HurtinMinorKey

The Black Magic doesn't exist yet, so it's hard to comment on it. However, I've found that most peoples opinions on it are saturated with wishful thinking. It all depends what you plan shooting. I think the 5D2 and gh2 compliment each other well, and make for a versatile toolkit.  Personally I'd wait until the fall announcements before i make any purchasing decisions. I'm still hoping for a 5-C.

[quote author=MOONGOAT link=topic=939.msg6819#msg6819 date=1341474210] I think it would be a mistake to create sub-forums for cameras and have comments directly on articles. Really you'd just be dividing an already small community. [/quote] This.

For me, nothing is worse than a shaky camera. It puts too much strain on the audiences eyes. And I've never seen stabilization that makes something look worse. Even modern pan and scans from 4k sources, like some of the shots in the Social Network, look good to me

[quote author=Andrew Reid link=topic=926.msg6743#msg6743 date=1341266579] [quote author=markm link=topic=926.msg6736#msg6736 date=1341250687] If I was serious about making a film I would choose the BMC. The FS700 is 8 Bit 4.2.2 out. I'm not sure if that could change if it ever gets its 4k option. [/quote] 8 bit per sample. Lots of colours (16.7m I think?) and 255 shades of each. Seems enough for me. 10 bit is overrated. Your screen is likely 8 bit too. Well my Dell U2711 and MacBook Pro use 8 bit LCD panels. JPEG and raw stills look fine with 255 per colour sample as does C300 footage. [/quote] I think Macbook Pros use 24 bits per pixel, but each pixel is represented by three 8 bit elements(red green blue).  When you play back you footage from a c300, since each photo site records only 8 bits in one color (RGB), then the remaining information is interpolated from neighboring photosites. I think you are confusing photosites with pixels.

[quote author=gene_can_sing link=topic=926.msg6727#msg6727 date=1341242601] It's interesting how everyone is comparing the FS700 to the C300. I think the image is comparable for sure; maybe a slight nod to the C300. But people seem to forget that all the amazing, dramatic slow motion stuff you cannot even come close to achieving on C300. Maybe not so much for narrative, but for doc work and beauty shots, the slow motion is HUGE. Adds so much to the drama to the shot. Plus FS700 costs $7000 less  :) [/quote] The biggest difference I've noticed between the two is that is with skin tones. I still haven't since a nice closeup from the fs700 that is anywhere close to what you get with the c300, or even the 5d3 for that matter.

For me, slow motion in a movie is like loud melodramatic music (see LOTR for both). It's okay if it's an action movie, otherwise it comes across as a cheap trick.

[quote author=QuickHitRecord link=topic=865.msg6591#msg6591 date=1340821948] So... unless the GH3 is 95mb/s or higher out of the box (which I doubt very much), I'll be holding off on this purchase until we can see if Vitaly can work his magic one more time. [/quote] I wonder if this could lead to a run on existing gh2s once they go out of production.

Has anyone considered the terrifying possibility that the video may be no matter, or gasp, worse on the gh3?  What if Pana decided they gave away too much for too little? Or they might just make it unhackable. I'm not trying to raise hell, i'm just wondering if anyone else considered these things a possibility?

Saw Moonrise Kingdom. It was shot with 16mm and the resolution definitely took a hit(for the worse) because of it. Otherwise, the movie was outstanding. Best I've seen in a while.

How are these guys not in violation of some IP law? Is this actually sanctioned by Zeiss?

[quote author=gene_can_sing link=topic=884.msg6472#msg6472 date=1340602840] As for me, I did the smart thing and pre-ordered my FS700. It's going to have a similar IQ to the C500 when they both have 12 bit 4K RAW recorders hooked up. The big difference is, the FS700 costs $8000 while the C500 is rumored to cost $30,000. A $22K price difference for similar IQ and RAW specs. [/quote] Sorry, but I haven't seen any FS700 footage that looks anywhere close to as good as the c300. You're paying $8000 do be able to do really cool slo-mo. In terms of IQ at regular fps, it's about $7000 more than you need to pay.  There is a reason the F3 is still more expensive.

