about a cinema camera unlike anything Canon has done before plus a rumor today that said to expect an “exciting” new cinema camera, possible ahead of NAB in April" So, if there is an "XC-style cinema camera," it will probably be an APS-C RF mount camera that is a stop-gap where the C100 Mark II used to sit - somewhere between mirrorless/DSLR video and the C200/C300. Since we have the C200 and pretty soon a new C300 to choose from, I think it would be smart to make a more mirrorless-like mini cinema camera.

Yes the EVA-1 was really close. I like that camera and have used it on quite a few jobs. Codec-wise and image wise, it's incredible. Would love something a bit smaller with a modern mount (for adapters/speedboosters) and a useable screen. When you're going for a small footprint, an external monitor with more batteries and chargers isn't ideal. But this is closest! I'm being very picky here - haha Agreed - and if it's someone who can disrupt a bit (like Fuji), then throw in some IBIS while you're at it.

I feel like Canon has made it clear that the C200 is a raw camera that also has other shooting options, so I wouldn't be too, too surprised (this is Canon after all) if they released a non-raw camera that does have a 4K 10-bit codec. It's definitely not a "better" codec than the C200's raw, but it is way more useful for most of my applications (and I would think most shooters in the sub $10k camera range). And yes, I guess they do have the C300II for 10-bit 4K, but it is 4 year old camera that is terribly designed. The only hope for Canon is if they go all out on the C300 Mark III and stop worrying about Mark II sales. The existence of the C300 Mark II at $10k is a main reason the C200 doesn't have a good middle-ground codec and that no C100 Mark III exists. My two main needs for a cinema camera are: - 10-bit 4K Codec and - Small, lightweight design (FS5-sized or smaller). How the main 4-5 manufacturers haven't released a camera like that by 2019 is a mystery to me.

I have a feeling that if Canon outs out a C100 MarkIII or a XC-style camera, it will have very similar specs to the original FS5 (10-bit in HD and 8-bit in 4K) - just four years later. Yea the Mark II versions for the FS7 and FS5 were just small updates, I wouldn't be surprised if they did a bigger update sooner rather than later - especially for the FS7. If the FS5 could do the 10-bit 4K and get approved by the Netflix's of the world, I think it would pretty quickly become one of the more popular doc and doc-series cameras. But it still has that Sony image, so I'll just keep hoping Canon or Fuji do it as well.

Whenever they do release the C300 Mark III, I hope it comes with a fairly big design overhaul. The tower clamshell design was terrible for both monitoring and audio controls - and any sort of trying to make it more useable meant that you would probably lose audio inputs, audio controls, or have to use an external monitor. The C200 is pretty great with an awesome screen, so they could pretty much just follow that design philosophy. - As I mentioned in the original post, I think the biggest opportunity for Canon (or anyone else) is in the C100 Mark III range. Especially since the video features in the EOS R(p) have been purposely crippled, it would make sense that they would release a lower level cinema camera with the RF mount and the 10-bit 422 4K that their mirrorless/dslr cameras lack (and the C200 lacks). Would be a big seller, I'd imagine.

Or an adapter of some kind to get the X5 and X7 on to the Ronin-S handle.

Yea I think we'll see a C300 Mark III before we see anything in the C100/XC-RF range. But I do feel like Canon would do really well to put out a documentary/journalism camera in the $5-$6k range, but to do that it would HAVE to have what many outlets require now (10-bit 422 4K), even just at 24-30fps. Their lineup should be C300 for 6-8k raw plus higher frame rates for cinema and high-end jobs, C200 for low cost raw but not an every day workhorse, and a C100 for the solo-shooter documentary and journalism camera. I would say these are two that I'm most excited about (since I'm assuming Canon will let me down). Fuji could do really well since they have no high-end to protect and that amazing lens lineup, film color profiles, and cinema history. I would have made the EVA-1 my main camera if it would have had an MFT mount. That camera with a Super35mm sensor + a speedbooster would have been amazing. Add MFT lens support with the JVC LS300's sensor punch-in for small and light options and it would have been great. -- Maybe it's just me or there are true technical limitations that don't seem like they should be limitations (10-bit 4K, Canon), but it seems like manufacturers have been making some good, but not great cameras for awhile now. A lot of them are close (EVA-1, C200) but are just hindered by a few stupid mistakes or decisions... Just wanting someone to really throw all their muscle behind a small-ish cinema camera and try to go all out - like Fuji did with the X-T3. Surely for another $4,000 they could make a killer mini cinema camera.

Yep - the XC style body with internal NDs and XLRs with RF Mount and 10-bit 422 codec is the dream

I throw my vote in for Black Magic Raw. Would love to see Fuji get into the cinema camera game - especially with their Super35 lens lineup and those MKX lenses.

