Bruno

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.

This is the one I have right now, although I never use it mounted on the camera, but on a light stand. It's the most powerful out of most of the mentioned lights and uses cheap NP-970 (as well as AA batteries). Also the color is quite there, it doesn't have a green tint.
 
[url="http://www.amazon.com/Aputure-AL-198-Camera-Lighting-Camcorder/dp/B008VKMLE4/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1351190687&sr=8-3&keywords=aputure+led"]http://www.amazon.com/Aputure-AL-198-Camera-Lighting-Camcorder/dp/B008VKMLE4/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1351190687&sr=8-3&keywords=aputure+led[/url]
 Then one option I'd like to have (but I haven't tried yet) because of it's higher power and the fact that it can be plugged is this one:
 
[url="http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Dimmable-Switch-Battery-Charger/dp/B0054EI79I/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1354919069&sr=8-2&keywords=312+led+light"]http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Dimmable-Switch-Battery-Charger/dp/B0054EI79I/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1354919069&sr=8-2&keywords=312+led+light[/url]
 
This one up there could be bulkier, but it doesn't seem to be much bigger.
Both lights come in daylight and selectable temperature versions. In the latest there are 156 daylight balanced LEDs and 156 tungsten balanced ones, so supposedly it has the same power as the daylight LED light only when all of the LEDs are on (which is a color temperature that sits in the middle).

You sure have options!

EDIT: I think the 312 ones are the same as the ones Tomekk mentioned, but these from Amazon are branded as Fotodiox, which is a brand that hasnt't let me down yet (in the adapters department at least!).

I guess we all assumed stuff. The OP was talking about a non-IS lens being usable even on a tripod. We respond supporting ourselves in personal experience, I believe. Then the thread starts drifting and we end up discussing whatever it is drove our attention away. For the last 20 posts I was thinking the OP wanted to shoot handheld with the 200mm! haha

But to summarize, I'll add my list of 2 cents.

1. It's hard to discuss stuff when we don't share the same language, and I'm talking about mere technical terms (or not so technical). I assumed "handheld" was about literally holding a camera with your bare hands, no support whatsoever. IS does help, using a non-IS lens is jittery as hell. And that's talking about a 200mm on a full frame camera. 'Cause it becomes around 300 on a super35 sensor or an APS-C sensor. Then 400mm on a MFT sensor! So unless we agree on the camera, it's hard to say how bad or good it will look.
There's definitely a "handheld look" as opposed to using a camera "handheld" or shooting with a "handycam". If I shoot with a shoulder support I wouldn't say I'm shooting handheld, but I'm definitely getting a handheld shot. So there's that, if it means anything to you.

2. I shot a documentary last monday with just my 28mm, 50mm and 135mm (and sadly, my 14-42mm kit) on my GH2. 50mm is as far as I'd go when shooting handheld (that is, using my bare hands). I like to think I've pretty steady hands. But 135mm (270mm on 35mm equivalent) is crappy footage altoghether, of course. But when I put on my shoulder rig, things start to look sweeter (although I really really miss IS). In other instances, some kind of support like a monopod or a tripod acting as one (of course, the ultimate weapon is a proper tripod, with which I've managed to get awesome pictures using EX Tele on the 135mm). I could put together a private popurri if you want to see those shots.

3. About IS not working handheld on a 200mm lens, markm... I used the HV series (HV20, 30 and 40) for a couple of years almost daily. I loved it, and still do. They all have image stabilization AND rolling shutter and shooting at their maximum 10x zoom was the equivalent to 430mm in 35mm terms. I'm not gonna say it was the best footage out there, but it was certainly useable. So I can say tele shots with IS do work. And of course, on the other hand, I would've never achieved them without it.
Here's a promo video I made to sell my cam with many shots I made through the years, and there you can see many long tele shots (like the little Beagle's ass, the two Jehova Witnesses on the building, the road/plane shot which reads "CON MUCHO ZOOM...", the crowd shot of Fito Paez's scenario...)

