Tim Sewell

? 
the first one i made flew away

The saga so far has seen me order 3 different fabrics. A white ripstop parachute nylon (suggested by the estimable Phil Rhodes), a classic sailcloth and some 'bridal' tulle. Picked up a length of muslin while I was there! Frame-wise I was pricing stuff up and it works out that just buying a couple of Manfrotto Lastolite 2mx2m frames will be cheaper than trying to build my own. I'll keep the board posted as to my progress.

The DP's response would most likely be:  "Perhaps it would be better if you shot this yourself..."

Properly exposed C-log on the C100 II looked to me, with the right lens, every bit as good as the 5d3 in raw.  I shot the latter for 2+ years (started in about May of 2013).  At the end of the day there's just way too many compromises with the 5d3 raw - tedious workflow (comparatively speaking), camera lock ups, audio sync headaches *if* ML raw even decides to record audio (yes I've used modern nightly builds).  Reliability?  Don't even compare the two.  No instant backup, no ND filters, no XLR audio, no Autofocus, shorter record times, more expensive (1000x or faster) CF cards, super dodgy 3x zoom mode that locked me up often.
If I'm shooting something I can do 10 takes on the 5d3 would be a good choice.  If it's a bride walking down the aisle, 100 out of 100 times I'd grab the c100.  If I need continuous AF, good audio, long battery life, long record times, quick turnaround, (you see where I'm going here) I'll grab the c100.  With the Sigma 18-35 1.8 it's like 27-54 2.8 of full frame, and you can still throw that 85 1.2 and blow the hell out of the background on both cameras.  Hell in the summer I had the 5d3 OVERHEAT shooting ML raw.  Never seen the c100 hiccup ever.   That image does have the magic sauce, but so does the c100 in C-Log.  I prefer it over the 1dc due to all the headaches.
No reliable 1080p30 or 1080p60 raw on the 5d3; c100 II has this.  I hate looking at sports shot in 24p, don't you?
I can go out with the 10-18 STM, 18-135 and 55-250 and shoot just about anything.  Dead silent AF with face tracking, great audio, great image and reliable.  No menu diving to toggle the WB, ISO, F/Stop, better focus peaking and punch in while recording.  An actual EVF instead of strapping on a damn loupe!    But hey...if you must have static shots with the FF DOF and raw, the 5d3 is the only thing in this price range.

I have to plus-1 for the C100 mkii. I recently sold my other cameras to buy a secondhand one (GBP3000) and although I've been pretty much confined to quarters due to a combination of work and bad weather since it arrived, what little I've been able to shoot has given me an experience I never had with any of the others. I loaded the log footage into FCPX, applied a technical LUT and felt my jaw hit the floor. Just an all-round gorgeous image. Experiments in the kitchen in low light were also mandible-lowering, it simply knocks the socks off anything I've ever used before in the way the IQ holds up at high ISOs. Add to that the ease-of-use, the astonishing battery life, the parsimonious-yet-gradeable codec, the NDs and you have a machine that you just want to pick up every time you have a moment spare.
I have the 55-250 and 18-135 STMs arriving over the next few days and, weather permitting, an afternoon filming my son in a tennis tournament at the weekend and I just can't wait.
I'll just also add that I've had an idea for a micro-documentary brewing in my mind for some time, but just couldn't figure out a way to do it single handed with my previous gear. Just my around-the-house experience so far with the C100 mkii has finally given me the confidence to set to work on it and I have a meeting soon with the subject to get it all in place - so thanks, Canon!

I think his blog is something like the fifth most influential in this field.

Apparently shipping now USD5995.

I have to plus-1 for the C100 mkii. I recently sold my other cameras to buy a secondhand one (GBP3000) and although I've been pretty much confined to quarters due to a combination of work and bad weather since it arrived, what little I've been able to shoot has given me an experience I never had with any of the others. I loaded the log footage into FCPX, applied a technical LUT and felt my jaw hit the floor. Just an all-round gorgeous image. Experiments in the kitchen in low light were also mandible-lowering, it simply knocks the socks off anything I've ever used before in the way the IQ holds up at high ISOs. Add to that the ease-of-use, the astonishing battery life, the parsimonious-yet-gradeable codec, the NDs and you have a machine that you just want to pick up every time you have a moment spare.
I have the 55-250 and 18-135 STMs arriving over the next few days and, weather permitting, an afternoon filming my son in a tennis tournament at the weekend and I just can't wait.
I'll just also add that I've had an idea for a micro-documentary brewing in my mind for some time, but just couldn't figure out a way to do it single handed with my previous gear. Just my around-the-house experience so far with the C100 mkii has finally given me the confidence to set to work on it and I have a meeting soon with the subject to get it all in place - so thanks, Canon!

