March 04, 2015, 05:58:23 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - syder

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Canon C100 praise & annoyances
« on: December 03, 2012, 01:24:04 PM »
Either way I quickly came to the conclusion that this camera exceeded my expectations, so many people were saying that Canon wouldn't sell any of these purely based on specs, but the IQ speaks for itself.

Funny that... Gear heads all over the internet were frothing at the mouth when the C300 spec was announced, they said no one in their right mind would buy one... And yet it's been the go to camera for a huge range of broadcast work because it performs so well out of the box with a very straightforwards workflow for tv.


But we don't want to shoot 30p or 60i (both are offered on the C100 btw), for cinema the standard frame rate is 24p,

This really depends on what your output is going to be. And of course where you are. In the UK we don't use 30p - its 25 - and because it's what material is broadcast at, its what most clients will ask for.

And the BBC requires intraframe HD material to be 100mb/s+ (50 for long gop material) so using the hdmi out of 5dmiii should be acceptable.

...and you're describing a reverse 3:2 pulldown - reverse as the tendency was always to go from film (high quality 35/16mm material) to video rather than vice-versa (crap low quality video to film)

Thanks for the 4:2:2 link - that should mean you have a lot more leeway to grade footage harder. Will be very interesting to see what emerges in April... And also thanks for the C100 thoughts, I've don't know anyone with one yet.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Inexpensive lens for Video
« on: December 01, 2012, 06:29:31 PM »

If you can't hand-hold a DSLR and manual focus the 50 1.8 with one finger, your skill level doesn't warrant handling anything more expensive if you ask me.  Moving up to the 1.4 is a marginal improvement for a 3x price difference... and getting into that price range, you might as well invest in a slightly more expensive Tokina 11-16

If you're spending as much as $500, I would DEFINITELY recommend the tokina 11-16 2.8.  At infinity focus, everythign a meter out or farther will stay in focus.   For filming kids, wide and already in focus should be a big plus for convenience factor.  Not missing a memory is more important than bokeh quality

?! The tiny amount of travel on the 50 f1.8 makes manually focussing ACCURATELY very hard. The lens is blatantly not designed to be manually focussed, and doing so is a pain in the ass. By contrast the 50 1.4 has over 360 degrees of travel meaning that you have far more fine grained control over focussing. That isn't a marginal improvement, its the difference between useable and not.

And suggesting a UWA as an alternative to a 50mm prime is just bizarre. Unless you want the extreme perspective distortion that comes with a UWA lens (great for landscapes/cityscapes/particular look how enormous my nose is portraits - crap for any kind of close up) this is awful advice.

For the use that the op suggested the tamron 17-50 2.8 (with or without VC) is a far better choice for less money.

The price difference is huge, but I wanted to know if im not using a 4k camera and I don't need the extra cinema features. Is the picture quality at  1920  that much better to justify the price over L lenses, such as 50mm 1.2, 35mm 1.4, 85 1.2, 135 2.0 etc.?

In a word... No.

They're designed mainly for production companies who'll spend serious money on C500s/C300s and will be using them for features and tv drama series. They really aren't made for run and gun budget shooters with DSLRs

The ML HDMI sounds a bit sketchy, but for the latest follow the 5Dmiii thread on their forum. The upcoming Canon firmware upgrade will likely be not only more stable, but will allow hardware manufacturers to design around its implementation (Atmos did this with the D800 for example), something they wont do for a project like ML.

We don't know what the Canon HDMI out will be, but it sure as hell wont be CinemaDNG. You'll need an external recorder - something like an Atmos Ninja or Blackmagic Hypershuttle, both of which will record to ProRes (for FCP) or DnxHd for Avid, at up to 220mb/s.

Lenses / Re: Advice 5d3, wide angle
« on: December 01, 2012, 08:30:33 AM »
I would have bought the Tokina 16-28 if it wasn't for the front element.

As someone whose paid work is mainly video I need to be able to attach things like variable ND filters. The tokina would require a rig + mattebox + a set of 4x4 ND filters which isn't what I want to use for a lot of gigs where mobility is paramount

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: The First Canon EOS 6D Video Footage
« on: November 30, 2012, 01:04:21 PM »
So for those that do not think Canon should have put a headphone jack in this (what US$ 2000?) camera, and then (some at least) go on about external recorders, why do they bother to put a mic jack in?

