jhnkng

I don't know what's worse, that they didn't notice that there weren't any women on the list, or that they came up with the weak sauce excuse of "well we invited them but they all* declined". 

* I wonder how many female photographers they invited vs male photographers? I'm going to guess the invited list wasn't 50/50.

I went to a C200 seminar that Canon held a month or so back and the Canon rep was adamant that the MXF upgrade was only 8bit 420. At the time I thought he might've been wrong, but dang...

Glad I didn't buy it!

2 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

Those are really good points. I do think that pretty soon a "prosumer" camera will more closely resemble an iPhone, but the higher end pro lines (the D850 seems to be going in that direction) look like a healthy market, too. MF is exciting for sure, I wish there were a true view camera replacement under $10k, and maybe that's a possibility soon.

The D850, like the D8xx line have always been high end professional cameras. Nikon already has excellent ergonomics (I like it better than mirrorless, which I find too small to use comfortably over a day) and camera UI (their wireless, software, and services UI on the other hand are utter garbage) as well as some of the best lenses around -- and even if you don't like Nikkor lenses you have access to Sigma Arts or Zeiss or any number of other manufacturers. So I think their ecosystem is pretty strong as well. 

What they do need is a clear road into the future. It's clear that the future is mirrorless, and online services and connectivity are going to be incredibly important as well. We don't know what their mirrorless camera will look like, and so far Nikon services are terrible, I've never managed to get Snapbridge to work at all on my D500. So they have neither the hardware or software for the future. The D850 looks great, I'm probably going to buy one to replace a couple of ageing Nikon bodies that I shoot with. But that's only because I've invested pretty deeply with Nikon, and the cameras they make now are pretty darn good. Good enough for the next 3 years? Or 6? I'm not so sure about that. And even if they keep me as a customer for the next 20 years of my professional life, what incentive will the next generations have to choose Nikon over any number of very capable cameras?

31 minutes ago, gethin said:

 

I just read that too and came here to comment.  it couldn't be 14bit raw could it? I mean could it? sounds too good to be true...

Nikon sRAW is 12bit, so I can't imagine it can be a high bit depth than that.

NFS seems to be pushing a little bit more original content, I've read a bunch of reviews that are original, but they still have a ton of stuff that are basically reposts. One thing that I do like is that they'll summarise videos they post -- which probably isn't great for the people making the videos, but it's nice to have that takeaway. I think they reserve a lot more of their original reporting for their podcasts, which is actually pretty good, though the presenters can be a bit stilted.

Their discussion board, on the other hand, is utter trash. Not as bad as youtube, but that's not a high bar.

9 hours ago, Dustin said:

I do love me some good slow mo!

Hell yeah! I just got a C100 mk2 and the only thing it didn't do was 120fps. I'd been looking at maybe an A6500 or a GH5 to fill that gap, but if I could get something I can use for more than just slomo then that would be ideal. I keep saying I'm ready to sell up and go to Sony, but then Nikon dribbles out a feature that I want...!

3 hours ago, Dustin said:

So what's the consensus on this? $4k ish for 4K, finally 1080p 120fps slow mo, Ibis, full frame sensor.. still not Sony/canon level continuous auto focus right? For that price you could buy 2 g85/a6300 plus lenses. I do love my Nikon though and can't imagine how detailed 40+ mgpixel stills would be 

I have an aging D800 that I've been thinking of upgrading for a while, so I'd be interested in a D850. I'd probably sell my D500 for the D850, if it shoots as fast as the rumours say and has 120fps slomo video.

Tons of great info here, thank you all! I haven't used the Zoom F4/F8 but I have a Tascam DR701D, and the Tascam is WAAAAAAY better than my Zoom H5. I'm not a pro sound recordist or anything but it's immediately obvious the difference in quality. Obviously it's quite a bit more expensive, but it's one of the few times where you can genuinely get double the quality for double the price.

I think have the same 80-200 Nikon 2.8 that you have and I got the Redrock Micro adaptors for mine -- works great. Total pain to put on, they're fixed into place with these tiny tiny tiny screws that require a lot of care not to lose, but once it's on it's rock solid. The 80-200 mounts on my C100m2 with no play at all. 

...maybe they were losing too much money on warranty returns?

*ducks*

8 hours ago, tugela said:

The RAW data is compressed, and that takes processing power. It is not just read to the card.

True, but h.264 is also compressed, and the raw data from the sensor has to be debayered as well. But I take your point that it isn't as straightforward as I had said.

