gelaxstudio

DSLRs are far from dead in videography. A7S and GH4 are two clear examples -though technically they are not DSLRs- of photo cameras designed with the videographer in mind.

Most of the current cinema cameras and video camcorders are actually  mirrorless cameras,they don't need OVF,they  metering light on sensor.

 

While Dslrs need a light metering sensor on top of the  mirror to do so,and no matter how great their phase detection AF is ,it only works for stills 

 

Light metering  sensorã€phase detection AF unitã€OVFã€mirror ，those  parts of a dslr actuallly useless when shooting a video,but they take up 30-40% of a dslr's value, which meams  30-40% of your investments in dslr will be wasted if you are not using it for photography.

 

And without those useless parts,they become mirrorless cameras , that is why GH4 and A7s make full use of their design,so they are  better for videography not only because they provide great image quality but also there are not waste of videographers' money.

People/companies who shoot with the C300 don't do it just because of the added image quality, they do it because of the form factor, XLR inputs, decent preamps, etc, etc. Having 4K on a DSLR is not what would make them ditch the C300.

Please do not forget that 6 years ago,people did think that 5D mark II can't  compete with DV cams ,because of its lack of many video-needed  features  (like what you mentioned as c300's advantages)

But nowaday 5D series are being used in filming many different videography works,including cinema projects.

 

The most important point is Image quality, always come the first to one's mind

  Canon know that well ,and that is why they only provide advance sampling for the C series ,while none of their DSLR or  Mirrorless cameras get better sampling except line-skipping

 

On the other hand, Sony and Panasonic do provide super advance sampling for their cheap DCs, like the RX10 GM1 G6

 

I think that Canon have to update their C  series first,then comes a dslr using better sampling  <_<

My biggest problem is lenses.

With Canon I can get a 10-18mm  for €250 ,  50mm 1.8m for €80. Now say how much would it cost to get the same FOV and light on m43 sensor? Or on a Sony-E mount? The sony version of the 50mm 1.8 costs €250 alone and I don't know about the quality, secondly the 10-18mm variant costs €800! So I would need to pay like 10 times for what I have now but with a good 1080p. Thus a good quality 1080p with cheap DSRL form Canon would fix my problems. Am I the only one?

now I see ,there are many canon lens owners like you,hoping that canon can do something,but those line-skipping Dslrs really wasting all your good quality lens ,moreover if you think about no power-zoom , quite-AF motor and smooth focusing ring ,ect

There are endless demands, dude

It seems we'll know soon enough is Canon is ready to respond.

 

http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/07/canon-to-make-a-big-splash-at-photokina-cr2/

 

Depending on whether or not the announcements are a disappointment and if that new sensor tech is really "revolutionary" we may see Canon repeating the cycle again... or not.

DSLRs are already out of date for videography,and canon cameras always have overheat issues which make 4K video and high framerate became impossible，check out the C500，then you will understand 

 

Do you actually think that canon will deliver a dslr under the price of 3000$ that can do 4K video  which the cinema cam C300 doesn't provide?

 

Come on ~The manufacturers are not playing their game in this way.

Its poor  compression codec make huge unnecessary filesize, moreover it is lack of  many  necessary features for pro works ,and it has strong rolling shutter  effects,therefore I think The 1DC is not just overpriced,it is too outdated,even its color science doesn't worth that price level 

This is very interesting:
http://***URL not allowed***/dynamic-range-sony-a7s-vs-arri-amira-canon-c300-5d-mark-iii-1dc-panasonic-gh4/

Brief summary:
Amira: 14.5

A7s: 14.1

5D Mark III: 11.8

1DC: 11.7

C300: 11.4

GH4: 10.9

A lot of  GH4 fans are gonna disappointed or oppose  this test~

For A7S ,it looks like awarded the gold medal,but for many other cameras , it is a death knell!

canon has join the competition by reducing the price of their products,maybe it is the only strategy so far

Oh come on !

I thought you drawed your conclusion by some tests or videos review! 

How can you judge something that you did't even test it ?!

 

There are some points you mentioned that I disagree with you :

 

The picture profiles on A7S is way more advance,you can change internal color performance of the camera.Simulate the canon-like colour is also possible,while GH4 can't do as much as A7S can.

So  I don't think the Color science and skin tones are advantages on the GH4. Actually the color performances on the A7S is not bad!

 

Moreover, A7S has much better dynamic range,people hardly see the differences between F55 and A7S in terms of DR! (see this video :

SONY a7s s-log2 test HD 1080p：

 

I don't think that it is necessary to compare the cinelike profile with S-log2 now,S-LOG2 is really a tool for work!

While cinelike profiles are NOT ! 

This is a comment from alex (a C300 and GH4 user),comment from www.fstopacademy.com,7S hand on shooting review:

Alex said:

 

For anyone who’s concerned about grading the 8bit of this camera vs 10bit of the GH4… I think it’s going to be a non-issue!

Testing yesterday, with the GH4 recording 10bit to a Ninja Blade, I found I could push the 8 bit internally recorded image from my C300 (50 Mbit) WAAAAAY further before either fell apart!

 

Specifically I was trying to see if I could underexpose to protect highlights in high contrast documentary interview situations. With the C300 I could push the midtones up by 25% (probably even more with a de-noiser) before I would start to feel uncomfortable about using them. The GH4, however… I couldn’t move push the midtones more than about 5% before it looked too ugly.

