November 29, 2014, 04:55:29 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 ... 46
46
EOS Bodies / Re: Just for Jrista: 2014 Market Data
« on: September 21, 2014, 05:34:38 PM »
It's also because being a "pro" doesn't mean anything.  there's really no standardization, so anyone can be one.

Being a pro generally means earning your living by practising your craft.
Many amateurs are more skilled than most pros.

47
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 21, 2014, 01:12:11 PM »
Yes the lower-end market below the C100 is the one neglected by Canon not the higher-end one. Up until the FS7 release, Canon were the best in the high-end share, and still are really the FS7 isn't even out yet.

Canon is best in high end? That's the first I heard this. Arri Alexa totally dominates high end. Almost  Hollywood movies  and TV dramas are shot on Alexa.

Red, F5/F55 are also much better than C500.

Canon did better with low end independent filmmakers with C300/C100 combo.

 

He meant high-end as the non, major-Hollywood type players see it. You are correct from the point of view of the really big boys though.

As someone who has used (in post and on set), the Cx00, FX5, Red One, Red One MX, Alexa, Red Epic, Scarlet, etc. I can say with confidence...

No.

Specs aren't everything. The Alexa is way ahead of the pack, yes. But the b cameras on Alexa sets are usually C100s, C300s, and dSLRs. Sony has great specs but the image isn't quite right and ergonomics are yucky and the F5 has not caught on that much outside high end corporate. Red is a mixed bag, the hardest to use well but it seems some people pull it off. Canon has poor specs but an excellent image and easy ergonomics for low end TV.

I would take the C500 over any Red camera other than the Dragon and over the Fx5 any day. Look at the cinematography oscar noms... All Alexa and film. B cameras are all Canon and go pro.
As a struggling indie, I have all my fingers crossed for the Sony PXW-FS7, and that's about as $high$ as I can go  on a camera. Ergonomics look like they will be great, and I'm hoping IQ will be up there too. I like the fact that it has built-in shoulder mount, extending handgrip control, and so many other nice features right out of the box, like slomo at 1080p, etc.
I am interested in the C100 as well, but at this point I'd rather wait on the mark II version.

48
EOS Bodies / Re: Just for Jrista: 2014 Market Data
« on: September 20, 2014, 12:25:30 PM »

That said, the real reason I am writing this post, how the heck can I first hear a rumor about a new Canon mount from Thom Hogan and not a site called CANON RUMORS.  Anyone know more about what Thom is referencing?  "Coincidentally, there are now rumors floating around that Canon might introduce a new mount with smaller sensor (ala the Nikon 1)."  Did I miss something?

I wish they'd just come out with an EOS-M mk III, the EF-M mount on APS-C is a good idea already.

49
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 20, 2014, 10:15:09 AM »
To OP: I think you've got it wrong.

From http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-definitely-a-new-e-mount-4k-video-camera-to-be-announced-at-photokina/:

"Sony will be taking design cues from the success of the Canon Cinema series. Will replace FS100. E-mount. 4k. Competitively priced. These will be C100 and C300 killers!!"

Looks like it's Sony that is chasing after Canon, not the other way round.  ;D

Let the war continue ... we get better cameras from both companies!  With the PXW-FS7 on the way (the camera referenced in the link), it's now Canon's turn to step it up.

50
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 20, 2014, 08:09:45 AM »
I think we all agree on this: the C100, C300 has been wonderful cameras for the past 3 years, in my experience the most well-designed AND the best HD image I've ever seen come out of a video camera, they are just truly remarkable when you actually use them and see the image. That's why the C300 became the de facto standard in HD broadcast, taking the Digibeta place in 2012-13-14. That specific camera is a true example of how sepcs are absolutely meaningless when evaluating a camera, everybody dismissed it immediately for the lack of specs yet it turned out to be workhorse you can trust and produce high quality images with, easily, this is what Canon is all about in both videography and photography fields. Look how many people are buying and using the C300 now compared to the Scarlet which was announced at the same time with remarkable specs that everybody predicted the failure of the C300.

