tugela

5 hours ago, Nikkor said:

What I don't understand is why they didn't make a "crappy" Fullframe mode. I mean, the 5Dr turns 50mp into 1080p, they could have turned 30mp into 4K the same way, or the way the 5dmkiii does 1080p.

Because it would have been beyond the capabilities of the processor within what they consider an acceptable thermal envelope.

They did it for technical reasons, not to screw you over.

1 minute ago, Hanriverprod said:

You think? Besides the orange tinted close-ups that might be 1080 slo-mo, really soft and out of focus I'm assuming because it's night, the 4k stuff looks pretty good for handheld and both the single operator and subject moving. Erratic shots this wide open at night is going to challenge any focus puller. How are you going to set marks for this kind of shooting? For this style, it looks pretty good to me. I imagine with more conventional shots with set marks for blocking the autofocus will do pretty good. I'm going to rent a 1dx ii and try it out.

Well, we have been told that DPAF is superfast at focusing and stays on target like glue. Apparently that is not the case, at least in the video above.

The daylight shots were soft as well, not only the low light ones.

6 hours ago, LippyLee said:

Won't be too disappointed if we see moire and aliasing in the 1080p as with the 80D, sensor is likely to be the same and the Digic 7 which is also used in the G7XII has not resulted in an improvement in video quality.

I still find this a great improvement by Canon of its mirrorless line and a step in the right direction.

The HD encoder logic in the Digic 7 is probably the same as that in the Digic 6, so you would not expect to see a difference with HD. Using the G7XII video as a reference point will be misleading as a result.

19 hours ago, Hanriverprod said:

Some of that autofocus at night wide open when it catches is impressive. That video looks like hyper reality almost cgi like. Can't tell how i feel about. It's alluring but strange. 

Most of that video was out of focus though. The camera was really struggling to keep up.

The footage looks relatively soft on a 1440p monitor as well, so it is not that great.

6 hours ago, mercer said:

And honestly, I still watch most movies on a 720p JVC, so what do I know... It looks good to me. 

That is the reason why you think it looks "better". Watch on a 65" screen and the differences become obvious pretty quickly.

9 hours ago, wolf33d said:

The pictures of the new Canon flagship mirorless leaked. Some specs as well.

this is the latest joke from Canon:

Ergonomics looks amazing. Nice EVF, nice button layout, nice body and grip. 

But guess what? They give us a 80D video spec with no 4K. Are we late 2016? Yes we are. Bravo Canon once again. This camera could have been an AMAZING video S35 camera if it had XC10 specs (4K and nice codec and nice CLOG). Technically easy but Canon won't do it because they are fuckers and I am tired of it

http://photorumors.com/2016/09/08/this-again-is-the-canon-eos-m5-mirrorless-camera/

It is not technically easy. If it was they would have done it. The hardware can't do it without a fan in the camera or using bit rate heavy storage.

8 hours ago, Milton Lopes said:

Waiting for the price tag. I dont usually consider Canon cameras, since i don't miss my old one since i've moved to Panasonic, but if it comes at Rebel price territory it sounds to me like a great B-Cam for its AF and stills capabilities. 

About $300-350 is what it is worth.

8 hours ago, mercer said:

7 hours ago, mercer said:

Is it though? As a consumer I would rather give my money to a company that is honest about their technological issues than to a company that gives everything but the kitchen sink and half of it doesn't work properly.

Say what you will about Canon, but when you buy one of their cameras, it works as advertised. And don't forget, Canon was the first DSLR/DSLM to have 4K. My point about heat dissipation was about highly compressed low bitrate 4K that the other companies are offering not the mjpeg or xf-avc codecs they are using in their higher end models.

And as I said before, when your high bitrate 1080 looks as good as downscaled 4K from other manufacturers, then who needs 4K?

Who really needs a 4K TV for that matter? They've created a catch-22 for consumers. They tell consumers... "Here's a 4K TV." The consumer replies... "Great, what can I watch on it?" They say... "Here's an expensive camera that shoots 4K, but it will overheat before your kid blows out her birthday candles." The consumer bends over and takes it in the ass with a big fat smile on their face. And then hands them a few grand for a TV and a camera.

Yes as flexible as e mount, not as much as m4/3 obviously. But C-mount lenses, Pentax 110, a lot of options. As of now, I believe it's just your generic speedboosters, ef and Nikon F. I assume an FD is probably on the horizon as well. 

