bradleyg5

I am using 5dII dng files and i can not get a single dng to import nevermind a sequence.  I'm confused because i thought it was ONLY black magic camera that was supported.  Says no media data when i import.    For you getting it to work can you make corrections in ACR and have them recognized?  If I could just avoid the export to TIF sequences that would save me a lot of time. 

I will appreciate your apologies when this camera comes out and a 1080p still frame looks nothing like a downscaled full resolution picture frame. I don't doubt they are "nice" Germans I'm just saying Leica expertise has never been in sensor technology, they are good at making things out of glass and metal.

[quote name='Bruno' timestamp='1348685717' post='19083'] The images are read at full sensor resolution, scaled down by the processor while in memory and then saved to the card/movie file. It's not that hard to understand, is it? 1DX, D4 and a ton other cameras don't achieve it because they weren't programmed to do so, doesn't mean it's impossible. [/quote] riiiiiiiiiiight I doubt in the highest possible terms that is what this camera does. You still need to move the data off the chip into memory and process it. it's a bandwidth limitation, the problem is you can't get the data off the sensor fast enough. If Sony can't do it, Canon can't do it, Panasonic can't do it, Nikon can't do it, Samsung can't do it, I very much doubt a tiny company like Leica that is still using CCDs in their cameras can do it. That's not what this camera does.

[quote name='cameraboy' timestamp='1348655136' post='19067'] nope...Duh.. software vs hardware.... [/quote] You're saying Leica is saying that the full 24MP can be read out of the sensor 24/25 times a second, then that information can be downscaled in software? How exactly is that supposed to work? that a Leica camera made of brass and iron is able to move that much information off the sensor when a 1dx or D4 doesn't come close to achieving it.

[quote]To scale 24MP down to 2MP for 1080p we do not just line-skipping, we average pixels. It is not pixel binning or anything like that.[/quote] Isn't this precisely what the Canon 5d Mark III does? This cuts down on noise and eliminates moire but results in a rather soft image. Maybe they figured out a way to produce a sharp image but I certainly wouldn't expect above and beyond the Mark III

How do you guys know that it's going to be as sharp as the GH2? if it's using a totally different more conventional sensor it could just be soft OM-D quality with a higher bitrate. Still going to need to see some raw footage. Entirely different sensor leads me to question this will be as sharp as the previous camera.

I'm still not getting it, my 5dII with Alexs hack can record above 50mbit/sec h.264, so that's hardly game changing. All-I is an inefficient codec that has shown to not substantially increase image quality, I suppose the one advantage is those on slow macs won't have to transcode all their footage to be able to edit. 60fps is not particularly slow motion and totally pointless otherwise. Still no confirmation on the clean HDMI output. The build quality is much higher, but in the way that makes it seem more like a travel camera.

Thank you, you just convinced me to skip the Blackmagic and save up for a Canon C100. More control does not seem to equal better quality in this instance.

2.5k is not as impressive when you say [size=4][font=arial, sans-serif]2432 x 1366 vs 1920x1080. Really doesn't give you a ton of room to crop, would be useful for stabilization but you certainly not going to significantly recompose a shot with 512x284 pixels of headroom.[/font] [font=arial, sans-serif]Honestly I think shooting in RAW would limit creativity more than it would enable it, you'd need to have a much tighter and scripted workflow and you couldn't be overshooting or experimenting too much.[/font] [font=arial, sans-serif]I think this camera would be great for seasoned independent producers looking to take a shot on a well funded projects, but I think it would be an absolute disaster to use on a no budget or micro budget flick. Most people would be much better served by the flexibility of a DSLR, the softness is not an issue unless you are trying to replicate a HBO series like Game of Thrones.[/font][/size]

Sony A mount has to be the most undeveloped lens system available.  Although the Sony 135mm F2.8 STF is probably one of the coolest lens I've seen [photozone review](http://www.photozone.de/sonyalphaff/737-sony135f28ff?start=1), would probably look amazing and like nothing else in video. They have what? some Zeiss lens and old Minolta design lens?  If this camera becomes the ultimate full frame video camera, it's going to be a cluster**** of people trying to find the lens they want for it.  Sony seems to hate designing lens for any of their systems. Sony full frame is that still photography system you almost forget exists, it's been like 5 years since their last camera.

The Canon 40mm F2.8 in Canada is 229$ (sharper wide open, shallower depth of field) The Panasonic 20mm F1.7 is 499$ What a complete joke, everybody talks about what a good deal the GH2 is and then fails to mention how monstrously over priced micro 4/3 lens are. It's not just priced like premium system it's priced ABOVE all other dslr systems when you take lens into consideration.  How sad is it that it's cheaper to build a full frame system than a micro four thirds system.

