Messages

16

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Teases Exclusive Screening at NAB 2012

« on: March 11, 2012, 10:15:45 PM »

Swap a new censor into the 1dx and you get your 4k dslr.  I agree with the previous posters who say it will be 4-6K in price. They want to undercut RED.

I hope they don't just make a DSLR for video. If you shoot video you don't want a dslr you want a video camera. There is nothing about DSLRs that I like except the video function. The form factor and features of a DSLR are not convenient for video.

If it is directed towards the film world and undercut the RED than I think that they would have to make something more modular. Possibly something that looks like a dslr but with more video options. Take out the mirror, add more video functionality. Photographers already have their camera with the 5DIII or the 1DX so why even bother making this camera for photography?

17

EOS Bodies / Re: Videographers happy with 5D Mark III?

« on: March 02, 2012, 09:56:11 PM »

Why would you want an external recording device for video with the 5D3? surely you'd use a RED for something like that? the point of an SLR I always thought was portability and affordability.

Is this first question a joke? Let me answer it: To record at a higher bitrate and higher quality to give you a better looking video through flexibility in color and in latitude. Last I checked buying a usable package for RED will cost around 20K. A 5D MIII and, say, an Atomos Ninja will cost about 4.5K. Still not on the same level but they certainly aren't in the same price range either.

As far as video output goes, it encodes in H.256 anyway, which is pretty compressed as is. If you want uncompressed HD, Canon want you to buy the C300. in terms of out, I defy anyone to tell the difference on a field monitor between h.256 720p and 1080p. Unless your monitor is HUGE.

Often times people will put out a larger full HD monitor for either clients or for themselves. Large monitors aren't uncommon. Sure, you'll never see one strapped to a camera but they are very common to have on a C-stand or a cart to use as reference.

It's preference, I suppose, but I really think "NO CLEAN HDMI OUT ZOMG!!11eleven" has become the battle cry of the "it ended up too expensive and I need to convince myself it isn't worth it" crowd.

You're right. It is preference. I think the real issue shooters have with canon excluding a clean output is because they CAN do it but they chose not to. I think while Canon was worried about loosing sales of the C300 they failed to match the competition over at Nikon who DID offer clean output because they want to sell cameras.

Someone has to tell Canon that the 5DMIII and the C300 aren't in the same market. I think they should be worried about losing sales to the D800 than to the C300. If somebody buys a C300 over a 5DMII WHO CARES! They are both Canon! They still bought your product. If they chose a D800 over a 5DMIII THEN they lose money. But that's just my opinion. I'm sure they have an actual strategy that I don't know about. I'm just bitter. Don't judge my bitterness.

18

EOS Bodies / Re: Videographers happy with 5D Mark III?

« on: March 02, 2012, 09:32:12 PM »

Did anyone notice that 5D3 native image resolution is exactly 1920*3 x 1280*3 (5760x3840). It is 3x3 pixel binning for video.

I've been wondering why no one has mentioned this when discussing Canon's supposedly odd 22.3MP resolution choice. This also seems to be a much overlooked factor when assessing moire and rolling shutter improvements.

The resolution certainly seems like a strange choice; it must have to do with video....

However, 1920X1080 bayer pattern (3x3 pixel binning) isn't that sharp.  The F3 has a 3+ megapixel sensor and the Alexa a 4+ megapixel sensor to achieve a sharp 1080p image.  In theory, bayer sensors can resolve about 70% of their stated resolution (not even taking aliasing into account)--so you need almost four megapixels to get a really crisp 1080p image.  And this puts the 5DIII's 1080p mode at closer to 720p, about what the previous cameras have resolved.  So that's disappointing.

The latitude, decrease in moire, decrease in skew (fingers crossed), and great looking colors still count for something, though.

So... disappointed because it's not up to par with the Alexa? I would say while it's nothing to gush at we shouldn't be disappointed because it's not competing with cameras that are about 10x the price.

19

EOS Bodies / Re: Videographers happy with 5D Mark III?

