Jump to content

BenEricson

Members
  • Content Count

    659
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by BenEricson

  1. 11 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

    There has been very little on it so far. I wonder if it is a availability problem or lack of interest.

    Availability. They’re really hard to get ahold of. I just got one of a few from a local shop here in Seattle.

    Seems very good so far. My vintage Olympus and Nikon glass with adapters also hit infinity perfect, meaning the flange distance is properly calibrated (this was an issue with the metabones right out of the box.)

    my 35mm F2 IS works great with the speed booster and AF. I don’t really have much to say besides the adapter works as it should. 

  2. On 12/29/2020 at 11:09 AM, josdr said:

    The RF lenses have been designed very video centric, I think you will get great AF one you use them. thanks for the heads up!

    Interesting that you say that. I own the 24-105 RF and I can tell you that the EF version has a stabilizer that is smoother for video work. The EF version has more of a pleasing sway, while the RF version can feel jumpy. I will be selling and purchasing the EF version that is better for video and half the price!

    I also find the third "control ring" to be incredibly annoying. This wouldn't be as much of an issue with a prime lens, but when there's 3 gears on a lens, it becomes really difficult to operate on the fly.

     

    RF.jpg

  3. 6 hours ago, kye said:

    Every camera has great rolloff if the DR is there, just apply a curve.  If I can get a compliment on the highlight rolloff from a budget P&S camera from 2009 then there are no excuses!

    It's also possible to get a nice rolloff on areas that are clipped, although you don't get any detail back from them obviously.  

    The more I learn about colour grading, the more that I realise that grading is in the same category as production design or lighting, you can't expect your footage to look great if you don't do any set dressing, hair or makeup, or just shoot with whatever light happens to be there when you happen to show up, so why would it look great if you didn't do any colour grading either?

    You are correct in your research.

    Let me rephrase what I said. I believe that if you're after that overall softer / filmic look, the bmpcc will get you there easier and quicker. There's no sense shooting with a GH5 if you can get that look with less work. A colorist friend of mine often says, "the least amount of moves wins.

  4. 5 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

    The 12 bit RAW makes a difference. Color holds up better. Now 12 bit Prores raw from the S1 should be just as organic looking tho.

    I have to disagree. In my experience, even the ProRes HQ offers a very unique and pleasing unprocessed feeling image. IMO a lot of the magic is in the highlights.

  5. 2 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

    Take the size of the film camera market today

    That will be size of digital camera market in 10 years 🙂

    I wonder if lack of a need for upgrade is a factor. A 5D Mkiii from 8 years ago is obviously much better than any cell phone, but also pretty comparable to a DSLR bought yesterday. I think cameras have been good enough for a while. This is obviously the case for video cameras...

    My partner takes photos for her business with a Canon 60d and an iPad. That camera is 10 years old and still more than enough for most quick product photography shots for the web... Why would she upgrade?

    The film market is pretty decent right now. Tons of people shoot film, but all of those cameras already exist. There are more than enough to supply to demand, unless you want a particular point and shoot, Leica, certain medium format cameras etc.

  6. 5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

    Shot a few times with it handheld, and yikes, the tension it puts on your right wrist as it tries to twist it around is immense. Not really a super comfortable camera to shoot with like that. Too tall!

    I personally love the camera and I find the weight and form factor to be great for shooting from the hip. You need to have your left hand supporting some weight on the lens, with your other hand in the grip. Shooting eye level handheld is another story, not realistic unless you strip down the top handle and monitor.

  7. 10 hours ago, Mmmbeats said:

    I thought I was quite okay with C300iii RAW, but now I can't seem to find any really nice examples of it.  Seems C200 and C300ii RAW is much nicer (creamy, organic, whatever).

    Are there any examples of C300iii RAW films that anybody particularly likes?  Thinking in reference to a possible C200ii mainly.

    No, I can’t find any either. From what I have seen, the DGO sensor is worse than the sensor on the C300 Mkii or the C200. You don’t even need to shoot raw to that look on the C300 mkii - 12 bit 1080p or 4K 10 bit both look excellent.

    This is coming from someone who just bought the C70 but has used the C300 mkii on hundreds of shoots. To top it off, my initial tests don’t show the sensor to be any cleaner than the older ones. Kind of a disappointment...

