Andrew - EOSHD

Work tools are boring. I've always found mirrorless cameras way more fun to actually shoot with. In his day job John Brawley has an Alexa. Why on earth would he shoot 'for fun' creatively, with an Olympus E-M1 II? But he does. There are a lot of talented DPs who shoot with DSLRs and mirrorless cameras once they down their RED and Arri cameras at the end of the day. Yet I find in the mid-range market for video pros (wedding videographers for example) there's an aspirational value attached to the higher-end pro cameras, that is stupid and pointless. Aspirations should be creative. Owning a Sony FS5 or Canon C500 doesn't make you more creative, it makes you more efficient at work by a slight bit, and you appear more professional because of the big nobs and bells & whistles. Sadly, it doesn't necessarily make for "better" work because I have yet to see a clear distinction between work shot on mirrorless cameras and on stuff like the C300. In fact often the small camera stuff looks better and more inspired. The legendary Anthony Dod Mantle is known for his rough and ready work with digital, but when he went Canon C-series on Oliver Stone's recent series of Putin interviews, the look they achieved was slap dash and lazy to my eye... Could have been so much better. He used DSLRs as well on this shoot (between 2015-2017) and those shots actually came out more interesting! Too many pro videographers seem to dream of cameras like an Alexa and RED, why shows to me how important the professional label and look is to people, but creatively, they are no better and actually worse than the small cameras. I hated shooting with my Sony FS5. A fiddly pain in the ass, for my music video work in Berlin, it needed an OIS lens and rig for handheld - limiting the choice of looks from the lens. With a GH5 you can put any lens on there and it is instantly stable for handheld work, with a tiny form factor that gets out of the way. The FS5's image was worse than an A7S II but double the price. Aside from high frame rates it didn't offer anything creatively over a DSLR or mirrorless camera and now I have 120fps full frame on two of my small cameras along with 240fps 1080p on the pocket RX100 IV - So why bother getting a more expensive camera if it doesn't power you along creatively as much as the cheaper stuff!? These pro cameras aren't cheap... Sometimes I got lucky and I bought a Canon C500 for a very good price used, but do you know how many times I have felt compelled to take it out and use it for artistic work? Zero times. Kendy Ty is another example of a pro who downs his workhorse RED and shoots with a DSLR... The camera gets out of the way to such an extent he can shoot short films in public and direct the actors at the same time as being the main cinematographer. His work sticks in the mind as some of the most creative and spontaneous I've seen and there's not a C200 in sight... zero need for one! I think pros have by-and-large completely forgotten and lost the spirit of the DSLR movement back from 2010-2012 as they sought efficiency. XLRs, built in NDs, yadda yadda. Blackmagic as well, when they ditched the small cameras and went all-out URSA on us. Canon too... Oh wait, they never got it in the first place, and they invented it! Cameras should not just be about making money. That's how an art-form gets boring. That's how it dies. They are not just about doing a job. They're about creatively enabling artists and they're about democratising the art form so that price doesn't act as a road block to new talent. Of course Canon only care about profit, they are not interested in that. The Olympus E-M1 II's stabilisation isn't seen on any of the pro cinema cameras. It's unique. It offers something creatively to the result that a bigger, more complex shooting rig simply does not. On the audio side, so important creatively, small mirrorless cameras used to have limitations and some still do - but with XLR boxes with phantom power that fit in a hot-shoe, you can't really complain. Audio is not a big limiting factor on the Panasonic GH5. I still know that pros have their professional reasons for going Cinema EOS or Sony FS or RED or even Arri... Workflows, codecs, ergonomics, power, performance, looking-the-part... I'm not denying their reasons for one second, it would be so naive to suggest they drop the workhorse cameras and use a mirrorless camera for paid work. But the creative side of the small cameras is what matters to me and I think it is being overlooked as specs in the $6000-$10,000 pro market hot up. Sure, you can shoot all day on a big battery to a small broadcast ready codec with the C200, very practical... But can you put a 1970's Super 16 lens on there? Can you increase the character of your images by a factor of 10? Does it have an anamorphic mode? Nope. If I ever buy a C200... Shoot me. It's over.

Get a GH5 if rolling shutter is a concern. Or shoot in full frame 4K mode on the A7R II which does pixel binning rather than a full sensor readout in that mode, so less rolling shutter. X70 has a completely different aesthetic to the A7S II... Does that not matter to you?!

MLVFS needs FUSE on MacOS, and it does work on Linux but I'd question why you'd even bother with it on Android as the mobile processors don't exactly cut through RAW video in Resolve, do they....