5 hours ago, tugela said:

For RAW essentially the camera has to create a zip file in real time on the fly. How well does your desktop handle that task, to put it into perspective? It will require a significant amount of processing to do that. If it were simply writing the data to storage then little processing would be required, likewise if it was discarding a lot of data during the compression to speed things up. But to keep all of the data while still compressing, that requires processor muscle to do in real time.

The code to implement higher bit rates/depths already exists, so it would already be there if it were that simple. The absence of those codecs means that the hardware encoder inside the new chip is not set up to enable it.

The desktop computer analogy doesn't really hold water, since desktop CPUs are general purpose, and has to be good at everything, while specialist processors like the DIGIC series is purpose built for a select few things only. I mean beefy a computer do you need to playback 4K 60p CinemaDNG at 60fps? If we could take that kind of computing power and shrink it to a chip that fits inside a camera, we'd be editing RAW on our phones. 

But I agree with your second point, Canon hasn't got production ready code to implement a higher bitrate codec. They've said as much really. But it's just engineering time, whatever problems they have implementing an 8/10bit 422 codec they can solve given enough time. The only real question is whether they will work to implement a beefier codec for the C200 or leave it for the C200 mkII.

1 hour ago, tugela said:

If the hardware doesn't support it, it doesn't matter how fast the processor is. Digic DV6 processors may be optimized differently than the DV5, to maximize thermal performance when doing hardware encoding. That would make sense since the DV6 is the sibling of the Digic 8, and that presumably will need a thermally optimized encoder to enable 4K in consumer cameras so that Canon can compete in those markets.

The processing power of the DV6 outside of hardware encoding may be necessary to handle the compression of the RAW feed, and that could explain why the C200 uses DV6s instead of DV5s.

There is no reasonable logical reason for not including the sorts of codecs already present in the C300II and XC10/15 otherwise. It has to be a hardware compromise. And that compromise may be leaving the middle codecs out of the equation so that the processor can deliver the best of both ends in a variety of product models, not just the C200.

That's an interesting point, I've just noticed that the C700 uses Triple DV5s rather than the DV6. I wonder if Canon's intention was to position the C200 as primarily a RAW capturing camera, with a low end codec for fast turnaround work. From this perspective launching the DV6 with CRL in a new product line is smart since Canon already has existing cameras that can do what people already want, and it means they can get it to market first and add/improve features as time goes on. 

9 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

One day Canon's rep can explain to me why there is 300MBit 4:2:2 on the £1400 XC10 but just 100Mbit 4:2:0 on the £7500 C200

I'm kicking myself for not asking the same question!!
 

2 hours ago, tugela said:

That seems weird, unless the hardware is just not set up for that. If that is the case then no firmware can change it. It may be something to do with the new processor, with perhaps the hardware encoder optimized for the Digic 8 variant so they can enable 4K footage in consumer models of their products.

It has to be because of the different processors used and the hardware encoding options available in each.

The C200 ships with Dual Digic 6 processors which has got to be faster than the single Digic 5 in the XC10. There's no way the hardware couldn't support it. RAW output can't be the reason either because RAW is *less* processor intensive -- it just takes the sensor feed and writes it to a card, it doesn't have to debayer or add noise reduction or anything. 

Canon's own press release for XF-AVC lists the specs of the codec, and for 4K it can do either 8/10bit I-Frame 422 and for HD 8/10/12bit 420/422/444. Committing resources to creating an 8bit 420 for 4K just to protect the C300mkII would be *insane*, though I wouldn't put it past them. It might even explain why it doesn't ship with XF-AVC.

I walked into the demo planning the business case to finance the C200, and I walked out with an order for a C100 mkII. They're now selling the C100 mkII for $5000AUD and it comes with an Atomos Ninja Blade kit, vs the C200 with retails for $12499AUD. Easiest purchase decision I've ever made!

40 minutes ago, mercer said:

Sorry, I made a misspec... I meant XF-AVC... which will be released next year in a firmware update. 

I was at a C200 demo a few days ago and the Canon rep said he was absolutely sure that the XF-AVC upgrade was going to be 4:2:0 8bit writing to SD cards. I even pushed back asking if there was any chance of seeing a 4:2:2 8bit writing to the CFast card, and he said no. I have no idea how high up he is in the company, and how deep his connections are to the engineers working on the C200, so take it with a big pinch of salt. Considering the XC10 shoots 4K 4:2:2 8bit to CFast it's mindblowing that Canon wouldn't put that in the C200.