You do understand that without a line/mic in you can't run a line out of an external mixer/preamp into a camera?

And you do understand how awful the headphone jack on the 5dm3 is?

Hell even having a cheap mic run straight into the camera (something like a rode ntg2 or videomic) to use as a track for something like pluraleyes to sync your high quality externally recorded sound to makes sense - and theres no reason or need to monitor that.

The 6D isn't meant to be a cinema camera - Canon did say the 5diii would be the EOS camera with better video than other offerings. But if you really wanted to use as such it would do fine - seeing as it's not pitched as a pro cameras it will no doubt be used by a lot of people for filming their kids and suchlike.

And judging video quality off a downconverted web video from a pre-production camera isn't going to tell you anything remotely definitive anyways.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Inexpensive lens for Video
« on: November 30, 2012, 12:49:11 PM »
+1 for 50 1.8 using manual focus

Id use a cheaper prime with manual focus. For something wider but a lil more expensive, the samyang 14mm 2.8 is great for video.  There is also a slightly more expensive "cine" version of the samyang with a manual aperature adjustment ring.  You can de-click the aperture ring to smoothly adjust aperture without abrupt exposure change while filming

for zoom, the 24-105 is a great choice with IS... although I'm not sure Id trust that one in the hands of a clumsy holder LOL.  Lok from digitalrevTV on youtube uses a 24-105 on a 5DII hand-holding and it always looks very pro.

-1 for 50 1.8

Utterly horrible to manually focus with its tiny mf ring with minimal travel. Makes accurately focussing damn hard, especially with fast moving subjects (like kids unless they're asleep)

If you go down the prime route you would be way way better off using an old prime which was designed to be manually focussed with an adapter. Or if you can find a cheap copy the tokina 35mm f2.8 macro is a very nice lens to mf with which is reasonably cheap and gives you a standardish focal length (50mm on crop is great for close ups, but particularly indoors where distances tend to be limited it is nowhere near wide enough for gv's)

Cheap but good zoom for video look for the tamron 17-50 f2.8. Without VC is sharper, with VC will probably give you better results handheld though.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions
« on: November 25, 2012, 06:16:59 AM »
gold rings are gone on the new art series style they actually look more like zeiss lenses now

gold ring is for EX lenses...this one despite the good build quality hasnt an EX designation.

maybe signa dropped the EX deisgnation, but all my EX lenses have a gold ring, like the latest zooms released...120-300 and 50-150

Which part of this is the first lens in the new art series did you not understand? That would be new as in new - not as part of the old EX series  :P

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS Coming [CR3]
« on: November 07, 2012, 07:47:36 AM »

It's just and again the price tag that clouds the sky and the assumption that Canon does not want to give people the choice but wants to engineer them into buying more expensive gear than they'd like. And imho it's still the aftermath of the 5d3 price shock, Canon simply being greedy and thus alienating their former loyal customers.

The 5Diii is available for £2339 in the UK now... Considering that it's a tool that considerably outperforms the 5dmii for event shooting and indy video that seems pretty reasonable. The price is not that far off what you'd have paid for a 5dmii a few years back.

Lenses / Re: Canon Makes the EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS Official
« on: November 06, 2012, 12:22:15 PM »
I LOVE my 24-105L - best general zoom I have ever had (and quite sharp, even on corners).  It is hard to imagine anyone choosing the new 24-70 over this one, unless the new one was a lot cheaper, which of course it is not. 

Except the new 24-70 is almost a macro (0.7x) lens. Which for many people makes it a more versatile lens than the extra reach. 105mm doesn't mean you don't need a tele lens. 0.7x magnification and hybrid IS does mean that many people wont have to buy/carry around a separate macro lens.

Also, with the new high ISO capabilities of modern DSLR's, image stabilization is not as necessary a feature as it once was.  Sure it is nice, but you can get by. 

IS is really useful for video. The hybrid IS system apparently is far better than the IS system found on the 24-105mm or the Tamron 24-70.