There are slight differences in color rendition too. Colors look better on 5dii than T3i. But from what I've seen here, I'd have to agree with AR, go with gh2, or wait for the GH3. I own a mkii, and it really shines for close ups, with a narrow DOF, but it  really drops off when you try and get a wide shot.  The gh2 seems like a better all purpose camera.

[quote author=Simco123 link=topic=884.msg6407#msg6407 date=1340474606] The 5DIII has higher bitrate and renders sharpness better in post than the 1Dx so all in all they are similar given both cameras uses similar codec. [/quote] According to the 1dx manual, it has the same data-rate. Seems like the same codec, written from a better sensor.

1dX vs 5dm3, very unscientific comparison. https://vimeo.com/44496874 The canon DSLRs are all clearly being nerfed to protect their cinema line.

Normally I'd tend to be pretty pessimistic here, but I really like Panasonic as a company in general.  I think they are going through a period of trying to re-establish themselves across a bunch of different markets.  They remind me a lot of Hyundai 5-7 years ago. 

Nobody else thinks they all look stupid for under exposing the room?

Wow, WTF is with the cheesy melodramatic music during the interviews?  All those DPs and no one knows how to soundtrack? Why did they all choose to underexpose the action? Just to get the detail out of window?  I thought they all looked kinda bad( i viewed it on a crappy laptop monitor). I guess C and B were the best for me.  They should have included film too. 

[quote author=Andrew Reid link=topic=848.msg6109#msg6109 date=1339773147] [quote author=MOONGOAT link=topic=848.msg6108#msg6108 date=1339772859] Colt Seman, not Semen. But thanks for the laugh :) [/quote] ;D Corrected! Sorry Colt. Seriously this guy and Johnny did a superb job, really impressed with their other work too. #onestowatch [/quote] [img]http://www.spscriptorium.com/Season5/SBFSeaMan.jpg[/img]

Don't worry, some upstart out their is going to force these fools to lower price eventually. Either way, it's cool that you tried to find a workaround.  Keep it up.

[quote author=Andrew Reid link=topic=837.msg6077#msg6077 date=1339689784] [quote author=TJB link=topic=837.msg6068#msg6068 date=1339657649] I didn't buy an FS100. I haven't bought a Canon 5DMK3 and I won't buy a Blackmagic Cinema Camera. $4,500 $3,500 $3,000 =$11,000 NOW.....soon I can buy a Canon C300! [/quote] FS700? [/quote] Unless you are doing slo-mo all the time, the FS700 is pretty overpriced for the IQ at it's normal frame rates. 

As far as video goes, Sony holds Nikon's leash because they supply them with sensors, and i bet that means that Sony is the one that determines what Nikon video can do so as not to interfere with Sony's v-cams. In other words, there is no reason to expect that Nikon will ever do anything great with their video.

^Why do you like the fs700 so much? Honestly I can't say that it performs better than any of it's lower priced rivals at normal frame rates. It just seems like something I'd rent if I had to do a few super slow-mo shots. 

[quote author=vincegortho link=topic=835.msg5997#msg5997 date=1339519065] I was thinking of sending my 5DIII off to maxmax and having them do it. Do you regret modifying yours? Or will you recommending certain precautions to evade the dust issue? Sorry, this is the topic I'm most interested in, which seems to have been ignored by James Miller* and that other mystery guy on vimeo who posted a six minute video then removed it. So much mystery around this mod. [/quote] The fault dear Brutus, is in the codec, not the camera!

Black Magic just got a shout-out during the Apple Keynote address. I wonder how much that cost..

Were they static test shots? Unless I am mistaken, the extra detail should only be noticeable when you have a of elements changing frame to frame.