Andrew Reid

29 minute limit on the NEX 5N actually, at least on the PAL one I have.

I found the problem was due to spaces in the folder name. Replaced spaces with _ and it worked.   I think a 2GB issue has also been mentioned, and fixed in latest raw2dng so make sure you get latest version.

For the impatient ones wanting Spartacus shot in raw on the 5D Mark III whilst the code is still being developed on a nightly basis, and for those wanting Hitchcock Rope style continuous takes. JUST WAIT

Why not just get the NEX 5N then... It's a fraction of the price.   The ergonomics on the VG series are also atrocious.

  All valid points you make Sean.   I don't mind what people shoot with raw - cats, dogs, whatever. As long as I have access to it on the 5D Mark III that's all that matters.

  Cool. Sometimes we need a fast turnaround. Sometimes we need raw.   It isn't that one is better than the other or visa versa... Aside from the image quality where the situation at the moment between DSLR compressed and DSLR raw is massive.

  This philosophy is much more interesting to me, than the mundane practicalities of workaday filmmaking, where reliability is a priority and the image just has to be 'good enough'.   Give me melting image processors any day.   JG yeah Red Code is awesome. Very flexible for many people.

Depends on the raw codec. Some are licensed.   Uncompressed bayer RGGB raw is simply data, there's no codec.

  I fully appreciate your point. Raw isn't practical for some people. It is a tired argument though, oft repeated and it only considers one kind of shooter.   Here's an analogy - consider in Tokyo that there's a guy playing some weird instrument for arts sake, the instrument is a pain to transport, a pain to set up, even trickier to play but the results are amazingly artistic. He is not considering anything else but the sound.   Anyway I think the 'difficulties' of raw and most of the impracticalities stem from people who are unable to get a decent workflow going, or can't bear to spend hours transcoding to ProRes, or can't bear to hack their camera, like Philip Bloom for instance. He's overstated how impractical it is time and again. Just because it doesn't fit one person's way of working doesn't mean that it won't fit someone else's. Just make it work. It's worth it.

Raw is already a standard.   And I'm not against compressed formats per see, they are convenient. The problem is not so much the codec, it is the sheer amount of image quality that is bulldozed in the implementation of it. That sensor outputs all the goodness, by the time it sees H.264 there's not much left.   My advice is for manufacturers to get serious about how they process that raw data and compress in camera. Panasonic could use their lovely AVC Ultra on a professional GH camera for instance, and do a full pixel readout of the sensor, store as much of the colour info and dynamic range and resolution as possible in a compressed format. The compression is the least of the problem, why do they have to throw so much out? There's no reason why 10bit 422 ProRes cannot be in a DSLR. It is in the Pocket Cinema Camera.

It's already posted.   I got 12,8000 exposure in the raw by matching it to the H.264 at ISO 12,800.   The DNG frame is independent from ISO. In order to get your ISO you change the exposure of the raw frame in post. Just download the raw frame and play with it.

For god's sake, why can't people just be positive.   If your free raw on a DSLR is so much of a hassle or too soft don't shoot with it. Spend $15,000 on a C300 instead, but first ask yourself how many 128GB CF cards you can buy for $15,000.   When you are shooting a live event you will be swapping cards every 20 minutes and breaking the flow, not practical. Don't shoot with it.   For when you are working on the performances, the lighting, the set, or shooting in fits and bursts documentary style the small 128GB card is not an issue. By the time you have shot 20 mins of footage, you will probably have spent an hour doing off camera stuff or shot selection or composition and the million other things that happen to get a good shot sequence together. Changing the card every 2 hours doesn't seem like a chore to me. Then after that the raw is whatever you want it to be. ProRes transcode... Done. Nobody should be archiving uncompressed raw, it doesn't make sense not to compress it in some form.   Raw is only big on the CF card, it doesn't have to be as big on your drive. You're shooting raw - that means you choose your codec.   In my view of it, the 5D Mark 3 IS shooting ProRes. It's raw! You capture the data and send it to ProRes land. View it like that and tell me why drive space is still such a big issue.   Best of all, raw gives you the ability to leave picture profiles and other camera settings like ISO alone and SHOOT. Wrong WB on H.264 and you are screwed. Wrong WB on raw - well there's no such thing as wrong WB with raw unless you blindly fuck it up in post and even then you have a much larger ability to fix a dodgy exposure or other problems which would have been baked into H.264.   H.264, be it on the FS100, GH3, GH2, whatever - is not going anywhere near my serious projects from now on. Raw all the way.

There was NEVER a good time to buy one. The image is appalling.

