Xiong

Never had a problem with my R1MX... Guess I'm lucky. lol
 
But seriously after a day of shooting I'm happy with the BMCC. I've seen folks talking highly about this cam and it deserves it! For me, it's not a red, but c'mon, it's really cheap for what it delivers.
 
My only complain is actually the cinemaDNG format. it's so damn heavy! They really should invest in some codec like redcode or cineform. It'll be hard to keep the storage ok. We backup all our raw footage and right now, for us cinemaDNG is not an option. We're teanscoding everything to cineform but not ideal.

There is a kind of workaround.

Firstly, the camera REC flashes when there's less than 5 mins of record time left.
 
You can also calculate how much remaining record time there is on a given SSD if you know the record time for a full disk.  For example, I know a 240GB SSD gives me close to 30 mins @ 25 FPS.
 
When you play back the last clip recorded, the TC field at the bottom displays the total record time.  This way, let's say it's 00:22:03:00 i know i have about 7 mins of record time left.
 
They won't do in camera file management.  They might do an in-camera format....maybe...
 
Alexa's don't allow you to delete individual clips, nor do RED....
 
jb

Yeah, out of all things I feel this desperately need an in-camera file management. This should be their next top priority, nothing is worse then being out in the field and not knowing how much is left on an SSD or not being able the format the card/ delete outtakes. Its fun to think as using this issue as using film, but thats really just a place holder. Other then that, i still really like what this camera's doing.

I really do believe people need to cut them some slack.
 
It took a company with a backing of millions of dollars (Red) years to deliver their first camera and it was very late.
 
These guys have what, $150,000 from Kickstarter? That is peanuts.
 
They are delivering a camera which does 2.4K from a global shutter for $3000!!!
 
This will be a fine back-up for the Blackmagic where rolling shutter would be an issue on the BMCC CMOS sensor.
 
The image quality from the samples so far look great.
 
The form factor is fine, it is is still a picture making box like all the other cameras. I don't see what is wild and weird about it. The handle comes off and you can rig it up like a DSLR or put it on a tripod. I do prefer the Epic's form factor but there were very few complaints about the original Bolex's form factor, and tons of interesting 16mm stuff was shot with just the handle and nothing else.

Yes but Bruno those likely to buy a BMC or Digital Bolex will be buying to make films.. Nice to have onboard sound for synching up to what you recorded seperately though and sometimes nice to have it as a back up. .

No 10-bit, so drab plastic skin unless we use a ton of post-production...
 
The Canon 550D *cough £250* with magic lantern has peaking. The RX100 has peaking. The 1DC... does not.
 
Hitting self with plank now.

One advantage the 1DC has is out-of-the-box nice looking images. I use the 5D3 as a reference to re-tune the FS700+MB output (can match pretty closely). So, the 1DC can save time, and time is money.

This is why I bought the 1DC.  The camera isn't for everyone. 
1.  Image  - it is better than what people think - knowing how to use it is very important - I'm slowly getting better(which isn't saying much for me as I'll first admit, I'm $hitty).  Although, you'd be surprised at the images it can compare too.
2.  Form Factor.
3.  Photography potential
4.  Batteries
5.  Quiet as a mouse
6.  Stealthness
7.  Solid, solid build - quality
8.  and so on
 
I wish Canon would give better specs such as 10 bit.  The camera is really alot better than people realize.  The IQ ranks above most cameras.   I'm not supporting Canon or not supporting them - I'm neutral. I am hoping they up from 8 bit color to 10 bit with a firmware update.  They have room to push this camera further.  I wasn't happy with the price, but the alternatives for me were more costly.  Everyone has there likes and dislikes with cameras.  Everyone buys for different reasons.   Life is short.  Enjoy.  Cheers.

"In no way is the Metabones adapter giving us a poor man’s full frame image here."
 
Uh oh... just wait for it. :)  You know this is going to be the talk of every indoctrinated 5D fanboy on the planet. "Don't let those speed-booster shooters fool you... they're not shooting on REAL FF cameras!"

