Canon 6D vs 5D MkIII vs 7D MkII for filming with EOSHD C-Log

[JazzBox]

26 minutes ago, Asmundma said:

Agree completly !    

Really, I thought the same until few days ago: I started in 2011 with Canon always in "Neutral" profile and I liked the colors but not the files. I had the 600D and then the 70D, but I used for some videos some 60D, 7D, 5D MkII and MkIII that I had from friends or rented. 

As soon as I "discovered" the Panasonic G6 on EOSHD.COM I sold the Canon (I had the 70D in that moment) and went for Panasonic mirrorless: G6, then GH4, and G7 replacing the G6 as second body some weeks ago. I love them, I use them every days with "Natural" Andy Lee's setting (great profile) but sometimes I need a flatter look.

I've bought the Micro Cinema Camera and I like the file a lot, but I prefer the easiness of control of DSLM/DSLR, so if the EOSHD Log-C could substitute the BlackMagic flat I'm more then happy  

I have to run a test side by side (BlackMagic / Canon with EOSHD Log-C), but in the meantime I ask here for advices, since I did not use the Canons in the last 2 years and to me, with Andrew's profile, they are brand new cameras. 

[IronFilm]

It shocks me a person would sell a GH4 and BMMCC to raise money for a Canon DSLR. As a GH4 together with a BMMCC already covers so much, is a great versatile pairing. 

[Dave Del Real]

19 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

It shocks me a person would sell a GH4 and BMMCC to raise money for a Canon DSLR. As a GH4 together with a BMMCC already covers so much, is a great versatile pairing. 

Sold both of mine. Don't get me wrong, I like 4K but resolution isn't everything. The 7D Mark II's were a gift, I wouldn't have purchased them. I was looking at maybe a 1DC or a C100 at the time but couldn't refuse the gift. Plus, I was thinking Magic Lantern might come soon and breathe life into the 7D2.

[mercer]

1 hour ago, JazzBox said:

Really, I thought the same until few days ago: I started in 2011 with Canon always in "Neutral" profile and I liked the colors but not the files. I had the 600D and then the 70D, but I used for some videos some 60D, 7D, 5D MkII and MkIII that I had from friends or rented. 

As soon as I "discovered" the Panasonic G6 on EOSHD.COM I sold the Canon (I had the 70D in that moment) and went for Panasonic mirrorless: G6, then GH4, and G7 replacing the G6 as second body some weeks ago. I love them, I use them every days with "Natural" Andy Lee's setting (great profile) but sometimes I need a flatter look.

I've bought the Micro Cinema Camera and I like the file a lot, but I prefer the easiness of control of DSLM/DSLR, so if the EOSHD Log-C could substitute the BlackMagic flat I'm more then happy  

I have to run a test side by side (BlackMagic / Canon with EOSHD Log-C), but in the meantime I ask here for advices, since I did not use the Canons in the last 2 years and to me, with Andrew's profile, they are brand new cameras. 

First I need to say that Canon LOG is not mushy crap, I know you didn't say that but it definitely needs to be clarified. The cameras that offer official Canon LOG are their higher end cameras that downsample the 1080p from 4K or shoot in 4K. The Canon LOG 1080p from my XC10 is as sharp and detailed as the 4K from the Panasonic G7, GX85, etc...

The 4K from my XC10 is a professional codec and grading the Canon LOG files is a joy. It blows away any consumer 4K anywhere near or below that price.

So, the question, for me, becomes... How well does Andrew's C-Log match up and can it be intercut with actual Canon LOG?

Personally, I am at a point that I would rather have the cinematic colors and gorgeous skin tones of Canon 1080p than the sterile video look of most other camera brands. 

If I were you, I would maybe consider a C100. Selling your BMMCC and GH4 would cover the costs. Then use one of the DSLRs you already have access to, with Andrew's C-Loh as a B-Cam. 

Or get a 5Diii, use ML Raw for those times you want 14 bit Raw and for simpler work, use Andrew's C-Log. 

I'd be interested to see how well the ML bitrate hacks combined with Andrew's C-Log works. 

I am so over other camera brands that I actually ordered a dirt cheap eos-m10 to test Andrew's C-Log and see how well I can match it with Canon LOG from my XC10. If it's fairly simple to get them close, my next camera will be an 80D or M5. 