As far as 4K, IDK why they can't put in a 100mbps mjpeg version or MP4 version like Panasonic. I remember that interview from the guy from Canon saying they were having heat dissipation issues. But as I said in my previous comment. Their high bitrate 1080p looks as good as Panny's low bitrate 4K, so for me where's the benefit? I am downscaling to 1080p before the edit, so I am losing nothing and saving time.

I also really like the new body too. It's nice to see them move to a power switch rather than the button. And I actually like tilt screens better than articulating screens, so again I am pleased with that. 

My questions are bitrate, IBIS, and how well the DPAF will translate through their ef to ef-m adapter. And price. 

Because they don't sell TVs. Or they were being honest last year when they said they were having issues solving heat dissipation for 4K. 

There is absolutely no reason to lie when your excuse is a flaw in technology. 

What are you talking about? Canon's HD bit rates in DSLRs is relatively low.

And pretty much all of it looks worse than downsized 4K.

20 hours ago, DBounce said:

There is no such camera. So why would anyone compare the 1DXMkII to something that is imaginary? Why not just compare to the A12... specs should be killer.

It is in development. Whether it will be released or not remains to be seen. However, the 7 series compete against the 5D, not the 1D, so you should make fair comparisons, not compare a particular model against a competitor's higher tier product.

If the 9 series makes it to market it will almost certainly have much beefier processing capabilities than the 7s, and the larger body form will help greatly in maintaining a more useable heat envelope.

Plus, the first mark III products in the 7 series will probably start to appear in 2017 as well, and they will be more advanced than current models. That is what Canon will be competing against.

13 hours ago, Asmundma said:

Thanks for those. This proves it for face detection, but if you follow a subject with a focus point, like sports, what your experience then? (For Sony) - it did not take me long to figure out that 1dx2 is much better. 

(

The proper comparison for the 1DX2 would be the A9, when it is released. I suspect the later will be more than a match for the Canon.

2 hours ago, rs3d said:

With stills this is easy in Lightroom, but which software supports removal of Chromatic Abberation in video?

In 4K this is quite visible, especially with manual lenses that are not recognized by the internal camera body correction...

By chromatic aberration do you mean real chromatic aberration or light scattering on the beyer filter? Both are commonly referred to as CA, even though only one is.

The only cure of light scattering on the sensor is to use a larger sensor with a relatively low pixel density.

23 hours ago, Ivanhurba said:

Funny you mention that. i guess canon fanboys are going to be on the defensive side from now on. I mean, who needs an EVF, Log, tilty swively screen, eye AF when you have dual pixel raw, dual pixel AF and dual cards. At least they added a touchscreen, not like those Sony losers. 

Never the less, his body language is very defensive, especially when he was talking about why mjpeg was used (he pretty clearly thinks that there is another reason that he doesn't want to say, lol). Which is odd for a marketing guy. Makes you wonder why.

The Canon guy's body language was very defensive.....I don't think he believed the spin he was giving, lol.

20 hours ago, DBounce said:

Had some spare time so I decided to look more closely into the 1080P of the 1DXMk2. And after doing this I concluded that it is pretty bad. More like 720P upscaled to 1080P.
Below I share my finding and compare to mobile as I firmly believe that a $6000 camera should handily outperform a smartphone if the playing field is even. The results may surprise you.

 

I think the problem is that most Canon DSLRs use 1080p of raw pixels, but after debeyering you end up with an effective color resolution of ~700-750p. Unless the sensor is oversampled you will not approach true 1080p resolution. My guess is that sampling is controlled through the hardware encoder in the processor, so if your camera still has one of the older processors (Digic 6 and earlier), you are going to get this soft relatively low res HD output. Maybe the Digic 7 will have the same problem, but it is too early to say since it is in only one camera for now.

Sampling is much better in 4K mode however (in those models that offer it), so in those cases you are probably better off shooting in 4K and downsampling to HD in post yourself.

6 hours ago, johnnymossville said:

I'm no Canon Fan Boi,  but what they lack in resolution they make up for in color science.     They have discovered the magic sauce that Sony would and SHOULD pay Billions for.  

There is no such thing as "color science". It is a made up buzz word (phrase) used in order to rationalize choices made.

9 hours ago, AaronChicago said:

4K 60p bit seems nearly impossible on GH4 sized body. Unless they have a new way to dispense heat.

No. All that is required is next generation silicon with lower power requirements. Panasonic apparently have one of the most advanced processors in any camera (except perhaps the one in the NX1) in the GH4, and that is two years older now. They likely have more modern components now with lower power requirements (which consequently can be pushed more and remain in an acceptable operating thermal envelope).

