Shaun Fontaine

So glad I held of buying one for my pocket cam, these are even better, I currently own no Canon or Nikon glass, only MFT so I gues the Nikon version will do me and I can just buy glass for that.

I just plan on using the free resolve for the moment, it's actually a very complete version of the software with only a few limitations. Not many companies make free versions of their software so complete.

still when it comes down to brass tacks, the KineRAW MINI does what it is suppose to do without a hack. It was built for purpose. The 5DM3 is amazing for what it does, it always seems no matter what test is done, the 5DM3 (RAW HACK) always seems to come out ontop, even against dedicated RAW video cameras such as the KineRaw and those by blackmagic. But when it comes down to it, it's not canon is it, it's Magic Lantern who is to thank. Now i'm not anti hack but one thing is for sure, Canon will never give us real pro video features at this price, they will never give you RAW or Prores or DNxHD or anything like that, so hacks will always be the way people have to go. In the end, better and cheaper cameras by the likes of BMCC will come out and eventually that line of 5D's will become obsolete for those who shoot for film making purposes who want quality codecs and RAW and 4k and so on. I mean even the Blackmagic 4K camera is nearly there at that point. Ok it only has a s35 sensor but who cares when it has global shutter and 4k images. All I'm saying is, Canon need to change or eventually people won't be buying the 5D series anymore for Video purposes in the future years to come.

Where do i start!?

 

I started off using Sony cameras around 20years ago when I worked as a corporate shooter. Betacam, BetaSP, Digibeta....I suppose I was a Sony fanboy because they had the best cameras and formats back then. I then worked as a camera assistant (high budget) and operator (lower budget) on music videos and promos all shot on 35mm. The cameras we went for 90% of the time were Arri 435 & 535's. So I guess I was an Arri fanboy? Then the 5D came out and for my own personal use (and a lot of paid work) I used the 5DII so I guess I became a Canon fanboy? Nine months ago I used a GH3 on a shoot and was sold on one. Went out and bought one a week later. I guess that makes me a Panasonic fanboy now? Or, do I just choose the tool that I feel is right for the job regardless of brand? I am not a 'fanboy' here defending Panasonic to justify my purchase.

 

I good camera is more than just the end image. What if the camera you were using hindered your ability to capture that image in the first place?

The BM cameras may be great for narrative where you can do retake after retake but imagine shooting something that needed to be captured first time with no second chances and then your card being full because the camera gives no indication how much remaining time or space the card has? Your end image doesn't exist, no amount of DR or bit depth will get back that shot you missed. Going back 20years I can't remember a camera that didn't give the operator any visual indication of remaining media. You could, I suppose, ask the interviewee to re-say that last response to the question but how unprofessional does that make you look in front of them and your producer?

 

I find it amazing how new technology makes people forget their art. VFX aside, an 8bit camera can generate fantastic images if you know what your doing. All of a sudden everyone wants RAW so that they don't have to white balance, can get sloppy on exposure etc. Yes, RAW has it's place but many of the productions I work on don't want me to hand over RAW files.

 

The BMPCC is almost a fantastic camera, if BM can fix a few of its querks as well as reliability then it would be a cheap camera to complement the GH3.

What makes you think I was directing my comments at you, I said there are a lot of fan boy comments on here. I was directing that comment more towards people that currently now only use DSLR's and only ever use them.

 8 bit camera can generate fantastic images if you know what your doing

I'm not in dispute of that fact, but 10 or 12 or even 14 is better for advertisement work, or narrative work. Again a lot of what I do is VFX based which is where i'm coming from. You can't say VFX aside like it's not an important factor for some people,  when a lot of my work is VFX and Film making. A lot of our work mixes CGI with real live action, so yes RAW is great for that, as is higher bit depths. 

What if the camera you were using hindered your ability to capture that image in the first place?

I've never had that problem, I've always managed to get the image even if the camera I was getting it from wasn't easy to use, I guess that comes down to skill. Besides just because I find a camera a hindrance, doesn't mean I can't get the best image out of it.

Also did I not mention, I thought I would give another perspective, this is mine, I feel like your attacking my reasoning, even though I already stated, I use it for advertisement and narrative film making, I don't do corporate videos, or documentaries or wedding videos. Nothing wrong with doing those, I'm just stating what I do, what I use the cameras for. A lot of people in advertisement rely heavily on VFX work, so cameras that can shoot past 8 bit is important. From a technical point of view. If you don't understand that,you don't know what your talking about. I don't care if you have shot on 35mm or been in the business 20 years.  I hate it when people spout out that they have used 35mm like you owe them more respect or gives them more credentials for having used it. I've been on one shoot using 35mm and honestly, so what.

I know you OWN a GH3, you moved on from a 7D I read your post, I get it, you don't like anyone knocking your new toy, so your here to defend it's honour. Is it a better camera than the pocket camera, it probably is. Does it produce better images in the hands of someone who knows that they're doing, No it doesn't and that's just a fact. And yes the final image is very important, It's not the only thing, but at the end of the day, isn't that the whole point.

