Messages

46

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X Structural Weakness

« on: September 01, 2012, 09:54:47 AM »

Right, does it blend.

But seriously, I would be worried things inside would now be misaligned and miscalibrated. Since the lens got hit the whole flange might be torqued etc. I would definitely send it in for repair and rent or use the backup in the meantime.

47

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: More Analysis of the C100

« on: August 29, 2012, 11:08:33 PM »

The only thing that's certain with regard to the color space is that AVCHD only accepts 4:2:0 color space. So the internal recording is definitely only 4:2:0, which is about the only reason you'd want a C300 instead.

The question under vigorous scrutiny right now is whether the HDMI output has 4:2:2 color or the half-resolution 4:2:0 color. If it cripples away 4:2:2 output to external recorders, I vote against this camera and Canon Cinema as a whole. If it allows 4:2:2, then there is no remaining resaon to shoot with a C300...you can get one of these, rent any add-ons you like and get back to the craft. If it doesn't offer 4:2:2 even externally, this camera is DOA in my view. EOS, as in End Of Story.

48

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: More Analysis of the C100

« on: August 29, 2012, 02:23:02 PM »

Sebastian at Cinema5D was unequivocal that the HDMI out was 4:2:2 uncompressed:

What's the difference to the C300?
The C100 records in AVCHD, a codec that will downcompress your footage to a 4:2:0 color space. Weird to see that limitation while many other specs are the same. There is no HD-SDI out, but the hdmi-out will deliver 4:2:2 for a better image recorded to a disk recorder.

http://www.cinema5d.com/news/?p=12761

He usually gets this sort of news first for some reason, so with his report and the Canon website I have to believe it's 4:2:2 vs. what one guy said he heard from Canon Support. The support people might not be briefed very well for a camera that's not shipping till the end of the year.

49

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: More Analysis of the C100

« on: August 29, 2012, 01:09:44 PM »

It makes sense though. Giving it external 4:2:2 would all but bury the c300.

Cannibalism is an essential nutrient for any company. Eat your own or be eaten by others.

I would say this camera is DOA if it doesn't have the external 4:2:2. That would be crippleware.

50

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: More Analysis of the C100

« on: August 29, 2012, 12:41:15 PM »

Canon support now says that the HDMI output is 4:2:0 8 bit.

weaksauce.

Link please.

(I see that is just from word-of-mouth on the EOSHD forum)

This published spec claims 4:2:2 color space, the press release only mentions 4:2:0 for the internal AVCHD recording.
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/cinema_eos_cameras/eos_c100#Specifications

51

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: More Analysis of the C100

« on: August 29, 2012, 12:32:00 PM »

It's true this is an all-in-one, you just might want an external recorder for green screen work or anything where IQ is important because the internal codec is 4:2:0 and the HDMI out is 4:2:2. Given the external recorders are under $1000, and save you the hassle of a ProRes transcode, I see no reason to buy a C300 over this, unless you need the better timecode/SDI etc. I think most of the people running timecode are shooting on Alexa etc. not C300. The C500 will play to that crowd. But I think the C300 just reached EOL, unless they unlock the 4K inside it somehow.

The accessories you might have for 5d2/3 shooting are still going to be beneficial though. ND solids aren't the only useful filters, external audio recorders are better in numerous ways, etc. With an external video recorder you will want rigging to keep it at hand, with a Ninja 2 you can use it as a monitor for the focus puller or for scopes. That this offers hand-held run and gun so well is a major plus over the FS700, and it has much better rolling shutter performance than the BMC.

A lot of people would have preferred the EOS M mount so they could adapt anything but Canon is in business to make money and wants people to buy its lenses. You can still adapt manual Nikon lenses. There are 80M EF lenses in the world and Samyang has cheap cinema options now.

This is a nice camera and if it is $6,500 it's reasonable. $16,000 for a C300 is no longer reasonable at all, if it ever could be argued to be. That price was for rental houses I think. This is priced to own.

52

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Canon Announces EOS C100 Professional Video Camera

« on: August 29, 2012, 09:37:49 AM »

Dear April,

Do you think Canon is so small a company that its releasing cinema cameras is sapping its efforts in stills photography?

You got your 5D3 and 1DX before this camera. Still unhappy?

Why do you need to criticize different people in a different division of an overall brand for helping people other than you?

Dear Canon:

WHO CARES?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

When will we see the fabled 7D mark II?