BUT, that was alright and good for the past couple of years, now, Canon HAS to offer 4K resolution, high frame rate, and 10 bit aqcuisition path. They just have to offer these solutions in order to compete with the upcoming (current?) market. Even if people are not in need for those right now, they WANT them. Especially when investing in a camera for their business, they will surely want it to be future proof 4K ready, with HFR and 10bit, that's why I believe the C line will not be purchased in quantities anymore after the FS7 release, it's just not a smart investment to buy a 12K$ 1080p camera right now, even if you don't need it.

Pretty much agree with everything you've said, including DPAF comment above.
I am hoping Canon goes to town on the C100 mk II soon, I love it's compact size! But that FS7 looks very compelling and is going to be hard to beat from the looks of it.

51
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 20, 2014, 12:56:59 AM »
DPAF and STM are for newbies and consumers that play around making videos, not professionals.

Yep, there are lots of newbies and consumers dropping $12,000 on a C300 to play around making videos.

True, however how many of the actual professionals dropping $12,000 on a C300 are doing so to play around with DPAF, especially on critical shoots? I'd wager the percentage is quite small at this point. That may change, especially if/as the technology improves...but I would be willing to bet that manual follow focus rigs are still used with a majority of C300 shoots where focus is critical.

There are 1000's of pros making a living shooting docs and ENG work either alone or with one assistant. Not all video work is done on a set with a team of cameramen, focus pullers, audio guys, and cable runners and what not. There's a place for AF, and it's actually really easy to not use it if you don't want to; no one suggested that manual focus was a thing of the past, but AF is a tool that will become increasingly useful as time goes on. And I'm sure my blasphemy is making someone's eye's bleed right now.

I haven't denied that autofocus is a useful tool. All I am saying is I think it's a bit preliminary to make any arguments that it's THE reason people are generally picking the Canon Cinema EOS system. I think it still has some issues with tracking, and I think there is a reason for that manual focusing is still a primary means of focusing (especially when getting it right is critical.) I don't think it will (or should) stay that way forever, and I think once other manufacturers start releasing video sensors with similar technology (it's coming, for sure) that we will see some rapid improvements in tracking capabilities.

Trust me, I'm the last guy to be against improving technology. I've spent weeks on these forums arguing that Canon needs to do MORE to improve their technology (particularly their sensors) more and faster. I just needed to balance Neuro's comment that implied that people are spending $12,000 on the C300 primarily to get DPAF. I don't think that's the case. I'm sure it's a useful feature people want, I just don't think that's THE reason people buy the C300.

I didn't think you were deadset against AF, like some other purists. And most certainly the C300 is a great camera even without AF. At the moment though, Canon's DPAF is the best available for video, and that's quite an achievement. But Sony's new PXW-FS7 seems poised to destroy C300 sales, if reviews live up to the specs and hype out there, DPAF or no DPAF. Performance is still unverified, and the Cx00 are a known entity delivering stellar low light performance, which might end up being the weak point of the FS7. Time will tell. I hope these developments push Canon into high gear, and urges them to accelerate their C100/C300 mk II development. I'm in favor of the C100 over C300, not just because of price, but size and weight as well. A smaller, lighter camera helps keep you agile, less conspicuous, and into tighter spots. ... all of which leads to greater chance to catch the moment.

52
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 20, 2014, 12:21:49 AM »
DPAF and STM are for newbies and consumers that play around making videos, not professionals.

Yep, there are lots of newbies and consumers dropping $12,000 on a C300 to play around making videos.

True, however how many of the actual professionals dropping $12,000 on a C300 are doing so to play around with DPAF, especially on critical shoots? I'd wager the percentage is quite small at this point. That may change, especially if/as the technology improves...but I would be willing to bet that manual follow focus rigs are still used with a majority of C300 shoots where focus is critical.