Come on, it's an old old arguement that there should be such a big divide between cameras for stills and cameras for video! We both know they do both so well. Otherwise, we'd all be satisfied with our small 1/2.3 inch handycams and gopros. The only DSLR that is not a video camera is the Nikon DF. They took the video off purely for marketing reasons. Also Canon have competition, they don't exist in a bubble. If they aren't competing with Sony for customers, then what are they even in the consumer electronics business for? To whither and die? You were... And a very good one. Hope you go back to that some day! Get into the spirit of things again I just picked up a Leica T from watching your YouTube channel. Photography is a big thing for me. But so is video. And I really love the DSLR price tag, the unassuming small body compared to a RED or C300. I hate - HATE - being a single operator of a cinema camera for my street cinematography - always feel like I am about to be robbed or told off for not having a permit. In a closed set for a music video then a big camera is fine... still a heavy pain in the ass for handheld though... And I hate rigs. There was a reason when the DSLR revolution started why filmmakers and DPs started using them for personal projects and other stuff... Because it was FUN!! Sadly, this is bullshit nonsense. Canon do not endorse or want ML in any way on their cameras and whatever effect ML is having on sales, Canon can't even detect as they have no way of knowing or researching the impact. It could be quite sizeable in my opinion but in no way does Canon care. They see it as an illegal hacking project, end of story. The reason 4K is not on the 6D II is presumably they did some market research and their idiot customers told them 1080p is what we want, it's easy to use. Which is why you should NEVER ask the public what they want. BREXIT anyone?

Raw Magic is great but it doesn't support the new 10bit / 12bit compressed RAW yet... At least my version didn't...?

Moire is not 100% absolutely completely gone but it is FAR better than the 100D out of the box video mode! Yes a good second unit to a 5D3, but it depends on how you use it. The 70D is double the price but has the benefit of articulated screen and Dual Pixel AF. I have always had a soft spot for the 100D though with it being so small and light compared to 5D3 and even the 70D. 80D, EOS M5 have a brighter future if ML port ever comes to fruition, which I think it will do eventually!

The Canon 100D is £250 used and I have always had a bit of a soft spot for it, being the smallest and lightest Canon DSLR body. I recently installed an experimental version of Magic Lantern on the 100D and am absolutely taken-aback by how good the image is! It practically eliminates moire and softness. The 100D shoots continuous 1.7K RAW video in 25p and 24p to SD card. Read the full article

Bad defence. 6D Mark II doesn't have ML RAW! It's not the same at all. Different chipset and processor. Performance will be completely different and likely much worse. Also there are key lenses still without OIS to support optimal EIS performance, like the Canon 24-70mm F2.8L II. Don't make me laugh! They'd rather it didn't exist. What a stupid comment! All I am asking for is an editable 4K codec on their 2017 DSLRs costing $2000+! So have 4K disabled out of the box and a $100 add on like V-LOG on the GH5, then.

UPDATE: Ah got it. MLVFS. Blog post coming. Shooting continuous 10bit video on the £250 Canon 100D at close to 1.8k in 2.35:1

What apps are you guys using to convert compressed RAW 10bit MLV to DNG on a Mac? I have searched for a few and only Mystic beta 0.5 works so far - but there are green focus pixels all over the frame on the 100D.

The current state of video on Canon DSLRs continues to go from bad to worse. Read the full article

Don't think Canon has a colour advantage any more. I am getting often superior results with EOSHD Pro Color on the A99 II, and the GH5's 10bit is something else.

Body only.

Replacement can't be far off!

They have reduced the price of the A7S II (and A7R II) by £500 on WEX in the UK. Is this a new thing or on-going reduction?

How about the Voigtlander 10.5mm F0.95? Anyone tried this yet?

I'm talking about the way people shoot now, not in the 50's. Yes there will always be the exception like a crew with 4 A-cams all with the same purpose. But in my mind and in this topic with Oliver we are talking supporting role, small camera, multiple bodies at a price lower than the A cam.

No, it's absurd to deny the existence of B-cameras. Same camera as the A cam isn't a B cam, it's another A cam!! That's the way the concept works!

Anyone watching Oliver Stone's Putin interviews on Sky Atlantic? Canon C series but 5D Mk III as B-camera and quite a few DSLRs going on there. B-cameras are a real thing... Saying C200 is B-cam on a C200 shoot is just silly.

Enjoy. I'll give you a free copy of EOSHD Pro Color to go with it, just DM me when it arrives!

Find the one that responds to protocols over HTTP and get that one I know what you mean though - I have the same dilemmas, in the end Mk IV has stood the test of time and I didn't feel upgraditus coming on... The A6300 and A6500 on the other hand, I regret buying.

Who cares about sales? Most people are sheep with minimum knowledge, and as I'm not a Canon shareholder I don't care about who is in the lead of sales, I care about what is going to give me the most artistic image, best specs, the most convenient form factor and best value for money.

Yes. Obviously the GH5 has the edge on the codec side with 10bit and it has slow-mo. Nearly everything else is better on the Olympus though, including the general 'feel' when using it. What is surprising about both is just how good the colour and skintones are... Canon have competition. I know I will keep both as they are too hard to sell... Obviously with the GH5 I don't absolutely need the E-M1 II but there is something about it that's compelling... a nicer feel in the hand and slightly better stabilisation with 90% of the video quality of the GH5.

It's not C-mount. It's Arri Standard mount (Arri-S)

I have upgraded your forum profile to a Super Member so you can edit your original post and generally have mod-like access to the forum. Thanks for all your efforts so far on the project.