lafilm

Sadly I don't think you'll be happy doing that vs the 1DC. I don't really care for specs, if the A7sII has the same image as the a7s with external recorder 4k (which it will most likely be worse as the external is 4:2:2 350mb0s ProRes HQ vs 100mbs 4:2:0 XAVC-L) or a7rII (heat issues, aliasing, blue channel clipping, horrid colour science of S-LOG2, then it's not a substitute for the 1DC, full stop.

The image is simply miles apart. Strange how the image is not the no.1 factor nowadays.

(I'd really rather give up peaking/zebras vs image quality, any day. The Canon 1DC even has enormously better stabilization system vs the terrible a7ii/a7rii one, something many seem to overlook just because the a7s one is spec-impressive, the 550D with a 150$ 18-55mm STM IS has enormously better IS vs everything I've seen from the A7 IBIS,, maybe a7sii is tweaked)

Well unfortunately doc.is my official title, and I specifically seem to hate it for some reason, Dr. or plain name is much better (plain name being best), and also specifically despise ''dude'' for another unknown reason, but not pal, fella, man, bro, etc. Well that's another subject on semantics/semasiology, so going back to Canonology:

It's a couple of reasons @lafilm 

-Size and weight:

I own a Canon 1Ds stills, the 1DC is already on the verge of the maximum bare-bones shootable size for me to use as an all-purpose production camera, so having that AND a shogun/501 takes it over the edge.

-Ergonomics

A 1DC is a tall thin camera, very tall, and adding a 5''/7'' monitor on the hot shoe, it's a ridiculous unbalanced tower to shoot normally with. I frequently do it with a 5'' monitor on a 60D/5D and already very ergonomically annoying, I have the BM Video-Assist on pre-order (for a couple of years now). And if I want it somewhere else other than the hotshoe, rigging is now a whole new issue. Doesn't help that I don't like using them att exceptt for absolute necessity, and doesn't help that all the rigs and cages I own are 5D optimized (and every other camera, just not the tall 1D).

-HDMI Cable 

Relying on it, in terms of robustness and even if not, it's an extra cable to annoy me.

-Power

It's another hungry device that has a different battery type and battery life from the kit.

-Cost

It's just not psychologically acceptable for me to invest in it, settle for all the previous, and pay a 1000-1500$ premium just to get focus and exposure assist. 

The issue is that these screens are capable of it (with ML), very very clear for focusing and framing just with a few enhancement firmware tools (Digic Peaking + Waveform (small). I mean come on Canon. We're not asking for it on a 5D, or even a 1D (which we should do), but on a C-Line camera.

K.I.S.S. A  barebones1D + Canon 35mm IS prime + card is something to love shooting with, simple, effective and alexa/c500/red-grade results.

 

*Are we sure people or at least owners of the 1Dc do send/contact Canon asking for this feature or just state it to themselves and on forums? (Canon doesn't read forums unfortunately unlike panasonic, sony and samsung)

JPEGs from the 5D are not 7 stops, they're 10-11 if picture style contrast slider is -4 and about 7-8 stops if it's +7 maxed out. 

 

I've studied Canon DSLRs to the point of being ready to get a PhD in Canonology. I've done more scientific testing to these cameras than anyone could ever be patient to do but for some reason I was enjoying testing even more than paid work using them. I was absolutely fascinated by the cinema images that came out of them therefore starting testing, and testing, and testing, non-endlessly. 

I've comprehensively tested 71 picture styles on 3-4 DSLR models, accurate testing for DR, colour science, noise, compression changes, gradeability, (that's 2-4 month worth of work), then after that started comprehensively studying and testing the creation of picture styles to change image quality. A boring 1-month work. 

I've come to these 100% correct facts,

-Using a 16 stops DR chart, All Canon DSLRs have the EXACT amount of dynamic range in video mode, from the 1100D to 5D MKIII. Meaning they clip the highlights and clip the shadows at the exact same point. 

The only way you can adjust that DR is using the contrast slider in-camera, the reduction from zero to -4 is exactly one stop in the highlights and one stop in the shadows. 

After in-camera -4 contrast (using any PS), there's absolutely zero ability to increase DR beyond that. It cannot be done, not by applying a LOG curve before compression, not by anything, the is LOCKED by the downscale and codec. Adding LOG to Canon SLRs codecs (either Cinestyle or your own accurate LOG curve) does not change clipping points at both end, not even by 1%. All it does, is lower the highlights and raise the shadows within the same DR container, affecting mid-tone distribution. So the benefit of these on a Canon DSLR is only limited to inter-cutting with flat-Log material so they'd be graded using the same De-Log workflow and colour grade. 

