Messages

1

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: EOS 1D C new Firmware 1.1.9 with 4K25P is out

« on: April 30, 2013, 03:00:59 AM »

Thanks florian!

I suspected as much, so no biggie. Still, would have been nice to have clean ISO 100 for outdoor shooting.

2

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: EOS 1D C new Firmware 1.1.9 with 4K25P is out

« on: April 29, 2013, 01:49:09 PM »

If you like me to check for any features you are missing let me know and I try to have a look if I can find them in the new version.

Hi florian and congratulations on getting your hands on this updated beauty!

Can you check if the clipping behavior is still there at ISOs below 400 if you set record mode to 4k and picture profile to Canon Log.

That is: 4k, Log and ISO 100. What happens to the histogram when you over expose? Does it go all the way to the right edge, or does it clip before?

3

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: EOS-1D C Firmware Update Possible Delay?

« on: April 29, 2013, 01:44:03 PM »

I believe you...

Well, that's enough for me...

Obviously I'm telling the "truth" as I know it, even if it turns out to be incorrect. But I wouldn't come out and say it if I had "read it on the internet". I feel my sources are pretty credible.

Regardless, when @MNS1974 said you need to send your camera in for a service upgrade, the bits kind of fall into place for me.

But I agree that it's lame when you do your homework and talk to the right people and they can't give you up to date information.

We'll see what happens, but my bet after today would be that you will have to send it in at some point.

And on a personal note, the fact that florian has gotten his updated camera is very good news for me as they seem to be rolling them out again.

Take care.

4

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: EOS-1D C Firmware Update Possible Delay?

« on: April 29, 2013, 10:58:36 AM »

Michael N Sutton, who has got good connection with Canon, just said on Twitter that the new firmware isn't downloadable, but will rather be a service upgrade that you will need to send your camera in to get.

"service upgrade" sure does sound better than "hardware recall", but to me that's just spin.

At the end of the day you will need to send your delivered Camera to Canon and it will come back fixed... no, sorry.. "serviced".

The way it sounds now, I don't think we'll ever hear anything from Canon on what they need to service or why we can't update ourselves just like with any other firmware update.

5

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: EOS-1D C Firmware Update Possible Delay?

« on: April 29, 2013, 10:31:08 AM »

That is not true as far as I know, I checked with all major dealers (including CVP) in the UK today and they all confirmed that there is no hardware upgrade required, the delay in shipment is due to Canon replacing stock 1D C with new 25p firmware.

I'm the guy waiting for delivery of my 1Dc in Zürich.

I talked to my Cinema EOS dealer again today and said I want a 1Dc that hasn't been updated the new firmware yet (so that I can get it fixed later) but every time they talk to Canon they get the same story: hardware recall. Hardware modifications needed for new firmware and they won't ship non-fixed cameras.

There's no reason not to believe the people involved. Everyone is pretty frustrated though.

They are also claiming that cameras being sold now is from original shipped batch.

Current estimation for my camera is mid May.

6

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Alternatives to 5D MK3 viewfinder adhesive mount?

« on: April 07, 2013, 04:32:40 PM »

Well, to each their own...

I couldn't imagine using something that would require a baseplate of any kind... Maybe if you're not using a vertical grip that could work.

I've used the Kinotehnik LCDVF for my mk2, mk3 and it will be the first thing i slap on my 1Dc.

The small metal frame gets applied with a silicon-like adhesive that easy to remove if you'd want to (without leaving any trace), but still sticks well enough not to come off accidentally.

The magnets are in the loupe itself (so not permanently attached to the camera) and they have no ill effects whatsoever on LCD screen or memory cards.

7

Lenses / Re: Canon Cine vs. L lens video. Hilarious

« on: February 27, 2013, 03:27:40 PM »

Ah yes, badge engineering. Canon is by far the most ridiculously greedy company in photography.

While I understand your frustration:

• if you've held one of the cine primes in your hand, you'll realize that a strict re-housing would be least twice the L price. Build is that much better
• They are not the same glass optically. While the differences are minor, even small differences get exponentially more  expensive at the top levels...
• The cine series are much smaller and that takes its toll as well

It adds up.

I AM surprised though, that a company such as Samyang/Rokinon isn't all over the 'cine glass' trend. They immediately need to re-house their already re-housed cine lenses into similar fat steel beauties.

There seems to be plenty of market space between normal glass and the $5000 mark for Canon/Zeiss.

8

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Cinema EOS C50 [CR1]

« on: February 20, 2013, 03:55:27 PM »

It would be great to see an upgrade path for 5D Mark III users.