We're just a couple months away from what I think will be a pretty big announcement period for cinema cameras. 2018 was a very slow year for cinema cameras (but boat loads of mirrorless cameras), but I think NAB 2019 could kick off a healthy string of announcements. I'm curious what most people are excited about seeing or are hoping they see. Here are my big wishes: Canon C100 Mark III or XC-Style RF Mount Camera There has been some rumors about a XC-like Super35mm ILC camera and, with the new RF mount, this would be a good chance to see it released (especially after the crippled video specs of Canon's first two mirrorless cameras). I think this might just go ahead and replace the C100-line. For it to be worth it, would have to have the Netflix-approved/broadcast ready specs of 10-bit 422, so I think it will have: - 4K 30fps at 10-bit 422 and 4k 60fps at 8-bit 420. - 120fps in HD - RF Mount - Internal NDs and XLRs Perhaps in the $4,500 - $6k range. Guess we could also see the C300 Mark III with optional 8K recording upgrade in the future. Would probably also have to add internal 4K Canon Raw Lite, 120fps in 4K, and a less terrible form factor of the Mark II (camera tower!). A C200 body would be great. I would also love to see Canon add some more compression ratios to their raw codec. I think the C200 is around 3:1 or 4:1, so an 8:1 and 12:1 option would be great to have as well. --- Fuji Super35mm Cinema Camera The camera I'm hoping for most is a small cinema camera from FUJI packed full of X-T3 specs, internal NDs, XLRs, and the IBIS of the X-H1. With their lineup of Super35mm lenses, I think Fuji would really crush it in the small $4 - $7k cinema camera space. They also seem to be focusing much more on video and the X-T3 and X-H1 would be great B-Cams/Gimbal cams. Also wouldn't be surprised if we saw an update to the X-H1 since it was so quickly surpassed in video specs by the X-T3. If so, then they should go for a bigger battery and maybe something revolutionary on a mirrorless camera like internal NDs -- Black Magic Ursa Mini Pro 6k I think this would be similar but with a new 6k+ sensor, BM raw, and perhaps a more compact form factor. Video Assist 2.0 - Blackmagic seems to be going for an end-to-end model and they could really help themselves by releasing an external 4K recorder that records Black Magic Raw but can be used with any camera that can output raw. In my opinion, Black Magic Raw is the most enticing compressed raw format announced recently. For many project Canon's CRL and ProRes Raw still have giant file sizes, whereas Black Magic Raw has 8:1 and 12:1 options that would be great for doc work and take up less space than ProRes LT. Then throw BM Raw into DaVinci for edit and grade. -- Panasonic EVA-2 (L Mount) Panasonic made some big mistakes with the EVA-1, which is an otherwise fantastic camera. The screen was unusable, the EF Mount not adaptable and no differentiation from Canon in the mount space, the audio controls were terrible... but the image, dual ISO, and CODECS!! were amazing. So, they just need to make some basic updates, put the main audio controls on the body (not in the menu), make a few areas less flimsy (audio knobs), make a great screen, and throw the L-Mount on there and they'd be good to go. -- Not sure we'll see much from Sony, but the Mark II versions of the FS7 and FS5 were so underwhelming that maybe they'll push a new FS7 out with 120fps in 4K, 6k+ sensor, or raw internal recording. Those are my biggest wishes and since I'm still in a bit of a camera flux, what actually does happen may direct me to what camera company I use for the next 3-4 years. Hoping most for the success of Canon or Fuji (my favorite images in the business), but we'll see.

Haha got it. Well, if anyone else is looking for a great on-camera mic, my recommendation might be useful!

I have no idea where this thread has gone, but this is my current favorite on-camera microphone for mirrorless/dslrs: https://www.amazon.com/Deity-Super-Cardioid-Directional-Smartphones-Transmitters/dp/B07K2XDDH3. with the Rode you can either do 0db or +20. Not great control. The Deity has a levels control on the back so it's as easy to change audio levels as it would be on a cinema camera that has dedicated audio knobs. I usually turn down the internal pre-amps on the camera as much as I can and then turn up the audio on the mic. This makes for some very nice and clean audio. It's also much smaller and more compact than the Rode mics. Here is a good overview video:

For sure. Doesn't seem like it should be that difficult to hook up an external recorder to transmit whatever audio it's capturing to the camera to record directly onto the video file.

