OliKMIA

5 hours ago, Richard Bugg said:

 The notion that nothing said can be trusted leads to cynicism.

Not nothing in general however advertising and marketing material can not be trusted, thus the need for independent reviews.

25 minutes ago, Eduardo Portas said:

No young filmmaker is going to spend 4,600 dollars on a 35mm T1.5 Canon Cinema lens, as I noted above.

Seems a bit too deceptive, no?

Even if they did I don't think anyone would have notice since the canon DSLR "image quality" is so horrible. There is no point of fitting a fancy cinelens on a horrible camera: 1080 that looks like 720, tons of aliasing, heavy contrast/low DR and so on. This video is just pure non-sense like most marketing material. Nothing deceptive here.

Now we can play the shocked virgins all we want but who is willing to pay a monthly fee to access DPR ? If the answer is no, that's what we must endure without bitching.
And even if DPR is own by amazon, there's still a financial department at the end of the accounting period. Money doesn't rain from the sky and I don't see why amazon would provide cash to this website just for fun.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like the sponsored post neither but as the DPR person said earlier in this thread the usual Banners Ads don't work anymore so they must find new source of revenue.

On 12/24/2016 at 10:24 AM, Andrew Reid said:

To think this video now has over half a million views and a sales spike in 80D's because of it...

All because some dick is prepared to bare face lie through a sponsored video so he can enrich himself.

And it totally undermines what we're trying to do, passing knowledge between us on the forum, testing cameras, putting time and money into reviews without any support from Canon at all.

They can all go and fuck themselves.

The video is so cynical.

I hope Canon's dumb pro customers who don't know better do what Scott DickWanker says he does.... selling all the pro Canon gear for an 80D! That would be funny.

Why do you even care ? If some people buy this camera based on an official video posted on the manufacturer channel there is nothing we can do for them. Cynical ? It's all about business. Did you call Philip Bloom cynical when he showed up in the official Phantom and Inspire release video ?

I really don't understand who Canon is targeting here. The mass market (blogger, soccer mom, your little sister) could have been influenced by this stupid marketing attempt a few years ago but they are now too busy shooting "stories" with their cell phone, doing editing in an app and post the result vertically in 720p on the social networks... They will never buy this outdated paperweight.

Now if a beginner videomaker purchase this crap it means he's dumb AF because he haven't done the most basic research, at this point he deserve to become a 80D user.

Honesty ? Since when advertisement and marketing is honest ? It just doesn't exist. Again, we must do the due diligence with the help of honest reviewer like you Andrew.

On 12/24/2016 at 7:46 PM, Eduardo Portas said:

For the sake of transparency, It would be even nicer if you noted that the director used a huge and expensive

Canon cinema lens for the majority of the shots: a 35mm T1.5 that costs 4,600 dollars!!!!

 

Except for marketing purpose, it's just lipstick on a pig... Or perhaps the gimbal was balanced this way... This lens changes nothing, the sensor and tech behind it is horrible for video. 1080 that looks like 720p since the T2i. A 40 years old FD lens would have been the same.

I wait until we get the full specs list and some independent reviews.

I think that DPR is past the clickbait thing leaving that to petapixel and fstoppers (amon others). DPR is known for its extensive camera review. Now the question remains, would you pay a monthly fee to maintain their independence ? Money doesn't fall from the sky and if we want a comprehensive Photo/video review media with regular and in depth coverage we must pay for it.  EOSHD is great but Andrew post when he can.

It's troubling for sure but DPR also needs a source of revenue, no one works for free. They have full time people, in depth reviews take time and hosting a website with thousand of visitors cost money.
The question is about the business model and I'll move the subject to us, the readers. We always want things for free but bitch against advertising. Are we not the problem ? How many people here would pay $5 or $10 per month to get access to a sponsor/ads free DPR ? If we are not ready to pay for their independence, we must endure the plague of advertorials and sponsorship. As simple as that.

Good points. Does it mean that we are going to loose the Pet and Food mode ?
 

Not sure about the Canon cycle though. As you said with the 5Dmk2, the 5Mk4 was so boring that I decided to continue with my 6D. Canon is it's own enemy here. Sony is on the opposite side, releasing way to much unfinished product every years. So far the only thing that prevented me to buy a Sony camera was the lack of battery life, lack of good lenses and quality issue (overheating, etc.). With the new G-master lens serie and Sigma entering into the FE mount dance, the lens situation is changing. As soon as they put their stuff together I'll be very happy to ditch Canon for Sony.

I also don't mind spending $2k for a GH5 given all the great features (4k60, 10bits, dual stab, etc) but I will not go above $3k if the market goes crazy with "medium format" (which one?) and > $5k prices.

That being said, this is my personal point of view and I'm not sure what people like me represent in the sales charts.

Hey Andrew. Sorry if I offended you. Your Spain video is great as well as all your stuff on Vimeo. Please don't invoke Godwin and Trump here. This election is finally over, I just can't stand it anymore. Let's focus on skin tones and filming look here. Enjoy your 1Dxmk2.

5 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

You are free to have a different opinion about your cameras but it's a bit questionable attacking someone for being against your favourite brand.

