Oliver Daniel

This from RedShark News: http://www.redsharknews.com/business/item/2038-canon-7d-mark-ii-debuts,-but-what-does-it-mean
 
"The reality Canon's 5D Mark II kicked off the HDSLR revolution, but it wasn't planned. In fact, it could be seen as a mistake, as the advanced (at the time) video capabilities of its DSLRs made those cameras popular amoung shooters, which likely ate into its pro video profits. With this latest version of the 7D, Canon refocused on the action photographer, all but ignoring the video advancements of competitors with similarly-priced cameras. When you take a step back from it, it makes sense; Canon sells far more equipment to photographers than video shooters, and why should its DSLRs compete directly against other Canon product categories like pro video? The big take-away may be that Canon is quietly removing itself from the DSLR video revolution that it accidentally started."
 
I don't tend to get into this whole Canon and Nikon are Video Grandpa's when it comes to video, but the above makes sense. Can't some of us just accept Canon's business decisions and move custom elsewhere? At this rate, it sounds like some people would actually go into apocalyptic meltdown if the Canon 5D MK IV didn't have 4k video and that Canon have "lost the plot." 

Here's the manner in which I'm going to be presenting my questions:
 
First of all congratulations for being a sales leader in the DSLR market and for the successful launch of Cinema EOS. I do however have some concerns that I feel my readers would like addressing.
 
Canon’s strong sales are based on having that price-performance ratio just right and about leading in performance at a price which is attractive to the customer. Looking at a lot of the recent output of the company in terms of DSLRs I feel that performance advantage is now actually a shortfall to the competition especially in two regards - video and image sensors.
 
Panasonic and Sony are offering 4K video on their consumer stills cameras and Canon are not. Moreoever Sony’s image sensors are ahead on all the key performance metrics - resolution (36MP), low light (12MP full frame), dynamic range (even the cheap A7 is 2 stops better than the 1D X) and video (full pixel readout on the A7S).
 
In terms of price Sony have a more aggressive price point for the A7 vs the Canon 6D on full format, cheaper still when it comes to enthusiast APS-C models.
 
Also it is clear the C300 is outdated relative to the Sony FS7 just announced at IBC, which does 4K recording internally for $8k and 180fps slow-mo with a 10bit 4:2:2 XAVC codec and more importantly filmmakers who I have known to have embraced the C300 as owners are saying to Sony “well done on the ergonomics”, an area of great strength traditionally for Canon and a great selling point of the C300.
 
Additionally it’s now possible for Canon users to take their hefty investment in Canon lenses to other systems, notably to Sony and Panasonic mirrorless cameras. Speaking as a user myself of a huge range of EF lenses, the only reason I haven’t sold my 5D Mark III yet is because of auto-focus. I am shooting stills and video on the A7S.
 
How would you address the concerns I’ve highlighted here today?

Unconfirmed rumours and conspiracy theories about features are a waste of time and distract away from the tools available to use right now, as well as your time to be actively creative and make some stuff.  ;)
 
If it can't be bought, doesn't matter. Life goes on.  :D

Why would a camera manufacturer spend time (money) adding more "power" to an older camera that does nothing to pay their bills?  Why do people believe manufacturers limit or turn off features?  Why would Olympus, which has no video line, throttle back a camera to stop it from competing with their non-existent video cameras?  To me, EOSHD has improved immensely from last year by staying away from this type of (naive to me) conspiracy thinking.  Wake up camera people :)  In a very difficult camera market ALL manufacturers are looking to put in as many features as they can to compete against smart-phones.  A win for any of them is a win for all.  Panasonic didn't come out with 4K out of the blue.  They have been working on this technology for years.  As for Magic Lantern, when the 50D came out there weren't CF cards fast enough to write RAW video.  Anyway, RAW is STILL not for consumers, for a long list of reasons.  I want built-in Canon RAW as much as the next guy, but I don't believe it's as easy a decision as it looks (overheating issues for one).
 
Sadly, people may leave EOSHD because Andrew isn't feeding into this fantasy of picking up a used E-M1 for $300 and turning on 4K video.  They will follow people who feed into the dream, rather than the reality.  This is true in all areas of expertise (why there are so many charlatans).  DON'T FALL FOR IT ;)  

I agree with Quirky on a lot of his points. I'm not sure why 5D RAW comes into this at all... It's a massively different kettle of fish. Although I think it's ok to show how cameras such as the a7S can match it in perceived performance.

I'm very close to ordering an a7S because I want a different look and toolset compared with my GH3. Rolling shutter, weird record button, odd skin tones on a7S.... Doesn't faze me. There will be work arounds... Love to learn and just shoot.

I'll be renting the a7S first though. Don't know why more people don't try before they buy. Did this with the GH3. Loved it, bought it. Tried the BMCC, thought it was ok, didn't buy it. Same goes for pretty much everything.

Also... You can't judge a camera just by watching a few Vimeo clips and tests, as this depends on skill and creativity. It's cool to see it's capabilities in the right hands, but to write it off just because someone had filmed something with bad rolling shutter or yellow skin is a little silly. Love camera and what they can do.... I'm just more interested in the subject of the filming :)

I said i wouldn't get an A7S based on my irritation at Sony for they lack of delivering good enough video quality on the a7r and a7 - at the time I felt it was on purpose to make the A7S more appealing and more likely for me to upgrade from my A7R - which i couldnt afford to do anyway.
 
I then saw the camera advertised for £1400 shipped (£700 less than on the sony website!!!) and decided it was time to invest in something that I could realistically use for showing lens performance (for Dog Schidt Optics purposes), since the A7R hadn't come up with what I had hoped for in video terms.  I wouldn't have bought it if it weren't £1400 and a piece of equipment that can be claimed against earnings, and even so, I will still be struggling for a while after paying for it on the credit card.
 
What I will say is I 100% empathise with Andrews somewhat flippant disregard for other cameras since using the A7S.  It is justified.  It's a marvel having such dynamic range on tap.  In a system that is so user friendly.  Which doesnt need rigging or silly evf's added.  It doesn;t feel real to me using this camera and seeing imagery I am used to seeing taking up 2-5gb per minute, and it's doing it in 300mb/min!, and doesnt need transcoding to a editable format for workability on my 2 year old hackintosh.
 
Ultimately you should buy a camera that fulfils your requirements at the time.  If something new comes along after you decide on a camera it doesnt mean you can no longer use your outdated (in blogging terms) equipment.  Being gear heads we all fall fowl to the desire for the newest thing...- and if it upsets you, make it a rule to not read reviews of new gear otherwise you'll get caught up in the consumer side of things again.   Instead pop out for a few hours and shoot something.    

I agree with Quirky on a lot of his points. I'm not sure why 5D RAW comes into this at all... It's a massively different kettle of fish. Although I think it's ok to show how cameras such as the a7S can match it in perceived performance.

I'm very close to ordering an a7S because I want a different look and toolset compared with my GH3. Rolling shutter, weird record button, odd skin tones on a7S.... Doesn't faze me. There will be work arounds... Love to learn and just shoot.

I'll be renting the a7S first though. Don't know why more people don't try before they buy. Did this with the GH3. Loved it, bought it. Tried the BMCC, thought it was ok, didn't buy it. Same goes for pretty much everything.

Also... You can't judge a camera just by watching a few Vimeo clips and tests, as this depends on skill and creativity. It's cool to see it's capabilities in the right hands, but to write it off just because someone had filmed something with bad rolling shutter or yellow skin is a little silly. Love camera and what they can do.... I'm just more interested in the subject of the filming :)

I shoot in a lot of awkward (but unique!) locations which are difficult to light... sure I light them up with all sorts of stuff but i really have to push the GH3 and this can cause some unwanted annoyances in the image. The aperture can almost be wide open, and difficult to focus with some lenses - so the a7S tools look to make this easier for me. 
 
Also I'd like to be able to get a shallower depth of field with some of my lenses for a few shots - purely a creative decision rather than for the hell of it like some do. Sure I can do some stuff with my GH3, I just need more to play with to get the look I want.
 
Lastly, the GH3 hasn't stopped me doing any of my ideas. They always go ahead regardless. I just feel the a7S will give me more creative tools to get the look I want.  Would be nice to be able to use a ridiculous wide angle as well. I love doing ridiculous things. The a7S seems ridiculous enough.  :P

Keep on working out, surely you'll find other benefits eventually. That's the whole point of creative benefits, isn't it. Your imagination, skills, good timing and a bit of luck together with the given tools at your disposal will create that magic serendipity. The creative benefits are up to you. 
The point being, no one can explain "creative benefits" to you exhaustively, because creativity is subjective. People can explain the technical benefits of low light performance, which you have already figured out, and the rest is up to you. It's up to you to make something cool of it.
 
 
 
I'm pretty sure Mr. Bloom was merely trying to make a point with that video clip, not cinematic art or technical perfection. As such the clip works just fine, but obviously it's not intended for extremely pedantic viewing. Or for the most pedantic of viewers, ftm. 
 
Now we (well, most of us, anyway) have established that one can get shots in pretty low light with that camera. It's up to each of us to make something useful and good looking with that feature. If you have no use for that feature, feel free to ignore it, or the whole camera.

As I'm really interested in the a7S, I had a browse around for prices and came across this:

http://panamoz.com/index.php/sony-ilce-7s-alpha-7s-a7s-full-frame-cmos-digital-camera-body-only.html

They are selling the a7S brand new for only £1339.50 inc.VAT, if paid by bank transfer.

This is insane, considering other online stores in the UK are selling for around £2099.

Does anybody know anything about this website? Why is it so cheap? Anything suspicious or 100% definitely correct?

Thanks!

As I'm really interested in the a7S, I had a browse around for prices and came across this:

http://panamoz.com/index.php/sony-ilce-7s-alpha-7s-a7s-full-frame-cmos-digital-camera-body-only.html

They are selling the a7S brand new for only £1339.50 inc.VAT, if paid by bank transfer.

This is insane, considering other online stores in the UK are selling for around £2099.

Does anybody know anything about this website? Why is it so cheap? Anything suspicious or 100% definitely correct?

Thanks!

Well, what did you expect? After all, it's a full frame CMOS sensor camera. Of course it'll show some, especially if you wiggle it. Even APS-C and smaller size CMOS cameras have some rolling shutter issues. Some more, some less, but they all have some. I don't think expecting no rolling shutter from a FF CMOS (4K) sensor camera is entirely realistic, so far. Better to try finding ways to work around the problem.
 
 
You might want to go for either a Digital Bolex (S16 CCD) or Blackmagic Production Camera (S35 CMOS with slap-on global shutter), then. I'd love to have either one, (or both:), too, but can't afford either one right now. Hopefully in the not too distant future I'll have one.

Try www.videoink.co.uk/musicvideoproduction

I have a completely new site coming out in 2 weeks with a new look and loads more vids, but plenty to see there :)

I make about 90% of my income making music videos, mostly with independent labels, PR and unsigned acts and I know a lot of bands... the effort these guys go to is absolutely immense and many of the tracks are much better than that chart nonsense the big labels stuff into our ears and brain until we are hypnotised or get into an almost violent, rebellious state of mind.
 
This completely sucks. I'm fed up of this bullying in the music industry. Some band members I know are geniuses, but have to make do stacking shelves 8 hours a week in a pound shop. They get bit by the money men and get nothing in return. They either waste talent or steal their worth for their own greed. 
 
My music video was up for Best Music Video at the Metal Hammer Golden Gods 2014 (it didn't win), and the quality of the entertainment was incredible. The energy and desire form the playing bands was unreal - bands who have toured constantly, slept in the car boot and lived on instant noodles just to play and get noticed. But the way things are going, genuine bands/artists won't get this chance and we will forever be presented with the conveyer belt of manufactured, soulless rubbish designed to make the big wigs fat and the most promising musicians with nothing but their 8 hour shift in the local pound shop. 
 
This says it all.... my brother is a singer and auditioned for X Factor 'for a laugh.' He got through 3 rounds, but was then turned down as they couldn't see how he would benefit from the competition. We received sad news that his wife (my sister in law) was diagnosed with a life threatening illness. X Factor representatives called him regarding auditions for Britains Got Talent...he said he couldn't attend as he needs to look after his wife because of her illness. At the instance he mentioned it, they said he could go back in the process because 'he would get far and have great appeal.' My brother sniffed a rotten fish...and told them where to go. 
 
This situation with my brother was quite sick, and sums the music industry in a nutshell. The power of the talent shows is immense and they dominate so much of the industry. But they are soulless sods who are only interested in exploiting vulnerable people and trying to dominate the industry with diluted brain warping rubbish. 
 
Independent music needs protection and must find a way to triumph over this diabolical situation. 

I make about 90% of my income making music videos, mostly with independent labels, PR and unsigned acts and I know a lot of bands... the effort these guys go to is absolutely immense and many of the tracks are much better than that chart nonsense the big labels stuff into our ears and brain until we are hypnotised or get into an almost violent, rebellious state of mind.
 
This completely sucks. I'm fed up of this bullying in the music industry. Some band members I know are geniuses, but have to make do stacking shelves 8 hours a week in a pound shop. They get bit by the money men and get nothing in return. They either waste talent or steal their worth for their own greed. 
 
My music video was up for Best Music Video at the Metal Hammer Golden Gods 2014 (it didn't win), and the quality of the entertainment was incredible. The energy and desire form the playing bands was unreal - bands who have toured constantly, slept in the car boot and lived on instant noodles just to play and get noticed. But the way things are going, genuine bands/artists won't get this chance and we will forever be presented with the conveyer belt of manufactured, soulless rubbish designed to make the big wigs fat and the most promising musicians with nothing but their 8 hour shift in the local pound shop. 
 
This says it all.... my brother is a singer and auditioned for X Factor 'for a laugh.' He got through 3 rounds, but was then turned down as they couldn't see how he would benefit from the competition. We received sad news that his wife (my sister in law) was diagnosed with a life threatening illness. X Factor representatives called him regarding auditions for Britains Got Talent...he said he couldn't attend as he needs to look after his wife because of her illness. At the instance he mentioned it, they said he could go back in the process because 'he would get far and have great appeal.' My brother sniffed a rotten fish...and told them where to go. 
 
This situation with my brother was quite sick, and sums the music industry in a nutshell. The power of the talent shows is immense and they dominate so much of the industry. But they are soulless sods who are only interested in exploiting vulnerable people and trying to dominate the industry with diluted brain warping rubbish. 
 
Independent music needs protection and must find a way to triumph over this diabolical situation. 

I make about 90% of my income making music videos, mostly with independent labels, PR and unsigned acts and I know a lot of bands... the effort these guys go to is absolutely immense and many of the tracks are much better than that chart nonsense the big labels stuff into our ears and brain until we are hypnotised or get into an almost violent, rebellious state of mind.
 
This completely sucks. I'm fed up of this bullying in the music industry. Some band members I know are geniuses, but have to make do stacking shelves 8 hours a week in a pound shop. They get bit by the money men and get nothing in return. They either waste talent or steal their worth for their own greed. 
 
