photographer-at-large

Zoom, and Letus Helix, please.

Has anyone else here had experience with Flolight's Bladelight? I have spent some time with it during a couple shoots now and been quite impressed. Color rendering is good and form factor is pretty unique. The flat panels have their place I suppose, but, after purchasing several a few years ago, have rarely actually used them. They seem like the type of thing I most often see used atop a camera hotshoe from the guys who bring their cameras to document NAB
I wrote up a fairly long review of sorts here if you're interested in the Bladelight.
A field-power option would be nice, but, at least the one I have, is only AC power.
 

Hey guys,
I'm not sure anyone cares, considering that these are two quite different creatures, but while I have both the SmallHD 501 and PIX-E5 still here I made a rough comparison between the two.
Quick upfront comment: the SmallHD 501 is a pure field monitor while the VideoDevices PIX-E5 can record in ProRes to a Speed Drive (a mSata SSD in a proprietary USB3 case). I have only tested the monitor functions and not the recording. If you're looking for an alternative to a Shogun or Odyssey you will want the PIX-E.
The SmallHD 501 allows to attach the sidefinder attachment, turning it into a not perfect but good EVF.

As most know, both of them are field monitors with 5 inch 1920x1080 pixel IPS screens. Both of them run on dual batteries so you can hot swap during use, the SmallHd using the ubiquitous Canon LP-E6 while the PIX-E5 takes the just as common Sony L batteries. Both monitors have a lot of exposure, focus and framing helps and can load LUTs from a SD card, a great feature to separate them from the cheaper low budget offering when shooting LOG profiles. So far with the similarities, I'll go a bit deeper on the specific stuff and differencies.

Models and operation:
The Small HD 501 is the cheaper 500series model, lacking the SDI in- & outputs that the more expensive SmallHD 502 brings, otherwise boasting exactly the same features. There's also more expensive 7 inch models. The SmallHD operates completely over the joystick plus back button, you'll won't have smudges on the screen like with a touch screen.
The VideoDevices PIX-E5 is the more expensive 5 inch PIX-E due to the SDI in- & outs, there's also a cheaper PIX-E5H that only has HDMI . Just like with SmallHD, VideoDevices also makes a 7 inch model. While the SmallHD has a very minimalist operating approach, the PIX-E5 on the other hand features a twist & push know on one side, 13 buttons on the front and touch screen in addition.

