Asmundma

A lot of people are is pissed about the R5 crippling, I could understand if you don’t have a Cx00 camera. If you have, your investment would be more or less lost. Thats the reason Canon did this firmware crippling. Actually it make sense, like it or not. So please stop this stupid arguing about the marketing, Use your logical sense Then this is 100% as expected. 

Yes, bummer, no 4k60 ...........shit.....

On 5/19/2018 at 2:30 PM, DBounce said:

So I downloaded some C200 footage to play around with... and, it seems noisy. I can’t seem to get it clean. Is nose reduction always needed with raw footage? Is that part of the normal raw process? I don’t recall always needing NR with my Blackmagic cameras.

Got the CRM Files from here. Had a play with the indoor footage. I worked directly from FCPX by installing the Canon plugin. With this plugin you can import and play the files directly from FCPX. Import was not the fastest thing, taking about two minutes or so for a 30 second clip. The edit was done on a late model 15” well spec’d MBP. 

Have any of you worked with C200 footage? Is my experience the norm, or am I missing something? Is there a problem with this footage that explains why it is noisy?

Have a play with it and post what you find

A lot of people do not Black balance, that’s why it can get noisy. 

1 hour ago, DBounce said:

With all due respect... I'm not "most likely wrong"... I'm definitely correct. I have this camera and edit frequently with my MBP. I don't need to watch a review to understand what I'm seeing in my real world workflow. 

Fyi: I don't run PP on macs. 

Hi, with all respect from my side as well. It a little bit strange, are you applying any colour correction and still get smooth playback and not using any proxies or optimised media? This was the reason that I got an iMac Pro with is cutting it well. 

I am considering upgrading my MacBook Pro (Mid 2015) for when I am on the road. However if I still will need to create proxies on a new 2018 MacBook Pro, the value is somewhat limited. Then we have the throttle issue as well. 

9 hours ago, DBounce said:

From my experience RawLite playback is less to do with cpu or gpu power and more to do with hard drive read speed. My 2016 MBP runs the same with or without eGPU. But loading files on the internal hard drive makes playback way smoother then loading from an external hard drive. FCPX has no issues. Resolve is smooth also, but only if playback is from the internal drive.

Maybe there is an advantage if you are doing CGI, but I seldom do that anymore.

Sorry but you are most likely wrong here. Have a look at this video (around 8min in the video he talked about Raw Light) : I currently have 3 Mac's, all with internal SSD - It is definitely the GPU that counts, only iMac Pro does a proper job. FCPX is best, then Resolve. 

17 hours ago, Gregormannschaft said:

Stoked to have bought the camera last week. Everything brand new in the box for around 5,500€ which I feel was a pretty good price. Bought a couple of Komputerbay CFAST cards which seem to be working out well so far. I've heard they can be hit and miss but didn't feel like paying 2x that price for the Sandisk.

The camera is a dream to operate, but I'm kind of surprised how tricky it is to shoot RAW at first. My first tests had a ton of noise, and the post-production workflow in FCPX makes things a little complicated by automatically applying a Canon CLOG 2 viewing LUT. Started grading the RAW footage first and then applying a standard Alexa Log LUT from IMPULZ and have been seeing some great results. The 4K 10bit 60fps is really beautiful and produces really smooth, rich results. Will be testing it out over the coming fortnight and will hopefully edit something together to show some results.

Oh, one thing. FCPX is magic. I'm on a maxed out 2014 Macbook Pro (yes, 2014) and I can smoothly playback and grade the RAW before transcoding. Which is insane. After creating proxies and throwing a little more footage on the timeline I've had hardly any issues at all.

Also, if anyone has used the C200 and the Sigma 18-35, could they share their experiences? I'm looking into grabbing that but not sure how it would be to operate handheld without lens IS. 

I have had the camera for 9 months. Use Fcpx, I question your report on the 2014 MacBook Pro editing of RAW. It does not run smooth on my MacBook Pro 2015, nor on iMac late 2014, but definitely smooth on my IMac Pro 10 core, with the best GPU. However, if you create proxies you can edit smoothly. The older Macs has max out configurations. Report says that even the 2018 MacBook Pro have issues with playing back RAW. 