« on: March 02, 2012, 09:06:00 AM »

Is it true that Canon is working on a Cinema DSLR that shoots 4k video? If so, i may hold out for that, assuming it's less expensive than the C300 that came out recently.

Yea, they claimed to have been working on one.

The 5D Mark III looks like an impressive photography camera. It looks like the video will be greatly improved. Obviously we'll have to wait a bit to see what the image will look like but I'm sure it's good. That being said, I doubt I'll upgrade. If I'm honest with myself my Mark II is just fine for now. It may have been worth trading it in if the 5D was cheaper but it's not.

If their next Cinema DSLR is anything like what I hope it will be it will be pretty sweet. 4K, SDI out, mounting points, maybe even XLR inputs? I'm hoping for a mini C300 really. It will likely be missing some big features of the C300 in order to keep it worth its price. Again, that's just what I'm hoping for. A man can dream can't he? I don't think I'm too crazy though, if it's a DSLR made for cinema they will eliminate most photography features and replace them with cinema features.

Either way, I'll be holding out to see what Canon has up their sleeve videowise. If my clients are still gushing about how great the 5D Mark II looks then I suppose I should be happy with it.

Honestly, with no clean HDMI the D800 looks almost like a better option. If I remember correctly I think it had clean HDMI out. I would never switch, though.

20

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Full Spec List?

« on: March 01, 2012, 04:53:16 PM »

Really, No USB 3.0? Looks like we'll be spending the next 4 years with USB 2.0. Shouldn't be too hard to integrate...

21

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Full Spec List?

« on: March 01, 2012, 12:17:14 PM »

Nobody has yet to answer my question:

How official is this list? Where did it come from? Is it everything or will Canon also include surprise stuff when it's announced?

What is the CR Rating on this?

Sorry cr guy but you kind of had a lapse when reporting on this. That or I missed something.

22

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Full Spec List?

« on: March 01, 2012, 09:35:12 AM »

Where did this spec list come from? Why is there a question mark but everyone is treating it as fact? Did I miss something?

23

EOS Bodies / Re: The Next 5D on February 27/28, 2012 [CR3]

« on: February 22, 2012, 10:52:53 PM »

I don't agree that it would eat out of the C300 market. The people buying them are out of completely different ponds. The C300 well makes up for it's price in it's features and functionality alone. Even if they were both 4K I'm sure they wouldn't be the same quality. Professional shoots demand convenience in order to save time and shooting with a DSLR certainly isn't convenient.

Hollywood is using footage from 5DMIIs all the time! They are essentially disposable cameras. The problem is that they aren't 4K. Theaters project a 4K image and if they provided that Hollywood would be all over it. Action films would eat them for breakfast.

Most theaters do NOT project in 4k. They're still mostly 2k. The reason why there is some demand for a 4k camera (besides the "mine is bigger!" crowd) is for post production and processing flexibility, although it actually complicates the post production workflow and adds expense. One of the reasons why the C300 is not a 4k camera is for workflow. It's intended to give a really good image right out of the camera so you don't have to grade or color correct every single frame that you shot. Shoot it, load it in, edit, output...fast and still looks good. Ever see the RED 4k footage straight out of the camera? Not so good. It holds up amazingly well in grading, but by the time you're even ready to edit the footage the C300's footage will already be airing on TV. Not a big deal for a feature movie, but a real big deal for fast turn around TV work.
4k is nice at this point for future proofing, but most people won't have anywhere to show 4k footage for years.

You're right. I didn't look into how many theaters actually implement 4K projectors. I just knew that theaters can project a 4K image. Most of which are large chain theaters. However, I believe that large productions that have the budgets to use DSLRs as disposable could use the 4K because those are the films that are outputting for 4K.

http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/mkt-digitalcinema/resource.latest.bbsccms-assets-mkt-digicinema-latest-4kmoviereleaseslisting.shtml#2011
http://sony.links.channelintelligence.com/oemsites/6553221/4K/sony4k.html?pg=2

24

EOS Bodies / Re: The Next 5D on February 27/28, 2012 [CR3]

« on: February 22, 2012, 08:14:04 PM »

I'm still hung up on the CF/SD card slots...I hate using SD. I've had a few of them go bad on me and that's enough to scare me away from them. I guess if it could save jpegs to SD and RAW to CF that wouldn't be a bad way to have a backup / quick reference card. I'd prefer dual CF slots.