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmgWXuQLQgM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmgWXuQLQgM[/url]

You can see it here in the title card right at the beginning (very subtle, you might have to make it HD and full screen to notice it), that's using Final Cut's "Earthquake" filter.
 
[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpcNvHmjx4Y"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpcNvHmjx4Y[/url]

You can see it here in the title card right at the beginning (very subtle, you might have to make it HD and full screen to notice it), that's using Final Cut's "Earthquake" filter.
 
[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpcNvHmjx4Y"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpcNvHmjx4Y[/url]

I used this position shake trick for most of my promos, just came to the conclusion on my lonesome, but it's good to share :) Subtler int he first one:
 
[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNGquFXmLOU"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNGquFXmLOU[/url]
 
More extreme here:
 
[url="https://vimeo.com/48174944"]https://vimeo.com/48174944[/url]
 
I did it in After Effects using a wiggle expression on position. Set a frequency either at frame rate or below, and use no more than a pixel or so. It works great!

OMG, what an offense!!!
 
 
English is not my native language, but what I read from this is "The BMCC is a much better deal. Andrew, when are you posting some footage so these people stop talking shit?".
The way I see it she was supporting what Andrew was saying, and didn't deserve such a harsh response, but that's just me.
 
 
So you compare the BMCC to the F55 and claim that the F55 market needs nothing else than a BMCC, but the C100 is a completely different market. Seriously...

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

@bruno Yes, it would almost seem as if I was talking to a different person... which I was. I had just typed the wrong name. Sorry about that. :) Fixing it now. It should make more sense in a minute.

Hi did shoot Black Swan's subway scenes with a Canon 7D and Canon lenses. :)
 
It's not uncommon at all to go wider than that on Super 35mm. Most of the Harry Potter films' main lens was a 21mm, and many other films use equally wide or even wider lens choices. It's a valid aesthetical choice and to me the argument "no one does/uses that anyway" is always a weak one. Films shouldn't all look the same, people shouldn't all use the exact same focal lengths, versatility is very important.
 
I don't think the BMCC's sensor size is a problem though, it's not that different from super 35, and between the EF and MFT mounts you should be able to use most of the available super 35 lenses, and maybe even some 16mm lenses too.
 
Having a pure super16 or super35 sensor size would work better with cine lenses, that's a fact, but few people amongst the target market of this camera own cine lenses anyway.

markm quotes:
 
"For me the BMC is a better camera (than the F55) that happens to be a fraction of the price."
"They use 35mm cameras on big productions and in years gone by without monitors or video assist."
"As for Jello and global shutter. Come on No one really notices this stuff anyway."
"16bit? Makes no difference No one can see any imporvements."
"How about listening to the truth which is the BMC shoots RAW so does the F55. SO you get the same picture with BOTH."
"There is not a rational argument to choose anything other than a BMC.""dont try to make yourself look an expert and me a wannabe or a fanboy" You're right, we're the ones who made ourselves look like losers. "To those who get a BMC. You literally got yourself a baby Alexa." You know babies can't do grownup work, right? :)  But I gotta give it to you, you did get something right: "This is what I hate about forums as they destroy the truth in favour of fanboyism"

"I dont care how good red says its compression is. It's still compression."
 
Never heard of lossless compression, have you?
 
"Making proxies is the least of your worries on a feature in post production So what you have to pay the editor a few more bob for the proxies BIG DEAL."
 
It IS a big deal. Try telling the producer (guy with the money) that you'll show him the last takes as soon as everything finishes transcoding in 2 hours, while he's paying for 150 crew people to sit and wait...
 
"Maybe you are heavily invested?"
 
Nope, not at all, anyone with a BMCC is more invested than I am!
 
"the truth which is the BMC shoots RAW so does the F55. SO you get the same picture with BOTH."
 
