Andrew Reid

I'll be reviewing it next week, one is on it's way to me now. The video is very capable on it and the sensor is actually quite large.

Good question. I prefer the FD 35mm F2. Just prefer the look. It is a subjective thing really. The slightly longer focal length does make a difference on the GH2, and makes for a shallower DOF at F2, when you want it. The minimum focus distance on it is also very good. And I prefer to pair 35mm with my anamorphic lenses like Iscorama, on APS-C and GH2, because 28mm is slightly too wide and my Iscorama begins to vignette too much. You might find the 35mm has less distortion too. The 28mm is a wide angle on full frame, the 35mm slightly less wide and so less challenging optically to get the distortion down.

I agree more competition would be healthy, to have all the major DSLR manufacturers in one country is ridiculous. I'm really surprised America and Europe don't have more of a presence in this technology field, like they do in consumer electronics with Apple, etc. It is great that Blackmagic are an Australian company. Japanese business culture is very conservative, and sometimes despite the best efforts of those amazing camera engineers, it shows!

Have you seen this guy Pol on the FB comments - his version of cinematography 'basics' is so narrow. It is an important point actually. As long as people understand how a shutter speed should be used and the affect it has on the image, it doesn't matter whether you think in terms of DSLR / photography shutter speeds or cinema camera shutter angle. 1/48 and 180 degrees are the same thing! [url="https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=499503160067106&id=163597790355306"]https://www.facebook...163597790355306[/url] "I cinematographer has to know how to expose light, nothing else". That's poppycock. A cinematographer who is merely a bag of knowledge with a tool is a operator, not an artist.

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/inline/1/500f28edc4474_CONTINEO_BMC_11.jpg[/img] Form factor fixed :)

Considering what they are offering the world, I think I can wait patiently and not sit there moaning like some people I've seen start doing recently. What are you, a child!?

All that for $399? Wow. What is the follow focus like, working well with the FD?

[quote name='marcuswolschon' timestamp='1343153513' post='14431'] Is 180° still 1/48s if you are not filming with 24p? [/quote] Nope. That is why they use angles as the standard, because they speak a common language across different video standards.

Unlikely engineering related, the timing is probably not a coincidence in terms of publicity reasons though. I really do hope it is not finished and they will tidy it up. I don't mind paying more for a higher end Kipon if they do a good job. Would be a shame to waste these Japanese custom electronics on a poor build. Good luck to them! 1 eager customer waiting here.

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/blackmagic-cinema-camera-on-show.jpg[/img] For DSLR users thinking of moving up to the Blackmagic Cinema Camera here's a guide to the biggest differences between a DSLR and an actual cinema camera.

Kipon's quality is below Metabones in my experience and they need to hide the wiring looms for final product, but if appropriately stocked and priced it could be a very useful adapter for GH2 owners until Metabones builds a better one :)

Hey Dan is there a better way of getting some clips to me? The KineRaw server really crawls in Berlin!! I'm getting 4.3kb per second on a line capable of 900kb and the download times out so it is basically impossible for me to grab the footage and write a blog about it. I can set up up with FTP access to my server if you can upload them to here. Cheers!

Tony really does have a bunch if Iscoramas and very good ones at that. Have a look.

[quote name='jonjak2' timestamp='1343119715' post='14400']We'll see if digital mimics all the imperfections of film in the future. Honestly, i'm not convinced, the cameras haven't been going in that direction so far, but lets see.[/quote] You can mimic the imperfections of film in post. The problem is not that the cameras are too clinical, it is that the Hollywood people are taking all the imperfections out of their images, giving us stuff which is too glossy, to commercial, too clean. This will get even worse after The Hobbit and 4K 48p. I remain to be convinced by the artistic merit of that as well. We shall see...

Great article. Very educational. Didn't even realise Phantom did 1,300fps in 2.35:1 2K mode, the highest I have seen from it has been 600fps. Agree with him that getting noticed and putting money into a production is more important than blowing it all on a $20k or even $100k camera. What is great about DSLRs is that you can invest more in the things that actually matter (and your lens family of course :) )

£850 for the pancake kit in the UK. That is more than I paid for my GH2 nearly 2 years ago, nearly as much as a high end mirrorless and nearly three times the price of an entry level NEX camera. The basic kit with the usual el cheapo 18-55mm is £769 and that doesn't include the EF adapter. There is no body only deal. US pricing is less in dollars(!), but the major retailers are not stocking it according to Canon, only more specialist stores and places like B&H.

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/canon-eos-m.jpg[/img] The Canon T4i in a smaller box Where do they get this kind of innovation from? Combine the controls of a compact with the guts of a T4i, to make a camera that is too dumbed down for enthusiasts and too expensive for casual snappers or your mum.

Where's the Canon advantage now? [img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/inline/1/500d54883c0aa_canonadvantagegone.jpg[/img] Now tell me they haven't let their significant lead slide away.