There are 1000's of pros making a living shooting docs and ENG work either alone or with one assistant. Not all video work is done on a set with a team of cameramen, focus pullers, audio guys, and cable runners and what not. There's a place for AF, and it's actually really easy to not use it if you don't want to; no one suggested that manual focus was a thing of the past, but AF is a tool that will become increasingly useful as time goes on. And I'm sure my blasphemy is making someone's eye's bleed right now.


53
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 19, 2014, 11:34:51 PM »
...
I know that DPAF locks onto subject well, but from what I'd seen, although people are impressed with the tracking, it isn't as good as what you get with a person actually pulling focus. There are often little blips where focus is just slightly out then it corrects, which IMO, isn't quite good enough for critical work. I'm sure it will improve...I'm curious to see if the 7D II's sensitivity improvements help that or not. I think moving from DPAF (which is basically just having horizontal detection) to something like QPAF, or another innovation that achieves the same thing (allowing horizontal and vertical detection) will improve tracking. Long term, someone will get to full double cross type technology, where phase detection can be performed in the horizontal, vertical, and both diagonal directions.
...

DPAF or QPAF doesn't work with those Zeis PL cinema lenses that are all manually focused.

As jrista has said, professionals behind cinema cameras don't use any sort of automated focus that is camera based and Canon knows this which is why all of its cinema lenses have focus gears on them.

DPAF and STM are for newbies and consumers that play around making videos, not professionals.
Let the flak fly.
Philip bloom , and others making full time income as film makers are either positive on dpaf,  or are already using it. OMG   and they didn't get your permission?  You should revoke their credentials, oh all - knowing master and judge, and fine them for paying canon to install dpaf on their C100 cams. I'm sure they are not using the AF, but just felt like giving canon a few hundred bucks. And pros don't use punch in focus. So many disobedient pros in the world, it must just drive you "real" pros nuts.

54
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 19, 2014, 09:19:47 PM »
Cameraman-interviewers don't use AF NOW because there isn't a good system available. Canon's DPAF can change that, and many one man bands are already touting the 70D, and C100, for this very reason. So, what was true yesterday, won't be true tomorrow, and some of it isn't even true today.

Careful now...it sounds like you're dangerously close to suggesting there's something innovative about Canon's newest CMOS sensors.  You might get some flak for that wild idea...   :o

LOL .... lots of flak ... manual focus is like the 11th commandment to video people. The DPAF technology is brilliant, and possibly revolutionary to video as they perfect it, and I am looking forward to seeing it full-sensor on upcoming Cx00 cameras.

I think the day when automatic AF systems can be programmed ahead of time to focus either on certain subjects at certain times, or to certain points within the depth of field at certain times (or maybe just at the push of a button), then the 11th commandment will happily be broken by a lot of video people. I think the main reason why manual still reigns supreme is that for many use cases, you pre-determine where your going to be focusing during a shoot, and pull focus from point a to point b to point c smoothly and at the right times and right rate during a clip.

I think the big deal with DPAF is you could track focus in a subject moving front to back in the depth of field, which from what I've seen, is probably the more difficult job for a focus puller (or the camera operator, if they are pulling their own focus). I think if QPAF comes along at some point, that will be when the accuracy and consistency of such focus improves to the point where it could really be relied upon for critical video work.

Reviewers claim that the DPAF in the 70D  doesn't hunt at all, and tracks fairly well. Combine that with touch screen to spot focus and it is extremely powerful, eliminating the human error. They need to provide really smooth pull, and variable focus speeds from slow to near-instant. Programmable timing isn't necessary because the camera operator can trigger that for planned shoots anyway. I think this is all coming sooner than later. Even magic lantern has programmable focus pull points, albeit a bit kludgey.

