Yes, but the people who want the speed of a 1DX2, resolution of a 5Dsr, video of a C700, and cost of a T6 (used) will never agree with that...…..WRT the decade long debate: stills vs video and get everything in one universal hybrid camera... even companies like SONY who are technology driven are being realistic about that:
Read more: http://sonyaddict.com/2019/04/04/dpr-cp-2019-sony-interview/#ixzz5kNFZaqiT
- Technology is the most important thing to Sony
Read more: http://sonyaddict.com/2019/04/04/dpr-cp-2019-sony-interview/#ixzz5kNEiRamL
- Stills and video have different needs so they should use different cameras
- Sony doesn’t think you can make a perfect hybrid camera
so there we have it.
Don I solved that problem. I bought a5DSR and a 1DX2. I dont need the flare of a C700 but a video competitive (for its price range) Eos R is welcomed
Totally understand your point Don, of course, but if the market can give us that, by all means yes, we want that!
Yes, even with the Sony cameras and using the s-log or picture profiles you only have a small room to edit or post processing. If you do it too much everything starts falling apart...That´s the big difference to raw. It´s kinda like the stills world and editing jpg vs raw. You are right, a video camera is a video camera! You never get the true feeling of video and they do have a lot of advantages to a dslr or a mirrorless, but....but.... The prices and most of all the portability....Then is the most big value form these hybrids (at least for me...) I can carry 2 cameras and both can film and shoot stills. In the past, if you wanted to film you must carry a videocamera and if you wanted to photograph you need another body, a stills camera. Now you can do both in every body! And this is insane! Atomos is playing a big role in here, not only being a great external recorder, but also in the controls and things we are able to control in the screen. It doesn´t transform completely a mirrorless or DSLR in a dedicated videocamera, but sure does help! Dedicated video-cameras shooting RAW are too expensive for most of the markets and that´s why mirrorless cameras are playing now big role in the market! They are way more cheaper and they deliver really good quality. Video cameras that are not interchangeable lenses i don´t really consider, because they give you big limitations in lenses (of course) and other things like controling DOF. For me, they are not so creative and more like documental style...Don’t get me wrong, I like to shoot video. I have shot a fair bit of it on DSLRs. The quality of DSLRs for video is improving, but the controls are not. Once you have used a true video camera you gain appreciation for the relative ease of smooth zooming and focusing. Once you go off tripod, they are much easier to hold steady.
As to the codecs used, yes, they all seem to be far lower colour depth than is needed to do any significant post processing. Personally, I think we are at a knee in the curve. What is needed to significantly improve video on a DSLR is more computing power and faster storage. I think we are on the edge of its arrival.
Wow, this looks incredible! Congratulation!I put here a link to the first presentation trailer that i am recording in Antarctica. I am going back there in November to finish the documentary. Thisi was filmed with the Canon 1dx mkII and Sony a7r3. would love to go back to Antarctica with a pro mirrorless Canon!!!
I should add an addendum to my “like” on this comment:I really cant here this tinfoil theory anymore :-D
What are the reasons that video production companies use cameras like the c300/700, reds, alexas, etc?
It is the professional and industry proven standards these cameras offer. Like XLR, proper Audio interfaces, buttons for all video settings, options for handles (build in, not attached with weird cages), big screens, SDI outputs, recording features to high end memory mediums like SSDs, reliability, raw, ports for everything, ..
If Canon would offer EXACTLY the same video quality from a c300 in a Canon EOS R II - than professional production companies would STILL not care about it. They would still not switch from the bigger and dedicated movie cameras. Nobody using a c300 and above would switch down to a mirrorless (unless the size is crucial and needed for a certain shot).
Canon does not need to "protect" the cinema line.
Thats like saying General Motors builds bad SUVs to "protect" their trucks....
I think canon is actualy having problems with the sensor readout and heat. They just cant process the full sensor in a decent speed and convert it to 4k. Thats why they stick to 1:1 pixel readout.I should add an addendum to my “like” on this comment:
But they do protect their cinema line.