6 hours ago, aldolega said:

IBIS would be really nice but I feel like if it was included, and the rumors were accurate, they definitely would have mentioned it. Maybe 4K60 and 6K30 generates too much heat for the sensor to be floating so it's not possible. If so I would expect the G7 replacement to have it, but be limited to 4K30 like the GX85.

 

The big heat source would be the processor, not the imager. I think that all of the manufacturers can shoot 4K60p with the sensors they have, they just can't do it without melting down their processors (unless they do a software solution like Canon).

29 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

$30k/£22.5k (plus VAT)

http://cvp.com/index.php?t=product/canon_1471c003aa_c700_pl

$2.5k/£2k for the XC15

http://cvp.com/index.php?t=product/canon_xc15_4k_uhd_camera

Lol....so, $500 for a screw thread?

4 minutes ago, Ivanhurba said:

This could be very well Canon's homerun for high-end productions they were expecting to have. Looks good and complete. Sure, out of our range, but it looks they didn't skimp on anything and it's priced accordingly.

Real professionals are not going to quibble over $30k. I am a scientist and the instruments we routinely use typically cost $50-$250k, so really $30k is relatively cheap if it is something you need to do you job.

So the thread title is incorrect and the cameras have not been announced as suggested?

2 hours ago, Marco Tecno said:

I guess 6k is going to become pretty standard for high end hybrid camera out in 2017 and 2018. I'm sure that itd be already possible on nx1 if Samsung had continued its support via fw updates.

Since the NX1 does a full sensor read and downconverts the result, it probably is capable of doing 6K. The output would likely not be too different from what we currently have however, since the effective resolution of that 6K output would still only be 4K. The full sensor read in the NX1 is the reason why it is the king of resolution currently.

2 minutes ago, DBounce said:

I can see you just don't get it ?

I get it fine. I just don't drink the cool aid.

6 hours ago, sudopera said:

Who knows, maybe they decided to upscale the video internally a bit, but frankly I don't see the logic there.

Horizontal resolution does not need to match vertical resolution. Remember in the old days we used to have non square pixels that were converted on display. Something similar could be done in camera to account for aspect differences.

8 hours ago, ricardo_sousa11 said:

Absolutely fake, and if true, it would certainly cost the same as an FS5 minimum. Besides, how can it be 20mp and output 6k ? Wouldnt it have to be at least 28mpx?

~18 mpixels would be the minimum for 6K, if you do fake resolution like Canon. With an oversampled sensor to account for debeyering, to reach true 6K resolution you would need about 36 mpixels. Accounting for extra pixels, a 20 mpixel sensor could produce a 6K image, with an effective color resolution of around 4K.

34 minutes ago, zetty said:

Isn't motion 100% dependent o

While I agree completely about the resolution, isn't motion entirely dependent on the framerate and shutter speed? What else there is to "get it right"?

24fps is just naturally very limiting in what kind of motion can you do..

"Motion" is the new buzzword for that unquantifiable quality that makes a less sophisticated but more fashionable camera "superior". We have seen the same nonsense in the past about frame rates, bit depth, color, dynamic range, "filmic" (whatever the hell that means - it seems to change year by year). Basically it is a psychological tool to use when demonstrating one's own superiority over peers, they are lesser because they "just don't get it".

It looks like ~720p though.

3 hours ago, jcs said:

The FS7 is great for slomo, the C300 II is great for AF, color, and skintones. Getting ARRI-like color from the C300 II is an amazing deal and the DPAF is super useful. Not having to mess with color AT ALL (if just wanting accurate/pleasing skintones) is a great advantage of the C300 II over the FS7. That's why Canon is still so popular.

But apparently not with the people renting equipment, if the OP is true.

6 hours ago, IronFilm said:

What "conventional timeline" product has even matched their original BMCC in terms of specs and price?

None!!

There has been no such rush due to that like you claim by BMD. As they're still well out in front as pioneers  (Kinefinity being perhaps the only close example, but only at the higher end of BMD's product range).

BM announces products way before they can actually sell them, a year or more in some cases. Most other manufacturers announce them when they are about to start shipping shortly. The point of doing this is pretty obvious: so they can claim bragging rights of being first, when reality is maybe not so much.

An example of the mad rush would be the 4K camera, which was rushed into market when it became clear the Panasonic were about to release the GH4 IIRC. Then there were a few others that were rushed onto the market so they could be sold before BM made their next "amazing" announcement at NAB, lol (presumably because no one would buy the "old" camera after the "new" one is announced).