The only element PS changes radically is colour science, in Canon DSLRs you can create any colour science look and make changes to each individual colour therefore it's useful if you want to tweak a certain colour you don't like, it gives enormous control over that, that's why PS for sale all alter the Canon Colour science to different degrees. 

I am getting off trail. 

Dynamic range, from the brightest clipping point to the darkest absolute black clipping point, they all have 11 stops of light. Exactly. Tested and tested and tested and tested. 

This is the numerical DR, but in real life, once the image gets darker in the shadows, noise is increased and codec artefacts, therefore the effective actual DR of Canon DSLRs will solely depend on YOUR judgment of what level of shadow noise is acceptable. For, my Canons have 10 stops if I clean up shadows a bit and 9 in I want clean shadows. Depends truly on your judgement. That's why DR is not a hard number to measure unfortunately. For example a camera can have 11 stops of DR which all of them are gorgeous and minimal shadow noise (this is Canon DSLRs shooting raw and removing the awesome fine grain), while another camera can have 14 stops of DR but the last 4 stops are simply unusable due to codec artefacts and noise. So, Canon DSLRs have 11 absolute stops but the h.264 codec artefacts in the shadows render a part of it un-usable, vs ML RAW which although have the same DR, the codec and noise make you effectively able to use it all in the final image due to the clean noise shadows to be easily cleaned up. 

*These were all my DR/PS knowledge I gathered through the years for anyone interested.

The D810: Also exactly 11 stops of absolute DR which I find strange how both companies are sharing the EAXCT same clipping points in video mode regardless of the raw stlls DR, almost seems on-purpose to limit it to 11 in 8bit h.264. BUT, the shadows are so clean and the codec is so lovely that on the D810 ALL of it is usable, making it very, very similar DR window to 5D RAW (but the 5d raw contains SO much more information INSIDE that window, being 14bit vs 8bit, mid-tones/skin is obviously enormously attached to that, but now we're entering a different subject from DR).

 

A piece of trivia: the A7s in SLOG2 is the first, absolute first camera to change that DR window taking it to about 12.5 stops fully usable shooting S-LOG2, the clipping window is truly expanded, a first for me to see, so DR lovers should really shoot a7s Slog2, the highest DR on this price bracket,

I hated the colours and all the ergonomics of it (size, batteries, LCD, menus, navigation, mount) and preferred having the D810 11 stops with Nikon rich gamut (just overall better image) and better ergonomics (though giving up the awesome EVF and peaking). 

The only camera I used that has the 5D/D810 rich colours AND ergonomics AND a7s DR AND a7s lowlight, is the 1DC. And that's why we fell in love. The only thing it lacks from being the mythical perfect camera for almost 90% of videographic/cinema applications, is EVF and peaking and NNDs. I'd buy an upgraded version with these three features inside the body/firmware and never look for another camera until 8K is adopted and I am forced to shoot it, as it's a perfect 4K image that holds through the entire era up to F55/Red 4K, I'll never want more. I'd buy it even at the old price and stop camera buying for 5-8 years. If only the arrogant Canon give it two ML features. 

 

 

 

By the time the supposed 4K 5D Mk IV comes out you can probably get a superior 1D C on eBay for $3k anyway. Likely $500 cheaper than the 5D Mk IV will be.

But due to the A7R II I will no longer be shooting with either of them!

I saw ​the original Alien 1979 when it came to the cinemas and to this day (I've seen a couple of time after that) I find this one of the most boring sci-fi movies. Only surpassed by 2001 as the most boring sci-fi ever. Camerons 1986 Aliens totally destroys it in every way. I'll admit though that it's two different type horror sci-fi movies. As for the 4K vs 1080 I stand by what I said. Have a nice day. :-)

So here's what I don't get about this discussion -- and please, somebody explain to me if I'm missing something!

It would be one thing to think of this as some sort of (strict) 'requirement' if 4k was a significant imposition. As far as I can tell, it's not. You can go right now and buy, let alone rent, a 4k camera for $1,300 at B&H or wherever [NX1]. (Sort of an aside, but it's on top of that more like a 6k sensor.) After that you've got tons of options; the obvious dslrs, Black Magic, you can get a RedOne on ebay for $6,000, etc. -- all in the few-thousand dollar range. What's really most important is what Ed David is driving home: how's your camera system compressing footage, and so forth. I find this really funny with the GH4/A7s debate, for instance. Sure, GH4 has internal 4K, but if you're downresing it to 1080p in editing, it's no different than the A7s which gives you straight-1080p based off of a full sensor readout. If you're going for cinema quality (4:2:2) then you'll need an Atmos Shogun in either case; so why all this talk about GH4 having 4k being any sort of advantage? Whatever, I digress.