Based on very recent experience - Canon C100 mkii.

Here's an amazingly detailed and informative video of a presentation given by David Mullen ASC on (mainly) simulating daylight.
 

I think his blog is something like the fifth most influential in this field.

Well look at this - newsshooter to the rescue: http://www.newsshooter.com/2017/02/23/masv-rush-a-super-fast-pay-as-you-go-file-transfer-system-for-the-professional-video-production-industry/

Well look at this - newsshooter to the rescue: http://www.newsshooter.com/2017/02/23/masv-rush-a-super-fast-pay-as-you-go-file-transfer-system-for-the-professional-video-production-industry/

Uploading a large ProRes master to Vimeo also helps to reduce motion compression artefacts.

Cool. I've been playing with this sort of thing too - trying to create a digital tobacco filter. Hadn't tried blending with 'Soften' mode, though, so that's this evening's activities planned for me! Thanks.

It sounds as though you should check out some tutorials on achieving dynamic balance, which will generally involve adjusting the sled weights non-symmetrically..

When they got to their vows... I nearly hurled

Uploading a large ProRes master to Vimeo also helps to reduce motion compression artefacts.

Also, compression artifacts will affect our perception of motion.

Dynamic range, motion cadence.

To my eyes slow-mo tends to look cinematic by default. But if the OP is speaking about dropping frames to convert to 24p... then yes,  I believe you are correct that motion blur will look at bit off. 

You will lose motion blur by shooting at a higher frame rate. Shooting at 24p gives a shutter speed of 1/48 (if you're using the 180 rule, which I assume you are), which gives the level of motion blur we subliminally associate with cinema. If you shoot, say at 60p, you'd be using a higher shutter speed by necessity, so the motion blur would be affected.

No doubt everyone's aware of this, but Cooke Optics' YouTube channel is yet another department of the free film school: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-Ya9gBlwOhRwtloTn1hvbA

Sorry but I can't agree with this - if you mean 'save' in the sense of preserving their current/historic size and market penetration. The fact is that there is certainly no technology available today that would let the vast majority of, say compact P&S camera users, produce watchable video. To produce anything of that nature still - and will for some time - needs practise and acquired skill. That majority of consumers neither want nor need to take the time and make the effort to build those skills.
Given the steady improvement in smartphone cameras, which very much allows consumer-level users to produce stills that look fine without skill or knowledge, I can't actually see anything that is going to save the photo camera makers butts in their current forms.
FWIW my prediction is that within a couple of decades we'll either have less than half the current number of manufacturers, or a similar number, but less than half their current sizes/values. Without the cash engine of a large consumer camera market we'll also see a relative rise in prices of the kind of cameras we want as fewer sales have to support the same level of R&D and tooling.

I used to work in the world of obscure international trade shows and magazines, first as an ad/space salesman, later on the operational side. The magazines - with enticing titles like 'World Plastics and Rubber Technology', 'Railway Interiors' and 'Automotive Testing International' were 100% advertiser-led. They had editorial staff, who called themselves journalists - but in reality they were employed to put the words of the advertisers and the exhibitors into a form that looked like journalism but was, in fact, thinly disguised advertorial. There was absolutely no way in the world that any of those magazines would have criticised any advertiser, exhibitor, or potential client of the future - the companies in those industries could have caused the immolation of a small country and the only news about them in our mags would have been about their latest widget. This became especially pernicious once the publishers all jumped on the (far more lucrative) expo business as potential exhibitors would be offered puff pieces in the magazines as an incentive to book stand space.
That, I'm afraid, is the end game in non-news journalism once it becomes advertiser led. In fact, it even happens in pure news as well - witness the ongoing reluctance, for instance, of the Daily Telegraph to publish articles critical of China in the light of its regular, highly profitable, supplements sponsored by that country.
Personally I stopped taking much notice of DPR once Amazon bought it as, having the experience outlined above, I couldn't see how a website owned by one of the largest camera retailers could maintain integrity in the long term. Whether or not they actually have started to water down adverse opinions of cameras or their manufacturers, the fact is that I can no longer be sure that they don't. And that's the pity of it.
I don't make my living with cameras any more - it's a fun hobby, but an incredibly expensive one (well it isn't actually - I've got friends who are into cars and motorbikes who will happily spend tens of thousands of pounds on their passions and no-one really bats an eyelid - I spend £3K on a camera and people think I'm insane) so I need to know that the sources of information I use to guide my purchases are going to give me the bad news as well as the good. I no longer bother with any of the 'magazine' style sites at all - I research potential purchases here and on DVX User and get opinions, in the round, that I can trust.