Wait so you are saying that even after you export your files from Premiere Pro they're forever tainted by the crushed blacks and highlights? Like if you make a video project in PP convert it to h.264, send me(on PC) the file the video will be crushed?  That's a huge workflow issue if you need to preconvert everything before being able to edit it without ruinning your footage. truely bizzar

[quote author=tehellet link=topic=701.msg5142#msg5142 date=1336669480] So in theory, the 21.5'' iMac with AMD Radeon HD 6750 should work with CS6 and the Mercury engine? And if it doesn't, it should be easy to "hack" it to make it work? [/quote] I would say yes, as long as it has 1GB of video ram from experience with the CUDA cards and that article, I would reckon any AMD card with 1GB of ram and quoted as supporting OpenCL should work. Wouldn't go buy a computer on that assumption just yet, but if you have a Mac from the last couple generations you should definitly download the free trial from Adobe and see if it works, as I bet it does.

Well there is an iMac with 6970M 1GB card. If you do the 'hack' that might work. But I'm not sure if you can add in cards because I don't know if the mac install has an equivalent "cuda_supported_cards" file. basically on windows in Program Files/Adobe/Premiere pro CS6 there is a file labled "cuda_supported_cards" if you open this file(as administrator) you can just type in your unsupported card and it magically works. Someone with a mac install should let us know if there is a text file like this on the mac install, maybe a "Open_CL_supported_cards" or something along those lines.

I was relying on having no competition for quick turnaround! :'( Been using this since CS5 and it's a huge advantage, the whole reason I got a Lenovo laptop was having the 1GB nvidia card for Premiere pro. I have it running on a GTX 460 1GB on my desktop and a Quadro FX 880 1GB in my laptop(basically a 330M). So even for NVidia cards you don't need the ones they officially support, I believe it just needs to be 1GB. And it's hardly a "hack" to get other cards working, you just need to add a line of text to a cuda_supported_cards.txt file. You don't even really need to use the GPU sniffer, you just need to enter it in the proper format which can be inferred from the other entries.  I can't get the Media encoder working at the moment with exported PP files that use graphics effects... although the direct export is working fine. I'm disappointed in SpeedGrade though! it's not renderless! if you try and export a PP project into it, it tries to convert it to 32bit uncompressed!  I'm totally lost with it, I hope Lynda releases a tutorial series because I'm having trouble seeing what I can do with it that i can't already just do in premiere. And man did I get a good deal on Production premium I have to brag. I got a full version of Production premium CS5 for 800 dollars off ebay(and it worked!) then I upgraded to CS5.5 right on the last day of availability and they give you a free update to CS6 so that's only an extra 400$. So production premium plus two version updates for 1200$ As opposed to the 1800$ they are asking up front if you want to start right at CS6. Such an insanely good deal because I primarily do photography so I get a lot of use out of photoshop and adobe camera raw.

What exactly is the point? a 25mm F0.95 on micro four thirds will produce the equivalent field of view and depth of field as a 50mm F1.8 on a 5d.  I don't really see the logic in paying a 1000+ dollars on a lens that will give the same look as the cheapest lens in available on 35mm full format.

What kind of quality is the expectation from DSLRs? Seems like blu-ray 1080p is the benchmark. I can't imagine any lower consumer format being able to discern the sharpness difference between a GH2 and other DSLRs. No way you could realistically tell the difference over broadcast HD since it's almost as compressed as Youtube.

great news, basically unbelievable that Canon didn't copy magic zoom and the zebra stripes implementation of ML. If they can get the full software package the 5dII has running on the 5dIII that will easily be the best large format camera on the market.

So the site keeps telling me cameras are to slow and soft and then there is an article posted that says fast sharp movies look like crap! That's it, decision made I'm staying on the 5dII for the foreseeable future, all money hereby diverted to lens and software. magic lantern on the 5dII still offers the best firmware out there on any large sensor camera so far. The new money is going to be in web, internet speeds just aren't increasing enough to even make full use of the video we can already make. I want more dynamic range though... I do think that gives you more possibilities for creating new looks.

[quote author=rommex link=topic=625.msg4602#msg4602 date=1335252574] [quote author=5DGH link=topic=625.msg4589#msg4589 date=1335213546] "a sensor so powerful it is vacuum cooled." Speechless...because it's such a nonsense. [/quote] It has so much vacuum in its cooling system as the device called vacuum cleaner does) Try to relax and have a flexible mind. [/quote] Lawl so when they say "vacuum cooled" they mean cooled by an indirect fan that creates a low pressure "vacuum" which moves air over the sensor? Comeon just call it fan cooled.