I assume you're posting this topic because you want to make a film, or have one already made you want to distribute. If you already have made something, then I think, since Zak Forsman has generously taken the time to share his experiences, it's not a big deal. If you haven't shot anything yet, then I'd say get a 4k camera. Your time on a film is so much better spent thinking about story, character, etc., than what seems to me a pretty solvable problem. If you have a specific non-4k camera you want to use for some very specific story/mood-driven reason (like Bolex monochrome or something) then I say your filmmaker's instinct should be: damn the consequences I want to make the best movie possible and this is my camera. In which case, again, it's a non-issue. Damn the consequences.

​The key selling point of OTUS is that it provides the closest replication of medium format.  A 55mm f1.4 which is sharp and clean wide open on full frame looks very similar to a 80mm f2.8 on medium format.  I'd say a hacked 5dmk3 shooting raw, with the 55mm/1.4 would probably be the easiest way to get the look of the alexa65 with an 80mm lens.

I'd take an Otus over a Rehoused Canon 50mm 1.2 anyday (it's a LOVELY lens but not for 4000$), unless I REALLY need that cinema housing/gears/size. Just miles better optics and much better value even for re-sale, Otus is a legend and always will be = high resale value.

If you need a Cine Prime lens with gears I'd get a Sigma 50mm ART and rehouse, or if budget allows a 55mm Otus (it's miles ahead of the Canon 50mm optics and miles ahead of Sigma's ART optics even if many try to indicate the sigma matches it for some reason, it doesn't, it's the sharpest 50 behind the otus in all optical qualities, inc. sharpness)

Get an Otus...

That's a winning combo right there. I will say that a few of those shots look artificially sharpened (the rocks in particular). 

​This has to be the biggest bullshit so far this year,,,  No-one will want to view material in 1080. Come on!

As for Blu-Ray 4K...... I've bought Aliens on VHS, Laserdisc, DVD and Blu-Ray. I'll be damned if I'll let the greedy bastards trick me into buying it one more time.

4k BD will be a still birth. The VoD libraries are growing any minute, I monitor a tendency away from discs that only gather dust. You don't?

never in a million years will a distributor let something like "it's not 4K" stop them from distributing a movie they think they can make money on. 

Okay, whatever you say. I'm not arguing distributors don't want 4K content. I'm saying that globally, even 1080p is overkill in many of the 130+ territories a movie will be sub-licensed to by your distributor. Profit motive will always come first for them. Also, when it comes to physical media, in my experience it's very easy to get a DVD deal. You'd have to have made a real dog of a movie not to get one. But it's much, much more difficult to get a distributor to commit to a Blu-ray release. 

I just renewed VOD and DVD rights in the US and Canada for my first movie. It was made in 2007 and shot on a Panasonic HVX200. The master we delivered is in Glorious 720p!!!

never in a million years will a distributor let something like "it's not 4K" stop them from distributing a movie they think they can make money on. 

I tend to agree with your theory. My plan was to shoot in 4K and then downres to 1080p for the edit.  I know there is an ongoing debate that you gain nothing by doing that but I think the footage looks weightier, more cinematic ... To my eye anyway.

Would it be smarter to edit in 4K prores and then downres, so I have a master in 4K and then do my grading on the 1080p? Or do the whole process in 4K before I downres?

I think it's a foregone conclusion they're optically superior to the cp2s and cn-es. You always pay a premium for cine lenses. 

​I'm guessing because what you shoot today might only be used a few years from now, and the expectations will be for the standards then, not the standards now.

This is what I have been thinking about lately. Sure 1080p is fine now, but if I start a project today, and it's good enough to go to market, you're still looking at a couple to a few years before release. I wonder if distributors will want 4K in 2 or 3 years. 

The film industry is constantly changing – we all know that.  But the thing that doesn’t change – the PA life – and it mostly stinks. Underpaid, overworked, abused mentally and physically.  Almost as timeless as filmmaking itself.

Production Assistants.  They are the low people on the totem pole – the entry job into filmmaking.  You don’t need a resume.  Just get recommended by a friend and have a smile and please be on time.