Short film 'Choices'. The hopeful junior filmmaker imagines a battle of the top low budget camera toys, filmed in stop-motion-like animation, using AAEs puppet tool. Dialogs from Rocky? Boxring represented by Andrews table? The Pocket beats the GH3 and the 7D to pieces. The 5D says: 'We won, it's over.' The Pocket answers: 'It ain't over til it's over' - and kicks the 5D over the edge. It falls with the Wilhelms scream, hits the ground and falls apart. The filmmaker takes the Pocket and smiles, the Pocket smiles back. They leave, iris fade-out, THE END. Must find a better ending. 

Haha, I like it. Good story

I think when it comes down to it, the poor little pocket cam is like the underdog in a boxing competition.  It's like Rocky Balboa in Rocky IV. Ivan Drago Aka the 5DM3 is all like "I must break you", then you got Apollo Creed Aka GH3, being all flashy thinking he stands a chance against Drago, But Drago brings out the RAW guns and beats the GH3 to death with them. Then Rocky is like, I'm going to beat Drago, Drago is like pffft, no way, then he realises, oh no Rocky might actually stand a chance.

Real world production workflows just don't accomodate RAw or even 4K IMHO.

 

Yet another person talking in absolutes. "Real world production workflows just don't accommodate Raw or even 4K" is a statement not an opinion, you can't say that then end with IMHO, the two contradict each other. But more to my point, what makes you think production workflows can't accommodate RAW, again my company uses RAW when filming for advertisement. We use Reds, Alexa's and many more set ups, mostly BMCC. of course, people doing corporate videos, music videos and free lance work for small businesses aren't going to need raw, but there are many productions workflows out there, you can't simple say real world production doesn't use a particular workflow. 

There is a place for RAW in workflows, even if not everybody here uses it. 

This article as many shoot out reviews do, has evoked many fan boy comments, it's almost like a comment section from IGN on the Xbox One vs PS4 debate.  it's clear that a lot of people on here aren't really being objective. The GH3 users are here to convince everyone and themselves that GH3 is king, even though it isn't. The GH3 produces a nice image and it's easy to use = best camera. I don't think so.

5DM3 is a fantastic camera and RAW makes it a beast, but again, is it the best RAW cinema camera? possibly but you also have to remember Magic lantern is not canon, if Magic lantern were to stop doing what they're doing, it would all be over. Which leads me onto my next point, it's a hack, so paid Jobs are something you most likely would never use it on. And before people start saying you would never use RAW on a paid job anyway? says who, you? a lot of people here seem to speak in absolutes. I work on paid Jobs and use RAW, but I do it with a BMCC. The workflow is a lot easier than converting the RAW files from canon DSLRs. Also it's not hacked, the software works with the hardware and it was intended to from the get go. I

I've been a DSLR shooter for years, Before that if I wanted the cinematic look, I had to set up a rail system with a 35mm adaptor from Redrock Micro with the Sony EX3 . What we can do now, it's mind blowing.

Again A lot of users here seem to be speaking in absolutes, like my way is the only way and what i'm saying is true because i've used X Y and Z camera therefore I know better. GH3 users saying the GH3 is the best because it's just as cinematic and it's so easy to set up and use with minimal accessories. What has ease of use have to do with the final image? 

I'm a narrative and advertisement film maker, we use blackmagic because despite their flaws, they work well and the final image is great, for people saying the 5DM3 blows it away in low light, I work in a stuido and we have lights, I thinnk huge sensors have made people lazy, not using lights because the sensor can cope in low light. I never shoot anything that doesn't have a proper lighting. We also have 5DM3 on set but we don't use them for filming in raw because it's paid. Why use RAW, you don't need it you say? we do because we do a lot of green screen work, I'm also a visual effects artist, anyone who is will know that working with 8 bit 4:2:0 DSLR footage will know it's terrible for keying, and before people say, I can key DSLR footage and it looks great, let me tell you, there is a big difference between, it looks ok, and something that looks professional.

I think people are downplaying a lot of what blackmagic does, Take the pocket cinema camera which I own (FAN BOY TALKING), It's under $1000 and shoots Prores 422 and will soon Shoot 12bit RAW CinemaDNG. No other camera does that, The GH3 is a lot easier to use and it produces fanastic images, it's also got a great view finder and it's files are smaller and easier to manage, guess what, I don't care about any of that stuff, I and my clients care about the end image, not how I got there, just what it is. The GH3 does not produce better images, I don't care what you say, it just doesn't. For me colour grading matters a lot, and RAW enables me to push it much further than any non hacked DSLR, the GH3 crumbles if you push it too much in the grading department. Even the pocket cams prores grades beautifully without RAW.

I thought I would just give a different perspective, I wasn't going to comment but I seen too many GH3 users saying why the GH3 is good enough and overall a better camera when you factor in it's easy of use. Like that's all that matters. I read someone saying in regards to Dynamic range, there was only a little difference between the 5D and the BMPCC, i'm sorry but I can tell a huge difference. 

I know i'll probably get shot down but i'm sorry I think a lot of people are missing the point, which is the end image. For run and gunners, yeah the GH3 is the way to go. For me, at the moment Blackmagic is my brand, expecting good things from the 4K version.