ScreensPro

Once again that video for anyone lost on the creative uses of this feature...

There is a bit of difference between doing a fast edit of longer footage and capturing the right moment with 30 frames.

This mode has it's uses.... But that video is not the best example.

Bruno.... 100% right.

We have already been told that it can take up to 1 minute to offload 30 frames from the buffer to the card. 1 minute per second!

It's a nice little tool, with a few cool, but minimal uses.... Enjoy it....

But let's put the tin hats away.... This isn't PROOF of some big conspiracy to stop you making your film in 4K raw.

Adding a bigger buffer is not gonna turn this into a cinema camera. Just keep your fingers crossed that Nikon might put this functionality into a camera with the CPU, cooling, buffer etc to actual sustain the output.

I've been using this technique since the Casio EX-F1 bought 3K/60p (2 seconds on this baby!) but it would be nice to have raw and interchangable lenses.

I've used it to make stock footage of things like locked off waterfalls and slow moving rivers. You can almost always get good results with time stretching and make a nice, usable 5-8 second clip

Nikon always limit their frame bursting to 1 second though, on these consumer cams... 4 seconds and this would become a much more legitimate tool. Hopefully Casio will get back into the game, they tend to give away plenty of tech

This year, Oscars host said he hoped Joaquin was 'on his meds'. Very sensitive considering his brother River Phoenix died from a drug overdose.

If you are that easily offended, don't watch something hosted by Seth MacFarlane. That much is very, very simple. I didn't see it all, but he seemed pretty tame and generally came across as a likeable guy.

Joaquin's brother died from taking heroin and cocaine..... Hardly a "med" and hardly related to a very mild gag about Joaquin saying some strange stuff.

For all we know, Seth and Joaquin are good friends.

Quite a bit of detail in those shadows.... Nice work Rich

Is it really necessary? 

In this day and age.... If you think solely through the mind of a film maker, you might be in for a rough ride. Who knows why they purchased/rented a C500 and used "weird" shutter speeds?.... I'm sure there was a good reason

We are now in a world where video, film making and stills are merging and the way people capture one or the other may be seen as non traditional (for now) but can be completely relevant to that person's need.

They might have the following needs.... They mainly want stills and need higher than the 12fps of the 1-DX, they love the Canon look, the client wants video too, but doesn't really care about the 1/48th "film look", they need a small camera with a long battery life. If the client is happy to pay the rental.... Then what better camera?

Times are changing.

The most amazing thing is the you CAN shoot these crazy shutter speeds now, because the ISO goes so high and is so clean.

Shooting at 1/2000 requires a hell of alot of light (or gain)

Hi is likely testing the ability to pull stills off the video........ You can pause that video at most parts and you see a beautiful still image. 1/48th would be covered in motion blur.

What is the favoured workflow for C500 4K/raw? Out the back to a Gemini?

If it could have been 4K raw in camera.... I think they'd hit a home run, the form fact is great imho

Above all else... I think Shane just loves Canon's colour.

The 2.7K mode is no better than GH2 1080p, in fact, far worse (to my eyes at least)... How small do you need a camera?

I applaud them for trying though, and it may be great if GoPro 4 goes proper 4K with cineform raw.

I thought this was to sit between the C100 and the C300, eg, the $10k bracket?

Maybe CR have changed their post?

If they could house the 1D-C sensor and throughput into a C100 body, i'd be sold. Scrap the stills features.

I see one of Bloom's minions is here. Sorry to shatter your illusion but I'm afraid your hero worship made you blind.

1DC is 8bit 422. It is not quite a rosey as your hero paint it to be. He said it has more detail than BMCC but all I see is plastic looking footage, as for banding it is there and he admit it but still don't want others critical of the same thing he freely admit.

in your hero's view only he, Philip Bloom can comment and be critical about his own stuff which is above criticism for anyone else. You seem to buy into his mindset.