Hi Andrew. I totally understand your point of view and I find this website very interesting. Even though I'm still "eating" to regular tables such as DPReview and other mainstream websites, picking the dish I like and ignoring the rest, I'm always curious to check your food. I know that your house will be different, a bit "bi-polar" sometime but always refreshing, free of any marketing interest and willing to be commercially incorrect in this huge ocean of product placement and influencers that internet has become.

For me Canon got a few interesting features (colors, DPAF) but the Cons are just too much for the price. However I have no religion in terms of gears. As long as you are comfortable with your Canon and others are satisfied with Sony or Pana, I totally respect that and will not do any proselytism.

That being said, I'm kind of confused by your Spanish video here. Looks like a video I could have made in 2 days back in the days when I started with my T3i. I mean the contrast, expo, colors, cuts and all that. I'm not attacking your skills, I'm assuming you make a living out of it and you surely have way more experience and knowledge than me but showing this type of video to illustrate a high end DSLR review is surprising. Perhaps this is what people are trying to say here.

2 hours ago, BenEricson said:

GH5 is not currently available, and you're talking about traveling around with twice as much gear. It all depends on what you're needs are. There's a lot to be said for one hybrid camera that just works, really really well.

You can tell the difference between good color and bad color, even on tiny displays, (mobile phone.) Any of the canon cameras just make work flow easier. 

Of course, no religious believe here. There is no perfect camera. Good that Andrew likes his 1dxII. As for the workflow I'm not sure about the massive MJPEG.

Agree on Color but I find the Spain video very very soft (might be youtube). The contrast and DR is so "Canon", reminds me my first T3i. Not a bad camera but at $6k I would rather keep my 6D/5dmk3 for photo and get an extra GH5 or future Osmo. DJI is really moving like crazy. Canon still has the great DPAF and low light is not that good on M4/3. We can't have it all but with H265 and 10 bits becoming more mainstream I'm not sure where the 1Dx will stand in 2-3 years. Hopefully Sony will put his stuff together.

Meanwhile Canon offers $3.5 camera that only do 4K with 1.7 crop and MJPEG (The P4 does H265 btw). I know, not the same sensor, FF, heat issues, etc. Lot of excuses.

Too bad there is no linear mode in 4K. It's a deal breaker for me.
 

The Casey video is complete BS since the guy didn't focus correctly (he was not aware of the focusing feature).

As for sensor quality over the P4 and GoPro 5/Karma, all of them have a 1/2.3" sensor, Mavic included. The GoPro 5, P4 and Mavic also max out at 60mbps. So the difference will come from signal treatment and optic.

At the moment there is no real independent review of the Mavic. Just a bunch of people hand picked by DJI.

So far there isn't real independent reviews of the Mavic and the Karma. Just a bunch of general previews made by people who don't know anything about drones or by people who have "preferred" relation with a manufacturer...

That being said, the Mavic looks very good but I'm curious about its ability to produce good image in windy condition. I've done good stuff with the P3 and P4 in 30mph winds. I'm also concerned about the tiny camera: will that be possible to install a ND filter on it ?

Between the P3 and P4, I would go for the P3 because it's much cheaper, same for the batteries (they are expensive). The P4 only brings sides features such as collision avoidance. The IQ isn't very different (just a bit more sharp on the P4).

This is all P3 btw (except the timelapse)

Now, is there a good or a least decent NATIVE zoom lens to put on this body ?

Thanks for your answer. I'm sure it's a lot of work, trial and error and experience. Not anything I would do right now especially when I can it for $9.99 ! Good job Andrew.

6 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

You load my picture profile file onto the camera via USB. Instructions provided in the guide. It is easy to do.

They are not just tweaks of the existing Canon profiles (i.e. dialling contrast, tone, etc.)

Ok makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. I didn't know about the possibility of building custom profiles beyond the traditional settings in the camera menu (tone, sharpness, saturation, etc.). Just out of curiosity, what kind of interface do you used to build these special profile ? Is there a special software to do that ?

Hi. Not sure to understand well. Basically you are offering a combination of Picture Profiles to enter in the Camera and then LUTs for post ?

So to get the "Chrome" look I would have to dial a specific Picture Profile and use the matching LUT in post ?

What about "C-LOG" ?  I assume it's just a picture profile here ?

Thanks

Unfortunately this is the usual Canon DSLR garbage also called "Canon 1080"...

Can't wait to blow $50k in the new C700 and have to carry to a brick. Yeah, Yeah, I know the C100 is available for $4000 but I do need 4k actually. Oh and I'll also buy a 5Dmk4 to take pictures because I need both stills and video. Thanks for opening my eyes @gelaxstudio 

5 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

But hey, I await to be pleasantly surprised

CANON

Oh no sorry, here is the GH5, A7S3 and A7R3. Bye Canon.

Yes.. I knew I saw that picture before, you know trying to shop for camera with real DR

The first picture is from the current "Dramatic DR improvement article" while the second is from the review D810 conclusion https://***URL removed***/reviews/nikon-d810/18

The first picture of the article to illustrate the increased DR comes from their review of the D810 and there is not mention of this... Kinf of misleading...