There was a lot of interest in the camera amongst the 12 or so of us in the room, and more than one person asked whether there would be a better codec coming in the future. I can't say for sure but I think if Canon had committed to even a future broadcast spec codec upgrade there might have been a couple of sales right there and then.

10 hours ago, yoclay said:

The whole premise of this article is that the price point of the cam is as an A-Cam is false.

The C200 is a B-Cam.

Not the other way around.

Despite the fact that the price point of the camera may be expensive for some people here does not make it an A-Cam.

Canon have a C300 and 700 series out there that shoot 4K.  The C100 does not. The C200 does for half the cost. That spells B-Cam.

Making the assumption that they should now come up with a B-Cam for their B-Cam strikes me as a bit silly.

According to newshooter.com:
"At a briefing last week Canon were adamant that it’s not a replacement for the C100 MkII, rather an upgrade path for C100 users who want more from their camera; and a potential B or C cam for C300 MkII and C700 users."

So it's a bit of both, which makes sense. It's certainly at the top of my list for an A Cam, and I can absolutely see C200s being used as B and C Cams for productions using the C700. Having DPAF would make it invaluable for any production using a gimbal, so I expect to see a ton of these around. I called a couple of places yesterday here in Sydney and they all said they've sold their allotments of C200s already.

8 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Your whole premise is based on a slice of the market that isn't representative.

Ask any of the distributors, retailers and rental shops and they will tell you that the majority are using the C200 as their main rig.

That RED, C700, F55, Alexa users will consider it a B-camera does not make it "Not an A-cam" in the eyes of the rest of the pro video market.

I know Cinema5D think $8000 is little money... all those ads are clearly paying well.

For the rest of us it's an A-camera.

But $8000 isn't that much money, considering how much you'd charge it out for on a job, amortised over 5 years. The C200 retails for $12000AUD, local rental houses still charge about $300/day for a C300 (mk1). So assuming I can charge the same for a C200, I'll have it paid off in 40 jobs. I'm mainly a photographer and even I can manage that. For a production house or a working pro that needs a camera like the C200 as a B Cam, that's cheap as.
 

The Tech Specs page for the Ursa Mini has storage rates listed for all the flavours of ProRes:
https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicursaminipro/techspecs#W-URSA-20

I shot a short doc on the Micro on ProRes LT and that graded just fine. 

I guess it depends on where you are and what people are shooting in your area, but here in Sydney lots of photographers and assistants shoot Canon, and Canon has an excellent professional support network in place, so it would be easy for me to beg/borrow/hire another C200 or any other Canon if I had a job that needed a B Cam. I'm pretty seriously considering a C200 (plus Canon finance has a 2% finance deal at the moment that's hard to beat) but how it might match with other cameras is a pretty big consideration.

That said, I almost never use a second camera. Maybe a GoPro, or a timelapse. I pretty much only shoot 1080p anyway, so a C100 would be perfectly acceptable for me to use as a B Cam for an interview. But I'm hearing clients talk about 4K, so I'll be pretty crazy to enter a 5 year finance agreement for a HD only camera now.

2 hours ago, AaronChicago said:

Yeah I"m pretty sure it's intentional crippling. The processor is plenty powerful enough. There's a CFast 2.0 slot as well.

Exactly. Kinda wish they'd gone with dual XQD slots with a single SD for proxies rather than a CFast slot. And I hope there will be a 10bit internal recording firmware update, even if it's a paid update.

3 hours ago, Eric Calabros said:

Because it needs more processing power. Raw is pure ~9 million data points. But a demosized image is 9 million x 3 data points plus gamma curve pluse color matrix plus white balance plus sharpening plus temporal noise reduction plus bit depth reduction plus color subsampling plus encoding. 

I don't think it's processing power -- the C300 Mk2 has Dual DIGIC 5s and can do 12bit internal recording, the C200 will have Dual DIGIC 6s (which I assume will be more powerful). It might be because there'd be no reason to by a C300, it might be because they're not 100% sure SD cards can't handle it (dunno why they wouldn't put in a UHS-II card slot in there), or maybe they'll release a firmware upgrade that allows for 10bit internal recording after they release the C300 Mk3 with RAW.

It currently supports 10bit 422 1080p through SDI, so I suspect we're going to see a lot of Ninja Stars appearing on production rigs. 