Holy crap, when I thought you couldn't be any more ignorant... oh wait, maybe the Magic Lantern guys will soon get the Rebel/550D to shoot raw, then we won't need to use the overpriced BMCC everyone is talking about!
 
Seriously, how old are you? There's no point...

You really don't get it do you? It's not just about image quality, it's about production workflows. Many DOPs only made the switch to digital with the Alexa and not the RED, and that's because of how it was designed and how it fits in a production workflow. The Alexa image itself won't be that different from a RED after you've graded it, etc, but it's the whole experience that matters to them.
 
You'll see plenty of BMCC cameras on big films, that's for sure, they'll be replacing the 5Ds whenever they need a small compact camera, and they will be so much better at it, no doubt about it, but that's it.
 
Rolling shutter is the worst problem about DSLRs in my opinion, and it's too bad that the BMCC didn't improve that aspect of it. Saying no one notices it is just plain nonsense, have you ever even shot handheld? How can you not notice it? On top of the weird effect, it makes the footage really hard to track and be used in post production, etc. It also makes stabilizing more difficult for stabilizing software, global shutter footage can get much better results with stabilizing in post.

You really don't get it do you? It's not just about image quality, it's about production workflows. Many DOPs only made the switch to digital with the Alexa and not the RED, and that's because of how it was designed and how it fits in a production workflow. The Alexa image itself won't be that different from a RED after you've graded it, etc, but it's the whole experience that matters to them.
 
You'll see plenty of BMCC cameras on big films, that's for sure, they'll be replacing the 5Ds whenever they need a small compact camera, and they will be so much better at it, no doubt about it, but that's it.
 
Rolling shutter is the worst problem about DSLRs in my opinion, and it's too bad that the BMCC didn't improve that aspect of it. Saying no one notices it is just plain nonsense, have you ever even shot handheld? How can you not notice it? On top of the weird effect, it makes the footage really hard to track and be used in post production, etc. It also makes stabilizing more difficult for stabilizing software, global shutter footage can get much better results with stabilizing in post.

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!
 
Is this forum becoming the equivalent of reduser for the BMCC or what?
 
You totally lost it. The BMCC is an amazing camera, and as I said before, an independent filmmaker would be crazy to get an F55 instead of a BMCC, but you clearly don't know what you're talking about when you state that the Alexa market would be equally well off with a BMCC.

I don't know what makes you say 35mm film cameras didn't have video assist. They didn't in the first few decades of filmmaking, that's for sure, but any 35mm camera these days or the past few decades has full video assist support.
 
Well you were comparing these two cameras in the first place, it's no wonder my post seems disingenuous to you! :)

Image quality is obviously very important, but the BMCC is not a camera that a DP would use on a big production. You'll definitely see many being used on big productions though, as B and C cams, or for specific scenes where they need a stealth camera, etc. but it doesn't have what it takes to be an A cam on a big production, and I'm not talking about image quality. They need it to be able to plug into the video village, record into external media, and so many other specific things, and the BMCC wan't made for that, it was made for us.
 
On top of it all, no matter how much a vimeo video looks like the BMCC to you, the F55 is a different beast in all aspects, and a much superior one I'm sure, which doesn't mean the BMCC wouldn't still be preferable for some situations or aesthetic choices.
 
It's apples and oranges really.

"The truth is the Alexa / F55 / BMC footage all looks the same and your not going to notice any difference when you grade it."
 
So, 1-1.5 stops of extra DR are unnoticable?
So, skin tone rendition is unnoticable?
So, the unique qualities of an S35 sensor* are unnoticable?
So, 16 bit is unnoticable?
So, zero jello is unnoticable?
 
* Please don't come to me with the line that with the right lens combos, you can get the same look. Go find me an equivilent lens to this:
[url="http://www.arri.com/camera/lenses/35_format_lenses/ultra_prime_8r.html"]http://www.arri.com/camera/lenses/35_format_lenses/ultra_prime_8r.html[/url]
You would need a 3mm-4mm T1.5 lens that matches the quality of an Arri Ultra prime. Their 16mm lenses go to 6mm, but would vignette on BMCC.
 