It's already here, and it's called the C100. For the time being.

If you care enough about video, and mk3's shortcomings get in the way (lack of resolved detail, no dedicated video features) the cost of a C100 ought to be a non issue.

I own both mk3 and C100 so I know their respective strengths. The C100 produces absolutely beautiful images. But having two cameras are not optimal for me. Like you Andrew, I wish the mk3 resolved more detail—at least as much as the 1Dc in S35 mode.

I don't buy the idea of a cheaper C-body camera. There's no room below the C100 for that. There is however plenty of room below the 1Dc.

A 5Dc or 3Dc that was priced between the mk3 and the 1Dx (probably closer to the latter) would be a very cool surprise come NAB. But it better deliver. I feel that Canon is a bit stuck with their more expensive models as it is difficult for Canon to outperform their top gear with cheaper models. But there is a slot free for a great C-line DSLR that doesn't have 4k, but delivers great 1080p along with stills functionality we're used to.

If they really want to innovate, they'd allow for a little nose after the EF-mount and integrate ND-filters. That's not going to happen, but the new xDc might.

9

EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon EOS-1S the Name? [CR1]

« on: October 06, 2012, 11:29:11 AM »

People need to understand the price game better.

If Canon charges $9000 for this body, and they might, then it's strictly positioning.

If you're an amateur you want gear to be as good as possible and as cheap as possible. A no brainer.

But if you're a pro?

Let's say that your invested in Canon and that your business is sustaining high end gear. You are charging your clients  a premium because you use the good stuff. You market yourself as such. The best gear sets you apart from amateurs.

Would you like that all the latest and greatest equipment become instantly available to every trigger happy "freelancer" out there?

I've heard on numerous occasions that Canon actively sets their better tech apart from entry level stuff by price. Just look at what's out there now. It's especially obvious in their Cinema Line of products.

And it's going to stay that way. Might as well get used to it. Don't have to like it.

10

Lenses / Re: Update for the EF 24-105 f/4 L ?

« on: September 23, 2012, 03:03:55 PM »

As others have said, a 2.8 version is not realistic.

But if they'd make a II with same optical qualities as 70-200 2.8L IS II, I'd EASILY pay $2000+ for that.

My 24-105 isn't my best performing lens, but it one of my favorites for sure. Extremely versatile.

For commercial applications it's easy to find better alternatives, but for everyday life—hands down my best lens.

Take it on a trip and you're not missing many shots. Bring an extender if you're desperate.

11

Lenses / Re: Photozone's review of the EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is up

« on: September 23, 2012, 02:45:36 PM »

...well look at the actual numbers...

Where do you get detailed specs on all the lenses?

Thanks,

A

12

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Shutter sounds cheap or maybe broken - 5DIII

« on: May 21, 2012, 03:43:47 PM »

First time I heard my shutter I also just looked at the camera in disbelief.

It has a very rattle-like quality to it. I'm coming from a mkII, which I think sounds much better.

I also find it kind of loudish, unless I'm in silent mode.

I guess it's an acquired taste.

I guess the sound and the AF-point linked evaluative metering are my gripes.

Love the camera, though.

13

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Seriously people, how many of you have actually read the 5DIII manual?

« on: May 21, 2012, 03:34:48 PM »

I have.  I went to the dungeons of the National Cathedral and liking what I am getting out of the 5D3.    The AF is a little bit slow (I have the 24-70 f/2.8L and it was dark).

...and I guess since you've read the manual, you can confidently say that you didn't use Spot AF?

Just saying, since that would make focusing significantly slower. But it's in the manual, so...

14

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5d3 not soft anymore?

« on: May 03, 2012, 08:05:06 AM »

While the difference seems huge in your comparison, I wouldn't read too much into it.

You could make any number of changes in Lightroom and then save that as 'default' for your mkIII. You can even make per ISO default settings.

We must assume that the DPP default has already been tweaked to some extent to be a good fit for mkIII.

There is also the question of picture styles: what was used as the "default" in your Lightroom shot?

Now, what WOULD concern me is: after having hand developed both images in each software, optimizing them, if there's STILL a big difference in detail/sharpness... that would be an issue.

15

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark III Spot Meter

« on: April 21, 2012, 05:51:39 AM »

Almost have the reversed problem:

When I'm at evaluative metering, shifting around the AF-point severely adjusts the metering. Almost the function you seem to wish for...

But when you're expecting normal evaluative metering, it kind of throws you off.

How can I turn off linking the evaluative metering to the AF-points??? Can't find it anywhere in the menus or manual.

Thanks