Messages

241

EOS Bodies / Re: 5dmkIII- No video autofocus?

« on: March 02, 2012, 05:26:34 AM »

for me, it's a good thing that it doesn't have video autofocus
it means they didn't throw resources at a feature that's only useful for casual users
in many respects, it feels like it's designed with pros in mind, and that's good (for me, and even though I'm not a video pro myself, just an amateur... that may not buy this yet because of the price)

242

EOS Bodies / Re: Just preordered the 5DIII, price is definitely $3499.99

« on: March 01, 2012, 06:55:21 PM »

the 5D2 was announced 17-sep-2008, with a $2700 price tag
back then (105 yen/usd), that was 285.000 yen

fast forward, and today (81 yen/usd) 285.000 yen are exactly $3500

so that's a very, very fair point to make

but also: the D800 sells for $3000, and I don't see it lacking in many respects...

243

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Viewfinder - Help

« on: March 01, 2012, 02:24:30 PM »

those all seem LCDVF clones
any of them should be good
this particular one had a relatively good reviews at cheesycam: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B004KCAQ9O/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_til?tag=similaar-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=B004KCAQ9O&adid=1T251ZCT8S0SHYYP4AMF&&ref-refURL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.similaar.com%2Ffoto%2Fequipment%2Fus_video.html

244

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Building kit around 5D Mark II...

« on: March 01, 2012, 04:22:52 AM »

manfrotto fluid heads are not real fluid heads
if you're spending heavy on a tripod, either go for the sachtler ace, or, if that feels too expensive get a fancier/e-image video tripod (I have the 7060 and I think it's great)
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?266905-500-Tripod-suggestions-for-60d

about lenses: for video, you don't need (or want) autofocus, so consider some samyang primes:
* the 85mm f/1.4 is a non-brainer: really, really cheap, and much closer to the canon-L or the zeiss than to the cheap canon non-L (specifically: the samyang has great bokeh, which is what you want on a portrait lens)
* the 35mm f/1.4 is great for full frame: impressive lens, even sharper than its canon-L and zeiss counterparts (it's not so great for APS-C, because bokeh is not nice, but for a 35mm on full frame that's not so important)

the 24mm is more expensive, and I'm still not sure how good it is; and they don't have a 50mm; for those focal lengths, consider the canon non-L zooms: the 24mm f/2.8 and 50mm f/1.4 are very nice lenses (unlike the non-L 28mm and 35mm, for example, which are too soft for my taste)

much more here:
http://www.similaar.com/foto/equipment/us_lensc.html#samyang

also, you'll need a lot more stuff: a loupe, microphone and recorder, lights, reflectors, etc
http://www.similaar.com/foto/equipment/us_video.html

and ND filters:
http://www.similaar.com/foto/equipment/us_acc.html#filter


finally, about the wish list you posted:
H4n: I have it; great; never used the remote
glidetrack: I have the DIY igus version; great
followfocus: I wouldn't get one of those friction ones; I have the dfocus
marshall monitor: never used one, but they say they're great; not always convenient, and for color rendition the LCD in the camera is more accurate, so you'll still need a loupe, I think
tripod: as stated above, I went e-images 7060, and I think it's better than that
pico dolly: never used one, but it seems somewhat useful (maybe not so much if you're already getting the glidetrack)
backpack: that's the one I have; great; I made some DIY foam job, which makes it even better
rode ntg2: a couple of years ago, there were some reports of issues when paired with the H4n; research that before you buy; I have the rode videomic, and I wouldn't buy it again if I was buying a mic today (it's not XLR); I haven't used it, but filmriot recommended a cheap shotgun mic recently: http://www.similaar.com/foto/equipment/us_video.html#audio

245

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Why all the hate for still camers?

« on: March 01, 2012, 04:10:28 AM »

I absolutely don't hate stills only cameras

but some people say a camera is worse just because it has video, and that's plain wrong

adding video to a camera which already has live view is basically free

as I already said on another thread, a high-end video processor (the one on the C300) is a very very cheap piece of silicon, it costs less than the weather sealed plugs on a weather-sealed camera (and I don't see anybody complaining that they don't shoot in the rain, so they want a non-weather-sealed 5D3)

246

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* Here's an Invite for March 2, 2012

« on: February 29, 2012, 12:57:34 PM »

thinking of this right now... http://xkcd.com/989/

247

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: ND Filter for video - how to use?

