March 06, 2015, 11:23:18 AM

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 - Etienne

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 48
Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 09, 2014, 02:51:57 PM »
This lens is very tempting. I wish it was a little lighter but it's now on my wish list. Can't wait to see the reviews, but Canon seems to be on a roll with good lenses. I hope they replace the 50 1.4 soon. Also a new 85 with IS would be awesome.

Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 07, 2014, 01:15:08 PM »
Still waiting for the most important spec ...

... the $ spec

Lenses / Re: More EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Talk [CR2]
« on: October 29, 2014, 03:20:26 AM »
I have the 70-200 2.8 IS II and 2x extender. While I like it's versatility, it is slow to focus and soft wide open. I am interested in this 100-400 mkII if it delivers fast performance, reasonable price, not too heavy and sharp wide open.
Otherwise I'll stick with the combo I have.

To be honest, I am hoping for a super sharp contrasty lightweight new  400 f/5.6 IS

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announces the Cinema EOS C100 Mark II
« on: October 23, 2014, 11:15:21 AM »
I also see no reason to record 4K today.

So I can stabilize in post, crop, downsample, and still have 1080p left.

This is a legitimate response, but this camera is aimed at people using professional-style rigs, no? So stabilisation isn't really an issue.
Sure it's not an issue ... If you are that one professional on earth who gets everything perfect the first time, even in fast moving ENG or doco environments. For the rest of us not-yet-perfect videographers ... every bit of tech helps

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announces the Cinema EOS C100 Mark II
« on: October 22, 2014, 10:03:19 AM »
If you use the C300 and C100 daily you will know how significantly better the C300 feels, and this upgrade makes the C100 actually nicer than the C300. The tiltable hq EVF is alone worthy of upgrade, the screen is also a great addition, slowmotion also is very good, these were the only complaints people had with the C100 and it fixed those. The dual pixel AF in the entire frame can revolutionize event/sports/documentary shooting. They also DO claim higher image quality and better high ISO performance.let's wait and see what it does in real life tests, but this seems like the most "complete" video camera for 5$k now. If you need 4K, this camera is not 4K, look at 4K cameras, there are many.

The Canon C line while disappoints web-readers who don't actually use the cameras, prove to be the best in class when actually used. The C300 didn't become the de facto standard for news and broadcast for it's spec sheet, remember how the scarlet was announced on the same day with an enormous spec sheet, look how many use the scarlet compared to the c300 now. Let's wait until we see the images and real-life tests.
It does not say dpaf for the entire frame. I'm guessing it is just the center as before.  But entire frame with a touch screen focus pull would change things

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announces the Cinema EOS C100 Mark II
« on: October 22, 2014, 01:39:45 AM »
This is a small refresh, nice to have stuff if you were going to buy a new C100 anyway, and that's why the price doesn't change much.

But the big news is still the Sony PXW-FS7 ... at $2,500 dollars more it still looks like a steal compared to the C100 mkII.

I am both disappointed in the incremental upgrade (I really thought the C100 II was going to be very tempting), and happy that it looks like an easy decision: Sony wins this round.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: IS on when filming on tripod?
« on: October 18, 2014, 01:52:12 PM »
I've shot some long exposure scenes that were absolutely ruined by having IS turned on with my 70-200 2.8L IS II lens :(.  I wouldn't trust it at all, even if it claims to have tripod detection.

The effect must be different with video vs photo. I've filmed a lot on a tripod with that lens, and never saw a problem with the video. I have seen problems on long exposure photos though. And I've seen problems with the 24-105 when IS is on using a tripod. Also the 35 f/2 IS has never given me a problem with IS on.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 40mm stm verses 35mm IS lens?
« on: October 18, 2014, 01:36:23 AM »
I don't know how you would follow focus with the 40mm STM ... there's not much of a focus ring.
I have both of these lenses. I rarely use the 40, but the 35 f/2 IS is a great little lens and I use it a lot.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: IS on when filming on tripod?
« on: October 17, 2014, 10:03:37 PM »
I usually leave my IS on all the time, but that's because the lenses have tripod detection, and the IS shuts off automatically. I do turn the IS off on the 24-105, I don't think it has tripod detection.

I use f/4 to 5.6 (on full frame) for interviews usually, depending on focal length and focal distance. You can get away with f/2.8 if you are framing the whole body sitting in chair. The subject will move around, and their distance to camera will change, so you need a little extra depth of field unless you intend to have the face go in and out of focus a bit. It's extremely difficult to keep a close face in focus at f/2.8, even on crop sensor. I don't like the variable ND filters. I have a 4- stop and a 6 stop ND (B&W), and they give a better result than the variable filters (I have a variable, can't remember the brand). You probably wont need a ND filter indoors unless you are blasting a lot more light than necessary at the subject.

