Leang

So it is a creative thing?
 
Well it didn't work. Please stick to the normal language from now on, cheers!

thanks for doing this test my n*****.  

I've no love for Sony, no vested interest in RED (yet) but this is what you get with the liberalization of patents that happened not too long ago, allowing corporations to snap up patents for stuff they never created just so that they could use the legal system as a weapon and as a means to subvert free enterprise and create monopolies with one hand while fighting them with the other.
 
It's just sorta funny that this time it's David wielding patent law at Goliath instead of the other way around.
 
 
edit: holy crap, RED sued Andrew (dismissed)

Can anybody testify that the Zeiss Distagon's are some of the best for HD vs. Canon or Nikkor?  Been really thinking of getting a cine kit of the PrimeCircle's.  The Zeiss cine CP.2's cover Full Frame and the extra blades offer a smoother oval bokeh...however, significantly more expensive than the modded Distagon's.
 
Eventually Full Frame (HD+) video will get better with DSLR's.  So the glass investment is worth it imo.  Hard to decide on the Distagon's vs. the CP2s.  Any links?

how about a firmware for shipments.

speaking like a champ! Get ready for XAVC

Something else important about bitrate is the codec used, and the settings the codec is using.
Some codecs can be more efficient at 30Mbps than similar ones at 70Mbps. Actually, even the same codec could be more efficient at 30Mbps than at twice the rate, depending on which settings it's using.
According to the Magic Lantern guys, Canon's H264 compression on DSLRs is not very efficient at all, and that might be the reason why Sony FS100's compression is so much cleaner at half the bit rate!

Sound schematics is not easy when trying to filter out electronic noise interference within camera.  Alexa or F65 have A/D converters almost just as good as top notch Nagra's or Sound Devices.   It's really expensive for a company to even be at the pro level for sound development.  24/96khz capture doesn't mean shit in the audio world its just marketing.  high grade converters are everything.  preamps and 48v within camera is practical but as far as db and noise forget it.  You'll always get noise or some inconsistencies when you want to crank the boost level needed.  I rather have a top line-in with an external pre and field mixer setup and a good mic.  of course all that doesnt mean shit if your boom operator doesnt know where to place a mic or know the best crop from his monitor....  hidden lavs, etc..all need separate proper audio gear.  but whatever standard works for you..

they need to quit that silly body shape, stick the electronics in a square die cast housing, whack a c mount on the front and sell the damn thing.  I don't know what is taking them so long.  they are dreaming while living off a load of money pledged by kickstarter backers..  Just how the BMCC isn't a viable business move, neither is this.  Both are not economically viable, silly ideas by people who dont understand manufacturing.  

What a nice and romantic project, doubt this will ever go anywhere. By the time they are ready to produce in masses (if they ever will be), consumer camcorders will be on the level of a sony f55.
 
Kudos though for trying.

B)

ok, fine, sorry, I surrender, everybody...GH2 anamorphic 4 life!  nothing else matters.

Nikon F please.

to be a DP it is a REQUIREMENT to know how to light, and not just a shot but a SCENE.   most DPs nowadays think they've got the perfect ISO for interiors and think everything is solved and no stylized lighting is required.

I don't care so much about pricing since higher end cams are premiumed for rental companies.  from a world wide perspective quality name brands have a better resale value since underdog industries and their countries favor known brands.  I know this for a fact.  it will be harder to sell a BMC and its workflow protocol to used buyers wanted to jump into the game even two years later.  this is how you justify the investment.  the C100 might not be that great compared to higher end standards but for 3rd world countries stil rocking 4:3 televisions believe me there are indie investors that would buy a C100 even 2 years later which to your currency wouldn't hit hard.  this is the reality.  this is why codecs are so important.  not everybody can rock and roll with RAW or even DNG.  that's just a fact.  but when post NLE's license easy codecs for machines that don't need muscle, the cams in which you think don't cut will actually benefit you.  there are broadcast companies that do buy used high end cams down the road.  all this high end shit right now will still be valuable 3 years down the road.  the final output is what matters which should be toward TV.  all you indie kats thinking hight end for cinema output get real.

SlashCam doing damage at EOSHD!  "all hells nawh!"

i like the Rokinon 650-1300mm for interviews handheld!  it's really hard.   :(   but that's what she said!  :o

i like the Rokinon 650-1300mm for interviews handheld!  it's really hard.   :(   but that's what she said!  :o

A scrip is brewing in my head. A comic parrody of the Moire Fear Mongering. I fear it will be a hit ;)

me neither because I haven't ordered one!  :P   I'm just joking around.  use what you've got.  I've been searching for some pro serviced retro tech cams to shoot some old VHS-C. just some particular projects I have in mind set in the 80's.  
 
but seriously for me camera blocking, fiction, technique, and then finally acting are the most thrilling and awarding things.  a good DP can light whatever.  cinema verite, exterior dynamic range theory, practice or highlight rolloff from skies...i mean seriously that's not what filmmaking is about.  paper/spec marketing seems to have owned the new generation of filmmaking enthusiasts and the only ones winning are camera manufacturers.  they're not really writing screenplays

I see.  he said ''wider sensor.'' 

[quote name='ScreensPro' timestamp='1352132766' post='21068']
Come on guys, it's not that bad and we know nothing about the sensor.

What if it is outputting a nice, sharp, 12+ DR, lowlight, 60p, 10bit 4:2:2 with a flat, log style? All you need is a hyperdeck and you have a camera that is (potentially) better than a C300 and maybe an F3. Don't forget the NDs, XLRs, waveforms etc.

For, what, $5k with deck and SSD?
[/quote]

My point is about interface for hardware. Panasonic did great introducing solid state format hence P2. Which records 100mbs with whatever data rate they choose to market. one of the main reasons the GH2 and GH1 got hype was its hack that supposedly records data more efficient for semi grading all on practical consumer based SDHC. Canon was rocking the MPEG format at 50mbs for a while. JVC seems to have a MOV priority for 36mbs on their pro cams. Sony too at 50mbs with their new trend at 50mbs. DSLR's have set the trend of H.264 or AVCHD 2.0 at a max 28mbs. So why does this cam have to suffer a lousy internal codec for a non breakthrough AG-AF series. This thing will probably ring at $6k and then I have to rely on a a separate deck as usual to get a hyped uncompressed stream? All I'm saying is that they should've implemented AVC-Intra into this cam. They blatantly have the technology. Seems like they just want to sell more of their decks and hype 10-bit 4:2:2 externally when AVC-Intra is already that spec even with their old AG-HPX300

needs more spec on Pocahontas..