Damphousse

I think if you just look at the marketing materials and consumer trends of the 5MP days and compare them with what is going on today you will realize only now are a great many consumers content with 18-24mp.

Everyone is going the wrong way about telling you what to do. The best solution is figure it out yourself. I shoot film sometimes for photography. To this day film photographers even the ones that use $5,000 cameras use hand held light meters. Frankly every once in awhile I walk around with one in my pocket. Why? Because I am not that good of a photographer so I don't have an automatic feel for light levels. So I walk around with a light meter and get an idea what apeture I will be shooting at with different ISO film and different filters. Unlike digital cameras filters can do a lot for B&W film photography. So with different ISO films, different lighting conditions, and multiple different filters you have to understand the relationship between apeture, ISO, shutter speed and lighting conditions. One thing no one has mentioned is most lenses are only optimal under a narrow set of apetures. I use f/16 and very rarely f/22 sometimes on an aps-c sensors but that is only for specialized situations. And the size of the photosites on a camera matter as well. The smaller the photosites the sooner the image becomes diffraction limited as you stop down. So if you take a small m43 sensor with a bunch of photosites and compare it to a 5D MK III with bigger photosites it will get diffraction limited sooner. So technically on an overcast day you may be able to come up with some apeture, ISO, shutter speed combination that works for getting exposure but you will probably get a soft image on a lot of days. So even in the UK with overcast skies you can end up with... -Suboptimal technical use of apetures due to using f/16 and f/22 -Creative constraints disallowing shallow depth of field Please review Fred Parker's Ultimate Exposure Computer. You can pick your lighting conditions, your ISO, and your shutter speed and it will tell you what your apeture will be. Based on a heavy over cast sky (12), ISO 100, and a shutter speed slower than 1/60 I determined that your apeture would have to be beyond f/8. So on a high megapixel m43 camera you are already into diffraction territory. And that is with a HEAVY overcast sky. If you have a bright overcast sky you are beyond f/11. So image softness and gigantic depth of field. You will have to wait for sunrise or sunset to use your lens/camera combination at it's optimal settings if no ND filter is put in place. And againg if you look at the exposure computer you will see that for indoor use you don't need an ND filter. Most of the time you have the opposite problem indoors. You are using f/1.4 lenses and battling with depth of field just wishing you could stop down a bit but you're afraid of bumping up the ISO.

I'm pretty tolerant of the "shaky cam" intentional effect on movies like Cloverfield, but there is something professional about that "shaky cam." I don't know what it is. It's better than when amatuers do it. I think this video looked "digital" vs "video." My three big problems with DSLR video is moire/aliasing, lack of global shutter, and weak codecs. Line skipping is an issue too. moire/aliasing has been minimised in a lot of new cameras and weak codecs are being addressed. The line skipping issue has been eliminated in some models. That leaves rolling shutter. I assume that is what is causing the issue. Global shutter can just handle the jarring movements a lot better. One of the big issues in the movie is they seem to set the camera down which causes a burst of reverberating shudders within the camera. It's fast movement with a rolling shutter so can't be cleaned up easily in post. Even if you want to leave the shake from placing the camera down in as an effect it just doesn't look good on a rolling shutter CMOS. The reason I turn my nose up at manual lenses and no IS is I've had little shudders ruin too many shots. Yes I use a tripod when I can and yes I even bought a steadicam which I now use as an improvised shoulder rig (still haven't found the time to balance and learn it). But there are times I need to shoot hand held and IS saves the day. I love my nonIS 50mm 1.4 in low light but I really have to brace myself or use a tripod/shoulder rig to avoid shot ruining shudders. Overall I don't think the GH4 was the right tool for the job. The GH4 is amazing and that didn't really come through in that video. A black magic production cam or some other global shutter machine might have been noticably better.

Even the GH4 has rolling shutter. I don't think unless you get into global shutter (BMPCC) or a Canon C300 you are going to see dramatic reductions in rolling shutter from G3 levels. Rolling shutter is kind of the final frontier. Yeah it is a tough time. I like to wait for new models to come down in price or at least get a used or refurb camera to take the sting out of depreciation. The problem is you have two interesting cameras coming out soon. The Panasonic LX8 and the Panasonic FZ1000. Both of these cameras have a 1" sensor and have built in lenses and 4K for $900. The Panasonic FZ1000 has been announced and the LX8 is still in rumor land but should be announced soon. The LX8 is even rumored to have a built in neutral density filter. The nice thing about those cameras is you buy the camera and a memory stick and you are off shooting. No other lenses or accesories to buy.

I thought it was a joke. But if you follow the links you come to a website where they literally say they will charge $800 for video "clips." With a rate of $400-$500 a minute. My guess is these folks are either retired or on disability and slapped together a website just to do some fishing. I doubt they've ever shot a video for $800. They probably just have it up there with the hope someone will bite one day.

I agree with everyone else. Dxo is just nerd pron that doesn't have any impact on purchasing decisions for real people. If someone gave me a choice between a free Canon 1DC vs a free BMCC I would take the Canon 1DC in a heartbeat. So would most people. The original non video 5D came out in 2006. You seriously don't see a difference between the original 5D and hte 5D mark III? Well you obviously aren't a photogher. DSLRs are for photographers. Yes some of us use them for video but as I've stated over and over again I've never met anyone in real life who uses their DSLR for video. I have seen people with DSLRs and a nice L lens hanging around their necks whip out an iphone and make a video. I mean I've seen them do it with the DSLR in front of them bolted onto a tripod! Sony is not going to win the DSLR war with stills. Canon and to a lesser degree Nikon have way too much infrustructure in place. DSLRs are a mature product. Even a lowly Canon rebel is more camera than the average person needs. The average person is simpy not going to notice the quality difference between a $300 Canon Rebel and a Nikon D800. What the average person sees is professionals using Canons and to a lesser degree Nikons. And the pros use those cameras because every accersory known to man is made for Canons. You can rent Canon lenses anywhere. You can get a Canon serviced anywhere. Not so with Sony. If you were a pro traveling a lot would you rather have the Canon safety net or a pretty DXO chart? As someone who has published pictures from a 3 megapixel camera back in the day I can tell you getting the shot is far more important than a DXO chart. Crazy megapixels and dynamic range come into play in really high end pro shoots but for chunk of commerical and editorial work the image out of a Canon Rebel gets the job done... build quality is another matter.

Not sure if I'm passing along new information here but if you want to view raw files in Windows you need a camera codec. Here is the link for Windows 7.

Turboguard, The other posters are right. Sensor size has nothing to do with shake. The 5D MK II is a more stable camera because it has more mass. And as others have said it is quite easy to rig up a BMPCC to have more mass. Just bolt stuff to it like a shoulder rig. Something else you may or may not be considering is did you use lenses with image stabilization (IS) built in on the 5D MK II? Many lenses that have IS don't work on the BMPCC. The last time I checked you needed a m43 lens with a physical IS on/off swich on the lens body. So that may be the source of your issue. Get a m43 lens with a physical on/off switch on the body and give it a try... assuming you haven't already.

Don't be so sure about that. Video is a fraction of the size of the photography market. And here is what the photographers are saying about the FZ1000 on DPreview... The camera sounds awesome to me but don't bank on it selling like a $300 DSLR.

Yeah, I don't know what the deal is with the super zooms. Frankly if they gave me something that was f/2.8 and had a zoom range of Full frame equivalent 20mm to 100mm in 4K I would be happy. The long end of the lens is not something I see myself using very much particularly if it is soft. Yeah, that is why I am considering it. For me something like a GH4 would be perfect. But once you add in the up front costs of getting a quality lens it actually becomes more expensive than a BMCC ef mount. A BMCC isn't ideal for me for a bunch of obvious reasons. But I considered it. So I won't necessarily spend the money and get a camera that works in all situations. But I can get a camera that works in a lot of situations. I still have my T3i and 50mm 1.4. It does a nice job with faces up close in low light. I am not a pro earning money. So I am very price sensitive. I considered the BMCC because I could get it for 25% off the already reduced $1999 price. I wonder if the GH4k will push it down in price even more. Granted it comes with Resolve. I guess I'll wait a couple of months and see where things shake out.

