lubricated

4:3 mode and iso50 is a must, the rest i can live with. 4:3 would increase the file size so i am not sure they have leftovers of processing power, maybe some firmware smarts can fix this... really, nobody knows:)

Mk3 is a nice upgrade for photos while video is a bust, i agree with you on that.

[quote author=BurnetRhoades link=topic=738.msg5441#msg5441 date=1337262698] It's an inherent part of the craft with these tools.  Given the fact that it's an option, as a shooter, not being at least somewhat versed in the options available would be like a traditional cinematographer not caring to know they have a variety of choices in film stock, each with its own qualities, quirks, strengths and limitations.  They wouldn't really be competent in their role if they just grabbed a box of film off the shelf, shot and were either disappointed or pleasantly surprised by t

GH2 rocks, no doubt about it. But sometimes, just sometimes people chase codecs and pixels too mush don't you think?

yet again - anybody has any info on 1Dx video? samples did look very good, can there be some actual difference from mk3? good comparison, wide angle detail is so much better on GH2.

non cropped 35mm 2k is 2048 X 1536 so there is not a huge improvement in pixel count, still - in video terms every extra pixel is more than welcome:)

red are bastards, period. that Ikonoskop A-cam screenshot looks great!

Damn guys, all this waiting and now i have only more questions than answers. Initial idea was to get Nikon d800 with one of the cheep external recorders, but i hate moire so that one is not going to happen. MkIII video improvements for 4 year wait are simply not good enough... Can there possibly be more 1080p like image on 1Dx or it will be exactly the same? fs100 is a great one, but i need good stills too...

looking good!

[quote author=tungah link=topic=369.msg2284#msg2284 date=1331097848] [quote author=magnifypictures link=topic=369.msg2283#msg2283 date=1331096332] so maybe im wrong or maybe its a typo but my calculations show that a 90 Mb/s video for 2.5 min should be (90/8)*2.5*60=1687.5MB. So this video is not at 90 Mb/s but rather closer to 30? I dont have vimeo plus so i cant check for certain. Either way I feel let down by this camera so far. Cant wait for the official reviews once the camera comes out. Maybe if we complain enough Canon will actually listen and fix our very realistic wish list. [/q

If so than not with internal recorder. This video is simply the same or worse than most stuff on market now, also soft and the aliasing was just an eye-stab since this was a tech demo. D4 show-reel about the hobbies was pretty good tho... i guess that was recorded externally then.