Btw, I also have a BMMCC, and for me, it is one of the most unenjoyable shooting experiences I have ever had. But I do admit, the footage is beautiful. 

[JazzBox]

9 hours ago, mercer said:

Btw, I also have a BMMCC, and for me, it is one of the most unenjoyable shooting experiences I have ever had. But I do admit, the footage is beautiful. 

To my taste BMMCC has the best file I have at my disposal, but 99% of the time I'm run and gun and I have no time to set it properly, so I shoot with Panasonic - that also I like, but at that point, Canon with EOSHD C-Log give me nicer colors... So I'm thinking to buy one... I could buy a 7DmkII or a 80D, but I don't know if they are good enough like 6D I tried with noise, high ISO etc... my Canon 70D was horrible when slightly underexposed... So I think that APS-C maybe is not good as full frame (talking about Canon, of course, with Panasonic G7 I can underexpose 2-3 stops with no problems).

[JazzBox]

On 21 settembre 2016 at 1:17 AM, mercer said:

Btw, I also have a BMMCC, and for me, it is one of the most unenjoyable shooting experiences I have ever had. But I do admit, the footage is beautiful. 

Mercer, I looked at your vimeo channel and I saw we used the same cameras: G7, BM Micro etc.. 
I cannot test Canon in these days since I'm far from my father, but in your opinion is the EOSHD C-Log as good the "film" profile on the Micro? 
Which setting do you use on the G7?
Thank you!

[mercer]

50 minutes ago, JazzBox said:

Mercer, I looked at your vimeo channel and I saw we used the same cameras: G7, BM Micro etc.. 
I cannot test Canon in these days since I'm far from my father, but in your opinion is the EOSHD C-Log as good the "film" profile on the Micro? 
Which setting do you use on the G7?
Thank you!

The Micro is definitely better, but I just don't like the ergonomics... I really, really don't like the ergonomics. 

Now the 5d Mkiii ML Raw is as good or better than the Micro. And the benefit with that camera is, you can take the ML card out and use the regular Canon with Reid-Log if you're looking for a quicker workflow. 

I also don't have the G7 anymore, I sold it when I bought the Micro. Then I bought an XC10 and a GX85, but I am selling the Micro and the GX85 and will replace them with either an 80D or maybe a C100ii. Oh yeah I also have an eos-m10, which is what I am currently using Reid-Log with. 

As far as my G7 settings... I used Noam Kroll's settings but with Natural instead of CineLikeD. 

[Bioskop.Inc]

Visioncolor's profiles, for Canon, are the best i've ever used, VisionTech being the pick of the bunch - only needs minor tweeking & you're done.

As far as BM cameras are concerned, they are 10bit Prores & not 8bit H264 - so of course their Film profile is going to be miles ahead of the majority of cameras on offer. However, if you haven't got the time to learn how to shoot a proper camera, then their Video profile setting has been vastly improved from its humble beginnings & produces a great image if you simply don't have the time to grade a lot or are used to grading 8bit H264 (NB. The bonus being that it won't fall apart like H264, because it's still 10bit ProRes).

The real problem with the Micro, it seems, is that improved battery & 60p simply doesn't seem to out weigh the bad ergonomics - whatever that is meant to mean for a drone camera?

[mercer]

3 hours ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

Visioncolor's profiles, for Canon, are the best i've ever used, VisionTech being the pick of the bunch - only needs minor tweeking & you're done.

As far as BM cameras are concerned, they are 10bit Prores & not 8bit H264 - so of course their Film profile is going to be miles ahead of the majority of cameras on offer. However, if you haven't got the time to learn how to shoot a proper camera, then their Video profile setting has been vastly improved from its humble beginnings & produces a great image if you simply don't have the time to grade a lot or are used to grading 8bit H264 (NB. The bonus being that it won't fall apart like H264, because it's still 10bit ProRes).

The real problem with the Micro, it seems, is that improved battery & 60p simply doesn't seem to out weigh the bad ergonomics - whatever that is meant to mean for a drone camera?

Yeah a drone camera... How many of the actual users fly it? And to be honest, if that is improved battery life, then the Pocket must be worse with battery than everybody claims, because I was lucky to get 45 minutes out of a battery, on the Micro, if I shut down the camera between takes. And even then the battery drains quickly unless you remove it. 