Should have read the next sentence... I'm waiting on Andrew's verdict. Everything that has been said is with a big asterisk. I need a full thorough review and more footage. I didn't like what I saw with some highlights in the clouds in a couple of scenes but I kept my mouth shut. I remeber the last time I questioned that in an early Sony FDR-AX100 thread. I was called all sorts of names. I have no desire for a repeat.

I was thinking about how I should reply to your question. I'm not really sure what to say. I think such a model would have made sense a year or so ago. But now they have the 4k GH4. And they also have a 4k all in one for $800. The GH3 currently sells for $1,000. So where would you stick such a camera in the lineup? What you describe has to be expensive to make. No one has attempted it other than Black Magic... and we saw how that turned out. Small sensor and a camera with tons of compromises selling for $1,000. Granted Panasonic would have economies of scale and could spread their R&D costs over multiple camera bodies and lines. But they would have to turn out a far more finished an polished product than Black Magic. And have a m43 sensor. That costs $$$. Net net I think you would still end up with something that costs north of $1,000... substantially north. And if it's north of $1,000 you start wandering into GH4 territory. I really don't know. Frankly before the announcement of the $800 4K wonder I was looking at a BMCC for $1,500ish. I had psyched myself up to plunge head long into the world of grading and now I have to switch gears. The idea of a very grade friendly prores file is intriguing but the wonderful detail that 4k gives you straight out of the camera is amazing. As a consumer it really is the more appropriate camera for me... assuming the codec, DR, etc are all acceptable. I just think most people in my position want a camera that gives good results right out of the camera. They don't want to have to color correct or grade everything. And for the pros why not just get the GH4? It's an interesting idea. But where does it fit in? By the way who buys a GH3 now for $1,000? I guess if you have a stable of m43 lenses and are into photography. But if you are mostly going to use it as a video camera how does it make sense?

Watch this...

Here's why. From the comment section of the DPreview article on the "$800 4k Panasonic..." How many cameras does Panasonic sell? How many cameras does Canon sell? Any questions? That mind you was not an isolated comment. I LOLed when I read this... Guys before going on rants or starting threads do market research. The main market for Canon's non Cinema line of cameras is photographers. Many photographers have minimal or no interest in video. Even for the photojournalist types the video you can grab with a stock 5D mk III is good enough and the camera system benefits far outweigh Panasonics camera system. This kind of stuff excites you and me but the much larger photo community couldn't care less. Another example...

I have to say though the guy that made that video is a clown. I have not used any of Samsung's 4k enabled cellphones but I can say from other cell phones I've used moire/aliasing and rolling shutter are a big concern. Also there is the issue of compression. That video was just designed to show the strenghts of the Samsung phone. Only one shot really showed one of it's fatal flaws. The DR shot looked nice on the 5D mk III raw and it looked terrible on the Note III. I would have also liked to have seen a moire/aliasing test and a rolling shutter test. He also chose not to do any grading or use an optimal lens on the 5D. The Note III video is really remarkable but that was not a fair nor complete test. Almost forgot. He said he used "flat" settings on the 5D mk III. I assume he also meant sharpening dialed way down. Well the sharpening on the Note III he left on auto which I can only assume means dialed way up to "Consumer sharp."

Yeah. Now this is interesting. I still think the average consumer doesn't have the horse power nor the displays to view 4k. Not that many people realize viewing 4k on a sub HD monitor still looks great. But I think the time is rapidly coming where 4k will be the new buzz word. It will be kind of like megapixel in the good ol' days. I mean today no one really noticed the fact Samsung put out a phone with 4k recording capabilities. On the phone forums no one is clamouring for it. But eventually they will. Canon in my mind still has time. I think what may happen is Canon may adopt a "doughnut" strategy. Meaning they already have 4k on their high end cameras and they will probably enable it on their low end (ie nonDSLR) cameras in the near future. At the same time they will leave all their sub $3,000 DSLRs stuck at 1080p... or whatever they claim their cameras output. It wouldn't be the first time we've seen a trickle up of features with Canon.

Read Andrew's article... Well Andrew you've given us yet another camera to think about. Back to the drawing board for me. Can't wait for your full review.

I still need to do a bit of research and thinking before I buy anything. A BMPCC or a BMCC are a lot of money for a toy. I'll take the MFT suggestion under advisment.

Interesting. Thanks for the reply. I guess I have been hearing so much about the GH4 I was wondering if I needed to get my head examined for even considering a BMCC.

Do they make an ef to bmpcc speedbooster? Aren't speedboosters $399?

The Canon 5D MK III is old news. This site is basically run by one person. In the now fast moving camera field he simply doesn't have the time to dwell on models. If you read the proprietor's reviews you will see he still mentions how much he likes the full frame asthetic. But as far as convient video cameras the GH4 trounces the 5D MK III. The GH4 isn't a hack. You don't have to shoot the GH4 in raw to get astounding images out of it. But really the cameras are two very different beasts than can coexist. The title of the website is unfortunate. Really the proprietor should have chosen a more general name. It probably seemed like a coup at the time to score such a great name. Now it seems more like a curse. This website was started way back in the day when large sensor video meant EOS. Now outside of the Cinema line and Magic Lantern hacks EOS stands for video laggard. No one is telling you to jump on the GH4 bandwagon. It's just the 5D Mk III isn't king of the hill anymore. That doesn't make it useless.

The reason I focused more on the BMCC is it has less of a crop and it has an ef mount that allows IS. Also it uses SSDs vs SD cards. I also found the used pricing to be interesting. I might actually be able to get a BMCC with full Resolve for $1500ish. That's a $500 discount (25%). You can't get a BMPCC for 25% off. Once you take into account the price of Resolve the price difference between a BMPCC and a BMCC on the used market is not that much.

Canon has sold a ton of video enabled DSLRs. Despite knowing a handful of photo enthusists I have almost never seen anyone use the video fuctions on their DSLRs. I have literally seen people with a DSLR in their bag whip out an iphone and shoot a video. And I have never seen someone sit down and use a NLE. Many of my friends who happily photoshop on their old computers don't even have the horse power to run adobe premiere. Those people aren't going to use raw nor edit 4k. There is a market for all this stuff but it sadly does not trickle down to the average consumer. Canon will not come out with 4k in a prosumer camera nor fix their moire/aliasing crap for years. They are the number one DSLR seller in the world. I don't expect that to change and I don't expect them to change.

In reading and responding to this post please keep in mind I am an amateur who only makes very little money shooting stock video. I mostly want this camera for hobby purposes. With the march to 4k in full swing (ie GH4, Sony FDR-AX100, BMPC 4k, Galaxy Note III, etc) where does that leave the BMCC? Is the BMCC a reasonable camera to buy used now or should people wait for more price reductions? I have always been averse to owning Black Magic cameras. Their lack of pedigree in the camera field and the delays and bugs scared me off. But at this stage if I could pick up a BMCC with Resolve for $1,500ish is this something wise to do? The reason I ask is of all the new wave of cameras to lauch in the last couple of years the BMCC seems like the cheapest to get up and running. I could use my ef lenses on it and SSDs have come down in price. $1,500 is still a lot of money but I could shoot the camera on day one just by adding an SSD. I don't need to shoot for hours. I mostly shoot 10-30 second clips. So there is not a pressing need for an external battery. Let me know your thoughts. Thanks.

I just don't think as a fraction of the total video people make up that big a portion of the 5D mk III customer base. Canon has their whole cinema line of cameras to protect. Giving up a few 5D mk III sales to protect that successful franchise makes business sense. I really wish the GH4 would shock Canon into action, but I'm not too optomistic.