PAs do many things.  Some are assistants to the director or producer, or the production manager, or the first assistant director.  They can do equipment runs, drive a van on nonunion shoots, do coffee runs, cable wraps, assist departments, do crowd control, lock down streets, get releases, just about everything.

They aren’t protected by any union and at the end of the day, they usually make minimum wage, which is sad to me because they do this on shoots where everyone else is usually paid well.

In New York they make about $100 to $200 a day on a commercial shoot.  Sometimes up to $300 a day.  But they work on average 14 hours a shoot day.  They get there 1hr to 1.5 hours before “call time” and stay till the end – including wrapping out, and many times driving home the crew.

So that’s around $7.14 a day which is lower than minimum wage in NYC which is $8.75 an hour in 2015.

I was a PA on set for about six months and in post production for about two years.  I did a bunch of stuff.  Drove a van. Picked up gear.  Picked up coffee.  Got yelled at about getting a bad walkie talkie – and by a DP who called me “Ed Wood and a pain in the ass” and gaffers and grips (never wrap cable unless you ask them first) – but overall I had it pretty easy. Being a post production PA is a lot easier – it’s a controlled environment.  Not as potentially chaotic as being on set.

I’ve heard a lot of horror stories.  The worse happened this year – I heard of a PA who died driving – don’t know if it was after a long shoot day or after the job wrapped.  I have heard stories of a PA delivering the stools of a producer to fed ex – his feces, packing them up and mailing them off. And just the usual stuff – getting berated by assistant directors, directors, and producers.  Not getting paid after the job.  And of course just working very long hours and no overtime.

There are a lot of stories if you ask around – but the thing is for me, I wish someone would look out for them.  Take Mad Max – Fury Road – $145 million dollar Hollywood production – and the PAs made $60 a day.  Link here.  

Why is this?  Why do people think PAs deserve to work long hours and get paid below minimum wage?  I think it’s because “that’s the way it is” – they just go with the flow.  Also most PAs are starting out – they aren’t going to complain and organize because they don’t want to be seen as being a “bad sport” – they want to start their career in film.  But the thing is, someone then has to say something about this.  And many people have.  And now, why not, I’ll go for it.

Here’s things I think could improve the production assistant’s way of life.

1.  Make sure PAs are paid for overtime work.  There is no reason they aren’t.  They aren’t the “producer” – and even producers should get paid overtime.  Why shouldn’t everyone get paid for the hours they put in?  If you don’t want to charge for overtime, fine, but if you do charge for overtime, you should be paid.  I know the justification is that the pick up and drop off days are usually half days at full pay – but still, why not just do overtime and negotiate a rate for the pick up and post day that’s the same.  Legally all people need to be paid for overtime in the USA – so why can the film industry get away with this?

2.  Make a group or website that sets a standard for PA rates.  This could be any website – or blog.  I say, and why not, the PA day rate on a commercial should be $200-300 a day for a 10 hour day.  Overtime at 10-12 at time and a half.  After 12 double time.  Turnaround time 12 hours or minimum.  Just like the standard is for everyone union member unless you want to do on a 12 hour day then double time after that.  Why not?  Why not give PAs a living wage as they “climb the ladder” – what is really the harm in that?  If they have more money, they can give back more to the economy and other things. Pay their rent.  Not have to live three hours away or move away.

3.  Put PAs into departments – like camera PA, lighting PA, production PA, etc etc.  Have it more specialized – makes them more productive and know what to do.  I think a lot of time on set, PAs can receive no marching orders.  And I’ve worked with PAs who work so much better when they are under the command of a smaller department.

4.  Today’s PA is tomorrow’s Boss.  So why not treat them well.  They may soon be hiring you for the next gig.

The film industry sets a high standard of decency and fairness.  We DPs are part of a community of sharing information and helping others – we are storytellers – we help get people’s messages across to so many. We are a very nice profession – full of really amazing, caring, lovely people.  I love my co-workers so much.  So many of them make me laugh.

So why not look back at the ones starting out try to help them?

I love when people are happy and positive on my sets – when people want to learn and don’t feel like they are being taken advantage of.  The energy of every crew member really helps.

At the same time, a bad apple hurts the collective energy. So let you help me.

There is nothing better on any set, than at the end of the day, when you feel like you and your co-workers help create something beautiful or meaningful, and all did it together – where everything comes together. I want everyone to feel that pride – everyone – the craft service person, the security guard, the medic, the PA.

​Goes to you too! Show us some C-log ungraded 4K eye candy when you can. Almost none out there.

​this is an example of some mostly handheld stuff shot and edited on one day in 4k: