Andrew Reid

Agree, it isn't really a worry.

As you'd expect for the price they resolve detail very well. A little less detailed than the GH2 but more organic looking. Not quite up there with the C300 and GH2 for sharpness and fine grain but very close.

[html][img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/1dx-comparison1.jpg[/img] Battle of the flagships We had a [url="http://www.eoshd.com/content/8259/canon-finally-stretches-video-legs-with-eos-1d-x-resolution-fixed-and-better-compression-chip"]small glimpse[/url] at what the 1D X was capable of last week. Now Associated Press shooter Ivan Sekretarev has very kindly provided his raw test clips to EOSHD. Here’s my view on them… [url="http://www.eoshd.com/content/8299/does-the-canon-1d-x-sharpen-as-well-as-the-5d-mark-iii-plus-bonus-1d-mk-iv-comparison/"]Read full article[/url] [/html]

[quote author=hoodlum link=topic=812.msg6606#msg6606 date=1340850635] Here is a short clip from the RX100 in 1080p60 28mbps that you can download. http://av.watch.impress.co.jp/video/avw/docs/541/059/00041.mts [/quote] Very impressive quality. No compression mud or noise, very nice clean resolution. I'll be buying myself one of these.

You're still mentioning the "competence of the camera" not the competence of the shooter though. I rest my case. DSLRs are competent as video cameras. But it is clear to me Canon could be doing better than just competent, given that the large sensor and interchangeable lens mount blows a consumer camcorder into the weeds for a cinematic image.

[html][img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/fs700-in-mongolia.jpg[/img] The first pro field report of the FS700 is in. This compliments some of the other reviews pretty well and a general consensus about the camera is starting to form amongst pros. Is it worth selling both your FS100 and 5D Mark III and buying this with the money left over? Let’s find out… [url="http://www.eoshd.com/content/8288/revealing-sony-fs700-field-report-video-review/"]Read full article[/url] [/html]

[quote author=amband link=topic=884.msg6578#msg6578 date=1340793761] [quote author=Junius link=topic=884.msg6452#msg6452 date=1340552598] it was the indie filmmakers, who according to you are "without knowledge", that gave Canon street-credibility amongst filmmakers. That is the simple fact that you can't recognise! [/quote] I recognize a lot of gullibility and lack of knowledge of DSLR negatives promoted by the indie film makers to their [s]victims[/s] Arts college audience [/quote] You can't blame DSLRs. You can only blame people. Give certain people an Epic and they will produce shit. Hell knows I've seen a lot of that.

Not just Canon but the whole of the Japanese camera business community should be watching their backs if TV and other consumer electronics sales are anything to go by. South Korea is more competitive on the cost of their exports. Now Samsung are a leader in LCD panel technology nobody can deny they deserve to own, along with LG, the TV market. As soon as China gets the technology required, they will be doing full frame DSLRs for $500 and nobody will be buying 5D Mark IIIs any more.

Interesting test. Might blog this after I've tried it myself. Well done guys.

[quote author=johnnymossville link=topic=902.msg6539#msg6539 date=1340740246] Those are really nice.  I like the retro look of the welterwerk one. Here's one I heard about last week that's really well done.  On a GH2 as well. [/quote] That in particular Johnny is stunningly beautiful. The lighting is almost as good as the camera. ;) Thanks for posting everyone and keep em coming.

No Simco, not lack of 'sharpness' but a lack of detail. Soft detail is nice. Learn to know the difference between soft vintage optics and a smeary image which is the result of an electronic process, and I'll forgive you for that comment!!

That comment above is extremely short sighted to say the least. There's no excuse for not improving existing features, be it stills or video. Convergence is happening. Do Apple sit by and not improve their graphics chip on an iPhone because it is primarily a phone not a games console? The size of the market Canon is pissing off with lacklustre DSLR video modes is sizeable.

[html][url="http://www.vimeo.com/43188144"]http://www.vimeo.com/43188144[/url] [url="http://www.vimeo.com/42592241"]http://www.vimeo.com/42592241[/url] I hope these inspire some shooting action. I sometimes get a accused of being a bit of a GH2 cheerleader, with pom poms. But the results from a $700 consumer camera speak for themselves. To me it will always be big news that aspiring filmmakers have access to this kind of image quality for $700, regardless of how much effort and money is required for good content. [url="http://www.eoshd.com/content/8280/two-great-low-budget-music-videos-shot-on-the-gh2/"]Read full article[/url] [/html]

Nice rig  ;D

[quote author=TC link=topic=884.msg6476#msg6476 date=1340614073] Why don't they just go the whole way, and watermark the video output from every Canon DSLR with the words, "NOT FOR VIDEO USE. PLEASE PURCHASE THE C300. ONLY $16,000 BODY ONLY." [/quote] Haha!!

Not confirmed 100% but it matches the specs precisely down to the last detail of the particular Fairchild / BA sensor in question.

I hope so. That many people shooting anamorphic is certainly preferable to 10,000 tests in 16:9.

I pulled the trigger on release day. Not very sensible but I wanted to support them and cover it on the site. I'm expecting the image will be superb. So far looking good. I'm expecting a nice smooth roll off in the highlights, great shadow detail, great resolution and of course raw for under $3000 which is a unique selling point. I'd say go for it. If it turns out it isn't for you, you can easily sell it without taking too much of a hit, as I'm expecting them to sell out for a good few months.

[quote author=Tzedekh link=topic=895.msg6490#msg6490 date=1340644899] The aspect ratio of 2,560 x 2,160 is 1.185:1 -- which is very close to 1.2:1, ideal for 2.4:1 anamorphic. Also, the 16.64 x 14.04-mm area of the BAE/Fairchild CIS2051 yields a diagonal of 21.8 mm, which is almost exactly the diagonal of the m4/3 format. Cropping the sensor's "area of interest" would reduce the effective sensor size and wring even more tears out of all the big-sensor fetishists. [/quote] Ideally yes this would be wonderful. But it would be a significantly greater data rate to handle and probably not just a firmware tweak at this late stage. V2 - yes would love to see this. Or even a V1.5 'Studio' version aka Alexa Studio.

My comment about TV was tongue in cheek. Regardless, it is a Cinema Camera not a TV camera so it should shoot in the cinema aspect ratio! I prefer the wider look.

[html][img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/blackmagic-cinema-camera.jpg[/img] [url="https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.398258513557700.106898.118532781530276&type=1"]Above: the BMD Cinema Camera pictured in a photo from PhotoCineRent in France. I have pre-ordered mine.[/url] The Blackmagic Cinema Camera is nearing release and final sensor calibration / firmware adjustments are taking place. When I last spoke to beta shooter John Brawley about his involvement with the camera, he had this to say on an anamorphic mode… “We have discussed the possibility of doing anamorphic. They’re aware that it’s a potential market. I don’t think you’ll see it on this version.” This feature would increase vertical resolution by nearly 800 lines and allow for the wider, more cinematic aspect ratios of 2.39:1 and 2.66:1 aspect ratios when used with an anamorphic lens. [url="http://www.eoshd.com/content/8265/how-blackmagic-can-add-anamorphic-recording-mode-to-their-cinema-camera-the-easy-way/"]Read full article[/url] [/html]

The jump to full frame depends on if you really need a shallower depth of field (but less manageable focus) better stills and a larger viewfinder for stills. That full frame look brings you a larger amount of bokeh and background blur on the same lens as would the T4i and the rendering of the lens especially towards the edges is different, with a greater curving of bokeh and a greater vignette. The full frame sensor is more demanding on lenses and you can't use T4i EFS glass with it. Do you have a lot of Canon EF / EFS lenses? If not then the camera choice is a no brainer. Get the GH2.

5D Mark III isn't selling as well as the chief rival, Nikon D800. Stills guys are mostly as underwhelmed by the incremental steps as we are. C300 is renting well. It doesn't however sell in great quantities, like a DSLR. It is a professional niche cam. The high value niche market is what Canon seem more intent on opening up, to the expense of a gaping giant hole called sub $15,000 video market - that includes pro, prosumer, consumer and enthusiast. Not a small group to piss on. The rental industry as a whole is on a downward trend BTW, exactly because of DSLRs and it is a trend that will only accelerate when the Blackmagic Cinema Camera comes out. The internal battery of the BMCC certainly does not make it useless 'except as a test bed'. You connect an external battery, as you would on any serious camera rig be it a FS100, GH2, 5D or BMCC. Resolution charts - name the last time you saw one on EOSHD. I think I've blogged one in 12 months!! However I do agree with you that the 5D Mark III is possibly just 'not very good' rather than crippled.

I agree with that, Canon are running a business and a large part of that business is video under $15,000. That is what they're lacking, majorly, at the moment. What about the small studios, small content producer, the kind I see a lot here in Berlin - the type of guy who walks into a shop with $10,000 and buys 3 or 4 5Ds for video? This is the kind of important customer Canon is letting down. The guy who needs and can afford 3 or 4 C300's is NOT a small studio, they're a niche, a rarity, a rental house maybe. Since the convergence of pro stills and video happened, due to the web and the cheaper cost of doing pro video, a new demand for pro video at $3000 has opened up. Canon wouldn't neglect their pro photographers at $3000, I have no idea why they feel the need to neglect pro video at $3000. They think it doesn't exist. I have news for you, it does. Massive new market! The stills guy who does video as well... Multimedia content, web designers, small to medium size business content producers, etc. etc. So many of them use DSLRs for video and have been left out in the cold by Canon focussing on a tiny but very high margin band of Hollywood twits. And don't get me started on video enthusiasts. They've been majorly, majorly shafted. Not important? Well there's tens of thousands of us with nothing to buy, nothing compelling. Surely this is a neglected market if ever I saw one. Blackmagic must be happy. Anyway, let's please try and get back to the 1D X as it is a different topic and very political!

[quote author=jcs link=topic=884.msg6423#msg6423 date=1340486867] Examining the full clip in detail, the 1DX has more resolution, however its antialiasing is weaker. It appears to be antialiased more on the vertical axis than the horizontal axis, giving it a more digital look vs. film. Ideally, the image is high resolution and antialiased. The 5D3 image looks more like film, even though it is lower resolution. Both images were noisy, and the ALL-I codec did not work very well for this shot (low motion): IPB would likely do better in this case with more detail and less block artifacts. 5D3 image sharpened at 33 + minor curve adjust, 1DX sharpened at 16, both Neat Video noise reduced. After processing, during playback and full screen, hard to see much of a difference in quality. [/quote] Good spot, it certainly does seem like there's a change to the anti-aliasing filter(s). From what I understood about the 5D Mark III it has a two-part filter, one to blur the horizontal and one vertical. However I'd say the gain here is due to reading more pixels, rather than anything in the optical path.