It's true that internal codecs have become pretty darn good and will only improve in the next couple of years, so it makes sense that Atomos would start focusing on just making solid monitors. The one thing that I wish third party manufacturers would really focus on is creating high quality audio options for mirrorless/dslr cameras. I'd love some sort of battery-grip sized recorder (no screen) that had a few XLR inputs and that's it. Would probably need external recording in order to have 2-4 channels of audio, but it would be pretty great to have that option. Something like the Video Devices Pix LR, but connected directly to the camera: https://www.newsshooter.com/2016/03/15/video-devices-pix-lr-audio-interface-adds-xlr-inputsoutputs-to-the-pix-e-series/ Either that or just work to improve on the XLR modules made by Panasonic. Panasonic's is OK, but doesn't really have great audio. Or even if camera manufacturers started adding a second 3.5mm jack and 2-channel audio or added a mini XLR like the BMPCC4K. Monitors are nice, but the ones that come with the camera work just fine 98% of the time. I'd much rather see 3rd party manufacturers work on audio enhancements - we really don't need more monitors at this point.

Asked this on another thread, but Andrew I'd be curious to hear your thoughts. I am actually curious of which would result in a better image (with everything else being equal). - 10 bit 422 LongGOP at 150mbps or in this case - 10 bit 420 LongGOP H265 at 72mbps (S1) - 8 bit 420 All-I at 480 mbps (EOS R) Especially if we assume they are all the same camera withe these shooting options. Even with a lower bit-depth, my knee jerk reaction would be that 6x or 3x the bit rate would result in a fuller, more gradable image than the 10-bit image. I remember all the hullaballoo around the GH5's 150mbps mode not really being "10 bit" because you have to have a data rate of so much to really get the advantage of the bit-depth (something like 300-400 mbps, if I remember correctly).

Is it just me or is there a big lack of 4" recorders that would be pretty great? I usually don't have trouble with on-camera monitors, but a bit more size would be great sometimes, but 5" is often overkill and just dwarfs all mirrorless cameras. Perhaps cameras should just start including a 4" screen - the Pocket 4K screen is awesome, but it really doesn't need to be that big (and, probably, that power hungry). I would love a 4" monitor to just siwtch between different cameras when necessary. I think the C200 screen is perfect in clarity, size, and weight (once you get a much better mounting solution, which is easy enough) - I think it's a bit smaller than 4"

Yea this video is ridiculous, especially since he has never touched the camera. With that said, I am a bit disappointed in the Panasonic S1. Mostly due to the lack of codecs that the GH5 (now a two year old camera) offers. And yes, it will get 10-bit 422, but I am actually curious of which is better (with all things being equal). - 10 bit 422 LongGOP at 150mbps or - 8 bit 420 All-I at 480 mbps (EOS R) Even with a lower bit-depth, my knee jerk reaction would be that triple the bit rate would result in a fuller, more gradable image than the 10-bit. Anyone test these two side by side? At the same time, I really like the 10-bit 422 150mbps on the GH5 and think it looks pretty great. From someone who has actually used the camera:

Totally agree on the 4K Ninja Star. As much as I love 10-bit 422 output and ProRes and ProRes Raw and all the other great things that external recorders give us, I hate external recorders. Putting a Ninja V on an EOS R or Z6 or X-T3 is sort of ridiculous (as others have mentioned here) and automatically negates why I would use those cameras in the first place (small, unassuming, versatile, total lightweight package, easy to mount on gimbal, etc). With the Ninja V, you also need to carry around 5-6 big NPF batteries (and therefore 5-6 chargers) just to get through a day of shooting. And also make sure your sound recordist is standing a good distance away from the camera. Which is difficult when you are also the sound recordist. Whether it's my C200 or EOS R or when using something like the GH5 or C300, I don't have any issues with the screens on those cameras. A monitor/recorder is often redundant, loud, and unnecessary (unless you're using the EVA-1, then an external monitor is totally necessary). PLEASE Atomos. Give me a compact 10-bit 422 4K Recorder without a screen and with a 5-watt per hour power draw (like most non-recording monitors).

I don't think that will be the direct comparison for very long. I think the RP doesn't really have any comparison and the EOS R is really the A7III and Z6. Pretty sure a $3k+ EOS R(x? 1?) flagship mirrorless full frame camera will come before long. The RF lenses are too good and too pricey to be just for the EOS R and RP. In the next 4-6 months, we'll see the flagship plus a cinema camera or two to fill the holes. Totally forgot that Canon is rumored to announce 5+ lenses tomorrow as well - that's exciting.

Okay great - will do some research but if you have some brands that have done particularly well, would love to know which ones.

From my experience, off-brand LP-E6s seem to last about 60% the time of the Canon batteries. Same for the LPE17s? Or do other manufacturer's batteries do a bit better?

The only big negative upon further review is the battery. Bummer to see a battery that has just over half the capacity of a Canon LP-E6 on a full frame camera that shoots 4K. I'm guessing you won't get much more than 45-minutes shooting on a battery that size. As someone who owns a lot of Canon LP-E6s and has battery life pretty high up on the priority list, that is a bummer. I'm waiting for the pro model anyway, but love the RP's size and price. If it had that bigger battery it may have made a good B-Cam to the EOS R on smaller, one-man band shoots - or as a camera to always have on a gimbal for quick shots.