     

  8. Picked up my C70, Canon 24-105 F4 RF, and EF adapter. Did some quick tests with a 35mm F2 IS and one practical lamp in the living room. Color looks like normal Canon color to me. I'll hopefully have time to shoot more stuff tomorrow afternoon.

    Initial thoughts... Camera feels pretty nice in the hands. The custom presets are really crippled. They took away BT.709 / C-LOG 2. Also, for some reason clog 2 clips at 85 IRE. 

    There are a ton of options for removing all of the noise reduction and you can go all the way to -10 sharpening. I think lowering the in camera sharpness and pairing the camera with older lenses will help to get away from that plastic skin look.

    Practical.thumb.jpg.a86cb876b58893d06965fb5f1c897fe4.jpg

  9. 37 minutes ago, Mmmbeats said:

    Firm rumour now of a C200 mkii incoming! 😲  This line-up is getting extremely hot.

    I'm just wondering (if true) how are they going to differentiate the C300iii?  Presumably the C70 will be cheaper.  C200 (mk i) might become a steal soon (both new and used).

    https://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-cinema-eos-c200-mark-ii-will-arrive-in-april-cr3/

    Wow. Too many cameras. I wonder if it'll be RF mount.

  10. 5 hours ago, guillaume juin said:

    well... why cannot you do that with the FX6? Because you prefer two points of contact instead of three? Three points of contact is not possible with the X70, wheareas it is with the FX6.

    With a loupe it is possible. It basically performs how any DSLR has for the last 10 years.

    The FX6 has no point of contact on the rear of the camera. IMO the FS5 or C300 is a better design than either one of them. 

    I think Sony and Canon have realized they can save the money by not putting in a EVF and still sell just as many units. 

  11. 29 minutes ago, Oliver Daniel said:

    On my ProGrades, you can shoot 4k 120, BUT, the camera will tell you it can’t. It works. BUT, sometimes the card will stop a few secs after recording and day the buffer is full. Not much though. 

    I would just go V90 using Prograde. Best SE cards I’ve ever used. 3 out of my 4 Angelbird cards are faulty. 

    Sale on BH right now. 187 a piece.

  12. 34 minutes ago, currensheldon said:

    The only place it does make sense is using the speedbooster. Pretty amazing you can spend around $700-$800, get the EF 24-70mm f4 IS and get stabilization, a true 24-70mm field of view, and a f2.8 aperture. Whereas the RF version will cost you $2300 and give you a 36-105mm (or so). Much prefer thee FoV of a true 24-70mm.

    OR get the Sigma EF 24-70mm f2.8 for $1100 and get a 24-70mm f2.0 with stabilization. Love the C70 and excited for it, but I'll probably wait for a full-frame C90 before transferring all my EF glass to RF glass (which I am excited to do...)

    It's all a trade off. It is likely there will be some chromatic aberration wide open. (The case on the FS7 / Metabones.) The lenses are also quite a bit larger. Look above at how ridiculous the 18-35 looks mounted so far out on such a small body. The focus ring looks uncomfortable to operate. It almost looks like it needs a rail system, certainly would for a 70-200.

    I do understand it is much more practical to have the 24-105 in EF and be able to choose between S35 and FF with a quick adapter swap, BUT the 24-105 in RF for example, has been reviewed as a much sharper lens compared to the older EF version. Exciting times to have these options and be able to argue over the many looks we can achieve!

    I will be buying the speed booster, but I am also excited about the quicker AF and smaller size of the available RF mount lenses. 

  13. 3 hours ago, Kisaha said:

    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1433714-REG/canon_rf_35mm_f_1_8_is.html

    What about this one? Small, light, I.S, macro and 1.8f.

    That would be the one I would get, everything else in EF.

    I have a C70, the speed booster, and this lens on pre-order. I might pick up the 85mm F2 IS as well. 

    The new 24-105 F4 IS looks interesting, as does the 24-70 2.8 IS.

    The RF mount features better AF, smaller sizes, and faster more light sensitive lenses. IMO buying this camera and not embracing the new lens options doesn't make much sense.

    3 hours ago, Oliver Daniel said:

    ProGrade V90 and V60. 

    Cool. Thanks. What frame rates work with the V60? 4K/24/10bit?

