« on: March 25, 2013, 08:39:47 PM »
The camera handles like crap, it's really heavy and even with the handles didn't feel great. Rent one and check it out, but make sure you try to edit some of the footage, even 60 seconds of footage and you'll see really quick what a pain it is. Believe me I was as pumped about this camera as anyone and mine actually came in last week but I passed on it. Might get the MFT in the future but there are just too many issues with the EF.
And some of the posters are giving excellent feedback on the camera itself, but I'm looking at the camera AND what you'll be using it for (which is arguably more important). You're not doing occasional studio shoots, you're doing real estate videos, which means you'll be shooting a lot and very frequently. Battery life would also be a big issue in your case, since the internal battery lasts maybe an hour. Also consider that you won't be shooting real estate videos in 2.5K RAW, it's just going to slow you down way too much, so try and take that spec out of the equation and look at it as just 1080p ProRes.
Fair points, all. I don't find raw as cumbersome as you seemed to. Perhaps my two-year-old machine is faster than the one you had available. The dynamic range of this camera still shows in the 10-bit 4:2:2 encoded files. Again, ProRes or DNxHD puts little extra burden on the workflow than the C100. Perhaps a bit more storage space, but with a benefit.
You point about the camera handling different than a proper video cam or a DSLR is also fair. It is clunky. A shoulder rig, slider, or tripod are a must. Whether Cgdillan uses these anyway is something he must consider.
Curious as to what issues the MFT version overcomes for you, given the issues you claim of the camera? None of those issues are changed in the MFT version. Is it just that the extra benefits of the MFT lenses (e.g., wider and/or faster) helps to further justify putting up with the costs you cite? I can understand that. Otherwise, you seemed very negative on the camera for certain reasons, only then to say that you might get one again in the future when none of those issues will be addressed.
In the end, I agree with you Axilrod. For a day-in, day-out workhorse (perhaps closer to run'n'gun), these issues might outweigh the image. A camera must be practical for its purpose. That's why my initial reaction to the OP was quite negative on the issue. Until I saw what I saw on my monitor. I'm just in love with the image this camera produces.
These are all great points to mention. I've been using my 5D3 for all my video work and for RE video i've been really feeling like I need more DR in my videos. I could care less about the 2.5K since the video will be probably viewed at 720p through vimeo. But the raw codec and extra DR I believe would greatly help my image, as well as my pride in my work. I was pretty turned off at first with all the "issues" the BMCC has, but I have totally fallen for the image it produces. I generally use Tripod, Glidecam, and Slider for stabilizations in my RE videos. I downloaded some test footage from the camera and FCP X actually took the .dng files in there native form wonderfully and the rendered extremely fast. I was very impressed. So I'm thinking towards the BMCC now over the C100 (I was thinking C100 over 5d3 for the extra dr and sharper image) as long as I can get in the house, shoot the proper exposure for each room, and get out. Usually takes about an hour to shoot a house up to 3,500 SF.