Anyone want to take bets on when the "real full-frame look" cine-meme will show up? I say 2 months.

Exactly.  People regularly spend $1000 or more on a single lens that they might use half or a third of the time they shoot, if not less.  Forget what anamorphic enthusiasts shell out for their passions.  $400 or $600 or $700 for something like this, even if this is only a hobby?  Comparatively speaking they're giving us all a gift pricing specialized optics like this.  
 
Elsewhere people are defending a major corporation's justifiable douchebaggery in charging $6K for tweaks to a second model in a single product development.  Meh, the internet.

Metabones is not that expensive.  The Speed booster is $400 in adapters without electronics, and $600 with electronics (EF needs electronics to change aperture).

I some times wonder the same, but i like to think its just curiosity and nothing negative... at least I hope..

Not possible.  Without being recorded through a speed booster, all editing software will crash during export from here on in.  

Don't forget the fact that every lens you buy suddenly has a double purpose (with and without speedbooster). And you don't have to buy f/1.4 lenses anymore, you can pay less than half for a f/2 and have the same light gathering capabilities. Even a dirt cheap f/2.8 prime makes a nice f/2.0.
 
For example: I'm interested in buying a reasonably fast (at least f/2) standard lens (50mm equivalent) and a wide angle (35mm equivalent) for my GH2.
 
I could buy a Canon FD / Nikkor 24mm f/2 to get the 50mm equivalent, that would cost €300 to €400 on eBay.
To get a 35mm equivalent, I'd need a 17mm. I could buy some crappy, rare, huge 17mm f/3.5, but that's not fast. The only choice is a Voigtlander 17.5mm f/0.95, for €1200!
 
With the Speed Booster, I could buy a Nikkor 35mm f/2.8 for €100 to get 50mm f/2 and a Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 for €200 to get a 35mm f/2.
 
For the price of the Voigtlander 17.5mm, you could buy the Samyang 24mm f/1.4 and the Speed Booster, and get pretty much the same effect: 35mm f/1.0. Plus the added bonus of all your lenses suddenly behaving the same as their much more expensive counterparts.
 
It is not cheap. But if you are in the market for a a few fast standard/wide lenses like me, then the Speed Booster instantly pays itself back. Plus you get options that aren't even possible without the adapter.
 
To me this actually is the most exciting product I've seen in years. Yes, we have seen a lot of technical developments on the camera side. Better sensors, cheaper camera's... Nice, but glass always stays the same. Nothing changes physics. Good glass is expensive. In a way it's nice that this doesn't change, lenses retain their value.
 
But now Metabones manages to come up with something that turns this very fixed part of photography/filmmaking upside down. If I were Sony (CaNikon are too slow anyway..) I'd instantly buy out Metabones and release this technology inside a mirrorless camera (with A-mount, just fit the element in place of the SLT-construction and use Phase Detection pixels) That would be the break trough cheap 'fullframe' camera and stir the market :)

It's not just about full frame support (though I admit that's what got my attention as a 5D2/5D3 owner with Canon lenses). They named it "Speed Booster" and not "Full Framester": the light gathering and focusing nature of the device is very cool. My 50 F1.4 becomes an F1.0, the 24-105 F4L becomes an F2.8, 70-200 F2.8 II becomes an F2.0 etc. The last feature which most people find hard to believe is the increase in image quality (improved MTF- modulation transfer function). This is measurable (they show graphs), and example images with reduced CA, increased sharpness and contrast: http://www.metabones.com/images/metabones/Speed%20Booster%20White%20Paper.pdf
 
Lots more example photos and videos from real-world use here: http://philipbloom.net/2013/01/13/speedbooster/
 
A minor technicality- the device is actually a 1.09 crop (close enough :)).

Very exciting, I applaud Metabone for releasing such a great adapter. Now Full Frame wont be a big issue for people who don't like crop factors, its a win win. Thats not saying people wont find something else to complain about though.