Also ... use shutter speed twice the frame rate, as others mention (24p = 1/50sec, 30p = 1/60 sec). Use two cameras at least if possible, get two angles and two framings. Use a lav mic, this will make more difference than anything else you do. Cheapest good solution :  Zoom H1N recorder with Olympus ME-15 lav mic, total cost $125 for both. Sync the audio in post and everyone will think you've been doing this for 25 years.
Don't forget to custom white balance and shoot with picture profile "marvels advanced." Set the sharpness and contrast down a couple notches, then adjust to taste in post.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 6D Mark II to Move Upmarket? [CR1]
« on: October 14, 2014, 03:26:23 PM »
Doesn't mean a thing. It will all depend on what the package offers.
If the 6DII has everything I want, and the 5D4 is too much$, I'll move up to a 6DII from the 5D3. I don't really care what model number they use.

EOS Bodies / Re: \
« on: October 13, 2014, 04:37:32 PM »
Nice video, but I agree that lack of touchscreen was a missed opportunity for this camera. It bodes well for the 80D, next rebel, or next EOS-M though.

EOS Bodies / Re: The Next Cinema EOS Camera Will Be..... [CR2]
« on: October 11, 2014, 03:05:42 AM »
I'm just excited to see this rumor. Canon can hit this out of the park.
The C100 is great for one man band and really small teams on a really small budget.
I'm not greedy: gives us 10 bit, 4:2:2, good codecs, 120fps (or better) at 1080p, 4K , 1/2 inch good viewfinder, amazing touch screen LCD, killer low light sensor with full sensor DPAF, face tracking, wifi control, wifi transfer and streaming capability, skip the GPS. Keep the weight and size down too!
Some people dump all over AF, but when you have to interview and operate the camera at the same time it can be a lifesaver, and the DPAF in the 70D is proving to be very good for this. Allows you to film yourself on camera and stay in focus too.
The C100 mkII could be the camera of my dreams.

EOS Bodies / Re: The Next Cinema EOS Camera Will Be..... [CR2]
« on: October 10, 2014, 04:20:37 PM »
Normally I'd be rather skeptical of Canon releasing a lower end camera that would outperform their current higher end model, but the C300 has been out for a long time and is still in high demand for TV work. A new C100 won't kill the rental market for the C300 or make it instantly obsolete. It might hurt sales, but since it's an established model on the verge of replacement anyway, I could actually see this happening.
A C100 mkII would sell like water in the desert  if it offered the things that prosumer camera nerds think are hot right now, like 4k and higher FPS. It would record internally to some compressed codec that TV and the BBC won't like, but anyone shooting weddings/scenics/webvideos wouldn't care too much about that. The C300 mkII would drop at NAB and record ProRes and do all the things that TV/BBC specs require. The wedding guys will think they still got a great camera for less than a C300 and the TV guys will have to buy the more expensive C300 II anyway. Win-win.
Even if it doesn't do everything that the Sony FS7 does, it will still do what makes Canon so desirable anyway...great skin tones straight out of the camera.

I'm guessing Canon will deliver a lot of goodies with C100 II, including the XF codec. We have just seen Sony come out with 3 really big value items that undermine Canon products: The A7s low light monster, the PXW-X70 small ENG / doc camera that not only destroys the Canon XA20 but beats out the much more expensive XF200 as well, and now the PXW-FS7 that looks implausibly affordable for what it delivers. Sony is demonstrating that they are in it to win it. I am rooting for Canon, but Sony is getting really tempting, so bring on an irresistible C100, or watch the dollars start flowing to Sony!

Canon General / Re: More Canon Lens Mentions [CR2]
« on: October 10, 2014, 04:00:45 PM »
If Canon pulls this off (11-24 f/4L) with outstanding quality, it would be worth quite a lot of $$$.
But it's still a bit of a specialist lens. Nice to know it's available. There are a lot of other things tempting money from my wallet, so this would fall into "nice to have" category for me, especially since there are other more practical and much cheaper ways, to go wide.

Still, I am glad they are NOT going to f/2.8 ... that lens would be a monster with an even bigger price, and difficult to use in cramped quarters. With the ever-increasing quality of high ISO sensors, f/2.8 is becoming less important for low light (f/2.8 is no where near enough for shallow DOF in an ultrawide, even at 24mm).

Canon General / Re: More Canon Lens Mentions [CR2]
« on: October 10, 2014, 11:32:20 AM »
Way too much $$ for me, but I might rent one. Very specialist lens.
I can put a $350 Rokinon 8mm f/2.8 (or 12mm f/2) on my EOS M, and get interesting results in a tiny package carried on a little waist bag. Sure it's not as good as a 11-24 on my 5D3, but it's quickly available while simultaneously using the 5D3 with a 16-35 or 70-200.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 48