I'd give the point here to the PIX-E, it's just more pleasant to set up and toggle the functions.
Operating system logic:
The 501 offers a page logic. You can create multiple pages that you set up with the tools of your choice (in whatever combination you need) and then just left-right jump with the joystick between the pages. So you might have one page with all your tools to set the right exposure and then the next page with your framing guides and focus helps. Nifty.
On the PIX-E5 you can activate and deactivate the different tools with the buttons on the bottom of the screen, configure them by holding the button. Works easy and quick, especially on combination with the touch screen.
I'll give this point to the SmallHD. While I think setting up the tools is quicker on the PIX-E, you only set them up once and then toggle between pages on the 501 while you would always turn tools on and off on the PIX-E. But this is by a hair, I think both is perfectly fine, might be a draw for others.
Exposure tools:
Both have configurable zebras, false colour, histogram, waveform and vectorscope. They feel slightly laggy and pixelated on the PIX-E but that's nit picking. A clear draw.
Focus tools:
They both have colored edge peaking in configurable strength and color.
The 501 features additional edge sharpening that emphasizes in focus edges so it's really easier to pull focus directly from the full screen video without the distracting peaking colors. It works quite well in my opinion and is better than colored edge peaking when using a nice big 5 or 7 inch monitor.
The PIX-E5 features a cool zoom function to punch in on the picture via touch screen, you can even move the zoomed frame area. 
Which is better? It depends. For me I'd say the full screen edge sharpening is better for run & gun where you want to keep an eye on the whole frame while the great punch in is good when shooting from sticks or in a more narrative setting.
Inputs & Outputs:
Both feature HDMI and SDI depending on the model as well as doing loop through. The point goes clearly to the PIX-E5 though as it has 4k via 6G SDI and HDMI while the Small HD only does FullHD. In addition the PIX-E5 can do FullHD up to 120fps (not that most consumer/prosumer cameras would even give that out, they only do it internally).
Image lag:
I've tested this point because a lot of people complained about the image lag of the PIX-E5 with roughly 5 frames of delay. VideoDevices really improved this a lot with the last firmware updates. Both monitors show a comparable amount of delay connected via HDMI to a Samsung NX1 or Nikon D750. If shot the camera screens and monitors with the iPhone in 240fps and both monitors lagged roughly the same behind the camera screens and reality.
Keep in mind that if you do loop through, there will be additional delay. The SmallHD won't work on the NX1 but it works when looping through the PIX-E5 (makes you wonder how SmallHD is incapable to fix this if even that is enough?) but obviously it will lag even more then. This is probably only relevant for the people who want to run multiple monitors/recorders on one camera to have separate view for operator and focus puller (and director).
Recording:
DUH! PIX-E5 because the SmallHD 501 is no recorder. In addition the PIX-E5 comes with the PIX-LR module to high quality audio features such as phantom powered XLR inputs.
Weight and size:
The SmallHD 501 is smaller by quite a margin, I didn't measure them but you can see it on the picture or look it up in the tech specs. 
The SmallHD 501 weighs 205g without batteries and 365g with my two aftermarket LP-E6. These bring 2000 mAh each.
The VideoDevices PIX-E5 is 450g without batteries and reachs 635g with two aftermarket NP-F550 (2900 mAh each) or, if you need a lot of juice, 1050g with two NP-F970 (7800 mAh each).
We don't have to discuss this, it's clearly in favor of the SmallHD 501. This was when using them as pure monitors, if you add the Speed Drive to record to the PIX-E5 will get even heavier. So when shooting with a A7s with a vintage lens, the PIX-E5 with batteries and media is as heavy as the camera. This is actually on the level of the bigger Shogun. One reason clearly is the superior build quality. While the SmallHD 501 is in no way flimsy, the PIX-E5 has a massive metal housing used for robustness and to dissipate heat (it also has an active cooling fan but the volume is perfectly fine).
Start up time:
Here comes the last point in my list and the absolute deal breaker for me. Everything above would be perfectly fine with both monitors and I think both are great choices but depending on how you want to shoot, the start up time of the PIX-E5 will be unacceptable. 
I've stopped the time between pushing the button / shoving the slider and the image appearing on screen for both monitors multiple times.
SmallHD 501: 3 seconds
PIX-E5: 32 seconds
For me that was just not workable as I like to pull the camera out of the bag, flip it on and shoot. I often won't want to stand around 30 seconds and wait for the monitor to power on. If you're shooting a music video or a narrative that might be fine though, it's more some documentary & travel style situations where I see this as a problem.
 
So this is my rough and brief impression of the two monitors (slash recorder). To be honest I think the VideoDevices PIX-E5 is the more extensive product, especially with the recording function, but due to the difference in weight and start up time I see the SmallHD 501 as more usable in my personal opinion and goals.
 
I'm sure I forgot something and will then add that later. If you have any questions, just ask.
[edit] There is further information about the startup time of the PIX-E5 further down in this thread.

Canon's 40mm 2.8 and 50mm 1.8 cover full-frame, and are STM lenses.

I got this info from a guy who just tested the 4K video capabilities of the camera:
"It records all formats to CF card also. I tested it today.
The 60fps @ 4K would bog down my card after about 10 seconds. But I think if my CF was just a little bit faster is would be able to hang. the 24fps and 30fps @ 4k will shoot forever. It’s awesome."
So the expensive Cfast cards are only needed for 4K 60p.

Crop factor is computed from the diagonal length, as opposed to the width or height. You can think of the diagonal as the diameter of the image circle. When comparing full frame 1080p compared to 4K crop (as with the 1DX II), we must use the diagonals of the imaging areas as opposed to the full sensor (since HD is 16:9 and the sensor is 3:2).
Since we know the full sensor/pixel size is 5472 x 3648, we can compute the following:
Full frame HD mode uses the full sensor width, so we need to compute the 16:9-based height from the width:
5472*9/16 = 3078 height. 5472/3078 = 1.78 = 16/9. The full frame diagonal is then:
sqrt(5472^2 + 3078^2) = 6278.29
DCI 4K cropped is:
sqrt(4096^2 + 2160^2) = 4630.64
Which makes the exact crop factor:
6278.29/4630.64 =1.3558
 

http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-eos-1d-x-mark-ii-video-frame-rate-options/

A very simple and quick test. Details in the YouTube description.