Tracking is another good use of the DPAF, but for me the biggest is just the fact that I can focus my attention on interviewing while the camera compensates for the subjects movements. I could even get three camera angles in focus while interviewing as a one-man-band, or a single cameraman can setup and monitor two cameras, especially with wifi control (sit at one camera, and operate the second remotely, including focus).

The more power, the better.
 

55
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 19, 2014, 09:01:01 PM »
Cameraman-interviewers don't use AF NOW because there isn't a good system available. Canon's DPAF can change that, and many one man bands are already touting the 70D, and C100, for this very reason. So, what was true yesterday, won't be true tomorrow, and some of it isn't even true today.

Careful now...it sounds like you're dangerously close to suggesting there's something innovative about Canon's newest CMOS sensors.  You might get some flak for that wild idea...   :o

LOL .... lots of flak ... manual focus is like the 11th commandment to video people. The DPAF technology is brilliant, and possibly revolutionary to video as they perfect it, and I am looking forward to seeing it full-sensor on upcoming Cx00 cameras.

56
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 19, 2014, 08:44:31 PM »
Sony seems on a roll with video cameras:

1.  The A7s ... a tiny FF low-light monster that can do 4K with a recorder, and almost fit in your pocket.

2.  The Upcoming PXW-X70 which seems to beat Canons new XF200 on every spec, and adds goodies like HD-SDI, full size HDMI, wifi control and more ... for $1200 less!

3.  The upcoming PXW-FS7 which seems set to clobber the C300 in every way at nearly half the price. Reviewers are saying that this camera will even compete against Sony's own very expensive, and much larger, F5 and F55 cameras.

Can Canon afford to wait? Or will Sony eat their cinema lunch? What do you think Canon will offer against these formidable Sony cams?

Canon had it all in the bag, but seems intent and giving it all away due being too conservative these days, having too much fear of internal cannibalization and too little fear of outside, too focused on milking things for too long.

The 7D2 is a prime example. The image quality is already completely out of date and the camera is not even on the shelves yet.

The worst thing that ever happened to Canon video is the second Canon marketing realized their engineers had accidentally stumbled onto something big (and I saw accidentally, because they were so out of touch that they didn't even imagine anyone would possible want manual controls for video on a 5 series camera! they have these tight little focus groups so all they heard from was some PJ who wanted ultra automatic, easy run and gun video and totally missed the clearly obvious bigger picture, but as soon as marketing realzied the bigger picture they went into we better make some new high end stuff and make sure to cripple the DSLR video as much as possible and proceed as slowly as we can to milk, milk, milk). And now, as you say SOny has a serious movie camera for the price of a 1DC that utterly blows the 1DC out of the water for serious filming. They have the A7S that blow away every single Canon DSLR for in camera 1080p quality (if you want to deal with RAW, the 5D3 with Magic Lantern RAW is good though, but that is only because of some brilliant hackers) and with a $2000 add-on can record a nicer 4k than the 1DC (so that is $4900 for A7S+NinjaShogun+Metabones lens adapter vs $10,000 and the lower priced SONY option gives you better video quality)!

I agree, and I hope this is just part of the leapfrog game, because when Canon gets it right they can hit it out of the ballpark. But Sony seems to be reaching for the stars with these new releases.

Aye, I think Canon's lagging farther and farther behind the packs (yes, it's plural now. :P)

I think Canon could have reached for the stars with the 7D II, delivering a home run on every single technology front. Instead, they did the same old thing...improve a couple key features, threw in GPS (seemingly as an afterthought, otherwise I think they would have had both GPS and WiFi and possibly even NFC), and called it a day. Oh, wait...they threw in another layer if microlenses on the sensor as well.

A "reach for the stars" home run would have had a kickass wicked new sensor based on radical new technology (or maybe just technology as good as the competition), GPS, WiFi, NFC, Dual CFast 2, 4k video, basically all the bells and whistles. The Samsung NX1 sounds to me, technologically, what the 7D II should have been...a high resolution ISOCELL BSI sensor with high FPS, and all the bells and whistles. The only thing the Samsung lacks is a lens lineup and awesome customer support.