Or the dadburn 200-400? (I need to know so I know when to sell my house, car, and neighbour's children - I don't have any of my own)

Or even the now pushed back 24-75?

Why all this cinema madness? I am a photographer, not an independant videographer!!!

53

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D C Available?

« on: August 27, 2012, 01:08:58 AM »

I heard the C500 will be more than double the price of the C300 ($35K?), for essentially the same camera, just uncrippled 4K. There are rumors the C300 has 4K or at least much higher res "somewhere in there" you just can't get at it. It would be a major coup if a hacker were to break into it.

The BMCC has a sunshade that clips over the touchscreen. The touchscreen is new, but it's the wave of the future clearly, even our beloved Canon is doing it on the T4i and M. The BMCC did everything "Apple" right down to the unreplaceable internal battery and milled aluminum chassis. Apple doesn't seem to have done so poorly with their embrace of touchscreens.

The BMCC isn't in "the club." The other camera manu's have become too comfortable in their trot. When you compare the bundled software...compare Davinci Resolve with...uhm..."Digital Photo Professional" (Resolve used to cost $250,000)...and everything else, Canon is being left in the dust. The 5D2 gave Canon a new franchise in large-sensor video. They fumbled.

54

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D C Available?

« on: August 26, 2012, 06:43:31 PM »

If this is 3-5x the price of the BMCC, why wouldn't they use the BMCC as a crash cam instead? What you _might_ lose in resolution...we won't know until someone shoots resolution charts with both...you regain in the BMCC's far superior RAW encoding onto commodity SSDs (which are faster and cheaper per GB than high-capacity CF cards).

The 1DC is not full-frame video btw...I think it crops to APS-H for video. Still, a bigger sensor, with better low-light, but the video output more or less sucks from it comparitively. I would rather have a C300 for the money and I think the C300 should cost more like $7,000. The C300 has good rolling shutter performance in its favor over all of these.

The reason I think 100 will be bought is because it's expensive and says Canon and there are 100 conspicuously consumptive collectors in the world who will just buy it for that and only that reason. I don't think anyone costing out a cinematic production is going to put these on the rental list...the rental houses may not even buy them. Canon may have to lend these to rental houses and productions or even pay productions to use them so they can showcase it as a demo. This may have been a cool idea when they thought of it two years ago but Canon has been overtaken by events and competitors that are in game shape.

55

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D C Available?

« on: August 24, 2012, 09:50:15 AM »

I think they will all be preproduction units. I would be impressed if Canon sells more than 100 of these. The Blackmagic Cinema Camera, which I think may sell over 10,000 units, deeply undercuts this white elephant and will likely beat it to market.

56

Lenses / Re: Do you switch off IS in sunny days?

« on: August 22, 2012, 08:28:49 AM »

You can actually still get motion blur on a 1/1000th exposure.

If you want to save battery you can turn IS off, you can get sharp hand-held shots all the way down to 1/60th or less if you have steady hands. Using continuous mode can help that, but that won't save you battery.

I turn it off when on tripod because they don't label it as tripod-safe or not and I'd rather not have the burden of memorizing which of my lenses are tripod safe vs. not when I'm focusing on making good compositions.

57

Lenses / Re: 17 ts-e vs 24 ts-e

« on: August 22, 2012, 08:14:48 AM »

If the sun is out of your frame and you are worried about flare, reach up with your hand and shade the lens from the sun, verifying your hand isn't in the shot. Voila.

Flare right now has gotten hip along with vignetting and grain and all the other old-school artifacts.

If you do architectural photography for a living you of course ought to get both of those fine lenses. The 17 is probably my next big EF purchase, I don't have the 24, and I don't do architectural photography for a living.

58

Lenses / Re: Canon Celebrates the Production of 80 Million EF Lenses

« on: August 22, 2012, 08:04:22 AM »

How many L's? How many cheap kits? I imagine most of those went out inside Rebel boxes.

59

EOS Bodies / Re: B&H is selling the 5D II at $1979. What does this indicate?

« on: August 17, 2012, 12:05:52 AM »

It means some people still like out-of-focus photography. 

60

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How rugged is my 5D Mkiii?

« on: August 16, 2012, 12:28:56 AM »

I understand photogs are visually fixated and perfectionistic...but isn't there glory in the character of well-worn tools?

Imagination, people! Are you obsessed with keeping your equipment sparkling, or your subjects?