On 29/05/2017 at 1:38 AM, mercer said:

Okay John, one last question about the 1080p... did you use Digital IS in this video along with the Sigma's OIS? If so, is there any crop?

Haha, no worries, I didn't use the Electronic VR, I just used the OIS on the lens. I've not tried it both on, but as far as I know they don't talk to each other so I suspect there are occasions where each system will work against each other. Neither the Electronic VR or the OIS on that lens is that great anyway, it'll help you handhold a tripod shot but it won't give you smooth motion.

On 29/05/2017 at 1:50 AM, mercer said:

Nice work, John... I loved the second to last shot. I really enjoy the intimate stories you portray in your films. If not for you, I would never know of this couple in Hiroshima or the Harley subculture of Japan. 

Thanks man, I'm glad you appreciate it! I love the little stories that are interesting but gets overlooked. I think I might have been a segment producer on some local current affairs show in a past life

While I agree with everyone here regarding not needing RAW and Panasonic not putting RAW output on a $6500 camera, I'm a one man band and I've been shooting 3:1 Compressed RAW on my BMMCC exclusively for my last few projects, and it ROCKS. 1080p RAW is great for run and gun, you get to adjust white balance after the fact, highlights look nicer, it's a little bit more forgiving if you don't nail your exposure. Data rates are manageable (I get 70min per 128gb SD card) and SD media is cheap. Resolve 14 handles BMMCC Compressed RAW like a champ, and now that I can edit, grade, and mix audio in the same program I don't even need proxies. 

4K RAW though... I don't think I'd want to wrestle that monster. Wrangling 4k prores from the GH4 was enough to send me back to 1080p. I don't know if it would be possible but it'd be great if Atomos could introduce compressed CDNG recording at different ratios, like REDCODE, for cameras that output RAW over SDI, and I'd certainly like to see Panasonic offer the option of a paid RAW output upgrade even if they charge through the nose for it.

I should mention that I still use my 3 Lexar cards, but only for stills and I always shoot dual card backup -- which is why I have so many cards in regular rotation! Those three Lexar cards are still going strong, no issues at all, but I feel like Lexar has more sample variation than Sandisk. Again, it is anecdotal, YMMV etc etc

(Also, I always, always, always buy media at reputable local retail stores, or I get them from B&H. Some things are worth paying for!)

I have 3 Lexar CF cards and 15 Sandisk SD and CF cards, and two of those Lexar cards have been replaced under warranty while I've not had a single issue with any of my Sandisk cards. It's circumstantial evidence at best, but I only buy Sandisk cards.

This was shot in Hiroshima over a couple of days in 2016. I'd just gotten the BM Micro Cinema Camera and I wanted to give the camera a good shakedown, and I thought a personal project was a nice way to do that. I shot a lot on the Tokina 11-16 with the BMPCC speedbooster, and various Nikon primes. I tried to lock in down in sticks where I could, since I hadn't really worked out how to rig it for handheld at the time, and since I was travelling I didn't have all my parts with me to franken rig it as I was shooting, so the hand held stuff (particularly in the car) is pretty messy.

I struggled with moire like crazy, I only had a Tiffen IRND with me and it wasn't always enough ND so I was stopping down for some of those outdoor shots, which really amped up the moire. I managed to tone down the worse of it, but an AA filter is a must with this camera if you intend to take it outside. I shot it in Prores LT, edited in Premiere Pro and graded in Resolve. Some of the night shots needed noise reduction, but mostly to remove the colour noise -- I actually like the structure of the noise, just not that keen on red and blue ants crawling all over the screen. Neat Video does a good job of removing chrominance noise while leaving the luminance noise, and it blends nicely with a little bit of grain using Filmconvert.

Hope you enjoy the film, love to hear what you think!

--

Daisaku & Takae have run their local grocery store in the hills of Hiroshima together for the last 53 years. In that time they have seen huge changes in their neighbourhood, and profound changes in the way local people shop for essentials. From humble beginnings selling cigarettes from a window in their family home to a bustling grocery store that served their community, they have seen and felt the rise of supermarkets and convenience stores and the impact that has had on their livelihood. 

Here they tell their story of how it started, what keeps them working, and what they will do when they finally retire.

CREDITS
Direction/DOP/Sound/Edit/Grade by John Kung
Translation and Interview by Iku Motonaga
Very special thanks to Daisaku and Takae for their generous telling of their story.