I believe this will be good eventually, but I guess there need to be some software updates before this gets stable and shows the benefits. I see a lot of people buying RAW cameras, but fail to see that you need a iMac Pro (or high end PC)  to run these things smoothly. If using FCPX, the cheapest thing is just to create proxies. The problem is that if you even are able to run the timeline with 4k, as soon as you start colour you footage you need more power. So even if people invest in the latest MacBook Pro model, one can easily get issues. You may need to create proxies anyway. That way I am happy with my iMac Pro. On the laptop I create proxies.

On 7/5/2018 at 11:44 AM, Ty Harper said:

As a USB interface I wouldn't be doing much recording (if that's what you were referring to). Maybe the odd v/o, or record as I continue to digitize my old vinyl. In the field it would be for talking head interviews that require more than two mic inputs as I already have a Marantz PMD661 with the Oade mod that's fine for my two-person interview needs. But sorry, are you saying the pre's on the F4/8/8n would be better than the RME FF400, or worse?

And thanks for the link!

Hi, I have extensive experience with RME and had the rme 400 , now UFX II. The drivers in RME is rock solid and you can record with low latencey (the is now way the Zoom will be that stable). If you record music, the RME is the way to go as it much better for that purpose (DsP with EQ, compressor, auto level of recording, high impedance input for guitar, etc.) , recording video sound the F8n will do well. Sound Devices will benefit from analog limiter, slightly less noise. 

On 7/9/2018 at 2:53 PM, webrunner5 said:

Oh no doubt you can build a heck of a editing machine for a Lot less money going the PC route. The edge PC's have is it IS the only real gaming platform, so there is always this big push for faster,better CPU's, GPU's. The only real edge Apple has for editing is if you are using FCPX. For any other platform PC's are the way to go. Any Mac is pretty far behind even a PC laptop when it comes to the GPU in them. And Resolve is a GPU hungry NLE. and also I think in a few more versions will be hands down the best NLE out there for just about any money. Now I doubt they are going to displace Avid Media Composer any time soon, but I bet they are going to try and do it, and sooner than later.

Ha ha , have en iMac Pro - come with your laptop man.....and running FCPX - 

On 4/11/2018 at 12:10 PM, IronFilm said:

Hold your horses, too early to call this a "FS5mk2" release! 

Welllll...  quite the opposite, we can say clearly this is *not* a FS5mk2 release! As there will be hardware improvements (while the FS5mk2 we can skeptical if there are any hardware changes....)

Remember, this F8n is only a couple of hundred dollars more than the launch price of the F8, is that worth it for a handful of improvements? (some which are very much wanted, such as line/mic switchable XLR inputs and headphone amp improvement) I reckon that is worth it for a couple of hundred dollars. 

 

 

This.

 

The F8n will probably have small cache, perhaps 10ms or less. So it can "look ahead". Some other recorders/software does that. 

 

 

Six hundred dollars more than the F8n, will it be worth it? 

I'm very skeptical if it will be. We'll find out soon enough!

I think it 1ms delay.

I have both the 1dx2 and c200, it defenetly a step up from 1dx2. Way more DR, cleaner footage etc. 

Hi

Got the c200 a while ago. Is there any difference to the Sony A7r3 and 1dx2 which I also have. 

The short answer is YES. The image is simply better both in MP4 and for sure Raw. Shooting canonlog3 give quite much better DR and image then my Sony and 1dx2. 

Now I totally understand why people go for a cinema camera.

On 3/4/2018 at 4:39 PM, Holger said:

Not my experience, in fact, I fully disagree. Metabones (version IV od V) works better than MC11 for _stills_, esp. in AFC. The Sigma adapter is restricted to the central portion of the VF, whereas I can use eye focus and tracking over the full screen with Metabones (green mode). Performance is not as good as with native glass, but very close. Many modes are fully supported. This is consensus in all the different forums I look into, too.

Big difference for video... not so good.

A real world test .........Raw 50P

Time for me to come back here - still excellent seems like - ..........

Maybe the app Fieldmonitor does the job, connected by WiFi though. For Panasonic and Sony.

In 2018, with a New Sony or Canon camera, who is shooting manual most of the time?

On 1/27/2018 at 11:04 PM, the_brotographer said:

To say that my videos fool people is outlandish. I find it tough not to get upset by statements like that. Performance varies greatly depending on what lens you're putting on it. The 35L II for instance, performs much better than the 35L mark 1. And yes, you can use them for relatively quick moving subjects, but only at a max of 3fps.