I think everyone on these boards are supporting BMCC, but blind fanboyism will do them no favours.

[quote name='endlos' timestamp='1354194534' post='22628']
And where is the evidence of that? Your not referring to the tired and outdated arguments against Final Cut X are you?
[/quote]

Right in front of your eyes!
DVD Studio Pro has been discontinued. Logic hasn't seen an update in years. Same for Aperture. There hasn't been a proper Mac Pro update in what, 3 years??? The iMac is their fastest machine at the moment!
They're obviously focusing all their efforts on iPads and iPhones and consumer stuff, I don't think you need any further proof of that...

The Alexa has become a favourite in film due to its amazing picture quality, and in broadcasting due to its picture quality AND prores support.
The RED didn't have prores until very recently and on paper it's always been better than the Alexa, but that wasn't enough for many top cinematographers.
I'm afraid these specs are more closely evaluated by people like us than actually top cinematographers, because they just hire one of each and run a bunch of test shoots, and in the end their decision is based on the image quality when they run the tests on a big screen. High fps will hardly be a deciding factor unless the film in question relies heavily on it. I've worked on films where the RED was only used because it's easier to use for stereo shoots, not because of image quality, so that has been a huge advantage for them.
Sony will have to deliver in image quality too if they want to succeed, these cameras are not cheap enough for the spec sheet reading enthusiasts and for the pros it doesn't really matter if they're slightly cheaper than an Alexa or RED. If they deliver though, then it might shake things up even more, and who knows soon we'll even be able to afford one!

Canon's C series cameras are great at what they do, you could almost say they're perfect for a bunch of different tasks, including indie filmmaking (maybe 60fps would make them even more perfect), but looking at what everyone else has on offer at the moment, I don't think I'm being unrealistic when I say that all their C cameras should have their prices dropped to half.

[quote name='endlos' timestamp='1354194534' post='22628']
And where is the evidence of that? Your not referring to the tired and outdated arguments against Final Cut X are you?
[/quote]

Right in front of your eyes!
DVD Studio Pro has been discontinued. Logic hasn't seen an update in years. Same for Aperture. There hasn't been a proper Mac Pro update in what, 3 years??? The iMac is their fastest machine at the moment!
They're obviously focusing all their efforts on iPads and iPhones and consumer stuff, I don't think you need any further proof of that...

The Alexa has become a favourite in film due to its amazing picture quality, and in broadcasting due to its picture quality AND prores support.
The RED didn't have prores until very recently and on paper it's always been better than the Alexa, but that wasn't enough for many top cinematographers.
I'm afraid these specs are more closely evaluated by people like us than actually top cinematographers, because they just hire one of each and run a bunch of test shoots, and in the end their decision is based on the image quality when they run the tests on a big screen. High fps will hardly be a deciding factor unless the film in question relies heavily on it. I've worked on films where the RED was only used because it's easier to use for stereo shoots, not because of image quality, so that has been a huge advantage for them.
Sony will have to deliver in image quality too if they want to succeed, these cameras are not cheap enough for the spec sheet reading enthusiasts and for the pros it doesn't really matter if they're slightly cheaper than an Alexa or RED. If they deliver though, then it might shake things up even more, and who knows soon we'll even be able to afford one!

Canon's C series cameras are great at what they do, you could almost say they're perfect for a bunch of different tasks, including indie filmmaking (maybe 60fps would make them even more perfect), but looking at what everyone else has on offer at the moment, I don't think I'm being unrealistic when I say that all their C cameras should have their prices dropped to half.

