Jump to content

Photo
- - - - -

Bought the Canon 1DC


  • Please log in to reply
100 replies to this topic

#81 ScreensPro

ScreensPro

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 373 posts

Posted 29 January 2013 - 08:39 PM

If they bring out the sharp S35 crop mode and clean HDMI, we can finally put an end to this "Canon owe the indie guys" stuff?



#82 EOSHD

EOSHD

    Andrew Reid - British Filmmaker - Editor EOSHD

  • Administrators
  • 3,788 posts

Posted 29 January 2013 - 10:33 PM

If they bring out the sharp S35 crop mode and clean HDMI, we can finally put an end to this "Canon owe the indie guys" stuff?

 

Sort of.

 

How about peaking for a start?



#83 FilmMan

FilmMan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 818 posts

Posted 29 January 2013 - 10:59 PM

Been doing alot of various test shots with the 1DC.  Overall, the image does rank with the big boys.  Yep, it is that good.  I can see why Hurlbut was so pumped about this camera.  Just my opinion.  Been testing a variety of iso's, lens, conditions, lighting, and so on.     



#84 EOSHD

EOSHD

    Andrew Reid - British Filmmaker - Editor EOSHD

  • Administrators
  • 3,788 posts

Posted 29 January 2013 - 11:05 PM

Been doing alot of various test shots with the 1DC.  Overall, the image does rank with the big boys.  Yep, it is that good.  I can see why Hurlbut was so pumped about this camera.  Just my opinion.  Been testing a variety of iso's, lens, conditions, lighting, and so on.     

 

Agree it is very nice image (as it should be for $12,000) as long as you're not doing heavy grading work and don't mind some banding on skies, skin tones, walls, etc. Bringing up shadow areas on actors faces will not bring good results, I think the 1D C is something that benefits from being lit as well as possible and crushing the blacks for a more contrasty look = better tonality.


Glad you are enjoying yours. I am trying to get one to test soon.



#85 ScreensPro

ScreensPro

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 373 posts

Posted 29 January 2013 - 11:35 PM

How about peaking for a start?

 

How did guys shooting film ever cope? ;-)

 

Hell, even sound is a perk compared to film cameras.



#86 EOSHD

EOSHD

    Andrew Reid - British Filmmaker - Editor EOSHD

  • Administrators
  • 3,788 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 01:12 AM

You know what I mean :) If we start taking away useful modern technology because 'the film guys coped' then we wouldn't get very far.

 

NEX 3 = $200 = peaking

 

1D C = $12k = no peaking!!

 

I think Canon's thinking here is that everyone will use it with a monitor or EVF which supplies the focus assist tools and so they don't have to spend a dime adding it to the display.

 

Actually since the built in display is so small that is the thing that most needs it.

 

Stupido



#87 Bruno

Bruno

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 713 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 01:58 AM

Every Canon DSLR can get peaking with Magic Lantern, except for the 1DX and 1DC, that's kind of funny!  :)



#88 hmcindie

hmcindie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 09:50 AM

Peaking isn't really used for actual narrative productions. They are used for one man band operations. When you plug a monitor in so the director can see the image, peaking is always turned off.

 

I do use peaking when I operate small cams like the Nex-5n but with cams that have larger display, I always turn it off because it is distracting when you try to look at the complete shot. I also turn off histograms and waveforms.

 

Agreed though that it should be there.



#89 ScreensPro

ScreensPro

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 373 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 12:53 PM

it does seem a stupid, small omission.

 

But i guess they just think that anyone using this cam will have a focus puller or it will be in a fixed position with a fixed focus.



#90 jgharding

jgharding

    British Director and Camera Op - London

  • Moderators
  • 1,262 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 05:34 PM

There's no thought behind it as far as i can see, they didn't decide not to include it cos it's "more pro" to have fewer options on-board. The bloody Arri Alexa has peaking. some use it, some don't. It's a standard camera option.

 

it's Canon brand philosophy to make as big a profit margin as possible by altering as little as possible in order to segment a line. I will need a lot of convincing before I believe their "cinema" lenses aren't slightly modified L-lenses.

 

The EOS DSLR line has no peaking in any of the Canon firmware (except C300, C100 and C500 which aren't DSLRs) so Canon didn't add it because they consider such development to be an unnecessary development expense. You may get it at a later date. Maybe. Most likely everyone will get really excited when an impending firmware update is announced, and it will just add a few bug fixes. That's a Canon classic

 

They simply wrote some extra code into the 1Dx and added a heat sink, shuffled a few bits around and added a fortune to the price. They didn't even print its own manual, you get a 1Dx manual and a 1DC add on.

 

The sad reality is that I would have dumped the 550D/600D ages ago except for Magic Lantern. I've used nice cinema cameras. I still think Magic Lantern is a work of utter genius.


  • EOSHD likes this
http://www.jgharding.com

Consults, directs and shoots. Loves shadows...