No moire, no aliasing? well prove it! I want to see a video of you pointing it directly at an LCD monitor with the focus critically sharp so you can see the pixels. Why don't people do this, it's the easiest and more sure-fire way to introduce moire, everybody always running around looking for brick walls to shoot and then declare it not a problem.  Should be like the default controlled test. By the way has anybody ran any of the Flaat picture styles with the new Mark III? I'd love to see if it pulls out more dynamic range than the Mark II

[quote author=chinageeks link=topic=600.msg4211#msg4211 date=1334717076] Boy I wish Blackmagic hadn't given this camera aninternal battery. Sure, you can connect it to some external batteries, but having to fiddle with extra wires and batteries just makes it harder to carry around, and attract more attention. With that form factor, I was really hoping this might be a good DSLR replacement for me as I do pretty much only documentary shooting where it's beneficial not to stand out/be obviously using expensive pro cameras. This thing looks kind of like a still camera, and although I'd prefer a larger sensor for better low-light and a smaller crop factor, I would SERIOUSLY be considering buying one...except for the battery. A 90-minute internal battery is almost totally useless to me. Really, an internal battery at all seems like kind of a terrible idea, although if it lasted a lot longer (say, five or six hours of shooting per charge) I could work with it. [/quote] Blackmagic has been drinking to much of the Apple koolaid I think. I don't see a pro video camera as an appropriate venue for the "limit functionality for simplicity" philosophy. The more I look at the more I just see the exact demographic they are going for. Dudes with a 3000$ macbook pro that they upgrade every 2 years and a 5dII that spends most of its time in the closet.  we shall see if this camera can compete while it's outputing 1080p, says 13 stops dynamic range but if that's only in 2.5k raw it won't dominate. Still wish Sony or Panasonic or Canon would just open up their cameras, they could probably give us a Raw format out of the 1dx or 5dIII if they really wanted that would blow this away. The recording directly onto an SSD is a great idea though. But seeing how poorly they implemented USB 3.0 on some their devices I'm pretty sceptical of every thunderbolt port being equal, for see lots of "bandwidth" issues for add in cards and laptops. What up Andrew! this whole revolution was supposed to be about Vista vision and we just keep getting further and further away, you could fit more than four of these sensors on a 5dII's chip.  I want to get away from the Reds and the small time companies without the dominating proprietary sensor technology.  Firmware is not that important that I'd be willing to give up on Sony/Panasonic/Canon chips.

[quote author=mxtp link=topic=596.msg4032#msg4032 date=1334604941] So this would result in about x2.3 crop factor with EOS glass? Maybe someone could answer this for me. Is there any technical reason why a micro4/3 lens to EOS mount would not work... Thus allowing the Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 or Voigtlander 17.5mm f/0.95 to work on the Blackmagic Cinema Camera? Just wondering. [/quote] the flange distance is to far on a EOS mount. There is to much distance between the back of the lens and the sensor for a micro 4/3 lens to focus properly. to focus to infinity the lens needs to be the proper distance from the focal plane. Eos mount is a very unusual choice if that's the only mount it comes with, You would only be able to adapt it to Nikon and M42 everything else won't focus properly. I can see some problems getting proper wide angles, hopefully it works properly with EF-S lens as well. "This is just a picture making box. Like Apple, BlackMagic seems to get that adding simplicity rather than complexity makes for a better product." ::) My eyes just rolled so hard they almost fell out of my head, really sucks that this device seems only properly compatible with Mac, why would you buy a low cost camera if you were editting on a needlessly expensive platform, you can get way more editting bang for the buck with a windows setup.  This seems more like a hipster camera.

Why can't they just make it usable for a loan wolf professional? I mean what is even the point of having the AF and exposure system and high quality stills function in a camera that is SOLELY to be used on set. Say I want a 1dx but I want it to have incredibly good 1080P with the option for uncompressed HDMI 4:2:2 output. Then say I want the headphone jack. and finally say I want 4k because silent 24 frames a second at 8.8Mega pixels is super useful for getting the best possible moment in a series. It just doesn't make sense how they wouldn't at least include all the features that magic lantern has, like the picture in picture zoom function is incredibly valuable. Having on screen zebra stripes.  Why not make it a camera that can also be used by a professional photographer? Plenty of professional photographers are already spending MORE on medium format cameras. I still think this camera could be an incredible sports and independent producer camera, it's all the will to put effort into software. Why are they absolutely so reluctant to develop advanced software suites to build into these cameras?

dpreview has the info up, it's 10k EUROS not 10k dollars. No focus peaking and baffling no zebra strips, it uses the exact same sensor as the 1Dx from the looks of it. Not terribly impressive to think it has less usability than a 5dII with magic lantern. Plus it doesn't even do 4k in full frame mode, I retract my previous statements. It looks like it's just a 1dx hacked into producing 4k video at a messily 24fps. Made for a world I know little about, I can't see using this for low end commercial work or documentaries that's for sure.