And an optical finder. And a tested, reliable AF system.

Without lenses and a decent finder (never seen an EVF that even compares), bells and whistles are just... bells and whistles. The 7D II is an actual, useable dSLR, which most dSLR buyers want. If all you want is specs, why are you going with the manufacturer that cares least about them? It's like getting upset when Apple doesn't put the fastest chip in their new rMBP and makes it thinner instead or something.... Canon is about the experience and creating useful tools, not necessarily the highest-specced ones.

Video/cinema cams don't have optical viewfinders.
AF is another big difference, although Canon's new DPAF system looks extremely promising for cameraman-interviewers.

Tell that to the Alexa studio (and every 35mm camera before that), but both the Samsung and 7DII are stills camera anyways.

Fwiw, "cameraman-interviewers" don't use AF, either!

Obviously film cameras have optical viewfinder, but not many can afford those, probably no one reading here. Alexa studio is an exeption, but still not affordable. Everything from Sony F55 on down, you know: the cameras mere mortals use, have LCD screens and/or EVF's.

Cameraman-interviewers don't use AF NOW because there isn't a good system available. Canon's DPAF can change that, and many one man bands are already touting the 70D, and C100, for this very reason. So, what was true yesterday, won't be true tomorrow, and some of it isn't even true today.

57
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 19, 2014, 08:28:45 PM »
Sony seems on a roll with video cameras:

1.  The A7s ... a tiny FF low-light monster that can do 4K with a recorder, and almost fit in your pocket.

2.  The Upcoming PXW-X70 which seems to beat Canons new XF200 on every spec, and adds goodies like HD-SDI, full size HDMI, wifi control and more ... for $1200 less!

3.  The upcoming PXW-FS7 which seems set to clobber the C300 in every way at nearly half the price. Reviewers are saying that this camera will even compete against Sony's own very expensive, and much larger, F5 and F55 cameras.

Can Canon afford to wait? Or will Sony eat their cinema lunch? What do you think Canon will offer against these formidable Sony cams?

Canon had it all in the bag, but seems intent and giving it all away due being too conservative these days, having too much fear of internal cannibalization and too little fear of outside, too focused on milking things for too long.

The 7D2 is a prime example. The image quality is already completely out of date and the camera is not even on the shelves yet.

The worst thing that ever happened to Canon video is the second Canon marketing realized their engineers had accidentally stumbled onto something big (and I saw accidentally, because they were so out of touch that they didn't even imagine anyone would possible want manual controls for video on a 5 series camera! they have these tight little focus groups so all they heard from was some PJ who wanted ultra automatic, easy run and gun video and totally missed the clearly obvious bigger picture, but as soon as marketing realzied the bigger picture they went into we better make some new high end stuff and make sure to cripple the DSLR video as much as possible and proceed as slowly as we can to milk, milk, milk). And now, as you say SOny has a serious movie camera for the price of a 1DC that utterly blows the 1DC out of the water for serious filming. They have the A7S that blow away every single Canon DSLR for in camera 1080p quality (if you want to deal with RAW, the 5D3 with Magic Lantern RAW is good though, but that is only because of some brilliant hackers) and with a $2000 add-on can record a nicer 4k than the 1DC (so that is $4900 for A7S+NinjaShogun+Metabones lens adapter vs $10,000 and the lower priced SONY option gives you better video quality)!

I agree, and I hope this is just part of the leapfrog game, because when Canon gets it right they can hit it out of the ballpark. But Sony seems to be reaching for the stars with these new releases.

Aye, I think Canon's lagging farther and farther behind the packs (yes, it's plural now. :P)

I think Canon could have reached for the stars with the 7D II, delivering a home run on every single technology front. Instead, they did the same old thing...improve a couple key features, threw in GPS (seemingly as an afterthought, otherwise I think they would have had both GPS and WiFi and possibly even NFC), and called it a day. Oh, wait...they threw in another layer if microlenses on the sensor as well.