But other than a few minor annoyances (IR Filter, lens selection) the ProRes image alone is the best 1080p image for the money and the Raw is just mind blowing.

I probably would have enjoyed the Pocket better, even with the frequent battery changes. And if I can ever find one for the right price, I will surely buy it and use it as designed... No screens, no external batteries, just an OIS lens or a C-Mount and monopod.

[Bioskop.Inc]

5 hours ago, mercer said:

Yeah a drone camera... How many of the actual users fly it? And to be honest, if that is improved battery life, then the Pocket must be worse with battery than everybody claims, because I was lucky to get 45 minutes out of a battery, on the Micro, if I shut down the camera between takes. And even then the battery drains quickly unless you remove it. 

But other than a few minor annoyances (IR Filter, lens selection) the ProRes image alone is the best 1080p image for the money and the Raw is just mind blowing.

I probably would have enjoyed the Pocket better, even with the frequent battery changes. And if I can ever find one for the right price, I will surely buy it and use it as designed... No screens, no external batteries, just an OIS lens or a C-Mount and monopod.

Got a huge smile on my face right now  - 45mins battery time, well they kept that quiet! Exactly the same on the Pocket....but you can actually pick it up & go without spending a fortune on the extras that are needed to make it useable.

There's a guy over at Cinematography.com that shared quite a few tips to get the best out of your battery life on the Pocket, not all of them logical but they work: turn down the screen brightness etc...and the strangest was, Do Not turn it off between takes, as that drains more of the battery. So much BS spoken about the Pocket & once you actually Learn (yes, I know, it's a dirty word nowadays, but it's an important aspect of life) how to use it properly, it is so much easier to use than a DSLR (cause your image worries are gone).

Ease of Use vs. Fucking Awesome Image - well I know what i'll pick everytime.....

[mercer]

4 hours ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

Got a huge smile on my face right now  - 45mins battery time, well they kept that quiet! Exactly the same on the Pocket....but you can actually pick it up & go without spending a fortune on the extras that are needed to make it useable.

There's a guy over at Cinematography.com that shared quite a few tips to get the best out of your battery life on the Pocket, not all of them logical but they work: turn down the screen brightness etc...and the strangest was, Do Not turn it off between takes, as that drains more of the battery. So much BS spoken about the Pocket & once you actually Learn (yes, I know, it's a dirty word nowadays, but it's an important aspect of life) how to use it properly, it is so much easier to use than a DSLR (cause your image worries are gone).

Ease of Use vs. Fucking Awesome Image - well I know what i'll pick everytime.....

Yeah, people claim to get 1.25-1.5 hours out of it, but I never saw that. Of course, to be fair, I was using Wasabi batteries and it was blazing hot when I was using it... if heat makes a difference. But, I use the same batteries, in the same weather, with my XC10 and I'm getting 1.5-2 hours out of them and that's with a screen at its brightest with 5-Axis turned on.

The other big issue I had with the Micro is the required rigging. Obviously, you need a screen, but the screen turns a camera the size of a Rubik's Cube into Frankenstein's monster.

And since my style of filmmaking is more slow burn, I attack principal photography like it's B-Unit. So a lot of run and gun shooting where I am the crew. So, I would shoot a couple shots at one location and then load up the truck and head 5-10 minutes down the road for the next. With the cumbersome rig, I was forced to break it down in between locations, and that gets old quick.

And then finally lens options. At the time all I owned was vintage, full frame lenses or vintage c-mounts. I had no interest in a speedbooster, so I was primarily using c-mounts. The 25mm Voigtlander was the best combo I used with it, but I sold it to help offset the costs of the monitor and the camera. 

Like I said, I probably should have bought a pocket and used it out of box with the 12-35mm OIS Panasonic handheld, and/or c-mounts with a monopod. I just hate the thought of paying a grand for a camera that cost $500 2 years ago. 

But it's my own fault, Zak warned everyone that if you prefer the DSLR form factor then you won't like the Micro. At the time, I didn't realize how much I liked the DSLR form factor. I've actually come so full circle that I prefer DSLRs now to even smaller mirrorless cameras.

But even now, I'll go back and look at some of my clips and I am mind blown every time. The ProRes alone is freaking amazing. And the Raw 3:1 is just insane. I shoot a lot of footage in the woods (horror type of stuff) and the difference Raw makes with foliage and tree bark is insane compared to any modern consumer price equivalent. 