#91 HurtinMinorKey

HurtinMinorKey

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 764 posts
  • LocationCambridge MA, USA

Posted 01 February 2013 - 08:19 PM

It's Canon brand philosophy to make as big a profit margin as possible by altering as little as possible in order to segment a line. I will need a lot of convincing before I believe their "cinema" lenses aren't slightly modified L-lenses.

 

11 blade diaphragm versus 9. In a totally different housing. It looks like the cine lenses are legit.

 

I remember when Jeff Cronenweth  did the promo for the c500, he was asked what he thought the best thing about the c500 was. He more or less said, the best thing about the new Canon cine cameras, is the new Canon cine lenses.

 

Lol.



#92 Leang

Leang

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 290 posts
  • Location─░stanbul

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:14 PM

11 blade diaphragm versus 9. In a totally different housing. It looks like the cine lenses are legit.

I remember when Jeff Cronenweth did the promo for the c500, he was asked what he thought the best thing about the c500 was. He more or less said, the best thing about the new Canon cine cameras, is the new Canon cine lenses.

Lol.

that's what I've been saying. At the pro level and testing for 4k it makes more sense to give criticism on their cine 4k primes in 4k mode than anything. Anything else is just irrelevant theory. Shooting and proving is something else.

#93 jgharding

jgharding

    British Director and Camera Op - London

  • Moderators
  • 1,262 posts

Posted 02 February 2013 - 11:58 AM

11 blade diaphragm versus 9. In a totally different housing. It looks like the cine lenses are legit.

 

I remember when Jeff Cronenweth  did the promo for the c500, he was asked what he thought the best thing about the c500 was. He more or less said, the best thing about the new Canon cine cameras, is the new Canon cine lenses.

 

Lol.

 

Hmm that is a shame for the C500 eh!? ;)

 

So I wonder if it's just the housing and the diaphragm that's changed, not the glass makeup?

 

Zeiss basically admit that CP2 are almost the same as the ZE etc primes, in better housings, with slightly cooler image, more diaphragm blades, so it wouldn't surprise me if the actual lens makeups were kinda the same in the Cinema lenses.

 

In which case i don't really have a point, as they are just good designs rehoused for another purpose (not that I'm an L-glass fan).

 

I supose it's just the shocing prices...


http://www.jgharding.com

Consults, directs and shoots. Loves shadows...

#94 jgharding

jgharding

    British Director and Camera Op - London

  • Moderators
  • 1,262 posts

Posted 04 February 2013 - 10:23 AM

There's a Dropbox link on this site where you can download some 4K DPX stills.

 

https://www.dropbox....voud/40OVBuP-6V

 

Some have been sharpened some haven't.

 

Scaled down to 1080p it looks good, though to be honest, it's still quite soft around the edges compares to its 4K competitors. I don't mind soft per say, but it seems strange. Blow it up to 100% and it the squishy Canon SLR look we all know and love (ish).


http://www.jgharding.com

Consults, directs and shoots. Loves shadows...

#95 FilmMan

FilmMan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 818 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 05:54 PM

Hi jgharding,

 

The 1DC is an interesting beast.  I've been testing, testing, testing.  Results been mixed at times   Trying to see the limitations and best situations for the camera.  Lenses, lighting* and so on play its role.  The camera has its own look.  I've had sometimes color shifts, even though I'm in manual.  I've had banding issues.  I've also had absolutely amazing detailed shots.  Can drive one to drink.  Burp.  Knowing what works and what could be problematic is important to me.  I'm no expert by any means.  Just trying to tame this camera.  For the most part the image is far above the food chain.  It ranks with the expensive cameras.  The image can be extremely sharp and detailed.  The image can be soft-ish but detailed too.   Cheers.



#96 HurtinMinorKey

HurtinMinorKey

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 764 posts
  • LocationCambridge MA, USA

Posted 05 February 2013 - 06:48 PM

^ what lenses have you been using primarily?



#97 FilmMan

FilmMan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 818 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 10:01 PM

Hi HurtinMinorKey,

I've been using Leica lenses.



#98 vas907

vas907

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 04:29 AM

Hi HurtinMinorKey,

I've been using Leica lenses.

I'm assuming Leica Rs. How do you rate these compared to modern glass, canon L lenses, Nikon etc. Saving up for a FS700 or 1DC and I'm not invested in Canon or Nikon glass and I honestly hate the look of Canon glass on Sony FS100/FS700.



#99 FilmMan

FilmMan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 818 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 06:25 AM

I'm assuming Leica Rs. How do you rate these compared to modern glass, canon L lenses, Nikon etc. Saving up for a FS700 or 1DC and I'm not invested in Canon or Nikon glass and I honestly hate the look of Canon glass on Sony FS100/FS700.

Yep Leica R.  I have Canon and Zeiss too.  Prefer the Leica.   


  • vas907 likes this

#100 vas907

vas907

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 07:01 PM

Yep Leica R.  I have Canon and Zeiss too.  Prefer the Leica.   

Appreciate the reply FilmMan.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users