  You're not wrong, you are indeed seeing more detail.   But it is oversharpened.   When I do the same sharpening to the 5D raw image, I get more blades of grass too.     Now the BMCC looks mushy in comparison.   First, the whole C5D comparison video is mute for comparing resolution, because it isn't 2.5K. They have downscaled the BMCC footage rather than upscale (and sharpen) the 5D Mark III raw to 2.5K to match the BMCC. That would have been more interesting (for those capable of viewing 2.5K on their display at least).   Now the over-sharpening I applied above (horrible isn't it?) - I believe a similar thing is at work in the original Cinema5D workflow. 5D isn't sharpened enough and the BMCC is way over - or probably like that straight from the sensor. Unless the path is sprinkled with red blue and green fairy dust, the BMCC shot has a lot of false detail. You can't claim it has no false detail. Yes there's more real detail there too but it comes at a cost.   I hate to start pissing on Blackmagic, they don't deserve it. Their image is still amazing. I have no plans to cancel my MFT 2.5K cam order, or pocket camera order, or 4K production camera order.   I think the 5D raw is close to 1000 lines, the 2.5K BMCC is about 1100-1200 lines. The 4K Production Camera will be another matter!  

  I think the CF interface tops out at 150MB/s, could be wrong on that. SSDs would be nice for the capacity but I think 1000x or maybe 1100x is the max for the current CF spec.   I've tried the higher frame rates now.   960x540 at 60fps works fine, but some aliasing.   1920x540 is squashed looking.   1280 x 720 is actually 1280 x 672, and looks a bit squashed too.   But the card can handle it pretty reliably at 48fps.   Next on my list to try is anamorphic lens & 1920x1280 (3:2), that is going to be my preferred mode. From 3:2 with the Iscorama you will get roughly 2.35:1 :)

That horizontal line artefact isn't the same as what you saw in Luke's video though is it?   Sure there are glitches. It is dev code!

Continuous takes longer than 40 sec are the exception rather than the rule actually. In my understanding file spanning is trivial stuff, I am sure they will get it going just as soon as they assign raw recording to a dedicated button :) Even Vitaliy was able to get file spanning on the GH2 hack without full control over the OS.

  One more dim light source for fill lighting around 2m away from the candle.

I've corrected your post :)  

I am not sure where you got that impression from, but it is broken get a refund :)   The way to think of it is:   Raw is top of the pyramid.   From that there are ways to compress and mangle the image and none of them are as good quality as raw.   JPEG and TIFF have nothing to do with AVCHD or H.264.   In the post world, TIFF is for sequences of very high quality stills.   AVCHD is a consumer video format with H.264 inside, at 24Mbit for 1080/24p.   Cine Style, log, etc. is just a way to get a bit more dynamic range out of a crappy compressed image, with raw you don't need log, it is N/A and if you just want a flat low contrast look then you apply it to the raw image in post.

[media]http://vimeo.com/66206596[/media] The 5D Mark III is already a very capable low light camera. In its factory guise whilst not quite as clean as the Canon C300 or Sony FS100, it is the best DSLR for low light shooting (though the Nikon D5200 puts up a good fight). But that was before the latest developments with ML Raw. Has low light improved even further? [url=http://www.eoshd.com/content/10338/low-light-test-of-5d-mark-iii-raw-vs-h-264]Read the full article here[/url]

  I think that's understating the 5D's image. BMCC is still wonderful but it has a serious competitor here.   Some of the extra perceived detail in the BMCC's 2.5K raw comes from false detail. The 1080p on the 5D is much cleaner, and less noisy.   A good comparison would be to upscale the 5D's raw to 2.5K size and compare on a 2.5K display. I expect a bit more sharpness from the BMCC but is it worth it when the trade off is some false detail and more noise?   2.5K resolution is great and 5D3's full frame likely to top out at 1080p, but the 1:1 crop mode could yet reach it's full potential and give us nearly 4K from a Super 35mm sized area with a very fast card. The 5D3's DMA memory in the camera does 700MB/s! That is faster than any SSD and not a bottleneck.   I have the BMCC 2.5K and 5D3 with me now and will do some comparisons. Feel free guys to let me know your ideas for tests.

  No 7MB is for 3.5K raw frames. It is 4MB per frame for 1080p. Less than Blackmagic.   Situation with storage and media is similar to Blackmagic. Just get as much camera media as you can afford, then compress the raw in post to something more management like ProRes or CineForm whilst maintaining the huge image quality leap from straight out of camera H.264.   You've seen how good it looks to 24Mbit compressed H.264 from the Vimeo download! Still a big leap from Canon's video image quality even if you throw away the raw files.

Not tried HDMI yet whilst recording raw but will tonight. Seems like a doable option.

Ah good news, that is a new development. 7D would be interesting with those faster processors.