Btw, have you ever used the Pocket with a native lens? Am curious to know how that focus button works.

[JazzBox]

On 25/9/2016 at 2:46 AM, Bioskop.Inc said:

Visioncolor's profiles, for Canon, are the best i've ever used, VisionTech being the pick of the bunch - only needs minor tweeking & you're done.

As far as BM cameras are concerned, they are 10bit Prores & not 8bit H264 - so of course their Film profile is going to be miles ahead of the majority of cameras on offer. However, if you haven't got the time to learn how to shoot a proper camera, then their Video profile setting has been vastly improved from its humble beginnings & produces a great image if you simply don't have the time to grade a lot or are used to grading 8bit H264 (NB. The bonus being that it won't fall apart like H264, because it's still 10bit ProRes).

The real problem with the Micro, it seems, is that improved battery & 60p simply doesn't seem to out weigh the bad ergonomics - whatever that is meant to mean for a drone camera?

I love the Micro's files and they are very simple to work with in post with corrections and color.
But the ergonomics is really bad... I like to shot as run and gun as I can, sometimes I have the time to rig all the things, but most of the time I like to spend more time on the lights / panels etc... and less on the camera   

If I had to choose I would have the BM Micro files in a GH4, maybe with a Super35 sensor

Maybe I could not sell the Micro and use it when I have time to setup it, but, talking about EOSHD C-Log, which Canon camera would you buy to use it as its best?  (possibly I would not use RAW) 
 

[Bioskop.Inc]

8 minutes ago, JazzBox said:

I love the Micro's files and they are very simple to work with in post with corrections and color.
But the ergonomics is really bad... I like to shot as run and gun as I can, sometimes I have the time to rig all the things, but most of the time I like to spend more time on the lights / panels etc... and less on the camera   

If I had to choose I would have the BM Micro files in a GH4, maybe with a Super35 sensor

Maybe I could not sell the Micro and use it when I have time to setup it, but, talking about EOSHD C-Log, which Canon camera would you buy to use it as its best?  (possibly I would not use RAW) 
 

The Micro's ergonomics is why I stayed faithful to the Pocket - it's all there in a tiny package. I think my next purchase will be a MB speedbooster, as it'll make it easier to use (better stability, which isn't bad now) & give me close to S35.

I'm kinda hoping that BM will make a smaller, more DSLR friendly shaped BMCC - can only live in hope!

Which Canon camera? Wait till the 5D4 comes out & then pick up a cheap 5D3.

It's a no brainer as you'll get Magic Lantern for free, which will give you RAW CDNG continuous filming (use it or not, it'll be there for you to change your mind) & all the other missing bits'n'bobs that ML have added to the party. Can't underestimate how useful the ML hack is for filming/photography - it's not just about adding RAW filming, there's so much more that it adds to your camera.

HOWEVER.....Just not so sure c-log is the way to go with DSLRs. But this might be how people are using it & then thinking that they can grade the footage to death! I might be wrong, but I took kidsrevil's advice (back in the day) & still feel that you can get good result's straight out of the box with a DSLR (& some minot tweeking).

Here's something i shot a few years ago on my Canon 60D - I used an early version of a VisionColor PP & just desaturated the footage, as I got the settings in-camera slightly wrong. It's all natural [window] light & 1 practical above the mirror. Also, the DPX conversion ended up being a red herring (at the time I was on FCP7 & it didn't handle H264 footage very well) - I've revisited the footage recently in FCPX & it still looks great. The Anamorphic squeeze is slightly out too!

 

[JazzBox]

26 minutes ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

The Micro's ergonomics is why I stayed faithful to the Pocket - it's all there in a tiny package. I think my next purchase will be a MB speedbooster, as it'll make it easier to use (better stability, which isn't bad now) & give me close to S35.

I'm kinda hoping that BM will make a smaller, more DSLR friendly shaped BMCC - can only live in hope!

Which Canon camera? Wait till the 5D4 comes out & then pick up a cheap 5D3.

It's a no brainer as you'll get Magic Lantern for free, which will give you RAW CDNG continuous filming (use it or not, it'll be there for you to change your mind) & all the other missing bits'n'bobs that ML have added to the party. Can't underestimate how useful the ML hack is for filming/photography - it's not just about adding RAW filming, there's so much more that it adds to your camera.