 

I fiddled with the NR settings, shadows, highlights, contrast, Cine D Profile, Natural Profile, but nothing made me smile and go… “Yeah! I like that.â€

 

As he said, GH4 with IPB code perform badly in color,and I don't know whether the 10 bit will help,but it may not be worthy because it requires a external recorder to do so.

 

 

In a A7S review from  Newsshooter.com,W. Ashley Maddox said:

it(A7S) had a natural grain look to it vs. the muddy blacks that I am seeing in the GH4. Compared to the FS700’s AVCHD, the XAVC codec is way easier to grade.

 

 

so,both camera in the same 8 bit color but xavc does performs  better than the IPB(the same code as AVCHD ) code on the GH4!

What a shame that GH4 is not using a better code instead of IPB!

I tested the different Cine profiles on my GH4 and to my surprise both Cinelike curves don't show any more DR than Standard does. It's a sort of reversed S-curve, upping the shadows end and suppressing the highlights, but with black, white and grey at the exact same spot. It's an image that LOOKS flat but hardly contains any additional DR. Oh, and the colours get screwed up in these profiles, don't know why. Curious about this new log, hoping there is highlight lattitude to be found. I'm not betting on the shadows, they're quite noisy already...

 

Unlike common gamma Log Files ,Cine-D file does not require a native ISO,and there is no official technical info explain how it work to reserve more DR,so thinking of it as a gamma profile is much like a joke <_<  

Canon's strengths is in the colour science and lenses.

 

I just wish they would push the price / performance barrier far more and surprise us occasionally with some in ya face innovation!!

Hey,Andrew.I have heared that the picture profile (especially the colour settings)on A7S can achieve any type of colour .

Simulate the canon-like colour is also possible,not any other  camera in the same price range peovide that .

Sony officially provided a recommended PP file for FS100 to match with the colour of 5D2 ,but do not know if it works the same on A7S ,its content is listed below:

 

Canon don't respond to each move by the perceived competition, because they don't have to. Sony are trying to innovate aggressively because they have to, and because it makes sense in their situation. Unlike Canon, they're not the market leader who benefits from the status quo on the market. Until the world around them changes enough and forces them to change their course, too. 

Meanwhile, if you're not happy with the pace Canon is moving, simply choose another product. Simple as that. 

 

You do know it  will cause a painful loss when you swicth from one brand to another,right?

A good point all round really. Canon will have to respond eventually for exactly that reason... Why not do it NOW and sell some extra cameras?

 

Canon are disappointing their customers at the moment with the lack of change.

Hey Guys ,Check this out! 

 

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Ratings/Landscape

 

Turn the filters on to compare canon cams with sony cams

 

You can see Canon is already way behind! 

The 1DX(the same sensor as 1DC) only get 11.8 stops of  Dynamic Range.It is differ from the 400d(which was released in 2006!) only by 0.8 stops!  

 

what canon did greatly improve in the recent 8 years ?I think mostly the Software and  phase detective auto focus??!

 

While Sony did improved GREATLY from 2006 to 2014. In 2006 ,first sony dslr A100(11.2EV)released, then today we see the a7(14.2EV) acheved a much higher score.

 

All this bring to a much strange question:WHY sony frustrated in DSLR businesses(only got 15% market share) but still trying to be the BEST.

While dslr king canon develop their  image  technology SLOWLY as a snail (obviously canon is not lack of money to do a better job)

 

IF this keep going on ,canon is NOT going to bring you a promising future!

Remember there is always a rule of surviving:not to advance is to go back! ^_^

 

If canon really want to respond to competitors,them should try very very hard ,and act fast ASAP ,before it is too LATE!(ummm, it is a little bit late actually~) :(

Recently,the launch of Olympus E-M5 has excited me!
I think this camera will be  the new Four Thirds flagship.It has a superb build-in stabilizer,which may kill all steadycam systems.and its waterproof and dustproof body is great for more camera shooting positions(like under water)
And  the tiny GH2 won't be able to do this ,maybe even the GH3 in near future.
If the  E-M5 has much the same video quality as GH2,it definitely will be one of the best video cameras! ;D
Here are some links to video samples of E-m5,check them out!
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzXcijOYOrI#ws]Olympus OM-D E-M5 example clip walking while movie recording with IS[/url]
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AgQ7AlbA1w#ws]Olympus OM-D E-M5 - Test-Video | CHIP Online (chip.de)[/url]
Curve adjustment function !Amazing!
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9IAoZFwd0k#ws]Olympus OM-D E-M5 - tone curve adjustment[/url]

My question is the title~
    For my opinion，the  3×3 binning is much like a digital low pass Filter .By binning pixel ，it cloud reduce Moire，but like the low pass Filter ，it will cause resolution loss in return.
    When I saw the ISO test video shooted  by 5DM3,it showed resolution loss ,but I ddi't think it's caused by NR or out of focus.After all,the video was came from Canon Japan,which mean it is highly credible.
    What's more ,as it's cuased by binning pixel,the high bit rate mode like ALL-I won't be able to make up the lost resolution,and sad to find out this function can't be disable if user wanted.

    I am not a expert in this aspect,so I can't sure my opinion is absolutely correct.
    Let's discuss and find the answer . :)