Lenses / Re: Canon Makes the EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS Official
« on: November 06, 2012, 09:33:40 AM »
So basically Canon discontinued the 24-70 F2.8 MKI and replaced it with a model twice the price and then brought out an F4 at roughly the same price point as the old F2.8.

Ridiculous. The Second hand market is the place to be atm, I will be trying to pick up a 24-70 MKI.

So you lose 1 stop by going from f2.8-f4 and then gain up to four stops with the hybrid IS. For handheld video in particular that is potentially a trade-off well worth making. Especially when you consider the high iso performance of the 5diii.

That the lens is almost a macro lens too makes it an interesting proposition. Particularly for run and gun documentary shooting where changing lens can be a right pain, having a lens with excellent stabilisation and which covers wide - short tele and macro could be very tempting.

It would be nice if the lens was cheaper, but for a lot of people it would replace buying the the 24-105 and and 100 non-L which makes it seem more reasonable

do you record uncompressed hdmi output video signal (which bring HUGE gb/hr video file) from the event/wedding??
how long do it take to encode it into DVD? i cant dare to imagine cuz it's already taking me too much time to encode it. and i only recorded it at high-compression 1080p 30fps from 5d3? I believe that's 25mbps.

With the Hyperdeck you can record full uncompressed but it is like a 1.5TB drive for just two hours of footage or something  ;D.

They also have compressed modes (rates up to 220mbps).
~1.5tb for 2hrs??? so, What is the "real usage" of uncompressed HDMI?

Uncompressed imo isn't very useful. You don't need that much data for 99.9% of jobs.

On the other hand being able to go from recording h264 encoded QTs which are 8 bit 4:2:0 at 90mb/s (all-i) to DNxHD/ProRes (ie the native codecs used by Avid/FCP) 10 bit 4:2:2 at 220mb/s means you're retaining far more colour information within your image, definitely meaning that you have a lot more leeway to perform deep grades on your footage. It'll be interesting to see what a 10 bit HDMI out image from the 5dmiii looks like given the various criticisms the h264 footage has seen - we'll find out if some of the apparent lack of resolution is a codec issue.

Working directly in DNxHD/ProRes is also a big workflow improvement, and means you can have more RT video tracks and RT effects on fast computers, and means no more having to transcode your footage before editing on slower machines.

I actually mean to record the clean HDMI out video. I wasn't talking audio, but yeah I have seen people use that for audio.

I've been tempted to try the BlackMagic Design HyperDeck Shuttle:

For about $500, you can get that, plus a 256 GB SSD. My only concern is that the HDMI out of the 5D (and other Canon DSLRs) is 60i. If anyone here can tell me whether the 24p can be recovered fairly easily, I'd appreciate it.

I saw that, but I'm worried about how to monitor things. They say there is no way to be sure it actually recorded and stuff was working until you check the footage later on and what if the camera LCD goes blank during recording? I fear it might end up more expensive in the end. I think it might also be much larger.

Camera - HDMI into - Z-finder evf (or similar monitoring device with an HDMI out port) - HDMI out into Hyperdeck?

Or does the z-finder evf downconvert the hdmi signal?

If so maybe just go with the Ninja 2

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Magic Lantern Firmware - Good or Bad?
« on: September 12, 2012, 11:42:31 AM »
Can't you (or a Canon service center) reinstall the original software/firmware if something goes wrong?

It doesn't replace the Canon firmware. It runs alongside side it off of the CF card. It doesn't install anything "into" your camera, so shouldn't be a problem.

This is about as true as the original post. ML involves having to change the firmware on your camera so that it will boot the ML software off the SD/CF card. However, that's the only change to the firmware which is made, so it almost certainly wont cause any problems, I've installed various versions of ML onto three cameras and its always been fine.

If you don't install the software onto the card you're using you'll be able to use the camera without ML if you decide you don't want to use any of the additional features.

FWIW I still have moments with my 5DIII where I get slightly confused as to why it doesn't do something I feel it should before remembering that it's one of the many extra features ML provides, not something built in (the last one was increasing the gain on the headphone output).

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8