  14. On 11/18/2020 at 3:58 PM, Oliver Daniel said:

    10. You can use a V60 in 4k100fps but comes up with a warning  that it won’t work. It does, but sometimes cuts off due to a full buffer. Not often though. I’d still get a V90. 

    Which cards are you using? I notice Sandisk only makes cards up to 128gb in V90. The V60 come in 256gb... Did the V60 seem to perform perfectly for 4k/24p/XFAVC?

    To be honest, I am a little bummed they went with SD. I would prefer c-fast or some sort of card that feels a bit more durable.

  15. 3 hours ago, D4cl00 said:

    To me these cameras look exactly the same as in the 1990s, except the recording media has shrunk.

    They're worse... Every camera in the 90s and early 2000s at least had a viewfinder and was usable for extremely long periods of time handheld. 

    I think the C70 a better design than the FX6. At least you can throw a loupe on the back and have two points of contact.

  16. 4 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

    Canon colour is one of those things that's said to be good so often, its accepted as fact...  even though those saying it are not really scrutinising the colour in the same indepth analysis as they would use,  say for example Sony colour.  

    Maybe true, but the baked in Profiles on the Canon just look better out of the box. I believe that is fact. The skin shows less flaws and appears smoother. I agree, opinions on color grading log files creates a different argument all together. I am really wanting to see more standard Rec 709 examples. 

    4 hours ago, scotchtape said:

    The last few vids really don't look amazing, subjective I know, but the sailor one the grade made the guy look like a zombie.

    So much for magic color science - the magic happens in post, or the unmagic.

    Agreed. Personally, I think the subject looks better with a little more saturation in the skin and a bit more contrast.

    I am more concerned with the texture. It is just looks so sharp to a fault. Again, there could be additional sharpening, processing, etc. Who knows. I would love to see camera with some vintage glass.

    Screen Shot 2020-11-14 at 1.31.02 PM.png

    Tester.jpg

  17. 4 hours ago, Mmmbeats said:

    I think the C300iii RAW looks really nice.  The C300iii is really the camera I want.  It's well out of my price range, but maybe I should just pull out all the stops and aim for it.  Apart from price (which I don't have too much complaint about, just can't afford) it ticks every box I can think of.

    Agreed. The C300iii looks great. The RF mount is very exciting and has an advantage over the EF. These two lenses in particular., both very fast lenses with IS and macro. The prices are also great. Both are under 600. 

    Canon RF 85mm f/2 Macro IS STM Lens

    Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 Macro IS STM Lens

  18. 1 hour ago, JordanWright said:

    I wouldn't call it a hidden cost, your gonna need NDs with any camera that doesn't have them internally. Its just about getting the best ones for the camera!

    Well yeah, I more meant the IR pollution. I know this has been taken care of on most of the hard stop filters. Still an issue with variable, no?

  19.  

    1 hour ago, JordanWright said:

    You'll want an IRND on the Pockets, I got significant IR pollution with the Tiffen VND. Currently using Hoya ProNDs the IR is correctable but still apparent. Nisi make affordable circular IRNDs, I haven't tried them but they review well. Id go for the 3 and 6 Stop. 

    Another example. There are tons of hidden costs and not even Black Magic documents issues like the IR pollution. 

    2 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

    That said yes its hard to beat something like a C300 but on the other hand people use to shoot DOCs on Film. The ease of use of something like a Pocket 4k is astounding compared to that. I think its all relative to some degree. 

    True, but all of those cameras are ergonomically beautifully designed. Even a simple Bolex has a view finder, drop in NDs (which Canon just now is utilizing 60 years later,) and 50d stock that make shooting in daylight actually possible at a reasonable shutter speed without NDs. For better or for worse, the Black Magic pocket cameras are very much a stripped down sensor in a box. If it had NDs, XLR, a flip screen, and a view finder, it would cost just as much as the C200.

    This sounds like I am anti Black Magic. I'm not. I own the Micro and the original pocket. Both are beautiful cameras, but have lots of flaws and quirks that took me a while to adapt to. The studio I work for has two C300 Mk2s and they're about 100x easier to setup and operate.

  20. 7 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

    It was also shot on the R5, so its hard to judge the C70 on this video.  I'm not sure which clip is which, when watching on via YouTube on my phone.  Some colours look great, others less so.  Some handle highlights better than others. 