« on: February 26, 2012, 06:46:59 AM »

when you're filtering a lot of light out, all ND filters have some color cast
my cheap tiffen have nearly no cast indoors, but they have some IR issues
http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsn.html
(the resolution tests, indoors, show no cast; the outdoor tests go green-ish as I increase filtration and stack glass; as shown there too, it's easily corrected by using custom white balance)

the higher-end tiffen NDs solve part of that issue, but again not all
http://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2010/02/10/filtration-beware-of-the-reaper-of-cheap-glass/

and they're not extremely expensive, but not cheap either
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004W2NDIS/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=similaar-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B004W2NDIS

248

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Why the hate for video capable DSLRs?

« on: February 26, 2012, 04:38:30 AM »

But as I see it:

For video, a sensor with 2 megapixels (FullHD - 1920x1080) is all that is required. Videos are viewed on monitors or on screens/beamers - all of which offer - at best! - Full HD.
The sensor+readout+processor needs to be able to handle an ongoing massive stream of data without any interruption. Image quality of single frames however is a secondary requirement at best. 
The sensor needs to be of a type that can handle capture incoming light for "indefinite periods" of time. Cooling that thing is a major hardware issue.
These requirements preclude certain sensor types (e.g. CCD-FT) from being used in regular video-enabled cameras altogether. This narrows the choice of image capturing device and layout friom the start to a much narrower field than for "stills capture only".

I only read this part of that huge post

it shows you don't really know much about video, so there's no point reading all the rest

for a start, a 2 mpix sensor is not enough for 1080p video, as each photosite in the sensor captures only one color - ideally, for 1080p you want 8mpix, so you get full color for each pixel, as in the c300; if the sensor is 3:2, that's 10 mpix (3840x2560)

and if your final images will be 4K, you want a 18 mpix sensor (the RED EPIC is 5120x2700, make that 3:2 and it's 17.5 mpix)

so the resolution of the 1DX sensor is perfect for 4K footage - just make read-out times fast enough, and avoid overheating (that's a very fair point you made, but if you want high fps you have to take this into account too), and you're basically done

because all the arguments about the processor are utterly silly

processing video streams is NOT all that difficult

the digic-dv-III found on the $16K C300 can also be found on the $300 HF-R200, it's a dirt-cheap processor that does the job reasonably well (it can't do 10 bits, only 8-bits 4:2:2, but it's a 4 years old chip, the next iteration should do 10 bits)

THE WEATHER SEALED PLUGS IN THE 1DX COST A LOT MORE THAN A HIGH-END VIDEO PROCESSOR

249

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: ND Filter for video - how to use?

« on: February 26, 2012, 04:10:47 AM »

check out this:
http://www.similaar.com/foto/tuten/630.html

and this (specially the color cast tests at the end, but also the sharpness issues of the LCW fader ND -and most faders, actually- in case you're considering one of those):
www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsn.html

250

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Why the hate for video capable DSLRs?

« on: February 24, 2012, 04:14:43 PM »

would you buy the same camera, with the same stills capabilities, for the same price, if it didn't have video?

because offering a "stills only" camera is easy

making it take stills better than other cameras that record video, for the same price, or with same image quality but for a lower price, is not as easy as you make it sound (if it were, you'd be at sigmarumors.com)

251

Canon General / Re: Should photographers hibernate?

« on: February 24, 2012, 04:11:11 AM »

@OP:
You're not alone. This very nice 3-years-old blog post proves it. And it also offers some interesting ideas.
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2009/02/breaking-photographers-block

252

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Why the hate for video capable DSLRs?

« on: February 22, 2012, 07:22:41 PM »

but without income from customers interested in video, there's very little money for developing new sensors and processors!
stick to 1Ds3, pay an arm and a leg, or be done with this silly argument

and in any case let me remind you that for decades the stills world was subsidized by the movie industry (which made film cheap thanks to its huge demand)

253

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Videos and AutoFocus

« on: February 22, 2012, 07:16:30 PM »

I wouldn't be surprised if they were putting a lot of effort into video AF, but I don't want it: serious video doesn't usually use autofocus, and I certainly don't need it or want it

now, 5x-10x zoom-in while recording, and focus peaking, would be very, very nice

254

EOS Bodies / Re: 4K DSLR?

« on: February 21, 2012, 10:22:35 AM »

RED records RAW video, but there's still a codec - just as .CR2 files have a codec (a way to arrange the bits so your computer can understand them)

if you refer to "lossy codec", RED's codec applies very moderate wavelet intra-frame compression (lossy, but visually flawless)

255

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

« on: February 21, 2012, 10:17:32 AM »

I'd rather have clean 1080p with a nice codec - and I don't think we'll be getting anything better than that for less than $10K, so it's just as good

also, once I've got clean 1080p with a nice codec, I'd rather have more fps than more resolution

4K is very low on my wish list (and yes, I have a Canon DSLR which I use only for video)