Ah... not quite the answer i was looking for with the question I posed..... Was it that you have zero comeback and had to revert to the... "oh, you're just a fanboy".... Show me any quote where bloom compares 8bit to 12 bit raw? It was a ridiculous thing to say, and you know it.

PB didn't paint the 1-DC in the greatest of light, in terms of image quality. Plus points and bad points.... Just like every other review i've seen about this camera. I'm pretty sure he wont be buying one any time soon, that is the impression he left on his blog.

I don't buy into anyone's mindset other than my own.... I deal in facts, i deal in clients, i deal in experience, i work very hard and make a healthy living using digital cameras.... I don't give a shit about so called celebrities (such a laughable term for, essentially, a blogger). All i care about is info, as i don't have time to search the web for every bit of industry news.

So funny how people are so quick to label someone a fanboy/minion just because they agree with ONE of the points raised by that person. Bloom was in the right about not judging the camera's weaknesses based on a jpg of an already compressed, graded video (in 1080p, i might add). That is the ONLY point i have defended.... I couldn't care less about the mudslinging afterwards.

An 8 bit 422 even if uncompressed cannot match 12 bit RAW let alone 13 stops of DR, not ever. Anyone who think otherwise is mental and Bloom is trying to change that view simply because of what?

When exactly did Bloom say that 8 bit 4:2:2 would, in anyway, compete with 12 bit raw? How is he trying to change that view?

I like this site for some things, i like PB's site for some things..... I couldn't give 2 shits about the bickering and egos behind the info. But spreading FUD is no help to anyone.

I can't see this getting much further than the lab, unfortunately.

Complex vector animations are ridiculously CPU intensive, and this must be very, very, very complex.

In some cases, it is true.... but not others.

I still use a Yahama electronic piano from the 90s because the technology hasn't really improved much more from then. If i were a professional musician, i might say otherwise.... but for my needs, it is more than good enough.

That will happen with imagery too.... Unless you absolutely have to have the newest and best to survive in the professional environment and get that, say, 5% better end product... You will be just fine with that 2nd hand Sony F55 or Alexa.

We are reaching a point of diminishing returns

I'm not sure about magic bullet..... but in after effects, you could duplicate the clip, reverse it, then mask the duplicate to only show the water. As your shot is moving... you would need to track the motion and apply it to the mask (or you could rotoscope, frame by frame).

Is it essential that the footage moves the same as you originally shot it though? (camera tilt down).... If not, you can just reverse the whole clip so it is in reverse and tilts up?

 the occasional live concert.

That makes the choice easy... F3. By far the best low light camera of the three.

With S-Log installed, it has great DR and really editable files.

what do you think?

I think you just described the Sony F55 ;)

it does seem a stupid, small omission.

But i guess they just think that anyone using this cam will have a focus puller or it will be in a fixed position with a fixed focus.

Not sure it has 14 stops either.... Seem to remember reading more like 12 stops... but alot of misinformation out there.

Certainly has a great image though.

This is where I tip my hat to Jim Jannard......

Love or hate RED (i'm somewhere in between).... You just know that Jim Jannard wants to produce the pinnacle of digital cameras as soon as possible, without too much concern about making a huge profit or holding back tech for the next release..... He's building his dream camera. The dragon may well be the pinnacle, especially if it is CCD or global shutter. Nowhere left to go other than ergonomics, NDs, battery time etc (non image aspects of the camera).

Once we hit that, and we might be just a few months away.... Then it is gonna be good times all round.

Yea, hard to tell what he meant.

All the 4K video and still samples look great though. Clearly far superior to even the best 1080p

How about peaking for a start?

How did guys shooting film ever cope? ;-)

Hell, even sound is a perk compared to film cameras.

Which image?.... or are you comparing 4K downscaled to 1080p, then zoomed in 2X, like it shows on the video?

Of course, downscaling 4K to 1080p will only look a little better than really good 1080p.