Andrew Reid

Wow that's not good. Doesn't clicking 'recover highlights' in Resolve fix this? Do you have a DNG of that frame above so I can test?

Yes absolutely. Less noise in the mid-tones and shadows with the GH3 codec compared to the hacked GH2. Never use AF so not sure about the focus areas.

This was shot 'flat-ish' in Custom picture profile all -5. Can be sharpened in post but I didn't touch it, all direct from the camera as it was the look I was seeking.

It is the video feed. They need to scale it better for the EVF. The glass smears like the NEX 7 if you have your eye not directly to it. Apart from that it is a nice upgrade from the GH2's viewfinder. Colour and contrast very good and it is OLED.

Yes it is pretty good in low light, better in the shadows than the GH2. This was a wide range of ISO, mainly between 640 and 1600 with the train cabin shot right up at 3200, F1.6 (it was shot through black glass and almost completely dark to the human eye). SLR Magic 12mm F1.6 is superb for shadows wide open because it has a cinematic effect, lifting the blacks. I found their new 35mm 0.95 and 1.4 prototypes did the same when I shot with them in Cologne.

[media]http://vimeo.com/54266780[/media]At the moment I am using the Panasonic GH3 like a bit of a director's viewfinder. But the advantage is, it is a rolling one. You can then put a draft cut together of the concept you're thinking of shooting - like a live action storyboard, see if it gives you an emotional response and if it succeeds - hire actors, and go back out and shoot it fully.

Most 16mm lenses won't work. Sensor is too big!

I am liking the GH3 more and more now having just shot some proper footage with it in Berlin. Will upload Monday.

Regarding 1D X and 1D C please read: http://www.eoshd.com/content/9140/interview-with-canons-mike-burnhill-on-the-canon-1d-c-4k-dslr

[quote name='Bruno' timestamp='1353865261' post='22268']I'm a Canon 7D user myself, and most my lenses are contax zeiss, so I don't even care about the active mount, but if I spend the money on te camera, I'll want it to support IS lenses if I ever need it to![/quote] Then why are you so much in favour of the MFT mount version? The EF version supports Contax Zeiss adapters and IS on Canon lenses!! I don't get this agro towards Blackmagic. They have just buried DSLR video with their first ever camera, and you want MORE? Right now?

Whilst I welcome the option of MFT mount, my opinion is the opposite. When you go to the MFT version you lose all support for Canon glass. No aperture control on the EF, EFS and L lenses. This is the most popular range of lenses with DSLR shooters overall. So many people want to use these lenses on the Blackmagic, especially people upgrading from Canon DSLRs such as the 5D Mark II, III and 7D. I think the EF mount version will sell the most. Besides, the Canon mount does not mean just Canon glass. It means Nikon, Leica R, M42, Olympus OM, Zeiss ZE, Contax Yashica Zeiss and more. Also - doing an adapter for Canon EF aperture control on the passive MFT mount is difficult and one likely won't arrive for some years. Passive means no electronic contacts between lens and camera body. Iris control on the body would be impossible unlike on a standard Micro Four Thirds camera so any adapter would have to be especially for the Blackmagic and have a built in aperture control switch. Of course this passive mount rules out a hell of a lot of nice MFT glass such as the Olympus 12mm F2, 45mm F1.8, Leica Lumix 25mm F1.4. Only one or two truly useful Micro Four Thirds lenses works on the passive mount. The pros for the MFT mount are... - C-mount glass, such as the lovely Switar 26mm F1.1 (though most c-mount stuff I have found impractical) - Leica M mount lenses such as the SLR Magic 50mm T0.95 - Voigtlander Nokton 17.5mm and 25mm F0.95 (probably the best reason to get the MFT version) - Canon FD lenses (more affordable than the newer versions in EF mount, but mostly softer) - Adapters to OCT 19 and PL mount Now ask yourself how many people have Canon glass and how many have the more rare stuff in the list above. I think the Canon mount version will outsell the MFT version actually. Canon mount only restricts those lenses on the list above and not Nikon, M42, etc. Even though I am an avid user of Micro Four Thirds and a big mirrorless fan I am having a hard time deciding which mount is right for me. It is not a straight forward decision. I'd love to use some of the more unusual glass on the mount, but the lack of electronic contacts and losing aperture control all my Canon EF / L glass is a serious turn off. Most of my Micro Four Thirds glass is electrical.

You have a normal lens (gives similar image to Canon EF 35mm F2 on Amazon). Not an anamorphic lens. Did you get my anamorphic shooter's guide? Would have saved you some money :)

Funny yes. Useful or educational no. But the colour IS nice :)

Ah right. Sorry, wasn't clear.

Why the hell would they be starting from scratch? Swapping the sensor and using a different lens mount on a new model is not exactly starting from scratch. They already have all the expertise to do it and the software side in Resolve, and the image processing hardware, and the codecs, and so on.

Colour is absolutely superb on this camera.

The GH2 is still amazing. It can probably be had for less than $600 now which is just staggering considering that in some ways it is better than the GH3 because of the video optimised sensor. The GH3 is more optimised for stills (Panasonic trying to catch up with Canon for mass market sales).