HOWEVER.....Just not so sure c-log is the way to go with DSLRs. But this might be how people are using it & then thinking that they can grade the footage to death! I might be wrong, but I took kidsrevil's advice (back in the day) & still feel that you can get good result's straight out of the box with a DSLR (& some minot tweeking).

Here's something i shot a few years ago on my Canon 60D - I used an early version of a VisionColor PP & just desaturated the footage, as I got the settings in-camera slightly wrong. It's all natural [window] light & 1 practical above the mirror. Also, the DPX conversion ended up being a red herring (at the time I was on FCP7 & it didn't handle H264 footage very well) - I've revisited the footage recently in FCPX & it still looks great. The Anamorphic squeeze is slightly out too!

 

Great filmic quality!

I use the GH4 and the G7 the very same way: no V-log or Cinelike D, but just "Natural" (with saturation and contrast -5) for a 90% ready look.
I'm deciding to sell the GH4 since Canon colors are better to my eyes and I don't need 4K ... but of course it is still a great camera  

[Bioskop.Inc]

1 hour ago, JazzBox said:

Great filmic quality!

I use the GH4 and the G7 the very same way: no V-log or Cinelike D, but just "Natural" (with saturation and contrast -5) for a 90% ready look.
I'm deciding to sell the GH4 since Canon colors are better to my eyes and I don't need 4K ... but of course it is still a great camera  

Yeah, I'm with you on the Canon Colours. I have seen some good things done with the GH cameras & the GH5 will be interesting, but only if it lives up to the specs.

The thing that bugs me most about the BM cameras is the colour, not really crazy about it. But because they spit out RAW/ProRes you can really go to town & actually get the look/colours that you want without your footage turning to mush - great for learning proper colour grading.

I personally found using a DSLR really hard at first, simply because I had to learn a new way of filming - well, accepting the limitations of a shit codec with digital tech. BM Pocket placed me back into my comfort zone & it was a relief to use a camera that I understood/would do what I wanted it to - it was like turning back the clock.

Go with what your gut says - there's no right or wrong, just what's best for you.

[EduPortas]

Hello, happy owner of a Canon 7D Mark II here. Also, buyer of Andrew's picture profiles.

Tried them the other day in the woods and got a very nice image after 1-click grading with FilmConvert.

Easy as pie.

I shot at 60p with my F2.8 17-55mm. Most of the shots were at 17mm and F5.6. My ISOs were pretty high.

I specifically decided to record some clips in the Mexican woods because of the

complex detail of the leaves, sticks, etc., and the strong contrast between shadows and well-lit spaces.

In years past, I've visited the same woods with my former 6D and my Fuji X100. 

The Canon 7D Mark II takes considerable better video than both. 

Hope this helps.
 

[JazzBox]

2 hours ago, EduPortas said:

Hello, happy owner of a Canon 7D Mark II here. Also, buyer of Andrew's picture profiles.

Tried them the other day in the woods and got a very nice image after 1-click grading with FilmConvert.

Easy as pie.

I shot at 60p with my F2.8 17-55mm. Most of the shots were at 17mm and F5.6. My ISOs were pretty high.

I specifically decided to record some clips in the Mexican woods because of the

complex detail of the leaves, sticks, etc., and the strong contrast between shadows and well-lit spaces.

In years past, I've visited the same woods with my former 6D and my Fuji X100. 

The Canon 7D Mark II takes considerable better video than both. 

Hope this helps.
 

Thank you very much! I'm really thinking between 5DmkIII and 7D! (or, if I sell all the things I have a C100 MkII...)
If you have some video on youtube/vimeo please share it  

[EduPortas]

2 hours ago, JazzBox said:

Thank you very much! I'm really thinking between 5DmkIII and 7D! (or, if I sell all the things I have a C100 MkII...)
If you have some video on youtube/vimeo please share it  

Cheers, I'll try to post some before and after still shots of the graded material

of my last visit to the woods. You'll get a good idea of the latitude of the 7D MII.

However, I would strongly advise you to test your particular camera-lens combination

with both of the camera's you mentioned. I've found that Canon lenses make a huge

difference in video. Every fault of the lens is magnified in video, as well as its attributes.

This is specially true for skin tones and the overall detail you wish to obtain from the human face.

Right now I can't shoot without my 17-55 or a decent prime (not necessarily L primes, though).