That's false. Professionals with knowledge of cameras know the feature or camera tiers, know that the more you want, the more you have to pay. They dont expect RED quality and features in a REBEL or 5D. In the case of Canon, they see that they pay the same price or more for a Canon camera with less features than all the competition. Which is the reason why people switch from Canon canon to another brand. The majority of them switch because of video related features.
Thank´s Peters! Hopefully it will be a good documentary when it´s finished. I use for filming the Canon 16-35 F4, 500mm f4 IS L, Tamron 70-200 F2.8 VC G2, this ones from Canon mount. From Sony, use the 24-105 F4 (but will change to the new Tamron 28-75 for E-mount. I also use the 50mm F1.8 from Canon sometimes.Wow, this looks incredible! Congratulation!
What kind of lenses/tripod/stabilization did you use to get that smooth shots?
you can't use logic with some peopleI think canon is actualy having problems with the sensor readout and heat. They just cant process the full sensor in a decent speed and convert it to 4k. Thats why they stick to 1:1 pixel readout.
The 1DX II and 5D IV are offering excellent 4k quality with 1:1 pixel readout. But The full-hd image that uses the whole sensor and processes it down to 2mpixel is realy realy bad. We actualy switched to 2 gh4 for some videoproduction where we only need full-hd (but want better quality than the 1dx and 5d "hd"). The filesize wouldnt be feasable for these shootings, since we collect a lot of footage in a studio.
More of the same old deflection. Countless hours of high quality video are reliably produced every year on devices without internal cooling fans.Such as by not equipping their photo cameras with cooling fans needed for reliable video work?
Nice work from the rubber boat! I could even get that great stable shots from a parking car in south africa :-DThank´s Peters! Hopefully it will be a good documentary when it´s finished. I use for filming the Canon 16-35 F4, 500mm f4 IS L, Tamron 70-200 F2.8 VC G2, this ones from Canon mount. From Sony, use the 24-105 F4 (but will change to the new Tamron 28-75 for E-mount. I also use the 50mm F1.8 from Canon sometimes.
For stabilization, I use the Feyutech a2000 with double hand bar (but honestly don´t recomend so much, I will change maybe for the new DJI or the new Zhiyun crane 3). The gimbal is very handfull specially in the rubber boats (zodiac boats) when filming in the water. In shore I use sturdy tripod with video head (S8 from Benro).
Say it again. The people here are in a photography bubble. I dont think they respect people to do video for a living. DR, log profiles, focus assists. and framerates are more important for video than photography but half the people here proudly just say "I dont want video in my camera. i dont use it"More of the same old deflection. Countless hours of high quality video are reliably produced every year on devices without internal cooling fans.
Allowing the 1Dx Mark II and 5D Mark IV to export 4K over HDMI would have reduced the thermal load on those cameras not increased it. It would also have made those cameras very competitive with the Cinema cameras available at the time. The C200 has an internal fan but it can't stream 4K or write internally to a mid-level codec. If it could it would encroach on the C300 Mark II.
Canon is a private company and if they feel it's necessary protect their higher end products by limiting the features of lower cost models that's their prerogative. It's my prerogative to invest in equipement which I feel offers the most value and right now that is not Canon.
I don't expect Canon to be better than everybody else at every aspect of camera design. I understand there are challenges in developing the technology to produce a high end mirror-less line.
However, there are numerous things that Canon could do right now to enhance the video effectiveness of their cameras using proven, currently available, technology. The updates in the OP for instance.
Canon's competitors don't make perfect cameras but you often feel as though they are releasing the best products they are capable of delivering. In Canon's case it's usually closer to "what's the least we can get away with". If they don't feel absolutely compelled to release a feature they won't. As a result, they are falling behind.
When Canon is failing to catch up to the video offerings in a Nikon it's time to worry. Companies with little history in digital video (FujiFilm) are blowing past Canon like they are standing still. Some folks in this forum need to get out of their bubble.