I'm letting the camera off the hook here. The fault is with the shooter. He was using ridiculous shutter speeds like 1/250 or 1/1400 with no regard to ND filters. 180 degrees should be 1/48 for 24p. That is going to heavily reduce the cinematic look unless his shots are locked down - but he was shooting tons of motion so you really notice. The guy also needs a proper handheld rig. It felt like the camera was given to a monkey on several cups of coffee who had been accidentally let lose inside a car and on a race track. So much jittery framing going on. The gradation and tonal range was lumpy and his contrast was poor, mainly due to LOG and not grading it properly... But I have to say that is partly down to the camera as well, not giving that smooth transition between tones and again it all looks very 8 bit now I am use to 12bit raw for my $3000 :) 4K and a large full frame sensor are a kind of magic. The rest of the camera is your standard Canon DSLR fare. It has moire too.

[url="http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/P1020070.jpg"][img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/P1020070.jpg[/img][/url] The Ikonoskop A-Cam is a 12bit uncompressed raw digital cinema camera that shoots in Cinema DNG format, much like the Blackmagic Cinema Camera. In many ways though this is a different animal. The Ikonoskop addresses some of what the Blackmagic Cinema Camera lacks in that it features a global shutter (it uses a CCD sensor rather than CMOS) and uses interchangeable Sony batteries (NP-F770, the same ones the FS100 uses). The only other digital cinema camera currently to feature a global shutter is the Sony F55 (likely over $25,000 when it hits the market). The Ikonoskop is 7700 Euros.

I agree it is not just a case of adding $1700 to the price of a Blackmagic Cinema Camera (minus the cost of their existing sensor). The processing power for 4K would also add to the cost. Software development - erm Resolve already handles 4K. Labour, testing - yes that has to be factored into the R&D. But they will absorb those costs pretty quickly with a 4K raw camera at $6k because they will sell tons of them.

[quote name='ScreensPro' timestamp='1353611092' post='22132'] Because they choose to comprimise in other areas.... your good specs (and mine, incidentally) are another man's "why bother with such a smaller sensor?". Your "great, it takes SSDs" are another man's "damn, SD cards are so much cheaper, lighter and i have 10 already". Under $10k, you will comprmise, for now at least.[/quote] I'm sorry, but WTF! How in any way is an SSD a compromise. SD cards are yesterday's technology, painfully slow and low capacity. Good luck getting that 1D C 4K footage off your compact flash in a hurry. The sensor is NOT SMALL. It sits in the upper-middle of the film stock range. Much larger than 16mm, larger than Super 16mm and smaller than Super 35mm. I am interested in the image and it is anything but compromised. I'll tell you what IS a compromise. Line skipping to get an image of a photographic sensor. Compressing your colour with LOG. Compressing your entire image with MPEG or H.264. Wreaking your colour with 8bit and your motion with long-GOP. Being unable to adjust the ISO or the white balance properly in post. Having a focus plane the size of a grain of sand in low light on a full frame sensor & fast aperture. All but one of these apply to even the $12,000 1D C. Canon is over for me. Sony on their way out. Panasonic in their by virtue of one camera. All must try harder.

The way to overcome the focus issue when something is in the path of the optics is to use a clear filter when the ND isn't in place.

Well Rich there's two sides to this, and maybe you are right. One possibility is that Blackmagic want to grab a share of the digital cinema market. Best way to do this is the pricing. Even though BMCC is really as good as a $15,000 camera, had they priced to match Canon they would have lost. At $3000, they are positioned to grab a share. It could be that the benefits of establishing themselves, giving themselves a foothold in the market were larger than the money they'd lose on the cameras. The other possibility is that electronics are getting cheap to produce, and Blackmagic already make a profit on their Hyper Deck Shuttle which is extremely keenly priced - that tells you that the image processing hardware to encode an uncompressed signal to ProRes is now affordable to produce in 2012. They may be aiming for the mass market in great quantities. If that is the case, a slim margin on the camera doesn't matter so much. I honestly would take the view that you can build this camera for $3000 and make a profit and I'd say the mark up on the other digital cinema cameras is insane.

I really don't see any logic in cancelling a pre-order, at all. People have waited this long, they should hold out. Even if you don't like the camera, they are so rare that it can be rented out to a film production as a B-cam, or indeed anybody who wants raw and can't afford a Red. You'd make your money back.

[quote name='FilmMan' timestamp='1353617686' post='22139'] BMC what is the number...10000? How many waiting in the wings? How many GH2 people? How many 5D2/5D3 holders? How many Red holders? You'd be surprised how many would jump on the bandwagon...And so on. I'm not arguing about the 1DC - it is an incredible camera. There are pricing risks going forward. Alot of competition will be entering the scene. How about the "company" which is working on their 4K "dslr type" and may show it at NAB 2013? Has competition entered in the 5D3 space? Yep. Pricing will change as more 4K competition arrive. Canon won't be the only fish in the sea. Cheers. [/quote] DSLRs sell in quantities of millions. I find it hard to believe that only 20,000 of those millions are interested in the video mode. The market for DSLR video has a lot of different sub-sections - some point & shoot, some casual hobbyists, some students, some pros, some artists, some tourists, some... You get the idea. But as a whole, the need for Canon to keep pushing the feature-set and image quality at consumer price points is huge. So why haven't they done so? Because somebody at the top level (or somebody possibly poorly advised) is more interested in making huge margins on Cinema EOS products in the broadcast industry, which is a tiny niche compared to the consumer DSLR market, and somehow they think it is OK to halt any progress in the large market for the sake of concentrating on the Hollywood niche. It is not just DSLR video people that Canon aren't providing enough progress for - think of the poor photographers who have not seen a step forward in image quality from their APS-C sensors since the 7D 3 years ago!