nigelbb Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 [quote name='XXX' timestamp='1346336854' post='16963'] BTW can anyone point me to some videos putting the C300 in good use?[/quote]Philip Bloom mostly uses the C300 now. He most recently filmed the Adidas advert with the team GB Olympians lip-synching with it http://philipbloom.net/2012/08/12/teamgb/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riccardocovino Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 mmhh I don't understand why the pre-order price seems to be good news: 4999 punds is 7900 dollars, almost exactly the announced price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurtinMinorKey Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 This is how it works in the aging Japanese corperate world. Somone important makes a big mistake(the pricing of the c300), and then no one will tell them they made a mistake, so they end up doubling down on their mistakes (c100 pricing). I still think the c300 is the best camera at its price or below, but I'm not sure the increase in quality over its rivals justifies the huge price premium. BTW, did anyone watch the c500 preview with Jeff Cronenweth? He said something to the effect of: the best thing about this system are the new lenses(Canon cine zooms). Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the camera itself though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avrofilmvideo Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Why for fs no 50P? Why 50i? Do they(canon) have to cripple everything like Sony? Is it such a big deal in 2012 to have at least 720-1280 50P recording?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gene_can_sing Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 We recently shot a music video for song that was really slow, atmospheric and meandering. We used my FS700 and it was mainly shot in 60fps (with a few shots at 120 and 240) and it looked GREAT because the song was so slow and mellow that the slow motion just complimented it so well. The FS700 is so flexible in so many ways BESIDES the frame rates. I would NOT even consider the C100 just because it does not have slow motion (sorry, but 60i does not qualify). That is such as joke to not have at least 60p in 2012. For the BMC, I can understand no slow motion because it's only $3000 and it has RAW, but for Canon, no excuses. I think if all you shoot is narrative and events, than 24fps only is fine and so is the C100. But for subjects like music videos, sports, B-Roll for documentaries or just the occasional tricked out shot; slow motion just adds so much drama to those typs of shots that 24fps just cannot do. Furthermore, after being on Canon for almost 4 years, I am happy to get away from the baked in Canon look. I LOVE the FS700 Cinegammas, especially Cinegamma 1 as it's really nostalgic and filmic looking and so great for grading. Unlike many, I like the form factor of the FS700. I shoot tons of handheld (since it's a look I love) and I do it just bare bones, no rig, no extra EVF, just using what is on the camera and I get great shots handheld. I think if the C100 was around 5K, it would be a hit, but the FS700 (especially is really hard to beat at that price). Rumor has it that Sony is about to announce a Codec upgrade for the FS700 very soon. Possibly in-camera 4:2:2 50mbps. I certain hope that is the case, and if it is, the C100 will be lost even before it launches. I think the C100 is really just a camera for the Canon fan boys. For people who want value, they are going to look elsewhere at BMC or Sony. Maybe in 2013, Canon might finally break the Gaaasssspppppp...... the 60p barrier. For them, it's a long, long time coming. avrofilmvideo and nahua 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightpainter Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 got my 5 months old fs-100 yesterday... 2900 DOLLARS!!!!... crasy... think we see in spring 13 a CANON 105...... ( 100er body / 2_4k/ 4:4:4/ new SENSOR / GLOBAL SHUTTER!!!!) ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tzedekh Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 [quote name='lightpainter' timestamp='1346406523' post='17024'] think we see in spring 13 a CANON 105...... ( 100er body / 2_4k/ 4:4:4/ new SENSOR / GLOBAL SHUTTER!!!!) [/quote] That was a joke, right? Canon is taking the expensive, conservative technology approach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted September 1, 2012 Author Administrators Share Posted September 1, 2012 As I said before global shutter is under development at various companies. But the industrial and scientific sensors which are already on the market with global shutter have trade offs in that mode, regarding less image quality. (Less dynamic range, more noise) So it will still be a while before the development projects (say at Panasonic and Sony) reach a certain performance level to make it worthwhile. I don't think there are many people who want to solve jello by fucking image quality. If what I believe about the BMCC's sensor is correct, that too has a global shutter mode. Have a guess why it isn't used :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Lipetz Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 [quote name='lexicon' timestamp='1346269089' post='16878'] So, basically "Wide DR Gamma" means just an intermediate gamma between REC709 and Canon Log. It's reported by Canon to measure 800%, which as I explained before, means that it adds [b]three more stops[/b] of dynamic range compared to REC709. It is a less extreme gamma than Canon Log, making it somehow usable without -or with little- grading in post, not a bad idea indeed. Canon website: [b]Canon Log Gamma and Wide DR Gamma[/b] Canon Log Gamma preserves shadow and highlight detail for maximum editing and grading in post-production without degrading image quality; contrast and sharpness are subdued with characteristics similar to negative film. Canon Log Gamma emphasizes rich gradients from mid-range to highlights and realizes 12-stops of Dynamic Range (DR). At ISO850, Canon Log Gamma enables 5.3 stops of latitude above optimal exposure (and 6.7 stops below), broadening the available dynamic range in color grading. [color=#000000][size=2][img]http://www.usa.canon.com/CUSA/assets/app/images/cameras/cinema_eos/C100/features/c100_feature_04a.jpg[/img][/size][/color] [color=#000000][size=2][size=4]Wide DR Gamma is based on Rec. 709 and is optimized for monitor output or situations requiring less color grading in post-production. Wide DR Gamma exhibits high dynamic range, suppressing brightness while maintaining seamless gradations. A wide dynamic range of 800% preserves latitude for post-production work, but Wide DR Gamma is designed for perfect color "out-of-the-box."[/size][/size][/color] [color=#000000][size=4]source: [/size][url="http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/cinema_eos_cameras/eos_c100#Features"]http://www.usa.canon...s_c100#Features[/url][/color] [/quote] Auto how well will AVCHD grade with log images? Perhaps wide DR log is just the limit of AVCHD in post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharding Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 [quote name='Philip Lipetz' timestamp='1346590726' post='17158'] Auto how well will AVCHD grade with log images? Perhaps wide DR log is just the limit of AVCHD in post. [/quote] I was gonna say, after a bit too much time with Cinestyle and CineGamma, these AVCHD/H264 based files don't seem to deal too well with really flat middles. It's one of the few things I actually tested, and though ultraflat gives you more options in post it invariably looks... slightly ragged... when compared to baking things in a bit, or even entirely. Now if we were recording to ProRes/DNxHD that'd be a different matter, but we're talking the same 24mbps for those extra three stops... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted September 2, 2012 Author Administrators Share Posted September 2, 2012 Have you tried grading CineForm yet JG? Doing some research into that compressed raw codec. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharding Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 No not Cineform RAW, I've seen the name chucked around as an option for BMD footage. used Cineform (before GoPro bought them) a couple of times as an intermediate before I realised DNxHD was free and did most of what I needed. If you're grading AVCHD/H264 source in After Effects from a Premiere timeline though, there's no reason to leave native, as AE treats all footage as individual frames of RGB and 32-bit if you tell it to, so you'll get all the latitude you can anyway. At least I don't think it's worth the transcode effort for such compressed sources. But even grading in AE, you do notice the difference between ultraflats and more sensible gamma. It's just how close together the midtones are, even LUTs don't fix entirely, it's just a side effect of using just as many bits to try and store information i think, there are simply fewer midtone values for the encoder to choose from at encoding stage. :/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharding Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 I think you can get Premiere alone to use Maximum Bit Depth for grades in the Sequence Settings menu, but really After Effects is best as it 'unpacks' your footage into individual uncompressed frames as part of its processing pipeline. The results just seem to be finer in AE than in Prem. It is a finishing tool, after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FilmMan Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 Here's some video: [url="http://vimeo.com/49083326"]http://vimeo.com/49083326[/url] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FilmMan Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 Sort of reminds me of "better" GH2 footage? I'm curious how the GH3 will turn out. :rolleyes: I won't be buyng the C100 camera. The footage does remind me of the FS100 too. I'm not knocking it by any means but... :ph34r: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FilmMan Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 In fairness, the footage for the most part is very clean and looks like the C300. Alot of new possible cameras are knocking on the door. Canon' s pricing is questionable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.