BenEricson

There's not much content shot with the BMMCC yet. There is tons of very black magic pocket footage however. The color it can produce is just on a different level.

To me the C300ii looks different than other cameras I have used, I wonder if this is improved. How did you feel about the motion on the F3?

It is the MKii, so C-LOG2 Bt709. It does something nice to the skin and the room in the highlights is really nice. You should try some C-LOG and download the LUTS canon has available. I think the WIDE DR looks really really nice myself. C log could work for wide shots with a need for a lot of range.

Yeah, it will work. A kit lens may be more compact. Another nice lens is the Canon 35mm F2 IS. I would say any lenses with IS will be best for this type of setting.

I have been using the C300 Mkii a ton the past few weeks. First two are FS700/7Q footage, the second is C300ii. The Canon just produces punchy colors that look cinematic. I really want to like the Sony stuff, but have struggled a lot with the FS700/7Q. That FS7 footage seems to look reasonably close to what I get out of the Canon though. I know VICE grades everything, so I wonder about that as well. I could do a direct side by side of the FS700/7Q and the C300ii, but probably not exactly what people are looking for.

The C100 also does REALLY well in mixed lighting/indoor lighting. You don't need a super high DR, so I would imagine it is perfect for this sort of thing. The c100ii is really underrated in my opinion. It just looks so nice.

Yes, it passes through. Same goes for the FS700/7Q. I use the C300mkii at work and the image is absolutely amazing. It's just beautiful to look at. I believe the C300ii and C500 have a comparable image.

Ed David might have some. He used to shoot with it a lot I think.

Exactly. Without a recorder, you're better off with a c100mkii...

I am considering as well. It's such a pro looking image. Wish the recorder wasn't so large.

I shot a ton of stuff with the histogram right in the middle with the pocket/pro res. The image looks great, the Sony FS700/7Q, you kinda need to peg the histogram to the right or the image just gets so noisy and gross. I do think well shot RAW when you have a ton of time to process just ends up looking better, but the struggle/time/work flow can end up ruining the creative process.

I'm curious if you can get smooth camera zooms at a slower rate with this camera. Been looking at this for a while. Seems like a nice grab and go camera... Some nice test footage. https://vimeo.com/134619668

I love how the F3 image looks. Seems like it has some magic to it, a bit like the pocket but with less hassle. (Internal ND, XLR audio.)

This is probably my favorite look out of the lot. Close to canon in a lot of ways. A nice light blue sky, nice looking skin as well. That lens is actually a vintage 50mm 1.4 Olympus Lens. It was all the way open so looks kind of soft. I wanted to get away from the super super sharp look. Also, you basically have to expose your shadows to at least 20 IRE, anything below that will result in a ton of noise. The 4k/60p is probably my favorite thing from this camera. If I get time, I can post some more footage. This is my favorite looking FS700/7Q footage. I think he shoots raw... https://vimeo.com/121079207

C100 with auto focus… Remember, you're shooting action, but you're still just trying to get shots. Same way you would shoot a baseball game. You don't try to follow the ball around the field. You just need a series of shots to tell the story.

I get what you're saying. The FS700 is really nice to use because of the slow motion, internal ND, XLR, and the 4k. The sony FS7 seems to nail color a lot better and there's some magic cameras like the Sony F3 that just have beautiful color. I use the c300ii at work, the 5D raw for personal stuff, and I just recently picked up a micro cinema camera as well. The only camera I struggle with color wise is the FS700. It doesn't matter how flat the image or how many bits I am supposedly getting... The first frame below is 4K FS700, the second is 1080p Black Magic Micro. I just can't get a film look out of the Sony. It always makes skin look too white, and if I warm up the scene, everything gets murky looking. I have some 4K footage currently uploading if anyone is interested in grading it, I would love to see your results. That being said, the Sony FS700/7Q is not a bad investment. I doubt the value will drop too far below what it is currently. It is probably good for another 4/5 years, which is insane because it's already 4/5 years old. Edit: Link to raw footage if anyone wants it. A bunch of 4k/60p in various lighting. https://we.tl/xE0joWj5Tw

A used Canon 24 - 105 is a really nice all around lens. You can use this for a variety of shoots, really goo for documentary shooting with the IS. F4 is a bit slow so it really shines in outdoor settings. The Sigma 18 - 35 is good as well. It really depends what camera. If you're shooting handheld or on a rig, image stabilization will be huge.

But no auto focus or 60p. There's not even any 30p at 4k!

Totally. The HQ might be too big, but I can send you some Pro Res LT S-LOG 2 stuff for you to play with tomorrow.

Pros: 4k, Internal NDs, XLR audio, 120fps/4k, Continuous 4k/60p, 7Q is a beautiful monitor on set, price. Cons: Sony color, ergonomics, size, and weight. I've used this setup a lot over the last year. I'm just not a fan of the color it produces. You will have a hell of a time getting the colors to get to look like canon. A 5D3 raw will destroy this setup in color. I actually borrowed it recently from work and shot a few test shots. If you want I can send you some 4K files to mess around with. The quality and lack of noise when exposed correctly is really nice. All that being said, a c100 will look better for an interview most of the time. Added resolution, sharpness, or high frame rates will not make the colors look better. https://vimeo.com/165244135 5D3 blows it away. It's nearly impossible to get a saturated commercial look out of the FS700. You can get a nice grade, or something interesting, but you won't get that canon look. The F3 actually produces really really nice, cinematic looking color. The FS700 can't even come close to the F3...

Exactly. You can talk specs all day, but the XC10 produces a better image than the RX10, same with the C100ii vs the FS5.

The C300ii says 15 but there is serious noise issue. The 5D3 in my experience has higher DR than the pocket or micro, just because it is so clean in the shadows. It's pretty amazing...

Looks really nice. How smooth are you able to get zooms on this camera? Is it possible to get a motorized zoom look? The color and detail is really nice, the quality of the lens shows when it is pointed towards a blown out light source. This could depend on the f stop, etc, but wide open towards the sky doesn't look so hot.

Exactly. It is proven time and time again that color is more important than sharpness. It would be sharper with the A7S, but the color would be "pure shit."

The colors on this camera are extremely difficult to work with. The footage is amazing in every other way. 4k/120fps is so nice to have. Lowlight is great as well. You can get the whole FS700/7Q kit for around 5k if you look around. The setup is large and not a huge fan of the color. It takes a lot of work to get it a nice place.