The reason is enlargement ratio. There is always a degradation of image quality when enlarging an image. The smaller the sensor, the more times an image must be enlarged to make the display size. Example. MFT has to be enlarged about 10 x to print an 8x10. A Full frame sensor only has to be enlarged about 5 times. This means that the larger sensor will be able to hide more defects than a smaller sensor, because it has been enlarged so much. 
 
My wife as recently watching an American Civil War documentary and commented on how clear the images were for being taken 150 years ago. I explained to her that most of these prints were contact prints, with no enlargement taken on 8"x10" film. 
 
Larger sensors will always have a greater quality to them, however, this prevents the camera from "wasting" all the information that was just thrown away before, by focusing the full frame image onto a crop sensor.
 
A better way to think about this for those who understand anamorphic, is that an anamorphic lens makes you lens wider by compressing a very wide image onto the sensor, so no image is lost (cropped) the allows you to use a longer lens. 
 
Mine is on order

Ridiculous statement.
 
We are talking about image making machines. Not narrative film cameras.
 
Do you think some indie kid shooting his friends reading out a poorly written script is far more important than, say, a guy sat in a hide for 9 hours trying to capture footage of a mountain lion?
 
We are all on here for different reasons. I've been involved on indie shoots, but my main work is nature imagery (stills/film). My view is just as valid as some indie filmmaker.

Century Optics Pro Series HD 0.7X WIDE ANGLE CONVERTER
for Sony HDV
 
front element glass is 82mm
rear is 60mm
72mm with the bayonet mount
 
Its big heavy and stunningy sharp!!
and makes your 50mm full frame into a 35mm full frame equivilent
 
I use it on my Tecnoir Cinema Rig supporting it using a clamp and rails
 
there is one on ebay here
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Century-Precision-Optics-0-7x-Wide-Angle-Converter-Lens-f-Sony-HDR-FX1-HVR-Z1U-/230903460835?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item35c2eb33e3

This is interesting, there was alot of people wanting a 35mm sized sensor so here you go I suppose. I like to know more info, more competition is always welcomed.

I'm noticing all of these raw cameras seem to be designed by software designers who can use solidworks rather than industrial designers who know how things work in the real world, in the physical domain. Surely they could have made the whole thing longer and thinner, with some way to hold the damn thing. no matter what rig this is fitted to, this will remain a 'tripod mount only' setup just like the BMCC.

Lets see some ergonomics and great design rather than silly specs that try to compete against cameras most of us would just hire if we need them.

The reason this will be so cheap is that no real industrial designer was employed to do a proper job of designing the product itself (in a physical sense). Numerous other corners and oversights will have been made. Granted I bet the pictures out of this thing look nice though.

Public perception, I to was in the Canon boat until I herd about the GH1, then the GH2.
 
 
Yeah, I'm all good with whats possible already. More people need to focus on their craft then anything else, but that doesnt mean a little advancement isnt bad either ;)

Public perception, I to was in the Canon boat until I herd about the GH1, then the GH2.
 
 
Yeah, I'm all good with whats possible already. More people need to focus on their craft then anything else, but that doesnt mean a little advancement isnt bad either ;)

I just wrapped a shoot with a rented C100. I can't comment on the footage yet as I have not seen it (obviously the recording codec has its limitations), but I was surprised by how much I loved the design of the camera. It was intuitive and handled beautifully and had everything that I needed within easy access, much more than the FS100, AF100, probably the BlackMagic and certainly moreso than any ENG-type camera I have ever used. By the look of it, the C300 and the C500 are the same. Based on this experience alone, I believe that Canon is still in the game even though I can't afford to own one of these cameras for personal projects.
 
I believe that the "Democratization of Filmmaking" has already happened, and now we're just clamoring for slight IQ improvements. I've been caught up in it like so many others, but I'm trying to direct that energy towards shooting more stuff and building my skill set. The improvements will come sooner rather than later. But if I can't tell a story with a GH2 or a 5DIII, then those improvements will be lost on me when they get here.

Zeiss lenses or Canon lenses via adapter
 
 
 
More DOF when opening up the iris.
 
 
SLRMagic 12mm, Olympus 12mm
 
 
A slight inconvenience.