    I posted some frames above. The one in the middle is the R5. I am almost certain. The color is more accurate and the skin tones pop without the need to shift everything towards red/pink. (look at the dress.)

    7 hours ago, Mmmbeats said:

    I keep getting a bit worried/distracted/obsessed by the highlight rendition with this camera.  The wedding film, above, doesn't look as nice overall as the previous stills.  Don't get me wrong, it's a nice piece, and I'm sure the families will be delighted, but the highlights do look quite abruptly clipped in places, and it does lend it a bit of a DSLR-y feel.

    Am I being paranoid?

    No. I notice the exact same issue with the C300 Mk3 as well. (same sensor.)

    I though this example was pretty nice. The skin tones look very clean. That being said, there is something about all of the examples that have this very video looking feel. If you don't know what I mean, watch some Komodo footage.

     

  21. I had a pretty bad experience with the P4K. If I did it again, I would probably buy the 6k for the native S35 sensor, eliminating the need for the expensive speed booster. I also would skip the SSD and just bite the bullet and buy c-fast cards. I had a gnarly situation where the SSD lost connection and took me a few minutes to get it back up and running. A few minutes feel like an eternity when the camera won’t respond...

    On top of that, the Metabones adapter and external hard drive eat though battery. I was forced to use an external power source, which adds more cable clutter and the need for mounting solutions. 

    In my opinion, interviews, docs, and everything that you list sounds like you’d be way better off with a c200 or some sort of all in one cinema camera. I don’t absolutely love Sony images, but a used Sony FS5 is probably a steal right now and very well suited for the type of work you describe. 

    I’ve used the C300 Mk2 for years on projects like those and couldn’t imagine having to carry ND filters, a clumsy mounted hot shoe shotgun mic, Lav Mics, while having to control audio through a menu based system.

    I know any camera is capable, but cameras that are designed to allow solo operators to work reliably and quickly, while improving the quality of the production and reduce the chance for error are a beautiful thing. There is a reason docs are shot on the FS7 / C300 (tiger king,) and not a Black Magic camera. Ease of use and reliability. Auto Focus, 5 hours off a single BP60 and dual slot recording 4K beats the SSD hanging of a BM4K and a “fair amount of LP-6s.”

    All of the Black Magic cameras will produce great images. They all have quirks but at the end of the day produce amazing images for the price point. They’re certainly not run and gun doc cameras out of the box, but with the proper rig and the experience, I am sure you can make great looking images.

  22. 52 minutes ago, Oliver Daniel said:

    Just had an email to say my C70 will be delivered by tomorrow! 

    That's awesome! I would love to see some shots with EOS Standard or maybe just Wide DR to get an idea of what the the image looks like straight out of the camera. 

    For instance, the color of the dress in this example jumps around dramatically. I think I am likely seeing the difference between maybe Log-2 on the C70 and the original C-Log on the R5?

    If I had to guess, I would suspect the R5 is producing the more golden looking skin tone, while the C70 looks a bit more red/orange. The saturation is a little crazy on the second frame, but the color looks more true / balanced to my eyes. 

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEO2DHysE6k

    C70.jpg

    Log1.jpg

    C70_2.jpg

  23. 2 hours ago, Mmmbeats said:

    Some very encouraging grading demos here:

    (if you find the guy super annoying, jump to the very worthwhile grading stuff at 5:30 😉)
     

     

    Man, I just don't see it. I love the specs, but a lot of this footage just reminds me of cheap DSLR footage with a poor attempt at a "film look." 

    The C300ii or older canon footage, (pre DGO sensor,) looks dynamic and beautiful with very accurate and balanced color.

    I do believe that you can a get a more neutral / classic look with this camera, but curious why a lot of the videos have a similar look. Maybe trying to grade a C-LOG2 file from scratch? 

    I've heard multiple people mention they love the IQ and the reviewer above is raving about it. The specs and size are great, and the images have a low noise floor, but do these images really knock people off their feet? All the praise over these images makes it sounds like we're all talking about the Komodo or something.

    https://vimeo.com/472141764 / More C70

    https://youtu.be/ohTfU1trOIo / Random C300 Mk2 video

×
×
  • Create New...