[JazzBox]

24 minutes ago, EduPortas said:

Cheers, I'll try to post some before and after still shots of the graded material

of my last visit to the woods. You'll get a good idea of the latitude of the 7D MII.

However, I would strongly advise you to test your particular camera-lens combination

with both of the camera's you mentioned. I've found that Canon lenses make a huge

difference in video. Every fault of the lens is magnified in video, as well as its attributes.

This is specially true for skin tones and the overall detail you wish to obtain from the human face.

Right now I can't shoot without my 17-55 or a decent prime (not necessarily L primes, though).

I only have m/43 lenses I use with GH4, G7 and BlackMagic Micro Cinema Camera and a bunch of CY Zeiss that I would use with the Canon I'm going to buy. 
I tried the 6D, great results at 3200 ISO, I'd like to buy something that could give me similar results

 

On 21 settembre 2016 at 1:09 AM, IronFilm said:

It shocks me a person would sell a GH4 and BMMCC to raise money for a Canon DSLR. As a GH4 together with a BMMCC already covers so much, is a great versatile pairing. 

Don't get me wrong, I love the GH4, but I also have the G7 and it is very good, very close to GH4. I'm certainly interested in GH5 (internal ProRes 422 etc...) but maybe the G8 would be great and cheaper...

I also love the BlackMagic Micro, but I don't like the ergonomics and the fact that I have to rig it every time. 
I rig the GH4 when I need follow focus etc... but sometimes I prefer to go just with the camera and a couple of nice Zeiss... and that's not possible with the Micro.

I'm searching a camera that is "fast" as the GH4 / G7, but could give me a flatter look, like the one from BlackMagic, that I can easily grade in post. And I'd love to use my CY Zeiss at their best, so I could have a real wide angle with 25 and 28, a nice 35, a good normal with 50 etc... 

I like the Super 35 look, but most of the people says that 7D MkII is noisier then 6D and 5D MKIII, so I could go for the full frame look in order to achieve a better clean file.

I don't want to use Metabones or similar speedboster, since I like to shoot as backlight as I can and I don't want to risk velvet or blue dots.

GH4's V-Log-L is not an option for me: very nice in good light, very bad indoor for my experience, so not really reliable. 

I was shocked from EOSHD C-Log at 3200 ISO with my father's 6D, really clean, no bad colors, no noise etc... Of course less resolution then GH4, but for narrative etc... it is very organic and "filmic". 

If you have suggestion I'm here  

[mercer]

2 hours ago, JazzBox said:

I only have m/43 lenses I use with GH4, G7 and BlackMagic Micro Cinema Camera and a bunch of CY Zeiss that I would use with the Canon I'm going to buy. 
I tried the 6D, great results at 3200 ISO, I'd like to buy something that could give me similar results

 

Don't get me wrong, I love the GH4, but I also have the G7 and it is very good, very close to GH4. I'm certainly interested in GH5 (internal ProRes 422 etc...) but maybe the G8 would be great and cheaper...

I also love the BlackMagic Micro, but I don't like the ergonomics and the fact that I have to rig it every time. 
I rig the GH4 when I need follow focus etc... but sometimes I prefer to go just with the camera and a couple of nice Zeiss... and that's not possible with the Micro.

I'm searching a camera that is "fast" as the GH4 / G7, but could give me a flatter look, like the one from BlackMagic, that I can easily grade in post. And I'd love to use my CY Zeiss at their best, so I could have a real wide angle with 25 and 28, a nice 35, a good normal with 50 etc... 

I like the Super 35 look, but most of the people says that 7D MkII is noisier then 6D and 5D MKIII, so I could go for the full frame look in order to achieve a better clean file.

I don't want to use Metabones or similar speedboster, since I like to shoot as backlight as I can and I don't want to risk velvet or blue dots.

GH4's V-Log-L is not an option for me: very nice in good light, very bad indoor for my experience, so not really reliable. 

I was shocked from EOSHD C-Log at 3200 ISO with my father's 6D, really clean, no bad colors, no noise etc... Of course less resolution then GH4, but for narrative etc... it is very organic and "filmic". 

If you have suggestion I'm here  

If you're interested in the C100ii, check out the last two pages of the XC10 thread, Lintel and Kubrickian have been posting some footage of the C100ii for me to see and it it just stunning.