25

EOS Bodies / Re: The Next 5D on February 27/28, 2012 [CR3]

« on: February 22, 2012, 07:38:56 PM »

HOW ABOUT A 4K VIDEO to justify the price, given how popular the 5dII was among filmmakers.

I think it's happening. 

Wont happen, it would eat up the sales of the 4K Cinema DSLR and that's definitely going to be a more expensive camera.  I'm sure it will have improved video, hopefully reduced moire and less banding, no rolling shutter.  All of that seems possible considering video on the 5DII was an afterthought.

You don't think that a 5D X is the 4K Cinema DSLR that they were referring to? If they split the 5D line I can see one of them being more video orientated. I'm just spewing opinions but I'm really hoping for large video improvements since that's my profession. Especially if they want to keep Nikon out of the video market.

I don't agree that it would eat out of the C300 market. The people buying them are out of completely different ponds. The C300 well makes up for it's price in it's features and functionality alone. Even if they were both 4K I'm sure they wouldn't be the same quality. Professional shoots demand convenience in order to save time and shooting with a DSLR certainly isn't convenient.

Hollywood is using footage from 5DMIIs all the time! They are essentially disposable cameras. The problem is that they aren't 4K. Theaters project a 4K image and if they provided that Hollywood would be all over it. Action films would eat them for breakfast.

26

EOS Bodies / Re: The Next 5D on February 27/28, 2012 [CR3]

« on: February 22, 2012, 07:28:00 PM »

My opinion:

The video functions in the 5D and 7D really created a huge demand for them that may not have been expected when they were first released...at least respectively. I'm from the video world and am seeing over half my peers using a Canon DSLR. Now, I know that the 5D's #1 goal is to be a great photography camera BUT there is no denying it's impact it has had on the video community. I think if the next 5D continues to push the envelope with its video functionality then I believe it may be worth the $3,500.

If it beats out the competition in both photography and video functionality it will be worth that extra $500.

27

Lenses / Re: Problems with 50 f1.4 & 135 f2.0 on 1.6x crop sensors

« on: February 22, 2012, 12:44:53 AM »

I have some trouble getting my t2i to focus with reliability, might be similar in your case.

True story.

Try to find a friend with the same camera to test the lenses on. I have a strong suspicion that it may be the camera's doing. However, you mention chromatic aberration which can only be a lens issue. However, the cropped sensor is essentially zooming into the center of the lens and can cause any lens flaws to become more apparent.

I suppose you don't have any samples for us to look at?

28

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: If 4k video in 5dx/5d3...

« on: February 21, 2012, 08:04:23 PM »

The fact that 4K in a DSLR is even being discussed is blowing me away. I would have never thought.....

Of course it is being discussed... 4k is all over the blogs, it is a big keyword/buzzword right now to described how big your epeen is, so naturally people want it.

Yea, I'm just commenting on how far we've come since I've started shooting video. I love how Canon is really raising the bar with their video implementation in their cameras. They decided to put 4K in a DSLR before people even started demanding it. 

29

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: If 4k video in 5dx/5d3...

« on: February 21, 2012, 11:23:49 AM »

4K would truly be a sick feature in a new 5D. The bigger - the better.

I do a lot of commercial work where I do interviews with a single camera so I need to be able to push into the shot to cover edits. 4K would allow me to do that without loss.

HOWEVER, I would never sacrifice essential features like dynamic range and overall quality just to have 4k.

I would prefer a crisp, clean, and high-bitrate 1080p to a soggy 4k.

Even in the professional commercial world 4K isn't always needed. The Arri Alexa, for instance, only shoots 2K. Unless you're shooting for a theatre screen you don't need 4K.

The fact that 4K in a DSLR is even being discussed is blowing me away. I would have never thought.....