[quote name='endlos' timestamp='1354194534' post='22628']
And where is the evidence of that? Your not referring to the tired and outdated arguments against Final Cut X are you?
[/quote]

Right in front of your eyes!
DVD Studio Pro has been discontinued. Logic hasn't seen an update in years. Same for Aperture. There hasn't been a proper Mac Pro update in what, 3 years??? The iMac is their fastest machine at the moment!
They're obviously focusing all their efforts on iPads and iPhones and consumer stuff, I don't think you need any further proof of that...

The Alexa has become a favourite in film due to its amazing picture quality, and in broadcasting due to its picture quality AND prores support.
The RED didn't have prores until very recently and on paper it's always been better than the Alexa, but that wasn't enough for many top cinematographers.
I'm afraid these specs are more closely evaluated by people like us than actually top cinematographers, because they just hire one of each and run a bunch of test shoots, and in the end their decision is based on the image quality when they run the tests on a big screen. High fps will hardly be a deciding factor unless the film in question relies heavily on it. I've worked on films where the RED was only used because it's easier to use for stereo shoots, not because of image quality, so that has been a huge advantage for them.
Sony will have to deliver in image quality too if they want to succeed, these cameras are not cheap enough for the spec sheet reading enthusiasts and for the pros it doesn't really matter if they're slightly cheaper than an Alexa or RED. If they deliver though, then it might shake things up even more, and who knows soon we'll even be able to afford one!

Canon's C series cameras are great at what they do, you could almost say they're perfect for a bunch of different tasks, including indie filmmaking (maybe 60fps would make them even more perfect), but looking at what everyone else has on offer at the moment, I don't think I'm being unrealistic when I say that all their C cameras should have their prices dropped to half.

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1354114969' post='22532']
Question for you guys who find it distracting - was the distraction caused by all shots in the first 25 seconds (summer scenes) or just a few?
[/quote]

IMO faces or full body shots is what gives it away the most. In the closeups of her shorts when she's walking, for instance, it's hard to tell since I don't know her, it can make her look thinner or chubbier if it's wrong, but doesn't feel as blatantly odd as a face or full body shot does.

I totally understand it's a look to have it stretched or squeezed, I just don't think it cuts well with undistorted footage, unless you go further and use more extreme distortion, then it would be clear it's a creative decision, this way it looks like something's wrong with it.

What a silly discussion. These people do have way too much time on their hands... seriously...

I don't have any money invested in this, but you don't need to look further than the Digital Bolex website news section to get extremely detailed info on the progress of the entire project. On top of that, you have the 2 creators showing up for interviews everywhere, on every different filmmaking website or blog, do you think they're all in on it? I don't think it would be worth it...

If this was a scam why would they stop at 100 orders? They could have gotten at least 5 to 10x more orders than that through kickstarter alone!!!

Maybe they're scammers AND dumb?

The reason the Digital Bolex is still vapour ware is because they didn't go and release the product they first announced ignoring everyone's input, instead they listened and they've been tweaking it according to feedback, and their progress has been documented in detail on their website, with a transparency uncommon to other manufacturers. Besides, the BMDCC is still vapour ware to many people who ordered it months ago too.

Anyway the point was that they're so close to having a really solid product that in my opinion it's worth going the extra mile and thinking it through. If you wanna settle for less, be my guest, I'm sure they'll appreciate it, but will it help changing things for the better?

What you're saying sounds like if you put raw in a cheap camera you can ignore everything else, and that's not true. Everyone complained about the audio capabilities on the DSLRs and the BMDCC is not any better in that regard. I'd definitely rent one if I need it, but as an indie filmmaker I can't be buying cameras incrementally, when so many little things clearly need to be addressed even before the camera comes out.

In my opinion the MFT version is a massive reason to cancel an order. The Canon mount made no sense when the camera was announced, makes even less sense now that an MFT version is coming.

You'd have to rent it straight away, because once the MFT version is out no one will touch the canon mount one and I'm guessing they'll be worth much less used than the MFT version, even though they cost the same.

Also with all these delays it starts making a lot of sense to see what the digital bolex can do before deciding on either camera.