My music video was up for Best Music Video at the Metal Hammer Golden Gods 2014 (it didn't win), and the quality of the entertainment was incredible. The energy and desire form the playing bands was unreal - bands who have toured constantly, slept in the car boot and lived on instant noodles just to play and get noticed. But the way things are going, genuine bands/artists won't get this chance and we will forever be presented with the conveyer belt of manufactured, soulless rubbish designed to make the big wigs fat and the most promising musicians with nothing but their 8 hour shift in the local pound shop. 
 
This says it all.... my brother is a singer and auditioned for X Factor 'for a laugh.' He got through 3 rounds, but was then turned down as they couldn't see how he would benefit from the competition. We received sad news that his wife (my sister in law) was diagnosed with a life threatening illness. X Factor representatives called him regarding auditions for Britains Got Talent...he said he couldn't attend as he needs to look after his wife because of her illness. At the instance he mentioned it, they said he could go back in the process because 'he would get far and have great appeal.' My brother sniffed a rotten fish...and told them where to go. 
 
This situation with my brother was quite sick, and sums the music industry in a nutshell. The power of the talent shows is immense and they dominate so much of the industry. But they are soulless sods who are only interested in exploiting vulnerable people and trying to dominate the industry with diluted brain warping rubbish. 
 
Independent music needs protection and must find a way to triumph over this diabolical situation. 

I make about 90% of my income making music videos, mostly with independent labels, PR and unsigned acts and I know a lot of bands... the effort these guys go to is absolutely immense and many of the tracks are much better than that chart nonsense the big labels stuff into our ears and brain until we are hypnotised or get into an almost violent, rebellious state of mind.
 
This completely sucks. I'm fed up of this bullying in the music industry. Some band members I know are geniuses, but have to make do stacking shelves 8 hours a week in a pound shop. They get bit by the money men and get nothing in return. They either waste talent or steal their worth for their own greed. 
 
My music video was up for Best Music Video at the Metal Hammer Golden Gods 2014 (it didn't win), and the quality of the entertainment was incredible. The energy and desire form the playing bands was unreal - bands who have toured constantly, slept in the car boot and lived on instant noodles just to play and get noticed. But the way things are going, genuine bands/artists won't get this chance and we will forever be presented with the conveyer belt of manufactured, soulless rubbish designed to make the big wigs fat and the most promising musicians with nothing but their 8 hour shift in the local pound shop. 
 
This says it all.... my brother is a singer and auditioned for X Factor 'for a laugh.' He got through 3 rounds, but was then turned down as they couldn't see how he would benefit from the competition. We received sad news that his wife (my sister in law) was diagnosed with a life threatening illness. X Factor representatives called him regarding auditions for Britains Got Talent...he said he couldn't attend as he needs to look after his wife because of her illness. At the instance he mentioned it, they said he could go back in the process because 'he would get far and have great appeal.' My brother sniffed a rotten fish...and told them where to go. 
 
This situation with my brother was quite sick, and sums the music industry in a nutshell. The power of the talent shows is immense and they dominate so much of the industry. But they are soulless sods who are only interested in exploiting vulnerable people and trying to dominate the industry with diluted brain warping rubbish. 
 
Independent music needs protection and must find a way to triumph over this diabolical situation. 

Don't forget the ready to shoot 4K pricing...
 
A7S = $4500
GH4 = $1699

Try www.videoink.co.uk/musicvideoproduction

I have a completely new site coming out in 2 weeks with a new look and loads more vids, but plenty to see there :)

This post is a little bit pointless. 
 
It doesn't matter what camera you use, as long as it suits you, looks good and gets the job done. If you buy a camera for status then you are not a filmmaker. 
 
A camera does not operate you. You operate the camera. So when that comes to the GH4, it is very capable in the right hands. 

Daniel Peters has done a great job, and I'm sure he would using any camera. I think the lack of IBIS adds something, depends on your personal taste. 
 