You can't just make blanket statements that it "does not work properly". Your definition of properly might vary compared to someone else's. For me, achieving center point is during video is a big step forward, and I'm fine with that. I find that for certain situations, it is "proper". However, I choose to use native glass in other situations for faster results that can be counted on a little more. 

But seriously, why would I take the time to test the lenses and adapters, only to try to fool people? Nonsense.

Actually I hope for another firmware update from Metabones giving you right. I moved from 5D3 to Sony A7S1, UNFORTUNATLY I soon found  out Canon glass did not work to well. To give you my standard w.r.t. Video AF, I have 1dx2, c200 and A7r3, that why it does not work properly. Its fair to warn people that there is chance to be disappointed.

Quality wize, the 10 bit issue is more a spec concern then a real one. The 8 bit is extremely good to be 8 bit. You get a slightly sharper image with the RAW Light and of course you can drag the colour wheels all a round and it would not fall apart in RAW and 15 stops of DR. 

You can now edit with colour grading and e.g. stabilisation in full 4k on both Resolve and FCPX with no hiccups on an iMac Pro. On FCPX, if you create proxies from the master files, the edit is completely smooth (e.g. laptop). You read speed for files with USB-3 400-500MBs (CFAST), so speed is not really a issue. Of course you have to live with files sizes which are more or less the same as ProRes.

On 1/25/2018 at 11:37 PM, Andrew Reid said:

Right just tried it. And it seems to be total crap.

VIDEO mode.

Set advanced mode on Metabones adapter V0.57 (Mk IV) - latest firmware

Tried Canon 35mm F2.0 IS (new-ish one with STM AF)

Even with AF responsiveness and speed both set to their fastest on the A7R3, performance is dismal compared to the Sigma lenses on the Sigma MC-11.

It's laggy, unsure, unreliable and noisy.

This is not in bright sunshine, it's inside. Maybe it is better in very bright light?

But the Sigmas were in dim light as well and did much better.

It's just about usable for a slow focus rack in bright light, but I wouldn't challenge it with anything else... Better to swap out the lens for a Sigma and MC-11.

Now in STILLS mode with Advanced mode set on Metabones... Oh dear. It's even worse. C-AF seems not even to use phase-detect AF and hunts around never really acquiring focus with any certainty!

Will do a bright light test tomorrow but doubt it is any better.

I have also tried Metabones for video with Canon glass (both modes), it does not work properly, so I agree. These videos fool people mostly. Can use metabones in green mode for stills with center AF for stills for not to fast photos shooting. Landscapes are ok. 

The problem with Sigmas is that they make noise when your AF works hard e.g. sports. A lot of Canon glass also make quite some noise. 

The best lenses are Sonys, most of them are quite when AF for video. 

14 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Dustin Abbott writes:

Every time I review a Sigma lens I will be closely looking at the AF (autofocus) performance. I’ve rarely had a problem with HSM motors when it comes to sound or speed (they are amongst the quietest focusing lenses that I’ve encountered and generally quite fast)

Source

And Lenstip writes:

The Sigma A 18-35 mm f/1.8 DC HSM, as its name indicates, is equipped with an ultrasonic autofocus motor called Hyper Sonic Motor. The work of the mechanism is, in fact, noiseless

Source

And DPReview writes:

The 18-35mm uses Sigma's 'Hypersonic Motor' for autofocus, which is fast, essentially silent, and generally very decisive.

Source

And ephotozine writes:

A silent HSM focusing motor powers the focusing mechanism, which is very quick to confirm focus and accurate, even on this pre-production sample.

Source

They must have tested for photos, not Video.  - Or I go and complain......

Hi, bought the Sigma 18-35 for use on C200. My lense make a hell of a noise when video AF, so I do not understand it is quiet at all. I find that native Sony FE lenses are the quiets. 

For Canon STM and new leses after 2012 is ok. 

Here you will find a comparison. If you want good AF there is one choice. 

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

To be fair, Sony 24-70mm F2.8 GM is a brick as well

24-70 F4 on the other hand... tiny. But is it any good? Anyone used it?

I had it. Did not stand to my quality requirements. The 16-35 F4 is much better. SO I have the brick......

On 12/19/2017 at 10:38 AM, Axel said:

Are you sure?

Please share with us the way you connect your Inferno to your Mac. Someone recommended putting a BM Decklink Mini 4k into an Akitio Node Lite housing, which would be ~$650 instead of $2500 for an AJA box or BM 4k Studio Extreme.

Should be a thunderbolt to hdmi dongle for a few bucks.