[quote name='Bruno' timestamp='1343044169' post='14353'] I don't really see a problem with them using the same sensor again (if indeed they are). Look at a still RAW out of a 7D and tell me what's so wrong or dated about it. However, it does bother me that they line-skip, and that they keep using the same codec when they have a better one in the 5D already. It is understandable though that they don't want their lower end cameras to be the first ones to deliver better specs, they wouldn't release a 650D that's way better than the 7D, and if they have any big improvements coming, I'd say they'll arrive with a 7D replacement, or maybe the rumored new full frame camera. [/quote] Of course there's nothing 'wrong' with the 7D's sensor in raw stills. This is Canon after all. It is the lack of progress and creativity that concerns me. The 7D's sensor was great when it came out 3 years ago. Way above any competition. Now APS-C rivals have nearly all caught up, and even the smaller Sony CMOS in the OM-D E-M5 too... At ISO 6400 even. Nikon D3200, OM-D, Fuji X Pro 1 and NEX 7 all are newer technology, and mostly better image quality be it in resolution terms of low light terms.

Is the G1X pocketable like the S100? Last time I checked, it wasn't. EOS M could have been an enthusiast's wet dream, instead it is a dumbed down T4i for your mum! She'd be far better off with an RX100 anyway.

[quote name='nickname' timestamp='1343003455' post='14325'] andrew, the sony rx100 is not a large sensor compact. its sensor is only about 30% bigger than an s100 sensor. and it does not in any way deliver dslr like quality. dr, colors, sharpness, dof are completely in small sensor territory. even at base iso it looks soft.[/quote] Wrong! Where the hell are you getting the 30% thing from? Also please do name a compact with a bigger sensor... I'll give you all night to think about it. Bye!

[quote name='jonjak2' timestamp='1342994911' post='14319']If you look at a well lit shot/scene on film, and then the same shot scene on the GH2 (with adjustments for highlights/shadows), the differences are far from subtle to me. The GH2 does not look like film under any circumstances.... You can intercut digital and film yes, of course, i've done it myself intercutting 35mm and the 5D! On many occasions you don't notice[/quote] So are we talking about something so subtle here between 35mm and 5D that on many occasions you don't notice, or are we to take you at your previous statement that the GH2 does not look like film under any circumstances. Not film-like? That is a bit of a narrow view. You're talking about subtle differences. To claim the whole damn film (like Blade Runner) looks the way it does because of a tiny subtle difference, is crazy. You haven't even mentioned lenses yet. Most of the Blade Runner look has nothing to do with 35mm - more the fact it is shot with anamorphic lenses. You don't mention the DP, director, once... Not a single time... So are you saying 35mm has the magic that no director is capable of adding? Or are you claiming it is a small subtle difference and digital is not quite there yet? Which is it? Is your main bone of contention the Zacuto shootout lighting? What are you judging the GH2 from, exactly? It looks as digital as you let it be, my friend. HurtinMinorKey - No Country and There Will Be Blood came out at the same time, I watched them at the same time, they were both nominated for Oscars, and I rate them equally as highly. I am amazed you can say one is amazing and one is awful. Amazed.

[quote name='jonjak2' timestamp='1342950645' post='14303'] My point is about the basic aesthetic features of film. 'Care' will never make a GH2 look like film. People compare digital to film because film has a particular aesthetic quality that is currently unmatched by digital, the same way artists may prefer particular paints, and so on. Of course professional film-makers will make digital/film look good. This isn't an arguement about professional/amateur. The fact is, there are no digital films that match the best 35mm films yet from an aesthetic perspective and that is down to the camera. There are some very good digital films, but until i see something matching the filmic look of There Will Be Blood/Jesse James i will continue this point. [/quote] I am glad you like There Will Be Blood. I do think digital has a harsher look than film - but Axel makes a good point about more care being taken with film. Digital is too forgiving. The differences in aesthetic between a GH2 in its comfort zone and 35mm film are subtle compared to the the differences between handling with care and not. Using an anamorphic lens on the GH2, exposing for the highlights, catching natural light at the right hour, having the light diffuse through fog or smoke in a real location, handling with care in post, softening the image, reducing contrast with flare, even adding some scanned 35mm film grain - all reduce the electronic digital look and add life. You really can intercut between digital and film, if done right even you wouldn't notice. The Alexa looks great - I don't mourn film, what I do mourn is the artistic sensibility and care which is being lost in the digital age especially in Hollywood. It is people who put the digital BAM look into digital not as much the camera itself.

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/canon-EOS-m-2012.jpg[/img] Canon last had an EF-M camera and lenses in 1991 (inset, LCD screen pic) The Canon EOS M mirrorless camera with new EF-M mount and lenses is due to be officially announced on Monday. The EOS M seems to be closest to the Sony NEX C3. The lack of physical controls hint that it is too basic to compete with the NEX 5N or NEX 7. Because it is designed to work with Canon's new STM AF lenses which use phase detect AF on the sensor I am 100% certain the EOS M will have the same 18MP APS-C CMOS as the T4i / 650D. Using the G1X sensor would make it incompatible with the very EOS-M lenses it is pictured with at launch. The 18-55mm EF-M STM and 22mm F2 EF-M STM. Will the new mount be the basis of a C100 affordable digital cinema camera, following the strategy of Panasonic and Sony?

I really think you are attributing far too much to the look of film. I can put life into a $700 digicam. The right light and the right lenses, the right grading and the right sensitivity of handling in post is all you need. Film has a nice grain and latitude. The mythology of a cinematic image is not just in film like grain and latitude, it is in so many other aspects of the camera, lens, light, location, actors, costumes and most importantly cinematographer.