6 hours ago, John Brawley said:

 

Such as...?

Resolve...?  Oh wait, you get that included with the camera...

Monitors ?  Converters ?  I think you're stretching a pretty long bow....

JB

Such as all the other stuff they make, much of which has much higher margins than these cameras.

People buy Resolve without buying a camera you know. If there were no cameras they probably would sell very few stand alone copies. By selling cameras it creates a buzz and market awareness of their other products, most of which likely have healthy margins. In essence it is a form of free advertising. If you buy one of their products (for example, a camera) you are much more likely to buy other related products they produce as well. This is what is called brand awareness and brand loyalty. The cameras serve the purpose of promoting the company as a serious player in the production field, something that would be WAY harder to do if they were just selling the sorts of things they originally sold.

The cameras themselves on the other hand are priced low, which means that margins are low, which in turn means that in order to break even on manufacturing and R&D they need to sell a LOT of them. A small operation like BM is unlikely to be able to achieve the sots of volumes that would be required for that.

I think it is more probable that their camera division operates at a loss, but it's value comes in leveraging other sectors of the company.

On ‎8‎/‎28‎/‎2016 at 11:10 AM, Kino said:

BMD's problem has always been quality control. Sadly, they seem to have only gotten worse with the Ursa Mini 4K and 4.6K. They don't learn from their past mistakes in rushing cameras out before they are ready. I think it has something to do with the fact that they source parts and do not manufacture their own circuits and sensors as with RED and the electronics conglomerates (Sony, Panasonic, Canon). They are a small camera operation (setting aside their post-production business, which is much older and more established) and offer niche budget products to indie filmmakers and videographers. I'm sure they will continue to focus on this market as opposed to producing cameras for larger productions, which require extensive service arrangements and logistical support.

I shoot with the BMPC-4K and I had a 4.6K on preorder last year. Once I learned about all the problems, I cancelled it just before they shipped it to me. Currently, it's just too much of a risk. Perhaps when they have figured out all the problems, I can be confident in ordering one again.

As for the price/performance, there is nothing even close . . .

The problem with them is that they announce and hype products long before they are ready, so that they can earn brownie points by being "first". But then there are delays, and finally a mad rush to push stuff out the door when it becomes clear that competitors who have more conventional development timelines are about to enter the market.

In that kind of environment QC is not a super high priority unfortunately.

14 hours ago, IronFilm said:

BMD can't make them fast enough to keep up with demand!! That doesn't sound like "not selling many".

 

And as others said, display store demos are damaged all the freaking time :-/

Only when they are flimsy designs to start with.

You expect a pro product to be built like a tank, particularly if it has a minimalist design.

On ‎8‎/‎24‎/‎2016 at 5:30 AM, Andrew Reid said:

We find ourselves in the slightly odd situation of Fuji and Samsung leading the $1000-$2000 market for Super 35mm video.

Read the full article

Quote

2 years later that camera’s video specification hasn’t been bettered by any other APS-C camera and that rather perversely Samsung have chosen not to continue making it.

More accurately, the improvement in video specs in 2016 came about BECAUSE Samsung left, lol. It prompted people to start hacking the cameras to improve performance

3 hours ago, SMGJohn said:

Hopefully Samsung stops being a twat and just makes the NX2 preferably in APS-C sensor cause the full frame is going to have shait rolling shutter unless they stuff two of their best cellphone ARM processors in the camera which will consume more power than a Tesla car.

2160p60 and 1440p120 with HDR or an actual proper LOG profile and high bitrate. 

I know they can do it, also is weird that they exited, everywhere I see and go their cameras are outsold, I checked an online store that had 20+ Samsung NX1, and then a couple of weeks after, they were outsold. 

Such a shame that no one else wants to make a camera like the NX1 even if it would sell like hotcakes.

It still remains a possibility that the camera technology was transferred to another company as a collaborative effort, and that the NX innards will be resurrected under another brand.

Btw, rolling shutter is a function of number of pixels, not sensor size. A FF sensor with the same number of pixels and the same processor would have the same RS. Presumably two years on they would be using a faster processor however, and the read could be done more rapidly with less RS. A NX1 mark II would probably have improved performance in most areas, such as RS, noise, ISO etc.

NX1s were selling out because there were not many distribution outlets and not many units were actually produced. The whole marketing aspect was very bizarre, almost as though they were not trying at all and had already decided to leave the market even before the camera was released.