Andrew Reid

Uncompressed is actually cheaper and less hardware intensive than compression.   This is why the BMCC costs $3000.   14 bit 4K of the sensor to shitty MPEG and it costs us money!   If I were Canon I'd have done an SSD box in a battery grip style casing under the base of the camera and do the absolute minimum of processing on the sensor output.

  Speed Booster still possible on the FZ mount. Read this...   http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/1912-metabones-speed-booster-review/?p=25898

True they use FZ mount but the flange is the same as E-mount ,18mm. That is the important thing - enough room to accommodate the Speed Booster. FZ just has a wider diameter to accommodate some rear elements on PL glass and has a tougher locking system, and adapters to PL out of the box.  

On a film production the job of the DP is not to file tax returns or chase clients for new business.   The job of a lone operator is 50% business and not all artists have that skill.   If you have though, the 1D C could be a good investment. I know people who have taken out a loan for more to get something leisurely like a camper van which depreciates and costs money to run and doesn't make you any money. At least this could make you some money.

There's such an embarrassment of riches at low prices at the moment for filmmakers, to spend $12,000 on a camera body has to be somewhat more than just an artistic decision. It has to pay its way... Here are 5 ways to become a Canon 1D C owner without taking a huge gamble on your finances!

Are you guys testing this by focussing at the further extent of zoom, then zooming back to wide angle, then back out again?   If you first focus at wide angle and zoom, the accuracy won't be enough.   Probably obvious but just thought I'd throw this in there.

It's a shame the form factor is so bulky. There's also a real lack of comparisons between 10bit F3 footage, BMCC 12bit raw and FS100 8bit AVCHD. Would be interesting to compare the F3.

Seems the F3 has halved in price since it came out.   £5200 on eBay. That is only a grand more than a new FS100!!   http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/710-53481-19255-0/1?icep_ff3=2&pub=5574929666&toolid=10001&campid=5336727214&customid=&icep_item=251217406711&ipn=psmain&icep_vectorid=229508&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=l

BTW the Sony F3 might dip below $8k on eBay before long. That does 10bit to external recorder if it has the required firmware upgrade.

Yes, haha you are right. The availability of the new stuff is incredibly poor! I feel we're at the beginning of a mountain of progress though, and not at the $15,000 mark but at $3000-6k

Please read up on my Speed Booster stuff sir. Already explained it all. It gives you 1 stop extra brightness so F4 becomes F2.8 in terms of exposure, and F1.4 becomes F1.0. The wide angle 24mm is the Samyang 24mm F1.4 on the Speed Booster. The SLR Magic lenses are T0.95 and used as-is, they are not Canon mount so don't fit the Speed Booster adapter. The 24-105mm costs around $800, price varies on country. In Europe it is about 600 euros used. Good lens.

Seems you're describing the KineRaw cameras? They're under $10k.

Please email them at support@slrmagic.com to order.

  It does have to be used in a certain way, that is what is great about Twixtor. Twixtor and 60p is not a match for 100fps or 200fps for general purpose slow mo, what I meant is that with skill you can get superb results from it - and the GH3 with 1080/60p costs $1299, the FS700 $8000 - in that context, Twixtor is suitable for budget shooters who can't afford the FS700. The GH3 is pretty similar to the FS700 image quality wise. Twixtor works well with 60p material, better than 24p on the GH2 - more frames to interpret from. It falls down with fast movement and motion blur. I like to use it a certain way and it has been incredible.   Did not dive into the Cinegammas. Not enough time as FS700 goes back to Sony on Friday.   I still prefer the Blackmagic for my work.

  I found the aliasing in normal 24p mode around highlights, not sure it is just a slow-mo thing.   I still have a Blackmagic Cinema Camera in my head as benchmark. This is the main problem. Seriously.

Thanks for the tests JCS, good info.

The Ikonoskop footage had real issues unfortunately. I really need the camera back again for longer than a few hours, and to go deeper into it. The comparison footage we shot vs the Blackmagic was pretty nice but the ND was giving us contaminated blacks, the LUT can't recover the image fully to match the Blackmagic and the frame has a black border.

http://vimeo.com/58068874 I've had a FS700 for a few days and tonight myself and Rudi of Slashcam.de got out and gave it a test run. We only shot for 2 or 3 hours and after editing the test I had a lot of ideas for slow-mo shots that would have worked with the song - slow-mo is actually a great creative tool, not a gimmick. Had we the FS700 for longer then I think I could run with this theme of rushing commuters set to the David Bowie song Move On, which pokes a little fun at wanderlust. Alas slow-mo is the FS700's best feature. I consider the ND as a bit of a clumsy bolt on, the Sony F5 does it much better. I will consider the 4K output when I see it. Until then this is a 1080p camera. I've also been shooting with the new SLR Magic 35mm T0.95 (Leica M / E-mount) and 25mm T0.95 (Micro Four Thirds / Blackmagic Cinema Camera MFT). Shooting slow mo in low light, you need them.  

Think is Ian I don't really use zooms in my work. I use primes. So my advice will be sketchy here, apologies for that. Also most photographic glass isn't par focal. That tends to be a high end cinema / TV lens thing.   I tried the 24-105mm on the Speed Booster tonight. Works beautifully. I think that is the best value Canon L lens you can get for the Speed Booster at the moment. Becomes a F2.8!

  I totally agree with you on this. There's a place for separate discussion of all the elements important to filmmaking. If I see anyone trying to derail a discussion about some technical aspects of film production on here with their boringly obvious and uninformative 'content is king' mantras I will be, to quote Tarantino, shutting their butts down.   The analogy you used about the actor board was perfect. One wouldn't interrupt a discussion about acting technique with something completely irrelevant about CMOS sensors so why do we see it happen so often in reverse on camera forums?   "Hey Daniel Day Lewis your acting is pretty useless without a lens!! How about we talk about what's really important!!?? Canon or Nikon glass?"

Welcome to the forum Ian. As far as my experience goes, the 24-105 is a parfocal lens but not tried it on the Speed Booster yet. You REALLY need to test this in a shop with your FS700 and Speed Booster before putting any money down on one.

  That doesn't sound right. Depth of field looks the same as a full frame sensor to me.   I could put some unlabelled shots up from the 5D Mark III with a 50mm on full frame, and the same 50mm on APS-C with Speed Booster. You wouldn't be able to tell them apart. If you think you can, you're welcome to try and I will take some shots :)

  Anything that adapts to EF mount works. I've tried M42, Contax Zeiss (CY), Nikon, OM, etc.

  Remember the lens needs to have space behind it between the sensor and rear element to work with the Speed Booster, so Leica M mount stuff won't work with it. Only SLR glass.

  Beats me. Because there's more profit in making a larger CMOS sensor and a lens that covers that I suppose?