$3180 for all that FS700R kit... and I thought the consumer stuff lost value quick. Wow pros really are prepared to dump their old stuff for nothing aren't they!!
The 1D C is also massively undervalued right now.
Both superb deals!
Well done on the FS700... you will need to spend another $2500 on the Odyssey though!
Personally I would take the A7S II over the FS700... the 120fps slow mo is very good and Super 35mm when used with speed booster. The 4K is internal and of course you get the stabiliser, raw stills, EVF and much smaller form factor. The low light is much better too. The FS700 was a bit of a step back for low light over the FS100 due to the bump in megapixels to handle 4K.
I am comparing the 1D C right now to the A7S II and it was tempting to sell, before the inevitable price gorging, however there's just something about that image... the colour is still out in front over the A7S II and it doesn't need so much fiddling in post to get it right.

Just thought about something. 
CanonRumors says in his last article that 5D IV will not have for sure 4K video, but that 1DXII will. 
I mean, 1080p is 5DII old, so 2008 old for Canon 5D line. If 5DIV is released in 2016 (and it will), 5DIII lasted for 4 years. 
So let's say 5DIV is a 2016-2020 camera. Do you seriously imagine that in 2020, the Canon 5DIV has 1080p video, same technology as 12 years old 5DII? That seems so ridiculous and impossible for a flashgip product. Well.... I can't wait to see the answer on this one, and I can say one thing, if 5D4 has no 4K I won't ever buy a Canon product my whole life just as a respect to myself, not giving money to a company that shits on us as much as this. 
So let's see  
 

First impressions of the C300 Mark II:
The Good
Autofocus and assisted manual focus so far is amazing. The best autofocus I've used. Even more amazing is it works on all Canon (camera-focus-controlled) EF lenses (tested on the 24-105 F4L and 24-70 F2.8 II, will test more soon). It makes a slight sound, similar to IS noise, but quieter. If using an on-camera mic for run & gun, the noise can be picked up (in a quiet room), however I think with a suspended mic mount the noise shouldn't be audible. No issue at all with a boom or lav. Assisted manual focus helps with 4K critical focus. Color is excellent, as expected. Favorite out-of-camera look so far with: Gamma: Canon Log, Color Space: DCI-P3 (or BT.709), Color Matrix: EOS Standard. Adobe CC doesn't have LUTs yet for the C300 II. One of the reasons for using a C300 II is to get excellent color out of camera with minimal work in post- no LUTs need with those settings (just curves, etc.). Audio is excellent with options for 24- as well as 16-bit. So far in the studio (and my desk) the image is very clean, with no visible recording artifacts (even at 50Mbps LGOP 422 10-bit (limited motion)). CFast 2.0 cards copy very fast to the computer over USB3: 300+MB/s to an SSD. Additional Observations
Compared to DSLR-sized cameras, it's huge and heavy. The top handle, external monitor and mic assembly, and side handle can all be removed to make a smaller package, though it's still relatively heavy compared to DSLRs. 4K is 410Mbps: the files are ALL-I and are huge (compared to the 50Mbps files we're used to with DSLRs, and 24Mbps files from the FS700). There is no long GOP option for smaller files. It appears Canon's processor(s) aren't powerful enough to handle long GOP for 4K. Premiere CC 2015 (latest) can't handle the new Canon XFAVC files very well (4K and 1080p). Playback is slow and choppy, even at 1/2 playback resolution (might also be a 24-bit 4-track audio issue, testing this). Adobe is offering 1 year of Creative Cloud for C300 II owners, perhaps they'll update Premiere soon to fully support C300 II XFAVC files. Note that I found similar issues when writing the Photon app for 10-bit H.264 support: Premiere ran slowly on those files (sometimes with errors decoding). The A7S II with my tweaked settings look pretty good next to the C300 II in 1080p. In 4K the A7S II has lots of macroblocks/artifacts, the C300 II is clean (with 4x larger files). The A7S II makes a nice B/super-low light camera to the C300 II. 1080p60 slomo looks decent, likely as it's supersampled from 4K. 120p is clearly lower resolution being a center crop without the benefit of supersampling (which also helps reduce noise and aliasing). 120p on the A7S II looks better.

