Jump to content

Adam Penney

Members via Facebook
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Adam Penney

  1. C stands for Cinema, and while the C-line has been super successful in broadcast, I'm disappointed that it did not actually deliver proper cinema tools. They should've named the line B for Broadcast, and focused on creating 1DC ( FF + S35 @ 4K ), 7DC ( 2K @ S35 ) and 5DC ( 2K @ Full Frame ) dslrs with internal EosRAW codec, this would've made the C-DSLR system very modular and perfect for filmmakers.

     

    What cinema tool would you like?

  2. We see this a lot with the announcement of every new camera and I thought it was the worst with the BMCC.  People use the world game changer far too often.  

     

    I own a C100 so maybe I'm bias.  Yes I shoot mostly for web and TV but to say the C300 looks 'tv', by which you mean bad, is just not true and I hate to say it but sounds kind of ignorant.  I have shot on the Epic, Scarlett, BMCC, C100, 5D, 7D etc and any of those cameras can look 'cinematic' when used correctly, and they can look bad when not.

     

    I shoot mostly documentary material so for me the C100 is the perfect camera (The C300 would be my perfect camera if I could afford one...) Yes on paper the C100 and even C300 do not look over impressive, but once you see the footage these cameras are recording all that goes out the window.   I shoot to AVCHD and I have seen my work broadcast on TV in HD and it looks great, better then most things I have seen on CBC to be honest..haha.  

     

    As far as a C200/C400, while I don't have any info saying otherwise, I can't see why Canon would upgrade just yet, their cameras are selling great right now.  

     

    As for the GH4, Id like to withhold judgement until the camera is out and we can see some solid reviews.  I feel though it wont live up to the hype, similar to the BMCC (shot on it one and will never use it again) 

  3. While your right to point out Canon needs to step it up, your lionizing of the GH4, a camera that isn't even out yet and one that you haven't even tested in a working environment is a bit speculative beyond reason, borderline fanboy. I use C300's constantly for national broadcast shows because the codec, form factor, storage and power draw ideally suit broadcast work. While you go on about the 4k abilities of a GH4, most pros and networks would take the 1080p of an Alexa any given day. And you seem to overlook the most glaring shortcoming of a GH4 - Micro 4/3's. It's a chip size that's neither here nor there. Too small to give a truly cinematic DOF and too limited in the choice of lenses. Then there are design flaws with the GH4. The HDMI cable will still get in the way of the flip out. Do you know if the 1/4" mount and lens mount have been reinforced since the GH3. I've ripped the 1/4" mount right out of the body from some mild vehicle mount and bent a lens mount with an Olympus zoom. The C 100/300 will easily hold a 70-200 without a lens bracket.

     

    In short, please stop talking like the GH4 is a success before you actually used one on a job with paying clients or extensively tested it. This sort of speculation serves no one, except perhaps Panasonic.

     

    I'm glad someone finally said it.  This is right on.  

×
×
  • Create New...