A "reach for the stars" home run would have had a kickass wicked new sensor based on radical new technology (or maybe just technology as good as the competition), GPS, WiFi, NFC, Dual CFast 2, 4k video, basically all the bells and whistles. The Samsung NX1 sounds to me, technologically, what the 7D II should have been...a high resolution ISOCELL BSI sensor with high FPS, and all the bells and whistles. The only thing the Samsung lacks is a lens lineup and awesome customer support.

And an optical finder. And a tested, reliable AF system.

Without lenses and a decent finder (never seen an EVF that even compares), bells and whistles are just... bells and whistles. The 7D II is an actual, useable dSLR, which most dSLR buyers want. If all you want is specs, why are you going with the manufacturer that cares least about them? It's like getting upset when Apple doesn't put the fastest chip in their new rMBP and makes it thinner instead or something.... Canon is about the experience and creating useful tools, not necessarily the highest-specced ones.

Video/cinema cams don't have optical viewfinders.
AF is another big difference, although Canon's new DPAF system looks extremely promising for cameraman-interviewers.

58
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 19, 2014, 07:57:48 PM »
No it won't. Other camera companies are already introducing 4K into their consumer product lines, so Canon doing it later would still be a dollar short and a day late.

Canon doing it now is a day late and a dollar short.  After all, with the right ($1,000) software, you can capture 4K video on a freaking iPhone 5S.  The fact that so many multi-thousand dollar DSLRs sold today can't even do what a <$100 cell phone (with 2 year contract) can do is an utter embarrassment, IMO.

It's way past time for Canon to step up their game and quit treating decent video quality as an excuse to squeeze more money out of their customers.  It's not an opportunity for an upsell anymore; it's basic functionality.

While I agree that Canon is slipping behind Sony in recent video releases, it's not near as bad as you imply.

I can do 4K natively on my Samsung Note 3, but not all 4Ks are equal, and 4K is not necessarily better than 1080p.  Specs often don't mean much, except to the marketing department. I'd like Canon offer some pro video to compete with these new Sony's. Do it right, and do it soon. For some reason, I'm attached to the Canon brand, but that only goes so far.

59
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 19, 2014, 07:12:56 PM »
Concerning the cinema line, I don't think will see a the C300 successor right now. Expect it in 2015, and of course it will have 4K and 10bit.

If you need 4K now, buy the FS7 and shoot with it, better than wondering why your C300 doesn't shoot 4K. If you don't need 4K right now, keep shooting beautiful 1080p with the C100/300 until their replacement is due sometime next year.

I think the Sony PXW-FS7 has caught a lot of people by surprise, including Canon, and they probably don't have anything ready to compete at that price point.

You're probably right, we won't see a new Cx00 camera for another year, maybe more. In the meantime this FS7 will be all alone in this class. Don't get me wrong, I am a Canon fan, and I became a fan because of the enormous bang-for-the-buck that Canon provided. But these latest Sony's are very compelling.

If the reviews bear out the specs, then the PXW-X70 will win over the Canon XF200 for me this year. And I was thinking C100 soon as well. Although it is a really nice camera, now it will be a matter of whether Canon introduces something that can compete with the FS7 in the next 6-10 months (provided that independent reviews confirm what the specs promise).
 

60
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras
« on: September 19, 2014, 03:16:14 PM »
BTW ... I am still hoping for an all-in EOS-M mark III that can be a APS-C version of the A7s

The Sony PXW-X70 seems like it will have no competition for some time since Canon just released the XF200.

My hope against the PXW-FS7 is that Canon gets a killer C100 mkII on the market soon, at or less than the Sony. Include DPAF accross the entire sensor and they'd have a differentiator. The DPAF would be extremely useful when doing interviews as a one-man-band.


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 46