Just received an email from Adorama...can pre-order body for $5600.

Will this cause Canon to adjust their C100-II and C300-II pricing?

I was looking forward to this announcement and now I'm not so sure what I think. All the obvious improvements are there, IBIS, 4K plus that nice extra of 1080p 120fps. And, of course, I look forward to seeing some consumer footage. But I had kind of hoped for less rolling shutter...or slightly increased MP count...

I might save (a lot) more and look at the Ursa Mini at some point. I can't quite get over the fact that some of the most impressive and filmic footage I've seen is from Blackmagic.

I filed this rumor with the A99II, curved sensor RX2 and the A9 "pro A7" unicorns SAR has been trumpeting for the last year or so. SAR had nothing on any of the upcoming releases - he was way off with the A7RII, had nothing on the RX10II or RX100IV. He also had nothing on the A7II at the end of last year. All the announcements were a complete surprise. It appears all his insider info evaporated after the hack and hes now just making stuff up. Well, he did get the A7RII about 20 minutes before the embargo was lifted.
I'm sure we'll start seeing "SR3 - A7sII to have IBIS, 399pt AF, 4k internal and BSI - will be released later this year or early next year" rumors soon. Followed by "SR3 - A7III getting 399pt AF, 4k internal and BSI - will be released later this year or early next year". You can probably add high resolution sensor shift mode like Olympus has to the rumor mill as well - I would because it will get clicks.
He did great work, but most of that's in the past. I still visit the site daily - its just a great resource for samples and tests of all things E-mount.

I would like to see a direct comparison between A7R II and A7S with the same picture profile(Slog2 with the same LUT applied) in terms of color. IMO it would be good to have something yellow and something red in the same shot(probably some flowers would be the best choice because of the natural colors) because from what I've seen A7S has greenish yellows and magentish reds.
Personally I think that is the main reason why it's hard to correct A7S colors because you have two color casts that are opposite to each other in the color spectrum at the same time... and I don't think that the whole image is affected by those casts, just certain colors(IMO yellows and reds).

While I do agree that the 1D C is the King of Colours right now, you can get the NX1 remarkably close with some simple CC:


 
Probably better to do some CC for those of us on a budget. Just used the stock tools in Sony Vegas. To me, it shows that the NX1 is actually capturing the colour data, but just representing it in a different way (otherwise you wouldn't be able to bring it back).
 
(NX1 on the bottom btw)

The 1DC renders better color than the C300 mark I.
Check out this side by side and notice the 1DC displaying warm and cool, while the C300 is mostly warm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6s5VDABzj0

Hollywood wanted a 4K DSLR so Canon saw an opportunity and enabled 1.3x 4K crop video mode on their 1D X. The 1D C was born and the £12,000 price tag made sure nobody bought it.
With the Samsung NX1, the consumer didn't want 4K H.265 but is getting it anyway, because Samsung wants them to buy that lovely 4K TV to view the footage with. This is called technological progress, where more powerful machines are thrust upon an unexpected public and everyone gets excited.
Now the two world collide in this shoutout. Expect fireworks!
The Samsung NX1 is currently on special offer for $1299 at B&H
Read the full article

I have just received my SLR Magic Rangefinder which is a groundbreaking concept. It transfers focus away from the main lens focus ring onto a dedicated buttery smooth geared 240 degree cinema lens focus ring and attached to the main lens like a screw on filter.
With the main lens set to infinity, focus is done purely through the SLR Magic Rangefinder.
This means that the awkward to focus Kowa 2x anamorphic lenses are now as usable as an Iscorama.
It means Nikon glass can finally focus the 'right' way!
It also gives closer focussing abilities for lenses that have a long minimum focus distance (like the 2m of an Iscorama anamorphic) and prevents the focus breathing inherit in all non-cinema photographic lenses.
Read the full article