Canon on assult? 3 new 8K60p cinema cam with up to 20+ DR

[TomTheDP]

Probably not 20 stops of dynamic range but even if it's only 1 or 2 stops more than the C300 MK3 or C500 MK2 that would be incredible, as those are already leading in class. 

Sounds like a great line up though. 

[newfoundmass]

I mean it doesn't mean they should stop trying to break into the market, but how many films are even filmed with Canon cinema cameras? I really don't see them used outside of corporate and doc work around here. I see mostly RED, Sony, and Blackmagic cameras used for most higher end and a lot of lower end, commercial/narrative work. 

[BenEricson]

On 4/29/2021 at 1:43 AM, ade towell said:

On these crazy DR claims (Canon aren't the only ones), when does this becomes false advertising? I start to lose respect for companies when they spin these figures, at some point they should be made accountable. If Arri has 14 stops of useable DR and the market leader (Arri don't feel the need to mislead), how do the others get away with their false claims?

Canon claims 15 stops and the sun still renders out a disgusting clipped out BLOB if you shoot towards it. On film, it would be a tint pin point. Black Magic Pocket 6K same story. Immediately looks cheap when you point it towards a bright light source. 

I would like to believe they will figure out how to get more highlight detail, but I really doubt it.

[BenEricson]

2 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

Probably not 20 stops of dynamic range but even if it's only 1 or 2 stops more than the C300 MK3 or C500 MK2 that would be incredible, as those are already leading in class. 

Sounds like a great line up though. 

See post above. 

[androidlad]

I‘ve seen the prototype, while definitely not 20 stops by ARRI standard, it's still a huge step up due to the multiple gain output.

[ntblowz]

1 hour ago, androidlad said:

I‘ve seen the prototype, while definitely not 20 stops by ARRI standard, it's still a huge step up due to the multiple gain output.

What does prototype look like? Similar to current design?

[HockeyFan12]

2 hours ago, BenEricson said:

Canon claims 15 stops and the sun still renders out a disgusting clipped out BLOB if you shoot towards it. On film, it would be a tint pin point. Black Magic Pocket 6K same story. Immediately looks cheap when you point it towards a bright light source. 

I would like to believe they will figure out how to get more highlight detail, but I really doubt it.

Even the Alexa is this way, if not quite as bad. I think it's just a trade-off with digital.

[BenEricson]

38 minutes ago, HockeyFan12 said:

Even the Alexa is this way, if not quite as bad. I think it's just a trade-off with digital.

You're right, but Alexa is WAY better than Canon. Once to you notice it, it's kind of a bummer.

[independent]

According to cineD, Alexa has a 1-stop increase in dynamic range over the c500ii or c300iii. 

What is everybody crying about? First, what are you doing, shooting the sun all day? 

Second, your audience almost certainly won’t see major differences between these cameras in properly shot scenes. If you see horrible clipping, that’s an exposure error. Or a poor creative decision. Somebody is getting fired.

Some of you think if you only had an Alexa, everything you shoot would look like roger deakins’ work. Sorry, a major reason why Alexa footage looks so good is that professionals know how to light and expose - for any camera. 

This is why we use dimmers on practicals, sheers on windows, and use lighting to control levels and contrast.

The differences among arri, red, and the best Sony and canon cameras are quite small on set. Yes, currently Arri’s highlight roll off is a bit nicer and has a bit more reach in the highlights, but nothing really changes the way we shoot with any of those cameras.

The truth is most of the current top cameras look very similar - properly exposed. Sure, you can stress test some cameras to show weaknesses - arri and red included, which would struggle in extreme low light. This is why these aren’t common for run-and-gun documentaries. 

If Canon produces new technologies (very possible) that ends up capturing more dynamic range than the Arri, I wouldn’t be surprised. Also, I wouldn’t consider the Arri trash for having a stop less of dynamic range. 
 

 

[BenEricson]

8 hours ago, independent said:

According to cineD, Alexa has a 1-stop increase in dynamic range over the c500ii or c300iii. 

What is everybody crying about? First, what are you doing, shooting the sun all day? 

Second, your audience almost certainly won’t see major differences between these cameras in properly shot scenes. If you see horrible clipping, that’s an exposure error. Or a poor creative decision. Somebody is getting fired.

Some of you think if you only had an Alexa, everything you shoot would look like roger deakins’ work. Sorry, a major reason why Alexa footage looks so good is that professionals know how to light and expose - for any camera. 

This is why we use dimmers on practicals, sheers on windows, and use lighting to control levels and contrast.

The differences among arri, red, and the best Sony and canon cameras are quite small on set. Yes, currently Arri’s highlight roll off is a bit nicer and has a bit more reach in the highlights, but nothing really changes the way we shoot with any of those cameras.

The truth is most of the current top cameras look very similar - properly exposed. Sure, you can stress test some cameras to show weaknesses - arri and red included, which would struggle in extreme low light. This is why these aren’t common for run-and-gun documentaries. 

If Canon produces new technologies (very possible) that ends up capturing more dynamic range than the Arri, I wouldn’t be surprised. Also, I wouldn’t consider the Arri trash for having a stop less of dynamic range. 
 

 

Damn, do you own stock in Canon and Sony? 😂 The only thing you left out is that they shot the season finale of house on the 5D.

[kye]

On 4/30/2021 at 4:18 PM, IronFilm said:

The FX9/VENICE have 4K S35.

ALL the ARRI digital cinema cameras have "identical" pixels, it's just the size of the sensor they've cut out of the wafer that varies. 

And that won't change until their 4K S35 sensor camera gets launched. 

In a way, these 4K LF format cameras were largely a stop gap measure for ARRI to slow the bleeding out to the true 4K competition (such as what is demanded by Netflix commissioned films). 

The FX9 and VENICE are FF aren't they?  If you're 6K FF then you can be 4K crop, but if you're larger than FF then 6K won't cut it, which is where the 65 is.

I agree about the "identical" pixel size, thus my comments about why they might choose this for colour performance.

The more I see what happens in the real world, the more I realise this "Netflix demands 4K" is really not a limitation, or at least not if you have a good team.  I see an incredible amount of content on Netflix that was purchased from people who shot on sub-4K cameras, and even some of the feature films that Netflix commissioned weren't shot on 4K cameras.  I think it's a "rule" on paper only, and if your content is good then they'll do the deal and make the money.

10 hours ago, independent said:

What is everybody crying about? First, what are you doing, shooting the sun all day? 

Second, your audience almost certainly won’t see major differences between these cameras in properly shot scenes. If you see horrible clipping, that’s an exposure error. Or a poor creative decision. Somebody is getting fired.

As was mentioned above, Canon cameras are often used for doc work, which is often shot outside in uncontrolled conditions, sometimes in a situation where they are just capturing things and not controlling them.  In this situation you will expose for your subject, splitting the exposure between the sun and shadow skin tones, and when they run to a position in-between you and the sun, it helps to not have the entire sky (or half the sky) as digital white.

However, as you say, the top cine cameras have quite a lot of DR, so it shouldn't be a big deal if you're using those cameras anyway.