I'd love a Digital Bolex, just because I find its features unique and I love the image it is capable of for the price. The "flawless tonality" doesn't come with the camera, it's the user! If you know what you are doing, some cameras just make a life a bit easier. I'll stop saying obvious stuff now :)
 
I'll be buying the GH4 as I've had a lot of success with the GH3, and it suits my style and needs perfectly. When I need more power behind the wheel, I just hire another camera. 

There seems to be various pissing matches concerning specs of this camera and that. At the end of the day, does it produce an image you like and how useable it is? I'm in prep for a movie I start in a few weeks. Intended for theatrical release we need IQ that'll hold up to the big screen. So we tested F55 vs Dragon vs Alexa. The tests were precise and extensive: ISO, over / under exposure, all with people and Macbeth Color Charts. Because of the tight schedule, I wanted the smaller cameras (f55 and Dragon) to be as good or better than the Arri. So we graded and projected the results at a full on commercial grade suite with a 15' screen.
 
The producer and director immediately felt the Arri was a hands down the better image. They couldn't quantify it. Being a tech, for me and the colorist, it all came down to flesh tones and color grade across the entire exposure range. When we wrestled with the F55 to get a rich honest flesh tone, the color chart was completely off (read: extra time in post keying and windowing that no one wants to pay for). The Epic came close, having quietest noise at all ISO's, but it too had some flesh tone issues as well as color aberrations in clipped areas. Worth noting, we shot the Alexa at 444 Pro Rez, not Arri Raw. How does it retain its amazing colors? Trading pixels for color space, instead of spreading your butter too thin.
 
Why do I bring this up? Because much of the conversations here obsess about pixel count, DR and other specs but few mention how well it grades the human face and how the grade effects your back ground colors. When I compare cameras, it's the first thing I look at (and what audience's pay the most attention to). The F55 despite it's stellar specs is dead to me as a feature film camera. We don't make movies for techs.
 
So I'm holding my judgement on the GH4 until I see some footage, not of rocks, bridges and buildings at night, cars, aggressive music video LUT's but just attempts to shoot faces, graded as naturally as can be. This is what attracted me to the BMC line up. I felt the colors were honest, requiring little work out of the box. I believe this is much of the success of the C300/500 line (see Hurlbut tests) despite being 8 bit and clippy on the high end. The F55 held highlights 6 stops over key. Insane DR. But specs do not a great image make. We also tested Scheider Xenars vs Cooke S4's vs Super Speeds. The sharpest of the bunch, the Schneiders were the F55 of lenses. Soulless paperweights.

I have no idea what pablogrollan is trying to say...anyway...
 
Great review! As Panasonic have got better with their cameras, so have your reviews. I've not pulled the trigger yet as a GH3 owner but will soon. Seen some ace stuff by shooters on the web. 
 
I noticed you mentioned the RED Epic in your post. I've been doing a few shoots on a rental unit recently and the power from that thing is immense.
 
Editing REDCODE is a breeze, but you know what? All my friends prefer the videos I've shot on my GH3 - they say my style goes missing on the Epic (I jump straight into the action with the GH3) and that while the Epic looks better, the small from factor of the GH3 opens the world up and I end up getting better shots, more creative, dynamic and exciting. I agree - it's sheer proof a higher specced camera does NOT make you a better shooter....in the Epic's case, it made me a little bit worse!
 
The GH4 is exciting because it's a smooth upgrade path - your style isn't limited by higher specced clunky (but awesome) monsters, and the image quality jumps, better tools to do a better job of what you are used to.
 
I'm a bit like you Andrew in that I like to be as light as possible, sure I've got a lot of clunky gear like lights, sliders, jibs etc and I enjoy to be on a big crew when I need to be, but its quite amazing what is available now to free up your hands (and shoulders, and back) and get shooting!
 
I'm planning to use the GH4 with a Silencer Pro (triggered follow focus, Kickstarter funded), with side handles and an Atomos Shogun mounted on the top. :)

Couldn't care less about the maths. As long as it looks good, who cares?  ;)

Huh? The image quality looks pretty meh to me.